Immigrants take the jobs American's don't want..

[yella_dawg]

When I was in high school, I made a pretty decent amount of spending money doing odd jobs, hauling hay and firewood, unloading produce, and so on. I got a reputation around my small town as someone available and dependable who would do a job and could find helpers if needed.

Fast forward to today. Another not quite so small town, and those odd jobs go to illegals who congregate in the parking lot of a convenience store a few blocks from my house. When I was in high school, I wanted those jobs. I hunted for them and I even paid finders fees a few times.

Right now, I'm unemployed and I'd love to get a couple of odd jobs a week. Years ago, when I worked in the oilfield, those odd jobs fed my kids when oil dropped below $20 a barrel and all the service companies closed up shop. But I don't fit in down at the Stop and Go.

Why does no one call them on these lies?

[coloradodem2005]

1. True and false.

Most people don't want those kinds of jobs. Though, with the economy the way it is, there may not be much choice.

[yella_dawg]

7. Is it true that no one wants the jobs?

Or is it that no one wants the jobs at the pay scale offered? I can see that seasonal agricultural jobs might go hunting. You have to be desperate to take a job that will last weeks or a few months at best, leaving you hanging twice a year.

Someone mentioned welders. Twenty years ago, people were lining up for welding jobs that would train. A good welder made damn good money. (Given the heat and hard work it was worth it.) So now they pay welders eight bucks an hour? Why the change?

I don't buy the "don't want the jobs" line. Unless you add in "and get paid a pittance".

[coloradodem2005]

9. Don't want them at the pay scale that they are offered.

n/t

[yella_dawg]

11. If that's the case,

then the illegals are diluting wages. Many or most illegal workers don't really live on our economy. Locals do. That puts them at a real disadvantage in the job market. Many of the illegals live in what amounts to a barracks with communal kitchens and transportation. A citizen raising a family under such conditions would get called down by CPS.

Why does nobody care about this?

[jwirr]

16. Meat packing plants are

another area where immigrants (often illegal) have taken over. My family have worked in that area for generations, not anymore. They now hire cheaper labor and use them part-time, temporary so they do not have to pay benefits.

[raccoon]

22. Amen to that

'I don't buy the "don't want the jobs" line. Unless you add in "and get paid a pittance".'

I think so too. I think Americans would take jobs, especially in construction, if they got paid more than a pittance.

Around here, there are lots of Mexicans (and Central Americans) working in housing and road construction.

[wideopen]

2. I find this to be true

I'm in KY, tobacco farmers CANNOT find the workers to harvest locally. Mexicans now do 90% of the harvesting around here. I have a immigration lawyer call me regularly to see if I have any jobs available for immigrants but they can only be hired if there is not a citizen that wants the job. This is a tough issue with many sides,I'm not sure what is fair.

[bonito]

3. they are willing to work for less

so thats where the work is going. seen it first hand in housing construction.

[wideopen]

5. I'm in construction also...

Most framing crews and drywallers are all mexican. Roofers too.

[yella_dawg]

8. Roofing is another trade that had people lining up for a job

twenty years ago. If you'd train, you were swamped with applicants. It was hard, miserable work, and you didn't get paid on rainy days. So the pay scale was good. What has changed in 20 years?

[Igel]

4. When I was in Oregon it was mostly migratory labor, mostly

Mexican, that picked berries. The old timers said that's what they used to do for summer jobs and before/after school, and the kids were incredulous--get dirty? sweat in the sun? Berries start coming in about when school ends in the spring, perfect timing.

My roomie at the time told off the kids but good. He had worked the last two years of high school and during summers moving irrigation lines in potato fields. Again, the school calendar fit in nicely--summer break coincided with the dry season. But he would have to be in the fields by 4:30 or 5 am to get his work done and then get to school.

Kids at my high school worked crab pots and lines, some helped their fathers, commercial fishermen.

None of that for them Eugene city kids.

[yella_dawg]

10. I'll buy that the kids in new Mustangs and designer jeans won't work crops

But what about the kids that are saving nickles and dimes to buy a car? They're still out there aren't they? Not every parent at the high school on parent/teacher's night can afford a car and insurance and prom outfits. I'm betting some of those kids would work if they could. Is that wrong?

[Igel]

12. Yeah, but I don't think they want agricultural jobs.

I mean, some kids probably got a kick out of spending their afternoons, weekends, and summers on the Chesapeake Bay.

