Society Questions for those still on the Trump train

[KWingJitsu]

2) To decrease the amount of commitments abroad, both monetarily and militarily.

He is certainly doing neither. Trying to goad North Korea into another war, itching to bomb Iran. Interfering in Syria.
New boss same as old bosses. Nothing new except the location.

3) To decrease the headcount of foreign born people in the US.

Straight out of the White Supremacist/Nationalist playbook/agenda. Call it travel ban (muslim ban). Call it "Build the wall". Call it remove DACA children. All bullet points to stop 'Murica from being less white - again.

6) To increase the public safety and national security apparatus of the country.

Sounds good on the surface till you realize his attorney general (one of the architects of #3) is pushing hard for re invigoration of the prison -to-pipeline program that had begun to be reversed. For profit prisons for the win.
Oh and there's that whole pardoning the criminal sheriff Apario fellow. This inevitably leads to encouragement to commit crimes by law enforcement, because 'the president is on their side', which feeds into the bootlicking 'cops can do no wrong' mentality in this country.

 

[SongExotic2]

You can look at Iraq. After we blew their shit up, we went and rebuilt their telecommunications infrastructure. While doing so, we installed capabilities to listen through cell phones to conversations even if those peopLe didn't think they were actively on them.

Nuh-uh

 

[SongExotic2]

This wasnt meant to be a policy discussion thread dipshit. OP is legit trying to understand why people stillbsidewith trump

You check your tone you slut!

 

[Yossarian]

Do you see one of Trump's goals as adjusting the implementation of free market orthodoxy?

I don't see him have any goals other than making himself look good right now. I think after the healthcare debacle, Trump and the republicans have parted ways.

If they do increase labor costs, what do you think would possibly happen? Also, how serious of a problem do you think migrant displacement of US labor is?

Increase labor costs where its needed, supply and demand, that is how free market is supposed to dictate prices and such. Will the world end? prices will rise accordingly yes, but at the right places. Sometimes it may look like we are saving monay because our products are cheaper, but we pay it back elsewhere. No free lunch, etc.

Lowering labor costs may lead to a weaker consumer, with less spending power, and the decline of the middle class, or at least, more strain on the lower class who now have to compete with 3rd world workers, which, would be happy to work for substandard wages. Maybe an oversimplification. Companies that use cheap labor may underbid companies that employ people with decent wages and in turn lose their bid. The effects of exploitive, cheap, labor is effecting more Americans (or legal working non-Americans for that matter) than often is realised.

 

[Disciplined Galt]

He is certainly doing neither. Trying to goad North Korea into another war, itching to bomb Iran. Interfering in Syria.
New boss same as old bosses. Nothing new except the location.
Straight out of the White Supremacist/Nationalist playbook/agenda. Call it travel ban (muslim ban). Call it "Build the wall". Call it remove DACA children. All bullet points to stop 'Murica from being less white - again.
Sounds good on the surface till you realize his attorney general (one of the architects of #3) is pushing hard for re invigoration of the prison -to-pipeline program that had begun to be reversed. For profit prisons for the win.
Oh and there's that whole pardoning the criminal sheriff Apario fellow. This inevitably leads to encouragement to commit crimes by law enforcement, because 'the president is on their side', which feeds into the bootlicking 'cops can do no wrong' mentality in this country.

Can you think of any reason a country wants to "stay white"?

 

[Yossarian]

How do foreign workers programs effect this?

What has to be determined is, are these programs for true labor shortages? Or are they just cheap labor? If it is the former, I would say little, but if it is the latter, it effects the native (citizens and residents) workers down the road.

There is little evidence that there are true labor shortages in these so called non/low skilled H-2b jobs. Also, these programs allow US companies to hire H-2B workers at far lower, sub-standard hourly wages over US workers that work for the average wages in that particular industry or field.

" ...flat wages and persistent high unemployment rates in the top 15 H-2B occupations for the past decade—sheds doubt on claims that there are labor shortages in the top 15 H-2B occupations."

And per rule of this threads no links, but an exception please for indication of source, very interesting stuff.
The H-2B temporary foreign worker program: For labor shortages or cheap, temporary labor?

I don't know if the same counts for skilled workers programs (H-1B) because it is highly unlikely engineers, etc are paid substantially less than their American counter parts. It is more likely also, that there is a labor shortage in high skilled fields because of the qualifications needed to fill these jobs.

