Guest Worker--Illegal Mexicans Shoot Themselves in the Foot?

[Red Clay]

I just had a thought that brightened my day :lol:

Up to now, illegal Mexicans have pretty much had the market cornered on providing cheap labor to the US because of their close geographic proximity. Today they are clamoring for a guest worker program that would legalize them. However   .......

.....any guest worker program would surely open up many other countries, many POOR countries, to be eligible to participate. SO.... the US employer can now "shop his cheap labor business". If the Mexican works for 10 dollars per hr.....

the poor Asian might work for 8 dollars per hr.
the poor worker from the FSU might work for 6 dollars per hr.
the poor worker from West Africa might work for 5 dollars per hr. AND, as an added bonus, many poor people from these other countries ALREADY SPEAK ENGLISH!!!!!!  American employers won't need their Mexicans anymore, they make TOO MUCH MONEY!!!!!!!

VIOLA!!! the illegal Mexican just had his WAGES DEPRESSED BY THE VERY PROGRAM HE DEMANDED WHILE MARCHING THROUGH OUR STREETS!!!!!!! :shock:  :shock:  :shock:

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!ROFLMAO!!!!!!! ENJOY YOUR NEW LEGAL STATUS, AMIGOS!!!!

[Ray]

Good point Red!

In the event that we need to implement a Guest Worker Program, I feel that Mexican Nationals should be excluded for at least the next 50 years. They are WAY over their quota already.

[Bueller]

I just  read  a two-sentence article in a Brazilian newspaper that said a recent survey showed that 80% of Americans support amnesty. They didn't show the survey itself or even say who did it-- I can't figure out why. :roll: I sent them about ten links to surveys showing just about the opposite.

[doombug]

I just  read  a two-sentence article in a Brazilian newspaper that said a recent survey showed that 80% of Americans support amnesty. They didn't show the survey itself or even say who did it-- I can't figure out why. :roll: I sent them about ten links to surveys showing just about the opposite.

If they don't correct or retract this, one could assume that their aim was to encourage Brazil's underclass to emigrate.  Something akin to the Mexican government's distribution of border-crossing pamphlets.

Was this a major daily?  Privately owned?

[Montrealer]

Can you guys deport one decent Mexican to Canada, I haven't found a decent landscaper in years.

[Ray]

Can you guys deport one decent Mexican to Canada, I haven't found a decent landscaper in years.

Just drive South till you find a Home Depot store and pick one out. Or better yet, take a whole car load back with you...  :lol:

[flipflop]

I grew up in SO Miami and learned to respect Cubans for the hardships they faced living in a poor country and having the gumption to come to the US in search of liberty and freedom.  I feel the same way about Mexican immgrants and wish hardship on no one. That said I think the Amnesty solution is a crock of [snip] and until they plug the sieve that is our border and start arresting and deporting all illegal immigrants this legislation should be shelved.

Im tired of half assed solutions to the problem, you have to nip it in the bud

[Bueller]

If they don't correct or retract this, one could assume that their aim was to encourage Brazil's underclass to emigrate.  Something akin to the Mexican government's distribution of border-crossing pamphlets.

Was this a major daily?  Privately owned?

  It is the Diário Catarinense, http://www.clicrbs.com.br/jornais/dc/jsp/default.jsp, the major daily of greater Florianópolis. Registration is required, so here is the article in its sweeping breadth and entirety (it's under the "Mundo" tab, if you want to see for yourself):

"Americano apóia lei

Quase 80% dos americanos estão de acordo com o programa de trabalhadores temporários proposto pelo presidente dos EUA, George W. Bush.

A pesquisa revelou que 79% dos entrevistados apóiam a iniciativa, além da implementação de um processo para que os trabalhadores adotem a cidadania americana."

  My translation:

  "Nearly 80% of Americans agree with the guest-worker program proposed by U.S. President George W. Bush.

  The poll showed that 79% of those interviewed support the initiative, along with the implementation of a process for the workers to become U.S. citizens."

  My response to the newspaper:

Achei muito inverossímil o artigo hoje que diz que 80% dos americanos apoiam o programa de trabalhadores temporários proposto por Bush. Uma pesquisa rápida no Google revela que a verdade é mais o menos o oposto. Vou colocar vários vínculos embaixo para mostrar isso, mas deixem-me comentar que não parece responsável citar uma "pesquisa" anonimamente, privando o leitor de lê-la por si próprio. É ainda pior neste caso, porque esta "pesquisa" parece falsa (ou, se não é falsa, deixem o leitor saber por que não encaixa com  tantas outras pesquisas). Pode alguém explicar a discrepância entre a "pesquisa" aludida e as pesquisas citadas embaixo?

