This weeks reading highlights the disparities between immigrant farm workers and citizen workers. The author's claim is that our countries food systems/policies were formed with this slightly baked-in, and that it may be intentional that we have an immigrant workforce being treated to worse off conditions than our country promises. I personally would believe that. A seemingly large theme in this country is to get built up by immigrants, then dispose of them like an asset, and this reading only supports that. An important segment of the reading talks about how the global trade system has been manipulating countries outside of the superpowers, specifically by forcing out small farmers to rely on our way of food production because our products may be cheaper. This initial start of the cycle is what leads to farmers losing their way of life, then relying on USA based food systems, and ultimately creating economic struggle to said area where our systems are introduced because those families and the ones around them are out of a supporting job, then possibly forced to relocate.
Some of this reading felt a bit redundant in the data they were giving, but overall was a powerful article. To circle back into disparities being baked-in, I think it shows our countries general lack of morals when it comes to becoming built-up. Allowing immigrants to work when it benefits us, then deporting them when it no longer does. It is obvious that any country would probably do this if they had the chance, since it allows to keep your citizens worrying less and you have the excuse of "oh, they aren't legal". It does bring up a big question to me though, and that is, while I know it is important, how much of migrant workers food insecurity is our issue to tackle? I know it is important for us to be aware of it, but we also know of many citizens facing the same challenges. It is hard to determine which illegal workers migrated because they had to or not, and most would argue the ones who get helped first should be the ones who immigrated because they had to, but again, that is a very hard and slow process to determine. The average income of someone living in a country illegally is almost always going to be low, so, should that be a higher up priority in food security, or should it not because they are not citizens? I personally haven't got a clue but I am curious what others think.
1 comment:
Jacob, I think your question is the one that everyone would rather turn their back on and not answer. I'll try to provide some insight. I think we first have to dispel the myth that migrant workers are taking our jobs. The only reason that is actually occurring is that the companies hiring migrants as opposed to their own citizens feel they need more than what we have to offer in some way or another. Whether it's to promote diversity in a business, or to fulfill a niche like finding a chemist who speaks Chinese and English, that specialized in an area of study. The population that typically states, "Migrant workers are taking our jobs." Are typically the ones who have never worked a day in the fields. Let me remind us all that most people shy away from labor-intensive work, let alone work that doesn't pay above $30,000. I think that if we are bringing workers here to help feed our mouths, the least we could do is make sure they're not only able to feed themselves, but also the families they leave behind. All the much more so, being that we have the funds to do it, given the exchange rate, the current average salary of most Mexicans, typically less than $1,000/month unless you have a well-paying job (which in that case they wouldn't come here to work). My point is we haven't solved our own issue of poverty, homelessness and hunger in our own country because it hasn't been prioritized in the legislation. Therefore, I think the least we can do is help those who help us.
Post a Comment