So you want better paying jobs?

[Boss]

Except that in your model here, LEGAL immigrants would suppress wages even more than illegal ones, because there are more of them.

Technically speaking, we're all "legal immigrants" unless you're full-blooded Native American, and still... probably an immigrant at some point.

No... My "model" is simply the laws of supply and demand which are the basis for free market capitalism. In order to have better paying jobs, we have to increase demand for labor and decrease supply of labor. Our policies should work toward those means. Instead, the left wants to drag us in the opposite direction as they continue to whine and complain about lack of decent pay.

NOpe. Being descended from legal immigrants multiple generations ago, does not make you an immigrant.

YOu cannot grow demand for labor faster than the whole World can fill it. NO matter how much you manage to increase US economic growth there are more people in the World who are there ready, willing and able to come here to do the work for less.

We must greatly limit immigration, both legal and legal, if we want to see rising wages.

Okay, if you read the OP, I called for high tariffs on imported goods. We also need policies which encourage companies to keep jobs here instead of outsourcing. We also need policies to repatriate wealth held abroad. We also need policies to stop illegal immigration.

There are dozens and dozens of things our government can do to encourage demand for labor and limit supply. But across the board, it seems that we're doing the exact opposite. The liberal left kicks and screams at any mention of policies that would help this situation while continuing to insist on policies that don't work and in many cases, are counterproductive to what we need to accomplish.

 

[Correll]

Except that in your model here, LEGAL immigrants would suppress wages even more than illegal ones, because there are more of them.

Technically speaking, we're all "legal immigrants" unless you're full-blooded Native American, and still... probably an immigrant at some point.

No... My "model" is simply the laws of supply and demand which are the basis for free market capitalism. In order to have better paying jobs, we have to increase demand for labor and decrease supply of labor. Our policies should work toward those means. Instead, the left wants to drag us in the opposite direction as they continue to whine and complain about lack of decent pay.

NOpe. Being descended from legal immigrants multiple generations ago, does not make you an immigrant.

YOu cannot grow demand for labor faster than the whole World can fill it. NO matter how much you manage to increase US economic growth there are more people in the World who are there ready, willing and able to come here to do the work for less.

We must greatly limit immigration, both legal and legal, if we want to see rising wages.

Okay, if you read the OP, I called for high tariffs on imported goods. We also need policies which encourage companies to keep jobs here instead of outsourcing. We also need policies to repatriate wealth held abroad. We also need policies to stop illegal immigration.

There are dozens and dozens of things our government can do to encourage demand for labor and limit supply. But across the board, it seems that we're doing the exact opposite. The liberal left kicks and screams at any mention of policies that would help this situation while continuing to insist on policies that don't work and in many cases, are counterproductive to what we need to accomplish.

I agree with all of the above, BUT, I just wanted to point out that the Wage Suppression would be a result of immigration, whether it is legal or not.

Both sources of labor are increasing supply and thus lowering price.

You cannot increase demand to exceed the supply if the supply is the whole world's poor.

 

[Boss]

I agree with all of the above, BUT, I just wanted to point out that the Wage Suppression would be a result of immigration, whether it is legal or not.

Both sources of labor are increasing supply and thus lowering price.

You cannot increase demand to exceed the supply if the supply is the whole world's poor.

Well you are right, all immigration delivers more labor supply or burden on the labor supply in the form of increased taxation. But legal immigration is strictly monitored and regulated, we can control that. We don't control illegal border crossings.

We are not going to stop people from immigrating here. That is simply an extremist view that you'll never see happen in a million years in this country. So get over that. We are the Home of Immigrants... it's kinda our whole thing. So, no, you won't stop all immigration into the US, therefore it's irrelevant to even discuss it. We can control it... we can limit it or put restrictions on it... that's much more likely, but we can't stop it. And truthfully, if free market capitalism is allowed to thrive again, we won't need to stop it.

You cannot increase demand to exceed the supply if the supply is the whole world's poor.

Again, you are right, which is why the tariffs would be so important. We also need trade deals that discourage US manufacturers from shipping jobs abroad. Tax incentives to keep those jobs here.

Instead, we see ever-increasing policies to do the exact opposite. More government control over the means of production (socialism) and more burden heaped on free market capitalism by environmental policies that only Sweden and Norway can seem to adhere to. Trade policies that allow big corporations in America to outsource labor and make a fortune while the typical American family gets nothing but cheap crap to buy and no jobs. The left and right both finding ways to justify the influx of illegal aliens... from anchor babies to doing the jobs Americans won't do... flooding us with more and more supply of cheap labor when we should be trying to increase demand for labor.

 

[Correll]

I agree with all of the above, BUT, I just wanted to point out that the Wage Suppression would be a result of immigration, whether it is legal or not.

Both sources of labor are increasing supply and thus lowering price.

You cannot increase demand to exceed the supply if the supply is the whole world's poor.

