Gail Wynand posted:

Another point we have to acknowledge is that even in the fantasy "jobs come back" scenario a lot of these people are just not fit for the labor force any longer.

readingatwork posted:

Because there are way to many people who want to come to the US to reasonably accommodate.

I'm totally on board with streamlining the immigration process though. That poo poo is awful.

readingatwork posted:

You pass a law saying that if you want to sell a product in the US you have to manufacture it here as well. Done.

Josef bugman posted:

Maybe in its current state. But the fact is that if you want life to come back to those little farming and mining communities the old fashioned way of doing it was infrastructure works and mass immigration. I think the latter helps the former.

SimonCat posted:

Heavy duty fines and legal actions against companies that hire illegal immigrants. It's the companies that bear the blame and responsibility for exploiting illegals, not the immigrants themselves. If you make it untenable to hire undocumented workers, then the immigrants won't come because there will be no jobs for them to work.

Josef bugman posted:

They may well amount to jack and poo poo, the companies are still going to want to cut them. There is also the on going problem of people not purchasing stuff as much because the overall buying power of people has reduced.

readingatwork posted:

You pass a law saying that if you want to sell a product in the US you have to manufacture it here as well. Done.

Lote posted:

Long haul trucking and shipping is one of the largest employment sectors in the United States with 1.8 million long haul truck drivers alone. Then you have all the other logistics people, etc. etc. Drivers are also 955 male and 60% white. People losing their jobs over a switch to toll roads would spark intense backlash.

readingatwork posted:

You pass a law saying that if you want to sell a product in the US you have to manufacture it here as well. Done.

Crowsbeak posted:

I say 100k a head. Also some of that money should go to the snitches.

Harik posted:

Companies want to cut every cost, news at 11. That doesn't mean American tech manufacturing is uncompetitive due to labor costs when they're a tiny fraction of a percent of the other costs that can be avoided overseas.

Besides, if the iPhone cost $2000 due to being built by American workers - the American workers could afford to buy it.

Gail Wynand posted:

So referring to POC earning an honest living as "slaves" is okay with you?

Party Plane Jones posted:

boner confessor posted:

this would start a massive trade war and explode the economy via other nations passing similarly restrictive tariffs on american exports. you have no idea what you're talking about

corn in the bible posted:

Sir, this is a McDonald's drive-through

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

In an interview with Leslie Stahl airing tonight, Trump clarified his Immigration plans.

- Goal is 2 to 3 million people gone in the first year.
- Going to focus on criminals first. No deportation force initially.

- Focus on criminals includes the following elements:

- Checking immigration status for everyone arrested or held in detention.
- "Sanctuary Cities" will be abolished by making any Sanctuary City ineligible to receive federal policing, DOJ, ICE, or DHS grants.
- Mandatory jail sentences for anyone caught twice or who has a felony.
- Anyone who overstays a visa will automatically have it revoked permanently.
- Any country that has more than 5% of its Student Visa or Tourist Visa program overstay their visa will have their visa programs suspended pending review.

Parts of the wall will be a fence and parts will be an actual wall. It will cover the entire border.

The U.S. might initially pay for the wall. But there will be temporary tariffs and a freeze on Mexican remittance payments and diplomatic visas until Mexico pays for it in full.

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

Doesn't mean Trump won't pass it as law. He doesn't have any idea what he's talking about either.

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

Doesn't mean Trump won't pass it as law. He doesn't have any idea what he's talking about either.

Torpor posted:

Get rid of excess labor. That will increase empowerment. All we gotta do is re-enact the Black Death and the big creditors will come to the table pretty fast.

There are no long term economic fixes to anything.

Josef bugman posted:

To be fair if he does he will wind up ignored by the GOP. He can scream till he's blue in the face but I doubt that they'd do something to hurt their pocket books.

Hollismason posted:

I told you he is going to build a loving wall and figure out some totally not payment way to say that Mexico paid for it . Also, of course he's going to build a great big huge section and then just have the rest of the wall be a fence.

