2016 Election Thread

[TheLeviathan]

I'd be fine with that....but the immensely powerful public unions are never going to let that happen unfortunately.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I'd be fine with that....but the immensely powerful public unions are never going to let that happen unfortunately.

Unless we kill their and corporate and foreign interest's lobbying power.  It's very sad day when private interest--making so little of the population--can sway a republic built upon the ideas of democracy.   At what point do we not this happen?

[PseudoSABR]

 

There is some truth though, and it does need to be acknowledged. 

No, there's not, and no it doesn't.  The bitterness is real, but only because Marie Antoinette's cake has grown sour.    

 

As a son of a lower middle class family, I understand the frustration of working your ass off to earn what little you can over minimum wage (and never know your children and have enough time to be the human you are).   But those who fight for a higher minimum wage, also fight for you; those who oppose minimum wage also oppose a higher wage for you.  Wages stagnate not because of immigration, but because there is no market incentive for higher wages for low-skill jobs when poverty exists.  Immigration only hurts American labor when businesses hire immigrants--thus the problem is on a market condition that allows for what's best for the American public to be undercut.  

 

The notion that Trump supporters are getting screwed by the "underclass" just isn't true, and a belief that will only maintain such level screwedness.  

 

And we poor whites must eventually learn that the erosion of our privilege is an inevitability when what we seek is an equitable society. That we are on the butt-end of privilege does not mean that we don't actually have much to give and many more burdens to bear.   

[TheLeviathan]

 

Unless we kill their and corporate and foreign interest's lobbying power.  It's very sad day when private interest--making so little of the population--can sway a republic built upon the ideas of democracy.   At what point do we not this happen?

 

It's the one thing I agree with Bernie on.....but then he's gone out and taken a bunch of union money.  So I don't think this ever gets fixed.

[mikecgrimes]

Thank you for this union and minimum wage discussion so I could be reminded why I could never support Bernie Sanders despite one of the greatest political ads I have ever seen.  To review unions are not just bad but very bad for the economy, and minimum wages are meaningless (if not destructive) pandering.  To understand why pass a course in econ 101, and pay very close attention to anything related to price.

 

I should ad there is an economic argument for the opposing view, but nobody who panders has ever bothered to use it, probably because they don't actually believe it, but that's just speculation on my part.

[ashbury]

 

Thank you for this union and minimum wage discussion so I could be reminded why I could never support Bernie Sanders despite one of the greatest political ads I have ever seen.  To review unions are not just bad but very bad for the economy, and minimum wages are meaningless (if not destructive) pandering.  To understand why pass a course in econ 101, and pay very close attention to anything related to price.

 

I should ad there is an economic argument for the opposing view, but nobody who panders has ever bothered to use it, probably because they don't actually believe it, but that's just speculation on my part.

Econ 101 explains why an unfettered free-enterprise system results in Dickensian wages for a vast underclass. It does not say that a moral society must embrace this result.

[Willihammer]

Let's say Bernie is elected and jacks up the minimum wage to $15/hr nationally.

 

How might that impact outsourcing?

Illegal immigration?

[drjim]

 

Let's say Bernie is elected and jacks up the minimum wage to $15/hr nationally.

 

How might that impact outsourcing?

Illegal immigration?

 

More outsourcing, less immigration

[Willihammer]

 

More outsourcing, less immigration

Less immigration? How so

[drjim]

 

No, there's not, and no it doesn't.  The bitterness is real, but only because Marie Antoinette's cake has grown sour.    

 

As a son of a lower middle class family, I understand the frustration of working your ass off to earn what little you can over minimum wage (and never know your children and have enough time to be the human you are).   But those who fight for a higher minimum wage, also fight for you; those who oppose minimum wage also oppose a higher wage for you.  Wages stagnate not because of immigration, but because there is no market incentive for higher wages for low-skill jobs when poverty exists.  Immigration only hurts American labor when businesses hire immigrants--thus the problem is on a market condition that allows for what's best for the American public to be undercut.  

