I keep reading over and over again in various places the claim that we do not have enough young people, and that we need to bring in more immigrants. But did these geniuses ever stop to consider WHY people are not having "enough" children?!? Could it possibly be because families simply cannot afford to have more children and maintain a decent standard of living?? Could it be because parents know that any children they have will be living with them well into adulthood because of the unaffordable cost of housing? Could it be because parents know that their children will face dismal job prospects and low wages? So perhaps the only responsible thing for any sensible family to do is NOT to have more than 1 or 2 children. And yet the government wants to bring in waves of immigrants who will keep having babies over and over again, whether they can afford it or not ?!? What exactly will be the effects of such policies? Widespread poverty, soaring youth unemployment, families that need government assistance because they do not earn enough to take care of themselves. I think we are already seeing these effects. The most insane argument I hear is the ridiculous assertion that more young people are needed to take care of the aging population. So what about the huge numbers of unemployed young adults, including many stuck in low wage jobs? Rather than bring in cheap immigrant care takers who will live in poverty, it seems to me that it would make far more sense for the government to simply help subsidize all these unemployed young adults to help take care of our old. Our cities are already overcrowded. There is a shortage of affordable housing. Young adults cannot afford to move out of their parents house and start life. There are not enough jobs for all the people we already have. The few job opportunities that are left are low wage, for the most part. The last thing we need are more people.
All the predictions of this time period centered around how great the working people would have it because they would be in high demand. The big businesses could not handle having to offer great benefits and good working conditions just to have our brilliant kids come into their employ. So they worked on NAFTA and outsourcing and lax immigration enforcement.
Legal immigrants go from green cards to naturalization... US Issues 1 Million Green Cards, Naturalizes 757,000 in 2012 March 23, 2013 WASHINGTON Nearly a million people became U.S. citizens last year, and just over a million became legal permanent residents, according to new data released by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
Granny says, "Dat's right - dat's who really writes our immigration laws... Business, labor close on deal for immigration bill 30 Mar.`13 WASHINGTON (AP) Prospects for a Senate deal on an ambitious rewrite of the nation's immigration laws improved markedly as business and labor appeared ready to set aside their differences over a new low-skilled worker program holding up the agreement.
I'm confident this little problem will be resolved in short order. The illegals I see, breed like rats. There should be no shortage of young American citizens, thanks to the antiquated and abused 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Don't you see? There was never a real shortage of young workers. It was all about creating an excuse to bring in huge numbers of immigrants and irreversibly alter the social composition. The Conservatives were just too cheap for their own good. In many ways, the education system was a big pyramid scheme. The supposed economic answer - a crazy one in retrospect - was to just give everyone university degrees so they would all earn more. So more people at the bottom would only help create more job positions higher up, so the thinking went.
here's something rather ironic from a pro-choicer from another thread in this forum: If our unborn children are "terrorist upon society economically", what exactly does that make all these immigrants who come here? If we are justified in aborting our own children... Seems some of the same arguments being used (by those on both the left and right) to justify abortion can also be used to justify restricting immigration. Pro-choicers say all those unwanted children from low income mothers will burden our society economically. Well, if that's the case, isn't the same true about poor immigrants who have many children?
Granny says, "Dat's right - da fix is in... US Business, Labor Agree on Immigration Deal March 31, 2013 > U.S. officials say big business and labor have reached an agreement on a low-skilled guest-worker program, creating a pathway to citizenship for 11 million illegal immigrants.
Why don't they train American workers for American jobs?... High-tech pushes for more in immigration bill May 13,`13 WASHINGTON (AP) -- High-tech companies looking to bring more skilled workers to the U.S. pushed Monday for more concessions in an immigration bill pending in the Senate. Labor unions said the Silicon Valley had already gotten enough in the legislation and further changes risked chipping away at protections for U.S. workers.
