Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The problem is "natives" shouldn't have to compete with immigrants for jobs. Or at the very least, they should be given priority in hiring, similar to the consideration veterans are given when applying for government jobs.
Why not? In order for a business to be competitive, its employees need to be competitive. And in order to be competitive, they have to be good at what they do. If the immigrant is more competitive than the native, then the immigrant wins.
Why not? In order for a business to be competitive, its employees need to be competitive. And in order to be competitive, they have to be good at what they do. If the immigrant is more competitive than the native, then the immigrant wins.
[this is pretty basic]
The problem is that our immigration policy does not make adjustments in the number allowed when unemployment is high. There are countries who take this into consideration. However, our country irresponsibly allows 1 million legal immigrants per year into this country. Never mind that American citizens and legal immigrants can't find work.
Perhaps if you have ever been in the position of not being hired because you were undercut by an illegal alien or legal immigrant, you would understand.
My point wasn't that there isn't a real difference between the left and right on illegal immigration, but that there's a philosophical split on illegal immigration stances amongst the left as well as amongst the right.
Your previous post suggested that everyone on the left supports illegal immigration for humanitarian reasons, which as I said, is not accurate.
I don’t know anyone among the left that are supportive of illegal immigration or at least not in United States. I know that there is a alternative movement within the labor-party in UK, called blue labor that is supportive of limiting illegal and legal immigration headed by orthodox-jewish academic named Maurice Glasman. But you could maybe mention one?
The problem is that our immigration policy does not make adjustments in the number allowed when unemployment is high. There are countries who take this into consideration. However, our country irresponsibly allows 1 million legal immigrants per year into this country. Never mind that American citizens and legal immigrants can't find work.
Perhaps if you have ever been in the position of not being hired because you were undercut by an illegal alien or legal immigrant, you would understand.
The issue is even if there are flexible caps, there would still be illegal immigrants. Not all come for jobs but they have to take a job when they get here. I may not agree with the rash of immigration in Texas and Arizona but I understand it.
The problem is that our immigration policy does not make adjustments in the number allowed when unemployment is high. There are countries who take this into consideration. However, our country irresponsibly allows 1 million legal immigrants per year into this country. Never mind that American citizens and legal immigrants can't find work.
Perhaps if you have ever been in the position of not being hired because you were undercut by an illegal alien or legal immigrant, you would understand.
So which is it - legal or illegal immigrants? Either way, as a US citizen who immigrated here 42 years ago, these arguments about immigrants taking jobs have been heard before by myself, my Mom, and my relatives. We ignored them because we were too busy working instead of complaining.
The issue is even if there are flexible caps, there would still be illegal immigrants. Not all come for jobs but they have to take a job when they get here. I may not agree with the rash of immigration in Texas and Arizona but I understand it.
What do you "understand" about the "rash of [illegal] immigration in Texas and Arizona"? What ever the reasons for those who decided to thumb their noses at our immigration laws, the fact is that they have no business being here.
So which is it - legal or illegal immigrants? Either way, as a US citizen who immigrated here 42 years ago, these arguments about immigrants taking jobs have been heard before by myself, my Mom, and my relatives. We ignored them because we were too busy working instead of complaining.
[this is a great country]
I'm talking about legal immigrants who are already here. What are you talking about?
You ignored the fact that there were Americans who were being shut out of the job market due to massive legal immigration?
"Complaining"? That's rather arrogant of you. I think that you would be complaining if your job got lost to an H1-B visa holder.
Don't you think that American citizens would also like to be "too busy working"?
What do you "understand" about the "rash of [illegal] immigration in Texas and Arizona"? What ever the reasons for those who decided to thumb their noses at our immigration laws, the fact is that they have no business being here.
The most recent come from three drug war nations and before that Mexico was the main culprit. People are fearing for their family's and children's lives. They are looking for asylum wherever they can find it. And then they have to work to continue living here and because they came illegally (due to the quotas being maxed out and the system being logged jammed) so they have to take under the table work that employers are more than happy to do because they don't have to account for payroll taxes.
It's not as cut as and dry as people make it. What I would say is we need to cut down the availability of H1B visas and make it so we ca get more Americans to work. The problem is, Americans cost more because of the need for benefits as well as payroll taxes on top of negotiations itself.
Can't anyone technically be undercut by anyone else? why does it have to be a legal immigrant?
Case in point cost of living varies dramatically. Could someone from San Francisco save a fair amount of money and buy a house in Kansas City? Sure..how is that not a price difference there?
I worked for a company where wages were set on competition, not cost of living. At one point we sent people to Brooklyn to do work. They were mad because our employees on a pay scale were two ranks below theirs. It was at least 5% per scale so it was probably 10-11% off of what they were making. I hear all the time about people that move out of the northeast and then cannot afford to move back in.
Competition can drive up standards Postsecondary degrees awarded statistics - states compared - Education data on StateMaster
So if someone went from the northeast to nevada chances are they'd have a degree and that might stand out more. Not all places have the same access to education and public transportation and technology. This factors into pricing because well people can undercut competition all the time. For what people can get on the coasts they can retire to midwest with much more.
Even if we aren't talking price there's always what else someone can do. Obviously if someone has more family that needs attention that can take time from work. Likewise with sickness, education you name it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
