Study: All Employment Growth Since 2000 Went to Immigrants

[Andylusion]

My opinion is that stupid racists need to stop blaming poor immigrants for coming to the US to seek a real life and instead place blame where it belongs- with the businesses that exploit poor people's suffering to maximize private profit.

The US has 46m people living here who cannot afford food each week. The problem is not food scarcity. The problem is food affordability. Cheap, unhealthy crap is what most Americans have to get by on because real food costs too much for their meager budgets.

The problem is that the richest nation in history doesn't pay its workers a wage that can provide the basic necessities in this system. The problem is that this system was designed for rich people by rich people at the expense of the workers.

As for El Paso, the spot where I was was a run-down street with a bronze placard in the middle with the border line clearly marked "US/Mexico". It was just a street like any other. No one had to jump a fence or forge a river. Perhaps I was mistaken. Perhaps it wasn't El Paso. Perhaps it doesn't even matter because the world's billionaires are sucking up as much money to themselves as possible, leaving billions of people all over the planet struggling to make due with the leftovers. The richest 85 people on Earth have more money than the poorest half of the world's population.

Those 85 people should be the focus of your rage. Those 85 people can afford to pay higher wages to the poorest half of the world's population.

Are you saying they should not employ people? I don't understand that suggestion. If the immigrants were being 'exploited', then they simply wouldn't work there. Obviously they must find it mutually beneficial.

The US has 46m people living here who cannot afford food each week.

False. Just flat out, wrong. The fact people are taking advantage of the system, doesn't mean they can't afford food. It means they don't have to afford food, because government is handing out food.

It work at a company that has free coffee. Does the fact that absolutely everyone in the company, including the CEO, get's free coffee at the expense of the company, mean that everyone is paid so little, including the CEO, that they can't afford coffee? Of course not.

Just because the government has drastically expanded the ability of people to get free food from the government, does not mean they can't afford food. *I* personally qualify for food stamps myself. Yet I choose to pay for my own food. If I did take food stamps, you would include me in that 'millions' who can't afford food.

It's not true. You are wrong. In the 1990s, we kicked millions of people off food stamps. No one was starving in the streets. They just bought their own food, and lived just fine.

The problem is that the richest nation in history doesn't pay its workers a wage that can provide the basic necessities in this system.

Just flat out wrong. Do you realize that two people working minimum wage at McDonald's, places them in the top 1% of wage earners in the entire planet??

The poorest working people in our society, have a higher standard of living than anywhere else in the world.

Everything you are saying is just wrong. You are just regurgitating left-wing talking points that have all been proven false over and over and over again.

 

[KNB]

An estimated 14.5 percent of American households were food insecure at least some time during the year in 2012, meaning they lacked access to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members. The change from 14.9 percent in 2011 is not considered statistically significant. The prevalence of very low food security was unchanged at 5.7 percent.
USDA ERS - Household Food Security in the United States in 2012

What is 15% of 300m? That's how many people in America can't afford food each week. 15% of the world's richest nation in history can't afford food each week. The average food stamp recipient gets $133/mo in government assistance, an average of $275/mo per household. Not much at all really, and with the rising costs of food, fuel, medicine, etc., and throw on an average of $30k in debt for college loans, millions of Americans are finding that even working two or three minimum-wage service jobs is still not enough to elevate their economic status.

http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/18SNAPavg$PP.pdf
http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/19SNAPavg$HH.pdf

The problem is not poor people. The problem is rich people. It always has been.

 

[Andylusion]

The problem is food affordability. Cheap, unhealthy crap is what most Americans have to get by on because real food costs too much for their meager budgets.

What rock do you live under?

So many things we can debate about, and yet people on the left say absolutely idiotic things like this.

Have you never been to an actual 'grocery' store?

Walmart this weeks ads.... ears of sweet corn... 15¢ an ear.

Do you not grasp that? You need me to post a picture of the ad, so you can see what it's like out here in the real world? I'll do it if you really need it.

15¢ an ear of corn. For the cost of ONE value meal at McDonald's, you could buy FIFTY ears of corn.

Fresh peaches, $1.48 a POUND.

Ground chuck, $2.99 a POUND. Quarter Pounder at McDs, $5. Or nearly 2 POUNDS for the same price?

THREE POUNDS of chicken for $7, or one chicken sandwich at Wendy's for $7.

Meijer's Weekly ads.

Plums, Apricots.... $1.29 a POUND.

Angus Beef Burgers, Entire box of them for $7.89.

I could go on and on. For the cost of one large fry, you can buy a POUND of potatoes.

And I could go on. But the point is, YOU HAVE TO BE AN IDIOT to claim that unhealthy food is cheaper than quality food. You are just flat out wrong. By any reasonable measure, unhealthy fast food, is vastly more expensive than quality food at the store, and by a wide wide margin.

 

[Andylusion]

An estimated 14.5 percent of American households were food insecure at least some time during the year in 2012, meaning they lacked access to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members. The change from 14.9 percent in 2011 is not considered statistically significant. The prevalence of very low food security was unchanged at 5.7 percent.
USDA ERS - Household Food Security in the United States in 2012

What is 15% of 300m? That's how many people in America can't afford food each week. 15% of the world's richest nation in history can't afford food each week. The average food stamp recipient gets $133/mo in government assistance, an average of $275/mo per household. Not much at all really, and with the rising costs of food, fuel, medicine, etc., and throw on an average of $30k in debt for college loans, millions of Americans are finding that even working two or three minimum-wage service jobs is still not enough to elevate their economic status.

http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/18SNAPavg$PP.pdf
http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/19SNAPavg$HH.pdf

The problem is not poor people. The problem is rich people. It always has been.

This has been disproved numerous times. I don't care what the government, which has invested interest in getting you to give them more power to correct this supposed problem, says. The government is wrong, and you are wrong.

Repeating a lie, doesn't make it true.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

We need to stop all immigration, let work visas expire, we need to put Americans first. Not a single foreigner should be allowed in to work until every willing and able American has a job first. And at that point, it should be far more restrictive. 1 million new immigrants come here every year, it is out of control. There are more people coming in one year now then came in the 17th and 18th centuries combined.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

The idea of "they're stealing our jobs" is almost as old as the country. And almost as wrong.
Liberalism and Marxism is about the free movement of capital and labor. The anti immigrant bunch is simply on the wrong track here.

There fixed it for you. Open borders and free trade are pushed by marxists and libertarians alike. Certainly not conservative values in the slightest. Conservatives believe in nation first, not money first.

"Karl Marx advocated Free Trade, i.e. Capitalism, because (a) whereas Protection builds up the nation-state, Free Trade breaks it down, as a prelude to the creation of a world-state by the Capitalists (b) Free Trade breaks down traditional culture, as a prelude to the creation of a world culture (c) Free Trade exacerbates class warfare, and through this the Capitalists will lose control of the world-state - they will be defeated by the impoverished classes, with the help of their backers in the higher classes."

Why Karl Marx supported Free Trade

 

[Andylusion]

We need to stop all immigration, let work visas expire, we need to put Americans first. Not a single foreigner should be allowed in to work until every willing and able American has a job first. And at that point, it should be far more restrictive. 1 million new immigrants come here every year, it is out of control. There are more people coming in one year now then came in the 17th and 18th centuries combined.

Um... yeah, that's logical given the fact we have drastically larger earth population than 17th and 18th centuries. But it's not that far off the relative number.

Put American's first? First in what exactly? Unskilled, low-wage labor? I thought we didn't want unskilled low wage jobs? Why not let them have them?

 

[Andylusion]

The idea of "they're stealing our jobs" is almost as old as the country. And almost as wrong.
Liberalism and Marxism is about the free movement of capital and labor. The anti immigrant bunch is simply on the wrong track here.

There fixed it for you. Open borders and free trade are pushed by marxists and libertarians alike. Certainly not conservative values in the slightest. Conservatives believe in nation first, not money first.

"Karl Marx advocated Free Trade, i.e. Capitalism, because (a) whereas Protection builds up the nation-state, Free Trade breaks it down, as a prelude to the creation of a world-state by the Capitalists (b) Free Trade breaks down traditional culture, as a prelude to the creation of a world culture (c) Free Trade exacerbates class warfare, and through this the Capitalists will lose control of the world-state - they will be defeated by the impoverished classes, with the help of their backers in the higher classes."

Why Karl Marx supported Free Trade

Free trade does not break down traditional culture.

A corrupt culture, tends to break down traditional culture.

In fact, the number one cause of our break down, is our idiotic people simply not having kids, waiting until they are old to have kids, and raising kids in broken homes.

Waiting until you are in your 30s to have kids, is absolute stupidity. Not having kids, is also stupidity. And worse than either of those, is raising kids in broken homes.

That's why our culture is falling apart. Not because of immigration. The US has had immigration for centuries. And it never impacted our culture, until now when the sexual revolution, made popping out kids, less about love, and a family, and more about a tax deduction, and a welfare benefit.

If you wait until you are 35 to have kids, and your kids wait until they are 35, you are 70 years old by the time you have grand kids. And when those grand kids hit 15, when they really start forming all of their views on life, and how to live... you are 85 years old.

The biggest source of passing on culture is from grand parent to grand child. But now you are 85 before they are hitting that stage of life. You can barely function. To your grand kids, you are just an old fuddie in the corner, who can't keep his teeth in.

No culture is passed on. That's what is wiping out American culture.

 

[RWHeathenGamer]

We need to stop all immigration, let work visas expire, we need to put Americans first. Not a single foreigner should be allowed in to work until every willing and able American has a job first. And at that point, it should be far more restrictive. 1 million new immigrants come here every year, it is out of control. There are more people coming in one year now then came in the 17th and 18th centuries combined.

Um... yeah, that's logical given the fact we have drastically larger earth population than 17th and 18th centuries. But it's not that far off the relative number.

Put American's first? First in what exactly? Unskilled, low-wage labor? I thought we didn't want unskilled low wage jobs? Why not let them have them?

Foreign born, not including illegals, is 13% alone today, whereas in 1850, foreign born in the Census of 1850 was about 4%. So it is far off its relative number

With a conservative estimate of about 11 million illegals in the US, about 16% of the population is foreign born.

Put Americans first in all skill levels of jobs. So, Americans don't want to work construction, service industry, IT, Tech, Engineering? What are you talking about, about 4% of illegals work in agriculture, neither the majority of illegal or legal immigrants pick fruit or mow lawns as you grossly stereotype them. They take jobs from real people, in competitive industries in a very down economy. Until all willing and able Americans are employed, not a single immigrant should be allowed in, and it should be restricted based on what area of the world they come from. We should reestablish pre 1965 quotas once we lift the necessary moratorium.

 

[Andylusion]

We need to stop all immigration, let work visas expire, we need to put Americans first. Not a single foreigner should be allowed in to work until every willing and able American has a job first. And at that point, it should be far more restrictive. 1 million new immigrants come here every year, it is out of control. There are more people coming in one year now then came in the 17th and 18th centuries combined.

Um... yeah, that's logical given the fact we have drastically larger earth population than 17th and 18th centuries. But it's not that far off the relative number.

Put American's first? First in what exactly? Unskilled, low-wage labor? I thought we didn't want unskilled low wage jobs? Why not let them have them?

Foreign born, not including illegals, is 13% alone today, whereas in 1850, foreign born in the Census of 1850 was about 4%. So it is far off its relative number

With a conservative estimate of about 11 million illegals in the US, about 16% of the population is foreign born.

Put Americans first in all skill levels of jobs. So, Americans don't want to work construction, service industry, IT, Tech, Engineering? What are you talking about, about 4% of illegals work in agriculture, neither the majority of illegal of legal immigrants pick fruit or mow lawns as you grossly stereotype them. They take jobs from real people, in competitive industries in a very down economy. Until all willing and able Americans are employed, not a single immigrant should be allowed in, and it should be restricted base on what area of the world they come from. We should reestablish pre 1965 quotas once we lift the necessary moratorium.

I don't care what the number is relative to all immigration in the US. Not important.

I meant the number of immigrants total relative to the worlds population.

Further, illegals are not the point. I'm completely against illegal immigrants. But I am in favor of legal immigration.

Nor did I stereotype in the way you suggest. You just made all that crap up. Lie to someone else.

Putting Americans first, is a prejudice view point, that I do not subscribe to. There is nothing inherently better about Americans over other immigrants. There is nothing inherently inferior about immigrants.

Further, putting less qualified, less skilled Americans in positions of engineering, over better skilled and qualified immigrants would be an absolute disaster for many companies.

Being American doesn't make you brilliant or smart. I have worked at several places where immigrants were far better and highly skilled, than any American in the building.

And you know what? All the Americans in the company benefited from the products and developments those immigrants created, that supplied income to the company that paid all their wages.

Shutting off immigration would only harm ourselves.

In fact, I just read an article about Russians immigrating to the UK, and how they have setup businesses, and companies, and stores and such. London is reaping billions of dollars in economic growth from immigrants to London.

How many hundred, if not thousands of Londoners would not have jobs, if the UK had a 'british first' belief system?

Terrible idea. Immigration is always a net positive, except for when they are sponges of the socialized welfare system, and that can be solved by eliminating the welfare system.

 

[Lakhota]

I don't believe the OP.