Questão de Arquivologia

Text II Comments from readers of Text I 1. April 17, 2013 at 7:03 p.m., Florianopolis - SC - Brasil Comment sent by U. N. The experience of field research in LA while living in the US gave me two insights in support of the thesis defended by the researchers. First, even poor campesinos from El Salvador 5 can prosper in the US. They send their kids to school, learn English as a second language, start a small business or do work shunned by Americans. The question is why a poor El Salvadorean can become a valuable citizen in the US and not in his 10 native country? The US economic and social systems are set up to provide opportunity for immigrants to prosper. Immigration is the engine of growth and prosperity of the American economy. The second argument is counter factual. 15 Countries closed to immigration lag behind those opened to foreign skill and knowledge. Take the case of Brazil. In the 19th century, many predicted Brazil would become a world power along with the US. The US became a major world superpower and 20 Brazil continues to be an emerging market with a sub par educational system and illiterate population. There are many reasons and factors that could explain Brazil’s backwardness. One, however, stands out. The country is closed to immigration, even badly 25 needed high skilled foreign professionals in dynamic sectors of the economy. The Brazilian economy in 2013 is stagnated with the lowest rate of labor productivity among the BRICS. Lack of qualified foreign workers + poor 30 quality of schools are the MAIN factor preventing Brazil to become a developed country in this century. 2. April 17, 2013 at 9:42 a.m., Dover - NJ - USA Comment sent by T. McK. I really wish these writers would look at real jobs and real industries. However the data looks overall, certain jobs that were once routinely done by lower 35 middle class workers, such as gardening, waiting at table, construction labor and so on, are almost all done by immigrants, especially illegals. And part of the reason is the poor enforcement of wage laws, and the existence of a cash economy. It may be that 40 these jobs are now forever changed, but since we have such poor opportunities for the working class, it seems a shame to lose a class of work that had formerly been available. For decades now, the elites (economists 45 and social thinkers of all sorts) have told us that globalization will bring benefits. And it has, to them. But we have lost much of what provided a way of life for working folks, each time promising them that it will get better. 5 Analista de Planejamento, Gestão e Infraestrutura 3. April 17, 2013 at 9:22 a.m., Dayton - Ohio - USA Comment sent by J. I. 50 I don’t see how the authors’ data support their case, in large part because they’ve neglected a critical issue-- precisely what kind of immigration are we talking about? If immigration law requires that immigrants be 55 paid a fair wage, have the right to vote and enjoy legal protections against abusive workplaces, and these are truly enforced, then yes, it’s reasonable to expect that immigrants would indeed boost living standards for both native-born and immigrant Americans alike. 60 But if immigrants are instead brought in as lowwage replacements for American workers, not allowed the right to vote or forced to ten or more years to gain it, and especially if employers have control over their visas and work situations, then living standards are 65 severely damaged for both immigrants and nativeborn Americans, that is for everyone but the 0.1% wealthiest Americans who benefit from cheap labor. Available at:<http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/04/16/ the-economics-of-immigration/expanded-immigration-improvesliving-standards>. Access on: Sept. 4th, 2013. Adapted.