Well you are right, all immigration delivers more labor supply or burden on the labor supply in the form of increased taxation. But legal immigration is strictly monitored and regulated, we can control that. We don't control illegal border crossings.

We are not going to stop people from immigrating here. That is simply an extremist view that you'll never see happen in a million years in this country. So get over that. We are the Home of Immigrants... it's kinda our whole thing. So, no, you won't stop all immigration into the US, therefore it's irrelevant to even discuss it. We can control it... we can limit it or put restrictions on it... that's much more likely, but we can't stop it. And truthfully, if free market capitalism is allowed to thrive again, we won't need to stop it.

You cannot increase demand to exceed the supply if the supply is the whole world's poor.

Again, you are right, which is why the tariffs would be so important. We also need trade deals that discourage US manufacturers from shipping jobs abroad. Tax incentives to keep those jobs here.

Instead, we see ever-increasing policies to do the exact opposite. More government control over the means of production (socialism) and more burden heaped on free market capitalism by environmental policies that only Sweden and Norway can seem to adhere to. Trade policies that allow big corporations in America to outsource labor and make a fortune while the typical American family gets nothing but cheap crap to buy and no jobs. The left and right both finding ways to justify the influx of illegal aliens... from anchor babies to doing the jobs Americans won't do... flooding us with more and more supply of cheap labor when we should be trying to increase demand for labor.

We are letting a million immigrants in a year, 85% of them from the Third World.

We are not "Strictly regulating" jack. Or if we are the purpose of the regulations are not the best interests of this nation.?


You admit that letting in large numbers of legal immigrates will work against any policy to designed to create higher wages for Americans.

Yet you dismiss the obvious answer of NOT letting in millions of immigrants we don't need.

You consider it "Extremist" to suggest that we curtain immigration to serve the interests of the American citizens.

By today's standards, you are correct. It is "extremist" to want immigration policy designed to serve the interests of the American Citizens.

DOes that say something me, or something about the state of the Conventional Wisdom?

 

[Boss]

I agree with all of the above, BUT, I just wanted to point out that the Wage Suppression would be a result of immigration, whether it is legal or not.

Both sources of labor are increasing supply and thus lowering price.

You cannot increase demand to exceed the supply if the supply is the whole world's poor.

Well you are right, all immigration delivers more labor supply or burden on the labor supply in the form of increased taxation. But legal immigration is strictly monitored and regulated, we can control that. We don't control illegal border crossings.

We are not going to stop people from immigrating here. That is simply an extremist view that you'll never see happen in a million years in this country. So get over that. We are the Home of Immigrants... it's kinda our whole thing. So, no, you won't stop all immigration into the US, therefore it's irrelevant to even discuss it. We can control it... we can limit it or put restrictions on it... that's much more likely, but we can't stop it. And truthfully, if free market capitalism is allowed to thrive again, we won't need to stop it.

You cannot increase demand to exceed the supply if the supply is the whole world's poor.

Again, you are right, which is why the tariffs would be so important. We also need trade deals that discourage US manufacturers from shipping jobs abroad. Tax incentives to keep those jobs here.

Instead, we see ever-increasing policies to do the exact opposite. More government control over the means of production (socialism) and more burden heaped on free market capitalism by environmental policies that only Sweden and Norway can seem to adhere to. Trade policies that allow big corporations in America to outsource labor and make a fortune while the typical American family gets nothing but cheap crap to buy and no jobs. The left and right both finding ways to justify the influx of illegal aliens... from anchor babies to doing the jobs Americans won't do... flooding us with more and more supply of cheap labor when we should be trying to increase demand for labor.

We are letting a million immigrants in a year, 85% of them from the Third World.

We are not "Strictly regulating" jack. Or if we are the purpose of the regulations are not the best interests of this nation.?


You admit that letting in large numbers of legal immigrates will work against any policy to designed to create higher wages for Americans.

Yet you dismiss the obvious answer of NOT letting in millions of immigrants we don't need.

You consider it "Extremist" to suggest that we curtain immigration to serve the interests of the American citizens.

By today's standards, you are correct. It is "extremist" to want immigration policy designed to serve the interests of the American Citizens.

DOes that say something me, or something about the state of the Conventional Wisdom?

No, I am sorry, I did not say that I dismiss not letting millions of immigrants we don't need in... I said that we CAN regulate that. Whether we ARE or not is a different matter. We CAN do it and perhaps we SHOULD do it. Still, we are never going to "curtain" immigration, if that means to stop it entirely. We're just not. I don't have a problem with restricting immigration... I think it should be restricted. And regulated! If Pedro doesn't have a job waiting for him here, he can't come. That IS our policy for most of the world.

What's "extremist" is saying you want us to stop ALL immigration, like that is going to somehow actually happen. It's not going to happen. Get over it. That doesn't mean the end of free market capitalism and total defeat in the objective to increase demand for labor. Free market capitalism literally built this entire nation on the backs of immigrants. Legal, law-abiding, tax paying immigrants who assimilated into American society.

