SCOTUS rejects most of Arizona immigration law - Page 6

Piscivore · 27th June 2012, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Just to be clear, you're contending that lower-paid workers are better for the economy than higher-paid workers?

No, he's contenting that lower-paid workers are better for the individual companies than higher-paid workers. That's why they hire them.

Or outsource them to Asia. Personally, I'd rather see the money go to a Mexican, "legal" or not, who is going to spend it in this state, but that's just me.

Wangler · 27th June 2012, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Conclusion: Bald faced lie. You're busted.

Thank god you ferreted this rat out.

May I suggest that next time you and CR branch a thread for this pissing match?

WildCat · 27th June 2012, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

No, he's contenting that lower-paid workers are better for the individual companies than higher-paid workers. That's why they hire them.

Ah, so it's all about enriching the companies at the expense of the workers?

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Or outsource them to Asia. Personally, I'd rather see the money go to a Mexican, "legal" or not, who is going to spend it in this state, but that's just me.

Say what?

How do the dishes in a restaurant in Tuscon get washed in China? How do you import fresh vegetables from China before they're, er, not fresh? Assuming China even had the agricultural capacity to fulfill the US market, which they don't. How does a lawn in Scottsdale get cut in China?

The point is, this has nothing to do with outsourcing. This has to do with jobs that cannot be outsourced, and keeping the wages below what the market would dictate if illegal labor was not an option.

How is it not taking the position that lower wages are good for the economy, if you're touting the economic impact of lowest paid workers in your society?

Wangler · 27th June 2012, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

Just google search and you can see it all.

I did, and I saw:

Arizona Hotels Thriving Despite Boycotts Over Immigration Law

It is Fox News, but the data source seems legit.

Ausmerican · 27th June 2012, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by Wangler

I did, and I saw:

Arizona Hotels Thriving Despite Boycotts Over Immigration Law

It is Fox News, but the data source seems legit.

Heres Bloomberg estimating the boycott cost at $141 million; http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...udy-shows.html

Heres a list of some of the effects to the state; http://www.boycottintolerance.org/updates/p/business

WildCat · 27th June 2012, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by Ausmerican

Heres Bloomberg estimating the boycott cost at $141 million; http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...udy-shows.html

Heres a list of some of the effects to the state; http://www.boycottintolerance.org/updates/p/business

Seems to contradict the AZ Office of Tourism:

Quote:

Following two years of steep declines in travel activity, the Arizona travel industry began to recover during 2010. Most indicators of travel activity in the state, including visitation and real visitor spending, were up. However, because of the severity of the recent recession, these gains were not translated into travel-generated employment as employers more often improved their balance sheets and increased the work hours of existing employees. A continuation of growth in visitation and spending should favorably affect future employment levels.

So AZ tourism took a hit in the recession (starting prior to SB1070) and began to recover in 2010, after SB1070.

Quote:

• Spending. Travel spending ($17.7 billion in 2010) in Arizona increased by 7.9 percent from 2009 to 2010 in current dollars and 4.6 percent when adjusted for inflation. The primary price increases were in transportation, especially motor fuel. Room rates declined by 3.2 percent, from 2009 to 2010, following an 11.9 percent the preceding year.

Travel Activity. According to Smith Travel Research, room demand in Arizona increased by 8.1 percent from 2009 to 2010. Visitor air arrivals on domestic flights increased by 0.5 percent following two years of 8 percent decreas

http://www.azot.gov/system/files/410...pdf?1310693693

Howie Felterbush · 27th June 2012, 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by Wangler

Thank god you ferreted this rat out.

May I suggest that next time you and CR branch a thread for this pissing match?

If SG did this for every nit-picking pissing match she got into, this forum would have more branches than Starbuck's.

Ranb · 27th June 2012, 09:30 PM

Congressman Luis Gutierrez was shown on CNN with his "guess who the immigrant is" schick. He would put up two photos, one Caucasian the other Latino and asked the audience who was the immigrant and most likely to be detained by Arizona police. He went on to imply (perhaps jokingly) that Americans were racist in general. I thought it was rather stupid.

Ranb

Skeptic Ginger · 28th June 2012, 12:00 AM

Originally Posted by Wangler

Thank god you ferreted this rat out.

May I suggest that next time you and CR branch a thread for this pissing match?

You can suggest all you want. It wasn't a pissing contest. The specific lie CR posted was related to the thread topic.

He claims to be a legal expert and this thread is about a law. His credibility, as it applies to legal expertise, matters in evaluating his posts in thread.

Skeptic Ginger · 28th June 2012, 12:15 AM

Originally Posted by Ranb

Congressman Luis Gutierrez was shown on CNN with his "guess who the immigrant is" schick. He would put up two photos, one Caucasian the other Latino and asked the audience who was the immigrant and most likely to be detained by Arizona police. He went on to imply (perhaps jokingly) that Americans were racist in general. I thought it was rather stupid.

Ranb

I don't think he was saying all Americans are racist. If someone watching thought Salina Gomez was an immigrant and didn't know Justin Bieber was Canadian, those were the people the Congressman was hoping to make a point to.

Ranb · 28th June 2012, 06:15 AM

If I can find a transcript of the conversation, I will post it. He accused Arizona cops and Americans in general. I thought it was very condescending.

Ranb

Guybrush Threepwood · 28th June 2012, 06:38 AM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

An AZ driver's license is good for 50 years. So someone comes in on a work visa and gets their DL. They stay past their visa and keep the license. Great law you got there AZ!

Actually, if you use a visa to get an AZ drivers license, the license expires when your visa does.

(Photo of AZ license available on request)

ponderingturtle · 28th June 2012, 08:10 AM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

A six pack and a loaded pistol.

And be sure to shoot any developmentally delayed people with dogs.

crimresearch · 28th June 2012, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by Ranb

If I can find a transcript of the conversation, I will post it. He accused Arizona cops and Americans in general. I thought it was very condescending.

Ranb

Well not all Arizona cops are as sanguine about the ease of telling who is who, as some of the 'experts' here...

http://news.yahoo.com/arizona-police...004622347.html

Ranb · 28th June 2012, 11:56 AM

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf

Quote:

B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY
21 OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS
22 STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS
23 UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE,
24 WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE
25 PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
26 PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c).

Bolding mine.

Assuming that this is part of what is left of 1070, it does allow some wiggle room. It also might protect a bigot police officer who wants to make a tough day for someone he does not like the looks of.

Ranb

WildCat · 28th June 2012, 12:06 PM

So, is it now established that those who want more immigration of low-skilled workers think that way because low wages are good for the economy because it's less expense for corporations and that's what they want?

Just think, as soon as your employees get uppity about the $2 you pay them to pick a large box of tomatoes you can just remind them there's millions more where they came from who will be happy with $2/box!

Prosperity!

Biscuit · 28th June 2012, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Doesn't support your claim.

You already tried that tactic when you claimed not to understand what I wrote. That article does support my claim.

Originally Posted by WildCat

Where's the study?

A study of what? The Arizona Hotel and Lodging association's report that meetings had been cancelled in the wake of SB1070 being passed? You want the actual notices of cancelation or something?

Originally Posted by WildCat

All you're offering is anecdotal evidence, and it's unclear what the origin of that evidence is.

If you are claiming the Arizona Hotel and Lodging Association was lying or incorrect you are free to prove it.

I am tired of you dodging this. I have meet the burden of proof - SB 1070 had a negative economic impact.

Biscuit · 28th June 2012, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Just to be clear, you're contending that lower-paid workers are better for the economy than higher-paid workers?

No. I said nothing even close to that.

You keep putting words in my mouth or misreading what I write. It would do you good to take a bit more care when reading my posts rather than just jumping to these conclusions.

Biscuit · 28th June 2012, 01:24 PM

Here is a study that backs up my claim. This study only looks at the actual, expected, and incremental loss to the economy with regards to conference booking. It was done in the wake of the passing of SB1070.

crimresearch · 28th June 2012, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

No. I said nothing even close to that.

You keep putting words in my mouth or misreading what I write. It would do you good to take a bit more care when reading my posts rather than just jumping to these conclusions.

Assumes good intentions not in evidence...

Piscivore · 28th June 2012, 03:04 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Ah, so it's all about enriching the companies at the expense of the workers?

Yes, that's why there's pressure not to enforce existing immigration laws; the PTB (and I'm not talking about the government, no matter which party is in charge at the moment) won't have it.

Quote:

Say what?

How do the dishes in a restaurant in Tuscon get washed in China? How do you import fresh vegetables from China before they're, er, not fresh? Assuming China even had the agricultural capacity to fulfill the US market, which they don't. How does a lawn in Scottsdale get cut in China?

The point is, this has nothing to do with outsourcing. This has to do with jobs that cannot be outsourced, and keeping the wages below what the market would dictate if illegal labor was not an option.

How is it not taking the position that lower wages are good for the economy, if you're touting the economic impact of lowest paid workers in your society?

What I mean is that if keeping the wages of joe-sixpack Americans higher than the rest of the world were really the point of all this "illegal immigration" uproar, we'd see an equal amount of noise from the right about outsourcing. We don't. In fact, they seem to be all for it. Why?

JoeTheJuggler · 28th June 2012, 03:23 PM

What's funny is that Gov. Brewer claimed that Arizona was "vindicated" and that the "heart" of the law was unanimously proven to be constitutional.

Riiiight!

What has she been smoking?

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Piscivore · 28th June 2012, 03:31 PM

Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler

What's funny is that Gov. Brewer claimed that Arizona was "vindicated" and that the "heart" of the law was unanimously proven to be constitutional.

Riiiight!

What has she been smoking?

Tea.

JoeTheJuggler · 28th June 2012, 03:53 PM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Tea.

Bazinga!

Nominated.

WildCat · 28th June 2012, 04:32 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

No. I said nothing even close to that.

You keep putting words in my mouth or misreading what I write. It would do you good to take a bit more care when reading my posts rather than just jumping to these conclusions.

Do you think that the economic impact of those jobs would be greater if they didn't have the option of using illegal workers?

Do you think low-skilled immigrantion should be allowed without an actual shortage of low-skilled workers? If so, what do you think the impact will be on wages paid to fill low-skill jobs if new foreign workers can always be brought in to further glut the market?

WildCat · 28th June 2012, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Yes, that's why there's pressure not to enforce existing immigration laws; the PTB (and I'm not talking about the government, no matter which party is in charge at the moment) won't have it.

What's a PTB?

Originally Posted by Piscivore

What I mean is that if keeping the wages of joe-sixpack Americans higher than the rest of the world were really the point of all this "illegal immigration" uproar,

I'm my own voice, not the voice of "the uproar", whatever that it.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

we'd see an equal amount of noise from the right about outsourcing. We don't. In fact, they seem to be all for it. Why?

Because this is irrelevant to outsourcing. These are jobs which cannot be outsourced! And perhaps people wouldn't be so concerned about outsourcing if incomes here at home, particularly towards the bottom end of the curve, were rising rather than being depressed by competition with illegal labor.

And what would President Piscivore do about outsourcing? I've yet to see any proposal that doesn't involve massive protectionism/trade wars. Maybe you have a workable idea.

Piscivore · 28th June 2012, 06:03 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

What's a PTB?

"Powers That Be".

Quote:

I'm my own voice, not the voice of "the uproar", whatever that it.

Then I'm not talking about you. But you cannot deny that an uproar exists. Who is fueling it, and why?

Quote:

Because this is irrelevant to outsourcing. These are jobs which cannot be outsourced! And perhaps people wouldn't be so concerned about outsourcing if incomes here at home, particularly towards the bottom end of the curve, were rising rather than being depressed by competition with illegal labor.

That's just it- Americans do not live on an island. American employers find American labour overpriced on the global labour market. outsourcing and hiring illegal imigrants are simply different responses to the same economic pressure. If we are going to preserve elevated waves in America, we need to force American companies to hire American labour- by punishing the companies that hire non-Americans BOTH in other counties and the ones that come here without permission. Prosecuting the illegal aliens adresses the wrong half of only part of the problem.

If we aren't trying to preserve elevated American wages, prosecuting illegal aliens makes not sense at all. Let everyone in, and prosecute those people- citizen or not, that commit crimes.

Quote:

And what would President Piscivore do about outsourcing? I've yet to see any proposal that doesn't involve massive protectionism/trade wars.

Yeah, how about that? Doesn't that point to an egregious disparity?

Quote:

Maybe you have a workable idea.

It wouldn't fly- it involves swallowing the very bitter pill we can't be the world's 1% anymore- most of us for no other reason than accident of birth.

WildCat · 29th June 2012, 05:35 AM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

That's just it- Americans do not live on an island. American employers find American labour overpriced on the global labour market.

This is the domestic labor market, not the gloval one. If you think that US labor costs should be comparable to the global average, then bear in mind the global average is ~$7,000/year. Is this your target income for the US worker?

Originally Posted by Piscivore

outsourcing and hiring illegal imigrants are simply different responses to the same economic pressure.

Nope. The US could make electronics domestically, for example, but we can't foprce anyone to buy them and it would be hard to compete with foreign manufactured items that are just as good as far as quality but half the price.

How do you expect a US manufacturer to stay in business in those circumstances?

There is no such pressure domestically. As I stated earlier, a homeowner in Peoria can't have his lawn mowed in Vietnam. Asian producers can't satisfy the US demand for fresh vegetables. A restaurant in St. Louis can't have its dishes washed in Thailand.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

If we are going to preserve elevated waves in America, we need to force American companies to hire American labour- by punishing the companies that hire non-Americans BOTH in other counties and the ones that come here without permission.

Please, describe in detail how you intend to punish American companies that outsource production and how this will help anyone in the US. You punted last time I asked this Mr. President Piscivore.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Prosecuting the illegal aliens adresses the wrong half of only part of the problem.

I happen to agree that a real crackdown on employers is in order and much preferable, but there is opposition to that from both ends of the political spectrum. Hell here in Illinois the Dems actually passed a bill making it illegal for employersw to use the federal e-verify system to verify Social Security numbers!

Originally Posted by Piscivore

If we aren't trying to preserve elevated American wages, prosecuting illegal aliens makes not sense at all. Let everyone in, and prosecute those people- citizen or not, that commit crimes.

Why shouldn't we try to preserve high wages in the US? Your problem is you somehow think outsourcing is the problem, but trying to control that is a fool's errand. At the end of the day you can't make people buy overpriced products, they'll pick the cheaper one all other things being equal. And if you introduce protectionism as your solution, then you start a trade war. And while your trade war is ongloing prices will rise while wages will fall due to exports taking a huge hit. Protectionism failks every time it's tried.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Yeah, how about that? Doesn't that point to an egregious disparity?

Please answer the question.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

It wouldn't fly- it involves swallowing the very bitter pill we can't be the world's 1% anymore- most of us for no other reason than accident of birth.

If we're no longer the world's 1% it should be because incomes in other countries are rising, your "solution" is to lower US incomes to the world average?

It's not an accident US incomes are high, it's the result of our economic policies (though it could certainly be improved) and social values. Mexico could be prosperous too, but they are stymied by widespread endemic corruption at all levels of government and society, not by some accident of birth.

Anyway, thanks for confirming that you think US workers make way too much money and we all need to take a huge pay cut, even poor people.

Piscivore · 29th June 2012, 07:43 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

This is the domestic labor market, not the gloval one. If you think that US labor costs should be comparable to the global average, then bear in mind the global average is ~$7,000/year. Is this your target income for the US worker?

It's not *my* target. I don't think labour costs "should be" any particular number. But if you've got an Indonesian (or a Mexican willing to sneak across the border) who will do the a job for $7k a year and an American who will expect $20k plus benefits for the same job, which is an employer going to want to hire?

Quote:

Nope. The US could make electronics domestically, for example, but we can't foprce anyone to buy them and it would be hard to compete with foreign manufactured items that are just as good as far as quality but half the price.

How do you expect a US manufacturer to stay in business in those circumstances?

How indeed.

Quote:

There is no such pressure domestically. As I stated earlier, a homeowner in Peoria can't have his lawn mowed in Vietnam. Asian producers can't satisfy the US demand for fresh vegetables. A restaurant in St. Louis can't have its dishes washed in Thailand.

Irrelevant- because the cheap labour comes here as easily as employers can move jobs overseas.

Quote:

Please, describe in detail how you intend to punish American companies that outsource production and how this will help anyone in the US. You punted last time I asked this Mr. President Piscivore.

Because I *don't* "intend to punish" anyone. I've not advocated the protectionist angle for American wages.

In fact, I haven't offered any solutions, because I don't claim to have them. I'm simply pointing out that going after "illegal immigrants" with protecting US wages as the goal isn't going to work.

Quote:

I happen to agree that a real crackdown on employers is in order and much preferable, but there is opposition to that from both ends of the political spectrum. Hell here in Illinois the Dems actually passed a bill making it illegal for employersw to use the federal e-verify system to verify Social Security numbers!

Like I said, the PTB won't have it... which means this whole immigration thing is simply a farce to get people worked up.

Quote:

Why shouldn't we try to preserve high wages in the US?

Why should we? Why should we expect a guy to make many times the wage for the same job as someone else simply because he was lucky enough to be born 100 miles north of an arbitrary, imaginary line as the other guy?

Quote:

Your problem is you somehow think outsourcing is the problem,

You're not listening, it is not THE problem, it is part of the same problem as illegal immigration.

Quote:

but trying to control that is a fool's errand.

Likewise illegal immigration, for the same reason.

Quote:

At the end of the day you can't make people buy overpriced products, they'll pick the cheaper one all other things being equal. And if you introduce protectionism as your solution, then you start a trade war. And while your trade war is ongloing prices will rise while wages will fall due to exports taking a huge hit. Protectionism failks every time it's tried.

Indeed.

Quote:

Please answer the question.

I did. I wouldn't do anything about it, I'm not interested in preserving high American wages. We live in a global community, and trying to keep ourselves far above everyone else in the world is sociopathic.

Quote:

If we're no longer the world's 1% it should be because incomes in other countries are rising, your "solution" is to lower US incomes to the world average?

Again, it is not *my* solution, it is the market's.

I'd love to see the incomes in other countries rise. And if their governments are corrupt I'd love to see the people there able to go to where they aren't- or failing that (because politics, right?) at least somewhat less so. Unhindered and freely. There's significant economic pressure against this too, because companies that currently hire illegal labour do so in part because they don't have to pay benefits they would have to to a documented worker and their status makes them compliant and easily manipulated.

Quote:

It's not an accident US incomes are high, it's the result of our economic policies (though it could certainly be improved) and social values. Mexico could be prosperous too, but they are stymied by widespread endemic corruption at all levels of government and society, not by some accident of birth.

"Accident of birth" refers to the individuals, not the economic system.

Quote:

Anyway, thanks for confirming that you think US workers make way too much money and we all need to take a huge pay cut, even poor people.

It's not what *I* think, it is what the companies that outsource jobs and hire illegal immigrants think, because they are the ones hiring them.

WildCat · 29th June 2012, 08:32 AM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

It's not *my* target. I don't think labour costs "should be" any particular number. But if you've got an Indonesian (or a Mexican willing to sneak across the border) who will do the a job for $7k a year and an American who will expect $20k plus benefits for the same job, which is an employer going to want to hire?

Of course it's your target. You think US labor prices should reflect the global average. I'm sure many emplopyers would be happy with slave labor, and indeed it's tolerated in some parts of the world, but that's not an argument for slavery.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

How indeed.

Yes, that's the question put to you. Do you care to answer it or will you continue to avoid it?

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Irrelevant- because the cheap labour comes here as easily as employers can move jobs overseas.

The US has an interest in maintaining a wealthy and prosperous society in the US. What is the US interest in walling ourselves off from trading with the rest of the world?

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Because I *don't* "intend to punish" anyone.

Of course you are, you said you wanted to punish employers who move jobs overseas.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

I've not advocated the protectionist angle for American wages.

Right, because you think American wages are too high and need to come dramatically downward. And it's interestoing how you are calling labor laws and policy "protectionism", while advocating actual protectionist laws and policies.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

In fact, I haven't offered any solutions, because I don't claim to have them.

No kidding! Instead, you demand the tide to recede when the moon is pulling it in.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

I'm simply pointing out that going after "illegal immigrants" with protecting US wages as the goal isn't going to work.

Of course it works. If employing illegal labor or cheap legal labor wasn't an option they'd be forced to pay their workers more, or go out of business. But if they go out of business other businesses will be happy to pay their workers more and take their market share.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Like I said, the PTB won't have it... which means this whole immigration thing is simply a farce to get people worked up.

You are part of the PTB, aren't you? Here you are advocating for lower wages and fewer benefits dor US workers. Maybe you own an unscrupulous company, or just like to get your lawn mowed for peanuts?

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Why should we? Why should we expect a guy to make many times the wage for the same job as someone else simply because he was lucky enough to be born 100 miles north of an arbitrary, imaginary line as the other guy?

Because we in the US have established a society that encourages economic growth. We should reap the rewards of our policies. Mexico has established a society that encourages public corruption, and they have nobody but themselves to blame for the state they're in. US workers certainly didn;t establish Mexico's social mores, why should they suffer the consequences?

Originally Posted by Piscivore

You're not listening, it is not THE problem, it is part of the same problem as illegal immigration.

It's completely unrelated to illegal immigration.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Likewise illegal immigration, for the same reason.

No, it's not. It would be quite trivial to crack down on employers who hire illegal workers. Do that and there'd be little reason for illegal immigration to take place.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Indeed.

I did. I wouldn't do anything about it, I'm not interested in preserving high American wages. We live in a global community, and trying to keep ourselves far above everyone else in the world is sociopathic.