But most would just as soon just get their allowances, but work in grocery stores and burger joints is probably a lot cooler than mucking about in fields getting sunburned. Remember, this was small city with pretensions to grandeur set in a very agriculture-based valley, so farmer kids were looked down at.

Kids in the country ... bailing hay's probably fine by them. Different set of peer pressures.

[jwirr]

17. In our area many of the employees

at the restaurants are older women and men. They are working to pay into social security or to make ends meet.

[this_side_up]

6. I don't know what the answer is but

I think the entire world needs to be on birth control
pills and condoms for double protection. Otherwise,
all aspects of life will only worsen.

Here, illegal aliens have taken the welding jobs
at a local company. From what I've read in the paper,
they are also going to welding school and it's
paid for by the feds.

One guy said he thinks maybe he wants to go home when he
is done with school.

[2Design]

13. those jobs don't pay much more than they did when you were in

high school

immigrants are given housing and food for many of these 'not wanted' jobs

[Strelnikov_]

14. Labor Black Market

All the current immigration policy of this country does is create a black market for labor, exploiting those who are here illegally, and driving down the wages and working conditions for legal residents.

Uncontrolled immigrant labor fills a void that it perpetuates, low wages that make the jobs undesirable due to an oversupply of labor, the classic supply/demand relationship.

As an example, meatpacking jobs (in the midwest) paid a middle class wage ($20/hr+ in 2000 $) in the 70's. These jobs provided good health care and retirement benefits because they were unionized. As was related by a worker from this era, the social contract was that it was hard, dangerous work that left most workers crippled when they retired, and the compensation was commensurate.

Over the 70's and 80's non-union plants were opened, and the unionized plants closed or the unions busted. As compensation was much lower at the non-union plants, U.S. citizens abandoned the industry, and the labor void was filled with immigrants. Since the supply of this labor is virtually unlimited, compensation and workplace safety has plummeted.

The 70's era worker, in the interview I heard, indicated that there would be no problem attracting U.S. citizens to the industry if compensation and workplace conditions were similar to the 70's.


Some thoughts on immigration policy from John Sayles which sums up my feelings on this issue.

John Sayles
From:A People's Democratic Platform
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20040802&s=forum

"The Democratic platform should call for an end to the hypocrisy of our immigration policy. Our current policy, an enormously expensive cat-and-mouse game, most notably on our southern border, calls on the INS to enforce immigration laws that are openly expected to be ignored by countless US industries and private employers. Some sort of regulated guest-worker program is needed.

Once it is in place, if immigrants continue to enter the country illegally and can't find work, word will filter back and the numbers will decrease dramatically. While in our country, however, those guest workers need to be protected from exploitation--to be assured they will be paid for their work, that their working conditions will meet state and federal safety standards and that they will receive no less than the federally mandated minimum wage (which needs to be raised).

Employers would be required to withhold some percentage (perhaps the equivalent of federal taxes and Social Security) from wages to help defray the costs of the program. Penalties for hiring foreign workers outside of the program would be high enough (and sufficiently enforced) to end the black market in labor that is thriving now.

Protecting all workers in this country is an important first step toward the amendment or abolition of NAFTA and the protection of workers throughout the world."

[raccoon]

21. That's horrible, about the meatpacking jobs

"As an example, meatpacking jobs (in the midwest) paid a middle class wage .... most workers crippled when they retired...


Omigod, that's horrible. SO much for the "virtue" of "hard work."

I am aware that this sort of thing is still happening a lot now, RSI and other crippling injuries people develop just because they have to get out and make a living.

[yella_dawg]

15. Post 13 & 14 validate my conclusion based on empirical evidence.

The US standard of living, exaggerated by petrodollar induced "affluence", has attracted flood of workers who "live" outside our economy. The "Wal-Mart" effect of continually trimming cost to lower prices and maximize profits has effectively disabled our economy.

28erl pointed out that unskilled labor is still paid `70's wages. loindelrio gave an example of skilled labor that has regressed to pre-union conditions, if not pre-union wages (which is likely if 1920's wages were examined in 2005 dollars). What is the benefit of this to employers? Is it an out-of-control cycle that is now bleeding out our economy? Using modern equipment, generous wages and benefits might raise meat prices 10 to 15 cents a pound, if that much. Modern workers in automated plants are incredibly productive. Given basic supply/demand curves, I doubt that price hike would have any significant negative effect on profits, while the more affluent workers would undoubtedly have a positive effect on profits.

