@bobknight33

No red herrings please.

Illegal immigrants pay taxes. They would pay more if they weren't threatened and demonized. They would pay even MORE if legislation like the DREAM act were passed.

The work that unauthorized immigrants do is slave labor. Unemployed Americans simply refuse to accept that level intense work for the comparatively low wage. (Young Turks did a report on that as well. Plus I would know, since all the onion farmers in south georgia were affected by these new "Arizona style" immigration laws)

Just admit, you've come across new information that requires you (and the rest of America) to rethink your opinion of migrant workers and their families.

Aye I agree that not hurting people is a worthy cause, but if you follow that line of thinking, once again you will find inconsistency. For example, if he truly doesn't want to hurt people, why did he try to have the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 repealed - twice.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096:h.r.2310:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d094:h.r.13264:

Wouldn't having less safety at work result in more harm to workers, and even deaths?

How about his stance on the environment, would a degraded, polluted environment lead to harm? Quite possibly, and he's sponsored more than a half dozen bills to try to get rid of, or limit legislation protecting it, including a bill to repeal the Soil and Water Conservation Act of 1977.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d096:h.r.7079:

There are plenty of studies that demonstrate a scientifically significant correlation between pesticide exposure and cancers, birth defects and spontaneous abortions. Look up carbaryl, atrazine and benomyl-carbendazim to name a few, if he truly wanted to avoid doing harm, shouldn't he focus on legislation that tightens up the use of toxic chemicals in the food chain so that the seasonal and migrant workers (especially) might have improved health outcomes?

What about his handling of the Florida oil spill, the ecosystem there got devastated and there will be ongoing health consequences for not just the locals. His reaction was that there should be less oversight by the Government and instead there should be promises by the corporations to make good any damages with the populations they affect. That's not just an example of how his principles could harm people but it's an example of libertarianism gone crazy. His sponsorship of the H.R.2415 and H.R.4004 bills back this up, both of them incentivize off-shore drilling.
http://www.ronpaul.com/2010-06-16/ron-paul-defends-obama-on-bp-oil-spill-and-himself-on-owning-gold/

He takes the stance that he 'doesn't want to hurt people because he's then able to get a lot of anti-abortion supporters to vote for him, or in other words, he's doing a good job of being a politician. In addition, he's deciding what is right and what is wrong for the people that have other opinions and may wish to express those opinions in the form of exercising the right to make an informed decision about their future family - I don't call that libertarianism.

Gotta get rid of those dangerous migrant workers, they're taking jobs from our fine upstanding convict population. Really that's about the only good thing to come from this, I'd imagine they'll get better/faster if they continue with the job.

Americans aren't used to doing this kind of work, specially for that pay. I swear its getting to the point where some people can't even imagine mowing their own yard.

They may have fucked themselves over for the moment, but it'll be interesting to see if more Americans find this an acceptable job to do.

Its not a lack of police to fight drug cartels which is the cause of the violence. That analysis is hollow. You are leaving out the devastating consequences of NAFTA and imperialism on these countries.

Poverty and unemployment have only worsened as a result of subsidies going towards big agrobussiness instead of local farmers. This is what leads to crime. Its a reaction by the working class getting even more fucked. When you can't get any $ by growing corn and instead have the chance to make $ selling drugs, yeah, you do it.

It isn't a coincidence that the majority of immigrants come from countries that have had dictators and death squads with the support of the US. Guatamala, El Salvador, Mexico. Destroyed economies create migrants which are CHEAP LABOR. Add to this the criminalization of immigrants with AZ's SB1070 and GA's copycat HB87. The AZ bill was pretty much written by Corrections Corporation of America, a private prison corporation which gets $200 per bed a night.

Its all part of the imperative of profit, the inherent violence of capitalism, duh
----
Additional reading:

http://blog.sojo.net/2010/10/28/prison-and-profits-the-politics-of-az%E2%80%99s-sb1070-bill-revealed/

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/5/25/harvest_of_empire_new_book_exposes
"And then there's this from independent journalist Zafar Bangash:

"The CIA, as Cockburn and (Jeffrey) St Clair reveal, had been in this business right from the beginning. In fact, even before it came into existence, its predecessors, the OSS and the Office of Naval Intelligence, were involved with criminals. One such criminal was Lucky Luciano, the most notorious gangster and drug trafficker in America in the forties."

