Society Questions for those still on the Trump train

[Yossarian]

The market is by definition the entire world (particularly in the neoliberal calculus).

The ideology says so, but in reality, since economies and policies differ per nation, in truth, that never holds up.

Regarding your second point, my post was a typo omitting a 0 which should have read 60,000

In the link you provided they mention that the total number of visa granted individuals (i.e. regulated) is about 1% of the workforce whereas some estimates have the total number with undocumented workers closer to 3% of the US workforce.

This shows to me that undocumented workers do impact our exisitng work-force, this includes foreign (seasonal/non-seasonal) workers. These percentages are also enough to cause wage stagnation (as you mentioned), or even lower wage standards. The threat of cheap labor is enough to do so.

So I guess the question is, if there needs to be a combination of increased fines on businesses employing these workers and increased enforcement to remove them, and then increased protectionism to disallow foreign companies from using their labor to compete with the domestic workers who fill those jobs, overall we're saying we need more government involvement in the market, no?

First of all, bravo, always admired one's ability to make long sentences
Paging @blank to check for grammatical errors.

overall we're saying we need more government involvement in the market, no?

Not exactly, what I am saying that governemnt involvement isn't always bad. It shouldn't be shunned based on ideoligistic blindness. I also welcome elements of socialism (as a European, almost second nature). Balance is needed. It is ok to employ the foreign worker, to help the foreign worker, but we have to consider the cost (the native workforce), and avoid exploitation and abuse by companies. It's not the first time a beneficial regulation or program is misused to favor profit over people.

All these programs need revision, including DACA. It doesn't mean they need to dissapear. But to go back to Trump, I don't see any careful consideration coming from this administration. It's going to be meatball surgery, a chop job. That is where the Trump train for me becomes a bumpy ride, and I may have fallen off already, who knows.

(I would have been on the Bernie train as well, but also maybe found myself in the same situation)

 

[Disciplined Galt]

The ideology says so, but in reality, since economies and policies differ per nation, in truth, that never holds up.

This shows to me that undocumented workers do impact our exisitng work-force, this includes foreign (seasonal/non-seasonal) workers. These percentages are also enough to cause wage stagnation (as you mentioned), or even lower wage standards. The threat of cheap labor is enough to do so.


First of all, bravo, always admired one's ability to make long sentences
Paging @blank to check for grammatical errors.


Not exactly, what I am saying that governemnt involvement isn't always bad. It shouldn't be shunned based on ideoligistic blindness. I also welcome elements of socialism (as a European, almost second nature). Balance is needed. It is ok to employ the foreign worker, to help the foreign worker, but we have to consider the cost (the native workforce), and avoid exploitation and abuse by companies. It's not the first time a beneficial regulation or program is misused to favor profit over people.

All these programs need revision, including DACA. It doesn't mean they need to dissapear. But to go back to Trump, I don't see any careful consideration coming from this administration. It's going to be meatball surgery, a chop job. That is where the Trump train for me becomes a bumpy ride, and I may have fallen off already, who knows.

(I would have been on the Bernie train as well, but also maybe found myself in the same situation)

Jew need to breathe, that sentence is to long. Would take several coughs.

 

[1031]

Paging @blank to check for grammatical errors.

The first comma is superfluous.
"and then" could be reduced to "with" and "to disallow" down to "disallowing."
After "jobs" there should just be a full stop followed up by a separate question.

 

[Yossarian]

Jew need to breathe

 

[kneeblock]

The ideology says so, but in reality, since economies and policies differ per nation, in truth, that never holds up.

This shows to me that undocumented workers do impact our exisitng work-force, this includes foreign (seasonal/non-seasonal) workers. These percentages are also enough to cause wage stagnation (as you mentioned), or even lower wage standards. The threat of cheap labor is enough to do so.


First of all, bravo, always admired one's ability to make long sentences
Paging @blank to check for grammatical errors.