What I see is a situation where employers are willing to go to any length to cut costs, as long as it doesn't affect the wages of the cost cutters. In doing so, they are indirectly sabotaging their customer base. The illegal worker problem is adding fuel to the fire, but I don't see it as a root cause. The situation has been accelerating since the early seventies, and is now self-sustaining.

The wage earner, in spite of effective wage growth, seems to be worse off than in the sixties and seventies. The 20k a year I brought home in 1975 supported a family in reasonable comfort. 60k as a single parent in 2000 left me budgeting carefully (granted, a chunk of disposable income went to savings). I didn't want my youngest teenager working a regular job (he was struggling in school). The odd jobs that kept me in pocket money as a teen don't exist. He would have happily taken one. I know educated two income couples who struggle.

I'm trying to understand the changes. Is it that we've come to struggle to live above our means, as a society? Has the social support net that invisibly bore part of the burden been weakened? Whatever it is, the numbers look rosy, but the reality is bleak, and becoming more so.

[jwirr]

18. I am not sure what you mean by social support net

but I can tell you from experience that when they cut out the "welfare" programs for the poor they did weaken the link between working and making a living. Before newtie's reform a person on welfare could take a job at one of those low paying places and the welfare would subsidize the income and pay for medical care for the worker and their family. Today that is cut off way too soon after a client starts to work. Both the employee and employer are hurt by the new reform because they now need a living wage and medical benefits from their employer to make ends meet. When a job fails to reach that goal then very few people want to take that job. Businesses seldom realize that they received any benefit from welfare. Yet they had a good supply of workers for low income jobs and their workers were healthy because they had medical care.

It is not just welfare reform that causes this need though. It is new work policies, such as part-time workers, temporary work both designed to cut down on benefit costs. It is also the relaxation of safety rules that make jobs much more dangerous which turns workers away.

[Jim__]

19. when I lived in Oregon they had a crackdown on illegal immigrants

This happend in the fall, apple-picking time. The orchard owners were all over TV complaining that Americans won't do the job of picking apples and the crop was going to rot on the trees. A couple of days later, the TV and radio were making public service announcements that no more apple-pickers were neeed. Americans came in droves for those apple-picking jobs.

[thegreatwildebeest]

20. They've always been here...

I would argue that somehow "the illegals" (a pejorative term at best) have always been here. Cesar Chavez, to my knowledge was organizing in the 60's, and worked the fields in the 30's and 40's himself. The bracero program was operated in the 50's to use immigrant labor as the basis of all agriculture, and we've been operating under a quasi legal/illegal situation ever since. And its not like most of them weren't here before Americans moved west and took the land from them (for a pittance under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo).

[Robert Oak]

23. not to the tune of 3M a year, 20M est. that's a massive burden

and also goes way way way beyond migrant field workers...

It's a huge burden to the US taxpayer, not only are they breaking
unions (meat packing), vunerable to gross exploitation, they also
work the system w/ fake social security numbers and are being
subsidized by the US taxpayer.

Even if a compromise for migrant field workers is done...
you cannot have that many operating not only in an underground
economy, but on top of it, working the US social services system
and Medicaid system when US citizens cannot get health care
and are getting wiped out in Medical bills.

[thegreatwildebeest]

24. How many exactly...

That is a silly assertion that is not supported by facts on the ground, and it ignores historical facts that tend to conflict with the very nice "Americans deserve work" race baiting that is unfortunatly prevelant amongst labor minded people that should target multinationals and not the workers at the bottom of the pile.

It's a huge burden to the US taxpayer, not only are they breaking
unions (meat packing), vunerable to gross exploitation, they also
work the system w/ fake social security numbers and are being
subsidized by the US taxpayer.

I would like to know the number of immigrant workers receiving adequate healthcare in this country, how many of them are receiving Social Security benefits, or whom otherwise are "gaming" a system, in a langauge most of them hardly understand.

The issue of union breaking is a nice example of dividing a class amongst racial/immigrant lines that union-busting corporations love to do. The response of many old-line unions to the immigrant issue, which is namely to be nativist and close minded, is what sealed their fate and led to the massive drop in union strength. You can't stop the immigrant issue, short of building a huge wall across the Mexican border, and even then, people will come in. Until Mexico has reasonable union rights and labor laws, as well as environmental laws, an issue we can force onto the multinationals through a variety of action, there will be no stop to the flood.


