Illegal Immigration

[The Persnickety Platypus]

Funny. It appears as if the unregulated free market embraced by today's religious right DOES have it's limitations.

When a greedy CEO decides to cut health care benefits for minimum wage workers in order to further engorge his profits, that's perfectly legit. But when a foreign laborer willing to work twice as hard for half the pay gets hired over you, THEN WE HAVE AN OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE!

I'm tired of all the capitalist pigs complaining about losing jobs to Hispanics. This is the form of society you have embraced. Now you get to deal with the competition it entails.




Here's an idea: force companies to pay all workers the same wages, and there is no incentive to hire the immigrant over your average blue collar worker. Problem solved.

Is it really this simple, or am I just missing something?

What is the purpose of the complex naturalization process? I always thought America was the land of opportunity. Suddenly it has become an exclusive membership club. We assert the joys of a free market all over the world, but wish to deny certain groups of people these same rights on the home front.

Another idea. Enter the borders- BAM, your a citizen. Screw the little aptitude tests.

Would this cause any signifigant economic backlashes? The workforce would be no more saturated than it all ready is, right? I'm asking you guys... I'm no economist.



Please share your ideas and solutions.

[juliod]

Here's an idea: force companies to pay all workers the same wages, and there is no incentive to hire the immigrant over your average blue collar worker. Problem solved.

Is it really this simple, or am I just missing something?

Yes. At the wages they are used to paying, the average US resident won't apply for the job. Hence the self-fulfilling prophesy "No one wants this job".

I favour the idea of strong, even draconian, penalties for companies that hire illegals. Heavy fines for the companies for hiring undocumented workers. And treat the managers and bosses who hire the illegals as human trafficers (in fact they are, just the last stage of the process). Give a few managers with 3 illegals under them 5-10 years in the state penetentiary, and the problem will solve itself. Companies will be so careful in who they hire that illegal immigration will disappear (mostly).

Couple this with a significant increase in the minimum wage, and it will be a workable and beneficial plan.

There's a Big Problem though. The lower middle class who would benefit most from solving these problems is heavily leaning toward the right. They support the corporations who are causing their own impoverishment. I have very little sympathy for them, but admire their altruism.

DanZ

[palmera]

I favour the idea of strong, even draconian, penalties for companies that hire illegals. Heavy fines for the companies for hiring undocumented workers. And treat the managers and bosses who hire the illegals as human trafficers (in fact they are, just the last stage of the process). Give a few managers with 3 illegals under them 5-10 years in the state penetentiary, and the problem will solve itself. Companies will be so careful in who they hire that illegal immigration will disappear (mostly).

And yet prisons across America are already over-crowded. Would you ask tax payers to further support the great influx of "criminals" in penitentiaries who hired undocumented workers?

While the minimum wage certainly needs to be elevated to a living wage, doing so can actually make things worse in both the short and long run in a number of ways. Companies will be forced to lay off thousands of employees just to compensate for the raise in labor cost. So then we're left with an even worse predicament: not only will unemployment "boom", with those millions who were barely getting by now living on the street, but the cost on the taxpayers will be the greatest burden on the middle class... the rich get richer and the poor get poorer in your scenario. Sure it's happening now in some ways, but the changes needed can have backlash effects that may not be worth it.

Not only that, the majority of those who hire undocumented workers could be put out of business in said scenario(ranches, farms, orchards and roofing companies-not to mention many other high-risk jobs- etc.); in which case there's no more job for the American to be above taking in the first place. We need, for economic prosperity, the continual influx of workers in America. With the rising number of jobs leaving America due to off-shoring (which is also necessary) to prevent the steady influx of labor would be harmful to future economic growth. While our borders do need to be better guarded, and our incoming workers documented, the answer is not to send managers to jail and criminalize incoming labor. The issues are extremely complex- for instance, immigrants, documented and not, make up about 1/5 of the U.S. workforce (according to Pew.) Are we going to turn them away, send them and their bosses to jail?

I'm tired of all the capitalist pigs complaining about losing jobs to Hispanics. This is the form of society you have embraced. Now you get to deal with the competition it entails.

