Monday, April 24, 2006

Time for a Tex-Mex Marshall Plan?

From a pure economic standpoint, this approach to immigration reform makes a lot of sense.

6 comments:

LonewackoDotCom said...

I discuss the article here. Hint: I use the word "treason".

Gritsforbreakfast said...

Nothing treasonous about it. In fact, I don't see a realistic alternative.

The cost of immigration enforcement is immense - one in three federal prosecutions is for immigration violations, e.g., and the Border Patrol is the largest police force in the world BEFORE any new programs. And none of it's working. If we're going to blow that much money, I'd prefer to spend it on an effective approach like this instead of failed ideas like building a wall or mass deportations.

The Marshall Plan wasn't treasonous when applied to Europe - it was in our interest - and from an economic perspective it would be in our interest to do the same thing in Mexico.

markm said...

It's not treasonous, but from everything I've heard about governments in Mexico, it might be rather like trying to fill a black hole with money.

The Marshall plan had two pre-existing conditions that don't apply here. One is that in most of the countries where it was applied, we had recently bombed the heck out of them, occupied them with our troops, forced a change of government (maybe back to what it was before the Germans invaded, but still a forced change), and sometimes hung the previous leaders. The second, and probably more important, was that most of the people affected knew what good government looked like, and were well along in creating reasonably effective and honest governments of their own.

Thane Eichenauer said...

Don't wait for the government to adopt a Marshall plan, feel free to donate to a worthy charity now! I can't imagine the average charity being any less worthy in their goals than the Marshall plan was.

I have no faith that "massive subsidies" as recommended by the referenced article will end up with any better results than the average government spending project. Paying Mexico to "foster a climate riper for investment" is a maquerade for socialism.

And pray tell what government is going to pay for the prayed for massive subsidies? The US government seems pretty well overextended as it is.

I have no objection to any Mexican state applying to join the United States or even just seceding from Mexico. The elimination or rejection of a corrupt political systems is the solution, anything less is unlikely to eliminate government cronyism that is the historical hallmark of Mexico.

Anonymous said...

Scrap the plan, unless it includes a military invasion of Mexico and the forced institution of a government so like ours that no noticable difference exists.

Then enjoy some "free trade" with a "first world" nation on our southern border.

OCCHC said...

The Tex-Mex Marshall Plan has more U.S. self interest than any other ever undertaken since the Civil War.

Our resources to effect a sound plan are extensive. We have tens of thousands of college educated persons of Mexican birth who would go to Mexico to help make this work in exchange for citizenship.

But, first we must make Mexico safe and, for that, we have tens of thousands of persons who would join an Tex-Mex army to help with that issue.

The bottom line would be a new economic vitality for the U.S. and the return of hundreds of thousands to Mexico where they could now find jobs and education for their children.

Where is the leadership?