It can be done again, we're just currently moving in the wrong direction.

 

[Correll]

I agree with all of the above, BUT, I just wanted to point out that the Wage Suppression would be a result of immigration, whether it is legal or not.

Both sources of labor are increasing supply and thus lowering price.

You cannot increase demand to exceed the supply if the supply is the whole world's poor.

Well you are right, all immigration delivers more labor supply or burden on the labor supply in the form of increased taxation. But legal immigration is strictly monitored and regulated, we can control that. We don't control illegal border crossings.

We are not going to stop people from immigrating here. That is simply an extremist view that you'll never see happen in a million years in this country. So get over that. We are the Home of Immigrants... it's kinda our whole thing. So, no, you won't stop all immigration into the US, therefore it's irrelevant to even discuss it. We can control it... we can limit it or put restrictions on it... that's much more likely, but we can't stop it. And truthfully, if free market capitalism is allowed to thrive again, we won't need to stop it.

You cannot increase demand to exceed the supply if the supply is the whole world's poor.

Again, you are right, which is why the tariffs would be so important. We also need trade deals that discourage US manufacturers from shipping jobs abroad. Tax incentives to keep those jobs here.

Instead, we see ever-increasing policies to do the exact opposite. More government control over the means of production (socialism) and more burden heaped on free market capitalism by environmental policies that only Sweden and Norway can seem to adhere to. Trade policies that allow big corporations in America to outsource labor and make a fortune while the typical American family gets nothing but cheap crap to buy and no jobs. The left and right both finding ways to justify the influx of illegal aliens... from anchor babies to doing the jobs Americans won't do... flooding us with more and more supply of cheap labor when we should be trying to increase demand for labor.

We are letting a million immigrants in a year, 85% of them from the Third World.

We are not "Strictly regulating" jack. Or if we are the purpose of the regulations are not the best interests of this nation.?


You admit that letting in large numbers of legal immigrates will work against any policy to designed to create higher wages for Americans.

Yet you dismiss the obvious answer of NOT letting in millions of immigrants we don't need.

You consider it "Extremist" to suggest that we curtain immigration to serve the interests of the American citizens.

By today's standards, you are correct. It is "extremist" to want immigration policy designed to serve the interests of the American Citizens.

DOes that say something me, or something about the state of the Conventional Wisdom?

No, I am sorry, I did not say that I dismiss not letting millions of immigrants we don't need in... I said that we CAN regulate that. Whether we ARE or not is a different matter. We CAN do it and perhaps we SHOULD do it. Still, we are never going to "curtain" immigration, if that means to stop it entirely. We're just not. I don't have a problem with restricting immigration... I think it should be restricted. And regulated! If Pedro doesn't have a job waiting for him here, he can't come. That IS our policy for most of the world.

What's "extremist" is saying you want us to stop ALL immigration, like that is going to somehow actually happen. It's not going to happen. Get over it. That doesn't mean the end of free market capitalism and total defeat in the objective to increase demand for labor. Free market capitalism literally built this entire nation on the backs of immigrants. Legal, law-abiding, tax paying immigrants who assimilated into American society.

It can be done again, we're just currently moving in the wrong direction.

If your plan is to just let in Pedro if he has a job waiting for him, you are making the enter world part of the US labor.


Which will complete crush your plan to get Demand to grow ahead of supply.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

By today's standards, you are correct. It is "extremist" to want immigration policy designed to serve the interests of the American Citizens.

yes, liberals invite 20 million illegals in to take our jobs and then wonder why incomes are down and unemployment is sky high!! Fortunately, liberals voters are stupid and don't understand the 20 million illegals working means 20 million Americans are not working.

If a liberal voter does catch on liberal pols just blame it on Republican businessmen moving factories to China.

 

[Boss]

If your plan is to just let in Pedro if he has a job waiting for him, you are making the enter world part of the US labor.


Which will complete crush your plan to get Demand to grow ahead of supply.

You're either not listening or deliberately not wanting to hear what I'm saying... not sure which.

We can regulate the number of aliens we allow to immigrate from each country every year. In fact, that's exactly what we do. One of the conditions they have to meet is to have employment waiting here for them when they come... this ensures we aren't accepting a burden on society. I didn't say we're going to take any old Pedro who can meet that criteria. That is a condition we apply to Pedro if he has applied for one of the limited number we will take. And maybe we apply other criteria as well?

And yes... again, this is detrimental to the objective of increasing demand for labor but as I said, we're not going to stop allowing people to migrate to the US.

 

[Correll]

If your plan is to just let in Pedro if he has a job waiting for him, you are making the enter world part of the US labor.


Which will complete crush your plan to get Demand to grow ahead of supply.