 

[Yossarian]

This wasnt meant to be a policy discussion thread dipshit. OP is legit trying to understand why people stillbsidewith trump

And yes, you're right, I am guilty as well. Back to the Trump train.

 

[Truck Party]

What has to be determined is, are these programs for true labor shortages? Or are they just cheap labor? If it is the former, I would say little, but if it is the latter, it effects the native (citizens and residents) workers down the road.

There is little evidence that there are true labor shortages in these so called non/low skilled H-2b jobs. Also, these programs allow US companies to hire H-2B workers at far lower, sub-standard hourly wages over US workers that work for the average wages in that particular industry or field.

" ...flat wages and persistent high unemployment rates in the top 15 H-2B occupations for the past decade—sheds doubt on claims that there are labor shortages in the top 15 H-2B occupations."

And per rule of this threads no links, but an exception please for indication of source, very interesting stuff.
The H-2B temporary foreign worker program: For labor shortages or cheap, temporary labor?

I don't know if the same counts for skilled workers programs (H-1B) because it is highly unlikely engineers, etc are paid substantially less than their American counter parts. It is more likely also, that there is a labor shortage in high skilled fields because of the qualifications needed to fill these jobs.

a month or two ago I saw an executive of the Chamber of Commerce, that group that bankrolls the GOP establishment, complain that they were having trouble finding immigrants for farm work in an area and that they might even have to *gasp* raise wages to attract American workers

 

[Yossarian]

a month or two ago I saw an executive of the Chamber of Commerce, that group that bankrolls the GOP establishment, complain that they were having trouble finding immigrants for farm work in an area and that they might even have to *gasp* raise wages to attract American workers

Again, another government program "designed to help the lower class" being a money grab. It's one of those examples of the republican right, not having enough faith in their free market ideology, and all of the sudden, don't mind government intervention.

If people don't want to do your filthy job, then increase your fucking wages.

 

[Freeloading Rusty]

What has to be determined is, are these programs for true labor shortages? Or are they just cheap labor? If it is the former, I would say little, but if it is the latter, it effects the native (citizens and residents) workers down the road.

There is little evidence that there are true labor shortages in these so called non/low skilled H-2b jobs. Also, these programs allow US companies to hire H-2B workers at far lower, sub-standard hourly wages over US workers that work for the average wages in that particular industry or field.

" ...flat wages and persistent high unemployment rates in the top 15 H-2B occupations for the past decade—sheds doubt on claims that there are labor shortages in the top 15 H-2B occupations."

Bingo.

 

[Freeloading Rusty]

a month or two ago I saw an executive of the Chamber of Commerce, that group that bankrolls the GOP establishment, complain that they were having trouble finding immigrants for farm work in an area and that they might even have to *gasp* raise wages to attract American workers

Again, fuck the foreign worker programs, companies should be forced to raise wages until the wages attract workers - as it should in a 'free market that will regulate and correct itself'.

 

[HEATH VON DOOM]

And yes, you're right, I am guilty as well. Back to the Trump train.

You are trying to explain why and are participating in this thread for the OP. That jackass just wants to turn everything into a clusterfuck arguement.

 

[kneeblock]

This wasnt meant to be a policy discussion thread dipshit. OP is legit trying to understand why people stillbsidewith trump

I don't mind policy discussion. Just not intention guessing. If posters want to deliberate over whether specific policies will lead to the fulfillment of stated goals, I'll allow it.

But yes, the main thrust is understanding whether supporters believe there is a path to implementation of thr administration's stated aims and why they think those aims are important.

 

[kneeblock]

I will debate #2 if you want.

Would you debate that that is Trump's stated aim or that his policies to date don't seem to reflect that aim? I'm more interested in debates of the former if you have them. The latter are a different issue.

 

[kneeblock]

He is certainly doing neither. Trying to goad North Korea into another war, itching to bomb Iran. Interfering in Syria.
New boss same as old bosses. Nothing new except the location.
Straight out of the White Supremacist/Nationalist playbook/agenda. Call it travel ban (muslim ban). Call it "Build the wall". Call it remove DACA children. All bullet points to stop 'Murica from being less white - again.
Sounds good on the surface till you realize his attorney general (one of the architects of #3) is pushing hard for re invigoration of the prison -to-pipeline program that had begun to be reversed. For profit prisons for the win.
Oh and there's that whole pardoning the criminal sheriff Apario fellow. This inevitably leads to encouragement to commit crimes by law enforcement, because 'the president is on their side', which feeds into the bootlicking 'cops can do no wrong' mentality in this country.

Restraint comrade.

 

[kneeblock]

I don't see him have any goals other than making himself look good right now. I think after the healthcare debacle, Trump and the republicans have parted ways.

Increase labor costs where its needed, supply and demand, that is how free market is supposed to dictate prices and such. Will the world end? prices will rise accordingly yes, but at the right places. Sometimes it may look like we are saving monay because our products are cheaper, but we pay it back elsewhere. No free lunch, etc.

Lowering labor costs may lead to a weaker consumer, with less spending power, and the decline of the middle class, or at least, more strain on the lower class who now have to compete with 3rd world workers, which, would be happy to work for substandard wages. Maybe an oversimplification. Companies that use cheap labor may underbid companies that employ people with decent wages and in turn lose their bid. The effects of exploitive, cheap, labor is effecting more Americans (or legal working non-Americans for that matter) than often is realised.

Regarding your first paragraph, do you think there is a risk of the inflation in food prices brought about by wage adjustments outweighing the cost of migrant labor? Do you think it's possible that even wage increases wouldn't attract American born labor?

I don't follow your second paragraph. Can you explain it a little more?

 

[BeardOfKnowledge]

Straight out of the White Supremacist/Nationalist playbook/agenda. Call it travel ban (muslim ban). Call it "Build the wall". Call it remove DACA children. All bullet points to stop 'Murica from being less white - again.

Where unemployment exists adding bodies to the employment pool isn't prudent. The funny thing is, it isn't whites who should be concerned about this.

 

[Yossarian]

Regarding your first paragraph, do you think there is a risk of the inflation in food prices brought about by wage adjustments outweighing the cost of migrant labor? Do you think it's possible that even wage increases wouldn't attract American born labor?

I don't follow your second paragraph. Can you explain it a little more?

If anything risks the occurance of inflation it is raising the minimum wage. But increasing certain wages in a particular job to attract more workers? I'm not convinced, but I am far from an economist. It might be possible that even after raising those wages, native workers won't show up to do the job. It's still a necessity to do so to avoid the abuse of programs such as H-2B programs that are used to exploit the foreign worker while at the same time keep wages substandard. Who banks the money? The companies. The losers? the native workers, and in a way, the foreign workers (as they are being exploited and used for cheap work). We can subsidize products and labor all we want, but what needs to be asked is, who is it benefitting? And does it help?

Second paragraph: if we want American workers to do these unskilled jobs and work for decent wages, we can't throw in unfair competition from 3rd world workers who would be willing to work for a considerable amount less. Not only that, companies abusing these foreign worker programs do not just affect native workers, but also other companies who DO employ American or resident workers. The unfairness of competition trickles down all the way. Now these companies are forced to lower wages to stay competitive, these workers come home with less pay, therefore becomer a weaker consumer, buying less food or products, etc. With retail collapsing, automation on its way, I don;t think inflation is at the top of the priority list, even though serious in nature. I believe that even those non-skilled jobs will become part of the unemployment solution. Right now these programs are merely a tool for cheap labor, masking the real cost of food production.

If you cannot follow me still, I aplogize, I am full of shit sometimes, and I am drinking momentarily.

 

[Zeph]

Would you debate that that is Trump's stated aim or that his policies to date don't seem to reflect that aim? I'm more interested in debates of the former if you have them. The latter are a different issue.

The latter.

 

[kneeblock]

If anything risks the occurance of inflation it is raising the minimum wage. But increasing certain wages in a particular job to attract more workers? I'm not convinced, but I am far from an economist. It might be possible that even after raising those wages, native workers won't show up to do the job. It's still a necessity to do so to avoid the abuse of programs such as H-2B programs that are used to exploit the foreign worker while at the same time keep wages substandard. Who banks the money? The companies. The losers? the native workers, and in a way, the foreign workers (as they are being exploited and used for cheap work). We can subsidize products and labor all we want, but what needs to be asked is, who is it benefitting? And does it help?

Second paragraph: if we want American workers to do these unskilled jobs and work for decent wages, we can't throw in unfair competition from 3rd world workers who would be willing to work for a considerable amount less. Not only that, companies abusing these foreign worker programs do not just affect native workers, but also other companies who DO employ American or resident workers. The unfairness of competition trickles down all the way. Now these companies are forced to lower wages to stay competitive, these workers come home with less pay, therefore becomer a weaker consumer, buying less food or products, etc. With retail collapsing, automation on its way, I don;t think inflation is at the top of the priority list, even though serious in nature. I believe that even those non-skilled jobs will become part of the unemployment solution. Right now these programs are merely a tool for cheap labor, masking the real cost of food production.

If you cannot follow me still, I aplogize, I am full of shit sometimes, and I am drinking momentarily.

I see what you mean about the H2-A situation. I guess the challenge is that most of that work is only seasonal so would be difficult to attract American workers at higher price points. Obviously companies could take a haircut in other areas to offset more expensive temporary labor, but it's generally more likely costs would be passed on to consumers.

Re: the second section, that clarifies your point considerably. Post more while drunk! Lol.

I can agree that companies shouldn't be allowed to drive down wages. I guess the question is, doesn't that mean we need better minimum wage laws with tougher enforcement? Or absent that, more incentives for collective bargaining?

Also, wages in California, for example, actually have gone up considerably. Over 50% in the past 20 years. Still farmers find it hard to get US workers. Right now, some pay around $14/hr, but maybe farm labor should be $20-$25/hr. If so, there would almost definitely be price inflation absent some form of regulation and price controls.

 

[Ted Williams' head]

Straight out of the White Supremacist/Nationalist playbook/agenda. Call it travel ban (muslim ban). Call it "Build the wall". Call it remove DACA children. All bullet points to stop 'Murica from being less white - again.

Straight out of the white supremacist playbook: to ask that immigrants come into the country legally and that they not fly planes into buildings or set off IEDs in crowded public areas. I believe these were the foundations upon which the KKK was founded!

 

[Yossarian]

Obviously companies could take a haircut in other areas to offset more expensive temporary labor, but it's generally more likely costs would be passed on to consumers.

This is true, but at least we face the costs at the right place. The ripple effect of these substandard wages (such as lowering wages elsewhere) have costs of their own that are at a point, hard to identify. When government tries to correct free market, it always leaves a footprint. They subsidize my school fees? Boom! School just got more expensive. It's like when we mess with an ecology system.

Minimum wage in California may have gone up, but maybe the cost of living has done the same. I assume it is more expenisve to live in California than in Ohio.

 

[kneeblock]

This is true, but at least we face the costs at the right place. The ripple effect of these substandard wages (such as lowering wages elsewhere) have costs of their own that are at a point, hard to identify. When government tries to correct free market, it always leaves a footprint. They subsidize my school fees? Boom! School just got more expensive. It's like when we mess with an ecology system.

Minimum wage in California may have gone up, but maybe the cost of living has done the same. I assume it is more expenisve to live in California than in Ohio.

So in this case what involvement are you taking about from government? If anything there has been less involvement from government that caused the wage depressions. NAFTA and GATT, for example, were deregulation measures that decreased or eliminated government import restrictions and increased labor market availability to companies. Lack of enforcement of labor laws is also reduced government involvement. The only real government involvement (at least in agricultural and other blue collar labor) has been the granting of the H2A visas and there are strict regulations in place on acceptable wages that actually compel companies to pay the state minimum or higher. These also only account for ~6000 workers annually. So do you think there needs to be more government involvement, or less?

 

[Yossarian]

If anything there has been less involvement from government that caused the wage depressions. NAFTA and GATT, for example, were deregulation measures that decreased or eliminated government import restrictions and increased labor market availability to companies.

It depends the way you look at it. I think NAFTA was one of the biggest government fingerprints ever left behind on existing import/export regulations. It's not that government has been taken out of these regulations, it simply has shifted regulations in favor of companies, instead of native workers/foreign workers. Trump has been a vocal critic of this trade deal, and that is where I would agree (although for the sake of staying on topic, worthy of another thread or discussion).

But if you see NAFTA as less government, than it would be a good point to make that less government could mean the loss of some 700,000 jobs (80% in manufacturing) and wages diminished because of the new found competition. One could use this argument to say that as a result of this "less government" involvement Mexican farmers were ran out of business (1.3 million jobs, and wonder where those workers went?).