Even if a compromise for migrant field workers is done...
you cannot have that many operating not only in an underground
economy, but on top of it, working the US social services system
and Medicaid system when US citizens cannot get health care
and are getting wiped out in Medical bills.

If we earn health care and other rights by locking ourselves up in an ivory tower, nothing is changed, and its only a matter of time before the multinational barbarians break down the door. Multinationals and corporations work on a global scale and people are still only concerned about local fiefdoms.

[Robert Oak]

25. sorry, look at the unbiased studies on my site

you will see, absolutely this is a major burden and is not in any
way "like" the LEGAL immigration from 1700-1970.

There is no "race" going on here it's economics and also what is fair.

Examine the facts and argue exclusively on this, for I don't deal with
unfounded accusation not based on economics and effective immigration policy like any other nation.

[thegreatwildebeest]

26. Hilarious

There is no "race" going on here it's economics and also what is fair.

Fair for whom? Americans? You mean white middle class folk? Whose fair are you talking about?

Mind you, I loathe the free trade agreements set up across the world, and I hate multinationals more than most people, but the kind of solutions anti-immigration, anti-outsourcing people mostly provide are protectionist measure that creates an Ivory Tower effect that cannot sustain itself. The solution, of course, is a global front against the global corporations. Until that point comes, the multinationals are going to keep playing their massive shell game of moving work around and pitting country against country.

[Robert Oak]

27. clearly you are antagonistic and didn't bother to read the site

Fair for the nation state, which are American citizens.

Clearly you didn't even bother to look at the site.

That is not immigration it is ILLEGAL immigration, the two are NOT
the same.

there is nothing about protectionist anything on our site.

I do not appreciate having freeper comments made on my post when
clearly we are not protectionists, isolationist or racist.

how interesting your attacks without even a thought or a logical
comment on the issues, from a financial viewpoint or a partical one
when the world is a series of nation-states no matter how much multinationals plays each one off the other.

[thegreatwildebeest]

28. No, I did...

Clearly you didn't even bother to look at the site.

I did, and I found it to be essentially nativist, concerned only with this anomalous class of "Americans", as opposed to discussing global solutions to a global problem.


I do not appreciate having freeper comments made on my post when
clearly we are not protectionists, isolationist or racist.

Protectionism, isolationism, and nativism are not the sole purview of the right, now or in the past. Economic policies, which are decidedly against immigration, for various protections of the American worker (whomever or whatever that specific era is) can be safely classified as protectionism.

how interesting your attacks without even a thought or a logical
comment on the issues, from a financial viewpoint or a partical one
when the world is a series of nation-states no matter how much multinationals plays each one off the other.


You just hit the nail on the head. Nation-states don't matter. Nationalism, doesn't matter. Humanity, however, does. Governnment is not the best, nor even the most practical tool to implement a solution to a problem that expands across borders and transcends the laws of any one country.

[Robert Oak]

29. so if you're for Americans, you're a protectionist, freeper alert!

[idlisambar]

30. Nations still matter

There are certainly issues with globalization that call for international cooperation, but the nation-state is still the principle political unit around which our world is organized. It is legitimate to discuss how we as "Americans" should have our own discussion on how to handle the globalization challenges we face. In many ways the challenges we face are unique if not in kind at least of degree (take a look at the trade figures).

[thegreatwildebeest]

31. I agree...

Oh I agree. As the principle political unit, you cannot ignore what happens in your backyard, or what your government does. Most of the gross inequality is due to lack of oversight. My disagreement is whether or not what I view as very short sighted protectionist measures are the best way to stop the bleeding of jobs. My argument is that unless the whole world is lifted up, there will never be any real solid safety to the American working class. Even with strict protectionist measures, eventually ways will be found around them, politicians will be bought, and the poor of the world will again be used as a leveraging point against the workers of America. Until the world working class is equivalent with the American working class, or some reasonable approximation, the shell game will continue.

[Robert Oak]

32. Every nation state has laws

you are calling basic tools of any nation state "protectionist"

You have called me rude remarks and implications that are not
on any DU post or are they part of our group and on any of our
website.

