CO puts farmers between immigrants and inmates

Colorado passed one of the toughest illegal immigrant bills in the nation last year. Which received many "huzzah's" from immigration hardliners nationwide. Even better, it like it worked, illegal immigrants fled the state (and maybe some legal ones too). Now the hard-liners song, "For Colorado's a jolly good fellow..." Two for two and on a roll. Now the stage is set for the final piece of the theory to be proven. With all those jobs that illegal immigrants took in agriculture that US citizens are pining away for available, citizens surely rushed in to fill the void. Right? Right?

Mmmmm, not so much. It looks like no one wanted those jobs after all, and crops rotted because there was no one to work the fields. Maybe as Meatloaf sang, "Two out of three ain't bad."

In any case, now CO farmers need a solution. And the survey says...Prison labor! That will get those fields tended to. Plus $.60 an hour (plus no unions!) can't beat that. But wait, wasn't that the problem to start with? How can any American, no matter how desperate work for $.60 an hour? I mean you'd have to force someone to work at those wages.

Which makes one wonder how serious the argument that illegal immigrants take jobs because they work at lower wages really is. I mean, if the solution is to use people who will work for less than 10% of the new minimum wage (at gunpoint), how does that help American workers get those jobs?

Two final points.

One. The "illegal immigrants take jobs argument" is false for roughly the same reasons as the minimum wage concept doesn't really help. The jobs II's (I squared?) take are jobs no one wants. These are the true "entry level" gigs. There are no third generation manual laborers. Sucking out supply won't bring in new American workers because there are no American workers looking to do the work. The jobs that are filled by II's can't pay more because the end product can't charge more, there's no way to pass on the increased cost. In fact, in most cases prices are going down. Get rid of labor supply and the industry just goes away, jobs are lost, product is lost, revenue is lost, and taxes are lost. Look at CO. The answer to this new supply of jobs is not a rush of labor, its Prison Labor. Doesn't this demonstrate anything? Bottom line, hardliners create lots of loses but no gains. Brilliant! But typical of government.

Two. When listening to the debate its important to look at who's talking (but not look who's talking too-terrible movie). Farmers and the like are very much against the hardliners. Makes sense, their livelihood, their homes, their land and homes depend on this supply of labor. Everyone wants to keep US agriculture alive, II's are the way, much better than subsidies. But who's arguing against? There's no group, American's Who Want to Work Crazy Hard for Low Wages (or AWWWCHLW-bless you), debating the point. Its politicians looking to gain points with the electorate. Or better put, people who have nothing at stake trying to gain favor from other people who have nothing at stake. No politician or voter against II's really touch the issue (nanny's exempted). The people who do touch this issue are uniformly against this new dance craze.

Beware politician's who smell votes...