Unskilled workers don't have a path to permanent residency

[one...two...tree 2,762]

You know what I mean. Bush has been the lefts devil for 8 years, The current administration still blames him for all our problems and here you are quoting him. The irony is great.

I'm not a spokesman for the Left anymore than you are a spokesman for Bush.

Edited June 4, 2010 by El Buscador

[Heracles 417]

Where did I ever disagree with expanding a guest worker program?

Because the 12,000,000 Californians living in poverty don't need work do they? Only foreigners do. It's easier to let them rot in poverty and just blame republicans and corporations.

Sorry but you have no clue. It's why you refuse to discuss the issue directly and will only respond with an article or some generic statement, like they pay taxes too. When are asked to back that up, to illustrate what illegals or even low skilled workers actually contribute in state and local tax versus services they use, you will find some article which simply states they pay taxes or run off to another section and and claim members are not level headed.

Edited June 4, 2010 by Booyah!

[JohnSmith2007 353]

I'm not a spokesman for the Left anymore than you are a spokesman for Bush.

God I love irony.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

God I love irony.

I voted for Obama and think he's a much better President than Bush was, but don't agree with every thing he's done. I thought and still do, think that Bush will go down in history as one of the worst Presidents, however, that doesn't mean I can't agree with some of the things he's done. Why this baffles you is beyond me, but this is just an attempt to derail the thread into personal attacks. Back to topic.

[SMOKE 1,426]

I voted for Obama and think he's a much better President than Bush was

[GabiandVi 34]

Bingo.

I just don't know how anyone fails to grasp this simple concept. These jobs would not pay poorly had the workforce been more restricted. For example, take a city like San Fran where people are afraid to work with their hands or deem the work bellow them. Who would pick up the trash? Who would do any sort of blue-collar work? Had there been no illegal aliens or an unlimited cheap labor pool, they would have to pay people $15 or $20 an hour to do the work period.

I have numerous personal examples of this in country where the labor pool is heavily restricted. A friend quit being an architect to clean construction sites because he works 30 hour weeks and is paid over $100K. As he said, he has no stress, receives a range of benefits and works 10 hours less than others. Actually, I have a number of friends and family that have quit white-collar jobs to take on various manual unskilled work - like landscaping; with many making between $2 to $5k a week. How is this possible? This work is beneath them right? Wrong, it's an example of supply an demand. It's also why as mentioned earlier, a Latin American family [forget from where] has managed to raise over hundred grand working as office cleaners and now own three investment properties in the US. How is this possible? Because they didn't have to compete with millions of illegals aliens. As a result, they are paid a good wage working in AUS.

In summary, wages will never increase and the 60,000,000 Americans living in poverty will never get a chance to succeed. What Aus demonstrates is that as long as the labor pool is restricted, it works against big business and everyone working has a chance to prosperity.

What I don't understand is why people don't get that AS NEEDED means that when there is NO NEED no visas will be granted, so why be so adamantly against it being available in the event that a need occur.

The welfare problem is another issue. We can certainly tie the "need" to welfare numbers as well as to unemployment numbers. I would hope it would be. But people on welfare is not what we are debating now.

We have a special skills visa that is on an as needed basis. We don't always have a need for engineers. Should we cancel all possibility of a visa for engineers because we don't need them just now?

I don't think anyone is suggesting that we start handing out visas without a need for the workers. But I'm sorry. I haven't given up on the US having the economy we had not that long ago. (I know you have and I think that is what you are arguing, not the actual benefits/problems of a visa.) And when that happens, without all the illegal workers, we will need some unskilled laborers.

We have a lot of illegal workers around here. We also have a lot of "help wanted" signs. This in the middle of a recession. True we have a lot of welfare recipients, but most of those have some sort of job. I teach the lowest of the low with regards to socioeconomics. 95% of them are on free breakfast, free lunch, yet all their parents work at some job, and most of the students do too. The days of welfare/poor people sitting on their "butts" is gone. So how is it that we have so many help wanted signs up if we don't need workers?

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

That is exactly what should happen. Illegal status of any sort should not be an option period. Once If that avenue is removed with a range of proactive measures, then this allows for an unskilled visa class, that people from all over the world would be able to apply for. That is, rather than the status-quo of just Latin Americans walking in as they see fit. It should be similar to the greencard lottery.

That said though, all forms of immigration should be heavily monitored.

The current US population density is: 83 per sq mile

*Canada: 8.8

*Australia: 7.6

^India: 931

^UK: 659

* A point the US was once at, hence country of immigrants.

^ The point where the US is headed

If there is such a statistic out there, I'd love to know what the potential population of the US would have to be for density to equal that of India or the United Kingdom.

[mawilson 2,133]

That is exactly what should happen. Illegal status of any sort should not be an option period. Once If that avenue is removed with a range of proactive measures, then this allows for an unskilled visa class, that people from all over the world would be able to apply for. That is, rather than the status-quo of just Latin Americans walking in as they see fit. It should be similar to the greencard lottery.

That said though, all forms of immigration should be heavily monitored.

The current US population density is: 83 per sq mile

*Canada: 8.8

*Australia: 7.6

^India: 931

^UK: 659

* A point the US was once at, hence country of immigrants.

^ The point where the US is headed

If there is such a statistic out there, I'd love to know what the potential population of the US would have to be for density to equal that of India or the United Kingdom.

Are you serious? It's elementary school math.

The answer is 3.365 billion (300m * 931 / 83) people for the population density of India, and 2.381 billion (300m * 659 / 83) people for the UK.

[Heracles 417]

What I don't understand is why people don't get that AS NEEDED means that when there is NO NEED no visas will be granted, so why be so adamantly against it being available in the event that a need occur.

Well I hate to be the bearer of bad news but with 60,000,000 in poverty, you are not going to need people for a very very very long time.

