In just a few short years it will be all over but the crying

[Rikurzhen]

Except the American workers often won't do the work, to say nothing of doing it slowly or badly.

I won't be a ditch differ for $10 per hour. No way. I will though be a ditch digger for $200 per hour. That's my personal metric. Other people have their own.

The point here is that the argument of "American workers won't do the job" is bogus because it's incomplete. American workers won't do the job for the pay that is offered.

In PA, on a similar Verizon fiber build, the local unions started causing trouble for the hispanics. So, in order to prevent problems, my company tried to hire all American crew. We posted ads looking for laborers and were paying $15 an hour. We had over 100 applicants the first week (this was in 2006 or so, when the economy was rolling). When we tried to arrange interviews, only 46 came in for the interview. Of that, 20 showed for their first day of work. Only 5 workers finished the first week. The rest never showed. Some of those who didn't come for an interview told us they didn't want to do that kind of work, but they needed something to put on their gov't form showing they were looking for work.

This is indeed a problem - work is competing with welfare payments of various kinds. I understand that.

My position is that solutions have to begin somewhere and the first part of the solution is to cut out the option of hiring foreign workers. American companies should be stuck with American workers, no matter how awful you think they are. Once we get that ironed out, then we attack the problem of welfare being an attractive alternative to work.

After all, as I noted above, these foreign workers are not replacing Americans, they're displacing them. Those Americans on welfare are still costing society and so the benefit you get (privatized) comes at a cost to society (socialized.)

 

[Mac1958]

Learn a skill and you're worth more.

Well, it used to be that way, but in today's America such behavior is considered mean and evil and greedy and you didn't earn that and roads & bridges 'n stuff.

So we can't have that.

.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Plenty of lower and middle class people do not pay enough in taxes to pay for their children's education. That is why everyone pays into it. This is why all those people without children pay into the education system. It is in everyone's best interest to have an educated population.

But those people are Americans. We owe a duty to each other and so society subsidizes the children of the poor.

Illegal infiltrators are not Americans and their children are not owed that duty.

The simple fact is that people are not machines. When we import these infiltrator laborers, their footprint in the economy is NOT just what happens between them and their employer. These laborers use all sorts of public services and because they are paid so little, they really are not pulling their fair share in supporting the public services.

We can't do much about that when the low paid workers are Americans, we have to subsidize them, but we sure as heck don't need to be importing more subsidy-suckers into society.

 

[WinterBorn]

Plenty of lower and middle class people do not pay enough in taxes to pay for their children's education. That is why everyone pays into it. This is why all those people without children pay into the education system. It is in everyone's best interest to have an educated population.

But those people are Americans. We owe a duty to each other and so society subsidizes the children of the poor.

Illegal infiltrators are not Americans and their children are not owed that duty.

The simple fact is that people are not machines. When we import these infiltrator laborers, their footprint in the economy is NOT just what happens between them and their employer. These laborers use all sorts of public services and because they are paid so little, they really are not pulling their fair share in supporting the public services.

We can't do much about that when the low paid workers are Americans, we have to subsidize them, but we sure as heck don't need to be importing more subsidy-suckers into society.

That is simple to fix. Unless you are a citizen or a documented alien, you get no gov't benefits except emergency medical care.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Plenty of lower and middle class people do not pay enough in taxes to pay for their children's education. That is why everyone pays into it. This is why all those people without children pay into the education system. It is in everyone's best interest to have an educated population.

But those people are Americans. We owe a duty to each other and so society subsidizes the children of the poor.

Illegal infiltrators are not Americans and their children are not owed that duty.

The simple fact is that people are not machines. When we import these infiltrator laborers, their footprint in the economy is NOT just what happens between them and their employer. These laborers use all sorts of public services and because they are paid so little, they really are not pulling their fair share in supporting the public services.

We can't do much about that when the low paid workers are Americans, we have to subsidize them, but we sure as heck don't need to be importing more subsidy-suckers into society.

That is simple to fix. Unless you are a citizen or a documented alien, you get no gov't benefits except emergency medical care.

Simple enough for you and me to fix but now we have all the leftists screaming like banshees. Look at this child infiltrator problem right now - those kids need free medical care, free housing, free schooling, etc. Ramp it down away from the kids and focus on infiltrator families - those kids need school, at school they get lunches, etc.

Going beyond that - roads cost money. Sewers cost money. Water infrastructure costs money. Policing costs money. These are all population dependent. A road has a fixed traffic capacity that it can handle per hour. All that cheap labor that employers love has to use social infrastructure. Society is subsidizing that cheap labor, even if it's just single guys with no kids.

Look, we're dealing with the fact that most liberals are insane, to some degree or another, and this poses problems for normal people because liberals have voice and vote. Your proposal to cut off benefits to kids would just have them frothing at the mouth like rabid animals.

