Well they should stop worrying. They will be fine. I suggest they don't make MSNBC or similar as their only news outlet. (and yes same for people who only watch Fox news or Newsmax).
The stock market isn't representative of 1) how the economy is doing and 2) how your civil rights are doing.
Would you say the surveillance state we've lived under since Bush is fine because the stock market is at an all time high? Similarly for the global inflation under COVID: is it fine since stocks went up?
Not necessarily. There are quite a few levers the U.S. government and Federal Reserve have to keep things humming along since we're a giant. Stocks are not as rational as you're making them out to be. As the saying goes "gradually, then suddenly"
Your remarks about "shorting the market if you think this" are not only ignorant but passive aggressive.
Article doesn't mention the pay once. No matter what you think about this issue, this is total trash journalism by the reporter Samuel Benson and Politico. No wonder people don't trust news sources.
the issue is pay, but it is hard to evaluate pay on a dairy, as the work occurs 365 days a year, with a few intense periods when haying and or planting and harvesting corn,calving, and then mostly 3~4 hrs a day, one very early in the morning, so there are only odd situations that make it worth while to anybody, and as pointed out, loosing labour can instantly change all of someones plans.
I read the article diferently as my grand parents and uncles farmed in Penn state, one of them as a dairy farmer and those experiences with them fills in the blanks.
It takes a lot of creativity and decisivness to survive in dairy and family farming, margins are small but often the equity is high, so the temptation to sell out to big business is always there.
I assume GP's point is that the farms rely on being able to pay below minimum wage (IIRC at least some places have carveouts in minimum wage laws for farm labor, not just tipped workers), and that's part of why it's so difficult to find replacement workers.
The lack of mentioning that in a story about the economic impacts of this seems like a deliberate choice to garner more sympathy than "I want to pay people $2 an hour to work" might otherwise. (That is a made up number, I did not go dig up the relevant PA pay rates.)
> “The whole thing is screwed up,” said John Painter, a three-time Trump voter who runs an organic dairy farm in Westfield. “We need people to do the jobs Americans are too spoiled to do.”
That seems to cover it in the words of one of the farmers. I personally wouldn't consider the article too sympathetic to them.
This from an advocacy group with a clear agenda. But if they wanted to raise wages they could just advocate for less immigration and robust enforcement. Restrict supply, wages will rise.
But they don't.
Capital will flow to maximize total shareholder value, therefore projected revenue/profits.
Nike opens factories in low-cost areas because they're allowed to. Before Clinton, most things were built in the country. Profits were lower, but the wage gap was also much lower.
What's funny is that the people who hate on America the most tend to also have a strong belief in American exceptionalism without realizing it. "America is the worst!" in one breath, while in the next breath saying "Everyone deserves to live in America".
What I see missing most in discussions around immigration is what it does to the home countries of the people trying to move to the United States. I know a lot of families who have come into the country from Mexico, and I don't blame them - I'd probably do the same. But if you look at the towns they're leaving (which I've done many times), it's creating a vacuum of good, hard-working people. As a result, crime and drug lords fill the vacuum, making it even more unsafe.
If you ask a lot of those people (which I've done), they'd really like to stay in their home countries - provided that there weren't growing concerns over crime. As Americans, why do we have to act like this is the only place in the world where people can be successful, and the only safe haven? What if we instead supported those countries and encouraged their brightest and best citizens to stay so that their communities can thrive?
I love immigrants, and I also love a lot of the countries they're coming from. I just wish we could stop pretending that everyone needs to move to the United States to be happy, productive, or successful.
And yes, markets tend to be affected by supply and demand, the labor market included. If you have an almost unlimited supply of people looking for work and willing to work at very low wages, of course we're going to see wages stagnate.
Pushing the agenda of supply and demand?
Generally any gain in income is NOT going towards the lowest rung American worker who are specifically being talked about here.
This is why you always told by open border advocates if you restrict/enforce immigration the price if produce will rise. Why would that be..
This is not true. Restrict supply too much and you can't build anything. Could you have built Nvidia by restricting supply? Probably not - so there seems to be a middle ground.
