February 2009

Issue 1, Volume 7

With the emergence of Wall Street as the epicenter of the present climate of the ongoing economic predicament, one of the most hotly debated components of America’s economic strife has taken a back seat – illegal immigration. A reason for the passivity is that economists generally reflect the sentiment that as a whole, illegal immigration produces a small positive net effect on the economy when averaged over the whole country. Often times, economists deal in absolute numbers - a practice that is dangerous because it neglects social and racial ramifications as well as the severe and immediate negative impacts that illegal immigrants have in particular areas. For each boomtown in this country, there is another ravaged by a similar influx of people. Do not give me the statistics and non-factual estimations of the pros and cons of illegal immigrants on a countrywide scale. Drawbacks and benefits exist within the legal system we abide by and economics should not supersede fairness. If immigration laws are not going to be executed uniformly and are ignored because of a positive influence on a particular segment of the economy, then what purpose do the laws serve at all?

Now, I certainly do not hold an anti-immigration stance. However immigration must occur within the boundaries of the law. I understand the history and the formation of this country. I understand how the interplay between ethnicities has contributed to create the current structure that makes America so unique in its diversity. However, there are avenues to undertake immigration legally. The United States has allowable quotas for immigrants from countries around the globe and people can utilize these outlets legally. In the U.S., legislature exists in a preference system that includes family based and employment visas, those seeking political asylum, and so on. Those who are pro-immigration will point out the bias in the preferential system that the U.S. employs. However, the operation is as fair as it can be. Granted, a bias is inherent in any type of preferential system, but it is not feasible for the country to accept the burden of allowing boundless immigrant populations to cross the border. Parameters must be in place for a healthy balance of human influx and prosperous environments to coexist.

Legally, the prescription is written for this balance to occur (in theory), yet the social ramifications are the most vocalized by pro-immigration advocates in their assessments of the issue – sometimes with validity, sometimes with the intention to detract from issues and displace guilt. By no means has the United States reached a utopian status regarding race and cultural relations and I do not intend to downplay the social stance on the issue. However, the country has certainly achieved exponential progress considering its roots.

If experts believe that illegal immigration causes a net plus for the country economically, why not allow the current systems and procedures to exist the way they do? The fact is that the climate that illegal immigration breeds in certain areas of the country plays a vital role in crippling the working class and perpetuating the gap between rich and poor – let alone the effects of untaxed money being sent overseas. The most common claim in defense from supporters is that “Illegal immigrants take the jobs that no one else would want to take.” This point of view is misguided. Tell that to a legal landscaper who cannot compete with large contractors who are given a pass to work with undocumented immigrants. Tell the legal bricklayer who pays insurance, taxes, and fair wages to his legal employees. Each of these costs associated with being a legalized immigrant produces a job that cannot be completed anywhere close to the price range if it were done illegally. Granted, large contractors drive the small everyman out with this practice, but let us go to the root of the issue – a societal structure that overlooks illegal activity and displaces honest men.

Those who pay a legal rent cannot be punished because they file taxes with the IRS. A double standard cannot exist, especially when the workers being exploited are our own. It does not matter to what degree it exists if this ideology does not follow any nationalistic sentiments of protecting one’s own. The system exhibits characteristics for exploitation by the few rich who do not get persecuted because if they did, the stagnation in building would be seen as an indicator of economic decline – and how dare we let that be. We are in a time when the masses are more than struggling and certain counties actually have a lot set aside for illegal immigrants to gather and wait to be picked up by contractors to start collecting untaxed income for the day. If this disconnect is not addressed effectively, immediately and at its root, expect the clashes to grow harsher and the economic climate to perpetuate this debacle that the law allows to endure.
Jim O’Neill is a second year MBA Student.