  I found the article today that says that 80% of Americans support Bush's proposed guest worker program difficult to believe. A quick search on Google shows that the truth is more or less the opposite. I will add several llinks below to show this, but let me say that it doesn't seem responsible to cite a "survey" anonymously, not allowing the reader to read it for himself. It's even worse in this case, because the "survey" appears false (or, if it's not false, let the reader know why it does not fit in with so many other surveys. Can someone explain the discrepancy between the "survey" that was alluded to and the surveys cited below?
 
http://www.alipac.us/article395.html
http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_researchd74c
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/6/12/141242.shtml
http://www.stopamnesty.us/ref/amnesties_polls.html
http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/terrorpoll.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,33752,00.html
http://www.numbersusa.com/interests/publicop.html
http://www.cis.org/articles/2001/back1201.html
http://www.declaration.net/news.asp?docID=2134&y=2001
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060331-121827-7630r_page2.htm[/url]

[Montrealer]

You may be asking yourself, as an American, what can I do to help with the immigration problem and illegal mexicans?

Here's a link to a video.

http://www.purple-twinkie.com/Amazing_Racist/Amazing-Racist-Mexican.asp

[Red Clay]

I wish hardship on nobody except those who fly the flag of Mexico in our streets, while hanging ours upside-down.

Immigration reform as it's being discussed right now is FULL of unintended consequenses.

[doombug]

 
"Nearly 80% of Americans agree with the guest-worker program proposed by U.S. President George W. Bush.

  The poll showed that 79% of those interviewed support the initiative, along with the implementation of a process for the workers to become U.S. citizens."

  My response to the newspaper:
 

I smell a poll rat.  Advocates for illegal aliens are twisting amnesty with guest workers, legal immigration with illegal immigration, and hoping the public is confused enough to unintentionally go along with whatever passes muster in the Senate.

Time to dig deeper and find the culprits.

[doombug]

It is the Diário Catarinense, http://www.clicrbs.com.br/jornais/dc/jsp/default.jsp, the major daily of greater Florianópolis. Registration is required, so here is the article in its sweeping breadth and entirety (it's under the "Mundo" tab, if you want to see for yourself):

"Americano apóia lei

Quase 80% dos americanos estão de acordo com o programa de trabalhadores temporários proposto pelo presidente dos EUA, George W. Bush.

A pesquisa revelou que 79% dos entrevistados apóiam a iniciativa, além da implementação de um processo para que os trabalhadores adotem a cidadania americana."

  My translation:

  "Nearly 80% of Americans agree with the guest-worker program proposed by U.S. President George W. Bush.

  The poll showed that 79% of those interviewed support the initiative, along with the implementation of a process for the workers to become U.S. citizens."

My response to the newspaper:

I found the article today that says that 80% of Americans support Bush's proposed guest worker program difficult to believe. A quick search on Google shows that the truth is more or less the opposite. I will add several llinks below to show this, but let me say that it doesn't seem responsible to cite a "survey" anonymously, not allowing the reader to read it for himself. It's even worse in this case, because the "survey" appears false (or, if it's not false, let the reader know why it does not fit in with so many other surveys. Can someone explain the discrepancy between the "survey" that was alluded to and the surveys cited below?
 

My guess is that they assumed most of their readers wouldn't dig up the original questionnaire.  Alas, there is a poll rat--or at least the nearly complete twisting of the poll question's original wording.  Time magazine (via SRBI) changed/shortened the wording of the poll question (effectively changing the meaning), and the Brazilian reporting of the poll question was itself a further misinterpretation of what was actually asked.

So, here is the transformation--from the original poll question by SRBI, up through to the final wording in the Diário Catarinense article.  Keep in mind, this poll involved only 1,004 participants:

SRBI's survey:  

Question #11(A):  Here are some policies that have been suggested to deal with illegal immigrants.  Would you favor or oppose...

Allowing illegal immigrants already working in the United States to register as guest workers for a fixed period of time, so the government could keep track of them.

