SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Trump administration is expected to issue a proposal in coming weeks that would make it harder for legal immigrants to become citizens or get green cards if they have ever used a range of popular public welfare programs, including Obamacare, four sources with knowledge of the plan told NBC News.
The move, which would not need congressional approval, is part of White House senior adviser Stephen Miller's plan to limit the number of migrants who obtain legal status in the U.S. each year.
[...] Though its effects could be far-reaching, the proposal to limit citizenship to immigrants who have not used public assistance does not appear to need congressional approval. As the Clinton administration did in 1999, the Trump administration would be redefining the term "public charge," which first emerged in immigration law in the 1800s in order to shield the U.S. from burdening too many immigrants who could not contribute to society.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by zocalo on Thursday August 16 2018, @12:16PM (18 children)
For the UK, that situation only seems likely to worsen, given we're already starting to see the impact of a smaller menial labour workforce following Brexit - basically the same thing Trump is proposing to enforce here - with employers in several low-wage sectors are reporting that they are struggling to find labourers due to the sharp decline in EU immigration over the last year or so. Since margins are so thin in many such fields (literally, in some cases like fruit picking) raising wages would require an increase in the price on the street, so it's a game of chicken to see who blinks first - the race to the pricing bottom the milk industry did with the supermarkets in reverse. Going to be interesting to see what happens with the availability/price of UK sourced fruit and veg next year...
Even the hardcore Brexiteers in the Conservative party seem to realise this is a potentially serious post-Brexit issue, especially since the UK relies on EU labour for a lot of skilled labour too, like many of the NHS' front line medical staff. Like Trump they're promising to somehow only allow the "right people" in and to somehow ensure that they leave again once their visas or whatever expire, but - also like much of what Trump says - the publically available details on how they're actually going to achieve what they say they will are either so vague as to be meaningless or entirely non-existant.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:35PM (1 child)
Actually, you've tasted the Kool-Aid, and you've been mildly poisoned.
There is no work that Americans won't do. Need your septic tank flushed? I can point you to a business staffed by Americans - black and white, and on ocassion a Native American - who will be more than happy to provide that service. Need corn picked? I've done it, and I know plenty of people who will do it. Strawberries? Zuchini? Watermelons? I know many people who will PAY THE FARMER to allow them to go out into the field, to pick their own fruits and produce. There is no work that Americans won't do.
The real problem is the welfare system. We actually pay people to do nothing. Now, if able bodied people can learn to play the system, and be paid to sit on their asses, why in hell would they want to work?
End the welfare, or cut it drastically, or at least change how it works.
We've discussed the system on Soylent in the past. The system actually PUNISHES people for doing stupid stuff like taking a part-time job. You make 150 dollar, and hope to spend it on the kids - but welfare reduces your welfare check by 200 dollar, and you can't even feed the kids. The system is broken - no matter your political leaning, no matter your philosophy in life, we can all agree that the system is broken.
We need to fix that system, then all the apparent lazy asses in the projects, who have nothing better to do than trade drugs, will find some kind of meaningful work.
There is no work that a hungry man will not do. None. And, THAT is the difference between welfare bums, and immigrants. The immigrants are hungry - welfare bums are fat and lazy because we've TAUGHT THEM TO BE FAT AND LAZY!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:06PM
It's one thing going to a U-pick to pick berries, corn, etc. It is quite another to do it for 8+ hrs/day, 8 days a week, as fast as you can, because the pay is by the pound, no real minimum wage in the fields.
the high school kids get some "charity" work detasseling corn, family & friends, and sometimes even paid a little extra. But if they were older? Or brown? Farmer John is paying as little as possible for it. He probably already does anyways for the "back 40".
While there are some "good" people willing to work (and get paid respectfully) to do things like pump septic tanks, mow lawns, etc., and customers who will pay for them, there are way more people who will only pay as little as they can to get such work done and will only pay out in cash, and have no qualms at all about it. And theres a decent pool of people willing to do said work for cash, too. Maybe they're "illegals". Maybe ex-cons. whatever.