 

[GreenBean]

So far as Hispanics - I can't speak re: all of them - but the ones I've known and seen put American Workers to shame - they are the most hardest working and dedicated people I've ever seen. They work for the half the price of American laborers and frequently do a better job, they don't demand extensive vacations and time off , medical expenses, extensive sick time . three day weekends - will work around the clock if asked to - and don't demand overtime pay ....... Perhaps this is why the ruling Class Democrats simply adore them and promote them emigrating here by any means possible - "Fuck the Law and Fuck the American Worker who needs them ? "

This is all well and good as it stands but it poses two problems for society.

1.) We are a high standard of living, and also a high cost of living, society. Being a hard worker is terrific, but that doesn't guarantee that the hard work translates into high income. What you're talking about is menial labor. No matter a person's race, it's very difficult to earn enough income via menial labor to pay one's own way through society. In LA right now it costs taxpayers about $10,000 per year to educate one child. Other school districts across the nation have higher costs. It's very difficult for a menial laborer to pay $10,000 per year in taxes, and that's only for one child.

2.) When we import Hispanics, we're not importing REPLACEMENTS for our black underclass, what we're doing is DISPLACING black people out of the labor market. Same too with underclass people in other racial groups. We don't have a shortage of low skilled or no-skilled labor in this country.

We don't have a shortage of low skilled or no-skilled labor in this country

No - but we do have a shortage of people who are willing to work for wetback wages. And an abundance of people who are just unwilling to work at all .

 

[Harry Dresden]

For unskilled labor, $26,000 a year is a decent wage. They got raises, just like any job does.

And most of the American laborers were paid the same. It comes to around $12.50 an hour or so. Well over minimum wage. The equipment operators made around $750 a week. But then, they had a skilled. An operator for a HDD rig would make $1k a week.

Learn a skill and you're worth more.


Oh, and we had one company try union labor. Until they had 1,000 of hand digging to do in the summer in Tampa. They guys quit. The hispanics did the work.

It's no mystery why employers like to hire these guys. I get it.

The problem is that they displace American workers. Those American workers don't just disappear from the face of the Earth.

On balance, the country is better off by forcing employers to hire American workers, even though they're not as hard working nor as cheap as the illegal Hispanics that employers prefer to hire.

We have over 25% of young black men, in the prime of their working lives, being idle for periods of a year or more. Yeah, compared to Hispanic workers, employers will have more problems managing such young black men, but too bad, they're Americans and those illegal Hispanics are not.

Except the American workers often won't do the work, to say nothing of doing it slowly or badly.

In PA, on a similar Verizon fiber build, the local unions started causing trouble for the hispanics. So, in order to prevent problems, my company tried to hire all American crew. We posted ads looking for laborers and were paying $15 an hour. We had over 100 applicants the first week (this was in 2006 or so, when the economy was rolling). When we tried to arrange interviews, only 46 came in for the interview. Of that, 20 showed for their first day of work. Only 5 workers finished the first week. The rest never showed. Some of those who didn't come for an interview told us they didn't want to do that kind of work, but they needed something to put on their gov't form showing they were looking for work.

out here about 2-3 years ago, the United Farm Workers Union got tired of hearing how Americans will pick Produce....so they ran an AD called "Take Our Jobs" saying they are hiring Farm Workers please apply.....they said 1600 "Legals" applied......and out of those only 50 showed up,after they seen the pay,benefits and hours...out of that 50 only 4 endured.......and i think they still run this today....

 

[Rikurzhen]

It's no mystery why employers like to hire these guys. I get it.

The problem is that they displace American workers. Those American workers don't just disappear from the face of the Earth.

On balance, the country is better off by forcing employers to hire American workers, even though they're not as hard working nor as cheap as the illegal Hispanics that employers prefer to hire.

We have over 25% of young black men, in the prime of their working lives, being idle for periods of a year or more. Yeah, compared to Hispanic workers, employers will have more problems managing such young black men, but too bad, they're Americans and those illegal Hispanics are not.

Except the American workers often won't do the work, to say nothing of doing it slowly or badly.

In PA, on a similar Verizon fiber build, the local unions started causing trouble for the hispanics. So, in order to prevent problems, my company tried to hire all American crew. We posted ads looking for laborers and were paying $15 an hour. We had over 100 applicants the first week (this was in 2006 or so, when the economy was rolling). When we tried to arrange interviews, only 46 came in for the interview. Of that, 20 showed for their first day of work. Only 5 workers finished the first week. The rest never showed. Some of those who didn't come for an interview told us they didn't want to do that kind of work, but they needed something to put on their gov't form showing they were looking for work.

out here about 2-3 years ago, the United Farm Workers Union got tired of hearing how Americans will pick Produce....so they ran an AD called "Take Our Jobs" saying they are hiring Farm Workers please apply.....they said 1600 "Legals" applied......and out of those only 50 showed up,after they seen the pay,benefits and hours...out of that 50 only 4 endured.......and i think they still run this today....

