Subfield Exam: Immigration and Stratification Theory

Inequality, Social Mobility and Labor

Download 326.75 Kb.
Size326.75 Kb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9

4 Inequality, Social Mobility and Labor

Date: 09.19.2011

Title: Explaining Education Differentials

Author: Richard Breen and John Goldthorpe

Source: Rationality and Society, 1997 V9 N3

Category and Keyword: education, class, gender, educational inequality, odds-ratios


  • To provide an explanation for increasing educational participation rates, little change in class differentials in these rates, and a recent and very rapid erosion of gender differentials in educational attainment levels.


  • Class and gender differences in patterns of educational decision are explained as the consequence of differences in resources and constraints.

  • Primary Effects: Association that exists between children’s class origin and their average levels of demonstrated academic ability.

  • Secondary Effects: Actual choices children make in their educational career (perhaps with their parents); and this is more crucial that primary.

  • Cultural accounts of class differentials in educational attainment are unsatisfactory so far (i.e. Goldthorpe 1996).

  • They suppose the existence of class structure and educational system.


  • Developed a mathematical model, using a Rational Action Approach.

  • Explains these 3 things from by individual decisions made in light of resources available to and the constraints facing individual pupils and their families.

  • Working class and Service class are analyzed (service class = more privileged)

Figure 1:

  • To decide whether to remain in school? 1) cost 2) likelihood of success of pupil 3) conditions on the parameters in question (with four sub points)

Assumptions and Findings:

  • Families want their children to be in the same or a class above (not downward spiral);

  • Solely because of the relative risk aversion that is seen as being common across classes, there will be a stronger preference among service than working-class pupils for remaining in education given that no costs attach to doing so.

  • Our second mechanism then allows for class differences in average ability levels and in turn in expectations of success.

  • Our third mechanism takes account of the costs of continuing in education and allows for a further source of class differentials, the average resource levels available to meet these costs.

  • Other assumptions include for example that the working class may see social immobility as an equal value as social mobility, while the service class seeks education to maintain and go up in status.

  • Again, there should be some outcome that can be considered as implying an inferior position to that from which children begin and that, for children of some class origins, this outcome should be less likely if they opt for less ambitious but ‘safer’ educational careers.

  • Included in the model: at a point all service class families will possess resources that exceed the costs of remaining in education and thus the proportion in this class who choose to continue in education will be equal to the proportion who perceive it to be in their interests…

  • For women, their gradient in their returns to education has steepened in the past 20 years. This means 1) gender differentials in educational attainment declines (it has) and 2) magnitude of class differences among women should increase.

ME: seems odd to separate out women from households with men, thinking that they may be in two different classes, but share the same household – this white women can claim oppression when they are part of a very privileged household; (see Asian book on women in China); but then they form part of the societal privileged group that supposedly maintains and perpetuates oppression of every other major minority group.

  • Support of their models here, support rational choice over cultural explanations of inequality.

4 Inequality, Social Mobility and Labor

Date: 09.19.2011

Title: Invisible Inequality: Social Class and Childrearing in Black Families and White Families

Author: Annette Lareau

Source: American Sociological Review, V 67 N5, 2002, 747-776

Category and Keyword: Social Class, Family, Inequality, Race, Childrearing


  • To understand better the mechanisms through which parents transmit advantages to their children in family life, as a measure of the impact of children’s life chances.

  • Thus, my second goal is to offer "conceptual umbrellas useful for making comparisons across race and class and for assessing the role of social structural location in shaping daily life


  • Ethnographic Data Set of white and black children, 10 years old, showing the effects of social class in the homes


  • Middle-class parents engage in concerted cultivation by attempting to foster children’s talents through organized leisure activities and extensive reasoning.

  • Working class and poor parents engage int eh accomplishment of natural growth, providing the conditions under which children can grow but leaving leisure activities to children themselves. These parents also use directives rather than reasoning. They do not focus on developing their children’s special talents.

  • Middle-class children, both white and black, gain an emerging sense of entitlement from their family life.

  • Race had less impact than social class [ME: makes sense as there is socialization going on here – and so our society socializes more blacks to be poor, it seems]

  • Differences in a cultural logic of childrearing gave parents and their children differential resources to draw on in their interactions with professionals and other adults outside the home.

    • Middle-class children gained individually insignificant but cumulatively important advantages.

