MY EVIDENCE IS NO LESS COMPELLING THAN "PEOPLE ARE LIVING" AND IF THEY AREN'T, THEY MUST BE STUPID.

1/23/2006 4:17:38 PM

Furthermore, some people are living a lot better than others. How are they doing this? They're controlling the means of production and paying employees as little as possible.

And how can you trust the concept of wages when there are so many illegal employees working for substantially less than a legal one can afford to? Doesn't that unnaturally drive wages down?

[Edited on January 23, 2006 at 4:18 PM. Reason : sss]

Also, abonorio, you seem to have gotten the idea that I'm against the free market and support regulating it at all levels. This is not the case. What I do not support is blind worship of the free market. I will not happily follow the free market wherever it may lead. You feel me?

[Edited on January 23, 2006 at 4:24 PM. Reason : sss]

1/23/2006 4:18:02 PM

Quote :

" And how can you trust the concept of wages when there are so many illegal employees working for substantially less than a legal one can afford to? Doesn't that unnaturally drive wages down?"

Because it's not. It's driving wages to the levels of equilibrium. Some jobs aren't worth minimum wage (goverment intervention). When it comes down to being able to pay the minimum wage and not being able to afford the means of production, you eliminate jobs.

Back when movie theaters were all the rage, they had ushers. THey were usually kids doing the work (high school). WHen the minimum wage got to a level that a theater could no longer justify paying an usher, it axed the jobs. That's what will happen if you blindly raise the minimum wage. You earn what you're worth. I'm sorry, some people aren't worth higher wages and thus should be making the minimum of what a company is allowed to pay.

But I am a worshipper of the free market and I'm proud

Quote :

"You feel me?"

PM me

1/23/2006 4:33:20 PM

Quote :

"It's driving wages to the levels of equilibrium."

Many illegal laborers work two to three jobs a day. They live in cheap 2-bedroom apartments with 4-16 other people. This lifestyle is how they can afford to work for what is almost nothing in America. Should Americans be expected to make less money just because businesses save a lot of loot through illegal labor?

1/23/2006 4:50:23 PM

No, it means getting different jobs than picking cabbage. And if there is a need for cabbage pickers and americans won't work for 2.00 an hour, guess what, the farmer raises the rate to the level that there are willing humans to do it.

1/23/2006 4:51:40 PM

^No, the farm hires illegal labor. Right?

1/23/2006 4:54:11 PM

Quote :

"And if there is a need for cabbage pickers and americans won't work for 2.00 an hour"

Yes, if there wasn't enough illegal labor, then that's what would happen. Supply and demand.

1/23/2006 4:54:53 PM

^THE FREE MARKET OPERATES UNDER THE ASSUMPTION THAT ILLEGAL LABOR DOES NOT EXIST.

?

You're not hearing me, I don't think.

Illegal labor unnaturally lowers wages. Illegals are willing to work and live in crappy conditions for a couple bucks an hour. They are willing to do this because that couple bucks can be sent home where it is worth more than it is here. The presence of this type of labor lowers wages for everyone, including legal American citizens. So...how can you find an equilibrium under these conditions?

[Edited on January 23, 2006 at 5:01 PM. Reason : sss]

1/23/2006 4:56:16 PM

No it doesn't, a truly free market doesn't discriminate against you based on the color of your skin. It views you as labor and you have a price and that price is dictated by the laws of supply and demand.

The market isn't racist.

1/23/2006 4:58:02 PM

Yep, so many people just don't get it. If there were no illegals to pick the cabbage for $2 an hour, then the farmers would pay the wage necessary to get an american to perform the hard labor ($20+ an hour in good weather) or they will learn to harvest their cabbage without hard labor (a teenager will drive an air-conditioned tractor for as little as $8 an hour)

1/23/2006 4:59:22 PM

^ and if that were the case, then we wouldn't have cabbage anymore in the same way that we don't have theater ushers.

1/23/2006 5:00:13 PM

Illegal labor unnaturally lowers wages. Illegals are willing to work and live in crappy conditions for a couple bucks an hour. They are willing to do this because that couple bucks can be sent home where it is worth more than it is here. The presence of this type of labor lowers wages for everyone, including legal American citizens. So...how can you find an equilibrium under these conditions?

^See, abonorio, what you said about not having cabbage, I think, is wrong. Employers, owners, capitalists would have to man up and pay the higher wage. They won't get as fat, but the employees won't be starving either.

[Edited on January 23, 2006 at 5:04 PM. Reason : sss]

1/23/2006 5:03:22 PM

Quote :

"Illegal labor unnaturally lowers wages."

Uh, no. Preventing labor from coming here is what's unnatural.

1/23/2006 5:06:57 PM

^I agree.

If these people were legal employees, as they should be, we would not have such a problem with the wage issue that I'm talking about.

1/23/2006 5:08:42 PM

Quote :

"The presence of this type of labor lowers wages for everyone, including legal American citizens. So...how can you find an equilibrium under these conditions? "

No, illegal labor makes everything CHEAPER because food, a necessity, is cheaper, which illegals are harvesting. That actually makes wages higher because you're spending less on what is necessary. Don't you see?

1/23/2006 5:09:04 PM

I see. That's interesting.

Perhaps we should move on to what GoldenViper touched on, and I'll include your last statement in my thoughts...

