Originally Posted by clownboy

If the business can hire a "good" (hardworking?) employee for minimum wage, where's the demand to pay higher? Really now, back to the books for you.

you haven't been paying attention......the demand comes from the fact business #2 also wants to hire an employee who is willing to work......demand, supply.....

Quote:

Well, you speak as if you're totally unaware of that fact. And yes, especially since you're talking about adding 40 million low income workers to the society. They rely upon services provided by, wait for it... TAXES.

I'm puzzled why you think everyone is going to be low income.....is your plumber low income, your car mechanic?......

Quote:

This is the first forum, the first time, where someone has called me a liberal. Heh heh, feels kinda dirty.

perhaps it's the first time you've spoken out in favor of liberal ideals like unions and job protection.....

__________________
....attached to sanity by a bungee cord.....

Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet

you haven't been paying attention......the demand comes from the fact business #2 also wants to hire an employee who is willing to work......demand, supply.....

Since you're talking about opening up that labor market to include the entire world, the supply outstrips the demand. At least until the "palying field" is leveled. But as always, it will level downward.

Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet

I'm puzzled why you think everyone is going to be low income.....is your plumber low income, your car mechanic?......

Great examples, and no, not under the current system - their market normal wages are good. BUT, I can walk down two blocks where an illegal alien (a mechanic in his home country) will work on my car for a fraction of what my normal mechanic will do the work.

Plumbing help is available too, but on new construction permits and inspections are required, so under the current system that industry is semi-protected from plunder.

It's simple really, and if you've ever been in business you should already know this - if a business can legally hire an employee for less, they will.

Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet

perhaps it's the first time you've spoken out in favor of liberal ideals like unions and job protection.....

Again, not promoting unions (it would help if you actually read what I posted with the mischaracterization filter). Job protection is trumpetted by all sorts of conservative orgs, what is it you find so liberal about the concept of protecting the country's job market?

Regardless, we're not going your way on this for very good reasons.

Originally Posted by clownboy

Since you're talking about opening up that labor market to include the entire world, the supply outstrips the demand. At least until the "palying field" is leveled. But as always, it will level downward.

not true, it's leveling upward.....it's only the folks on the top of the teeter-totter than will experience a temporary drop....

Quote:

Great examples, and no, not under the current system - their market normal wages are good. BUT, I can walk down two blocks where an illegal alien (a mechanic in his home country) will work on my car for a fraction of what my normal mechanic will do the work.

you ignore the fact that under my proposal there wouldn't be an illegal alien down the block.....

Quote:

It's simple really, and if you've ever been in business you should already know this - if a business can legally hire an employee for less, they will.

again, you ignore the fact that with more people, businesses will need more employees....

Quote:

Again, not promoting unions (it would help if you actually read what I posted with the mischaracterization filter). Job protection is trumpetted by all sorts of conservative orgs, what is it you find so liberal about the concept of protecting the country's job market? Regardless, we're not going your way on this for very good reasons.

the only reasons for not going my way is protecting OUR jobs from THEM.....however, you may have noticed that OUR jobs have been going the THEM anyway....only the jobs are in China and Mexico......job protectionism is one of the primary factors in why manufacturing jobs are no longer HERE.....and job protectionism has always been a liberal mantra.....the so-called conservative orgs that are pushing it are simply RINOS......or conservatives not bright enough to realize what's involved.....

__________________
....attached to sanity by a bungee cord.....

Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet

not true, it's leveling upward.....it's only the folks on the top of the teeter-totter than will experience a temporary drop....

Nope, largely because the folks with the large concentration of wealth aren't exposed to the job market. Their wealth isn't exposed, doesn't contribute to the leveling effect.

Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet

you ignore the fact that under my proposal there wouldn't be an illegal alien down the block.....

And that's the point. Refer to the economics lesson #1 that you never quite got.

Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet

again, you ignore the fact that with more people, businesses will need more employees....

And you ignore that they can pay them less. The supply exceeds the demand. There is still only so much car work to go around, but the mechanics can be hired from anywhere at the lowest allowed wage (minimum wage). It leads to the land of McJobs.

Originally Posted by PostmodernProphet

the only reasons for not going my way is protecting OUR jobs from THEM.....however, you may have noticed that OUR jobs have been going the THEM anyway....only the jobs are in China and Mexico......job protectionism is one of the primary factors in why manufacturing jobs are no longer HERE.....and job protectionism has always been a liberal mantra.....the so-called conservative orgs that are pushing it are simply RINOS......or conservatives not bright enough to realize what's involved.....