Not exactly, what I am saying that governemnt involvement isn't always bad. It shouldn't be shunned based on ideoligistic blindness. I also welcome elements of socialism (as a European, almost second nature). Balance is needed. It is ok to employ the foreign worker, to help the foreign worker, but we have to consider the cost (the native workforce), and avoid exploitation and abuse by companies. It's not the first time a beneficial regulation or program is misused to favor profit over people.

All these programs need revision, including DACA. It doesn't mean they need to dissapear. But to go back to Trump, I don't see any careful consideration coming from this administration. It's going to be meatball surgery, a chop job. That is where the Trump train for me becomes a bumpy ride, and I may have fallen off already, who knows.

(I would have been on the Bernie train as well, but also maybe found myself in the same situation)

Thanks for answering. I guess my only remaining questions would be more policy specific:

1) What specific changes need to be made to guest worker programs? Decreased number of visas granted across the board or just further modifications to make sure their wages don't create distortions?

2) By increasing spending on border enforcement (among other national security increases), the government becomes a larger employer. What are your feelings on this enhancement of the security state?

3) What changes should be made to DACA?

 

[Yossarian]

Thanks for answering.

No need to thank me. I welcome a thread with measured, respectful, discussion.

What specific changes need to be made to guest worker programs?

I think they already got rid of the returning worker exemption, which is a good start. Pay similar wages (dictated by the Department of Labor) as their American counter-parts, not just minumum wage or below (if they can). I also believe they are now forced to re-hire previously employed US workers first. There are a lot of amendments made, and probably will be made to deal with the negative effects of these programs. Priorities have changed with a near 40% unemployment amongst lower educated millenials, etc.

Decreased number of visas granted across the board or just further modifications to make sure their wages don't create distortions?

I don't know how true this is, but I believe Trump actually raised the 66k cap to 81k visas. It's bizarre and contradicting Trump's so called Amercia First narrative. It's not helpful, and purely an aim at obtaining cheap and exploitive labor for companies to cash in on (including Trump's company).

I think we would need a bit of both, restriction and modification.

By increasing spending on border enforcement (among other national security increases), the government becomes a larger employer. What are your feelings on this enhancement of the security state?

If we need more security, then we need more security. But indeed, it does not match the popular "small government" narrative. Myself, I ask these questions:

Why the need for increased border security if being illegal doesn't mean that much anymore? Your unauthorized stay in a foreign land is reduced to the euphemistic term "undocumented", and much easier legal terms can be used now to soften such a crime even more. I ask, if one is to be a proponent of legalizing these "undocumented", then would that person be willing to do away with borders?

My answer is, no. We do not need increased border security. Not until we figure out what exactly we are protecting us from. It's not like there is an absence of border security as we speak. And a lot of the illegal immigrants are due to overstay, they stayed after their perfectly legal visas expired, through borders other than physical ones (Canada/Mexico).

What changes should be made to DACA?

First, the people that came forward should not be subject to deportation. They came out of the shadow so to speak in good trust.

After that, we should decide if illegal immigrants should ever be able to obtain a green card. A message needs to be send to the law abiding immigrants who went through the process (a hard and lengthy one) from day one. The same message should proclaim loudly that there is no unlawful way to obtain a lawful residency. Again, what would be the purpose of legal immigration? Fairness and consistency is key.

Fuck, I talk too much man. Lets say you are our president. President Kneeblock. Like the sound of that? What would you do with DACA? Leave it as is?

 

[kneeblock]

No need to thank me. I welcome a thread with measured, respectful, discussion.


I think they already got rid of the returning worker exemption, which is a good start. Pay similar wages (dictated by the Department of Labor) as their American counter-parts, not just minumum wage or below (if they can). I also believe they are now forced to re-hire previously employed US workers first. There are a lot of amendments made, and probably will be made to deal with the negative effects of these programs. Priorities have changed with a near 40% unemployment amongst lower educated millenials, etc.