You're either not listening or deliberately not wanting to hear what I'm saying... not sure which.

We can regulate the number of aliens we allow to immigrate from each country every year. In fact, that's exactly what we do. One of the conditions they have to meet is to have employment waiting here for them when they come... this ensures we aren't accepting a burden on society. I didn't say we're going to take any old Pedro who can meet that criteria. That is a condition we apply to Pedro if he has applied for one of the limited number we will take. And maybe we apply other criteria as well?

And yes... again, this is detrimental to the objective of increasing demand for labor but as I said, we're not going to stop allowing people to migrate to the US.

I hear what you are saying. Are you hearing me that we are still bringing in millions of under educated and unskilled immigrates despite that?

Most come over on family reunion clause. Do they need jobs waiting for them?

And anyone you bring over is filling the job at the salary that was offered. If that slot was not filled by Pedro, then the employer might have had to raise the wage to attract someone to do it.

As long as they have the option of filling it with someone without raising the wage, that is what they will do.



Legal immigration is primarily what is growing the Supply of Labor faster than the Demand.


THe limited number need to be LOW, or zero. The criteria needs to be, "we actually CANNOT fill the jobs with Americans".

 

[CultureCitizen]

If your plan is to just let in Pedro if he has a job waiting for him, you are making the enter world part of the US labor.


Which will complete crush your plan to get Demand to grow ahead of supply.

You're either not listening or deliberately not wanting to hear what I'm saying... not sure which.

We can regulate the number of aliens we allow to immigrate from each country every year. In fact, that's exactly what we do. One of the conditions they have to meet is to have employment waiting here for them when they come... this ensures we aren't accepting a burden on society. I didn't say we're going to take any old Pedro who can meet that criteria. That is a condition we apply to Pedro if he has applied for one of the limited number we will take. And maybe we apply other criteria as well?

And yes... again, this is detrimental to the objective of increasing demand for labor but as I said, we're not going to stop allowing people to migrate to the US.

I hear what you are saying. Are you hearing me that we are still bringing in millions of under educated and unskilled immigrates despite that?

Most come over on family reunion clause. Do they need jobs waiting for them?

And anyone you bring over is filling the job at the salary that was offered. If that slot was not filled by Pedro, then the employer might have had to raise the wage to attract someone to do it.

As long as they have the option of filling it with someone without raising the wage, that is what they will do.



Legal immigration is primarily what is growing the Supply of Labor faster than the Demand.


THe limited number need to be LOW, or zero. The criteria needs to be, "we actually CANNOT fill the jobs with Americans".

I think it is exactly the other way around : the supply of "low paying jobs" (which happen to be high paying jobs in LA ) is what drives immigration. The number illegals leveled off after the 2008 recesion.

I suspect what happens is that there is a pool of jobs which no American citizen wants to do for certain amount, but foreign people are willing to take for that amount or less.

Unauthorized Immigrants: Who they are and what the public thinks

 

[Correll]

If your plan is to just let in Pedro if he has a job waiting for him, you are making the enter world part of the US labor.


Which will complete crush your plan to get Demand to grow ahead of supply.

You're either not listening or deliberately not wanting to hear what I'm saying... not sure which.

We can regulate the number of aliens we allow to immigrate from each country every year. In fact, that's exactly what we do. One of the conditions they have to meet is to have employment waiting here for them when they come... this ensures we aren't accepting a burden on society. I didn't say we're going to take any old Pedro who can meet that criteria. That is a condition we apply to Pedro if he has applied for one of the limited number we will take. And maybe we apply other criteria as well?

And yes... again, this is detrimental to the objective of increasing demand for labor but as I said, we're not going to stop allowing people to migrate to the US.

I hear what you are saying. Are you hearing me that we are still bringing in millions of under educated and unskilled immigrates despite that?

Most come over on family reunion clause. Do they need jobs waiting for them?

And anyone you bring over is filling the job at the salary that was offered. If that slot was not filled by Pedro, then the employer might have had to raise the wage to attract someone to do it.

As long as they have the option of filling it with someone without raising the wage, that is what they will do.



Legal immigration is primarily what is growing the Supply of Labor faster than the Demand.


THe limited number need to be LOW, or zero. The criteria needs to be, "we actually CANNOT fill the jobs with Americans".

I think it is exactly the other way around : the supply of "low paying jobs" (which happen to be high paying jobs in LA ) is what drives immigration. The number illegals leveled off after the 2008 recesion.

I suspect what happens is that there is a pool of jobs which no American citizen wants to do for certain amount, but foreign people are willing to take for that amount or less.

Unauthorized Immigrants: Who they are and what the public thinks

You are discussing what drives immigration. I was discussion the effect on immigration on wages.

Yes. Economic opportunity is what attracts immigrants to the US, or to any first world nation.

When they get here, then are then expanding the supply of labor.

