Backlash stirs in US against foreign worker visas

Just in case, some people have difficulties imagining poor Europeans in 1700, 1800, 1900s : here is an example in our time of street children ... in the UK.

<iframe width="640" height="390" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/3HVoIC-e3nI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Actually, just reading Dickens
( http://www.amazon.com/Oliver-Twist/...id=1404786837&sr=8-9&keywords=charles+dickens
)
should get the imagination going on that poverty certainly existed in Europe as well, and these people would be sent to the colonies when the wealthy were fed up with the sight of poors.
 
Curious how this topic might relate to Fed policy or broader government policy. That is, some economists seem concerned about wage growth, the strength of the consumer, and the hollowing of the middle class. Should the government be doing more to encourage wage growth? Or, put another way, what is the government doing to suppress wage growth, and should it be doing less of that?

Clearly, importing workers is and has been deflationary. As part of the tech workforce, I can say that my salary has just about matched inflation since 2000 (early in my career). This is in spite of achieving a masters degree and moving beyond an apprentice level. I know there are a lot of people in worse off shape. I consider myself lucky, and I am certainly not planning to match inflation over the back half of my career.

-lf
 
To understand public policies, one might want to understand how those who make these policies think, their background as well.
If they view inequality as something due to piped dices, but believe their country should be meritocratic, then these policymakers might want to create mechanism to level the playing field.
But if for instance they view existing inequality as not due to any unfairness but due to people degree of laziness, then these policymakers might not have any incentives to change things.
 
5 years of QE and ZIRP. The US on average has had about 2% GDP since 2009.
Data since WWII shows that 3.3% GDP Y/Y is required for stable employment.
Year/year 2% GDP growth has been accompanied with a 10% increase in unemployment. (Does not seem to agree with US 9ish to 6ish % drop.)

I dont think wages will increase in a low growth environment beyond the 2-3%
COLA type wage increases that seem to be common for the middle class.
The last time the employer wasnt in the drivers seat and there was wage pressure was 1999, short lived as that was.
 
traderslair said:
I'm sorry, but if there's one thing you guys can do is at least respect native americans. Not immigrants, give me a freaking break. What's next, winning the world cup soccer?
More...
On this subject you're a complete fool. Here's some knowledge you're clearly too lazy to get for yourself:

Immigrant - a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence.

I've never migrated anywhere. Neither have most Americans. Ergo we are not immigrants. Nothing about ancestry has anything to do with immigration status, it is personal history that determines immigration status.

Overall you appear to be challenging the legitimacy of the USA as a nation. Guess who gives less than a flying fuck about that.
 
kut2k2 said:
On this subject you're a complete fool. Here's some knowledge you're clearly too lazy to get for yourself:

Immigrant - a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence.

I've never migrated anywhere. Neither have most Americans. Ergo we are not immigrants. Nothing about ancestry has anything to do with immigration status, it is personal history that determines immigration status.

Overall you appear to be challenging the legitimacy of the USA as a nation. Guess who gives less than a flying fuck about that.
More...

I have visited quiet a few countries where there are more people decendants of immigrants than "natives". It is always a good thing to recognise and RESPECT the natives ( at least the people who were there before your ancestors wave of immigration). And remembering why/how your ancestors immigrated, and the reasons for the immigration does help develop respect for the natives.
A "colonial" mentality that says I am here as the descendent of a "conqueror" is not a good thing, because it means you have a lot of psychological junk ( arrogance, inability to recognise ancestor's crimes of murder/genocide and the guilt that goes with it, etc...) and have not yet worked on that.



Feel free to criticise.
 
Also, by learning to respect the "natives", you might come to learn that your ancestors were able to benefit ( ample natural resources, fertile untouched land,...) because may be the native had developed a system of ecological development/preservation. You must know that some former colonial countries
are suffering from draugh and lack of water - unseen before because the native knew how to respect their land and environmenty, not just suck it dry.
And may be you will come to realise that your ancestors were just sucking up natural resouces and not building it up.

Just broadening the mind. :)
 
smallStops said:
I have visited quiet a few countries where there are more people decendants of immigrants than "natives". It is always a good thing to recognise and RESPECT the natives ( at least the people who were there before your ancestors wave of immigration). And remembering why/how your ancestors immigrated, and the reasons for the immigration does help develop respect for the natives.
A "colonial" mentality that says I am here as the descendent of a "conqueror" is not a good thing, because it means you have a lot of psychological junk ( arrogance, inability to recognise ancestor's crimes of murder/genocide and the guilt that goes with it, etc...) and have not yet worked on that.



Feel free to criticise.
More...
Show me where I disrespected Native Americans,. This sidetrack is silly. The USA is long recognized worldwide as a legitimate nation, our sordid past notwithstanding. So what exactly is your point?
 
kut2k2 said:
Showw me where I disrespected Native Americans,. This sidetrack is silly. The USA is long recognized worldwide as a legitimate nation, our sordid past notwithstanding. So what exactly is your point?
More...

The point is : you are still an immigrant. Just like the one who arrived recently.
The true owners are still the Native Americans. You are just a GUEST ( unwanted from Native American point of view) and will always be, exactly like the more recent immigrants.
Now if the Native Americans, the "native", like in some rare countries, were to stipulate themselves,
not you or your ancestors that you are part owner of the place, then it is another story.
But as far as the US is concerned: you are a GUEST.

Disclaimer : I do visit the US, but never lived there as I do not like the under current of violence in the culture.
 
smallStops said:
The point is : you are still an immigrant. Just like the one who arrived recently.
The true owners are still the Native Americans. You are just a GUEST ( unwanted from Native American point of view) and will always be, exactly like the more recent immigrants.
Now if the Native Americans, the "native", like in some rare countries, were to stipulate themselves,
not you or your ancestors that you are part owner of the place, then it is another story.
But as far as the US is concerned: you are a GUEST.

Disclaimer : I do visit the US, but never lived there as I do not like the under current of violence in the culture.
More...
No point in arguing with the willfully ignorant, so I'll just state a few facts and drop this subject.

You clearly don't know the meaning of immigrant, despite being handed it on a platter.

This is what activists with an agenda do: pervert the meaning of commonly accepted words to push their own ideology regardless of the facts.

Nothing to be gained from arguing with that sort, their minds are set in concrete.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top