Do Illegals take "Jobs that Americans Won't Do?"

[Oddball]

Wage-wise, maybe. But his innovation was not unique and that is what made America an industrial powerhouse, surpassing Britain, the first industrial society.

Surpassing Britain was inevitable, from the standpoint of available natural resources, coupled with a zero tax base for labor, alone.

 

[Anathema]

The border can't be secured. Most undocumented workers come in on tourist, work, marriage or student visas and overstay them

I’ve long said ANY foreigner entering this country needs to be microchipped and tracked. Overstay your Visa… get a bullet in the head.

 

[Moonglow]

They do the job that is the most disgusting to most Americans - vote Democrat.

Prove it then.

 

[AZrailwhale]

I’ve long said ANY foreigner entering this country needs to be microchipped and tracked. Overstay your Visa… get a bullet in the head.

I realize you are being sarcastic, but microchipping visitors is a good idea.

 

[justoffal]

No.

They work for wages for which Americans won't work.

Why won't Americans work for those wages? Two reasons:

1) Our welfare system is so generous to those who are eligible, and so easy to defraud for those who are not, that working at a low-wage job would actually cost a low-wage worker money. Why should they work for less money than welfare will give them in bennies? Can't blame them.

2) The presence of illegal workers keeps wages below what the free market would demand if only American citizens and legal immigrants were in the job force.

The answer:

1) secure the border.

2) Negotiate the number of unskilled workers to be allowed to come in. These negotiations would take place between people representing employers and people representing the low-skilled Americans that the employers propose to displace.

3) Make employers of low-wage guests workers responsible to make sure the laws are followed by their employees.

There is a dark shadow here in the background that nobody wants to talk about. But it needs to be outed. The sad truth is that many low wage jobs cannot support a family and may not even be enough to support an individual. While welfare seems socialistic and counterproductive it also prevents us from having to literally step over dead bodies on our way to work every day.....so it's a trade off of sorts. There will always be abusers and thieves that's for sure but is it also sure that society has always had the poor on the fringes simply starving and dying. To the extent that we pay attention to this we reveal the level of our civilized capabiities....to the extent that we forget that all things have a cost we reveal the extent or lack thereof of our social acumen. As always the middle ground compromise leaves a fringe on both sides of unsatisfied needs and goals....it can't be helped.

JO

 

[justoffal]

They do the job that is the most disgusting to most Americans - vote Democrat.

hahahaha....isn't that the truth...

JO

 

[Moonglow]

The Repubs want the illegals because they claim they are better workers than white people.

 

[citygator]

Help wanted signs everywhere. Unemployment is at a historic low. You want to tame inflation? Increase immigration, offer work visas, and allow for DACA to move forward.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Bullshit. No one should have to work for slave labor. Most people on "welfare" have at least some family members doing these undesirable jobs.

I disagree with the term "slave wages," because it is an oxymoron. But that is for another thread.

No one has to work for any wages anywhere. If employers did not have a steady flow of illegal aliens willing to work for very low wages, they would have to pay higher wages.

Bullshit. The One Percent will always try to find ways to cheat the people who do the work.

Then it is pointless to try to improve the situation. People will always find a way to cheat anything.

The border can't be secured. Most undocumented workers come in on tourist, work, marriage or student visas and overstay them. No matter how many fences you build, people will figure ways around them. In fact, fences have made the problem worse. Instead of a guy coming up here for harvest season and going home with decent money, they come up to stay and bring their families.

Wishful thinking. "Remain in Mexico" and Title 42 slowed the flow significantly. Completing the wall would at least give border patrol a border to defend. We aren't securing the border because the people in charge now want it to remain open.

Um, yeah, because we all know that the one percenters will negotiate in good faith... you know, like Amazon and Starbucks trying to crush union efforts. because they are negotiating in good faith. Those Dick Rockets aren't going to buy themselves.

No one negotiates in good faith. Everyone negotiates to get the most for themselves (except for most American presidents who give away the store to chalk up a "deal"). Negotiations are how laws are made. Currently, low-skilled Americans do not have a seat at the table in negotiations about how many immigrants and guest workers are allowed in, so of course they are getting screwed.

Uh, guy, this is how we GOT into this mess.

When Simpson-Mazolli was signed in the 1980's by Ronnie Ray-gun, part of the deal was that employers were going to make sure they weren't hiring illegals. This was pretty much putting the foxes in charge of guarding the henhouse. Legit employers followed the law. The ones who didn't found ways around it.

I suppose I should have said, "hold employers accountable," rather than "make them responsible." Yes, they will try to cheat, and yes, they will succeed in many cases. Which is why illegal immigration must be stopped at the border and not at the Human Resources offices of farming, distribution, landscaping, housekeeping, and manufacturing companies. The idea (not saying it was your idea), that we can stop illegal immigration by "going after" employers of illegals is a fantasy propounded by people who have no interest whatsoever in stopping illegal immigration.

Unless you actually imprison heads of companies that hire illegals, they will keep doing it.