Wow, that is frankly amazing. Time to get rid of minimum wage laws, workplace safety laws, the EPA, etc etc, yes?

Originally Posted by Piscivore

Again, it is not *my* solution, it is the market's.

It sure looks like your solution here. The market merely chooses according to the parameters in effect. If illegal labor is unavailable, the market will force wages upwards.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

I'd love to see the incomes in other countries rise. And if their governments are corrupt I'd love to see the people there able to go to where they aren't- or failing that (because politics, right?) at least somewhat less so. Unhindered and freely. There's significant economic pressure against this too, because companies that currently hire illegal labour do so in part because they don't have to pay benefits they would have to to a documented worker and their status makes them compliant and easily manipulated.

It makes no difference whether or not the unskilled labor flowing across the border is legal or illegal, by glutting the market wages are pushed downward.

Originally Posted by Piscivore

"Accident of birth" refers to the individuals, not the economic system.

To whom does the US government serve, low-skilled US workes or low-skilled workers in foreign countries?

Originally Posted by Piscivore

It's not what *I* think, it is what the companies that outsource jobs and hire illegal immigrants think, because they are the ones hiring them.

You've just repeated over and over how you think US workers are overpaid and wages need to come way down, now you deny this?

Piscivore · 29th June 2012, 09:32 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Of course it's your target. You think US labor prices should reflect the global average.

It's not that I think they "should", it's that I think they eventually will. Would you say someone pointing out the housing bubble before it broke "wanted" the housing market to crash?

Quote:

I'm sure many emplopyers would be happy with slave labor, and indeed it's tolerated in some parts of the world, but that's not an argument for slavery.

Indeed.

Quote:

Yes, that's the question put to you. Do you care to answer it or will you continue to avoid it?

I did answer- I don't have the magic solution. Seems to me we're headed for a big problem... I'm just saying that prosecuting illegal immigrants isn't the solution, nor is it even going to help, at all.

Pushing me for an answer I siad I don't have is just playing the "perfect solution" card. Just because I don't know how to fix it doesn't mean the current strategy isn't wrong.

Quote:

The US has an interest in maintaining a wealthy and prosperous society in the US. What is the US interest in walling ourselves off from trading with the rest of the world?

None at all. But we have to accept the bad (lower average wages) with the good (higher trade income) if we are going to be part of a global market. Or keep trying to prop up a bubble.

Quote:

Of course you are, you said you wanted to punish employers who move jobs overseas.

That's not what I said. I said that those who claim they want to curtail illegal immigration because it costs American jobs and lowers American wages should be in favour of curtailing outsourcing too, because it has the same deliterious effect. They are not, so therefore their interest in "illegal immigration" has to do with something other than American jobs and American wages.

Quote:

Right, because you think American wages are too high and need to come dramatically downward. And it's interestoing how you are calling labor laws and policy "protectionism", while advocating actual protectionist laws and policies.

No kidding! Instead, you demand the tide to recede when the moon is pulling it in.

You are part of the PTB, aren't you? Here you are advocating for lower wages and fewer benefits dor US workers. Maybe you own an unscrupulous company, or just like to get your lawn mowed for peanuts?

Wow, that is frankly amazing. Time to get rid of minimum wage laws, workplace safety laws, the EPA, etc etc, yes?

You've just repeated over and over how you think US workers are overpaid and wages need to come way down, now you deny this?

When you are ready to read what I wrote instead of telling me what I think, let me know.

Quote:

No, it's not. It would be quite trivial to crack down on employers who hire illegal workers. Do that and there'd be little reason for illegal immigration to take place.

So why doesn't that happen? Why the push to punish the workers?

Biscuit · 29th June 2012, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Do you think that the economic impact of those jobs would be greater if they didn't have the option of using illegal workers?

A lot of undocumented workers make pretty good money (or they wouldn't be here), they cause fewer problems for employers, take less time off, and work their butts off because they know there is another guy waiting to take his job. I think having to hire legal workers would probably cost the businesses more but I don't know.

The economy as a whole? I have no idea. I have heard business leaders and immigrant activists groups both claim the cost of good would rise if all the undocumented workers disappeared yesterday.

Originally Posted by WildCat

Do you think low-skilled immigrantion should be allowed without an actual shortage of low-skilled workers? If so, what do you think the impact will be on wages paid to fill low-skill jobs if new foreign workers can always be brought in to further glut the market?

I don't think we should have illegal immigration. A guest worker program would be a separate issue but that won't work until businesses find it is to risky/expensive to higher illegal immigrants.

On another note a lot of undocumented workers are not low skill. Some of the best masons and irrigation workers I have ever meet had no papers.

I apologize for being a snarly and rude in my last post I am going to use my, "It's too hot in AZ and that makes me cranky" card.

Piscivore · 29th June 2012, 10:13 AM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

"It's too hot in AZ..."

You got that right.

Biscuit · 29th June 2012, 12:21 PM

Originally Posted by Piscivore

You got that right.

And muggy now on top of the heat! Why won't it rain!? WHY!?

Piscivore · 29th June 2012, 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

And muggy now on top of the heat! Why won't it rain!? WHY!?

The extra humidity is from illegals sweating all over the place.

Wangler · 29th June 2012, 05:44 PM

Originally Posted by Biscuit

A lot of undocumented workers make pretty good money (or they wouldn't be here), they cause fewer problems for employers, take less time off, and work their butts off because they know there is another guy waiting to take his job.

Biscuit, do you have a reference for these claims, or are they anecdotal?

Thanks!

Biscuit · 30th June 2012, 11:11 PM

For what its worth I have figured out the solution to illegal immigration.

Biscuit · 30th June 2012, 11:16 PM

Originally Posted by Wangler

Biscuit, do you have a reference for these claims, or are they anecdotal?

Thanks!

As they employer keeps no records it would be hard to prove but logically it makes sense.

- The pay must be worth the danger faced to get here

- Being here illegally one tries to cause as few problems as possible

First hand accounts of their labor

chuck4842 · 1st July 2012, 04:37 AM

Although people originally thought illegals would bring down the cost of labor, they didn't consider the possibility of the dominoe effect it could bring to to the highly skilled jobs. For example a lot of folks believe we've even outsourced the office of the Presidency to an illegal with no papers.

Mojo · 1st July 2012, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by chuck4842

For example a lot of folks believe we've even outsourced the office of the Presidency to an illegal with no papers.

Yes, but to believe that you would need to be grossly ignorant of the US Constitution, and an idiot.

27th June 2012, 04:07 PM	#201
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,456	Originally Posted by WildCat Just to be clear, you're contending that lower-paid workers are better for the economy than higher-paid workers? No, he's contenting that lower-paid workers are better for the individual companies than higher-paid workers. That's why they hire them. Or outsource them to Asia. Personally, I'd rather see the money go to a Mexican, "legal" or not, who is going to spend it in this state, but that's just me.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen Last edited by Piscivore; 27th June 2012 at 04:09 PM.

27th June 2012, 05:37 PM	#205
Ausmerican Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 3,381	Originally Posted by Wangler I did, and I saw: Arizona Hotels Thriving Despite Boycotts Over Immigration Law It is Fox News, but the data source seems legit. Heres Bloomberg estimating the boycott cost at $141 million; http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...udy-shows.html Heres a list of some of the effects to the state; http://www.boycottintolerance.org/updates/p/business
Ausmerican Illuminator Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 3,381	__________________ Everyone must believe in something. I believe I'll go canoeing. Henry David Thoreau

27th June 2012, 06:04 PM	#207
Howie Felterbush Bow Tie Daddy Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: In the twilight, singing all the old lullabies Posts: 5,333	Originally Posted by Wangler Thank god you ferreted this rat out. May I suggest that next time you and CR branch a thread for this pissing match? If SG did this for every nit-picking pissing match she got into, this forum would have more branches than Starbuck's.
	__________________ "Don't be too offended by the likes of him - I hear he doesn't even own ascots." -JoeyDonuts "I must be more tired than I thought. Howie, you are starting to make sense." -MG1962 "You're a mean old evil cynic. And mean." Halfcentaur

28th June 2012, 12:00 AM	#209
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,518	Originally Posted by Wangler Thank god you ferreted this rat out. May I suggest that next time you and CR branch a thread for this pissing match? You can suggest all you want. It wasn't a pissing contest. The specific lie CR posted was related to the thread topic. He claims to be a legal expert and this thread is about a law. His credibility, as it applies to legal expertise, matters in evaluating his posts in thread.
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

28th June 2012, 12:15 AM	#210
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,518	Originally Posted by Ranb Congressman Luis Gutierrez was shown on CNN with his "guess who the immigrant is" schick. He would put up two photos, one Caucasian the other Latino and asked the audience who was the immigrant and most likely to be detained by Arizona police. He went on to imply (perhaps jokingly) that Americans were racist in general. I thought it was rather stupid. Ranb I don't think he was saying all Americans are racist. If someone watching thought Salina Gomez was an immigrant and didn't know Justin Bieber was Canadian, those were the people the Congressman was hoping to make a point to.
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

27th June 2012, 04:13 PM	#202
Wangler Master Poster Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: OH State Posts: 2,230	Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger Conclusion: Bald faced lie. You're busted. Thank god you ferreted this rat out. May I suggest that next time you and CR branch a thread for this pissing match?

27th June 2012, 04:25 PM	#203
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,983	Originally Posted by Piscivore No, he's contenting that lower-paid workers are better for the individual companies than higher-paid workers. That's why they hire them. Ah, so it's all about enriching the companies at the expense of the workers? Originally Posted by Piscivore Or outsource them to Asia. Personally, I'd rather see the money go to a Mexican, "legal" or not, who is going to spend it in this state, but that's just me. Say what? How do the dishes in a restaurant in Tuscon get washed in China? How do you import fresh vegetables from China before they're, er, not fresh? Assuming China even had the agricultural capacity to fulfill the US market, which they don't. How does a lawn in Scottsdale get cut in China? The point is, this has nothing to do with outsourcing. This has to do with jobs that cannot be outsourced, and keeping the wages below what the market would dictate if illegal labor was not an option. How is it not taking the position that lower wages are good for the economy, if you're touting the economic impact of lowest paid workers in your society?

27th June 2012, 04:34 PM	#204
Wangler Master Poster Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: OH State Posts: 2,230	Originally Posted by Biscuit Just google search and you can see it all. I did, and I saw: Arizona Hotels Thriving Despite Boycotts Over Immigration Law It is Fox News, but the data source seems legit.

27th June 2012, 06:00 PM	#206
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,983	Originally Posted by Ausmerican Heres Bloomberg estimating the boycott cost at $141 million; http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...udy-shows.html Heres a list of some of the effects to the state; http://www.boycottintolerance.org/updates/p/business Seems to contradict the AZ Office of Tourism: Quote: Following two years of steep declines in travel activity, the Arizona travel industry began to recover during 2010. Most indicators of travel activity in the state, including visitation and real visitor spending, were up. However, because of the severity of the recent recession, these gains were not translated into travel-generated employment as employers more often improved their balance sheets and increased the work hours of existing employees. A continuation of growth in visitation and spending should favorably affect future employment levels. So AZ tourism took a hit in the recession (starting prior to SB1070) and began to recover in 2010, after SB1070. Quote: • Spending. Travel spending ($17.7 billion in 2010) in Arizona increased by 7.9 percent from 2009 to 2010 in current dollars and 4.6 percent when adjusted for inflation. The primary price increases were in transportation, especially motor fuel. Room rates declined by 3.2 percent, from 2009 to 2010, following an 11.9 percent the preceding year. Travel Activity. According to Smith Travel Research, room demand in Arizona increased by 8.1 percent from 2009 to 2010. Visitor air arrivals on domestic flights increased by 0.5 percent following two years of 8 percent decreas http://www.azot.gov/system/files/410...pdf?1310693693

27th June 2012, 09:30 PM	#208
Ranb Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: WA USA Posts: 4,099	Congressman Luis Gutierrez was shown on CNN with his "guess who the immigrant is" schick. He would put up two photos, one Caucasian the other Latino and asked the audience who was the immigrant and most likely to be detained by Arizona police. He went on to imply (perhaps jokingly) that Americans were racist in general. I thought it was rather stupid. Ranb

28th June 2012, 06:15 AM	#211
Ranb Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: WA USA Posts: 4,099	If I can find a transcript of the conversation, I will post it. He accused Arizona cops and Americans in general. I thought it was very condescending. Ranb

28th June 2012, 06:38 AM	#212
Guybrush Threepwood Trainee Pirate Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: An Uaimh Posts: 1,559	Originally Posted by Biscuit An AZ driver's license is good for 50 years. So someone comes in on a work visa and gets their DL. They stay past their visa and keep the license. Great law you got there AZ! Actually, if you use a visa to get an AZ drivers license, the license expires when your visa does. (Photo of AZ license available on request)

28th June 2012, 08:10 AM	#213
ponderingturtle Orthogonal Vector Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Tarrytown, NY Posts: 26,420	Originally Posted by BenBurch A six pack and a loaded pistol. And be sure to shoot any developmentally delayed people with dogs.
	__________________ Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody "There shall be no poofing in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin

28th June 2012, 11:39 AM	#214
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by Ranb If I can find a transcript of the conversation, I will post it. He accused Arizona cops and Americans in general. I thought it was very condescending. Ranb Well not all Arizona cops are as sanguine about the ease of telling who is who, as some of the 'experts' here... http://news.yahoo.com/arizona-police...004622347.html
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

28th June 2012, 11:56 AM	#215
Ranb Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: WA USA Posts: 4,099	http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/49leg/2r/bills/sb1070s.pdf Quote: B. FOR ANY LAWFUL CONTACT MADE BY A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL OR AGENCY 21 OF THIS STATE OR A COUNTY, CITY, TOWN OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THIS 22 STATE WHERE REASONABLE SUSPICION EXISTS THAT THE PERSON IS AN ALIEN WHO IS 23 UNLAWFULLY PRESENT IN THE UNITED STATES, A REASONABLE ATTEMPT SHALL BE MADE, 24 WHEN PRACTICABLE, TO DETERMINE THE IMMIGRATION STATUS OF THE PERSON. THE 25 PERSON'S IMMIGRATION STATUS SHALL BE VERIFIED WITH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 26 PURSUANT TO 8 UNITED STATES CODE SECTION 1373(c). Bolding mine. Assuming that this is part of what is left of 1070, it does allow some wiggle room. It also might protect a bigot police officer who wants to make a tough day for someone he does not like the looks of. Ranb
	Last edited by Ranb; 28th June 2012 at 11:59 AM.

