novus collectus
Moderator
I think I am going to change my screen name to "thread killer" 
.
.
Illegals: Should Assets and Profits Be Seized?
- Thread starter Unique 5.7
- Start date
shootinstudent
New member
LAK,
See above. "Free" and "good" are two different things.
See above. "Free" and "good" are two different things.
Jammer Six
New member
It never pays to discuss anything with someone who isn't both capable and willing to listen.
shootinstudent
New member
ahenry,
LOL, for both of our sensibilities let's call it general advice for no one in particular. In the abstract, Jammer Six is correct!
LOL, for both of our sensibilities let's call it general advice for no one in particular. In the abstract, Jammer Six is correct!
shootinstudent,
Right; "free" and "good" are two different things. What is "free" is not necessarily "good" in and of itself.
Which is why our government has the power to regulate certain aspects of commerce and why we have - or had - clearly defined national borders and immigration controls.
Right; "free" and "good" are two different things. What is "free" is not necessarily "good" in and of itself.
Which is why our government has the power to regulate certain aspects of commerce and why we have - or had - clearly defined national borders and immigration controls.
Ozzieman: The constitution forbids Bills of Attainder. Just how is the current operation of Asset Forfeiture Laws different from a Bill of Attainder?
General: There seems to be an assumption that the only reason jobs are going overseas is because of price. When a firm or person buys a product (including labor), any number of reasons drives where they spend their money. Quality of product, location of product, and price of product go into the decision making process. Jobs aren't just going to India because they work cheaply, but because the work competently enough at that price to make it profitable.
Many, many, Mexicans work here illegally. In some cases it's price, in some it is quality of work performed (i.e.: Work Ethic). Protectionism doesn't work. Never has, never will. It might work short-term, but the long term economic damage can be witnessed by the utter collapse of the big 3 automakers which IMO will be complete as soon as the Japanese begin to manufacture full-sized trucks and SUV's here. Just this past week, GM's bond rating was reduced to junk status. Ford's was downgraded to just above junk status.
Take it for what it's worth.
When employment goes up, Bush is criticized because the jobs created are "low paying" jobs nobody wants, but then when illegal aliens fill the jobs nobody wants, then all of a sudden people hypothetically want them, but when I ask around nobody actually wants to do them themselves, they just think that somebody would want them. I am confused.
PS Ozzieman: Thanks for getting back on topic. Every so often we need somebody to do that.
General: There seems to be an assumption that the only reason jobs are going overseas is because of price. When a firm or person buys a product (including labor), any number of reasons drives where they spend their money. Quality of product, location of product, and price of product go into the decision making process. Jobs aren't just going to India because they work cheaply, but because the work competently enough at that price to make it profitable.
Many, many, Mexicans work here illegally. In some cases it's price, in some it is quality of work performed (i.e.: Work Ethic). Protectionism doesn't work. Never has, never will. It might work short-term, but the long term economic damage can be witnessed by the utter collapse of the big 3 automakers which IMO will be complete as soon as the Japanese begin to manufacture full-sized trucks and SUV's here. Just this past week, GM's bond rating was reduced to junk status. Ford's was downgraded to just above junk status.
Take it for what it's worth.
When employment goes up, Bush is criticized because the jobs created are "low paying" jobs nobody wants, but then when illegal aliens fill the jobs nobody wants, then all of a sudden people hypothetically want them, but when I ask around nobody actually wants to do them themselves, they just think that somebody would want them. I am confused.
PS Ozzieman: Thanks for getting back on topic. Every so often we need somebody to do that.
I know that I considered this conversation over, and this isn’t really intended to re-open it but I had a conversation today that I thought was worth relating as it helps illustrate my view.
I was talking to an individual today and he related some things to me. He was a legally admitted foreigner, authorized to work here in the U.S. He had held a manual labor job here in the U.S. Recently his employer let him and about 9 of his coworkers go because some individuals came to him, found out what he was paying his current employees and offered to do the work for about 100 dollars a week less. In reality the real wage they offered the employer was even lower because they were in fact, illegal. The employer would be able to hire them at the lower wage while at the same time avoiding all the normal expenses of hiring legal employees. This individual I was speaking with was willing to work at a wage lower than the illegal immigrants, but his employer was unwilling to keep him on because of the secondary costs of the benefits he was required to provide an authorized laborer. Additionally, the liability he held with legal employees was non-existent with illegals. The bottom line is that the legal employees are now unable to work, at least at their prior place of employment, due to illegal immigrants.
I realize this is anecdotal, but the story illustrates what I have been saying. These ten or so legal workers were perfectly willing to work at the same wage or even lower than the illegal workers. However, due to the requirements an employer has in order to employee legal workers, there is never a wage at which he cannot employ illegal immigrants for less. The illegal immigrant has created an artificial market for labor. Or put another way, the illegal immigrant is keeping the cost for labor lower than the true market price.
I was talking to an individual today and he related some things to me. He was a legally admitted foreigner, authorized to work here in the U.S. He had held a manual labor job here in the U.S. Recently his employer let him and about 9 of his coworkers go because some individuals came to him, found out what he was paying his current employees and offered to do the work for about 100 dollars a week less. In reality the real wage they offered the employer was even lower because they were in fact, illegal. The employer would be able to hire them at the lower wage while at the same time avoiding all the normal expenses of hiring legal employees. This individual I was speaking with was willing to work at a wage lower than the illegal immigrants, but his employer was unwilling to keep him on because of the secondary costs of the benefits he was required to provide an authorized laborer. Additionally, the liability he held with legal employees was non-existent with illegals. The bottom line is that the legal employees are now unable to work, at least at their prior place of employment, due to illegal immigrants.
I realize this is anecdotal, but the story illustrates what I have been saying. These ten or so legal workers were perfectly willing to work at the same wage or even lower than the illegal workers. However, due to the requirements an employer has in order to employee legal workers, there is never a wage at which he cannot employ illegal immigrants for less. The illegal immigrant has created an artificial market for labor. Or put another way, the illegal immigrant is keeping the cost for labor lower than the true market price.
.....this "debate" has ended, and this is what I've gathered.....
Legally working employees have artificially inflated the cost to employers, therefore the "solution" to a "free market" economy is to hire ILLEGAL workers; keeping the cost to consumers for THAT product competitively inexpensive......
Legally working employees have artificially inflated the cost to employers, therefore the "solution" to a "free market" economy is to hire ILLEGAL workers; keeping the cost to consumers for THAT product competitively inexpensive......