This is specifically addressing the type workers mentioned in the article. Restricting immigration of those who would compete with them. Which ain't going to be your Nvida type engineers.
- While some policymakers have blamed immigration for slowing U.S. wage growth since the 1970s, most
academic research finds little long run effect on Americans’ wages.
- The available evidence suggests that immigration leads to more innovation, a better educated workforce,
greater occupational specialization, better matching of skills with jobs, and higher overall economic
productivity.
- Immigration also has a net positive effect on combined federal, state, and local budgets. But not all taxpayers
benefit equally. In regions with large populations of less educated, low-income immigrants, native-bor
Clearly there foreign workers at Starbucks or there would not be protests:
According to the popular videos circulating over the Internet, Starbucks halted a few minutes of their services across the nation as a form of protest against the recent “illegal deportation of immigrants.” "We are stopping work for a few minutes to read a statement in protest of actions against our fellow workers," Starbucks Workers United members at the Ellicott City location in Maryland said in a statement during their strike on April 1.
Immigration’s impact on wages, especially in the long term, is not as straightforward as “less supply → higher pay.” Multiple studies from the U.S. National Academies of Sciences and leading labor economists find that immigration has only small effects on native-born workers’ wages, and in most cases boost overall wage growth by fueling demand, entrepreneurship, and innovation. Restricting immigration might reduce competition in some low-skill job markets, but it can also harm industries that rely on labor shortages being filled, push up costs for consumers, and slow economic growth, which in the longer run counteracts any wage gains.
"Immigration’s impact on wages, especially in the long term, is not as straightforward as “less supply → higher pay.”
"Restricting immigration might reduce competition in some low-skill job markets, but it can also harm industries that rely on labor shortages being filled"
So restricting immigration of low wage workers, would push up wages in low wage industries. Seems pretty clear.
You’re describing a narrow, short-run, partial-equilibrium effect. In the real world, general-equilibrium effects swamp it:
Cut low-wage immigration and you don’t just raise some hourly rates. You also shrink output, kill complementary jobs, and push prices up for everyone, which erodes those wage gains. The National Academies’ comprehensive review finds immigration’s impact on native wages is small overall and often positive for some groups, with clear long-run growth benefits. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/23550/the-economic...
Recent CBO work attributes stronger labor-force growth and higher GDP to immigration. Reverse that and you get slower growth and upward price pressure that cancels your “clear” wage story. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/60569
So yes, if you freeze the rest of the economy in place, fewer workers can bid up some wages. Once you allow demand, complementarities, and prices to move, the simple “less supply → higher pay” slogan stops matching the data.
https://www.jobs.now/jobs/153205684-senior-director-enrollme...
Must have masters in Project Management, IT, Business Administration (pretty broad). Also have 4 years experience in enrollment management systems & operations in higher education setting.
Probably a decent number Americans who could qualify for this.
For the job requiring Russian, that requirement is likely because the owner or hiring manager speaks Russian (the name where to send resumes to is Russian). Should that be a legitimate requirement to allow a visa for someone to work in the US? I cannot speak to that.
Should it not be? If the criteria is there solely to make sure only his countrymen can get jobs and get to the US then I agree it’s wrong. However if they were willing to hire anyone who spoke Russian regardless of origin then I think the question becomes
“Are people/companies allowed to hire for niche skill sets that fit their specific needs, when it de facto bars 99% of citizens from getting the job?”
At this point in time I believe there is an embargo on trade with Russia. Having a job like that since the beginning of the Ukraine war sanctions should have raised red flags.
I came into the thread to talk about the Russian one, is there any proof that Russian is actually required for the job, or is this a filtering mechanism that they can put in place in order to target the job listing to a specific person?
> is there any proof that Russian is actually required for the job
I suppose I could imagine a construction foreman job that requires Spanish, for the reason that you will be interacting with Mexican labor that doesn't speak English.
But I doubt that Russian-speaking interior fitters in Lynwood don't speak any English.
This has been the case before the current administration. It isn't administration elusive. There is a lack of professionalism by some US border agents.