 

The notion that Trump supporters are getting screwed by the "underclass" just isn't true, and a belief that will only maintain such level screwedness.  

 

And we poor whites must eventually learn that the erosion of our privilege is an inevitability when what we seek is an equitable society. That we are on the butt-end of privilege does not mean that we don't actually have much to give and many more burdens to bear.   

 

I'm a son of lower middle class too, and I think evoking privilege here shows a lack of seriousness. This is fundamental economic issues - as in wages are stagnant and costs of previously attainable basics are increasing. People should absolutely not sit back and accept this as OK.

 

And immigration absolutely has an impact of the stagnation of wages. It is far from the only thing, and probably not even the primary thing, but it is the most tangible thing and the easiest to lash out at. Low wages remain when there is a large supply of labor available and willing to do work for said low wages. Immigration keeps that flow going - why do you think business minded Republicans are so big into immigration reform? And why do you think poverty stays so strong? Perhaps because we bring in significant numbers who are in poverty and who prevent the easiest way to climb out of poverty (high wages).

 

Raising minimum wage strikes me as very short sighted. At best a temporary fix to a more complicated and long term problem, and at worst the catalyst to accelerating a bad trend - by leading companies to adapt different business models.

[drjim]

 

Less immigration? How so

 

Fewer jobs on the low end. Immigration generally follows supply of jobs - which is why it slowed quite a bit the last decade.

 

There certainly might be more under the table and dark economy action, but I don't think that will increase immigration.

[Willihammer]

 

Fewer jobs on the low end. Immigration generally follows supply of jobs - which is why it slowed quite a bit the last decade.

 

There certainly might be more under the table and dark economy action, but I don't think that will increase immigration.

I have a hard time envisioning a scenario that doesn't exacerbate both trends. Some jobs can't be outsourced.

[drjim]

 

I have a hard time envisioning a scenario that doesn't exacerbate both trends. Some jobs can't be outsourced.

 

True, but if minimum wage is increased, it will lead to more native employment taking those positions - and actually might lead to more underemployed college graduates (those in grad school, stay at home parents, etc) re-entering the work force, making the available jobs that much more scarce.

[Willihammer]

 

True, but if minimum wage is increased, it will lead to more native employment taking those positions - and actually might lead to more underemployed college graduates (those in grad school, stay at home parents, etc) re-entering the work force, making the available jobs that much more scarce.

Why would any company, whose competitors have fired their native employees in favor of cheaper illegal labor, hire natives at $15/hr? There is an upward pressure on illegal immigration in that sense, no?

[drjim]

Why would any company, whose competitors have fired their native employees in favor of cheaper illegal labor, hire natives at $15/hr? There is an upward pressure on illegal immigration in that sense, no?

This is all theoretical of course, but higher wage would increase the quality of applicant for available job.

 

And it's not that natives were fired, just that jobs were filled with lower wage seekers.

 

I hope we aren't talking past each other. The likely outcome is an overall squeeze on lower skilled jobs, as they are outsourced (if possible), eliminated or replaced by technology as much as possible.

[Willihammer]

 

This is all theoretical of course, but higher wage would increase the quality of applicant for available job.

And it's not that natives were fired, just that jobs were filled with lower wage seekers.

I hope we aren't talking past each other. The likely outcome is an overall squeeze on lower skilled jobs, as they are outsourced (if possible), eliminated or replaced by technology as much as possible.

I think we agree that a min. wage hike would increase pressure on companies to find cheaper labor. You seem to think companies would relieve that pressure by outsourcing jobs. IMO outsourcing and illegal immigration seem like two sides of the same coin, and companies can relieve increasing labor costs either way, depending on what makes the most sense for them.

[drjim]

I think we agree that a min. wage hike would increase pressure on companies to find cheaper labor. You seem to think companies would relieve that pressure by outsourcing jobs. IMO outsourcing and illegal immigration seem like two sides of the same coin, and companies can relieve increasing labor costs either way, depending on what makes the most sense for them.

