In our next unit, we will be studying our immigration history, but specifically, we'll look at the time period of 1880s - 1924 when a huge influx of Eastern and Southern European immigrants arrived on our shores looking for work, land, the American Dream and freedom.
One question that swirls around the current immigration debate is whether or not a 700-mile wall should be built along the 1,952-mile border w/ Mexico. The House approved $2.2 billion for the wall back in December 2005 to "build a double set of steel walls with floodlights, surveillance cameras and motion detectors along one-third of the U.S.-Mexican border." 1 The Senate approved the bill shortly afterwards.
On Thursday, October 26, President Bush signed this bill into law. "Unfortunately the United States has not been in complete control of its borders for decades and therefore illegal immigration has been on the rise," Bush said at a signing ceremony. He called the fence bill "an important step in our nation's efforts to secure our borders." 3 (What's interesting to note about this Yahoo article that I quoted from here is that it can't even figure out how long the southern border of the U.S. is. One part of the article says it's a "nearly 2,000-mile border" while another part of the article refers to the "fence project covering one-third of the 2,100-mile border." Last time I checked, we haven't changed our southern border with Mexico since the Gadsden Purchase in 1853.)
So, what do you think? Does America need this wall? Why or why not? Read the articles on illegal immigration and decide before answering. Check on the links below to read some opinions. Your answer should be 150 words or more. Answer by Sunday night 10/29/06, 11:59 p.m.
1. Article from the San Fransico Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/02/26/BORDERFENCE.TMP
2. Diagram of wall taken from website: http://www.dakotavoice.com/images/fence.jpg
3. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061026/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration_8
This is the home of the online journals and musings of my American history students at Groves High School in Beverly Hills, Michigan begun in the fall of 2006. At this site, students will share their thoughts and feelings about the topics in American history that interest them. They will respond to journals as well as be responsible for posting once a week. I hope you enjoy your visit, and please feel free to leave a comment or two.
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Monday, October 16, 2006
Journal #3 - Modern Day Social Costs of Capitalism
In our unit on late 19th Century industry and unions, we're examining the social costs of unregulated capitalism and the response in unions and labor strife/conflict. In today's world, we see a shrinking manufacturing work force with American jobs going overseas, the increased costs of health care for workers (with millions not covered as well), city slums and poverty (something that hasn't changed since the late 19th Century). Corporations are also downsizing which affect white color jobs and not just manufacturing jobs.
There are several options you can choose from when considering your journal. Pick one of the following questions and answer it fully in a journal of a minimum of 150 words.
1. With jobs going overseas (outsourcing), companies say that they need to do this to compete with other companies. For instance, companies send work overseas to cut costs and see their stock price jump as a result. Critics say that these foreign workers don't pay taxes to the American government like American workers would; also, the unemployed American workers become part of the unemployment pool. They may be overqualified for entry level jobs.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=519224 - Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's business article on outsourcing and its benefits.
Is there a limit of jobs that American companies should be allowed to export overseas? Or do American companies need to compete with other companies and shouldn't be held back by government restrictions?
2. Products made in foreign countries by workers (some of whom are under 18) allow American companies to keep prices lower for us, the American consumer. American businesses aren't bound by U.S. child labor laws but bound by the laws of the country. Plus, U.S. companies don't have to pay American minimum wages. This is taken from www.sweatshopwatch.org:
"According to independent labor rights organizations in Hong Kong, a living wage in China would be about $0.87/hour. Minimum wage rates vary as they are set by each provincial government, however, they do not meet this living wage. Shanghai's minimum is $0.21/hour, and Guangzhou's $0.26/hour.
("Behind the Label: Made in China," March 1998, Charles Kernaghan/National Labor Committee.) "
The question is: are you willing to continue buying goods from companies that use labor like this b/c of the price? Or are you willing to buy from companies that don't employ child labor or cheap labor overseas? Why? Explain. See the flyer or see www.sweatshops.org. http://www.sweatshopwatch.org/media/pdf/sweatfree_handout05.pdf
There are several options you can choose from when considering your journal. Pick one of the following questions and answer it fully in a journal of a minimum of 150 words.
1. With jobs going overseas (outsourcing), companies say that they need to do this to compete with other companies. For instance, companies send work overseas to cut costs and see their stock price jump as a result. Critics say that these foreign workers don't pay taxes to the American government like American workers would; also, the unemployed American workers become part of the unemployment pool. They may be overqualified for entry level jobs.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=519224 - Milwaukee Journal Sentinel's business article on outsourcing and its benefits.
Is there a limit of jobs that American companies should be allowed to export overseas? Or do American companies need to compete with other companies and shouldn't be held back by government restrictions?
2. Products made in foreign countries by workers (some of whom are under 18) allow American companies to keep prices lower for us, the American consumer. American businesses aren't bound by U.S. child labor laws but bound by the laws of the country. Plus, U.S. companies don't have to pay American minimum wages. This is taken from www.sweatshopwatch.org:
"According to independent labor rights organizations in Hong Kong, a living wage in China would be about $0.87/hour. Minimum wage rates vary as they are set by each provincial government, however, they do not meet this living wage. Shanghai's minimum is $0.21/hour, and Guangzhou's $0.26/hour.
("Behind the Label: Made in China," March 1998, Charles Kernaghan/National Labor Committee.) "
The question is: are you willing to continue buying goods from companies that use labor like this b/c of the price? Or are you willing to buy from companies that don't employ child labor or cheap labor overseas? Why? Explain. See the flyer or see www.sweatshops.org. http://www.sweatshopwatch.org/media/pdf/sweatfree_handout05.pdf
Labels:
19th Century Industry,
American Dream,
outsourcing,
sweatshops,
unions
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)