28th June 2012, 12:06 PM	#216
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,983	So, is it now established that those who want more immigration of low-skilled workers think that way because low wages are good for the economy because it's less expense for corporations and that's what they want? Just think, as soon as your employees get uppity about the $2 you pay them to pick a large box of tomatoes you can just remind them there's millions more where they came from who will be happy with $2/box! Prosperity!

28th June 2012, 12:59 PM	#217
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,765	Originally Posted by WildCat Doesn't support your claim. You already tried that tactic when you claimed not to understand what I wrote. That article does support my claim. Originally Posted by WildCat Where's the study? A study of what? The Arizona Hotel and Lodging association's report that meetings had been cancelled in the wake of SB1070 being passed? You want the actual notices of cancelation or something? Originally Posted by WildCat All you're offering is anecdotal evidence, and it's unclear what the origin of that evidence is. If you are claiming the Arizona Hotel and Lodging Association was lying or incorrect you are free to prove it. I am tired of you dodging this. I have meet the burden of proof - SB 1070 had a negative economic impact.
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,765	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

28th June 2012, 01:05 PM	#218
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,765	Originally Posted by WildCat Just to be clear, you're contending that lower-paid workers are better for the economy than higher-paid workers? No. I said nothing even close to that. You keep putting words in my mouth or misreading what I write. It would do you good to take a bit more care when reading my posts rather than just jumping to these conclusions.
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,765	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

28th June 2012, 01:24 PM	#219
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,765	Here is a study that backs up my claim. This study only looks at the actual, expected, and incremental loss to the economy with regards to conference booking. It was done in the wake of the passing of SB1070.
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,765	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

28th June 2012, 02:54 PM	#220
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618	Originally Posted by Biscuit No. I said nothing even close to that. You keep putting words in my mouth or misreading what I write. It would do you good to take a bit more care when reading my posts rather than just jumping to these conclusions. Assumes good intentions not in evidence...
crimresearch Alumbrado Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 10,618

28th June 2012, 03:04 PM	#221
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,456	Originally Posted by WildCat Ah, so it's all about enriching the companies at the expense of the workers? Yes, that's why there's pressure not to enforce existing immigration laws; the PTB (and I'm not talking about the government, no matter which party is in charge at the moment) won't have it. Quote: Say what? How do the dishes in a restaurant in Tuscon get washed in China? How do you import fresh vegetables from China before they're, er, not fresh? Assuming China even had the agricultural capacity to fulfill the US market, which they don't. How does a lawn in Scottsdale get cut in China? The point is, this has nothing to do with outsourcing. This has to do with jobs that cannot be outsourced, and keeping the wages below what the market would dictate if illegal labor was not an option. How is it not taking the position that lower wages are good for the economy, if you're touting the economic impact of lowest paid workers in your society? What I mean is that if keeping the wages of joe-sixpack Americans higher than the rest of the world were really the point of all this "illegal immigration" uproar, we'd see an equal amount of noise from the right about outsourcing. We don't. In fact, they seem to be all for it. Why?
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen

28th June 2012, 03:31 PM	#223
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,456	Originally Posted by JoeTheJuggler What's funny is that Gov. Brewer claimed that Arizona was "vindicated" and that the "heart" of the law was unanimously proven to be constitutional. Riiiight! What has she been smoking? Tea.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen

28th June 2012, 03:53 PM	#224
JoeTheJuggler Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: St. Louis Posts: 26,705	Originally Posted by Piscivore Tea. Bazinga! Nominated.
	__________________ "That is a very graphic analogy which aids understanding wonderfully while being, strictly speaking, wrong in every possible way." —Ponder Stibbons

28th June 2012, 04:32 PM	#225
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,983	Originally Posted by Biscuit No. I said nothing even close to that. You keep putting words in my mouth or misreading what I write. It would do you good to take a bit more care when reading my posts rather than just jumping to these conclusions. Do you think that the economic impact of those *jobs* would be greater if they didn't have the option of using illegal workers? Do you think low-skilled immigrantion should be allowed without an actual shortage of low-skilled workers? If so, what do you think the impact will be on wages paid to fill low-skill jobs if new foreign workers can always be brought in to further glut the market?

28th June 2012, 04:47 PM	#226
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,983	Originally Posted by Piscivore Yes, that's why there's pressure not to enforce existing immigration laws; the PTB (and I'm not talking about the government, no matter which party is in charge at the moment) won't have it. What's a PTB? Originally Posted by Piscivore What I mean is that if keeping the wages of joe-sixpack Americans higher than the rest of the world were really the point of all this "illegal immigration" uproar, I'm my own voice, not the voice of "the uproar", whatever that it. Originally Posted by Piscivore we'd see an equal amount of noise from the right about outsourcing. We don't. In fact, they seem to be all for it. Why? Because this is irrelevant to outsourcing. These are jobs which cannot be outsourced! And perhaps people wouldn't be so concerned about outsourcing if incomes here at home, particularly towards the bottom end of the curve, were rising rather than being depressed by competition with illegal labor. And what would President Piscivore do about outsourcing? I've yet to see any proposal that doesn't involve massive protectionism/trade wars. Maybe you have a workable idea.

28th June 2012, 06:03 PM	#227
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,456	Originally Posted by WildCat What's a PTB? "Powers That Be". Quote: I'm my own voice, not the voice of "the uproar", whatever that it. Then I'm not talking about you. But you cannot deny that an uproar exists. Who is fueling it, and why? Quote: Because this is irrelevant to outsourcing. These are jobs which cannot be outsourced! And perhaps people wouldn't be so concerned about outsourcing if incomes here at home, particularly towards the bottom end of the curve, were rising rather than being depressed by competition with illegal labor. That's just it- Americans do not live on an island. American employers find American labour overpriced on the global labour market. outsourcing and hiring illegal imigrants are simply different responses to the same economic pressure. If we are going to preserve elevated waves in America, we need to force American companies to hire American labour- by punishing the companies that hire non-Americans BOTH in other counties and the ones that come here without permission. Prosecuting the illegal aliens adresses the wrong half of only part of the problem. If we aren't trying to preserve elevated American wages, prosecuting illegal aliens makes not sense at all. Let everyone in, and prosecute those people- citizen or not, that commit crimes. Quote: And what would President Piscivore do about outsourcing? I've yet to see any proposal that doesn't involve massive protectionism/trade wars. Yeah, how about that? Doesn't that point to an egregious disparity? Quote: Maybe you have a workable idea. It wouldn't fly- it involves swallowing the very bitter pill we can't be the world's 1% anymore- most of us for no other reason than accident of birth.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen

29th June 2012, 05:35 AM	#228
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,983	Originally Posted by Piscivore That's just it- Americans do not live on an island. American employers find American labour overpriced on the global labour market. This is the domestic labor market, not the gloval one. If you think that US labor costs should be comparable to the global average, then bear in mind the global average is ~$7,000/year. Is this your target income for the US worker? Originally Posted by Piscivore outsourcing and hiring illegal imigrants are simply different responses to the same economic pressure. Nope. The US could make electronics domestically, for example, but we can't foprce anyone to buy them and it would be hard to compete with foreign manufactured items that are just as good as far as quality but half the price. How do you expect a US manufacturer to stay in business in those circumstances? There is no such pressure domestically. As I stated earlier, a homeowner in Peoria can't have his lawn mowed in Vietnam. Asian producers can't satisfy the US demand for fresh vegetables. A restaurant in St. Louis can't have its dishes washed in Thailand. Originally Posted by Piscivore If we are going to preserve elevated waves in America, we need to force American companies to hire American labour- by punishing the companies that hire non-Americans BOTH in other counties and the ones that come here without permission. Please, describe in detail how you intend to punish American companies that outsource production and how this will help anyone in the US. You punted last time I asked this Mr. President Piscivore. Originally Posted by Piscivore Prosecuting the illegal aliens adresses the wrong half of only part of the problem. I happen to agree that a real crackdown on employers is in order and much preferable, but there is opposition to that from both ends of the political spectrum. Hell here in Illinois the Dems actually passed a bill making it illegal for employersw to use the federal e-verify system to verify Social Security numbers! Originally Posted by Piscivore If we aren't trying to preserve elevated American wages, prosecuting illegal aliens makes not sense at all. Let everyone in, and prosecute those people- citizen or not, that commit crimes. Why shouldn't we try to preserve high wages in the US? Your problem is you somehow think outsourcing is the problem, but trying to control that is a fool's errand. At the end of the day you can't make people buy overpriced products, they'll pick the cheaper one all other things being equal. And if you introduce protectionism as your solution, then you start a trade war. And while your trade war is ongloing prices will rise while wages will fall due to exports taking a huge hit. Protectionism failks every time it's tried. Originally Posted by Piscivore Yeah, how about that? Doesn't that point to an egregious disparity? Please answer the question. Originally Posted by Piscivore It wouldn't fly- it involves swallowing the very bitter pill we can't be the world's 1% anymore- most of us for no other reason than accident of birth. If we're no longer the world's 1% it should be because incomes in other countries are rising, your "solution" is to lower US incomes to the world average? It's not an accident US incomes are high, it's the result of our economic policies (though it could certainly be improved) and social values. Mexico could be prosperous too, but they are stymied by widespread endemic corruption at all levels of government and society, not by some accident of birth. Anyway, thanks for confirming that you think US workers make way too much money and we all need to take a huge pay cut, even poor people.
	Last edited by WildCat; 29th June 2012 at 05:39 AM.

29th June 2012, 07:43 AM	#229
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,456	Originally Posted by WildCat This is the domestic labor market, not the gloval one. If you think that US labor costs should be comparable to the global average, then bear in mind the global average is ~$7,000/year. Is this your target income for the US worker? It's not my target. I don't think labour costs "should be" any particular number. But if you've got an Indonesian (or a Mexican willing to sneak across the border) who will do the a job for $7k a year and an American who will expect $20k plus benefits for the same job, which is an employer going to want to hire? Quote: Nope. The US could make electronics domestically, for example, but we can't foprce anyone to buy them and it would be hard to compete with foreign manufactured items that are just as good as far as quality but half the price. How do you expect a US manufacturer to stay in business in those circumstances? How indeed. Quote: There is no such pressure domestically. As I stated earlier, a homeowner in Peoria can't have his lawn mowed in Vietnam. Asian producers can't satisfy the US demand for fresh vegetables. A restaurant in St. Louis can't have its dishes washed in Thailand. Irrelevant- because the cheap labour comes here as easily as employers can move jobs overseas. Quote: Please, describe in detail how you intend to punish American companies that outsource production and how this will help anyone in the US. You punted last time I asked this Mr. President Piscivore. Because I don't "intend to punish" anyone. I've not advocated the protectionist angle for American wages. In fact, I haven't offered any solutions, because I don't claim to have them. I'm simply pointing out that going after "illegal immigrants" with protecting US wages as the goal isn't going to work. Quote: I happen to agree that a real crackdown on employers is in order and much preferable, but there is opposition to that from both ends of the political spectrum. Hell here in Illinois the Dems actually passed a bill making it illegal for employersw to use the federal e-verify system to verify Social Security numbers! Like I said, the PTB won't have it... which means this whole immigration thing is simply a farce to get people worked up. Quote: Why shouldn't we try to preserve high wages in the US? Why should we? Why should we expect a guy to make many times the wage for the same job as someone else simply because he was lucky enough to be born 100 miles north of an arbitrary, imaginary line as the other guy? Quote: Your problem is you somehow think outsourcing is the problem, You're not listening, it is not THE problem, it is part of the same problem as illegal immigration. Quote: but trying to control that is a fool's errand. Likewise illegal immigration, for the same reason. Quote: At the end of the day you can't make people buy overpriced products, they'll pick the cheaper one all other things being equal. And if you introduce protectionism as your solution, then you start a trade war. And while your trade war is ongloing prices will rise while wages will fall due to exports taking a huge hit. Protectionism failks every time it's tried. Indeed. Quote: Please answer the question. I did. I wouldn't do anything about it, I'm not interested in preserving high American wages. We live in a global community, and trying to keep ourselves far above everyone else in the world is sociopathic. Quote: If we're no longer the world's 1% it should be because incomes in other countries are rising, your "solution" is to lower US incomes to the world average? Again, it is not my solution, it is the market's. I'd love to see the incomes in other countries rise. And if their governments are corrupt I'd love to see the people there able to go to where they aren't- or failing that (because politics, right?) at least somewhat less so. Unhindered and freely. There's significant economic pressure against this too, because companies that currently hire illegal labour do so in part because they don't have to pay benefits they would have to to a documented worker and their status makes them compliant and easily manipulated. Quote: It's not an accident US incomes are high, it's the result of our economic policies (though it could certainly be improved) and social values. Mexico could be prosperous too, but they are stymied by widespread endemic corruption at all levels of government and society, not by some accident of birth. "Accident of birth" refers to the individuals, not the economic system. Quote: Anyway, thanks for confirming that you think US workers make way too much money and we all need to take a huge pay cut, even poor people. It's not what I think, it is what the companies that outsource jobs and hire illegal immigrants think, because they are the ones hiring them.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen Last edited by Piscivore; 29th June 2012 at 07:47 AM.