But that is if you would see NAFTA as less government, and I don't see that being the case. Government stepped in and disrupted trade deals similar to ones employed by countries all over the world. Less or more government? we may argue what is what, but one thing we should be able to agree with is that direct competition between workers from developed countries and developing countries is unfair competition. It drives down wages in one country, destroys jobs in the other, exploits foreign (close to border) workers (no labor laws, etc).

I'm not saying my view is right or wrong, it's just an opinion based on observation. I'm not an economist. I am always open to shifting my views based on other considerations.

These also only account for ~6000 workers annually. So do you think there needs to be more government involvement, or less?

I've seen numbers ten times as much as you mentioned.

Estimated number of temporary foreign workers employed in the United States, 2013
Nonimmigrant visa classification or status Number of workers
H-2A visa for seasonal agricultural occupations 74,859
H-2B visa for seasonal nonagricultural occupations 94,919
H-1B visa for specialty occupations 460,749
J-1 visa for Exchange Visitor Program participants 215,866
J-2 visa for spouses of J-1 exchange visitors 8,243
L-1 visa for intracompany transferees 311,257
L-2 visa for spouses of intracompany transferees 38,952
O-1/O-2 visa for persons with extraordinary ability (O-2 for their assistants) 29,894
F-1 visa for foreign students, Optional Practical Training program (OPT) and STEM OPT extensions 139,155
TN visa or status for Canadian and Mexican nationals in certain professional occupations under NAFTA 50,000
Total 1,423,894

Temporary foreign workers by the numbers: New estimates by visa classification

 

[kneeblock]

It depends the way you look at it. I think NAFTA was one of the biggest government fingerprints ever left behind on existing import/export regulations. It's not that government has been taken out of these regulations, it simply has shifted regulations in favor of companies, instead of native workers/foreign workers. Trump has been a vocal critic of this trade deal, and that is where I would agree (although for the sake of staying on topic, worthy of another thread or discussion).

But if you see NAFTA as less government, than it would be a good point to make that less government could mean the loss of some 700,000 jobs (80% in manufacturing) and wages diminished because of the new found competition. One could use this argument to say that as a result of this "less government" involvement Mexican farmers were ran out of business (1.3 million jobs, and wonder where those workers went?).

But that is if you would see NAFTA as less government, and I don't see that being the case. Government stepped in and disrupted trade deals similar to ones employed by countries all over the world. Less or more government? we may argue what is what, but one thing we should be able to agree with is that direct competition between workers from developed countries and developing countries is unfair competition. It drives down wages in one country, destroys jobs in the other, exploits foreign (close to border) workers (no labor laws, etc).

I'm not saying my view is right or wrong, it's just an opinion based on observation. I'm not an economist. I am always open to shifting my views based on other considerations.


I've seen numbers ten times as much as you mentioned.

Estimated number of temporary foreign workers employed in the United States, 2013
Nonimmigrant visa classification or status Number of workers
H-2A visa for seasonal agricultural occupations 74,859
H-2B visa for seasonal nonagricultural occupations 94,919
H-1B visa for specialty occupations 460,749
J-1 visa for Exchange Visitor Program participants 215,866
J-2 visa for spouses of J-1 exchange visitors 8,243
L-1 visa for intracompany transferees 311,257
L-2 visa for spouses of intracompany transferees 38,952
O-1/O-2 visa for persons with extraordinary ability (O-2 for their assistants) 29,894
F-1 visa for foreign students, Optional Practical Training program (OPT) and STEM OPT extensions 139,155
TN visa or status for Canadian and Mexican nationals in certain professional occupations under NAFTA 50,000
Total 1,423,894

Temporary foreign workers by the numbers: New estimates by visa classification

I can agree that NAFTA was due to government action and definitely left a large footprint, but it was definitely a deregulation maneuver. Free market capitalism has little to say about national soveriegnty in markets. The market is by definition the entire world (particularly in the neoliberal calculus).

Regarding your second point, my post was a typo omitting a 0 which should have read 60,000, but I'm still off by around ~15K which isn't insignificant. I focused on H2A because we were specifically talking about agricultural workers.

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.

So in that case, the main problem is that 2% of the workforce who may be driving wages down. 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?