Odds and ends
- The New York Times: Miami is “awash with Cuban doctors,” only some of whom have been able to pass exams and gain a U.S. medical license. They are praised by the spokeswoman for Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart: “They work alongside U.S.-trained doctors, and they enhance any practice or wherever they work.”
- Armengol notes the three minor mentions of Fidel Castro in Raul’s speech last Saturday: a reference to his electricity conservation and generation measures, a mention of Americans’ hope for Fidel and his generation to die off, and a general reference to Fidel’s teachings.
- AP: Cubalse’s dollar stores, soon to be taken over by TRD Caribe, are closed for a longer-than-expected inventory, giving rise to rumors of shortages.
Is there any independent confirmation of the number of Cuban doctors Diaz-Balart cites as having taken part in the US defection program? 2,000 is the number his cheif of staff provides in the article. I don't trust anything coming out of that office...
ReplyDeleteIt makes me ill to think that we have a program to lure doctors from the poorest parts of Africa and Latin America to the US with this new incentive. If doctors want to defect, fine. But why should the US create a special program with incentives to assist this?
I looked up the statuatory authority for this program. It is a section of US Code that allows paroling of immigrants for "urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit." Can someone tell me what is the urgent humanitarian reason to steal a doctor from a poor community. Of course, this has the potential of creating a humanitarian disaster, not preventing one. Disgusting!
what about the morality of coercion, leftside? what about giving Cuban medical personnel the freedom of choice of where they wish to practice their skills? Are there millions in need of better health care around the world? Of course there are. But is the answer forcibly shipping Cuban medics abroad, garnishing most of their wages, and separating them from their families to prevent more defections? In your mind, as a socialist, the answer is probably Yes, since coercion and lack of respect for individual freedoms are the foundations of socialism...
ReplyDeletechingon
Leftside,
ReplyDeleteYou use the term "stealing" when referring to Cuban doctors. To whom did they belong before coming to the USA?
Vecino de NF
But is the answer forcibly shipping Cuban medics abroad, garnishing most of their wages, and separating them from their families to prevent more defections?
ReplyDeleteChingon, I guess you don't understand that these Cuban doctors are volunteers, ie. no one is forced to serve anywhere. As far as their wages, are you also unaware that they make much more than they would at home?
Vecino, maybe "stealing" is too strong a word for what we are doing. But "luring" does not seem to capture the immorality of this program either...
What if we were to say that every doctor in Colombia or Mexico could be granted free admission into the US, in addition to an automatic path to residency, welfare payments, immediate entrant cash assistance, "refugee social services," "targeted assistance," additional ORR discretionary assistance, etc? We could solve a big chunk of our health care crisis overnight. We'd have 20,000 new doctors. But at what cost to the Colombians and Mexicans left behind? The immorality is obvious, but that you two are blind to it does not surprise me.
A "volunteer" in Cuba, leftside? Please don't insult us.
ReplyDeleteThe reason your analogy is of no applicability here (big surprise) is that lacks any moral component of coercion and force. Doctors from other countries are free to exercise their free will and freedom of choice. Therefore, there is no reason to single them out for special humanitarian consideration.
I know it is impossible to penetrate that tinfoil hat of yours that keeps you connected to your home planet, but for every other sentient being out there it's important to set the record straight.
chingon
A "volunteer" in Cuba, leftside? Please don't insult us.
ReplyDeleteYou insult yourself showing such a lack of knowledge of Cuba. Yes, the doctors serving abroad are ALL volunteers - and always have been.
And if you are saying Cubans supposed lack of rights justifies handing them a free US immigration pass, why doesn't the US Interest's Section just stand on the corner and hand out visas and free airfare to the US to every Cuban who wants to re-settle?
ReplyDeletebecause if they did that the whole country would descend on USINT's property and that would be kind of a mess
ReplyDeleteLeftside,
ReplyDeleteDo you agree that Cuban medical personnel are prevented by Cuban decrees from freely immigrating? So if they want to immigrate to the USA they have to do so by first "volunteering" to fulfill an internationalist mission and then hope to gain asylum in any country that gives it to them. The US is not the only country where they settle. Quite a few of these Cuban doctors settle in Spain where it is much easier to get medical credentials.