I interviewed for a position at a distribution place where most of the warehouse employees were Mexicans... and the guy right up said that he knew most of his employees were illegal, but as long as they had something that looked "legit", that was fine with him. Oh, also, we had to have all the work done by sundown on Fridays, because the owners were observant Jews. So which laws they obeyed were subject to change.

They obeyed God's laws, having faith that God would strike down with furious anger those who do not. They disobeyed man's laws, having faith that they would get away with it and that it is part of the American system, legal or not.

 

[Anathema]

realize you are being sarcastic, but microchipping visitors is a good idea.

I don’t do sarcasm. I’m as serious as a heart attack in Antarctica. I also do not believe that Constitutional Rights should be extended to foreign this country.

 

[alang1216]

Surpassing Britain was inevitable, from the standpoint of available natural resources, coupled with a zero tax base for labor, alone.

I disagree. Britain had a global colonial system to provide markets and resources. I think one key factor was the low wages they were able to pay within Britain. There was no incentive to replace older machines with newer ones or improve quality. It just made the workers angry and didn't help the bottom line until it was so far gone that the factories just closed.

 

[dblack]

No.

They work for wages for which Americans won't work.

Why won't Americans work for those wages? Two reasons:

1) Our welfare system is so generous to those who are eligible, and so easy to defraud for those who are not, that working at a low-wage job would actually cost a low-wage worker money. Why should they work for less money than welfare will give them in bennies? Can't blame them.

2) The presence of illegal workers keeps wages below what the free market would demand if only American citizens and legal immigrants were in the job force.

The answer:

1) secure the border.

2) Negotiate the number of unskilled workers to be allowed to come in. These negotiations would take place between people representing employers and people representing the low-skilled Americans that the employers propose to displace.

3) Make employers of low-wage guests workers responsible to make sure the laws are followed by their employees.

Better answer - fix the root problem: the welfare state.

 

[justoffal]

Unfortunately, Ford was the exception.

Well yes.....we are back to the principle of the Laffer curve as applied to simple economics....Lefty freaking hates that guy but I tell you he is the most intuitive economic and financial genius of the century. Way ahead of Keynes.....
Remember the pop-eye cartoon from the forties?

This guy right here was based on Keynes.....I'm telling you ... I give you J. Wellington Wimpy..... the King of Aggregate demand!

 

[justoffal]

I disagree. Britain had a global colonial system to provide markets and resources. I think one key factor was the low wages they were able to pay within Britain. There was no incentive to replace older machines with newer ones or improve quality. It just made the workers angry and didn't help the bottom line until it was so far gone that the factories just closed.

There are times when we go to the old manual Bridgeports here on the campus when the damned computer driven machines just won't do something right. At that point a class A machinist is worth his weight in gold....I mean LITERALLY... Our last campus manager was very smart to stop the auctioning off of the machines.... he set up a building with all the old technologies " Just in case " .....and put them all there ready to roll should they be needed.
It was a very smart move.


jO

 

[Oddball]

I disagree. Britain had a global colonial system to provide markets and resources. I think one key factor was the low wages they were able to pay within Britain. There was no incentive to replace older machines with newer ones or improve quality. It just made the workers angry and didn't help the bottom line until it was so far gone that the factories just closed.

Though they may have had the system, it was still costly to bring in the resources and export the finished products...That obstacle existed to a far lower degree here...Likewise, their centuries-old gubmint imposed far greater tax costs than did the fledgling republic.

That's not to say that labor costs weren't also a factor, just not the lone, or even most significant, one.

 

[JoeB131]

Then it is pointless to try to improve the situation. People will always find a way to cheat anything.

Trust but verify. The problem is, the illegal has nothing to lose. You send him back. He tries again next week.

Wishful thinking. "Remain in Mexico" and Title 42 slowed the flow significantly. Completing the wall would at least give border patrol a border to defend. We aren't securing the border because the people in charge now want it to remain open.

Actually, we saw a spike in illegal migration in 2019 because Orange Shitgibbon didn't have it under control. People were rushing to get across. 2020 saw a dip, but that was because we had a plague ravaging the country and most of the businesses were closed for a time.

No one negotiates in good faith. Everyone negotiates to get the most for themselves (except for most American presidents who give away the store to chalk up a "deal"). Negotiations are how laws are made. Currently, low-skilled Americans do not have a seat at the table in negotiations about how many immigrants and guest workers are allowed in, so of course they are getting screwed.

Except no one thinks they are "low-skilled'. Even the most low-skilled American thinks lettuce picking or toilet cleaning is beneath him.

I suppose I should have said, "hold employers accountable," rather than "make them responsible." Yes, they will try to cheat, and yes, they will succeed in many cases. Which is why illegal immigration must be stopped at the border and not at the Human Resources offices of farming, distribution, landscaping, housekeeping, and manufacturing companies. The idea (not saying it was your idea), that we can stop illegal immigration by "going after" employers of illegals is a fantasy propounded by people who have no interest whatsoever in stopping illegal immigration.

Not at all. - No matter how good you think your border fence is, someone will figure out a way around it. The found that the Trump Border fence could be defeated with simple tools bought at a home depot.