The CIA's involvement in drug trafficking closely dovetails America's adventures overseas - from Indo-China in the sixties to Afghanistan in the eighties....As Alfred McCoy states in his book: Politics of Heroin: CIA complicity in the Global Drug Trade, beginning with CIA raids from Burma into China in the early fifties, the agency found that 'ruthless drug lords made effective anti-communists." ("CIA peddles drugs while US Media act as cheerleaders", Zafar Bangash, Muslimedia, January 16-31, 1999)

And, this from author William Blum:

"ClA-supported Mujahedeen rebels ... engaged heavily in drug trafficking while fighting against the Soviet-supported government," writes historian William Blum. "The Agency's principal client was Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, one of the leading druglords and a leading heroin refiner. CIA-supplied trucks and mules, which had carried arms into Afghanistan, were used to transport opium to laboratories along the Afghan/Pakistan border. The output provided up to one half of the heroin used annually in the United States and three-quarters of that used in Western Europe....""


http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=18877

i feel ya BB.

it's just the current narrative that most people buy into propagated by the media.
why?
because they have shit to do,families to take care of and many times two jobs..sometimes three.
the factual information is out there but you have to look to find it and most people just dont have the time.
so we get folks regurgitating factoids and arguments given to them by well-paid pundits.
"they took our jobs"
if some dude from mexico who cant even speak the language, and has no education, took your job then you are a loser of such EPIC and humiliating proportions.
pablo didnt take your job,your job was outsourced to india.blame your company not some migrant worker.

in the 80's they gave us the narrative "welfare queens" now we are being told it is those "greedy" and "lazy" school teachers,and the unions they are part of,totally ignoring the history of unions and the thousands who died fighting so we can have:
40 hr work weeks.
weekends off.
safer work enviroments.
equal labor practices and the fact that its illegal to have your 8 yr old daughter working 14 hrs a day..7 days a week.
the list is impressive.

they say that universal health care is socialism while conveniently ignoring certain aspects of our government being of that very model.
they also ignore those pesky facts that health care would be cheaper on a single payer plan.one that we already have!
medicare is by far one of the most efficient per dollar than any other government institution.
but those facts just get in the way of their narrative.

look at how they formulate their premise.
using words to compare our government with running a business or household.
it is weak and factually dishonest but people can relate to that because they understand...
it relates to how THEY live,so it makes sense to them.
but it has nothing at all to do with reality.

the food stamp program,along with social security have been two of the great success stories.
keeping the poor and working poor from destitution due to all resources going to food.
lowered child mortality because these kids can eat and older,more vulnerable of this society dont end up homeless.
almost 70 million on food stamps but what will they show as their proof these things are a failure?
anecdotal evidence.not to convey a strong point but rather to appeal to the emotional nature of us all.

these people are being duped into believing that certain politicians think and feel just like they do.
no...they dont.
the ONLY time you matter to a politician EVER..is the election cycle.

for as long as public elections are financed by private funding special interest will always have their ears and by proxy...set the narrative.
they call it "public relations".
i call it what it is:propaganda.

oh man.total derailment.
my bad.

>> ^ulysses1904:

Yeah his voice is obnoxious. And the editing and sound effects are the usual manipulative crap. The only thing missing is the mushroom cloud at the finale. Or was it there, I stopped watching before the end.


However, the message for the cars is completely true. I am not a wealthy person, so fluctuations in used car parts is a real pain for me...and it has been noticeable. Even moreso since many of the components I have needed of late have been engine related.
>> ^handmethekeysyou:

I almost upvoted this video after the beginning sequence.
But after the narrator's obnoxious tone, and then specifically the line, "but this government misallocation of money and resources always[emphasis mine] leads to unintended consequences," I stopped watching.
Always? Now there are a few ways of interpreting this sentences. First would be that when the government misallocates money and resources, there are unintended consequences. I won't disagree with that semantically, but if that's what he's saying, does it really need to be said? When the government screws up, it screws up. The first rule of Tautology Club is the first rule of Tautology Club.
A second interpretation is that government policy always misallocates money and resources & there are always, without fail, unintended consequences. Well, now I'll disagree semantically. Saying that all policy misallocates $$ & resources is ludicrous. If the video is going to talk about the fact that in all policy, there is always some money misused, that sounds interesting and is a worthwhile, constructive criticism. But something in those ominous clouds composited behind the Capitol Building tells me this isn't going to be an objective, in-depth look at government spending.
I suppose this video is 10 minutes of cherry-picked policies that the government screwed up. I'd love to watch and get worked up about it, but now I know it would just be anti-government propaganda.
...
I decided to watch some of it since maybe it was unfair to rail on it so hard after only a minute. Things that struck me:
- Use of Uncle Sam to suggest overbearing government propaganda. Video then proceeds to lay the propaganda on heavier than a North Korean campaign to get you to trim your hair. People in the streets, in photo negative! Capitol building with dollar signs coming out it, heading right for the lens, in photo negative! How about you composite some more shots over other shots to make this all seem so overwhelming? I think there was a full 5 seconds in there without a single hit or sting. I was bored and not emotionally outraged during those 5 seconds. Please reedit to fix.
- You're going to argue against "regulations" at large? All regulation is hurting me, the consumer, the citizen? [Regulating the amount of lead in my paint ultimately costs me more money, which means I can't provide as well for my children, who are currently eating paint chips.] Strange that he doesn't name a single specific regulation. Though it's actually nice. It saves me from having to think. Now I know, regulation=bad, and I don't need to worry my pretty little head about the whys and hows of it all.
- Nor does he explain the line "We have recently seen that sometimes it's the regulator that keeps bad businesses in business." Ok, sometimes that happens...like, when? Oh, I don't actually know any examples, just sometimes it happens. I can't wait to put on a smug expression of intellectual superiority after I wow the crowd at my next cocktail party when I pull this nugget out.
- During the regulation bit, he does relate that we're paying a "regulation tax" that's priced into my health insurance, shoes, clothing [shoes aren't clothing?], food, cars, homes, and pretty much anything I buy. I hate taxes! I buy at least 3 of those things! [So what?] So...I hate regulations! Which regulations do I hate again? [Not sure.] All of them! [Did I mention this is propaganda?]
I stopped after the regulations part [can you tell I didn't like that bit?]. I have no conclusive paragraph to sum everything up. This video is terrible and offensive.


There are many examples of bad companies staying in power because of using the power of law to enforce their agenda. For instance, the enjoyed legal monopoly of most telco and cable companies. Or, the higher prices Americans pay for sugar because of import tariffs on sugar. And thusly making corn sugar, its unhealthier cousin, the mainstay of American diets. Or, the corn subsidy that makes corn feeding beef more economical, even though it causes ecoli to then be produced by said cattle; this all benefits fast food industries to the defiant of us all. Or minimum wage, it necessarily raises unemployment by denying low skilled workers access to market priced labor; this protects high skilled labor from ever being found wanting for lower priced labor mainly benefiting large union positions, while relegating to perpetual unemployment/illegal employment a low skilled migrant worker.

But I admit, there needed to be more examples and less dogma in the video.

you guys are focusing on the word "progress" - i think the focus is on the word "crazy" ... and in that regard, segregation and slavery wasn't really crazy to anyone reaping the profits of the systems in place.

Slavery, in actuality, yes - crazy. But in financial terms, a business practice to maximize profits. This country has always been ruled by the landowners and the wealthy and slave labor has always been used. First african americans, now foreign workers at slave's wages... including migrant workers.
The elite still have slaves, kept in bondage by wages far below a living wage.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Colbert, Immigration, Politics' to 'Colbert, Immigration, Politics, Migrant, Farm, Workers, Immigrants' - edited by calvados

Tags for this video have been changed from 'stephen colbert, congressional hearing, illegal immigration, house committee' to 'migrant, farm, workers, congressional hearing, illegal immigration, house committee' - edited by calvados

Bravo. Exquisitely balanced use of deadpan irony, satire and sarcasm to make these points in a much more thought provoking way than would otherwise have been possible. People seem to have completely missed this.

Satire is never quite as funny when it has to be explained, but what he did through this dialog was bring out in the open numerous ingrained (and many would agree, wrong) views on the subject of migrant labor (esp on farms). Food for thought, pardon the pun.

Also WTF is up with the lady checking her Blackberry when someone is speaking? I find it staggering that members of this House Judiciary sub-committee haven't been issued Droid Incredibles.

>> ^Tymbrwulf:

>> ^dgandhi:

When my GF saw me throwing pennies in the trash, she asked me to put them in a jar for her, so I did. When she decided to use them, she wasted 5 minutes, and a cashiers patience, in an attempt to utilize this otherwise "wasted" money. She then came back and acknowledged the basic truth, that unless you make migrant-farm-hand wages, pennies are not worth your time. She no longer complains when I throw them in the trash.