Being available for jobs in their home country, in the "having a job before they come here" is also growing the supply of labor.

 

[CultureCitizen]

You are discussing what drives immigration. I was discussion the effect on immigration on wages.

Yes. Economic opportunity is what attracts immigrants to the US, or to any first world nation.

When they get here, then are then expanding the supply of labor.

Being available for jobs in their home country, in the "having a job before they come here" is also growing the supply of labor.

But there lies the question. Given the initial situation ( a lack of supply for low skill , low pay wages mostly : agriculture, cleaning and maintenance, construction , manufacturing and extraction industry).
What would be the market response ?
A) Increase the salaries
B) Offshore the jobs
C) Increase the level of automation.

I can see a clear tendency towards automation in agriculture, construction ( there is already a bricklaying robot )and manufacturing, also manufactures can be offshored. Clearly cleaning and maintenance are jobs which can not be offshored and have no easy way to be automated yet.
I would argue that illegals are not the only factor depressing low skill salaries, but also automation and offshoring, so keeping illegals outside is really just a short term solution.

Probably a better solution would be to find a way to help develop those countries and turn them into effective trade partners ( poor countries hardly make a good market ) . That is exactly what the US did with Europe after WWII and it worked wonderfully IMHO. NAFTA didn't live up to its expectations, so this is clearly not the correct way.
This has to be complemented with a policy that ensures Americans can have access to high paying jobs. Eventually all the low skill jobs will go the way of the Dodo bird.

Jobs Americans Won't Do?

 

[Boss]

If your plan is to just let in Pedro if he has a job waiting for him, you are making the enter world part of the US labor.


Which will complete crush your plan to get Demand to grow ahead of supply.

You're either not listening or deliberately not wanting to hear what I'm saying... not sure which.

We can regulate the number of aliens we allow to immigrate from each country every year. In fact, that's exactly what we do. One of the conditions they have to meet is to have employment waiting here for them when they come... this ensures we aren't accepting a burden on society. I didn't say we're going to take any old Pedro who can meet that criteria. That is a condition we apply to Pedro if he has applied for one of the limited number we will take. And maybe we apply other criteria as well?

And yes... again, this is detrimental to the objective of increasing demand for labor but as I said, we're not going to stop allowing people to migrate to the US.

I hear what you are saying. Are you hearing me that we are still bringing in millions of under educated and unskilled immigrates despite that?

Most come over on family reunion clause. Do they need jobs waiting for them?

And anyone you bring over is filling the job at the salary that was offered. If that slot was not filled by Pedro, then the employer might have had to raise the wage to attract someone to do it.

As long as they have the option of filling it with someone without raising the wage, that is what they will do.

Legal immigration is primarily what is growing the Supply of Labor faster than the Demand.

THe limited number need to be LOW, or zero. The criteria needs to be, "we actually CANNOT fill the jobs with Americans".

I do hear you but...
1) We are not going to stop legal immigration to the US.
2) It's better to require immigrants to have employment when they come.
3) There isn't any job that an American can't do, so we can fill any job with an American.

Now, let's get a handle on the scope of the situation. In order to effectively realize the effects of supply and demand when it comes to labor, we need to create somewhere around 60 million new jobs. Needless to say, we don't get there overnight. If we deported every illegal alien in the country it wouldn't create more than about 6 million jobs at best... that's perhaps 10%. Even if we somehow managed to kick out the legal immigrants, that's still just a drop in the bucket in terms of the number of jobs we need to create. And when we create new jobs, they need to be better than $7.50 hr. jobs picking lettuce because Pedro went home.

We need to deport illegals when we can, perhaps even limit legal immigration or apply tougher criteria. This cuts down the supply of labor but we still need to create a whole lot of jobs. You cannot fix this problem simply by gettin' rid of foreigners. In fact, I think we should create so many jobs we can take in more foreigners... legally, of course.

It sounds like a lot... 60 million jobs... it is a lot... but it's not that hard to do, really. It takes time and patience but mostly, it takes the right policies. As of now, we have policies that are counterproductive, doing the opposite of what we need to do. We have to stop this emotive ridiculous "war on the rich" and ever-increasing burden on free market capitalism.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

You cannot fix this problem simply by gettin' rid of foreigners. .

we might have 20-30 million illegals here so kicking them out would create tons and tons of new jobs plus reduced the burden on Welfare programs etc. plus create up word pressure on wages. It would be a miracle. Then we could eliminate the corporate tax and bring back perhaps another 20 million jobs. With unemployment at 5%
now we'd have way more job opening than we could handle.

Liberals are 100% stupid and so oppose above solutions.

 

[Correll]

You are discussing what drives immigration. I was discussion the effect on immigration on wages.

Yes. Economic opportunity is what attracts immigrants to the US, or to any first world nation.

When they get here, then are then expanding the supply of labor.

Being available for jobs in their home country, in the "having a job before they come here" is also growing the supply of labor.

