Everyone who crosses the border at legal entry points has to be checked. Those who crossed the border not at legal entry points have not been checked and so have to be checked if they get caught inside the country. That is why the law in Arizona concerning illegal immigrants has been introduced.

The problem is, to find those who have crossed the borders illegally, you have to check even those people who have always been inside the country and should not have to be checked on. It brings a lot of inconveniences to a lot of people.

A solution to the problem of illegal immigration is to accept it and stop fighting it the conventional ways. People do not want open borders. But borders are always open no matter what you do. All the laws that have been passed trying to stop illegal immigration have only made the problem worse. For example, you make it hard for people to come or to return after they leave, and they won’t leave after they come.

Problems created by open borders should be addressed one by one. If there is any government service that should not be available to illegal immigrants, don’t make it available to them. If there are jobs that should not be taken by illegal immigrants, don’t let those jobs be taken by them. I understand that there are jobs that you can not stop those people from taking. But jobs that can be taken by illegal immigrants are not good paying jobs. The majority of good paying jobs can not be taken by them. Most good paying jobs that have been lost are actually lost to people in other countries rather than to illegal immigrants in this country. You can not stop a large chunk of good paying jobs from being taken by people in other countries. So why are you so hell-bent on stopping other people from taking any job in this country?

The main problem brought to the society by illegal immigration is that you can not stop someone from going to the emergency room or giving birth, which cost the society financially. But if human beings are considered assets rather than liabilities, then these expenses and investments should be considered worthy.

Answer this question first: “Is the Dollar undervalued compared to the Pound?” Whatever is true about the Dollar and the Pound is also true about the Yuan and the Dollar, except that the Yuan is pegged to the Dollar. Things are more expensive in England, where the Pound is used. Does it mean that the Dollar is undervalued? As we all know, the Pound and the Dollar can be exchanged freely. So nobody complains that the Dollar is undervalued compared to the Pound. Are people complaining that the Yuan is undervalued compared to the Dollar simply because the Yuan is pegged to the Dollar?

I am very sure that after the Yuan is de-pegged from the Dollar, everything will still be cheaper in China than in the US. Prices are decided by the size of the market. The bigger a market is, the lower the prices are, and so the higher the value of the currency being used in that market is. The value of a currency is not decided by the exchange rates or whether it can be freely traded or not.

China has been helping keep the Dollar from depreciating by pegging the Yuan to the Dollar. If the Yuan is de-pegged from the Dollar, the Dollar will depreciate. That means that US companies will earn less with exports to China, and their cost of production will increase if they have to rely on imports from China, which means less profits for them. Since profits are what drive businesses operating in the first place, the reduction of profits will cause the reduction of businesses, which may result in job reduction rather than job creation.

Also, as I have said before, an economy grows when productivity goes up, not when prices go up. If the Yuan is de-pegged from the Dollar, prices will go up in the US, which will not result in an expansion of the US economy or the US job market.

The only hope for the de-peg of the Yuan to help create jobs in the US is the potential increase in US exports to China assuming that China will not do anything to protect Chinese businesses from being hit by imports from the US. I hope that this alone can offset the other negative effects brought about by the de-peg of the Yuan.

My attention was turned to the impact of migration after reading Chinese Real Estate: Four Ways to Profit From the Biggest Urban Migration in History on moneymorning.com. The following is from this article.

“Given what you may have heard about Chinese property values in recent months, it may surprise you to learn that Chinese real estate investors are extremely value oriented.

And so are the institutional investors I’ve run into during my latest investment-research visit to this country. These institutional players want to lock up some valuable land parcels before 2020. That’s the date by which 500 million Chinese citizens are expected to have moved into China’s cities as part of the greatest urban migration ever recorded.

You can do the math: We’re talking about a group that’s 1.6 times the entire U.S. population … moving from China’s countryside to its cities in the next 10 years.”

From this article, I see that migration brings the increase in the values of local properties. So why are people so much against migration? Part of the reason is that they are stressed out over the increase in rents and property prices that results from migration.

Let’s look at how New York City has been handling the expansion of the city’s population. Rents in New York City have been going up fast during economic boom time, when many people from all over the US and the world move over here. And New Yorkers have been having a hard time with their rents because of that. The city government dealt with this issue by offering rent-control apartments and offering affordable housing to people with low incomes.

So in order to benefit from migration, local government has to come up with good strategies to help local residents deal with problems brought about by migration. I guess this is what the US government has failed to do. And this is the reason why the US government can not reform immigration.

The Yuan peg to the Dollar makes the Dollar increases in value along side with the Yuan. And US budget deficit is funded by foreign governments. So the value of the Dollar has not declined, yet. It will decline if most other countries sell US debts or the Yuan is de-pegged from the Dollar.