...........................(base).....Favor.....Oppose......No Answer/Don't know

3/29/06-3/30/06...(1004)......79%.......18%............2%

http://www.srbi.com/TimePoll_Final_Report-2006-03-31.pdf
[I've indicated in RED only those portions of the poll question that were carried over to the final edit.  Also, take note of question #9 in the survey.  It could be argued that this is a warm-up question that unduly influences how one later responds to question #11(A).  Question #9 likely influences responses to question #11(E), as well]


SRBI's analysis of the results (after the survey was completed)--complete with a re-worded interpretation of question #11(A) from above:

Do You Favor or Oppose the Following to Deal with Illegal Immigration?

Allowing illegal immigrants to register as guest workers:   79% (percent favor)

http://www.srbi.com/time_poll.html

Time magazine releases the survey results.  As you can see, they've passed along the the now re-worded/truncated version of SRBI's poll question #11(A):

Do You Favor or Oppose the Following to Deal with Illegal Immigration?

Allowing illegal immigrants to register as guest workers:  79% (percent favor)

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1179089,00.html

And, finally, your translated version of Diário Catarinense's interpretation of the question:

Nearly 80% of Americans agree with the guest-worker program proposed by U.S. President George W. Bush.

The poll showed that 79% of those interviewed support the initiative, along with the implementation of a process for the workers to become U.S. citizens.

http://www.clicrbs.com.br/jornais/dc/jsp/default.jsp


Apparently, most of America now supports a guest-worker program along with citizenship for illegal aliens.  (Sounds like amnesty).  All because of the clever layout, wording, and misinterpretation of a poll's results?

I wonder how much of Latin America now believes the protesters successfully "intimidated" Americans into overwhelmingly supporting a guest worker program (aka, amnesty) for illegal aliens.

By the way, for anyone who thinks the recent pro- illegal-immigrant demonstrations might have benefited the immigrants, check out question #16.
And question #14 is interesting as well.  Sort of contradicts the Brazilian interpretation of question #11(A).

[Edit:  I've sent copies of this to Michelle Malkin, and to the editors at V.DARE.com and DeportAliens.com.  Maybe they can uncover something  more solid.  Thanks for the initial heads up on the Brazilian article, Bueller.]

[Ray]

Good work Bug!

That's also an excellent lesson in leftist propaganda techniques and yet another reason to not trust all these political poll "results".

[doombug]

I think you're right.  The difference is staggering between their poll and most others.  

I'm finding a large variation in polling results around essentially the same question.  Though, some of the questions are more explicit than others:

"Polls indicate about 60 percent of Americans oppose guest-worker programs that would offer illegal immigrants an avenue to lawful work status..."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/27/AR2006032700684.html?nav=rss_email/components?nav=slate

"But those polled also said by a 50-40 margin that they favor a guest-worker program for foreigners who have jobs here."
"Fifty-four percent of people who know an immigrant favored a guest-worker plan. But 50 percent of those who said they don't know an immigrant opposed such a plan."
http://newspolls.org/story.php?story_id=49

"President Bush has proposed a 'guest worker' program that would give undocumented workers the opportunity to apply for temporary worker status. The workers would pay taxes, be required to return home after three years and would be given no special preference if they applied for permanent citizenship. Would you support or oppose Bush’s guest worker program?"  
Support:  62%
http://www.kaet.asu.edu/horizon/poll/2005/4-26-05.htm

"Voters were also asked, 'Do you support or oppose the Bush administration's proposal to give millions of illegal aliens guest worker status and the opportunity to become citizens?' Only 35 percent gave their support, and 56 percent said no."
http://www.alipac.us/article395.html

"Two-thirds of likely voters in Florida would oppose a plan to allow some undocumented immigrants to live and work legally in the United States, according to a new poll conducted for the South Florida Sun-Sentinel and Florida Times-Union."
http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/000844.html

"As you may know, President Bush has proposed to allow foreigners who have jobs but are staying illegally in the United States to apply for legal, temporary-worker status. Do you strongly favor, somewhat favor, somewhat oppose, or strongly oppose this proposal?"
Total that favor:  37%
http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
[NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll]

"Do you support or oppose making it easier for illegal immigrants to become legal workers?"
Support:  41%
http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
[Quinnipiac University poll]

"Should immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally be allowed to apply for work permits which would allow them to stay and work in the United States, or shouldn't they be allowed to do that?"
Allowed:  32%
http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm
[CBS News Poll]

"Two-thirds of Californians support a guest-worker plan, the poll found. Among registered voters, the majority was slightly smaller, at 60 percent, while among those not registered to vote -- half of whom are noncitizens -- support for the plan was higher, at 73 percent."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/03/09/BAGSVHL04P1.DTL


All of these randomly encountered polls seem to run contrary to the SRBI poll results by a vast margin. (As Bueller already pointed out.)
 