Wow, you really don't have a clue regarding this particular issue. Yeah, I suppose the folks at Eagle Forums are RINOs, same for Michelle Malkin and the Washington Republican Party.

Our work is valued where it is because of all the little and big things it takes to operate our society at a certain economic level. Other nations don't necessarily have that level of economic infrastructure.

Originally Posted by clownboy

Nope, largely because the folks with the large concentration of wealth aren't exposed to the job market. Their wealth isn't exposed, doesn't contribute to the leveling effect.

so, for example, you don't think it will effect Port Authority dock workers who's unions make sure they maintain incomes of $100k plus a year?......what exactly do you mean by "folks with a large concentration of wealth"?.....

Quote:

And that's the point. Refer to the economics lesson #1 that you never quite got.

the point is that your objection fails, because it wouldn't occur....

Quote:

And you ignore that they can pay them less. The supply exceeds the demand. There is still only so much car work to go around, but the mechanics can be hired from anywhere at the lowest allowed wage (minimum wage). It leads to the land of McJobs.

false for several reasons.....if the population increases there is MORE car work than before, and more plumbing work and more butcher work and more everything work.....yes, you can hire entry level people at minimum wage.....but in a freely operating system (without job protection in place) qualified people find jobs at higher wages....because employers are willing to pay more money to people who know what they are doing and customers are willing to pay more to employers who have employees that know what they are doing......it's simply the way work works......

Quote:

Wow, you really don't have a clue regarding this particular issue. Yeah, I suppose the folks at Eagle Forums are RINOs, same for Michelle Malkin and the Washington Republican Party.

if for some odd reason they are promoting job protectionism, yes, they are....the reason we haven't solved this issue yet is because BOTH parties are promoting job protectionism......and take a good look at what happened during the Bush administration with respect to spending and tell me with a straight face that conservatives can't act like liberals...

Quote:

Our work is valued where it is because of all the little and big things it takes to operate our society at a certain economic level. Other nations don't necessarily have that level of economic infrastructure.

and as long as we continue job protection we will not return to a healthy economic balance with other nations.....

__________________
....attached to sanity by a bungee cord.....

From the Independent

Republican governor knows she can still count on voters despite legal setback

By Guy Adams
Friday, 30 July 2010


It wasn't all bad news for Jan Brewer, the hard-knuckle governor of Arizona who has taken ownership of the state's attempt to crack down on illegal immigration, and therefore managed to turn herself into one of the best-known players in a snowballing political debate that has polarised America.

Yes, the signature legislation she had oh-so publicly signed back in April has now been thrown into legal limbo. Yes, she has turned Arizona's good name into a byword for knee-jerk right-wingery, sparking a trade boycott which has cost the state tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars in lost trade and tourism and united major US cities with the governments of Mexico, Argentina and Ecuador in steely condemnation.

And yes, she has found herself at odds with almost all the major organisations involved in the civil rights movement, together with public figures such as the Rev Al Sharpton, the singer Shakira, the Black Eyed Peas, and what seems like half of Hollywood.

But Governor Brewer, a Republican facing a re-election battle before November's elections, knows that the only statistic that really counts is the one in the polls. And roughly 60 per cent of Arizonans support Senate Bill 1070, the tough law which aimed to combat illegal immigration. Their backing has been enough to give her a record 20 per cent lead over her Democratic rival, Terry Goddard.

Although she is widely despised by the Latino community, who make up 30 per cent of the state's 6.5 million residents, Ms Brewer knows that their turnout at elections is historically tiny.

Meanwhile the white community feels besieged by a Latino community which is accused of failing to integrate or learn English (many billboards in Phoenix's poorer neighbourhoods are in Spanish). Immigrants are widely accused of committing crimes, taking up places in public schools, and using free hospital beds.

Ms Brewer tapped into this sentiment, blaming migrants for a wave of violence. "Our law enforcement agencies have found bodies in the desert either buried or just lying out there that have been beheaded."

That surprised the police and border patrol agencies. They have yet to record a single immigration-related beheading. Ever. In fact, violent crime in Arizona is at a 20-year low.

And though Ms Brewer talks of a "terrible crisis" affecting her state, official estimates suggest that the number of undocumented workers has fallen since 2008.

It nonetheless suits the governor and her Republican-dominated state senate to keep the issue bubbling away. She has declared that the injunction was "just a bump in the road," and she would appeal against it.

However it will take weeks, and possibly months, for her to even get a hearing. If the case makes its way to the Supreme Court, it could take years. "Jan Brewer played politics with immigration, and she lost," was how her opponent Mr Goddard put it yesterday.