Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Support Our Annual Fund Drive! CounterPunch is entirely supported by our readers. Your donations pay for our small staff, tiny office, writers, designers, techies, bandwidth and servers. We don’t owe anything to advertisers, foundations, one-percenters or political parties. You are our only safety net. Please make a tax-deductible donation today.
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Outsourcing the Golden Years

by STAN COX

“I’ve come up with my own numbers. And I will stand by these numbers. The annual gross cost to U.S. taxpayers to provide schooling, hospitalization, and whatever plethoric benefits are out there for the 30 million illegal aliens is approximately $400 billion per year funded by bona fide U.S. taxpayers. That’s $400 billion per year and going up.”

— Jim Gilchrist, co-founder, the Minuteman Project, quoted in David Horowitz’s Frontpagemag.com

“They now live in America, so it’s time for all nationalities to learn to live like Americans. This means learn how to speak English; learn how to have good hygiene; learn how to use appliances in their homes correctly. And then the pride will come to them.”

— A woman in Herndon, Virginia speaking at a public meeting against a proposed day-labor center, as recorded by NPR.

“The labor’s very cheap. It’s the materials that get expensive.”

— A US retiree with a new home under construction near Lake Chapala, Mexico

Hysterical claims like Gilchrist’s above are a staple of the anti-immigrant movement. But after spending a couple of weeks in the gringo retirement belt along Mexico’s largest lake, I’m ready to argue that most of the standard anti-Mexican-immigration arguments — or mirror images of them — can be applied just as well to the small but swelling tide of immigration by US and Canadian citizens into Mexico.

Around 50,000 or so US citizens reside in the Lake Chapala – Guadalajara area. They come to live, in the mangled syntax of an AARP Magazine article on retirement in Mexico, “La Vida Cheapo”. Many are enjoying something approximating the standard of living they always had in, say, Illinois or California, but on a much lower budget. Others are spending at the same or an increased rate, but living the life they never could have had back home.

In either case, the expatriate community is plopping down its characteristically massive ecological footprint alongside Lake Chapala, and letting the locals pay the tab.

Bigfoot spotted in Mexico

The Oakland-based think tank Redefining Progress regularly compiles the per-capita resource consumption, waste generation, and ecosystem destruction of people in each country of the world, and converts it all into a single measure of land area – an ecological ‘footprint’. By their reckoning, that footprint for the average human being worldwide is a little over 5 acres — an unsustainable burden over the long term. Mexico’s per capita footprint is slightly above the world average, at a little over 6 acres; in the United States, it’s almost 25.

Despite needing little or no air conditioning or heating in Lake Chapala’s delightful climate, immigrants from up north appear to be having a per-person ecological impact approaching that of their stay-at-home compatriots, which, by Redefining Progress’ figures, is as heavy as that of about 4 average Mexicans.

A flood of immigrants with a high-consumption lifestyle flocking to its shores is the last thing that the already ecologically devastated lake needs. According to NASA, water volume has dropped perhaps 75% from its historic level, with two-thirds of that loss coming since 1986. Enough dry ground has been laid bare to accomodate the entire city of Washington, DC. And because of pollution, to quote the AARP article, “The lake is now a view, nothing more.” Even the lake’s aesthetic appeal is waning, choked as it is with water hyacinth.

Lake Chapala would be threatened whether or not the gringos had shown up, but piling even more big houses onto the slopes above the north shore, with their acres of pavement, and swimming pools (always filled despite growing water shortages), and septic systems that wouldn’t pass code in the US, and bright green, well-watered, monocultural lawns, and heavy monthly spraying for insects, spiders, and scorpions, and washers and dryers running full blast, and no clothes lines in sight, despite the bright sun and low humidity (if there’s one thing we gringos know how to do, it’s “use appliances in our homes correctly”!), it’s kind of hard to argue that immigration is having a positive impact around the lake.

And that’s just in one small region. Each winter finds at least 700,000 North Americans residing in Mexico, and many of them stay year-round.