This is a classic "free traitor" argument to blanketly call
someone "protectionist" who believes for example, that an underground
economy which feeds off of government subsidizies designed for it's citizens and paid for by taxes is a burden, far outweighing benefits...
as well as a classic technique to depress wages and avoid any nation state employment regulations, such as OSHA. By using the government
programs to subsidize this illegal population costs more than
hiring Americans at fair wages with employment and safety laws in check. It also enables, say a 3rd world country, to quickly rid itself of it's economic burdens by dumping the poor into the US and maintain their opressive economic system.

Explain on econonomic terms how government jobs should not be outsourced due to keeping
the taxpayer money w/in the nation state as well as due to security issues. Explain how this is "protectionist" and therefore "bad".
Explain how taking US taxpayer dollars and purchasing
services in other nations helps our economy or "makes the world a better place" to that single woman in N.C. who doesn't have a job...
or explain how our social security numbers now are available throughout the world, as well as our mortgages and our medical records.

It's also completely mythical to believe that the PNP of India
will magically meet the US's in less than 50 years barring a total
economic collapse of the US which brings it to the 3rd world economic GNP levels....and lifestyle I might point out.

If you wish to state a belief that a global union, environmental and worker rights and so on are the long term cure, say so, we have been supporting that for quite some time. But, while the nation states are individually
controlled by multinationals (ever heard of divide and conquer)
and the world isn't one big "happy place where we all share a coke,
sing and hold hands"...ignoring the nation states trade, deficit,
immigration poliicies, which the US is NOT "free" trade, it's giveaway trade, esp. with China. (look at Peg the Yuan to the actual China PNTR, which is a giveaway to China on intellectual property,
manadatory partnership with a state sponsored Chinese corporation,
DEMANDS hiring Chinese workers, giveaway of manufacturing expertise), one needs to focus on this nation state and AMERICANS!

Is this trade giveaway policy creating a new free mythical Chinese middle class of 1.3B that is now going to save the world from oppression? Doesn't look like it.

Is that helping the US nation state? Maybe in terms of eroding the US's economic position...which is backed up by statistics.

So, go call China racist since they want Chinese workers or call China protectionist for demanding the manufacturing giveaways to them...

But, outright antagonistic rude insults do nothing for these boards, nor do they do anything for the current economic state of the nation and getting something done about it.

[thegreatwildebeest]

33. ::Sigh::

This is a classic "free traitor" argument to blanketly call
someone "protectionist" who believes for example, that an underground
economy which feeds off of government subsidizies designed for it's citizens and paid for by taxes is a burden, far outweighing benefits...

I clearly and distinctly expressed my disdain for free-trade agreements in a previous post, as cited below.

Mind you, I loathe the free trade agreements set up across the world, and I hate multinationals more than most people,

How can that be construed as me being a "free traitor".

It also enables, say a 3rd world country, to quickly rid itself of it's economic burdens by dumping the poor into the US and maintain their opressive economic system.

Most, if not all, of the poor countries of the world are completely unable to systematically move immigrants into this country, save Mexico and other South American countries where we are connected by land. Even the number of illegal chinese immigrants is nowhere large enough to relieve the economic burden of a country of more 700 million poor people. Moreover, this ignores the many third world movements to retain economic and social justice, ones that are often destroyed by multinationals or US involvement (see the Zapatista movement, the Brazillian Landless Movement, the Aregentinian factory workers).

If you wish to state a belief that a global union, environmental and worker rights and so on are the long term cure, say so, we have been supporting that for quite some time.

Actually I did say so, again in a previous post, as cited below.

The solution, of course, is a global front against the global corporations.

But, while the nation states are individually
controlled by multinationals (ever heard of divide and conquer)

Again, I have already mentioned this before.

the multinationals are going to keep playing their massive shell game of moving work around and pitting country against country.


Explain on econonomic terms how government jobs should not be outsourced due to keeping
the taxpayer money w/in the nation state as well as due to security issues. Explain how this is "protectionist" and therefore "bad".
Explain how taking US taxpayer dollars and purchasing
services in other nations helps our economy or "makes the world a better place" to that single woman in N.C. who doesn't have a job...
or explain how our social security numbers now are available throughout the world, as well as our mortgages and our medical records.

American tax payers money should not be used for outsourcing promotion, or for any sort of "Free-trade" marauding done by mutlinationals. Privitization and outsourcing of public services is a bad thing. Public sector employees deserve a right to representatopn and fair wages, and should not be cut.

