Stefano R. Mugnaini is just another xian who wants the the USA to be a charity organization. We're not.
Illegal immigration is a crime and those who support them are also criminals. On May 31, 7:53 am, MJ <[email protected]> wrote: > Is Immigration Really the Problem?Tuesday, May 31, 2011 > byStefano R. Mugnaini > I am constantly awestruck by the prodigious destructive capacity of my > children. My three-year-old daughter can break things that I can't even take > apart; seemingly sturdy objects quail before her wrath. One of my greatest > fears is that, as an adult, she will channel this knack for destruction into > its most logical outcome: a career in public "service." > One of my favorite rhetorical games to play with proponents of bigger and > better government is to challenge them to name an area where government > action proves superior to private action. Most answers, if any are tendered, > relate to military spending, criminal justice, or infrastructure construction > and maintenance -- sectors that are hardly models of temporal or pecuniary > efficiency. Of course, to even have this discussion, it is necessary to > ignore the mounds of shattered glass that pile up as government bricks > breakwindow after windowto create projects for the public good. Is it any > wonder that the urban centers that have been the beneficiaries of the most > sincere intervention by our magnanimous central planners most closely > resemble the aftermaths of natural disasters or the ravages of war? > When we draw Hayek's famous concept of the "fatal conceit" of central > planners out to its logical conclusion, we must conclude that all legislative > activity, whether explicitly economic or not, is burdened with the threat of > producing dramatic, unintended, and undesirable consequences. In his > magnificent work,Our Enemy, the State, Albert Jay Nock described a delicate > balance between "State" and "social" power.Thus the State "turns every > contingency into a resource" for accumulating power in itself, always at the > expense of social power; and with this it develops a habit of acquiescence in > the people. New generations appear, each temperamentally adjusted … to new > increments of State power, and they tend to take the process of continuous > accumulation as quite in order. (p. 10)The consequences of this shifting of > power often create new crises, which call for new legislative solutions and > new opportunities for the growth of state power. Fair-minded individuals may > differ on what is necessary to limit the inherent danger of government > abuses; proposals run the gamut from strict constitutionalism to anarchy, but > only the strongly deluded fail to recognize the risks that exist when one > individual or group is given coercive power over the actions of another. > A prime example of this phenomenon is on display with every bit of news about > our southern border. Among many other factors, the "War on Drugs" and the > welfare state have added to a plethora of enticements that encourage -- even > incentivize -- an influx of immigrants seeking a better life than can be had > south of the border. Regardless of the reader's conclusions about immigration > policy, it is clear that government policy has had the general effect of > exacerbating the difficulties inherent in this situation. > It has beenwell explainedhow the "War on Drugs" artificially limits supply > and increases risk, thereby increasing prices and profit margins. This, > obviously, creates a financial incentive for individuals to become drug mules > and risk the hazardous journey across the border with illicit substances. > Surely this effect is an unintended one, but government intervention in this > realm creates and augments the very market it is aimed at quelling. State > action may paint a market black, but cannot drive it out of existence. > But what about the "War on Immigration"? All that is needed, we are told, is > the development of a comprehensive immigration-reform policy. Then the Rio > Grande will flow with milk and honey and the deserts will bloom with > high-paying jobs. A recent trend has been for states and municipalities, > frustrated with federal inaction, to attempt to take matters into their own > hands. > In my area, the approach that has gained traction is to crack down on those > who rent homes and provide jobs to undocumented individuals. Arecent > lawpassed by the Summerville town council mirrors legislation that has been > put into place throughout the country. This law makes it illegal to rent out > an apartment or house without first verifying the immigration status of > potential tenants. This is further proof that governments have a tendency to > complicate and intensify the problems that they set out to solve. To explain > this point, it is first necessary to consider the most commoncomplaintsabout > illegal immigrants:They take low-paying jobs.They receive social services > (such as reduced-cost housing, WIC, and other welfare benefits) that far > outstrip their contributions to the local and national economy.They commit > crimes and turn to illicit means to provide for themselves. > The veracity of these charges has been explored ad nauseam, and at least > partially refuted, but that is not the goal of this essay. For our purposes, > presume these claims to be legitimate, universally proven allegations. > Assuming that illegal immigrants are absolutely guilty of all the above > charges, attempt to answer this question: How will legislation that denies > jobs and housing to individuals already in our communities lighten the burden > they place on society? > Is this not the fatal conceit magnified? Will they not become more dependent > on social services and more likely to resort to crime to attain their daily > bread and shelter from the elements? What other choice is there? This > approach is similar to laws that prohibit homelessness. If we can eradicate > an undesirable thing simply by legislation, why not prohibit joblessness, > too? Or poor eyesight? Or stupidity? > Presumably, the goal is to send the message that illegal immigrants need to > move on down the road. But what happens when the next town, and then the > next, enacts similar laws? Eventually, there is no escaping the consequences > of such laws; the cure creates the disease, just asminimum wage laws create > unemployment. > Perhaps a better approach is to simply free the market, including the labor > market, and dismantle the welfare state. If we were all responsible for our > own healthcare, education, and sustenance, then none but the most strident > racist would possibly lose sleep over the legal status of their employee or > neighbor. If we find the wisdom and boldness to exchange the wars on drugs, > poverty, and immigration for a war on legislation, then maybe we will find > greater freedom and prosperity for all. > Stefano R. Mugnaini is the minister of theEssex Village Church of Christin > Charleston, South Carolina, and a graduate student working toward a master of > divinity, expecting to graduate this > year.http://mises.org/daily/5324/Is-Immigration-Really-the-Problem -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