About the only thing that ole G-Dubbs has done right is in his push for free trade. Though the illegal immigrant problem is tough to deal with for a variety of reasons, if we are to remain a capitalist society (which I sincerely hope) the continual influx of workers and outsorcing of jobs to furthest reaches of the globe (or just India and China ) is the only way to achieve economic growth and stability. While some of the gripes can be empathized with, you're right on target about the nature of capitalistic societies. Competition is the key component to quality in product, labor, et.al.

But, as stated before, the issues are complex, far more so than we can tackle here- though dialogue, as always is necessary.

[Cephus]

Yes. At the wages they are used to paying, the average US resident won't apply for the job. Hence the self-fulfilling prophesy "No one wants this job".

Which is, of course, ridiculous. These jobs got done long before the illegal problem, they just paid better wages. What, you think offices didn't get cleaned, crops didn't get picked and buildings didn't get built before illegal aliens showed up?

Getting rid of illegal aliens will increase the wages in these fields back to where they used to be, nothing more.

I favour the idea of strong, even draconian, penalties for companies that hire illegals. Heavy fines for the companies for hiring undocumented workers. And treat the managers and bosses who hire the illegals as human trafficers (in fact they are, just the last stage of the process). Give a few managers with 3 illegals under them 5-10 years in the state penetentiary, and the problem will solve itself. Companies will be so careful in who they hire that illegal immigration will disappear (mostly).

We just need to enforce the current laws. It's supposed to be a $10,000 fine per infraction, which means that some large companies could face millions of dollars in fines, and they should. Put that money directly into border enforcement. Start charging countries that send their citizens here illegally fines. Threaten to reduce their foreign aid if they don't stem the tide.

It can be done, it just requires a little guts and that's something the current administration is a tad short on.

Couple this with a significant increase in the minimum wage, and it will be a workable and beneficial plan.

The minimum wage doesn't matter when you're paying people under the table. If they're not respecting the labor laws, do you think they're going to respect the legal pay scale?

[McCulloch]

Yes. At the wages they are used to paying, the average US resident won't apply for the job. Hence the self-fulfilling prophesy "No one wants this job".

Which is, of course, ridiculous. These jobs got done long before the illegal problem, they just paid better wages. What, you think offices didn't get cleaned, crops didn't get picked and buildings didn't get built before illegal aliens showed up?

You think so? Could it be that they did not pay better wages? As they were forced to increase the wages to citizens, the economic incentives to illegally hire non-citizens also increased.

Getting rid of illegal aliens will increase the wages in these fields back to where they used to be, nothing more.

Nothing is quite that straight forward. Increase the cost of labour in the US Agricultural industry and it then becomes less competitive internationally. Then to protect the US Agriculture industry, you increase tariffs. If you increase the cost of maintaining office space in the US, then you also increase the incentive to outsource office work offshore.

We just need to enforce the current laws. It's supposed to be a $10,000 fine per infraction, which means that some large companies could face millions of dollars in fines, and they should. Put that money directly into border enforcement. Start charging countries that send their citizens here illegally fines. Threaten to reduce their foreign aid if they don't stem the tide.

It can be done, it just requires a little guts and that's something the current administration is a tad short on.

When there is a strong economic incentive to do things a particular way, legal enforcement by itself is not usually successful. Didn't we learn that from prohibition?

[juliod]

And yet prisons across America are already over-crowded. Would you ask tax payers to further support the great influx of "criminals" in penitentiaries who hired undocumented workers?

You'd only need to sentance 2 or 3 managers to prison for the deterance effect to stop the problem.

Not only that, the majority of those who hire undocumented workers could be put out of business in said scenario(ranches, farms, orchards and roofing companies-not to mention many other high-risk jobs- etc.);

First, that probably isn't true. The money saved on wages is pocketed by the proprietors or shareholders. Income disparity has been increasing for a while now. Clearly unsustainable.

Secondly, companies that cannot afford to pay a living wage should go out of business. As it is they are in effect being subsidized by the poor.

DanZ

[juliod]

I also have another radical proposal to deal with these issues.

I suggest we align business taxes with the pay-disparity in a company. So a company where the CEO makes hugely more than the lower employees pays a high tax, while a company with more even pay bands ays less tax.

I would suggest (as an endpoint) that a company where everyone makes exactly the same wage would pay no corporate income tax.

At the other end, I would suggest a 20% increase over current taxes for companies in the top 20% of pay disparity (I don't know what the relevant figures are for those companies).