    • Working-class and poor children did not display the same sense of entitlement or advantages.

  • Kingston’s work (2000) concluded there were thin evidence for social class differences; class distinguishes neither distinctive parenting styles or distinctive involvement of kids" in specific behaviors.

Table 2:

  • The pattern of concerted cultivation fostered an emerging sense of entitlement in the life of Alexander Williams and other middle-class children. By contrast, the commitment to nurturing children's natural growth fostered an emerging sense of constraint in the life of Harold McAllister and other working- class or poor children. (These consequences of childrearing practices are summarized in Table 2.)


  • By contrast, when Wendy Driver is told to hit the boy who is pestering her (when the teacher isn't looking) or Billy Yanelli is told to physically de- fend himself, despite school rules, they are not learning how to make bureaucratic institutions work to their advantage. Instead, they are being given lessons in frustration and powerlessness.

  • For example, many working-class and poor parents who wanted more activities for their children were seeking a safe haven for them. Their goal was to provide protection from harm rather than to cultivate the child's talents per se.

4 Inequality, Social Mobility and Labor

Date: 09.29.2011

Title: The Intersection of Work and Gender: Central American Immigrant Women and Employment in California, in Gender and US Immigration: Contemporary Trends

Author: Cecilia Menjivar

Source: Book, 2003

Category and Keyword: Migration, Gender, US Immigration


  • My intention in this study was to understand the intersection of US paid work and gender relations in the family lives of Central American immigrant women. (120).

  • To examine how gender relations are transformed or affirmed through contemporary immigration, as sociocultural patterns and broader forces are configured differently across time and locales.


  • Changes not simply the result of earning a wage.

  • To put front and center the experiences of women (Hagan has done this, i.e. 1996), few others.

  • Context of reception and context of original home are vital to understanding dynamic.

  • AND With the increasing feminization of the workforce around the world, insights gained from these studies may enhance our understanding of a growing immigrant population.

Method and Data:

  • 26 Salvadoran women in San Francisco and 25 Guatemalan women in L.A., arrived no longer than 5 years, about 1 hour interview.

  • Guatemalans: 14 ladinas and 11 indigenous women

Context of Exit:

  • Crisis of the 1980s (her analysis seems weak and would benefit from i.e. Susan Jonas);

  • Sum: These events drove thousands of Central Americans from all sectors of society to abandon their usual places of residence.

Context of Arrival:

  • As Portes and Rumbaut (1996) note, the context of reception channels immigrants in differing directions, often altering the link between individual skills and expected rewards. As we shall see, the receiving context has a powerful homogenizing effect on these Central American immigrants.

  • She talks about TPS and Asylum (107) but has serious errors in her understanding of the law – (ME: how immigrants perceive the law and how the law really is – there is a gap.)

Effects of US Employment:

  • Employment has been seen a a source of women’s increased bargaining power and control over resources, which, in turn, is believed to be the basis for personal liberty and more egalitarian relationships within the home (Benería & Roldán, 1987; Safa, 1995).

  • More complex: Entry into paid work in the US is not an unqualified indication of empowerment and improved status within the family.

  • Comparisons of gender relations between ladino and indigenous Guatemalans have emphasized the greater male dominance among ladino men, whereas indigenous gender relations have been characterized as more equalitarian…

  • Conditions for Domestic Violence: Women who are main providers – correlate with men who believe they are not fulfilling their expected social role, turn to bad habits (drinking).

  • Ethnic Differences: Whereas the women’s increased ability to procure jobs became an affront for some ladino Guatemalan and Salvadoran men, indigenous men saw it as an opportunity for both to get ahead.

Social Class, Meaning of Work:

  • WORK: not liberating for women, as viewed by them, but as a way to meet the survival requirements of their families. (Different from indigenous Guatemalans)

    • They do not have the same ethnic- and class-specific perceptions of work and aspirations as the women in the other two groups (ladinas and Salvador)

    • e.g. ladina women crystal party! (reinforced middle-class ideal of housewife)

  • Maintaining separate finances, however, may actually worsen the women’s burden, particularly for ladina Guatemalans and Salvadorans. Some of the men, already felling constrained by their own inability to command adequate earnings and realizing the women’s potential to support the households, have responded by evading their own financial responsibilities.