But there lies the question. Given the initial situation ( a lack of supply for low skill , low pay wages mostly : agriculture, cleaning and maintenance, construction , manufacturing and extraction industry).
What would be the market response ?
A) Increase the salaries
B) Offshore the jobs
C) Increase the level of automation.

I can see a clear tendency towards automation in agriculture, construction ( there is already a bricklaying robot )and manufacturing, also manufactures can be offshored. Clearly cleaning and maintenance are jobs which can not be offshored and have no easy way to be automated yet.
I would argue that illegals are not the only factor depressing low skill salaries, but also automation and offshoring, so keeping illegals outside is really just a short term solution.

Probably a better solution would be to find a way to help develop those countries and turn them into effective trade partners ( poor countries hardly make a good market ) . That is exactly what the US did with Europe after WWII and it worked wonderfully IMHO. NAFTA didn't live up to its expectations, so this is clearly not the correct way.
This has to be complemented with a policy that ensures Americans can have access to high paying jobs. Eventually all the low skill jobs will go the way of the Dodo bird.

Jobs Americans Won't Do?

Keeping in mind your "initial situation" is a hypothetical, because currently we have an excess supply of low skilled workers dureto immigration,

A, B and/or C depending on other factors.

Yes, Automation is also contributing to the decrease in jobs. I did not mean to imply that increased supply of immigrant workers was the ONLY factor. And that "short term" is going to be measured in decades.

That is another issue that will have to be addressed.

But currently, IMO, if there is enough of these jobs to attract 40 million immigrants, then there is enough demand there to greatly increase wages if we curtain immigration and deport the illegals and any legal immigrants who meet the standards for revoking citizenship.

And the Third World is not Europe. Europe, post WWII was an industrialized First World continent that needed REBUILT.

Any policy that depends on OUR ability to raise the Third World to First World status in any reasonable time frame is not a reasonable proposal.

Also, our trade gap with Europe is at an all time High also. It doesn't get the same press but it is still part of the problem.

 

[Correll]

If your plan is to just let in Pedro if he has a job waiting for him, you are making the enter world part of the US labor.


Which will complete crush your plan to get Demand to grow ahead of supply.

You're either not listening or deliberately not wanting to hear what I'm saying... not sure which.

We can regulate the number of aliens we allow to immigrate from each country every year. In fact, that's exactly what we do. One of the conditions they have to meet is to have employment waiting here for them when they come... this ensures we aren't accepting a burden on society. I didn't say we're going to take any old Pedro who can meet that criteria. That is a condition we apply to Pedro if he has applied for one of the limited number we will take. And maybe we apply other criteria as well?

And yes... again, this is detrimental to the objective of increasing demand for labor but as I said, we're not going to stop allowing people to migrate to the US.

I hear what you are saying. Are you hearing me that we are still bringing in millions of under educated and unskilled immigrates despite that?

Most come over on family reunion clause. Do they need jobs waiting for them?

And anyone you bring over is filling the job at the salary that was offered. If that slot was not filled by Pedro, then the employer might have had to raise the wage to attract someone to do it.

As long as they have the option of filling it with someone without raising the wage, that is what they will do.

Legal immigration is primarily what is growing the Supply of Labor faster than the Demand.

THe limited number need to be LOW, or zero. The criteria needs to be, "we actually CANNOT fill the jobs with Americans".

I do hear you but...
1) We are not going to stop legal immigration to the US.
2) It's better to require immigrants to have employment when they come.
3) There isn't any job that an American can't do, so we can fill any job with an American.

Now, let's get a handle on the scope of the situation. In order to effectively realize the effects of supply and demand when it comes to labor, we need to create somewhere around 60 million new jobs. Needless to say, we don't get there overnight. If we deported every illegal alien in the country it wouldn't create more than about 6 million jobs at best... that's perhaps 10%. Even if we somehow managed to kick out the legal immigrants, that's still just a drop in the bucket in terms of the number of jobs we need to create. And when we create new jobs, they need to be better than $7.50 hr. jobs picking lettuce because Pedro went home.

We need to deport illegals when we can, perhaps even limit legal immigration or apply tougher criteria. This cuts down the supply of labor but we still need to create a whole lot of jobs. You cannot fix this problem simply by gettin' rid of foreigners. In fact, I think we should create so many jobs we can take in more foreigners... legally, of course.

It sounds like a lot... 60 million jobs... it is a lot... but it's not that hard to do, really. It takes time and patience but mostly, it takes the right policies. As of now, we have policies that are counterproductive, doing the opposite of what we need to do. We have to stop this emotive ridiculous "war on the rich" and ever-increasing burden on free market capitalism.

I certainly support pro job growth policies.

I respectfully disagree on the level of control needed on the Supply side of Labor.

 

[Boss]

If your plan is to just let in Pedro if he has a job waiting for him, you are making the enter world part of the US labor.