I don't know how true this is, but I believe Trump actually raised the 66k cap to 81k visas. It's bizarre and contradicting Trump's so called Amercia First narrative. It's not helpful, and purely an aim at obtaining cheap and exploitive labor for companies to cash in on (including Trump's company).

I think we would need a bit of both, restriction and modification.


If we need more security, then we need more security. But indeed, it does not match the popular "small government" narrative. Myself, I ask these questions:

Why the need for increased border security if being illegal doesn't mean that much anymore? Your unauthorized stay in a foreign land is reduced to the euphemistic term "undocumented", and much easier legal terms can be used now to soften such a crime even more. I ask, if one is to be a proponent of legalizing these "undocumented", then would that person be willing to do away with borders?

My answer is, no. We do not need increased border security. Not until we figure out what exactly we are protecting us from. It's not like there is an absence of border security as we speak. And a lot of the illegal immigrants are due to overstay, they stayed after their perfectly legal visas expired, through borders other than physical ones (Canada/Mexico).


First, the people that came forward should not be subject to deportation. They came out of the shadow so to speak in good trust.

After that, we should decide if illegal immigrants should ever be able to obtain a green card. A message needs to be send to the law abiding immigrants who went through the process (a hard and lengthy one) from day one. The same message should proclaim loudly that there is no unlawful way to obtain a lawful residency. Again, what would be the purpose of legal immigration? Fairness and consistency is key.

Fuck, I talk too much man. Lets say you are our president. President Kneeblock. Like the sound of that? What would you do with DACA? Leave it as is?

You make some interesting points about the Trump administration's inconsistencies. I don't think there will be a dent in the unemployment rate of millennials because by and large they are educated and will have no interest in agricultural work.

I don't like the sound of being President, but I think a more sensible policy would have been to keep daca intact and then work with Congress to do a comprehensive immigration plan that addressed paths to citizenship for DACA registrants, enforcement mechanisms at the border, support for states coping with high levels of guest workers, overhauls to the visa numbers and maybe bundling it with some trade policies to disincetivize outsourcing. What happened instead was Trump punted to Congress which effectively put a gun to their head in the absence of any plan from the White House or Congress. I do think there's merit to having the legislative branch handle the issue, but I don't think the haste was necessary.

 

[Yossarian]

I don't think there will be a dent in the unemployment rate of millennials

Fair enough. But consider that 75% of farm work is already done by Americans, the Amercians won't-do-this-job myth is just as much of an exaggeration.

a more sensible policy would have been to keep daca intact and then work with Congress to do a comprehensive immigration plan that addressed paths to citizenship for DACA registrants

Agreed. They should have free passage towards citizenship without the threat of being deported or arrested. But it would have to include the same mechanisms regular immigrants have to go through (such as paying the large fees, wait and wait, etc). No special treatment.

What happened instead was Trump punted to Congress which effectively put a gun to their head in the absence of any plan from the White House or Congress. I do think there's merit to having the legislative branch handle the issue, but I don't think the haste was necessary.

This has basically happened from day one. A lot of pressure on Congress from their own guy, but I don't feel bad. Congress is now doing what it's supposed to be doing and they seem almost uncomfortable in doing so.

 

[kneeblock]

Fair enough. But consider that 75% of farm work is already done by Americans, the Amercians won't-do-this-job myth is just as much of an exaggeration.


Agreed. They should have free passage towards citizenship without the threat of being deported or arrested. But it would have to include the same mechanisms regular immigrants have to go through (such as paying the large fees, wait and wait, etc). No special treatment.


This has basically happened from day one. A lot of pressure on Congress from their own guy, but I don't feel bad. Congress is now doing what it's supposed to be doing and they seem almost uncomfortable in doing so.

Yes, the one thing I think is laudable is Trump seems to enjoy making Congress squirm, but I fear he's in the process making too many actual humans feel grave insecurity and abdicating some powers of the executive that are appropriate to retain.