    • PREDATES migration: two types of patriarchy in Guatemala: For instance, Maynard (1974) analyzes two types of patriarchy in Guatemala: a “responsible patriarchy” among indigenous groups and an “irresponsible patriarchy” among ladino Guatemalans. Although men are seen as dominant in both groups indigenous men are more likely to prove regular support for their families, whereas ladino Guatemalan men seemed less reliable.

  • Ambivalence or opposition to a working wife seemed to be a particularly important issue among the ladino Guatemalans with aspirations for middle-class status, for whom it was a matter of prestige to support their wives. (114)

  • (non-indigenous) – NOT helping in the household: In a way, this serves to assure the men, conceivably threatened by the women’s improved economic opportunities, that they still hold authority.

Ideology formation: Work Context:

  • The lives of most of these immigrants are structured so that they do not actively interact with the wider society; instead they live, shop, and socialize mainly with other Latinos. However, the organization of women’s and men’s work differs, and it exposes them to dissimilar worlds where they observe behaviors and practices and behaviors beyond their immediate groups, which they may selectively incorporate in their own routines. (STILL a difference with indigenous. Why? maybe social world of employer too distant)


    • Men in restaurants, construction, etc, with other men of like minds

    • Women in households, isolated, witnessing the women’s and men’s roles together as more equal.

5 Migration / Policy / World Inequality

Date: 09.20.2011

Title: The Trend in Between-Nation Income Inequality

Author: Glenn Firebaugh

Source: American Review of Sociology; 2000 26:323-339

Category and Keyword: Income Inequality, convergence theory, cross-national, income growth


  • Review evidence of inequality between-nations, its origin and leveling off. It also makes suggestions for strategic research to further understand how the world’s income is distributed both across and within nations.


  • Earliest theorists at dawn of Industrial Revolution (Thomas Malthus, 1798), framing the population-trap model: In this model, economic gains are short-lived as the geometric growth of population inevitably catches up with linear economic gains.

  • Today we have unprecedented population growth (> 5x that of 1800) and even higher per-capita incomes (8-fold increase in constant dollars): $650 per capita in 1820 to $5150 in 1992.

  • Central issue: not whether there is enough to go around – but how evenly the worlds’ income is distributed.

  • National incomes have diverged greatly: Europe 14 x wealthier today than Africa compared to 1820; Individual nations are 30x wealthier, however.

  • Population-trap models: contradicted by rise in income per capita; Convergence theory contradicted because of the uneven distribution of wealth, increasing.


  • Relevance to sociologists: when nations are weighted by population size, the distribution of income across nations has remained relatively stable in recent decades.

  • Why? (arguing) Because change in the level of inequality for the world overall is a function of change in population-weighted between-nation inequality (plus change in population-weighted within-nation income inequality).

  • Convergence Theory of Economics: (neo-classical growth theory)

    • National economies tend to converge because of the principle of diminishing returns to capital and labor. As rich industrial nations experience diminishing returns, poorer nations …will tend to catch up as they industrialize.

    • Endogenous growth theory: In today’s world the principle of diminishing returns can be overcome by specialized inputs made possible by research.

    • Firebaugh weights nations by population size, therefore adds a new element into research.

  • Theories in sociology (not about between-nation income inequality), but on determinants of national economic growth.

    • Theory: Dependency-Induced Divergence

    • Offers evidence why the strata tend to diverge, i.e. theory of world stratification of why some nations are rich and others poor (i.e. core versus periphery nations). In effect, it argues that Marx’s law of uneven development applies to the world economy as a whole rather than to classes within individual industrial nations.

    • Theory: Population-Induced Divergence

    • National income is income per capita, so change in national income is determined by rate of population growth as well as by rate of economic expansion. If 2 countries have the same national income, but different population growths, then the nation with the slower population growth rate will exhibit the more rapid growth in income per capita.

  • Within-Nation VERSUS Between-Nation Inequality

5 Migration / Policy / World Inequality

Date: 09.20.2011

Title: Metropolitan Migrants: The migration of urban Mexicans to the united states

Author: Ruben Hernandez=Leon

Source: Book, 2008

Category and Keyword: Migration, Mexico, Networks, Development


  • Explain the migration circuit between Mexico and the U.S., using the Monterrey-Houston migratory circuit to observe the causes and social organization of metropolitan emigration.