So back to the question of morality! Who is guilty of immorality: the country/government/society that "lures" a professional with better living/working conditions or the professional that leaves the country that educated and trained him/her? If it is the latter, one would have to ask what is it that makes working/living conditions in Cuba not so desirable for this person, or is it that these individuals are morally imperfect? If the second, shouldn't we ask where did the Revolution go wrong if after 50 years of praising and instilling social solidarity the native professionals are inured to such exhortations?
Look forward to your insights!
Vecino de NF
Do you agree that Cuban medical personnel are prevented by Cuban decrees from freely immigrating?
ReplyDeleteNo I don't. Doctors only have the added visa regulation that mandates they effectively pay the nation back for their free education and training with X years of service (common elsewhere - in India, they have to post bonds). And a very few specialists are considered patrimony because they were trainined in highly technical things no one else knows. But no, plenty of Cuban doctors have emigrated legally.
So if they want to immigrate to the USA they have to do so by first "volunteering"...
You seem to imply that immigrating to the US or Spain is some kind of human right. I can assure you, it is not (certainly the US and Spain do not see it that way).
Who is guilty of immorality: the country/government/society that "lures" a professional with better living/working conditions
Come on. We are not luring Cuban doctors with "better living/working conditions." We are luring them with a special immigration procedure tailored especially for them - combined with other special provisions that only apply to Cubans. These special policies are my beef.
Of course, the person who leaves can also be considered to be weak morally. But I do not blame anyone for trying to better their material conditions within the framework of the law.
If the second, shouldn't we ask where did the Revolution go wrong if after 50 years of praising and instilling social solidarity the native professionals are inured to such exhortations?
Again, you are absolving the US Government of their major role in contributing to the immorality. The Cuban Revolution has achieved wonders in instilling social solidarity - you can see and feel it as you walk down any street. How many Cubans have served in internationalist missions abroad - in very poor conditions? 100,000? 500,000? That only 1-5% have deserted, given the "free pass to America" card we have created is actually extremely low. Imagine if we created the same program for Mexican doctors? Do you think any would be left in Mexico??
Leftside,
ReplyDeleteAs an aside, I am very much pro free immigration and free markets so I have no problem opening the borders to anyone who wants to become part of the American way of life so I am fine with Mexican doctors coming over and working in the USA after they become accredited here. So that point is settled as far as I am concerned.
I got a serious problem with the Cuban policy of treating its citizens as property using as an excuse the investments that were made in preparing them. A close analogy would be parents insisting that their children do not leave their home until they repay every expense that the parents incurred in raising them. In the old days when the term of servitude was finite this arrangement was called indetured servitude, and if the term of servitude is indefinite it was called slavery. Either way it is not very nice way to run a society. For one thing it disincentivizes the pursuit of professional careers because they are seen as limiting one's future options. On a side note, medical education in Cuba is cheap in part because the way that it has been set up.
Anyway is always good to read your comments. They are always thoughful although almost never right (pun intended!).
Vecino de NF
Leftside,
ReplyDeleteI almost forgot. Immigration to the USA or Spain is not a human right. The right to leave and enter your country without your country's interference in the absence of any pending judicial proceeding is. To enter another country has never been considered a human right by any national or international convention as far as I know. We agree on that one?
Vecino de NF
Vecino, I am glad you are not one of those hypocritical free marketeers who really only believe capital ought to be free, not its traditional counterpoint, labor. I am a believer in planning and letting countries decide their own trade and immigration policies... True free markets would lead only to a lowest common denominator world with massive dislocations. In the US, truly open borders would be an unrivaled humanitarian catastrophe. Given that this is realistically an impossibility, I do not consider that point settled...
ReplyDeleteYou seem to be saying that having medical students pay back their education is servitude or slavery. I guess only debts to private banks and universities are valid, while debts to the State and people of your nation are not? Again, this is common practice in developing nations that provide cheap medical training. Otherwise everyone would simply train for cheap, become a doctor, leave their country to settle in the US or Canada. There would be no doctors left. Brain drain is a real thing - and Governments can not just allow a positive investment in excellent education to be thrown away and given to the rich countries. It appears you have no answer for this serious issue.
And finally, there is no judicial proceeding in order to leave Cuba. There is an administrative process, whereby fees have to be paid, forms filled out and a handful of logical requirements met. We can argue whether some of these requirements is excessive, but Cuba is in a unique situation with the US dangling the carrot of easy immigration so close to Cuba's nose. As long as the US policy is to encourage illegal immigration, I find it hard to point my finger at Cuba first. As soon as the Adjustment Act is dropped, I will join those in calling for reform of Cuba's policies. But again, according to the US, the "vast majority" of emigration applicants are able to get through the process and leave (the bigger hurdle is gaining an entry visa to the US - which again, encourages illegal migration).