But your website mentions not only remedies such as these, but clearly re-orienting American trade policy to a protectionist slants, in order to preserve jobs at home. As I've said before, this sort of ivory tower thinking will not stop problems in America. 50 years ago when such things were in place, the world was just as poor as it is today. And the world will be just as poor after any protectionist measures are introduced. Global solidarity is whats needed. Organizing across countries would leave multinationals no worker to exploit and a fair system for all.

and the world isn't one big "happy place where we all share a coke,
sing and hold hands"...ignoring the nation states trade, deficit,
immigration poliicies, which the US is NOT "free" trade, it's giveaway trade, esp. with China. (look at Peg the Yuan to the actual China PNTR, which is a giveaway to China on intellectual property,
manadatory partnership with a state sponsored Chinese corporation,
DEMANDS hiring Chinese workers, giveaway of manufacturing expertise), one needs to focus on this nation state and AMERICANS!

Give away trade implies that the Chinese are better off, in the long run, with the trade situation as it currently. Simply put, there not, not anymore than Mexico was ten years ago after NAFTA. In the beginning of course, new factories were opened and work commenced, but that was until the cost of doing business rose too high, and the factories again packed up and moved to China. This will happen, yet again, to China, and so on down the line as long as there are economically poor countries to exploit.

Moreover, one ignores the massive mineral and natural resource abuse that has sustained American manufacturing of all stripes for years. A large chunk of natural resources that have gone into American manufacturing, for years, has been exploited or otherwise gotten for considerably unfair prices with third world countries that have no room to bargain, and a commodities market that devestates them. I do not consider a fair price for these things to be in anyway protectionist.


So, go call China racist since they want Chinese workers or call China protectionist for demanding the manufacturing giveaways to them...

Protectionism in general is a poor solution to economic problems. But fighting for fair resource and mineral prices (such has been done in latin america and Africa with oil) is not protectionism, but simply whats fair. Third world countries for years have had their natural resources exploited and abused to fuel western manufacturing and agriculture, from the banana republicas of south america, to the tea dynasty's of India.

Third world developing countries have been under a unfair economic system for hundreds of years, from colonialism to the the neo-liberal policies of multinationals. One that is obviously supported and maintained by the US, other governments, and multinationals. One that is again carried out on the ground by local elites, who care little for egalitarianism, or any sort of economic justice.



But, outright antagonistic rude insults do nothing for these boards, nor do they do anything for the current economic state of the nation and getting something done about it.

I have neither been rude or antagonistic, if by rude and atagonistic you mean disagreeing with your assertions, and calling a duck a duck. You are the one who has used such childish accusations such as "Freeper" and "free traitor", despite my clear antipathy for free trade deals and multinationals.

[Robert Oak]

34. end of responses

here you contradict your previous posts and accusations.

There is nothing on our site for "protectionist" stances.

I'm fairly tired of this for you seem to be trying to twist
our purpose for some reason not known. Now your arguments take
directly from many pointing out the delicacies of global trade
which are on our site as well as many of the economists listed on our site, yet are trying to imply the content on our site is magically
not this and is something else and lift our arguments by trying to make them your own.

Amazingly twisted.

Again, for anyone actually interested in discussing economics and trade,
OUR SITE HAS NO "PROTECTIONIST" "ivory tower" stances. In fact we
give information that isn't "corporate purchased" on economic theory
in order to obtain a fair trade policy, which is a fairly complex
system and currently completely biased by multinational corporations for short term profits and not much else.

The original argument that somehow we are racist for pointing out
the incredible government subsidizes and economic burdens by
this ongoing underground economy and ILLEGAL immigration for the American middle class...

well if that's a problem for you to be concerned about America and Americans...why are you on a board that is completely devoted to liberal American politics out of concern for the future of AMERICA?

[thegreatwildebeest]

36. Baseless

Now your arguments take
directly from many pointing out the delicacies of global trade
which are on our site as well as many of the economists listed on our site, yet are trying to imply the content on our site is magically
not this and is something else and lift our arguments by trying to make them your own.

Bull. You list Pat Buchanan and Lou Dobbs on your website, a paleo conservative and an openly anti-immigrant nativist. And I've been clear from the beginning and even went and cited my own prior posts against your baseless accusations.


well if that's a problem for you to be concerned about America and Americans...why are you on a board that is completely devoted to liberal American politics out of concern for the future of AMERICA?

