In an article in the January issue of First Things, professor Reuven Brenner suggests revising immigration policy to maximize the influx of “the vital few whose contributions to economic growth is disproportionately high.” Jeffrey Mirus, president of CatholicCulture.org, believes this is an approach that can combine solidarity and subsidiarity:
Brenner argues that there are now several places around the world where such persons, raised mainly in the global south, can migrate to better their socio-economic lot, so that the United States finds itself in competition for the very talent pool which can mitigate or solve its immigration problems. He recommends policy revisions which encourage the arrival of such people in large numbers, which would in turn provide a way to harness the energies of many more immigrants who are not yet in a position to contribute substantially to the economy.
If Americans, along with many others around the world, are torn between hospitality and xenophobia when it comes to immigration, then this approach might well facilitate the former while reducing the latter. It envisions using government to bring out the best in what the community itself has to offer, rather than seeking to control everything through bureaucratic regulation, massive programs, or impossible police responsibilities. It recognizes the value of human liberty and the benefits which flow from each person’s active participation in the shaping of his own future. This sort of thinking puts subsidiarity at the service of solidarity. Because immigration is necessarily a national issue, this proposal rightly looks to the Federal government for part of the solution. But it still represents the kind of thinking we need—thinking outside the Federal box.
January 22nd, 2010 | 11:03 am
Funny that the 16 out of18 Republican Senators who opposed immigration reform and killed the bill in 2007 are now not in Office, God Does Justice.
What would you see yourself as if you were looking thru the Eyes of Almighty GOD ?
BECAUSE,
How you Treat others is how God TREATS You.
How you Forgive others is how god FORGIVES You.
How you See others is how God SEEs You.
When you show Empathy for the plight of another HUMAN BEING, God takes empathy in YOUR PLIGHT.
When others slight you and you ignore the call to Vengeance that burns inside, God erases all memory of your failures towards him.
When you SEE THE IMAGE OF GOD in ANOTHER HUMAN BEING, Then the IMAGE of GOD Becomes REVEALED WITHIN YOU.
The way You Judge other HUMANS is HOW GOD Judges You.
All Humans are EQUAL, ALL Humans are created and are the same in Almighty GODS VISION.
What You wish for the other is what GOD Gives YOU.
PASS IMMIGRATION AND SEE OUR NATION FLOURISH.
January 22nd, 2010 | 11:44 am
The more I learn about subsidarity as articulated by the Catholic hierarchy, the more it appears to be a toxic contemporary revival of the pan-Romanism that was painfully diverted from the mainstream of US Catholicism during the First Great Wave of immigration in the last quarter of the 19th century. At that time a few reformist American bishops pushed hard for Catholicism to repudiate the hyperreactionary counter-reformation agenda of Rome and develop a genuine modern accomodation with the protestant-based civic culture of the United States. The modern liberationista hierarchy, having infested the clergy with a generation of perverts and reaped its harvest of empty pews, looks at Latin aliens as the magic rejuvenator of its flock, not unlike the mission fathers of Spanish California looked at that indigneous population– like Gualupana sheep. As history shows, the bishops are destroying the village in order to “save” it. The chasm the neo-romanists are rebuilding between Catholicism and what is still culturally an overwhelmingly protestant American society will warm the hearts of every nativist, whether in the grave or online. The road to hell is lined with foolish padres.
January 22nd, 2010 | 12:24 pm
>>PASS IMMIGRATION AND SEE OUR NATION FLOURISH.>>
Basic principle:
We are a sovereign nation and have the right to control our borders.
I’m in favor of passing the exact same laws for immigration into the US as Mexico has for immigration into Mexico.
Would you accept those laws? (with the same enforcement Mexico imposes?)
January 22nd, 2010 | 2:20 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Immigration Tips, law . law said: "Solidarity, Subsidiarity, and Immigration Reform » First Thoughts …" http://tinyurl.com/yc9f3qs #immigration [...]
January 24th, 2010 | 4:00 am
I am disgusted by the disinformation of the left. Someone who wishes non-Americans to enter legally and respect our laws is labeled a racist or being xenophobic. Nothing could be further from the truth. Everyone I know understands immigration is desirable and necessary. We just prefer they be here with proper documentation, obey our laws, and embrace American values and culture if they want to stay. It would also be nice if immigrants were employable and didn’t come and immediately go on welfare.
January 24th, 2010 | 8:51 am
Rampant population growth threatens our economy and quality of life. Immigration, both legal and illegal, are fueling this growth. I’m not talking about environmental degradation or resource depletion. I’m talking about the effect upon rising unemployment and poverty in America.
I am the author of a book titled “Five Short Blasts: A New Economic Theory Exposes The Fatal Flaw in Globalization and Its Consequences for America.” To make a long story short, my theory is that, as population density rises beyond some critical level, per capita consumption of products begins to decline out of the need to conserve space. People who live in crowded conditions simply don’t have enough space to use and store many products. This declining per capita consumption, in the face of rising productivity (per capita output, which always rises), inevitably yields rising unemployment and poverty.
This theory has huge implications for U.S. policy toward population management, especially immigration policy. Our policies of encouraging high rates of immigration are rooted in the belief of economists that population growth is a good thing, fueling economic growth. Through most of human history, the interests of the common good and business (corporations) were both well-served by continuing population growth. For the common good, we needed more workers to man our factories, producing the goods needed for a high standard of living. This population growth translated into sales volume growth for corporations. Both were happy.
But, once a critical population density is breached, their interests diverge. It is in the best interest of the common good to stabilize the population, avoiding an erosion of our quality of life through high unemployment and poverty. However, it is still in the interest of corporations to fuel population growth because, even though per capita consumption goes into decline, total consumption still increases. We now find ourselves in the position of having corporations and economists influencing public policy in a direction that is not in the best interest of the common good.
The U.N. ranks the U.S. with eight third world countries – India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Democratic Republic of Congo, Bangladesh, Uganda, Ethiopia and China – as accounting for fully half of the world’s population growth by 2050. It’s absolutely imperative that our population be stabilized, and that’s impossible without dramatically reining in immigration, both legal and illegal.
If you’re interested in learning more about this important new economic theory, I invite you to visit my web site at http://PeteMurphy.wordpress.com.
Pete Murphy
Author, “Five Short Blasts”
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact