BajaNomad - Reverse Migration

Reverse Migration

toneart - 2-28-2009 at 09:45 PM

Reverse Migration Rocks Mexico
By Malcolm Beith
Page 1 of 1

Posted February 2009

With the U.S. economy contracting rapidly, Mexican migrants are heading back south. But they're finding the homecoming isn't quite what they imagined.

Every Saturday for nearly four years, Elena Trujillo has gone to the local department store in Morelia, Michoacán, to pick up money wired home by her 34-year-old son, Ángel. This 59-year-old mother of three is one of the between 16 and 35 million Mexicans who depend on remittances from relatives in the United States to boost their incomes. But in late September -- for Trujillo and for countless others -- the wire transfers stopped coming. Confused at first, Trujillo was reassured by Ángel on the phone: Everything is OK; I have a surprise for you. The next week, Trujillo received another transfer, this one much larger than normal. She was ecstatic. Ángel's construction work must finally be paying dividends, she thought. Then, just a few days later, Ángel came back to Michoacán. "I couldn't believe it. He had given up and come home," Trujillo said. "He had given up on the American Dream."

Ángel Trujillo is just one of as many as 3 million Mexicans who some experts and officials predict will return home from the United States in the coming months. The economic crisis in the United States is already hitting migrant workers, many of whom work in tanking industries such as construction and manufacturing. Unemployment among Mexican immigrants was 9.7 percent in January, up from 4.5 percent in March of last year, and higher than the 7.6 percent for the United States overall, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Not surprisingly, remittances from the United States are also falling for the first time in the 13 years that officials have kept figures on record. In 2008, transfers dropped $1 billion compared with year before, and economists say that the effects of the recession are only beginning to be felt.

Mexico's central bank announced in late January that 20,000 of the migrants who returned for Christmas won't go back to the United States. Officials in Mexican states such as Michoacán, Puebla, and Zacatecas, which send some of the largest numbers of migrants north each year, are predicting a mass return as more migrants give up on the land of opportunity. Fewer migrants than ever are leaving Mexico, too, according to the Mexican government, with the emigration rate dropping 46 percent since 2006.

Local and federal governments have made it clear that returning migrants are more than welcome (officials even hand out information pamphlets entitled "Bienvenido, paisano" -- "Welcome, countryman" -- to help the returnees). But the realities of Mexico's economy will likely leave some doors shut.

Having fallen behind by 200,000 on a promise to create two to four times that number of new jobs by this past December, the government of President Felipe Calderón is not well placed to accept an influx of once emigrants. Mexico's economy secretary said earlier this month that "zero" formal jobs would be created this year. Although the Calderón administration is investing heavily in infrastructure, the jobs created will only be temporary. Local governments, like that of Michoacán, are appealing for federal subsidies to help spur growth of sectors such as agriculture and generate more jobs. They also want federal funding to help returnees set up small businesses. But officials throughout Mexico acknowledge how difficult it will be to absorb those who once left. Some experts and Mexican columnists warn that if the massive southbound flood of migrants does occur in the coming months, resentment could boil to the surface.

Jose Mendez Lopez, a 46-year-old Morelia resident who heads a construction team, is just one employer who will welcome returnees -- but will still give preference to those he knows. Unemployment is already rife in states such as Michoacán, even before an influx of returnees. And because of the experience many ex-migrants have gained in the U.S. construction industry, Mendez says, they often ask for higher pay than local workers. He can only offer about $10 a day, a standard wage for a Mexican construction worker. If push comes to shove, Mendez will hire the people he knows. But, he says, "I prefer my team who has been here all along. They didn't quit on Mexico."

Returning to a land left behind poses challenges for returning migrants. In a city like Morelia, where many locals still wear traditional indigenous dress and some even wear cowboy hats, a Mexican who has lived in the United States can be spotted a mile away. The returnees wear clothes from stores like Urban Outfitters (and not the knockoff versions that are popular among ordinary Mexicans), sport new sneakers, and don baseball caps of U.S. teams (again, not the fakes). They'll shun straws that aren't pre-wrapped, and according to some local policemen, they are clueless about the "code" -- in other words, when to pay a bribe in order to avoid the laborious process of paying a traffic ticket.

Despite the barrage of returns late in 2008, the jury is still out over whether the predicted mass exodus from the United States will occur -- and when. Most Mexican officials, for example, are now dialing back their predictions to about one million returnees -- still a big wave coming. If the U.S. economy does go completely south, Mexico and Central America will still look worse by comparison. Migrants, advocates, and experts agree: "There will be ups and downs [in the flow of migrants heading north]," as says Martha Luz Rojas, an immigration expert at the Colegio de la Frontera Sur, located near Mexico's southern border. "But where else are migrants going to go -- Europe?"

And even if the "pull" factors drawing immigrants to the United States decline, many still expect that "push" effects could overpower its stalling economy. Drug violence is consuming parts of Mexico -- an escalating phenomenon that could spur more emigration in spite of the risks faced by migrants navigating a terrain that is increasingly controlled by Mexico's organized criminal gangs.

Back in Mexico for more than two months now, Ángel Trujillo is vowing to stick it out in Michoacán, even though he won't be able to send his mother a few hundred dollars a week anymore. Instead, he'll help her rebuild her home and work in construction in Morelia and its environs when he can. He's working on picking up the local accent and slang again and trying to integrate himself into the community -- if only to help him get a job in construction that suits his qualifications. "This is my country," he says. "I'm sure I'll get used to it."

Others, such as Juana Patiño, an engineering consultant who has been working in Houston for 10 years, aren't so attached. She came back this past holiday season to sniff out opportunities in Mexico for a qualified professional like herself. She was disappointed to find that the pay is either too low or the possibility of advancement nearly nonexistent. So Patiño is returning to her adopted home. "I don't really like living there, but I'm going back," she says. "There are always more opportunities there."

Malcolm Beith is the Mexico editor at The News, Mexico's English-language daily.

Packoderm - 2-28-2009 at 09:58 PM

So Patiño is returning to her adopted home (The U.S). "I don't really like living there, but I'm going back," she says. "There are always more opportunities there."

Do we really need such people here? I say let her move to Europe. Maybe they are more in need of people who don't want to be a part of it.

Woooosh - 2-28-2009 at 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Packoderm
So Patiño is returning to her adopted home (The U.S). "I don't really like living there, but I'm going back," she says. "There are always more opportunities there."

Do we really need such people here? I say let her move to Europe. Maybe they are more in need of people who don't want to be a part of it.

canada. canada. canada.

DENNIS - 2-28-2009 at 11:30 PM

Thanks, Tony.

Mulegena - 2-28-2009 at 11:40 PM

Thanks for the post, Tony.

Times, oh how they are a'changing.

Packoderm - 2-28-2009 at 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Woooosh

Quote:

canada. canada. canada.

You're so right. Their heart would be so more more in it than here in the U.S. Other than the money they can glean, the U.S. is just not their cup of tea for many of them. I guess it would be like me trying to fit in with the locals in Iran. I would probably cling to any kind of American community if there is one and never bother to become a part of Iran. I can't see that being much good for Iran. But as far as people moving here who do not want to be a part of us - I guess its good for us they say.

Bajahowodd - 2-28-2009 at 11:57 PM

Huh?

CaboRon - 3-1-2009 at 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Woooosh

Quote:

canada. canada. canada.

Barry A. - 3-1-2009 at 07:13 AM

Tony (et al)----

People say the darndest things when under the pressure of an interview (and are not to be taken litterally). The bottom line, it seems to me, is that she made a choice, and the choice was she was better off in the USA than in Mexico. Who really cares, or knows, why she made that choice other than her??? Life is a series of tradeoffs, and I can understand that-----we all do it constantly. As long as she is contributing to the USA more than detracting, and is legal, I say "welcome".

Barry

oldlady - 3-1-2009 at 07:49 AM

Amen.

shari - 3-1-2009 at 08:18 AM

whoa...I cant count the number of our amigos who say they dont really like living in the states or canada...but they do...for $$$.

I do feel sorry for the returnees though...they really dont fit in and will be very tough to adjust to the wages and lifestyle in mexico...better get a cowboy hat quick!

805gregg - 3-1-2009 at 08:50 AM

One of my Mexican workers said he might return home. I asked him if he had a job there? He said yes working at a cemetary making 50 pesos a days. I told him I would pay him 50 pesos a day to stay.

Packoderm - 3-1-2009 at 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Barry A.
Tony (et al)----

"...and is legal, I say "welcome"."

Barry

That's a key point.

Packoderm - 3-1-2009 at 11:25 AM

Shari, I agree. It can get hard to continue to work on this merry go round they call the U.S. I wouldn't be completely be against making an escape myself and go through the legal rigmarole that it would take to live somewhere like Baja. Along the lines of the article on which this thread is based, lets say that I successfully assimilated into Baja culture, I don't feel that there would be such a problem with me returning home even if I essentially forgot how to speak English as the returning Mexicans are having with just a corrupted dialect. I guess they're more tight knit down there.

Humboldt Chris and Robin - 3-1-2009 at 11:45 AM

We noticed what appeared to be a pretty large influx of overloaded vehicles with personal belongings headed south as we crossed the northwest corner of Sonora on our way to Baja in January. We figured it was the reverse migration and wondered what those folks were going to find in their home communities given what Mexicans had told us about the state of their economy. Family structures probably compensate for some if it, but our economic woes are compounded in all developing countries and from everyone we talked to, times are tough south of the border.

No scientific analysis here, but our observation was that the people heading south were families, and likely some of the hard working immigrants that have been the backbone of the southwest labor market for a long time. Their legal status is less important to me than the legality of their occupations in the U.S. Can't blame illegal immigrants for taking advantage of employers who ask no questions and usually risk very little for employing illegal immigrants. This of course excludes drug cartels and pot plantation workers. It is also imperative that we analyse the plight of Mexicans over the last decade as NAFTA has saturated Mexican agriculture markets with cheap and subsidized American grains, forcing farm families to migrate to cities and border towns in search of opportunity (A global problem between all developed and developing regions of the globe).

My ancestors came here a couple hundred years ago, with legal status only because England claimed and occupied the place at the expense of the existing governance structures that ruled the land at that time. Legal and illegal immigrant status has wavered throughout our history, often times with little regard for sanity in its policy formulation, and today is little different than past episodes in our long history of immigration. I do not favor wide open unrestricted and undocumented immigration, but it troubles me that on these threads I occasionally see some pretty mean spirited tones directed towards people responding to conditions in the increasingly globalized economy. Particularly since we all seem to love Mexico ourselves!

Barry A. - 3-1-2009 at 12:22 PM

Tho some may be "mean sprited", the vast majority of us simply want our laws obeyed, as we would do when we go to another Country. I don't blame the immigrants---------it is the USA Govt. that I blame, and the many employers that violate hiring-statutes, and a citizenry that turns it's back on the problem, and even incourages violations. This sort of lawlessness simply cannot be allowed to continue in a "civilized" society, in my opinion.

My comments have NOTHING to do with the actual Mexican people, who many correctly point out are simply trying to better themselves, and provide for their families.

The foundation of our Country, like it or not, is the LAW.

Barry

toneart - 3-1-2009 at 01:55 PM

Interesting, but predictable, how the Conservatives get hung up on the last paragraph which reports of a woman who is ambiguous about residing in The U.S.

I posted the article because the focus was on it's title: Reverse Migration. The article deals with the economic impact on Mexico.

In Journalism an article begins with the most important aspects first, and diminishes in importance throughout. One reason for this is column space considerations. If the editor has to cut something, it is from the bottom up. That way, the gist of the article is not lost if cutting is necessary. :smug:

mtgoat666 - 3-1-2009 at 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Barry A.

The foundation of our Country, like it or not, is the LAW.

Barry

You law and order types crack me up. The foundation of our country was a violent revolution against unfair law. The cause of many positive major changes in our country has often involved violence or civil disobedience against unfair laws or unfairly implemented laws.

BajaGringo - 3-1-2009 at 02:43 PM

I wish that those who pound their fists about law and order in regards to "illegal" immigration would be just as outspoken about the millions of "legal" citizens breaking the law ever single day, buying copious quantities of illegal drugs which fuels the narco mess in Mexico.

In this country based on "law and order" we seem to pick which ones we think are more important. It is amusing to me that it often comes at the expense of those with darker skin/eyes and a different ethnic heritage.

Nomads are above that of course...

Barry A. - 3-1-2009 at 04:21 PM

Well, I guess it is just how you look at it. I, for one, advocate the obeying of ALL laws, as long as they are on the books. If a law is wrongheaded, or bad, then we can change it, and there are effective ways of doing that, as you all know----and we have plenty of them that need changing, I suppose. Reverting back to what happened 100's of years ago under very different circumstances is not productive, to my way of thinking.

To just ignor certain laws is tantamount to anarchy, and results in chaos eventually, it seems to me.

As for the "drug laws"--------I take a really narrow view of them--------as far as I am concerned responsibility for the "drug problem", and all related to it, sits squarely on the shoulders of the "user"-------without them, no problem!

So yes, I am one of those "law enforcement types" :lol:

Barry

BajaGringo - 3-1-2009 at 04:27 PM

I consider you Barry, to be one of those with a pretty fair view of things, even if I do disagree with you...

Barry A. - 3-1-2009 at 04:34 PM

Thank you, Sir.

I don't know anybody that I completely agree with. In fact it would be unsettling if we all "agreed". :yes:

------that's no fun at all.

Viva Baja.

Barry

Bajahowodd - 3-1-2009 at 04:49 PM

But Barry, what is really different between marijuana and booze? The law? They both get people high, which is what so many people seek. One of my biggest problems is with the Nixon-era idea that Marijuana was a gateway drug to harder drugs. They put marijuana in a schedule one category which, on its face, makes it more dangerous than cocaine or methamphetamine. Light beer is a gateway drug, when alcoholics are involved. No one seems to understand that a certain percentage of the populace have addictive tendencies, and no matter what the addiction, they will abuse their choice of addiction. Pot is likely less of a danger to society as alcohol. Problem is that we, as a nation have witnessed decades of folks making a living fighting the war on drugs. They will not give up the fight lightly. But geez, reefer madness seems to have a life of its own. This thread wasn't about drug laws to start. So I apologize for that.

nancyinpdx - 3-1-2009 at 04:57 PM

:lol:

LOL!!! I agree.

Quote:

Originally posted by BajaGringo
I wish that those who pound their fists about law and order in regards to "illegal" immigration would be just as outspoken about the millions of "legal" citizens breaking the law ever single day, buying copious quantities of illegal drugs which fuels the narco mess in Mexico.

In this country based on "law and order" we seem to pick which ones we think are more important. It is amusing to me that it often comes at the expense of those with darker skin/eyes and a different ethnic heritage.

Nomads are above that of course...

Barry A. - 3-1-2009 at 05:03 PM

I don't disagree with that. If it is a bad law, then it should be dumped. I agree that the "law makers" got carried away with that one (Marijuana). It is complicated-----way beyond my comprehension, but I am coming around to your way of thinking, on this issue, anyway. :lol:

Barry

Bajahowodd - 3-1-2009 at 05:08 PM

Barry, have a light? :lol:

Bajahowodd - 3-1-2009 at 05:08 PM

Just for the record, i have not smoked pot for several decades.

Barry A. - 3-1-2009 at 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bajahowodd
Barry, have a light? :lol:

Nope, tried it once---------made me insanely serious---------drove others nuts I was sooooo serious. Not for me.

Besides, I don't smoke-------bad for you. :light:

Now Negra Modelo??? that's another story. :biggrin:

Nice try.

Barry

k-rico - 3-2-2009 at 07:36 AM

Back to the topic of reverse immigration. California has just declared a drought emergency. Water rationing is coming. The central valley region where the news articles are saying 50% of the fruits and vegetables grown in the US are grown will be hard hit, as will the cities. I've read that 95,000 farm workers are expected to lose their jobs because farmland will be drying up. I suspect many are illegals and if so, may be returning to Mexico. Even if they don't return to their homeland, the money they were sending back to their families is going to stop.

Does anybody know how many of the CA farm workers are illegals?

k-rico - 3-2-2009 at 07:56 AM

Eventhough illegal immigration is not what this thread is about others have brought it up and I must say this. There would be a lot less illegal immigration if the legal process wasn't so complicated, lengthy, and expensive. I sponsored my wife's application for permanent residency (green card) and I paid $3,500 in legal fees, it produced a mountain of paperwork, it took 18 months, and we had to fly to the American consulate in Juarez for processing. There were also two physical exams, and two interviews.

Folks looking for jobs manning wheelbarrows, garbage men, or farmworkers don't have the wherewithal to complete the process.

[Edited on 3-2-2009 by k-rico]

mtgoat666 - 3-2-2009 at 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by k-rico
Back to the topic of reverse immigration. California has just declared a drought emergency. Water rationing is coming. The central valley region where the news articles are saying 50% of the fruits and vegetables grown in the US are grown will be hard hit, as will the cities.

Americans are an overweight, fat lot. something like 1/3 of gringos are obese. Response to drought conditions should be mandatory diets for fat people, so we decrease agricultural use of water. Also, fat people drive up our health care costs. Response to health care cost crisis should be mandatory fat camps for fat people. You may think I am joking -- I am not. Fat people are ruining our economy and decreasing american productivity.