  • The restructuring of the Mexican economy—prompted by the transition from a development model of import substitution industrialization (ISI) to a policy of export-oriented industrialization (EOI) – has driven urban households in Monterrey to increasingly deploy the labor of their members internationally.

Chapter 1:

  • Questions: E.G. What are the distinctive causes, dynamics, and outcomes of the international migratory flows that originate in Mexican cities and metropolitan areas? How are the types of networks and social capital, household arrangements, experiences of labor market incorporation at the destination, and the overall social process of migration associated with the city origin of migrants? Does transnationalism and transnational forms of social organization develop in cities and metropolitan source areas of international migration? etc. (9)

  • Migratory Circuit: this is between Monterrey and Houston. Mexico and US shaped the kind of migration between the 2 countries, i.e. urban dwellers could not migrate to the US Southwest for agricultural work in the Bracero program (10).

  • Transnational Migration Circuit? Confusion between migratory circuits and transnational studies with scholars (12). Houston-Monterrey NOT a transnational community; (14)

    • Point 1: structural origin of Migratory Circuit (MC) between Monterrey-Houston (MH). AND, patterns that have evolved.

    • Point 2: Nature of Networks, Households, Extended Families

    • Point 3: Migration Industry

  • Networks: (17)

    • Massey (1987) Strong ties. Roberts (1995) Weak ties // both their ideas come from Durkheim’s ideas on urbanization.

    • New Conceptual Theory: 1) first wave establishes social infrastructure 2) then it matures; 3) the social capital of urban areas is not strong enough for robust network development (Massey 2004);

    • (22) Hernandez-Leon shows how urbanites establish social ties and social capital and networks (this book);

  • Migration Industry (MI): (24)

    • Hypothesis is that the infrastructure for migration is distinct from networks that facilitate it (mobility). MI helps sustain mobility.

Chapter 2: Urban-Industrial Development in Mexico, 1940 to 2005.

  • ISI from 1940 to the 1980s enabled the worker sector to grow; This is 1930s to 1982 and we see the growth of the urban industrial working class. “Peripheral Fordism” was created, such that there was no incentive for these urban workers to migrate to the US with better wages, as they had comparable wages in Mexican industry. 1929 crisis provoked Mexico to industrialize. Export agriculture used to finance industrial development (36). Social consequences of ISI: made urban working class & salaried urban middle-class (37). Social Programs: for Industrial Worker (1943); for public servants (1961); for housing (1972); By 1970, 24% of Mexico’s exports were servicing the foreign debt. GNP increased, along with the economically active population in urban areas, but decreased in rural areas. (35) Rapid urbanization (1940 – 22%, 2000 – 75%). ISI was abandoned with the 1982 crisis. By 1980, the social wage was 44% of the industrial worker income (39). Rural and urban poor not included. In 1980, 56.26% of the population was urban.

    • ISI is exhausted and collapsed. Why? 1) Large part of population excluded from benefits 2) Agriculture in the 1960s could not subsidize industrial development 3) Dependent on foreign borrowing. (to 42)

  • Export Orientated Industrialization (EOI) since the 1980s changed this. This is an Urban-Industrial Restructuring.

    • From 1982 to 1985, the urban labor work force declined from 83.4% to 76.2%. More people joined the workforce and unemployment increased. Women entered the workforce. 1982 – 1986 cities bear the brunt of the downturn, but the maquiladoras along the border spur city growth there.

    • Now international migration becomes an alternative.

  • Transition to EOI (see p. 48 for scholars on this topic); 1) Modernize! link local and foreign capital. 2) Liberalize Trade (reduce Fordism); 3) Goal was to “compete” in the world market for flexible technologies, labor process, sell inventories, do away with unions and welfare protections, etc. 4) Deregulate labor market via changing the federal code; [ME: can this be understood better by envisioning this as a “dialogue” and “change” internally within capitalists? Is there a better grasp, therefore, of these changes and the dangers capitalists saw between themselves as they competed worldwide?]

  • Asia shift: by 1996 only 9.42% of TOTAL employment was in manufacturing, excluding the Maquiladoras (52) By 2004, 45% of all manufacturing jobs (but what does this mean compared to this other figure??) with the Maquiladoras (54);

  • Case of Monterrey:

  • 1846 to 1848 border moves south (U.S.); A political and military region was formed to ensure commerce. The industrialists in Monterrey sold items to the South during the US Civil War and accumulated capital. Regional growth helps (i.e. economic and demographic growth of Texas); Transportation links (Railroad); (to 58); after returning to Monterrey from exile in the US (1910-1917), they returned and created employee cooperatives; subsidies grew; company unions created while government unions prevented. ISI takes off as a reconciliation between the government and business (61).

