When the “Concerned Citizens for Immigration Reform” monitored 152 McDonald’s franchises in Connecticut they discovered that Hispanics were over-represented as staff 6 to 9 times in relation to their proportion of the general population of the state. Missing in action for the most part were African Americans, Euro-Americans, seniors and high school students who formerly depended on those jobs to scrape by or supplement the family income. They found that Hispanics accounted for 87% of McDonald’s employees in Fairfield County and 64% in New Haven---quite an achievement for a demographic that comprised just 10% of the population at the time of the survey. http://www.alipac.us/article757.html
McDonald’s of course would not over-represent Hispanics because they love Mexican culture or have any plans to switch to a Mexican menu. They simply love the bottom line: cheap wages and low benefits. A business motive that is as old as the hills, only in this era, that motive is dressed up as a quest for cultural diversity and liberal tolerance, and any opposition to it is depicted as nasty, nativist and bigoted. One wonders how “diverse” MexAmerica will be in 2040 with 450 million people living without the diversity of wildlife, farmland or water and the absence of a 1st amendment to do anything about it because free speech has long been sacrificed on the altar of ethnic harmony.
Too many Canadians, especially those who engineer public opinion, elect governments and frame immigration policy, believe that Canada also needs a “McJob” fix to plug a gap in skilled labour or supply the demographic base for an aged workforce that will need pension and medical support. They seem willfully ignorant of consistent studies that demonstrate that unskilled workers, who comprise the vast portion of immigrants legal or illegal on both sides of the border, are unable to pay enough income tax to even reimburse government coffers for the services they consume, never mind subsidize the needs of others.
According to Robert Rector of the Heritage Foundation each family of illegal immigrants, almost universally unskilled, cost American taxpayers some $22,000 annually in services provided minus taxes paid.
Some $338 billion in expenditures were paid out in that same year (2007) in total for an illegal immigrant population that was conservatively estimated to be 12 million in number. Other studies, mostly done by Edwin Rubenstein, only confirmed this portrait of a crushing unskilled immigrant burden.
Herbert Grubel, economics professor emeritus of Simon Fraser University, did a report for the Fraser Institute that painted the Canadian problem in similar colours. For the period studied, 1990-2002, immigration cost taxpayers $18.3 billion in 2002 alone. Why? A politically driven immigration selection process that favoured the recruitment of unskilled workers, who comprise an incredible 80% of the total intake. Many are brought in under the extended family wing of the skilled or professional migrants who sponsor them, and most of those deemed “refugees” lack meaningful skills. Incredibly, most apparently lack the most important vocational skill of all---fluency in at least one of the two official languages. Of 600,000 admitted in 1998-2000, only 43% spoke English or French.
American commentary suggests that it takes on average the salaries of 2-3 workers to pay for the social security cheque of one retiree, but 5 Walmart employees or 9 workers at MacDonalds to deliver the same tax revenue required to pay for that same cheque. http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/RetirementandWills/P98826.asp If supporting an aged population is going to be the rationale given for mass immigration, a claim so far demolished by logic and analysis in at least two countries, then importing people qualified to work only at “McJobs” is not the answer. We are merely trying to build a welfare state on a foundation of imported low-wage quick sand---and killing the environment in the process.
And if a skills shortage does indeed exist, uncorroborated as it is by any thorough and objective inventory, it is one chronic to a growth economy that ultimately must be abandoned in favour of a steady-state model. In the meantime, immediate needs could be satisfied with an immigration quota 20% or less of its present level and targeted to those who could assist us rather than the reverse, therefore delivering more bang for the ecological “buck” we are paying by allowing any increment to our hyper-consumer society. The money saved from abandoning mass immigration and population growth, the formula for economic success in other jurisdictions like Japan, money that according to Grubel is equivalent to what Canadians spend on health care, could be deployed in training Canadians to fill Canadian jobs. And any surplus monies could be more cost-effectively spent on increasing our foreign aid budget to help potential immigrants where they should be helped---in their own countries, especially if the aid was tied to family planning.
Let McDonald’s hire locals at decent wages and train them to cook real food at realistic prices. If they can’t afford that, they shouldn’t be in business.