But squeezing that lanor pool is eventually going to make some of your voter base upset. Dogma/ideology be damned, you're fking with their money now.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:39PM (10 children)
So you are asserting that it is economically, politically and socially wise to import a low skilled worker, let some farmer pay them crap wages then give them welfare at public expense to make up the difference between their pay and what it takes to actually live, then pay an American to remain in poverty in some squalid public housing block so they won't take the job either. All so you can pay a few cents less for a salad a Chipotle. Doesn't work that way. Yes the lettuce they buy is cheaper but everybody is paying a crapload more in taxes than the difference.
Instead leave the Mexican at home to make Mexico Great, put some "pressure" on the multi-generation welfare cases to get the hell out of the Blue Shithole public housing and get in the fields and do a day's labor. This will reduce public expenditures on welfare for both the illegal (yes they get welfare) and the American, drive the American and their children to improve themselves so as to escape such labor and generally help Make America Great Again. Everybody wins except the Democratic Party but I can bear their misfortune with great fortitude.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by G-forze on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:44PM (6 children)
And then you can use the difference to buy more bombs for brown people! Halliburton is ever grateful.
If I run into the term "SJW", I stop reading.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:15PM (5 children)
Brown people. Why is it always brown people? We have demonstrated our willingness to kill red people, white people, yellow people, brown people, or black people. But, all you can remember are the brown people. Find us some green people, and we'll kill 'em. Polka-dotted people. Orange people. Paisley people. We don't give a small damn what color, or pattern, or whatever. Lizard people, zombie people, mutant people - they all bleed if you hurt them.
Oh wait. You're a racist? Ahhhhh - so the color of the dead guy matters to you? Got it.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:18PM (2 children)
Of the 7 military interventions we're currently involved in I'm sure it's just a coincidence that all 7 of them are primarily inhabited by brown people.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:22PM
Yes, it is a coincidence. What is NOT coincidental is, the presence of black GOLD!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:31PM
Syrians and other mediterranean people are more white or olive than brown. Show me some real brown people we're bombing. The common connection is oil, religion, and politics rather than skin color... You're simplifying things and obfuscating the real problem of the MIC militarying to get funds to pay for more industrying, and the pet politicians that take their money and spin agendas at home.
(Score: 3, Funny) by tangomargarine on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:23PM (1 child)
Well, there's one guy, but I wouldn't hold my breath...
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:35PM
You're talking about the orangutan? Why you wanna call him "people"? Sometimes, it's hard to remember that those privileged ones born with a silver spoon in their ass are really people.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:15PM (2 children)
At the end of that first paragraph I was almost expecting you to conclude that companies should pay their employees better.
I was blinded by a sudden burst of optimism. Back to business as Republican usual.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:21PM (1 child)
Without the government subsidizing them, pay would have to rise. Farm labor is currently priced below the actual market price, remove the government and that would have to seek a price where labor could be attracted. Removing some of the welfare State would push some but prices would have to also pull to rebalance the economy. But that is ok since it it would lower the deficit spending and free up the capital markets and eventually even permit another round of tax cuts. The net economic impact would be positive.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:12PM
The quality of life would also be higher; being a sort of indentured servant / sorta slave / sorta migrant refugee must suck, and using the government to prop up corporate profits to perpetuate that is pretty evil.
We kinda fought something aroun 1860-1865 over the same issue; sure the easiest thing to do with slaves is to keep them pickin cotton, but at some point no matter how much of a PITA it is for everyone, you gotta upgrade that lifestyle.
I would not be sad to see the human misery of the migrant farm worker lifestyle go away. Much like the end of slavery in 1865 wasn't a whole lot of fun for anyone, it still kinda needed to be done, and that was the time to do it. We're well past the due date to end migrant farm worker as a job title.
The memes about the evilness of the "Democratic Party Plantation" go deeper than would first appear. "Suffer forever, so we can lead you"
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:32PM
You know, we used to say that without slaves, our country would fall apart economically.
We used to say that production would halt without children laboring in the mines. There is no end to the desire for the cheapest labor possible. Yet, somehow we have survived--better than survived, even.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:29PM (3 children)
There has never in the history of employment in any field from Java Android App Development to Cabbage Picker been an employer who is NOT crying himself into dehydration in public over there being "no applications" (at his shitty pay rate and shitty supervisory policies and shitty benefits if there are any and shitty pension again if any).