On the other hand, if they get here, and there are no jobs, they'll go home.

They obeyed God's laws, having faith that God would strike down with furious anger those who do not. They disobeyed man's laws, having faith that they would get away with it and that it is part of the American system, legal or not.

Right.... I worry more about a real government than an imaginary sky pixie.

 

[Seymour Flops]

There is a dark shadow here in the background that nobody wants to talk about. But it needs to be outed. The sad truth is that many low wage jobs cannot support a family and may not even be enough to support an individual. While welfare seems socialistic and counterproductive it also prevents us from having to literally step over dead bodies on our way to work every day.....so it's a trade off of sorts. There will always be abusers and thieves that's for sure but is it also sure that society has always had the poor on the fringes simply starving and dying. To the extent that we pay attention to this we reveal the level of our civilized capabiities....to the extent that we forget that all things have a cost we reveal the extent or lack thereof of our social acumen. As always the middle ground compromise leaves a fringe on both sides of unsatisfied needs and goals....it can't be helped.

JO

What we're doing with the welfare for the working poor is subsidizing companies who pay less than a living wage by adding to the resources of the workers juuuust enough for them to survive and be motivated to keep working. Marx's definition of "minimum wage" was the least amount of money to be paid a worker to motivate him to come back the next day. Now employers can pay less than that natural minimum wage, thanks to welfare.

If that were the most efficient way, if paying low wages kept prices low enough that the extra taxes were less of a burden than the higher prices would be, I would have less problem with it. But it isn't.

It is not efficient and it is not sustainable in the long run. We are financing these government subsidies of low wages through money borrowed largely from China or printed out of thin air. We now feel the effect of all that thin air money in the the current inflation - literally the pumping up of of our money supply with thin air. That's what "inflation" means.

So, now prices are going up and may soon reach the point at which the current low wages and the current benefits are not enough to keep a head of family coming to work. Then what?

Increase the wages or increase the benefits?

If employers increase the wages, they have to pass on that cost in the form of higher prices and inflation becomes a spiral. If we borrow and print more to pay higher benefits, inflation becomes a spiral.

Our strong currency, accepted world wide as the "gold standard," has been our saving grace for decades. It has allowed us to print a great deal of it and leave other countries no viable option other than accepting it. That is not unlimited, though. At this point it would take very little for the world to adopt a new standard currency, like the Euro or the Digital gold-backed Yuan.

Then what?

 

[dblack]

What we're doing with the welfare for the working poor is subsidizing companies who pay less than a living wage by adding to the resources of the workers juuuust enough for them to survive and be motivated to keep working. Marx's definition of "minimum wage" was the least amount of money to be paid a worker to motivate him to come back the next day. Now employers can pay less than that natural minimum wage, thanks to welfare.

Huh? That's kind of impossible. By the definition you offered, if the worker comes back the next day, the wage offered isn't below the natural minimum.

 

[justoffal]

What we're doing with the welfare for the working poor is subsidizing companies who pay less than a living wage by adding to the resources of the workers juuuust enough for them to survive and be motivated to keep working. Marx's definition of "minimum wage" was the least amount of money to be paid a worker to motivate him to come back the next day. Now employers can pay less than that natural minimum wage, thanks to welfare.

If that were the most efficient way, if paying low wages kept prices low enough that the extra taxes were less of a burden than the higher prices would be, I would have less problem with it. But it isn't.

It is not efficient and it is not sustainable in the long run. We are financing these government subsidies of low wages through money borrowed largely from China or printed out of thin air. We now feel the effect of all that thin air money in the the current inflation - literally the pumping up of of our money supply with thin air. That's what "inflation" means.

So, now prices are going up and may soon reach the point at which the current low wages and the current benefits are not enough to keep a head of family coming to work. Then what?

Increase the wages or increase the benefits?

If employers increase the wages, they have to pass on that cost in the form of higher prices and inflation becomes a spiral. If we borrow and print more to pay higher benefits, inflation becomes a spiral.

Our strong currency, accepted world wide as the "gold standard," has been our saving grace for decades. It has allowed us to print a great deal of it and leave other countries no viable option other than accepting it. That is not unlimited, though. At this point it would take very little for the world to adopt a new standard currency, like the Euro or the Digital gold-backed Yuan.

Then what?

The Euro will never make it....too much social pressure in Europe that puts devaluation force on the currency. But the Yuan? Let's just take a look at it for a moment. When you consider that the " Man Hour " is the ultimate currency bar none....then you realize that China simply has more of them than anyone else....the conclusion is inevitable. Not to be slighted here is India.... Hell the Dollar has been propelled on the backs of nearly a century of close to slave labor...that is exactly what made it so powrful.....it has reached the end of that vicarious credit IMO and will need to re-prove itself soon; But alas...it cannot because the great Industrial base wherein it was fostered and multiplied is no longer there.

JO

 

[justoffal]

Huh? That's kind of impossible. By the definition you offered, if the worker comes back the next day, the wage offered isn't below the natural minimum.

no....some people don't realize that they are sinking and working for a losing battle....they keep coming out of habit.

JO