Which will complete crush your plan to get Demand to grow ahead of supply.

You're either not listening or deliberately not wanting to hear what I'm saying... not sure which.

We can regulate the number of aliens we allow to immigrate from each country every year. In fact, that's exactly what we do. One of the conditions they have to meet is to have employment waiting here for them when they come... this ensures we aren't accepting a burden on society. I didn't say we're going to take any old Pedro who can meet that criteria. That is a condition we apply to Pedro if he has applied for one of the limited number we will take. And maybe we apply other criteria as well?

And yes... again, this is detrimental to the objective of increasing demand for labor but as I said, we're not going to stop allowing people to migrate to the US.

I hear what you are saying. Are you hearing me that we are still bringing in millions of under educated and unskilled immigrates despite that?

Most come over on family reunion clause. Do they need jobs waiting for them?

And anyone you bring over is filling the job at the salary that was offered. If that slot was not filled by Pedro, then the employer might have had to raise the wage to attract someone to do it.

As long as they have the option of filling it with someone without raising the wage, that is what they will do.

Legal immigration is primarily what is growing the Supply of Labor faster than the Demand.

THe limited number need to be LOW, or zero. The criteria needs to be, "we actually CANNOT fill the jobs with Americans".

I do hear you but...
1) We are not going to stop legal immigration to the US.
2) It's better to require immigrants to have employment when they come.
3) There isn't any job that an American can't do, so we can fill any job with an American.

Now, let's get a handle on the scope of the situation. In order to effectively realize the effects of supply and demand when it comes to labor, we need to create somewhere around 60 million new jobs. Needless to say, we don't get there overnight. If we deported every illegal alien in the country it wouldn't create more than about 6 million jobs at best... that's perhaps 10%. Even if we somehow managed to kick out the legal immigrants, that's still just a drop in the bucket in terms of the number of jobs we need to create. And when we create new jobs, they need to be better than $7.50 hr. jobs picking lettuce because Pedro went home.

We need to deport illegals when we can, perhaps even limit legal immigration or apply tougher criteria. This cuts down the supply of labor but we still need to create a whole lot of jobs. You cannot fix this problem simply by gettin' rid of foreigners. In fact, I think we should create so many jobs we can take in more foreigners... legally, of course.

It sounds like a lot... 60 million jobs... it is a lot... but it's not that hard to do, really. It takes time and patience but mostly, it takes the right policies. As of now, we have policies that are counterproductive, doing the opposite of what we need to do. We have to stop this emotive ridiculous "war on the rich" and ever-increasing burden on free market capitalism.

I certainly support pro job growth policies.

I respectfully disagree on the level of control needed on the Supply side of Labor.

Well we don't really disagree. You are right, deporting all illegal immigrants and closing immigration to the US would restrict the supply of labor. which is certainly what we want to do... BUT... it's not going to happen. We're never going to shut down immigration to the US... it's just something that is never going to happen so why torture yourself? We can deport illegal aliens and we have to do that as well as building a wall to secure the border and punish employers who hire illegal workers. But even with every effort devoted to cracking down on illegal immigration, we're still not going to deport 11-20 million people... not gonna happen. We can lament on how we think it should... we can agree that it would be great if we could... but realistically, it isn't going to happen. We've got to accept that some of those people are going to get to stay, whether we like that or not.

Now some might read this is and say, "Wow, Boss supports amnesty!" Nothing could be further from the truth. I wish (like you) that we could deport every last one of the illegal immigrants in our country. But it's one thing to say you want that and it's another thing to actually try and do it. We can certainly deport the criminals once they've committed a crime. We can certainly deport those who overstay their visas.

The problem is, once we've acknowledged them as illegals and then gave them access to health care or some sort of benefit... we've screwed ourselves. We've accepted they are "subject to jurisdiction" and they have specific Constitutional rights. All they have to show is that we knew they were here illegally and didn't do anything about it. Sanctuary cities were an ignorant idea. But the consequence of stupid policy is that we have to live with what it caused. In this case, it will cause us to eventually have to grant citizenship to many illegal aliens.

I know you hate to hear that, I hate it too, but it's what is going to eventually happen. I want the wall built before it does, as well as some beefed up efforts on enforcing our laws. Then I would like to see some kind of 'path to citizenship' program so that we can register these people, administer a fine or penalty and allow them to eventually gain legal status or citizenship. Perhaps, as we accept these new citizens in, we reduce the number of legal immigrants who can come from their country to offset? Lots of ways we can mitigate the damage but reality is, we're going to have to accept some of these illegals and we're not ever going to stop allowing immigration altogether.

 

[danielpalos]

We have a Commerce Clause in law; why are we losing money on Commerce at our borders.

 

[Correll]

If your plan is to just let in Pedro if he has a job waiting for him, you are making the enter world part of the US labor.