I don't disagree, but the benefit for illegal immigrants for businesses is that they will work at such a low wage. If that wage is increased to $15/hr that will (theoretically) lead to more people willing to work that job that wouldn't before at the lower wage illegal immigrants would.

 

Question would be if black market and under the table would pick up slack. While it certainly would to some extent, I still think overall it squeezes out the labor supply on the low end, leaving minimal demand for illegal immigrant labor.

[Willihammer]

 

I don't disagree, but the benefit for illegal immigrants for businesses is that they will work at such a low wage. If that wage is increased to $15/hr that will (theoretically) lead to more people willing to work that job that wouldn't before at the lower wage illegal immigrants would.

Question would be if black market and under the table would pick up slack. While it certainly would to some extent, I still think overall it squeezes out the labor supply on the low end, leaving minimal demand for illegal immigrant labor.

It sounds like you're saying one American who is willing to do unskilled labor at $15/hr, and not $7.25, is more productive than one and a half illegals who would do the same work at $10/hr. I disagree. Americans do not hustle any more than illegals. In fact the opposite is true, in my experience.

[PseudoSABR]

 

And immigration absolutely has an impact of the stagnation of wages. It is far from the only thing, and probably not even the primary thing, but it is the most tangible thing and the easiest to lash out at. Low wages remain when there is a large supply of labor available and willing to do work for said low wages. Immigration keeps that flow going - why do you think business minded Republicans are so big into immigration reform? And why do you think poverty stays so strong? Perhaps because we bring in significant numbers who are in poverty and who prevent the easiest way to climb out of poverty (high wages).

 

Raising minimum wage strikes me as very short sighted. At best a temporary fix to a more complicated and long term problem, and at worst the catalyst to accelerating a bad trend - by leading companies to adapt different business models.

I mean, do you think Trump's immigration policy would have any tangible effect on wages? Really?  Because that's what you seem to be suggesting.   Building a wall and deporting Muslims will have zero impact on wages for the lower white middle class folks.   That's why there's no legitimacy to their actual anger.    (This is not to suggest that Immigration isn't a problem, but it's problem that has no bearing on wages, it might change the price of fruit and Mexican food though).

 

The long term solution that people seem to desire for the wage problem is a market solution - don't hold your breath for that one.   Businesses DO need to adopt different models to adapt to the need for higher wages.  Some are already doing this - in what looks like a PR - which suggests there's plenty of room for our economy to survive higher wages for low skill workers.  That some businesses won't survive is the nature of capitalism, and where there's a niche another business should take its place.  Businesses will have a choice either make less profit, or find a way to run more efficiently.  

 

It'd be dandy if there was this long-term, self-sustainable solution to low wages, but there isn't.  It's something that needs to be regulated or it won't happen.  (If we could get closer to full-employment, the market might need to compete for low skill labor, but to get to full-employment we'd need some other form of regulation, as businesses owners benefit from our current system, not the one where they have to compete for labor.) 

[PseudoSABR]

 

IMO outsourcing and illegal immigration seem like two sides of the same coin, and companies can relieve increasing labor costs either way, depending on what makes the most sense for them.

Outsourcing and the hiring of illegal immigration should not be options for the American businesses that profit off our consumerism and legal protections.  A corporation is a public trust that should be revoked when it takes steps like these.   In fact, I'd be in favor of criminalizing such steps.  

 

The truth is and free-market proponents don't like to hear, but businesses could bear out higher minimum wages by paying those at the top less or by making less profit (for shame).  That businesses seem to base their success off growth rather than profit (largely because of the stock market) should not dictate how we evaluate our economic policy.  We need more business owners and corporations that can survive on mere profit, and we need to take away the incentive of unfettered (and unsustainable) growth.