Another kind of immigrant freeloader

Back here in the US, battles over Mexican immigration are breaking out all along the political spectrum. All factions point to extensive cost-benefit analyses to support their case. Few if any of those tallies take into account the huge subsidy immigrants provide to business by working long, hard days for cut-rate paychecks. And the folks who don’t emigrate, who stay back to manufacture goods for export to the States at even lower wages, are chipping in with their own subsidy.

Now, with the golden years looking less and less economically secure for many Americans, our economy is turning to Mexican working people once again, as we outsource the support structure for an increasing number of retirees. For example:

* The Mexican highway system is excellent these days; some of the more hardy immigrants claim they can drive the 700 or so miles from the border to Chapala in a single, if long, day. And gas sells at familiar prices.

* Flush with cash from the sale of a house in the States, immigrants can either buy a bigger, better one or have a dream home virtually hand-built. A favorite topic of cafe conversation is the high skill, the lack of need for power tools, and above all, the low cost, of the local construction workers. One hears complaints that housing costs have increased since the 2004 publication of the AARP article (which, despite the lake’s condition, gave the area a good plug), and prices are expected to climb further if, as expected, Time magazine runs a piece on the Lake Chapala scene sometime this year.

* More than anything else, those who are immigrating from the US are fleeing our nation’s chaotic, outrageously costly, and often incompetent medical and insurance systems. In the Guadalajara-Chapala area, they can obtain excellent health care at a fraction of the cost, thanks largely to low Mexican salaries and wages. And health insurance is cheap, too.

* Whether or not an immigrant couple could afford domestic workers back in the States, they can hire as many as they want in Mexico — with no worries about their employees’ immigration status and no Social Security tax to pay!

* New immigrants can choose between gated and ungated communities.

* Imported food and other goods are obtainable around the lake area, but at a price that doesn’t appeal to most retirees. Thus, a regular part of the immigrants’ monthly or weekly routine is a 20-mile run up Highway 23 to Wal-Mart, Sam’s, Home Depot, and Costco in Guadalajara. The merchandise is from all over, the wages — such as they are — go to the local employees, but most of the wealth goes abroad to the stores’ shareholders.

* Nothing astonishes immigrants so much as the low taxes. Everyone talks about them; I was told of annual property tax figures ranging from $40 to $150, for houses valued in the low to mid six figures. No worries about sales taxes, either. But if there’s any grumbling by the locals about immigrant freeloaders, I didn’t hear it.

A real immigration debate?

I realize that the spectacle of American expatriates living off the lean of the land is nothing new. I lived in India off and on between 1980 and 2000, and there the exploitation of cheap labor by local and foreign elites was truly extraordinary. But if we’re going to debate the immigration “crisis” in this country, let’s take seriously the impact of American emigration as well.

If we wave aside the dust and fog of the current debate, what we see all around us in the US are immigrants from Mexico and other nations working very hard in tough jobs for low pay, making do with limited resources. What Mexicans see in places like Lake Chapala are immigrants who do little or no work but whose upkeep requires vast amounts of resources.

But, turning over what they see as their ace, anti-immigration crusaders will point out that the gringos are down there legally. These Mexicans are up here illegally! The question to ask, though, is, Why? What’s the source of those labels, “legal” and “illegal”? They arise, of course, from that deep divide in power and wealth that occurs at the Rio Grande. Add to that our nation’s determination to reserve a fourth of the planet’s resources for our own 4.5% of its population while maintaining access to the cheapest possible labor for any particular job that needs to be done.

If the sample I encountered was representative, the expatriates in Mexico don’t tend to be of the Ugly American variety. Most of those I met value open-mindedness and cultural sensitivity, and many seem delighted to be no longer living in territory under the direct control of the Bush regime (Well, there was that one Texas couple with a signed picture of George W. on their mantle … and the perhaps overly sensitive columnist for the English-language Lake Chapala Review who defends the Aztec practice of human sacrifice …)

Most every immigrant I met down around Lake Chapala was pleasant and friendly and well-intentioned. As the face of our country abroad, they were several cuts above some of the dubious types who fan out from the United States and across the borders of other nations every year, whether invited or uninvited — like troops in robo-warrior gear, or economic hit men, or covert operatives, or Benny Hinn-style megavangelists, or puking students on spring break, or corporate buyers seeking out the cheapest sweatshop goods. But, however good our intentions, whether we like it or not, when we Americans head for economically or ecologically impoverished parts of the world we usually end up embodying what our nation has become – a bottomless resource sink.