Which will complete crush your plan to get Demand to grow ahead of supply.

You're either not listening or deliberately not wanting to hear what I'm saying... not sure which.

We can regulate the number of aliens we allow to immigrate from each country every year. In fact, that's exactly what we do. One of the conditions they have to meet is to have employment waiting here for them when they come... this ensures we aren't accepting a burden on society. I didn't say we're going to take any old Pedro who can meet that criteria. That is a condition we apply to Pedro if he has applied for one of the limited number we will take. And maybe we apply other criteria as well?

And yes... again, this is detrimental to the objective of increasing demand for labor but as I said, we're not going to stop allowing people to migrate to the US.

I hear what you are saying. Are you hearing me that we are still bringing in millions of under educated and unskilled immigrates despite that?

Most come over on family reunion clause. Do they need jobs waiting for them?

And anyone you bring over is filling the job at the salary that was offered. If that slot was not filled by Pedro, then the employer might have had to raise the wage to attract someone to do it.

As long as they have the option of filling it with someone without raising the wage, that is what they will do.

Legal immigration is primarily what is growing the Supply of Labor faster than the Demand.

THe limited number need to be LOW, or zero. The criteria needs to be, "we actually CANNOT fill the jobs with Americans".

I do hear you but...
1) We are not going to stop legal immigration to the US.
2) It's better to require immigrants to have employment when they come.
3) There isn't any job that an American can't do, so we can fill any job with an American.

Now, let's get a handle on the scope of the situation. In order to effectively realize the effects of supply and demand when it comes to labor, we need to create somewhere around 60 million new jobs. Needless to say, we don't get there overnight. If we deported every illegal alien in the country it wouldn't create more than about 6 million jobs at best... that's perhaps 10%. Even if we somehow managed to kick out the legal immigrants, that's still just a drop in the bucket in terms of the number of jobs we need to create. And when we create new jobs, they need to be better than $7.50 hr. jobs picking lettuce because Pedro went home.

We need to deport illegals when we can, perhaps even limit legal immigration or apply tougher criteria. This cuts down the supply of labor but we still need to create a whole lot of jobs. You cannot fix this problem simply by gettin' rid of foreigners. In fact, I think we should create so many jobs we can take in more foreigners... legally, of course.

It sounds like a lot... 60 million jobs... it is a lot... but it's not that hard to do, really. It takes time and patience but mostly, it takes the right policies. As of now, we have policies that are counterproductive, doing the opposite of what we need to do. We have to stop this emotive ridiculous "war on the rich" and ever-increasing burden on free market capitalism.

I certainly support pro job growth policies.

I respectfully disagree on the level of control needed on the Supply side of Labor.

Well we don't really disagree. You are right, deporting all illegal immigrants and closing immigration to the US would restrict the supply of labor. which is certainly what we want to do... BUT... it's not going to happen. We're never going to shut down immigration to the US... it's just something that is never going to happen so why torture yourself? We can deport illegal aliens and we have to do that as well as building a wall to secure the border and punish employers who hire illegal workers. But even with every effort devoted to cracking down on illegal immigration, we're still not going to deport 11-20 million people... not gonna happen. We can lament on how we think it should... we can agree that it would be great if we could... but realistically, it isn't going to happen. We've got to accept that some of those people are going to get to stay, whether we like that or not.

Now some might read this is and say, "Wow, Boss supports amnesty!" Nothing could be further from the truth. I wish (like you) that we could deport every last one of the illegal immigrants in our country. But it's one thing to say you want that and it's another thing to actually try and do it. We can certainly deport the criminals once they've committed a crime. We can certainly deport those who overstay their visas.

The problem is, once we've acknowledged them as illegals and then gave them access to health care or some sort of benefit... we've screwed ourselves. We've accepted they are "subject to jurisdiction" and they have specific Constitutional rights. All they have to show is that we knew they were here illegally and didn't do anything about it. Sanctuary cities were an ignorant idea. But the consequence of stupid policy is that we have to live with what it caused. In this case, it will cause us to eventually have to grant citizenship to many illegal aliens.

I know you hate to hear that, I hate it too, but it's what is going to eventually happen. I want the wall built before it does, as well as some beefed up efforts on enforcing our laws. Then I would like to see some kind of 'path to citizenship' program so that we can register these people, administer a fine or penalty and allow them to eventually gain legal status or citizenship. Perhaps, as we accept these new citizens in, we reduce the number of legal immigrants who can come from their country to offset? Lots of ways we can mitigate the damage but reality is, we're going to have to accept some of these illegals and we're not ever going to stop allowing immigration altogether.

If we don't deport and curtail, then you can kiss your pro-growth ideas goodbye, because the Dems will be in charge and their policies will be exactly opposite of what you want.

 

[MarathonMike]

America needs to stop acting like the world's bitch and start acting like the leader of the free world. Getting the apologist Liberals out of office would be a great first step.