Bolded is crazy because does this mean he is going to kick out people who are not overstaying.

This whole thing is bonkers.

Main Paineframe posted:

That's a problem, because the people in these areas want long-term fixes and won't be satisfied with less. They don't want a few years worth of construction jobs, they want an economic revitalization creating jobs that will still be around for their children.

quote:

The fact that you in the same breath are talking about neoliberals and liberals as separate things is hysterical. Further still, I don't view capitalism as an aid program. I'd like to help them more than just "well I guess you can come here and take a lovely job." But that apparently makes me a horrible person who cares more about the foreign poor than poor people here.

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

Trump has the GOP by the nuts right now. They'll do what he says.

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

Trump has the GOP by the nuts right now. They'll do what he says.

Main Paineframe posted:

That's because rule one of dogwhistles is that if someone can't hear the (((echoes))), they're not supposed to know about them.

Pervis posted:

What makes you think they would lose their jobs? The companies who owns the toll roads would just end up becoming the major trucking companies (by acquisition or otherwise) and using their leverage to force all the smaller, non-road-owning companies out. And they would pay lower because now there's fewer options. At a very minimum I'd guess very important highway corridor's would be converted to public/private partnerships, ones that aren't easily replaced or moved around.


In which case it'll be done in the South or other highly not-unionized places, rather than the parts of the country that are the reason why Trump won (the Rust Belt).

Shifty Pony posted:

The south isn't capable of absorbing many more high tech manufacturing jobs (and all manufacturing would be high tech due to automation).

Just look at the cluster duck that Boeing in SC has been.

Lightning Knight posted:

There are a whole lot more working class and poor people than middle class people at this point. Also we didn't abandon working white people, they abandoned us for Reagan. We didn't bother trying to recapture them, which isn't much better, but that distinction is important because we didn't choose to be massive gently caress ups with a weird base, the Republicans scooped our base out from under us.

Also I personally think that the middle class people who vote for us will continue to vote for us because they tend to be motivated more by identity politics than economics. The majority of middle class white suburbanites vote Republican nowadays. The median income in America is, what, 60k? That's who we should be focusing on, because wealth inequality is so bad that the median income is approaching poor working class.

Hollismason posted:

Trump has no loyalty what so ever so the idea that if Republican's step out of line and he won't call them on it is ridiculous.

Josef bugman posted:

I have to think that during the bronze age collapse did people get this pissed at their kids for moving to Athens. "Lad this hill forts been here for more than 3 generations, I'm not leaving" "But dad all the tin and copper jobs are in the Polis' now, I have to go" "Your no son of mine" -slams door before being killed by angry sea person-

Party Plane Jones posted:

Night10194 posted:

This was the entire cause of the Maccabees revolt.

Well, that, and the Selucid King sacking Jerusalem because he was frustrated he couldn't actually fight the Ptolemies and sacrificing a pig on the Holy of Holies in a fit of pique. That was a bad idea. Also pretty Trump.

Josef bugman posted:

Do you think they will care? Because I don't see most of the GOP heads just bending the knee. They'll let him do speeches and ignore him.

Who knows though, It may well be that they do bend the knee. I just can't see it being long before there ends up being an actual purge of the party.

Josef bugman posted:

What happens when other countries start doing the same to you?

Pervis posted:

In which case it'll be done in the South or other highly not-unionized places, rather than the parts of the country that are the reason why Trump won (the Rust Belt).

Grouchio posted:

So what sort of paths is Trump likely to take regarding China, and what would be the outcomes? I know there are a couple of options.

quote:

Has the surge in immigration since 1970 led to slower wage growth for native-born workers? Academic research does not provide much support for this claim. The evidence suggests that when immigration increases the supply of labor, firms increase investment to offset any reduction in capital per worker, thereby keeping average wages from falling over the long term. Moreover, immigrants are often imperfect substitutes for native-born workers in U.S. labor markets. That means they do not compete for the same jobs and put minimal downward pressure on natives’ wages. This might explain why competition from new immigrants has mostly affected earlier immigrants, who experienced significant reductions in wages from the surge in immigration. In contrast, studies find that immigration has actually raised average wages of native-born workers during the last few decades.

Immigrants are at the forefront of innovation and ingenuity in the United States, accounting for a disproportionately high share of patent filings, science and technology graduates, and senior positions at top venture capital-funded firms. In addition, the presence of immigrants often creates opportunities for less-skilled native workers to become more specialized in their work, thereby increasing their productivity.

Immigration generally also improves the government’s fiscal situation, as many immigrants pay more in taxes over a lifetime than they consume in government services. However, native-born residents of states with large concentrations of less-educated immigrants may face larger tax burdens, as these immigrants pay less in taxes and are more likely to send children to public schools.

quote:

A popular view is that immigrants are taking jobs from American citizens. However, although immigrants increase the supply of labor, they also spend their wages on homes, food, TVs and other goods and services and expand domestic economic demand. This increased demand, in turn, generates more jobs to build those homes, make and sell food, and transport TVs.

Most empirical studies indicate long-term benefits for natives’ employment and wages from immigration, although some studies suggest that these gains come at the cost of short-term losses from lower wages and higher unemployment. Standard economic theory implies that while higher labor supply from immigration may initially depress wages, over time firms increase investment to restore the amount of capital per worker, which then restores wages.Steady growth in the capital-labor ratio prevents workers’ average productivity, and therefore their average wages from declining over the long run. Figure 2 shows the pre-1980 trend in the capital-labor ratio extrapolated over the next few decades – the period when U.S. immigration accelerated. Consistent with the theory, the actual capital-labor ratio did not significantly or permanently deviate from that trend after 1980.

quote:

Despite these increases in labor supply, in many cases immigrants appear to complement American-born workers rather than replacing them. Because less-educated immigrants often lack the linguistic skills required for many jobs, they tend to take jobs in manual labor-intensive occupations such as agriculture and construction. Even for low-skilled native-born workers in these industries, the effects of increased competition from immigrants are ambiguous, as many take advantage of their superior communication abilities and shift into occupations where these skills are more valuable, such as personal services and sales.
Similarly, highly educated immigrants face a disadvantage in communication-intensive jobs, and therefore tend to work in scientific and technical occupations. Highly skilled natives in management, media, and other culture- and language-dependent jobs face little competition from high skilled immigrants. The inflow of foreign labor is, therefore, concentrated in a subset of occupations that tend to employ many immigrants already. Consequently, it is earlier immigrants who face the greatest increase in competitive pressure.

quote:

Economists generally agree that the effects of immigration on the U.S. economy are broadly positive. Immigrants, whether high- or low-skilled, legal or illegal, are unlikely to replace native-born workers or reduce their wages over the long-term, though they may cause some short-term dislocations in labor markets. Indeed, the experience of the last few decades suggests that immigration may actually have significant long-term benefits for the native-born, pushing them into higher-paying occupations and raising the overall pace of innovation and productivity growth. Moreover, as baby boomers have begun moving into retirement in advanced economies around the world, immigration is helping to keep America comparatively young and reducing the burden of financing retirement benefits for a growing elderly population. While natives bear some upfront costs for the provision of public services to immigrants and their families, the evidence suggests a net positive return on the investment over the long term.

quote:

Ya, fair enough. I mean if you are a white suburbanite and you were not one of the 70m Americans who voted for Obama in 2008 (I managed to convince my NASCAR watching, bow hunting uncle in suburban Davenport Iowa to vote Obama in 2008 and I've seen pictures of him on facebook wearing a MAGA hat, although he won't say if he went Trump yet ), there is probably not much of a chance to reach you. Still, don't discount the power of the much maligned American Dream. It is what gets a lot of the working class people we need up in morning.

readingatwork posted:

You'll still be able to buy foreign goods. It just won't come from a US-owned company. Likewise foreign companies will still be able to buy American goods, just not from foreign-owned companies. Banning outsourcing doesn't mean ending all trade.

readingatwork posted:

Better than no jobs at all.