The welfare problem is another issue. We can certainly tie the "need" to welfare numbers as well as to unemployment numbers. I would hope it would be. But people on welfare is not what we are debating now.

I never mentioned welfare, so I am not sure what you are referring to there. My examples were all based on the consequences of restricting labor, as is the case in countries like Canada and Australia.

We have a special skills visa that is on an as needed basis. We don't always have a need for engineers. Should we cancel all possibility of a visa for engineers because we don't need them just now?

Pretty much actually. How else do you think Canada, Australia and the UK's points system visa works? However and yet ironically, engineers are in short supply here, hence their high salaries following graduation. Basically S&D in action.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that we start handing out visas without a need for the workers. But I'm sorry. I haven't given up on the US having the economy we had not that long ago. (I know you have and I think that is what you are arguing, not the actual benefits/problems of a visa.) And when that happens, without all the illegal workers, we will need some unskilled laborers.

If that was the case, why would your state still suffer such a chronic poverty, even during the boom? Contrary to popular belief, people having a job is not a boom or a sign of success. Ultimately Quality of life is what matters. This excessive supply of labor has resulted in the Q.O.L for your average American dropping significantly. Furthermore, in various states and areas throughout the country, it clearly approaches that of 2nd/3rd world levels. I am not disagreeing with what you are saying, however, the US simply does not need anymore unskilled workers.

We have a lot of illegal workers around here. We also have a lot of "help wanted" signs. This in the middle of a recession. True we have a lot of welfare recipients, but most of those have some sort of job. I teach the lowest of the low with regards to socioeconomics. 95% of them are on free breakfast, free lunch, yet all their parents work at some job, and most of the students do too. The days of welfare/poor people sitting on their "butts" is gone. So how is it that we have so many help wanted signs up if we don't need workers?

Which goes back to my earlier point. Help wanted signs are up because people don't want and should not work $6 an hour jobs. Whereas, pay then them $16 they would earn doing the same work in AUS, then come tell me if you will still see such signs. The very reason so many Americans are stuck in ruts is because they have no opportunity or ability to get out of poverty. None is going to get out of poverty on a minimum wage job without some miracle. Whereas, I am willing to bet and even fund an experiment that if we are to pay these people Aussie wages, they will get out of poverty and even want to work.

What you and I don't agree on is how you lift the wages so Americans will do that work. A certain other poster on the other hand isn't interested in increasing wages or improving America for Americans, rather then want as many immigrants in as possible period.

Edited June 4, 2010 by Booyah!

[Heracles 417]

If there is such a statistic out there, I'd love to know what the potential population of the US would have to be for density to equal that of India or the United Kingdom.

Norway, Canada and Australia provide one of the highest standards of living in the entire world. If we were to use Norway, which has the highest density out of the three, America is technically overpopulated by ~119,000,000 people already.

When the US was a country of immigrants and only had 50 million in population, the population density was ~13.45 per sq mile. Thus, the need for immigrants.

Once the US reaches its projected 550 million or so, it will have a population density of close to 140. The equivalent density of Mexico in 2010.

PS I don't know about you but I am not interested in living in London-esque style chicken pens. Heck, I don't even like chickens living in such conditions, thus purchasing free-range eggs.

Edited June 4, 2010 by Booyah!

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Are you serious? It's elementary school math.

The answer is 3.365 billion (300m * 931 / 83) people for the population density of India, and 2.381 billion (300m * 659 / 83) people for the UK.

Well, I sort of knew that but I guess I didn't finish the thought. If you had that sort of density, if the US physically big enough? Or is there still room left over?

[peejay 327]

I still find it odd that in an economy where this past month of May private employers only added 41,000 net new jobs when millions of Americans are unemployed, that many of our politicians and other misguided souls continue to obsess about continuing to provide employment to large numbers of foreign workers whether they are legal or illegal. What other country on earth is this stupid or ridiculous while screwing its own citizens?

Why would we even debate this when US unemployment is officially hovering officially around 10% (but in reality is much, much higher). I just don't get it.

Edited June 5, 2010 by peejay

[DEDixon 39]

doing away with birth right citizenship has to be part of expanding guest worker program. it is the logical thing to do, but not sure logic has any place in politics.

also, strict enforcement with very hash penalty when employers hire people who have no right to work is necessary.

i'd love to have a maid.... maybe 2 maids. let's be like singapore, the arabs, and hong kong, bring in hired help by the plane full. oh and they can't bring their children with them, let's not forget that.

so many people in the world sitting around doing nothing, let's give them something to do!

[Heracles 417]

I still find it odd that in an economy where this past month of May private employers only added 41,000 net new jobs when millions of Americans are unemployed, that many of our politicians and other misguided souls continue to obsess about continuing to provide employment to large numbers of foreign workers whether they are legal or illegal. What other country on earth is this stupid or ridiculous while screwing its own citizens?

Why would we even debate this when US unemployment is officially hovering officially around 10% (but in reality is much, much higher). I just don't get it.

You said it.

That thought that in such an economy anyone is advocating immigration continue as usual, is just ludicrous and illustrates how little they understand about an economy.

You really do have to wonder about someone and their ideals [priorities] when assisting foreign nationals takes precedence over assisting their own equivalent citizens, that are living in squalor themselves.

Edited June 5, 2010 by Booyah!

[DEDixon 39]

Q.O.L by what standard and is this a measure of happiness or how much material wealth one has? i do not think Q.O.L should be about how much ####### you have in your garage. Poverty as compared to who, what? Those you see who you (or the gov't) think live in poverty might not feel that way themselves. Be careful not to apply your standard of living on others. Just because you see a house that is losing its paint and is in some disrepair doesn't mean the occupants aren't happy. They just might feel that they have all they need.