Regarding the BOLD above, and speaking as a farmer, it is an absolute fact that it is more difficult every day to find farm workers. The first FACT is that Americans won't do this type of work. So farmers are left with the migrant farm workers to work the farms. However, the older migrant workers are getting tired of working, getting too old, and simply slowing down. Any of their kids who were born or raised in the USA, are too spoiled and lazy and don't like this type of work. So, IMO, what farmers need is a sustained level of 'young' migrant farm workers who will do this work with the idea of achieving something much more than they can wherever it is they come from. And yes this means allowing more legal and illegal immigrants into the USA...
I was just thinking about this the other day...in which the US government allows something like 900,000 green card workers into the USA each year and who knows how many jobs are outsourced off-shore because US employers can't find enough qualified employees? Then I couple this with our public education system in which the high school graduation rate is what...75%? In many areas it might be 50%! And we can be assured that if 25% fail high school that another 15-20% basically learned nothing but somehow advanced through the system. If this can be true then the collective we are failing 40-45% of all kids in our drop-out public education system. This led me to wonder out of this 40-45% group of public education failures, how many of them had the potential to succeed in college, to become scientists, teachers, renowned artists and musicians; in other words how many of them were little Einstein's in the making but the collective we failed to give them the tools to become future leaders of the USA? My guess is that those kids in this 40-45% group have equal potential to those who are given better public education options...but we'll never know because the collective we are squandering American talent because we're too stupid and cheap to develop the full potential of our kids! So we just bring them in from around the world, outsource jobs around the world, then Americans complain because politics and stupidity drives the dialogue instead of solving the root problems...
Because many American farms that grow labor-intensive crops (things that need to be picked) are having trouble competing with the low-cost agricultural labor in Mexico and Chile. Another victim of free trade. These farms don't have trouble finding workers, they just have trouble finding people willing to do intense exhausting farm work long hours of the day for minimum wage and no benefits.
Just curious what types of jobs you believe farm workers are also qualified to do? And if you can name something, please explain why farm workers are not taking those 'other' jobs instead of working in the farm fields? And of all the 'other' jobs you can list, what are their current average wages...and how do they compare to the $8/hour to $16/hour that farm workers are being paid in my area?
Just thought I would mention the situation in Japan. There is a huge number of Japanese trapped in low paying jobs who barely earn enough to afford housing (the cost of living is high in Japan, especially in the cities). Unemployment is also rather high, although the official government statistics downplay this. Despite the serious employment problems, there are still politicians claiming that Japan does not have enough nurses to take care of its aging population. Even The Economist has echoed this absurd claim, and one wonders if they just have some ulterior motive, resenting the fact that Japan is one of the few industrialized countries still ethnically homogenous. (This magazine has become fond of subtly pushing progressive agendas in recent years) "Bringing Foreign Workers Ruins Japan", written by Goro Ono, honorary professor at Saitama University. Goro Ono wrote, "If industries where labor is in high demand pay adequate salaries, people will work there." Ono used nursing as a good example. "Japan is actively bringing in Indonesians and other foreigners to cover a shortage because nurses in Japan are woefully underpaid. While on the other hand, public entities never have trouble finding garbage collectors because they get decent salaries." Ono also brought up the lack of discussion about the cost of building infrastructure to accept more immigrants. Japan is an interesting situation because many garbage collectors get paid more than nurses. So for the Japanese, it is clear to see that there is no shortage of labor. It is just that certain politicians want a supply of cheap labor, even though these foreign workers will scarcely have enough to live on. What Japanese person in their right mind would go through all that training for a job that does not even pay decently? Same thing is happening in many American and European cities with high costs of living. The hospitals pay poorly and then wonder why they can not find any nurses. Because potential workers do not want to go through all the training of becoming a nurse, only to get a low salary and have to live in an expensive city where the hospital is. Peter Capelli, professor at the prestigious Wharton school of business, wrote: "Indeed, some of the most puzzling stories to come out of the Great Recession are the many claims by employers that they cannot find qualified applicants to fill their jobs, despite the millions of unemployed who are seeking work. Beyond the anecdotes themselves is survey evidence, most recently from Manpower, which finds roughly half of employers reporting trouble filling their vacancies. The first thing that makes me wonder about the supposed 'skill gap' is that, when pressed for more evidence, roughly 10% of employers admit that the problem is really that the candidates they want won't accept the positions at the wage level being offered. That's not a skill shortage, it's simply being unwilling to pay the going price."