Why does simple economics escape so many people? If you're offering to pay people $X per hour and you can't find any takers, that doesn't mean that people are unwilling to work, it just means that you're not paying enough.

There is no grand law of the universe which insures that employers are protected from having to raise wages to market clearing prices.

 

[WinterBorn]

I think making $26k a year for unskilled labor sounds pretty fair to me.

What is minimum wage? $7.50? So paying someone $12.50 an hour is not enough?

If you have an 8 man crew, you are paying $100 an hour (plus the taxes and other expenses of employees) for warm bodies and muscles.

And the starting pay is just that, what you make starting out. At that point you need more supervision and produce less. After 90 days, you get a bump. After you learn, you get a bump. Employers will pay to keep good employees. But they shouldn't have to pay thru the nose just because you are a warm body taking up space.

 

[JoeB131]

I think making $26k a year for unskilled labor sounds pretty fair to me.

What is minimum wage? $7.50? So paying someone $12.50 an hour is not enough?

If you have an 8 man crew, you are paying $100 an hour (plus the taxes and other expenses of employees) for warm bodies and muscles.

And the starting pay is just that, what you make starting out. At that point you need more supervision and produce less. After 90 days, you get a bump. After you learn, you get a bump. Employers will pay to keep good employees. But they shouldn't have to pay thru the nose just because you are a warm body taking up space.

Everyone should make a living wage, regardless of whether their job is "skilled" or not.

Period.

i know this is a concept you wingnuts don't understand.

 

[Rikurzhen]

I think making $26k a year for unskilled labor sounds pretty fair to me.

What is minimum wage? $7.50? So paying someone $12.50 an hour is not enough?

If you have an 8 man crew, you are paying $100 an hour (plus the taxes and other expenses of employees) for warm bodies and muscles.

And the starting pay is just that, what you make starting out. At that point you need more supervision and produce less. After 90 days, you get a bump. After you learn, you get a bump. Employers will pay to keep good employees. But they shouldn't have to pay thru the nose just because you are a warm body taking up space.

Everyone should make a living wage, regardless of whether their job is "skilled" or not.

Period.

i know this is a concept you wingnuts don't understand.

Do you employ a nanny in your home, working alongside a maid, working alongside a footman, working alongside a chauffeur, working alongside gardeners, working alongside cooks?

If not, why not?

 

[JoeB131]

I think making $26k a year for unskilled labor sounds pretty fair to me.

What is minimum wage? $7.50? So paying someone $12.50 an hour is not enough?

If you have an 8 man crew, you are paying $100 an hour (plus the taxes and other expenses of employees) for warm bodies and muscles.

And the starting pay is just that, what you make starting out. At that point you need more supervision and produce less. After 90 days, you get a bump. After you learn, you get a bump. Employers will pay to keep good employees. But they shouldn't have to pay thru the nose just because you are a warm body taking up space.

Everyone should make a living wage, regardless of whether their job is "skilled" or not.

Period.

i know this is a concept you wingnuts don't understand.

Do you employ a nanny in your home, working alongside a maid, working alongside a footman, working alongside a chauffeur, working alongside gardeners, working alongside cooks?

If not, why not?

No, no, no, no and no.

But all those people should make living wages, too.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Everyone should make a living wage, regardless of whether their job is "skilled" or not.

Period.

i know this is a concept you wingnuts don't understand.

Do you employ a nanny in your home, working alongside a maid, working alongside a footman, working alongside a chauffeur, working alongside gardeners, working alongside cooks?

If not, why not?

No, no, no, no and no.

But all those people should make living wages, too.

Why don't you employ these people. Thanks in advance for your answer.

 

[JoeB131]

Do you employ a nanny in your home, working alongside a maid, working alongside a footman, working alongside a chauffeur, working alongside gardeners, working alongside cooks?

If not, why not?

No, no, no, no and no.

But all those people should make living wages, too.

Why don't you employ these people. Thanks in advance for your answer.

maybe because I don't think those who have money should be able to abuse those of us without money.

Hey, if a rich person needs a heart transplant, is it okay if they kidnap you off the street and take one? After all, they are probably much better than a Stormfront reject like you.

 

[WinterBorn]

I think making $26k a year for unskilled labor sounds pretty fair to me.

What is minimum wage? $7.50? So paying someone $12.50 an hour is not enough?

If you have an 8 man crew, you are paying $100 an hour (plus the taxes and other expenses of employees) for warm bodies and muscles.