Leftside,
ReplyDeleteI have no problem with professionals paying back their education to whom ever made it possible. But you appear to miss the point that keeping someone in indetured service for an indefinite time period to pay back an education or public service is just plain wrong. If that was the case, then everyone who has ever received a government paid service would be s slave to the state forever (think K-12 public education, police, fire and ems services, etc.) The problem in Cuba is that the government deems labor as property of the state making every Cuban de facto property of the state. It's the ultimate alienation of labor. That's the true reason why there are all the immigration restrictions in Cuba which btw predate the Cuban Adjustment Act.
Vecino de NF
The problem in Cuba is that the government deems labor as property of the state making every Cuban de facto property of the state.
ReplyDeleteSorry, but when you ignore all the specific rational arguments I'm making and skip to this kind of general paranoid nonsense, there's not much more to discuss. Cuba allows its people to leave - through an orderly process. US policies encourage disorder, illegality and death. Do you support current US migration policies?
Leftside,
ReplyDeleteCan someone in Cuba decide on the spur of the moment that he wants to leave Cuba and do so after simply getting a passport which is after all a requirement by the foreign country not Cuba? The answer is no. Does the Cuban government reserves the right to deny exit to any Cuban national even when he/she is not subject to any pending judicial proceeding? The answer is yes. Do these make Cuba's travel policy the exception rather than the rule in the Americas? The answer is yes. You probably agree with these three answers. Right?
To your question whether I support US migration policies, I must answer no. They are contradictory and they foster a bureaucracy that makes DMVs everywhere havens of efficiency, and calmness. Can I live with them? Sure, they do not affect me personally. You are welcome to lobby to change them if they are so important to you.
Vecino de NF
Vecino, you are exhasuting. Haven't we been over this before?
ReplyDeleteYes, Cuba requires an exit visa - as do many other nations (Phillipines, Colombia, Serbia, etc). If you meet the 3 or 4 simple requirements (as any legitimate traveler should), there is no problem getting an exit visa? Again, the "vast majority" have no problem, according to the US State Department.
The only cause for denying an exit visa if the administrative requirements have been met is on national security grounds. Similarly, the US Department of Homeland Securuty has sole discretion to keep out persons it does not want in the country on NS grounds (remember the Notre Dame professor?). The hemisphere's paragon of human rights - Colombia - also does this. Most recently, Colombia denied a union organizer the right to leave to collect an human rights award in Ecuador. Sound familiar??
It is fine to criticize this practice. But how many Cubans have been affected? Five or six in the last 10 years?? We know about their cases because the US media publishes every episode (not the Colombian or any other ones though). So no, Cuba is not the sole exception... (I don't care enough to research all the other countries that may have simialal policies or records).
I have said before, I support reform in this area in Cuba. There was much speculation about Raul changing this last year (some prominent Cubans have also criticized it). But as the exit visa is connected to US policies (that I am glad you don't support), I think it is incumbent to try to change my own Government's policies first.
Leftside,
ReplyDeleteYes, I think we have being over this subject before but you still do not see the rigth way ;-)!
There is a difference between a country keeping foreigners out and a country keeping their citizens from leaving. The first is common practice. The second seems unusual to Americans although at one point passports were withdrawn during the 1950s by administrative fiat. I do not agree with any country doing so. Can we agree on that point?
I am still interested in reading your opinion about Raul Castro's last two speeches.
Vecino de NF
here's the typical conversation with vecino -- leftside gives rational, specific responses, vecino ignores it all and just keeps hitting on the same misdirection, the same misinformation. conceptionally vecino continues to be wrong, it is not as difficult or govt controlled to leave cuba, provided the proper requirements are met, as it is in any other country. and NO other country has anything similar to the Cuban Adjustment ACt.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 9:08AM,
ReplyDeleteCould you please reply yes or no to my three questions?
Can someone in Cuba decide on the spur of the moment that he wants to leave Cuba and do so after simply getting a passport which is after all a requirement by the foreign country not Cuba?
Does the Cuban government reserves the right to deny exit to any Cuban national even when he/she is not subject to any pending judicial proceeding?
Do these make Cuba's travel policy the exception rather than the rule in the Americas?
Also please point out which Leftside point I ignored?
Thanks!
Vecino de NF