Of course, we would need to count the total compensation for the executive, including regular pay, incentives, bonuses, options, etc.

And no gaming would be allowed. This would specifically include part-time employees and others.

So under this system companies would get a benefit of reduced taxes simply by reducing the pay of the top executives, or (even better) by increasing the wages of the lower employees.

DanZ

[The Persnickety Platypus]

You'd only need to sentance 2 or 3 managers to prison for the deterance effect to stop the problem.

That was the theory with the death penalty. Now look at the crime rates.

We need to utilize the new wave of workers, not ban them.

While the minimum wage certainly needs to be elevated to a living wage, doing so can actually make things worse in both the short and long run in a number of ways. Companies will be forced to lay off thousands of employees just to compensate for the raise in labor cost.

I have never actually witnessed this phenomena. Orgeon has a mimimum wage of over seven dollars, and boasts the highest job growth rate in the country. From all indications, I am inclined to believe that there is very little correlation between minimum wage and the employment rate.

Some Republican leaders have touted the same claims at proposed min wage increases, but their obvious pro-corporate anti-worker sentiments cast much doubt on the validity of such an argument.

Compensate for the raise in labor cost, or compensate for the CEO's new yacht? As Juliod mentions, most of this excess wealth from the feudalistic conditions companies are allowed to exert upon their lowly working stewards is pocketed by the upper echlon.

There should be an income limit for all wealthy business leaders. That alone would probably be enough to compensate for the wage raise.

While some of the gripes can be empathized with, you're right on target about the nature of capitalistic societies. Competition is the key component to quality in product, labor, et.al.

Unregulated, even?

The current energy industry, for example, can hardly be considered productive. When a few people/companies have the ability to assert their control over all the nation's oil, raking in record profits (while casting a burden on lower class citizens dependant on commuting) is no problem. The government does nothing about this of course, as if it were not for the generous campaign contributions from such people, they would never be in office.

Countries who exercise the "law of the jungle" in terms of economics always crumble. Our elected leaders do not control the country, the corporate predators do.

This past year the US ecomomy is said to have grown signifigantly, but not under the terms you might expect. 80% of all workers have witnessed wage decreases (relative to the inflation trend), and America's POLQ quality of life ratings continue to plummet. The said "economy growth" has been exclusive to the upper percentile of pay earners, who's companies continue to be blessed with the unregulatory tenants of this "free" market.

Hard-line capitalism measures "prosperity" in terms of the whole, which has proven to be it's downfall in building truly successful societies. The US should be moving in the direction of the European welfare states, who have succeeded in balancing national prosperity with quality of life.



Only slightly off topic. This remains my central irk with the immigration problem- the free market we live in entails a company's ability to outsource pay to the most profitable venue, which is root of the consequential unemployment dillema we currently face, not to mention the unruly power granted to the said corporations.

At the same time, I feel that these immigrants must be accompanied. They are merely trying to build a better life for themselves and their family's- as is their God-given right. I am not so nationalistic that I would choose to turn them away for sake of our own workers.

I am not sure how to best balance these priorities, but I know that increased government interference fits somewhere in the equation.

[juliod]

That was the theory with the death penalty. Now look at the crime rates.

Yeah, but it's also the theory behind all other laws, some of which work. I think a white-collar manager is more deterred by prison than a violent criminal is by death.

We need to utilize the new wave of workers, not ban them.

I agree. But we also have to agree that these must be legal immigrants, not exploitable non-citizens. I suggest we attack the cause, not the effect, and in my opinion that means targeting managers and corporations.

If human trafficking is wrong, then it is at least as wrong to be the end-user of the traffic as it is to be the middle-man.

DanZ

[McCulloch]

I also have another radical proposal to deal with these issues.

I suggest we align business taxes with the pay-disparity in a company. So a company where the CEO makes hugely more than the lower employees pays a high tax, while a company with more even pay bands ays less tax.
...

Interesting notion. If implemented, there would be a huge tax advantage to contracting out a firm's lowest paid work.
Let's say I'm running a small software development firm. Our lowest paid employees are the night cleaning staff. We let them all go and contract with our building management to clean, ka-ching! reduced taxes. Our next lowest paid employees are the telephone support people. Outsource to India. Ka-ching! reduced taxes.