The line about Argentinians leaving for Spain, Italy, and Israel as countries of origin suggests that a significant part of the $53 billion in transfers may be between relatively more wealthy workers in the U.S. etc. sending money to families that might be relatively well off themselves in the home country.  I wonder if anyone has done research on that.

In any case, I'm betting most of the $40 billion sent from the United States to Latin America and the Caribbean is poor-to-poor.

Which is why I'm very, very angry that Western Union taking 10 to 20 percent or more and we, civil society et. al., haven't come up with a better way of moving this life support around.

It could never be costless as you need a  huge number of places for people to send and receive payments, but these could be maintained with far smaller fees and, more important, that infrastructure could also used for international grassroots activism and communication.

I've got my re-growing savings to put up for making this big idea happen, and our immigrant brethren have $40 billion.  Just a matter of getting enough people together.  Drop me a line.

Here's some background on how wire transfers are done today, from a 2003 December 22 Business Week article by David Fairlamb in Frankfurt, with Geri Smith in Mexico City and Frederik Balfour in Hong Kong, told from Western Union's perspective rather than that of the people involved:

Western Union, which started life in 1851 as a telegraph company, is coming under pressure.  Commissions on most transactions run 10% or higher, making Western Union a most reliable profit generator for its Denver parent, First Data Corp. (FDC ), which acquired it in 1995.  Analysts expect the wholly owned unit, which almost collapsed a decade ago after fax machines undercut its Telex business, to make more than $1 billion in operating profits on revenues of more than $3.5 billion this year [2003].

Although Western Union controls 80% of the market in regions such as Latin America, it can no longer take its position for granted. "This is a real high-margin business," says Jeffrey J. Slowik, executive vice-president of PayQuik, a Philadelphia supplier of money-transfer technology to banks. "It's hardly surprising rivals are moving in."

Among Western Union's big rivals: Bank of America, Citibank, and Wells Fargo. Those three are targeting remittances worth $25 billion a year that Hispanics working -- legally or illegally -- in the U.S. send to Latin America.  Each has recently bought into or established a relationship with a Mexican bank: Citi owns Banamex, Bank of America (BAC ) has a stake in Grupo Financiero Santander-Serfin, and Wells Fargo (WFC ) works with Bancomer. Immigrant workers can now transfer money easily and [slightly more] cheaply to relatives through those banks' ATM networks or by wire transfers.

How much in startup costs would it take to reach a critical mass of people in, say, a particular immigrant community and the people in their country of origin?  Think big.