And the starting pay is just that, what you make starting out. At that point you need more supervision and produce less. After 90 days, you get a bump. After you learn, you get a bump. Employers will pay to keep good employees. But they shouldn't have to pay thru the nose just because you are a warm body taking up space.

Everyone should make a living wage, regardless of whether their job is "skilled" or not.

Period.

i know this is a concept you wingnuts don't understand.

You seem to be operating under the mistaken impression that businesses exist to provide income for workers.

A worker is paid for what he can produce or do. It is that simple. If you want a living wage (whatever that is) you need to have something to offer.

This is why union jobs have disappeared. They have not been outsourced overseas as much as they have been replaced by automation.

 

[WinterBorn]

Everyone should make a living wage, regardless of whether their job is "skilled" or not.

Period.

i know this is a concept you wingnuts don't understand.

Do you employ a nanny in your home, working alongside a maid, working alongside a footman, working alongside a chauffeur, working alongside gardeners, working alongside cooks?

If not, why not?

No, no, no, no and no.

But all those people should make living wages, too.

Exactly what is a living wage? Enough to provide housing, food and transportation to and from work & shopping? If so, then the $26,000 per year that the guys in Tampa made for their work was a living wage.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, no, no, no and no.

But all those people should make living wages, too.

Why don't you employ these people. Thanks in advance for your answer.

maybe because I don't think those who have money should be able to abuse those of us without money.

Hey, if a rich person needs a heart transplant, is it okay if they kidnap you off the street and take one? After all, they are probably much better than a Stormfront reject like you.

Those who have money risked their capital and/or have a skill that is worth more money.

Someone who has no skills is not worth nearly as much on the market. This has nothing to do with their worth as a person, which is what the heart transplant analogy suggests.

 

[Rikurzhen]

No, no, no, no and no.

But all those people should make living wages, too.

Why don't you employ these people. Thanks in advance for your answer.

maybe because I don't think those who have money should be able to abuse those of us without money.

Hey, if a rich person needs a heart transplant, is it okay if they kidnap you off the street and take one? After all, they are probably much better than a Stormfront reject like you.

That was a complete non-answer. Poor job of distraction on your part. Do you want to try to answer the question or not?

 

[Harry Dresden]

Except the American workers often won't do the work, to say nothing of doing it slowly or badly.

In PA, on a similar Verizon fiber build, the local unions started causing trouble for the hispanics. So, in order to prevent problems, my company tried to hire all American crew. We posted ads looking for laborers and were paying $15 an hour. We had over 100 applicants the first week (this was in 2006 or so, when the economy was rolling). When we tried to arrange interviews, only 46 came in for the interview. Of that, 20 showed for their first day of work. Only 5 workers finished the first week. The rest never showed. Some of those who didn't come for an interview told us they didn't want to do that kind of work, but they needed something to put on their gov't form showing they were looking for work.

out here about 2-3 years ago, the United Farm Workers Union got tired of hearing how Americans will pick Produce....so they ran an AD called "Take Our Jobs" saying they are hiring Farm Workers please apply.....they said 1600 "Legals" applied......and out of those only 50 showed up,after they seen the pay,benefits and hours...out of that 50 only 4 endured.......and i think they still run this today....

Why does simple economics escape so many people? If you're offering to pay people $X per hour and you can't find any takers, that doesn't mean that people are unwilling to work, it just means that you're not paying enough.

There is no grand law of the universe which insures that employers are protected from having to raise wages to market clearing prices.

those who applied knew exactly what the pay was.....i know one person,a Mexican,born here who has actually tried working the fields for a summer....he said he would not do it again even if he was getting 20 bucks an hour.....he said its fucking back breaking,you burn up,and your back and knees are killing you after 10 hours of squatting and bending over..... and the reason the people who do it now can do it.....is because they have the mindset for it,most have been doing it since they were kids.....not to many Americans,including the native born Mexicans would last let alone attempt it.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

I think making $26k a year for unskilled labor sounds pretty fair to me.

What is minimum wage? $7.50? So paying someone $12.50 an hour is not enough?

If you have an 8 man crew, you are paying $100 an hour (plus the taxes and other expenses of employees) for warm bodies and muscles.

And the starting pay is just that, what you make starting out. At that point you need more supervision and produce less. After 90 days, you get a bump. After you learn, you get a bump. Employers will pay to keep good employees. But they shouldn't have to pay thru the nose just because you are a warm body taking up space.

Everyone should make a living wage, regardless of whether their job is "skilled" or not.

Period.

i know this is a concept you wingnuts don't understand.

you have to start somewhere Joe.....if the top wage guys are lets say 20-25 an hour and now all of a sudden the low wage guys have gone from 9 an hour to say 14.....dont you think the guys above them are going to want a 5 buck an hour raise too?...