Well my own personal politics run a bit more radical than the typical member on this board (anarchist till the bitter sweet end), so I guess I tend not to box myself in as merely just an American liberal. That said I'm on this board because progressives are the closest approximation in the standard political spectrum to myself. And don't you dare insinuate that I am somehow anti-American. You neither know me personally, or have paid attention to a damn thing I've said.

[idlisambar]

35. China is not Mexico

"Give away trade implies that the Chinese are better off, in the long run, with the trade situation as it currently. Simply put, there not, not anymore than Mexico was ten years ago after NAFTA. In the beginning of course, new factories were opened and work commenced, but that was until the cost of doing business rose too high, and the factories again packed up and moved to China. This will happen, yet again, to China, and so on down the line as long as there are economically poor countries to exploit."

I would bet that China's development path will better resemble Japan or Korea than Mexico. China is more or less following the neo-mercantilist East Asian model, constantly seeking to boost production capacity and technological capability. It is unlikely that China will be outpriced in labor-intensive manufacturing any time soon, but even so China is already making significant strides in developing capital-intensive manufacturing capabilities. Mexico, by contrast, cannot benefit as China does from its raw size and has more or less subscribed to neo-liberalism in its development -- a proven loser.

For now China is directing its energies to increasing its national economic power, with consumer welfare taking a back seat. Gradually, however, the buildup in wealth will reach more and more of the population just as it did in other East Asian developmental states.

[thegreatwildebeest]

37. True...

True. But like the asian tigers, and Japan before them, collapse and deep growing pains will result. Japan has been going on what, a decade plus recession that has led to serious and dramatic reforms of the whole financial sector and corporations. The LDP, which has been the defacto ruler for some 50 years, is increasingly seeing its might whittle more and more away. In as short as 10 years we will see a Japan that is rid of the often nepotistic and corrupt corporations that dominate it today.

Mexico on the other hand, has seen nothing like that. And thats basically the fault of its own ruling classes, who are seeing a state seething with armed rebellion and crime of rampant proportions. Until the day either a bloody revolution breaks out or they finally agree on significant land reform.

As for China, as I mentioned in another post on this board, the prospects of the 700 billion plus agricultural workers, whom are the absolutely lowest paid of the low, ever seeing the fruits of developments is slim. I don't think theres ENOUGH things to manufacture to even keep that many factories busy. Again, some sort of agricultural reform must be taken out. But I do agree that China's protectionist response on manufacturing has afforded them develoment Mexico hasn't seen. But it will not last I think.

[idlisambar]

40. A few notes

First, with respect to the situation in Japan, reports of collapse are highly exagerrated. The Japanese are still among the wealthiest people on Earth, and their distribution of material wealth also tends to be more evenly spread than in the United States and even western European nations. By many measures, including those of health and balance of trade Japan is doing very well, much better than the U.S. Japan's growth numbers have not been as impressive as they once were, but much of that is due to different measurement standards, particularly with respect to inflation, and much of the rest is due to demographics.

As for the "Asian tigers", in retrospect it is clear that the financial crisis of the late 90's was a mere hiccup in the larger scheme of things. The Asian tiger economies (Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong) are humming along quite nicely right now by whatever metric you want to use.

All things considered the Chinese leadership has ample reason to feel confident that the East Asian model will work just as well for them as it did for its neighbors, which is very well indeed. It remains to be seen what role environmental factors and resource constraints will play in hurting China's prospects of continued growth.

[spikesmom]

38. Hi Robert

Months ago I checked out your site and appreciate that i am not alone in my stance against outsourcing. I see middle -class America losing the shirts off our backs slowly and painfully to corporate ass-kickers who have no regard for "the worker". great job on the sites and posts- keep it up! people ,like me , are listenning. By the way, to everyone reading this entry, we can do something. We can stop buying goods or services from companies that outsource and letting them know why.

[Robert Oak]

41. hola Spikesmom, glad you're here on DU

we need to keep on protesting and doing what we can do.

We're outnumbered, out monied, out propaganda...but it has only been through the people, in mass, that any change has happened throughout
history so if enough people start standing up and taking action...
we might get back to some sort of democracy.