29th June 2012, 08:32 AM	#230
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 48,983	Originally Posted by Piscivore It's not my target. I don't think labour costs "should be" any particular number. But if you've got an Indonesian (or a Mexican willing to sneak across the border) who will do the a job for $7k a year and an American who will expect $20k plus benefits for the same job, which is an employer going to want to hire? Of course it's your target. You think US labor prices should reflect the global average. I'm sure many emplopyers would be happy with slave labor, and indeed it's tolerated in some parts of the world, but that's not an argument for slavery. Originally Posted by Piscivore How indeed. Yes, that's the question put to you. Do you care to answer it or will you continue to avoid it? Originally Posted by Piscivore Irrelevant- because the cheap labour comes here as easily as employers can move jobs overseas. The US has an interest in maintaining a wealthy and prosperous society in the US. What is the US interest in walling ourselves off from trading with the rest of the world? Originally Posted by Piscivore Because I don't "intend to punish" anyone. Of course you are, you said you wanted to punish employers who move jobs overseas. Originally Posted by Piscivore I've not advocated the protectionist angle for American wages. Right, because you think American wages are too high and need to come dramatically downward. And it's interestoing how you are calling labor laws and policy "protectionism", while advocating actual protectionist laws and policies. Originally Posted by Piscivore In fact, I haven't offered any solutions, because I don't claim to have them. No kidding! Instead, you demand the tide to recede when the moon is pulling it in. Originally Posted by Piscivore I'm simply pointing out that going after "illegal immigrants" with protecting US wages as the goal isn't going to work. Of course it works. If employing illegal labor or cheap legal labor wasn't an option they'd be forced to pay their workers more, or go out of business. But if they go out of business other businesses will be happy to pay their workers more and take their market share. Originally Posted by Piscivore Like I said, the PTB won't have it... which means this whole immigration thing is simply a farce to get people worked up. You are part of the PTB, aren't you? Here you are advocating for lower wages and fewer benefits dor US workers. Maybe you own an unscrupulous company, or just like to get your lawn mowed for peanuts? Originally Posted by Piscivore Why should we? Why should we expect a guy to make many times the wage for the same job as someone else simply because he was lucky enough to be born 100 miles north of an arbitrary, imaginary line as the other guy? Because we in the US have established a society that encourages economic growth. We should reap the rewards of our policies. Mexico has established a society that encourages public corruption, and they have nobody but themselves to blame for the state they're in. US workers certainly didn;t establish Mexico's social mores, why should they suffer the consequences? Originally Posted by Piscivore You're not listening, it is not THE problem, it is part of the same problem as illegal immigration. It's completely unrelated to illegal immigration. Originally Posted by Piscivore Likewise illegal immigration, for the same reason. No, it's not. It would be quite trivial to crack down on employers who hire illegal workers. Do that and there'd be little reason for illegal immigration to take place. Originally Posted by Piscivore Indeed. I did. I wouldn't do anything about it, I'm not interested in preserving high American wages. We live in a global community, and trying to keep ourselves far above everyone else in the world is sociopathic. Wow, that is frankly amazing. Time to get rid of minimum wage laws, workplace safety laws, the EPA, etc etc, yes? Originally Posted by Piscivore Again, it is not my solution, it is the market's. It sure looks like your solution here. The market merely chooses according to the parameters in effect. If illegal labor is unavailable, the market will force wages upwards. Originally Posted by Piscivore I'd love to see the incomes in other countries rise. And if their governments are corrupt I'd love to see the people there able to go to where they aren't- or failing that (because politics, right?) at least somewhat less so. Unhindered and freely. There's significant economic pressure against this too, because companies that currently hire illegal labour do so in part because they don't have to pay benefits they would have to to a documented worker and their status makes them compliant and easily manipulated. It makes no difference whether or not the unskilled labor flowing across the border is legal or illegal, by glutting the market wages are pushed downward. Originally Posted by Piscivore "Accident of birth" refers to the individuals, not the economic system. To whom does the US government serve, low-skilled US workes or low-skilled workers in foreign countries? Originally Posted by Piscivore It's not what I think, it is what the companies that outsource jobs and hire illegal immigrants think, because they are the ones hiring them. You've just repeated over and over how you think US workers are overpaid and wages need to come way down, now you deny this?

29th June 2012, 09:32 AM	#231
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,456	Originally Posted by WildCat Of course it's your target. You think US labor prices should reflect the global average. It's not that I think they "should", it's that I think they eventually will. Would you say someone pointing out the housing bubble before it broke "wanted" the housing market to crash? Quote: I'm sure many emplopyers would be happy with slave labor, and indeed it's tolerated in some parts of the world, but that's not an argument for slavery. Indeed. Quote: Yes, that's the question put to you. Do you care to answer it or will you continue to avoid it? I did answer- I don't have the magic solution. Seems to me we're headed for a big problem... I'm just saying that prosecuting illegal immigrants isn't the solution, nor is it even going to help, at all. Pushing me for an answer I siad I don't have is just playing the "perfect solution" card. Just because I don't know how to fix it doesn't mean the current strategy isn't wrong. Quote: The US has an interest in maintaining a wealthy and prosperous society in the US. What is the US interest in walling ourselves off from trading with the rest of the world? None at all. But we have to accept the bad (lower average wages) with the good (higher trade income) if we are going to be part of a global market. Or keep trying to prop up a bubble. Quote: Of course you are, you said you wanted to punish employers who move jobs overseas. That's not what I said. I said that those who claim they want to curtail illegal immigration because it costs American jobs and lowers American wages should be in favour of curtailing outsourcing too, because it has the same deliterious effect. They are not, so therefore their interest in "illegal immigration" has to do with something other than American jobs and American wages. Quote: Right, because you think American wages are too high and need to come dramatically downward. And it's interestoing how you are calling labor laws and policy "protectionism", while advocating actual protectionist laws and policies. No kidding! Instead, you demand the tide to recede when the moon is pulling it in. You are part of the PTB, aren't you? Here you are advocating for lower wages and fewer benefits dor US workers. Maybe you own an unscrupulous company, or just like to get your lawn mowed for peanuts? Wow, that is frankly amazing. Time to get rid of minimum wage laws, workplace safety laws, the EPA, etc etc, yes? You've just repeated over and over how you think US workers are overpaid and wages need to come way down, now you deny this? When you are ready to read what I wrote instead of telling me what I think, let me know. Quote: No, it's not. It would be quite trivial to crack down on employers who hire illegal workers. Do that and there'd be little reason for illegal immigration to take place. So why doesn't that happen? Why the push to punish the workers?
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen Last edited by Piscivore; 29th June 2012 at 09:39 AM.

29th June 2012, 09:48 AM	#232
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,765	Originally Posted by WildCat Do you think that the economic impact of those *jobs* would be greater if they didn't have the option of using illegal workers? A lot of undocumented workers make pretty good money (or they wouldn't be here), they cause fewer problems for employers, take less time off, and work their butts off because they know there is another guy waiting to take his job. I think having to hire legal workers would probably cost the businesses more but I don't know. The economy as a whole? I have no idea. I have heard business leaders and immigrant activists groups both claim the cost of good would rise if all the undocumented workers disappeared yesterday. Originally Posted by WildCat Do you think low-skilled immigrantion should be allowed without an actual shortage of low-skilled workers? If so, what do you think the impact will be on wages paid to fill low-skill jobs if new foreign workers can always be brought in to further glut the market? I don't think we should have illegal immigration. A guest worker program would be a separate issue but that won't work until businesses find it is to risky/expensive to higher illegal immigrants. On another note a lot of undocumented workers are not low skill. Some of the best masons and irrigation workers I have ever meet had no papers. I apologize for being a snarly and rude in my last post I am going to use my, "It's too hot in AZ and that makes me cranky" card.
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,765	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

29th June 2012, 10:13 AM	#233
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,456	Originally Posted by Biscuit "It's too hot in AZ..." You got that right.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen

29th June 2012, 12:21 PM	#234
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,765	Originally Posted by Piscivore You got that right. And muggy now on top of the heat! Why won't it rain!? WHY!?
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,765	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

29th June 2012, 01:27 PM	#235
Piscivore Smelling fishy Join Date: May 2004 Location: Home is wherever I'm with you Posts: 26,456	Originally Posted by Biscuit And muggy now on top of the heat! Why won't it rain!? WHY!? The extra humidity is from illegals sweating all over the place.
	__________________ It's always been Wankershim. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen

29th June 2012, 05:44 PM	#236
Wangler Master Poster Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: OH State Posts: 2,230	Originally Posted by Biscuit A lot of undocumented workers make pretty good money (or they wouldn't be here), they cause fewer problems for employers, take less time off, and work their butts off because they know there is another guy waiting to take his job. Biscuit, do you have a reference for these claims, or are they anecdotal? Thanks!