 

 

[Hrbowski]

 

I mean, do you think Trump's immigration policy would have any tangible effect on wages? Really?  Because that's what you seem to be suggesting.   Building a wall and deporting Muslims will have zero impact on wages for the lower white middle class folks. 

You seem to be taking some liberty here. Trump has never said he will deport Muslims.

[PseudoSABR]

 

You seem to be taking some liberty here. Trump has never said he will deport Muslims.

Oh my bad.  Wouldn't want to suggest he's said anything crazy.

[drjim]

 

I mean, do you think Trump's immigration policy would have any tangible effect on wages? Really?  Because that's what you seem to be suggesting.   Building a wall and deporting Muslims will have zero impact on wages for the lower white middle class folks.   That's why there's no legitimacy to their actual anger.    (This is not to suggest that Immigration isn't a problem, but it's problem that has no bearing on wages, it might change the price of fruit and Mexican food though).

 

The long term solution that people seem to desire for the wage problem is a market solution - don't hold your breath for that one.   Businesses DO need to adopt different models to adapt to the need for higher wages.  Some are already doing this - in what looks like a PR - which suggests there's plenty of room for our economy to survive higher wages for low skill workers.  That some businesses won't survive is the nature of capitalism, and where there's a niche another business should take its place.  Businesses will have a choice either make less profit, or find a way to run more efficiently.  

 

It'd be dandy if there was this long-term, self-sustainable solution to low wages, but there isn't.  It's something that needs to be regulated or it won't happen.  (If we could get closer to full-employment, the market might need to compete for low skill labor, but to get to full-employment we'd need some other form of regulation, as businesses owners benefit from our current system, not the one where they have to compete for labor.) 

 

Of course I don't think Trump's policies would do anything to help this situation. I don't think he has a policy solution to anything. But he can certainly tap into an emotional feeling that is not going away.

 

I still would push back if you don't think cutting off an inflow of unskilled workers will have no impact on the wages of low skilled workers currently in the country going forward. I do think the tradeoff is worth it, if there is a more comprehensive system around it.

 

I also agree that there is a market solution, but I am also skeptical it will be instituted. And sorry, government regulation is not the answer, companies with the resources will include enough exemptions and workarounds to make it useless on a large scale.

 

The true solution is a more enlightened business class that, for self interest (if nothing else), sees the benefit of paying their workers a higher wage, and that stability in the middle to lower middle class is preferable to the current outcome. As you said, some of this is happening on a smaller scale, but it will also take better consumers, perhaps willing to pay higher prices for a more equitable society too.

[drjim]

 

It sounds like you're saying one American who is willing to do unskilled labor at $15/hr, and not $7.25, is more productive than one and a half illegals who would do the same work at $10/hr. I disagree. Americans do not hustle any more than illegals. In fact the opposite is true, in my experience.

 

Where does the $10/hr come from? That would be below the new minimum wage. I'm assuming no black market here on the ownership side.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

No, there's not, and no it doesn't.  The bitterness is real, but only because Marie Antoinette's cake has grown sour.    

 

As a son of a lower middle class family, I understand the frustration of working your ass off to earn what little you can over minimum wage (and never know your children and have enough time to be the human you are).   But those who fight for a higher minimum wage, also fight for you; those who oppose minimum wage also oppose a higher wage for you.  Wages stagnate not because of immigration, but because there is no market incentive for higher wages for low-skill jobs when poverty exists.  Immigration only hurts American labor when businesses hire immigrants--thus the problem is on a market condition that allows for what's best for the American public to be undercut.  

 

The notion that Trump supporters are getting screwed by the "underclass" just isn't true, and a belief that will only maintain such level screwedness.  

 

And we poor whites must eventually learn that the erosion of our privilege is an inevitability when what we seek is an equitable society. That we are on the butt-end of privilege does not mean that we don't actually have much to give and many more burdens to bear.   