Stupefying :shock:

[doombug]

Update on the poll controversy.

Someone else has caught on to the Time/SRBI poll trickery.  Mickey Kaus, a blogger at Slate.com, posted on April 1, 2006 the following:

Fool's Poll:
Do they know what day it is?

Time Magazine has released a poll purporting to show that:

"A lopsided majority of the American public, 72%, favor a "guest worker" program in a head-to-head match-up over a House bill that would criminalize illegal immigration." [Emph. added]

Here is the question Time asked:

TWO DIFFERENT APPROACHES HAVE BEEN SUGGESTED TO DEAL WITH ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. PLEASE TELL ME WHICH COMES CLOSEST TO YOUR VIEWS ...

MAKE ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION A CRIME AND NOT ALLOW ANYONE WHO ENTERED THE COUNTRY ILLEGALLY TO WORK OR STAY IN THE UNITED STATES UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES [25%]

ALLOW ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS TO GET TEMPORARY WORK VISAS SO THE GOVERNMENT CAN TRACK THEM  WHILE THEY EARN PERMANENT RESIDENCE AFTER SIX YEARS IF THEY LEARN ENGLISH, PAY A FINE, PAY ANY BACK TAXES, AND HAVE NO CRIMINAL RECORD [72%]

P.S.: April Fool's! ... Correction: Oh wait. I was going to do an April Fool's item in which I parodied Time's comically biased wording, but I accidentally printed the actual wording they used. I apologize for the error. ... Maybe Mystery Pollster [a fellow blogger] will correct me, but this seems not close to being a fair poll question. The polltakers make the editorial case for one side after describing the other side with language that's extreme ("anyone," "under any circumstances") and probably inaccurate. (Are there really no circumstances in which someone who entered illegally could stay in the country under the House bill?) I doubt many actual politicians, with their careers on the line, will believe Time. ... It's almost as if they poll-tested the words they used in the poll to make sure they'd get the desired respectable result. ...  P.P.S.: Emphasis on comic bias words added ... P.P.P.S.: The question is such a special confection it apparently hasn't been asked by this polling organization before. Those questions that have been asked before seem to reveal a mild 2-6% movement in the Bush/guest worker direction over the past three months. But they also show a 69% majority in favor of denying illegals driver's licenses, and a 56% majority in favor of a "2,000 mile" fence--and even a near-equal 47-49 split on "deporting all illegal immigrants back to their home countries"!  ... P.P.P.P.S.: The Time poll also seems to show substantial backlash after last week's demonstrations. By a roughly 3-1 margin eople say they were moved to oppose the marchers' cause. But if that were the case you'd think it would be reflected in the results. ...

More: It's also hard to jibe Time's "guest worker" result this two-week old Hart/McInturff NBC/WSJ poll, featuring more balanced wording, that found a 59-37 majority against allowing illegals to "apply for legal, temporary worker status."  (See question 22a, and also 22b).

http://www.slate.com/id/2138935/

On a related matter...

It's all over the Net, now.  These dumbasses who were waving their Mexican flags so brazenly are starting to realize that the majority--their tax-paying sponsors--are getting just a tad pissed.  Now the organizers (who apparently follow the polls too) are rushing to do damage control; they're distributing American flags as quick as they can "borrow" them from cemeteries and school storage. (I'm exagerrating a little; you're school flags and cemetary flags are still safe.)

From Udolpho.com:

"The protests themselves are proof of how insulated from mainstream American society these communities are.  Were these people truly assimilating they would have some inkling about how much they are trying the patience of people normally unconcerned with the issue, particularly while flaunting their allegiance to another country.  But when you spend your life in a culturally inbred barrio you tend not to get that exposure to the broader society.  Just whatever is on Telemundo."
http://www.udolpho.com/weblog/?id=00903&title=More-protests-finally-some-action-on-immigration