  • With the downtown (as described earlier), workers desired the success of ISI, so migrated when income and jobs weakened to maintain what they knew under ISI. Idea: (67): “The urban working class is now bearing the brunt of industrial modernization and the creation of a competitive manufacturing sector through migration to the U.S.”

Chapter 3:

  • Purpose: I show how such causal forces (just outlined) operate at the urban neighborhood, household, and individual levels in La Fama, the working-class district in the metropolitan area of Monterrey where I conducted fieldwork.

  • My research in the Bayou City suggested the presence in La Fama of a critical mass of individuals with international migratory experience, a precondition I deemed necessary to analyze the causes and social organization of U.S.-bound migration.

  • It is predominately a working class district (today).

Table 1: Sociodemographic and housing characteristics of la Fama residents.

  • Tural to urban migration is indeed a central experience of most households in La Fama, as 63.5 percent of the heads and 62.7 percent of the spouses reported having conducted at least one internal migratory move (1997-1998 survey). In many cases, such move has been a single trip to permanently settle in Monterrey. (to page 84 – where the are employed).

  • (85) Through my field work in Monterrey and Houston, I identified a set of pioneers and their children from La Fama and neighboring districts who have personally facilitated the migration of fellow urbanites.

  • (89) Migration to the U.S. became a more common practice among the residents of La Fama during the 1980s and the 1990s, the period when Mexico’s urban-industrial economies went through a profound process of restricting.

  • (90) Data collected in La Fama and Houston show that women migrate not only as part of a process of family reunification (usually following males) but also as household heads responsible for the sustenance of their children.

  • (92) Migration is never the outcome of personal and household motivations exclusively. Instead, the frequency and duration of migration reflects the circumstances in which the overall social process takes place. EG A) Labor Market Incorporation (now year round jobs); B) Policy Changes (IRCA in 1986);

  • (94) Not surprisingly, the data from La Fama show few instances of U.S.-bound migration in the first of these phases, corresponding to the Bracero program (1942-64), during which only 12.4 percent of all individuals with U.S. experience conducted their first migratory trip.

Table 4: Selected Migrant characteristics by period of Migration (First Trip) (42-64, 65-82, 83-99).

  • (96) In the aftermath of the economic transformations taking place in Mexico, during the most recent period (1983-99), migration from La Fama to the U.S. virtually exploded: 2/3 of all migrants conducted their first US trip during this phase—a 3-fold increase from the previous period.

  • Today, some may not be returning, because of the border enforcement strategy being used by the U.S.

  • (95) As the case of pioneer migrant Raul Trevino illustrated above, at least a portion of this migration was connected to the recruitment of skilled industrial workers conducted by U.S. companies in Monterrey in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

  • (107) conclusion

    • 1) Bracero Program years = first phase; returning men settled in Monterrey area instead of going back to rural area; US earnings helped finance a rural-to-urban migration within Mexico.

    • 2) US firm recruitment = second phase; they went for jobs in the aerospace and oil industries in LA and Houston; these pioneer migrants are bracero turned urbanites and industrial workers who first moved to CA and IL and relocated to TX.

    • 3) Restructuring = third phase. Houston has emerged as the most important destination.

    • chapter 4 describes this mc.

Chapter 4: The Monterrey-Houston Connection: The social organization of migration and the economic incorporation of immigrants


  • to analyze the kinds of networks and social capital these urbanites use to migrate to the U.S. and specifically to Houston. He links social contacts / activities with immigrants, families and friends in the mc of hm.

  • Networks and kinship ties are central to urban migration (and social relations used); The neighborhood of La Fama (which had economic cooperation and residence and social ties) was recreated in Houston (in part allowed by the 1970s oil boom in Texas).

  • (112) Mexican laborers now attracted by need to build the infrastructure (which was influenced by NYC which made financial decisions on oil and Detroit (cars))

  • (115) demands of the oil industry spurred illegal immigration in the 1970s. This became problematic in 1931 when oil dropped from $34 a barrel (1981) to $16 (1985-1986);

  • (118) IRCA (1986): social capital enhanced for some by this law;

  • Social Capital refers to which relatives knew which relatives which facilitate immigrating (SEE TABLE 5, p. 120 – includes neighbors and coworkers); Siblings are an important source of migratory capital.