Its always "there's no one applying at the wage we'd LIKE to pay". Always and forever and everywhere. Of course its everywhere in propaganda and of course it means nothing.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by zocalo on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:24PM (2 children)
I mentioned the UK's milk trade in my OP, which is a pretty good example of why some of these the menial labour wages are so low, and it's not entirely down to the employers - the consumers have to carry some of the blame too. If you're shopping for the cheapest deal at the discount store - regardless of what quality corners they're cutting to get that price point - rather than supporting the farmer directly at farmer's markets etc. then you're part of the problem, like it or not. For their part, consumers (understandably) don't want to more pay for stuff than they have to - especially after several years of inflation outpacing wage increases - so it's beneficial for stores to put pressure on their suppliers to lower costs, and if a given supplier won't cut costs, well, maybe one of their competitor's will. There's *always* someone willing to shave off a few more pence when they're desperate rather than risk produce going off, so the price went into a downward spiral into unsustianable levels for many farmers. When you're faced with selling at a loss and at least putting some food on the table as your debt accumulates, or pouring your milk down the drain and having nothing, what are you going to do?
What the UK is starting to see now is many more industries getting into that level of cut-throat competition - they've *got* to start increasing wages to get the workers, but whoever does so first will be at a financial disadvantage compared to their competitors who have held out. Ultimately the wages, and the prices for produce on the shelf, are going to go have up but that just fuels inflation and we're back to the start of the circle again. What remains to be seen is whether those wage increases are going to outpace the resulting inflation or not, and if not (which seems more likely based on previous examples) then ultimately everyone ends up worse off.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:07PM (1 child)
Economics, especially at the end of a cycle, like now, is a "press your luck" game. The more you play god with peoples lives and force immigration and otherwise F with them, the longer it will be until the next phase of the natural cycle AND the longer and deeper the eventual recession will be, so some folks want the reboot now to minimize human suffering, whereas some folks have outstanding bets on the financial markets etc and F the people we're gonna run this into the ground so I can 'win'. Typical human fight over whats better for all of humanity vs whats better for one's own pocketbook.
So... the specific strategy being discussed is you can goose the economy along a little longer into a much deeper and longer depression IF you weaponize immigrants to keep the wheels turning that little bit slower during a cycle. But its no long term solution, obviously.
The real outcome of permanently lower standard of living is eventually the milk marketplace (from your example) absolutely inevitably stops. Its a market that is running now but is inherently not immortal and the end is coming up. To some extent its desecration of the dead to keep messing with the world to prop it up a little longer. Just shut it down now with some dignity rather than crashing the whole thing to keep it running a little longer. In a world of shrinking opportunity for all, no amount of scrambling will prevent the end of the milk market, but there are people trying to profit off it by turning human misery into revenue, which is the immigration game.
Two interesting aspects of the immigration game never discussed in public; if these people are so profitable, why is their home country such an economic disaster? Surely you'd think if they're an endless pot of gold, they'd want to stay home. So surely they're a massive economic drain. And the second aspect is supposedly immigration boosts an economy, but in the future why would it be any better in the sense that OK take the fairy tale that "new where-evers" will be more profitable than the natives, well, why is that assumed to be permanent; surely if they assimilate their productivity would drop to that of the natives and you'd be back to where you started, the natives aren't profitable enough we need ever more immigrants?
In that way immigrants are economic heroin; if its supposedly so great why don't all the dealers keep it and use it for themselves, and there's no rational argument why a long term ever increasing addiction would improve quality of life in the long term. A little pain killer under reasonable scientific control is often quite valuable, but uncontrolled addiction is another.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @04:04AM
Presumably because the nation states they are coming from lack sufficient physical and social infrastructure to allow them to value-add. Hard to be productive when you are ducking bullets or laid up in bed from poorly treated water.
And in almost all the cases that are relevant to at least the USA's interests, it was their foreign policy failures and frankly war crimes that created the problems in the first place. Supporting brutal dictators, training death squads and arming insurgencies doesn't do wonders for stability, and its rather unfair to expect people to build a prosperous nation when a Superpower rolls over in its sleep and crushes their democratic government and installs a nightmare fashioned from their own paranoia.