Hi, I was wondering what the economics and related social factors are in this current controversy?
I'm not USian, so I'm not too familiar with things there. I know its being used as a political football, so to speak, but there must be material factors involved too right? I mean, I see some commentary here about the 'political' drama aspect, and people saying its "manufactured" or similar. But I'm not sure if they mean it's not real (or vastly 'overblown' in terms of effect) or if they mean it is real, but caused by someone(s).
As far as I understand, human migration is (despite being against international labor law) treated as a commodity exchange, especially by richer countries. Like the US (and Europe) like to mess a place up (or bribe comprador rulers), because it consequentially provides them with exploitable labor, temporary or permanent.
I may be incorrect, but thats how it seems to me. So, if that is true, what are the material considerations for those states that are making a drama out of the Southern Border issues? I know that agricultural labor and domestic servents and porters are often from poorer countries where I am. Certain industries (hospitality, agriculture, construction, warehouse/factory) are reliant on such migrants. So how does this break down for the US, in terms of industries, and States interests?
Are they causing a shortage of commodity labor for the big coastal cities? Are they messing with the Academy (students)? Is the military affected? Is it more about servants for the wealthy?
I ask because I haven't really seen a good analysis of this on these grounds, only on either moral or political grounds, from a USian yet. Thanks!
Yes, the current border fight - I don't mean like a physical struggle, but a political one.
I guess I'm asking, who profits? and whose profits are being impacted, by this current struggle? To try to understand the interests involved.
Seemingly both parties backers (and factions in those parties backers) have good reason to have immigration, and also have those immigrants desperate and exploitable. Of course there will be those who don't have an interest in immigration too, some because of ideology, but also and primarily because of economics. Seemingly, the new Confederacy is on the face of it, appealing to those interests - who are they?
Republicans broadly chase the interests of petty bourgeoisie and large-scale private enterprise owners like the DeVos family or the Waltons or the living Koch brother, who want to hire those illegal immigrants. Democrats are a little more complicated, but its financial backers tend to come from more urban industries like tech, who want immigration to be easier so they can depress the wages of the skilled workers they rely on.
Ok, thanks.
Do the small bourgeoisie like immigration in the US? They tend to be against it in my country, especially in less urban areas, because they can rely on local (often familial) networks and being the only game in town for their labor, and need less of it in any case.
Given what you've mentioned, where does the outrage (I saw reported - maybe its untrue) come from when border states started moving migrants to cities? Just that it was messing with the 'usual' system of filtration or those states usual 'sourcing' of migrant workers, or they were the wrong kind of labor?
I've seen that Biden is, apparantly, wanting to 'toughen' the border (conditionally on passing other foriegn policy related budgets), is the 'crisis' simply a matter of those states wanting in on the public money tree that the Biden admin and backers have been enjoying with Ukraine?
Also, do you know or suspect if the 'crisis' relates in any way to the spats with Mexico (I think they recently nationalised an oil processing facility, and there's been talk of re-writing the trade agreement), or in any way to the infamous intelligence agency directed drug trafficking business across the border?
I wonder also about the demographics of those moving north, usually its the case that people who migrate internationally (as opposed to internally displaced) are relatively well-off (in their home countries), because the very poorest can't afford to move. Are they mostly from South/Central America, or is cheap air travel also adding people from other places (I've seen some claims of this, but I'm not sure whether to believe them)? Are the people coming from the South useful at all to the Dem's usual backers?
Thanks for responding, I don't mean to flood you with questions it just seems like a fairly big deal and the reporting and analysis around the issue just frames it in terms of a political dispute without mentioning why. Like, I understand the (low level) border conflict between Canada/US, because its about fishing. But this, I have no idea...
Sorry it took me so long to get back to this, I kept forgetting about it and finding it again when I wasn't in a good position to write a good response, but kept meaning to. I think to address something pretty central here, the term "border crisis" isn't any specific event or events, it's the general term the media uses to hold up refugees and illegal residents as a spectacle to fuel reactionary politics. But it's really not just about the state of Texas being pricks about it, it's the whole situation.
Broadly speaking, suburban and rural petty bourgeoisie tend to be the most vociferous Republicans and compromise its primary funding network, and are the iconic exploiters of illegal migrants - things like restauranteurs hiring them as dishwashers and bar-backs, or landscaping companies hiring them to do yardwork. Urban petty bourg are more split between the two parties, for a number of reasons, often stuff like the politicization of race in the US.
The federal government has spent billions of dollars creating resources to house these people at the border when they cross. Texas shipping them around sends them to places that have no idea what to do with them. IIRC New York City had to set up ersatz shelters in public school gymnasiums so they didn't have to sleep in the cold.
No, because if it was, Democrats would happily throw it at them. The reaction from state governments and federal Republicans is just political showmanship, because they refuse to give Biden a win, especially during election season.
Definitely doesn't, nobody really cares about Mexico right now. If the US had any serious spats with Mexico, AMLO would be out of power before you could say "banana republic."
They come here because a lot of their countries are in shambles with poverty and crime and political instability, which stems from US intervention in a big way (yellow-Parenti-dot-jpg). When the three letter agencies were smuggling coke in, they had their own airplanes to do it with, registered under a separately-owned company. Drugs do get smuggled in across the border, it definitely happens, but I don't think they're typically strapped to starving migrants. Makes more sense to hide it in crates or strap it to the bottom of cars.
Most border migrants are, but most people who are illegal residents in the US are visa overstays from countries that participate in the Visa Waiver program. Nobody gives a hoot about those at all, so there are some seriously racist undertones to the border "crisis."
Indirectly, in that they push the price of cheap labor down, which has a number of effects downhill that help them (more people train for the skilled labor that Dem backers tend to employ, goods are cheaper, etc). And it does see some benefit for Dems as a party - because of the politicization of race in the US, Latinos are broadly a fairly reliable Democratic voting block, with some exceptions like the Cubans in Florida. But you can't vote if you don't go through the grueling process of obtaining a citizenship, so while there's no direct effects there, we are now seeing the later generations swell the ranks.