  • role of women (121-123)

  • Neighbors as source of weak ties: but a key source to migrate; there are strengths and weaknesses of neighborhood weak ties. E.G. Trust, reciprocity and sense of obligation; (exogamy helped in migration in urban area)

  • (128) Labor Market: not the poorest migrated, rather mixture of skilled and semi-skilled;

  • (134) HM connection: Transnational community or segmented immigrant populations? The workers are now a part of the segmented immigrant population.

  • (141) Resident undocumented population: consequences, for example, of IRAIRA. A) immigration slowed B) aggravated felony C) infidelity of spouse D) Native working poor do not fear deportation

  • (151) Among concluding remarks: despite these transformations, during the 1990s, skilled manufacturing workers from La Fama could still find employment as machinists and industrial mechanics in the Bayou City’s large network of small-and medium-sized shops servicing the oil industry and NASA. AND (152) In the hm circuit, cross-border activities were conducted individually and through families, households, and neighborhood-based networks in te form of private social and economic ventures.

Chapter 5: The Migration Industry [providing mobility across international borders for financial gain] (mi) in the hm connection.


  • I identify the components and characterize the role of the mi in the social organization of international mobility; and second, through the lens of a case study, I tease out the interactions between the migration industry, its entrepreneurs, and its activities, on the one hand, and social and political actors, such as migrants, their social networks, and state institutions, on the other.

  • Why? Vital to understand whether entry into the migration industry is contingent on the migration entrepreneur’s membership in the social network and the ethnic group he or she serves.


  • (in the conclusion)

  • 1) The shutdown of Transportes Garcia did not leave the migrants from La Fama and surrounding neighborhoods without a camioneta service to tend to their remittance and transportation needs. (181). Jorge’s trusted driver started a business, for example.

  • 2) All of the new migration entrepreneurs arising in his wake were members of he same social network as their clients, were acquainted with the needs of fellow migrants, and had a sense of how to satisfy them in a cost-effective manner.

  • 3) the camionetas that link the urban neighborhoods of hm are part of a larger matrix of businesses catering to the mobility, communication, legal, and financial needs of immigrants and their families and households on both sides of the border. (e.g. wire transfer companies)

  • 4) Given the availability of multiple low-cost options, can the camionetas compete and survive? not in the short run. Their advantage: specialization and social embeddedness in distinct migratory circuits, a combination of multiple services under one roof, and the negotiation of risks and costs by moving between formality and informality in the two political and legal contexts where they operate.

Chapter 6: Metropolitan Migrants: A New Dimension of Mexico-U.S. Migration


  • Extrapolate four findings about the causes and the socioeconomic and sociopolitical organization of migration.

    • Note: there are various causes of urban migration (i.e. recruiters) and researches of migration need to pay attention to urban settings.

    • 1) The evidence collected in Monterrey shows that, in addition to kinship networks, these Mexican urbanites use the weak ties that connect them to their neighbors and coworkers to support their cross-border sojourning.

    • 2) Monterrey and Houston constitute a circuit because of the constant migration-driven movement of people, information, money, and goods in both directions across the border—to paraphrase Durand (1988). A) International migration is a trans-state process. B) implication: scholars cannot fully understand immigration if they do not systematically study the economic, political, and sociological realities of sending localities and countries.

    • 3) MI: Often marginalized and viewed as an appendage to the core phenomenon and its central actors, the migration industry and migration entrepreneurs make several important contributions to the social process of international migration, opening markets for foreign labor, establishing regular connections between origin and destination, and structuring opportunities for immigrants.

    • 4) Rural and Urban migrants move because of different reasons. Rural migrants: embedded in peasant household economy; Mexican urbanites appear to migrate internationally as a result of dislocations produced by industrial modernization and the declining quality of urban-industrial labor markets. In their case, migrationn substitutes for local employment instead of supplementing it…

  • Conclusion: I content that the continuation and deepening of economic restricting in Mexico will advance the dislocation of urban-industrial workers, creating conditions for their migration to the U.S.

Download 326.75 Kb.

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9

The database is protected by copyright © 2022
send message

    Main page