"Not enough young workers" Unemployment is rampant in the ghettos. Just train those young people and there will be plenty of labor for all businesses. But instead of doing that, go to any vacation spot in the mid west or east coast and you see plenty of European kids doing the jobs that should have been given to American ghetto youths.
Americans complain about the high costs of everything today, talk about needing to make decisions between paying rent and eating. If you raise all the wages then you raise the prices of all goods and services...inflation. So the same people today complaining about their wages and purchasing power won't gain anything with increased wages. Using some logic if people are living pay-check to pay-check, then the wisest thing to do is greatly reduce their expenses well within their projected income. How this is achieved is up to each individual. Logic says if this group of people cannot earn more then they must reduce spending. If they wish to earn more, and the system won't simply give it away, then each person must obtain training and education and consider relocation in order to earn more. However, if people earn more then spend more...there are still no gains...
But wages are only one component of consumer prices. The other component is land rent. In fact, in many cities the workers have to be paid much more to afford housing. And the housing is expensive because there is limited space and the land had to be purchased from the previous owner. It is really too complex to describe in a single post, but the point is that, while prices may rise, they will not rise in proportion to the rise of wages.
I didn't imply inflation rates would match income increases? You cannot increase all wages in the work place by 10% or 50% or 100% without this additional cost effecting the expenses of a business and ultimately the price of goods and services. So many believe labor costs are not a big deal to business but they are; and it's not just the wages, but also the higher cost of materials which are produced by higher labor costs and transportation, etc. A person's desire to earn more cannot be solved by government...it is this simple IMO...
So many believe land costs are not a big deal to business but they are; and it's not just the rent or mortgage, but also the higher cost of labor because the workers have to be paid enough to afford housing, and the higher cost of living in regions where land rents are more expensive. Besides, America has plenty of poor people already. Even if Americans could save a little money by using cheap foreign workers, would it not instead be better to pay a little bit more so Americans could work in these jobs? Is it better to pay 12 dollars an hour, or 7 dollars an hour to a foreign laborer and have an unemployed American?
If I was at a labor hall, along with 20-30 others, and someone came in and said they needed some labor, and the dude across from me raised their hand and said they will work for $12/hour, I would raise my hand and state that I'll do the work for $11/hour. When we have a large supply of unskilled and lower-skilled workers, and they are competing for jobs, the wages are going to be lower. Typically an employer has a defined job position, and a wage scale for that position...maybe $7.25/hour to $8/hour, then they set out to find the workers. If they have trouble finding workers they might increase their pay scale say to $7.25/hour to $10/hour. If they have no problem filling the positions, then they know the wage scale is correct for the moment. So...why would an employer pay a worker $12/hour when plenty are willing to work for $7/hour? Since the pay scales go from $7.25/hour up to maybe $50/hour, if you raise the $7.25 to $12/hour then you also need to raise all the other pay scales by about 65%. Of course business is already having a hard time competing in the world marketplace so increasing all wages by 65% probably will exacerbate the issue. And when all is said and done, there will be inflation, and those earning $12/hour will still be at the bottom end of incomes...nothing changes...
In certain sectors,yes their is a shortage. Agriculture,absolutely. How in heck would California produce milk without immigrant labor? I saw an estimation that 40% of the dairy workers in the state are immigrants. Those numbers are higher in the vegetable and fruit growing sectors. The problem though,is that as soon as these workers get a chance,they go to the city and get construction jobs for much better pay.
How in heck would California produce milk without immigrant labor? With cows! 'Immigrant' labor includes everyone who are illegal or illegal. 'Illegal immigrant' includes only those who are illegal. In reading your statement above, there is no issue whatsoever with 'immigrants' since all of us are immigrants. Who cares if they get construction jobs or any type of jobs? If they are better paying jobs then where are the Americans?