Because China is holding massive amount of US debts, China is reluctant to de-peg the Yuan from the Dollar and decrease the value of their holding. But China can certainly let the Yuan appreciate to some degree after selling a certain amount of US debts.

When the US government asks China to de-peg the Yuan from the Dollar, they are basically asking China to sell US debts. But since the US government still wants China to buy more US debts, they can not afford to push China hard on this issue.

The effect of an increase in the supply of labors is the decrease in prices, which is a good thing, especially for the value of the currency. It increases the value of the currency.

Americans have been complaining mightily against the potential decline of the value of the US Dollar. So why can’t we welcome the fact that our dollars can buy more and more stuff and pay for more and more services with cheaper and cheaper labors?

China has an almost unlimited supply of labors. That is why the Chinese economy can still grow after its exports have been hit by the worldwide economic downturn. And the Chinese currency’s value keeps rising. Why do Americans keep complaining about the potential decline of the value of the Dollar and keep trying to limit the supply of labors at the same time?

There are many protests against Arizona Legislature’s proposed law to require police officers who have “reasonable suspicion” about someone’s immigration status to demand to see documents.

I know some White New Yorkers who have moved to Arizona. They are not rich. They can not afford the same space they used to be able to afford in New York. So they moved. If there are more new immigrants in Arizona, as what has happened to New York, Arizona can get as expensive as New York. And these folks will not be able to find a place in the US that they can afford any more.

So unless there are government subsidies for these folks to buy or rent properties, Arizona should be reserved for these folks. I think some of the resistance to immigration will be lessened if the US government offers help to US citizens who are having a hard time keeping up with their bills.

Having said that, the proposed law in Arizona is unenforceable without subjecting Arizona police to accusations of racial profiling or some kind of profiling. This is because without resorting to some kind of profiling, the police will not be able to make a determination as to who should be questioned and who should not.

The following paragraphs are taken from the website for the book “13 Bankers”. I am of the view that even though the businesses, which include frauds, conducted by these bankers have caused major problems to the US economy, what really brought down the US economy is not just what they did. They only accelerated the downfall and profited from it. Stocks and options traders do that all the time.

“The title of this book is taken from a meeting held at the White House on March 27, 2009. In attendance were the heads of thirteen major U.S. banks (as well as representatives of two banking industry associations).”

“We chose this meeting because it aptly symbolizes the solidarity between the new Obama administration and the major banks at the depths of the financial crisis and recession. Speaking with reporters after the meeting, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said, “We’re all in this together,” a phrase repeated by multiple bank CEOs. This contrasted with the new Franklin Delano Roosevelt administration of 1933, which largely froze out the bankers, much to their chagrin.

This is also the meeting at which Obama said, “My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.” This was the point at which the government had to decide if it would defend the financial oligarchy from populist outrage, or whether it would reform the financial system that brought us the financial crisis and severe recession. We do not think it was an easy choice. But ultimately Obama and his advisers chose to bet on the bankers they knew. The result has been even larger banks and an even more concentrated financial sector.”

“I’m not much for sugar coating, so I’m just going to tell it like it is: Harry Reid, like President Obama, is merely giving lip-service to the issue of comprehensive immigration reform because he needs the Hispanic vote to get reelected.

The reality is that the closer we get to November the likelihood of CIR grows fainter and fainter. Reid and Obama know this. They also know that if they talk the talk it is very likely that they won’t be punished by Hispanic voters for their failure to walk the walk because the GOP is just that bad to immigrants.

Reid’s delay of CIR to the last possible moment speaks volumes of his true intention, which is to avoid the issue altogether, and then fall back on the tried and true strategy to pass blame to the GOP so he can save face as the mid-terms draw closer.

We elected these people to meaningfully address comprehensive immigration reform, not lie to our faces and then stab us in the back while we cast our vote in the election booth.

I’m not buying any of it, and neither should you in November.

Send a message to Washington: Reid must Go!”

Read more: The Daily Flip Flop: Reid Backpedals on Immigration Reform by Matthew Kolken.

“Schumer and Graham dramatize the lack of new ideas among Washington power brokers. Real immigration reform requires a real alternative. We need a framework that embodies the goals of immigrants and working people, not the political calculations of a reluctant Congress.”

“Those who say no alternative is possible might remember the “go slow” advice given to young students going to jail in the South in the early ’60s. If they’d heeded it, we’d still be waiting for a Voting Rights Act. Do we believe in equality or not?”

Read more: Better options needed on immigration reform by David Bacon.