 

I think what's being missed from this conversation is that there was a time when a blue collar salary could actually pay the bills.  Unfortunately, there's an economic system in place that has had a hidden inflation tax for nearly a 100 years now.  Those said wages haven't increased fast enough to make up for it and it's left everyone fighting with each other over the scraps.  I'm not sure unions are fighting for a higher wage for me or really anyone else but themselves.  I get that, to a point, but to be honest, the real reform needs to be with the economic system that doesn't stack the deck against the poor.  Unfortunately, only one politician in this election cycle even talks about this.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Public unions are a problem in the same that government subsidies create a shadow demand to pilfer public funds.  Perhaps rather than having public workers unionize, states could impose a statutory mandate to increase pay to match inflation/increase in standard of living.   Unions in the private market are essential and don't necessarily lead to the same absurd results that public unions might cause as there's clear operation bottom line.   A business could go belly up and get snuffed out of existence if unions overplay their hand, however, states and local municipalities (although they can go bankrupt) will never cease to exist--in that sense there's no barrier that prevents unions from bargaining their municipalities into forever-poverty.

 

This would take care of a lot of those problems.  You'd still need something in place to protect against unnecessary discipline (b/c it happens)... but on the flip side, it would be nice to actually have a mechanism to get rid of problem employees as well (b/c that doesn't happen nearly enough).

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Fewer jobs on the low end. Immigration generally follows supply of jobs - which is why it slowed quite a bit the last decade.

 

There certainly might be more under the table and dark economy action, but I don't think that will increase immigration.

 

I'm sorry, but most of the illegal immigration we have today is fed by the under the table and dark economy action.  Doubling minimum wage will not lower that type of immigration.  If anything, it will accelerate it as more and more people will start hiring illegals to save costs. If people like Mitt Romney who can afford to pay minimum wage hire illegals, imagine what those with a much slimmer cash flow will do.

[drjim]

 

I'm sorry, but most of the illegal immigration we have today is fed by the under the table and dark economy action.  Doubling minimum wage will not lower that type of immigration.  If anything, it will accelerate it as more and more people will start hiring illegals to save costs. If people like Mitt Romney who can afford to pay minimum wage hire illegals, imagine what those with a much slimmer cash flow will do.

 

Depends on how hard you want to enforce labor laws.

[Willihammer]

 

Where does the $10/hr come from? That would be below the new minimum wage. I'm assuming no black market here on the ownership side.

And you assume that because

-$15/hr would be expand the labor pool to include workers who previously would not be motivated to work these jobs at $7.25. Combined with

-Additional outsourcing that reduces the number of jobs and creates an environment where only the most highly qualified, American workers would be hired, thereby reducing illegal migrants who cannot meet such standards,

is that right?

 

If that's the case, what is it about the high quality American worker, that makes him/her so much more productive at flipping a burger or swinging a hammer at $15/hr, than one and a half Mexicans doing it at $10/hr? Or are you suggesting Americans would fill the jobs at $10/hr instead of Mexicans?

[drjim]

 

And you assume that because

-$15/hr would be expand the labor pool to include workers who previously would not be motivated to work these jobs at $7.25. Combined with

-Additional outsourcing that reduces the number of jobs and creates an environment where only the most highly qualified, American workers would be hired, thereby reducing illegal migrants who cannot meet such standards,

is that right?

 

If that's the case, what is it about the high quality American worker, that makes him/her so much more productive at flipping a burger or swinging a hammer at $15/hr, than one and a half Mexicans doing it at $10/hr? Or are you suggesting Americans would fill the jobs at $10/hr instead of Mexicans?

 

Now I'm tracking. I don't think one worker is more efficient than 1.5 workers, but that doesn't have to be the comparison anymore, since they will have to choose between a $15/hr of both options. For specific industries it might not change much, but Fast Food might start using more automated technology instead of labor, such as self ordering, more machines to cook.

 

And for those industries that can, they will continue to outsource positions - but certainly won't be possible in many.

 

It is an interesting combo to increase the low skilled labor pool (through more open immigration), demand a higher minimum wage, and shame companies that outsource/automate/cut positions.