If the presence of illegal labor, like you said, makes everything cheaper, then what are we doing? How is our economy functioning? They come here, live under horrible conditions, work 16 hours a day every day, work under dangerous conditions, and then they are paid almost nothing. We benefit because everything is cheaper. That sounds kind of like a slave economy to me, playa.

That's why I believe they should be legal employees who pay taxes, have rights to unions, etc...

[Edited on January 23, 2006 at 5:16 PM. Reason : sss]

1/23/2006 5:15:52 PM

Quote :

"^ and if that were the case, then we wouldn't have cabbage anymore in the same way that we don't have theater ushers."

Eh? Ushers were not necessary to operating a movie theater. In fact, we have far more movie theaters today than back then. The elimination of Ushers was not debilitating, just as eliminating $2 mexican labor would not be for cabbage production. Farmers will figure out how to harvest their cabbage without cheap labor (mechanization) or simply bite the bullet and pay higher wages (with the resultant higher price for cabbage).

My point is that it doesn't matter. Cheap labor is NOT NECESSARY for the US economy, we can easily adapt either way. Immigration is an unquestionable benefit, but not for economic reasons. I wish everyone would stop pretending it was the main reason when it is in fact not a reason at all. And illegal immigration is a crime, every single one of them should be a legal immigrant.

^ BTW, no one should EVER have a RIGHT to unionize. Such a concept as a "right to unionize" revokes my "right NOT to unionize"

[Edited on January 23, 2006 at 5:40 PM. Reason : ^]

1/23/2006 5:38:15 PM

Quote :

"Cheap labor is NOT NECESSARY for the US economy, we can easily adapt either way. Immigration is an unquestionable benefit, but not for economic reasons. I wish everyone would stop pretending it was the main reason when it is in fact not a reason at all. And illegal immigration is a crime, every single one of them should be a legal immigrant."

I love it when smart, informed people are able to express my frustrated thoughts so eloquently.

And, Lonesnark, I'll be sure to watch my language when I talk about unions. Thanks!

1/23/2006 6:18:56 PM

Loneshark, your opinion doesn't make sense. What do you mean it's not a necessity? Of course it's not. But you're acting like illiminating migrant illegal workers will cause no disrupt in the economy. When poor folks notice a dollar raise in the price of produce, they sure will think you're wrong. What I'm saying is that migrant work is good for both mexico and the united states. They're making much more than they would have in the mother land and we're benefiting with cheaper produce. Even Vicente Fox said that "Mexicans are doing things that not even blacks in America would do." No one wants these jobs that they're doing. If they're willing to work, why not let them? There is no crime in doing that. If you give them all the rights of the American citizen (of which they are not), then you will essentially remove the advantage that we have to let them work here. Sure pay them $10 an hour. Fuck the poor people striving to make ends meet.

And I also have negative feelings about unions. But that's another debate.

1/23/2006 10:04:19 PM

Quote :

"Even Vicente Fox said that "Mexicans are doing things that not even blacks in America would do." No one wants these jobs that they're doing."

So what? What is it about produce harvest that makes you believe "back-breaking manual labor" is the only way to do it? I bet someone has figured out a clever way to harvest the produce using machines, yet the cheap mexican labor prices them out of the market. The price of produce, as a result, would not double, merely go up 10 to 20%.

I would point you to the history of Germany and Japan in the 1970s. Germany encouraged immigration from albania, I believe, in search of cheap labor to feel the jobs that German's refused to perform anymore, while Japan did nothing. As of 1990, economists agreed: while Germany was stuck with an underclass of albanians, the Japanese just built robots.

Quote :

"If you give them all the rights of the American citizen (of which they are not), then you will essentially remove the advantage that we have to let them work here. Sure pay them $10 an hour. Fuck the poor people striving to make ends meet."

Economics is not a zero-sum game. Higher wages for Mexicans does not automatically equate to higher prices. Yes, the price would probably rise some, but not go up five fold (assuming we maintain the $2 vs $10 analogy) because farmers will shift to higher capital investment in machines and mechanization to combat the increased wage. For example, if wages go up five-fold, yet we manage to increase labor productivity four fold, prices need only rise 20%.

That said, why do you feel America's poor are owed cheap produce, at the expense of mexican laborers? Might your argument against harming america's poor work for any work-force, from the town baker to the workers in a ford motorplant? Should we pass wage caps?

[Edited on January 23, 2006 at 11:10 PM. Reason : .,.]

1/23/2006 11:05:25 PM

^ Loneshark, in the history of message boards, I don't think anyone has done what I'm about to do.

I think you may have a very valid point. It has its merits. If you could substitute that foreign labor with capital and not more domestic labor, you may be able to offset that price or even drive down the price of produce. I'd still have to mull that, but you're point is perfectly valid.

Don't know how we got on this tangent from schools... but to reopen that debate...

SCHOOLS SHOULD BE PRIVATIZED AND OPENED TO THE LAWS OF THE MARKET

1/24/2006 10:29:22 AM

I don't know what you guys are talking about. I hate it when shit gets too deep for me. I know something isn't right, but I can't even begin to propose a way to change things.

Last night, I realized that politics/government are impotent vehicles for social change. My concerns lie outside the reach of the government, I suppose.

And oh yeah, privatizing schools is a bad idea.

1/24/2006 11:38:11 AM

^^ woot woot

1/24/2006 4:10:52 PM