My 8th grade history teacher told us that he picked up every piece of loose change that he would find on the ground and pocket it. He would then empty out his loose change into a jar at the end of each day. Once a year, he would go into the bank with his jar of loose change, and exchange it for hard currency. He was able to supplement his income by over $1000 a year. All from loose change he found lying around. This was in 1998.


i have a co-worker who does this; and we work at a courthouse, so there are ample opportunities to find loose change...he makes about 100 dollars every time he turns it in...about once a year. i am afraid that i must call bullshit on your story.

>> ^dgandhi:


When my GF saw me throwing pennies in the trash, she asked me to put them in a jar for her, so I did. When she decided to use them, she wasted 5 minutes, and a cashiers patience, in an attempt to utilize this otherwise "wasted" money. She then came back and acknowledged the basic truth, that unless you make migrant-farm-hand wages, pennies are not worth your time. She no longer complains when I throw them in the trash.


My 8th grade history teacher told us that he picked up every piece of loose change that he would find on the ground and pocket it. He would then empty out his loose change into a jar at the end of each day. Once a year, he would go into the bank with his jar of loose change, and exchange it for hard currency. He was able to supplement his income by over $1000 a year. All from loose change he found lying around. This was in 1998.

>> ^Tymbrwulf:

For those of you that hate pennies/nickels. I will GLADLY take them all off your hands! Please let me know if you would like to join me on this little endeavor.


You can dig them out of my trash bin.

When my GF saw me throwing pennies in the trash, she asked me to put them in a jar for her, so I did. When she decided to use them, she wasted 5 minutes, and a cashiers patience, in an attempt to utilize this otherwise "wasted" money. She then came back and acknowledged the basic truth, that unless you make migrant-farm-hand wages, pennies are not worth your time. She no longer complains when I throw them in the trash.

Well put, I rather enjoyed reading this.

In reply to this comment by GeeSussFreeK:
It is funny how immigration has gone from what has made this country great, to a problem that needs to be addressed. Even very liberal things covertly sponsor more restrictive immigration practices; like labor unions. Cheap labor coming into this country is a big threat to them. It is all pretty hilarious that people who want to come to this country and better their lives are criminalized. The reality is there are some real foundational problems wrong with the current US system of welfare's that cause immigration to be a problem. As of now, people have to leave their families behind in Mexico and send them money that they could be spending here! That makes no sense! There are always going to be rouge elements of criminals mixed in and among your migrant population, but that isn't any different than the people that are already here!

They never address the real issues on shows like this. Why is immigration such a tedious, expensive process specifically designed to keep people out instead of channeling people into this great nation? Why are we specifically targeting Mexican immigrants many of whom make our economies work all across the south (there would be no real domestic fruit harvest without them, and your local hardware store wouldn't nearly be as robust without day laborers standing around waiting to be useful)? And why is a nation that used its open boarders to become one of the most prospers and powerful nations in the world (from a nation of farmers), that spreads its culture like a sickness to the rest of the world? As per usual, it is most likely powerful corporate interests using do-gooders as front men to accomplish their objectives, like welfare and minimum wage (all 3 of these are very key issues for labor unions interestingly enough).

It is funny how immigration has gone from what has made this country great, to a problem that needs to be addressed. Even very liberal things covertly sponsor more restrictive immigration practices; like labor unions. Cheap labor coming into this country is a big threat to them. It is all pretty hilarious that people who want to come to this country and better their lives are criminalized. The reality is there are some real foundational problems wrong with the current US system of welfare's that cause immigration to be a problem. As of now, people have to leave their families behind in Mexico and send them money that they could be spending here! That makes no sense! There are always going to be rouge elements of criminals mixed in and among your migrant population, but that isn't any different than the people that are already here!

They never address the real issues on shows like this. Why is immigration such a tedious, expensive process specifically designed to keep people out instead of channeling people into this great nation? Why are we specifically targeting Mexican immigrants many of whom make our economies work all across the south (there would be no real domestic fruit harvest without them, and your local hardware store wouldn't nearly be as robust without day laborers standing around waiting to be useful)? And why is a nation that used its open boarders to become one of the most prospers and powerful nations in the world (from a nation of farmers), that spreads its culture like a sickness to the rest of the world? As per usual, it is most likely powerful corporate interests using do-gooders as front men to accomplish their objectives, like welfare and minimum wage (all 3 of these are very key issues for labor unions interestingly enough).