Russia Likely Did Swing Votes For Donald Trump

[_canpakes]

So, there's this:

We don't hire white guys or other Hispanic's that are actually naturalized, and live like you and I...and not because we don't want to, but becasue they want too much money, and if we did, we would not be competitive and win contracts.

And then there's this:

I could hire a licensed insured contractor for 50, 60, or 70 dollars and hour, or go to Home Depot and give an illegal a $100.00 a day and lunch (or less).

I have hired illegals before around my house, and I know contractors that do this all the time...

In the second quote, you were in full control of the 'contract' without competition and willingly chose cheaper immigrant labor simply because you did not want to pay more.

Do you interpret that your [arguably typical] approach here might also play a part in perpetuating the wage problem you are complaining about, as opposed to merely blaming immigrants for accepting whatever pay level that you've decided to offer?

[_Hawkeye]

If there aren't enough English speakers left in L.A. for there to be a demand for electricians who speak English, move someplace else. I can assure you that most cities in America have many English speaking people--even if there aren't any left in L.A. Move to where the opportunity matches your skill set. That is how the free market works.

Capitalism isn't supposed to be easy. It is supposed to be competitive. Not everybody wins.

Just because you aren't very competitive in your chosen market doesn't mean the world would be a better place if the government steps in and tells customers who they can and cannot hire.

That is an equally dumb post, and a cop out.

You are saying that it is okay for illegal immigrants come to your city, take your jobs by working cheaper, and if you don't like it move? And folks wonder why Trump won.

That isn't what he said. If your service area no longer has enough English speaking potential customers, then it is because they're moving out already. They're not forced out, they're doing so by choice. So why would you stick around if your income depends on them? People move around in this country all the time because of work, there is no shame in that. If I'm studying to become a Marine scientist, I'm not going to live in Las Vegas. If you're working in new home construction, you're not likely going to be sticking around in South Dakota. You're going to be moving where there is demand.

Immigrants are not taking your jobs. There are no your jobs, there are just jobs, and many of them only exist because of the supply and demand immigrants bring to the table. For instance, assume everyone in this country were native-born, well educated, white-collar workers. The average annual income is $200,000. However, people looking to make more money cannot do so because there isn't enough time in the day and they have to take care of their kids. The only choice left to them is to pay $200,000/year in professional child care. Why so much? Because in this affluent, immigrant-free utopia, everyone is well trained and well educated.

If only we had a large workforce of cheap labor so real wages can actually increase...

And if immigrants are beating out their native-born competition in 1099 employment it just means they're willing to work more for less. Isn't that the heart of free market capitalism? Something is only worth what someone is willing to pay, whether it be goods or services. And whether you understand it or not, a perfect capitalistic society requires that there be winners and losers. It is impossible for everyone to be a millionaire. As the saying goes, the world needs ditch-diggers too.

[Guest]

So we're back to the inherent immorality of exploiting the desperate.

- Doc

[_Hawkeye]

So we're back tk the inherent immorality of exploiting the desperate.

- Doc

I don't believe they are being exploited.

[_Res Ipsa]

So we're back tk the inherent immorality of exploiting the desperate.

- Doc

And that’s where you get into critiques of free market Captalism. The market doesn’t care whether some folks, or maybe lots of folks, earn enough in wages to enable them to afford housing. In fact, it doesn’t care whether some folks are even able to earn subsistence wages. The market’s “solution” to poverty level wages may be to let substantial numbers of people starve to death. The market is Honey Badger — it don’t care.

If you look at Marxian critique of capitalism, this is a feature and not a bug. According to that critique, Capitalism necessarily generates a significant number of poor folks — the reserve army of the unemployed. The presence of these folks keeps wages low, allowing the owners of capital the opportunity to expropriate the value of labor to a higher degree.

So, it is certainly possible here that your beef is with Capitalism, and not just Libertarians.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

So we're back tk the inherent immorality of exploiting the desperate.

- Doc

I don't believe they are being exploited.

That's nice you think that. I googled 'exploitation of mexican immigrants' and holy cow a lot of people disagree with you.

https://www.google.com/search?q=exploit ... e&ie=UTF-8

- Doc

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

So, it is certainly possible here that your beef is with Capitalism, and not just Libertarians.

I'm a radical centrist so it's with both.

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

So we're back tk the inherent immorality of exploiting the desperate.

- Doc

Seems like having a better paying job with a higher standard of living is the opposite of exploitation. Oh, there no doubt is a lot of exploitation of immigrant labor. Specifically, when people cannot legally participate in the economy, they are cut off from access to legal institutions that give them access to contract enforcement and labor regulations. But it's quite another thing to assert that giving someone a job that pays substantially more than what they were making in an exchange of mutual benefit is immoral exploitation. You know what is immoral? Denying people freedom of movement, free exchange of goods and services, and crippling their standard of living all so you can feel less competition in your field of work.

[_EAllusion]

So, there's this:

We don't hire white guys or other Hispanic's that are actually naturalized, and live like you and I...and not because we don't want to, but becasue they want too much money, and if we did, we would not be competitive and win contracts.

I've been stringing Markk along on this point, but what I'm getting at is that the terrible immigrant labor his business is hiring is actually getting the job done to the satisfaction of people his business is selling to. He is making the argument for you that immigrant labor is driving down costs in his field, which is no doubt helpful to consumers of his products. No doubt he has headaches with his labor pool, but they are meeting demand which is why he continues to participate in the hiring of them.

[_Res Ipsa]

So, it is certainly possible here that your beef is with Capitalism, and not just Libertarians.

I'm a radical centrist so it's with both.

- Doc

Yeah, I’ve seen you describe yourself this way before. I get that it’s cute to describe yourself in contrary terms, but is it a coherent political philosophy? Or is it just cover for throwing tantrums about things that piss you off?