STAN COX is a plant breeder and writer in Salina, Kansas. Contact him at t.stan@cox.net.

 

Stan Cox is a senior scientist at The Land Institute in Salina, Kansas and author most recently of Any Way You Slice It: The Past, Present, and Future of Rationing (The New Press, 2013). Contact him at t.stan@cox.net.

More articles by:

2016 Fund Drive
Smart. Fierce. Uncompromised. Support CounterPunch Now!

  • cp-store
  • donate paypal

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

Weekend Edition
September 30, 2016
Friday - Sunday
Henry Giroux
Thinking Dangerously in the Age of Normalized Ignorance
Stanley L. Cohen
Israel and Academic Freedom: a Closed Book
Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
Can Russia Learn From Brazil’s Fate? 
Andrew Levine
A Putrid Election: the Horserace as Farce
Mike Whitney
The Biggest Heist in Human History
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Sick Blue Line
Rob Urie
The Twilight of the Leisure Class
Vijay Prashad
In a Hall of Mirrors: Fear and Dislike at the Polls
Alexander Cockburn
The Man Who Built Clinton World
John Wight
Who Will Save Us From America?
Pepe Escobar
Afghanistan; It’s the Heroin, Stupid
W. T. Whitney
When Women’s Lives Don’t Matter
Howard Lisnoff
What was Missing From The Nation’s Interview with Bernie Sanders
Julian Vigo
“Ooops, I Did It Again”: How the BBC Funnels Stories for Financial Gain
Jeremy Brecher
Dakota Access Pipeline and the Future of American Labor
Binoy Kampmark
Pictures Left Incomplete: MH17 and the Joint Investigation Team
Andrew Kahn
Nader Gave Us Bush? Hillary Could Give Us Trump
Steve Horn
Obama Weakens Endangered Species Act
Dave Lindorff
US Propaganda Campaign to Demonize Russia in Full Gear over One-Sided Dutch/Aussie Report on Flight 17 Downing
John W. Whitehead
Uncomfortable Truths You Won’t Hear From the Presidential Candidates
Ramzy Baroud
Shimon Peres: Israel’s Nuclear Man
Brandon Jordan
The Battle for Mercosur
Murray Dobbin
A Globalization Wake-Up Call
Jesse Ventura
Corrupted Science: the DEA and Marijuana
Richard W. Behan
Installing a President by Force: Hillary Clinton and Our Moribund Democracy
Andrew Stewart
The Democratic Plot to Privatize Social Security
Daniel Borgstrom
On the Streets of Oakland, Expressing Solidarity with Charlotte
Marjorie Cohn
President Obama: ‘Patron’ of the Israeli Occupation
Norman Pollack
The “Self-Hating” Jew: A Critique
David Rosen
The Living Body & the Ecological Crisis
Joseph Natoli
Thoughtcrimes and Stupidspeak: Our Assault Against Words
Ron Jacobs
A Cycle of Death Underscored by Greed and a Lust for Power
Uri Avnery
Abu Mazen’s Balance Sheet
Kim Nicolini
Long Drive Home
Louisa Willcox
Tribes Make History with Signing of Grizzly Bear Treaty
Art Martin
The Matrix Around the Next Bend: Facebook, Augmented Reality and the Podification of the Populace
Andre Vltchek
Failures of the Western Left
Ishmael Reed
Millennialism or Extinctionism?
Frances Madeson
Why It’s Time to Create a Cabinet-Level Dept. of Native Affairs
Laura Finley
Presidential Debate Recommendations
José Negroni
Mass Firings on Broadway Lead Singers to Push Back
Leticia Cortez
Entering the Historical Dissonance Surrounding Desafinados
Robert J. Burrowes
Gandhi: ‘My Life is My Message’
Charles R. Larson
Queen Lear? Deborah Levy’s “Hot Milk”
David Yearsley
Bring on the Nibelungen: If Wagner Scored the Debates
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail
[i]
[i]
[i]
[i]