[fasttense]

44. Yeah they have always been here.

My grandmother and father were kicked out of California during the dust bowl years. They were picking fruit and the owners didn't want them Oakies, though dad told of numerous foreign born people picking fruit without a problem.

I think the difference now is that it is done on a grander scale. Wal-Mart and all the others hire illegals and the gov't turns a blind eye. Where before only some industries did it, now anyone who can get away with it does it.

[spikesmom]

39. We are being sold a bad bill of goods on outsourcing

Here is a list of senators that are working on the US/India Caucus to establish better investment opportunities, jobs, and H-1B programs for Indians (the India kind!)....These senators are selling out their constituents but I guess they don't care as long as their pockets get lined in $$$$$$$ http://www.usinpac.com/Opportunities.asp?SEC_ID=6

[spikesmom]

42. FBI OUTSOURCING AGENT JOBS!!!!

Hey Comrads ,
Check this out- this is so ridiculus!
March 10, 2005

FBI to Outsource Agents to India, China
Under pressure to produce more actionable intelligence, the Federal Bureau of Investigation has announced that it plans to layoff many of its agents and outsource their positions to countries including India, China and Vietnam. The move will enable the FBI to hire three times as many agents at a fraction of the wage that they would earn in the US.

Unemployed agents retraining for service sector jobs

By Cole Walters, staff reporter

WASHINGTON, DC—Last year Chad H. found what he thought was his dream job. The FBI cyber agent couldn’t have been happier with his work, a combination of high-tech intrigue, heart-pumping excitement and plenty of surveillance of teens downloading music files from the internet and other individuals allegedly violating copyright laws.

But last week Chad and hundreds of other FBI agents got the word that they were being laid off. Like thousands of other US employers, the FBI has discovered that firing employees here and outsourcing their positions to countries with lower wages and more relaxed labor standards can generate huge savings. “I’m disappointed. I won’t deny that,” Chad said. “But that seems to be the way that the economy works these days. First it was manufacturing jobs, then high tech, now special agents.”

Same spooks—half the cost
For fiscal year 2006, the FBI submitted a budget request totaling 31,475 positions (including 12,140 agents and 2,745 Intelligence Analysts) and $5.7 billion. The agency hasn’t yet said what percentage of those positions it proposes to outsource overseas, nor has it detailed how the jobs will be divided among the four main countries to which the jobs will be outsourced: India, Pakistan, China and Vietnam.

By laying off agents here and replacing them with workers in other countries, the FBI could save billions of dollars. Currently, special agents enter service as GS 10 employees on the government pay scale and can advance to the GS 13 grade level in field non-supervisory assignments. All special agents qualify for availability pay, which is an additional premium compensation for unscheduled duty equaling 25 percent of the agent's base salary.

Whose side are they on?
But not everyone thinks that replacing thousands of US born special agents with foreign nationals from India, Pakistan, China, and Vietnam is a great idea, despite the fact that the move will generate significant cost savings and enable the FBI to compete on a global stage. Some opponents question, for example, whether agents from other countries would feel the same compunction to uphold the major FBI priorities, including protecting the US from terrorism, fighting white collar crime and enforcing corruption?

“What about when we go to war with China and all of our special agents are Chinese?” says intelligence expert Charles G. Faherty, author of Red Star Rising: Up Against the Great Wall. “That could be a real problem.”

From Special Agent to Sales Associate
For former cyber agent Chad H., however, the possibility of war with China—and being sold-out by his Chinese replacement—is the last thing on his mind. He’s more concerned these days with earning a living. While he has more than a decade of experience in the computer industry, most of those jobs, like the special agent positions, have been shipped overseas.

Unfortunately, he doesn’t qualify for retraining through the federal Trade Adjustment Assistance Program (TAA/NAFTA), a program that benefits employees of companies that have been adversely affected by foreign competition but doesn’t apply to government agencies.

For now, says Chad, he’s taking things one day at a time. “It seems like almost every job these days you need to be able to use a computer terminal: cashier, pizza delivery. I’ve got a lot of skills. Hopefully I’ll be able to put them to use again soon.

If you are a resident of India, Pakistan, China or Vietnam and are interested in applying for a job with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, visit their website and apply today! https://www.fbijobs.com/

-----I got this from The Swift Report

[Robert Oak]

43. even though this is a joke, it's not far from the truth

Grover Norquist has written the "2nd term agenda" that literally
demands the federal government outsource itself.