Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:47AM   Printer-friendly
from the working-for-a-living dept.

Adam Davidson at The New York Times has a story debunking the myth of the job-stealing immigrant:

When I was growing up in the 1980s, I watched my grandfather — my dad’s stepdad — struggle with his own prejudice. He was a blue-collar World War II veteran who loved his family above all things and was constantly afraid for them. He carried a gun and, like many men of his generation, saw threats in people he didn’t understand: African-Americans, independent women, gays. By the time he died, 10 years ago, he had softened. He stopped using racist and homophobic slurs; he even hugged my gay cousin. But there was one view he wasn’t going to change. He had no time for Hispanics, he told us, and he wasn’t backing down. After all, this wasn’t a matter of bigotry. It was plain economics. These immigrants were stealing jobs from “Americans.”

I’ve been thinking about my grandfather lately, because there are signs that 2015 could bring about the beginning of a truce — or at least a reconfiguration — in the politics of immigration. Several of the potential Republican presidential candidates, most notably Jeb Bush, have expressed pro-immigration views. Even self-identified Tea Party Republicans respond three to two in favor of a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. Every other group — Republicans in general, independents and especially Democrats — is largely pro-immigrant. According to Pew, roughly as many people (18 percent of Americans) believed in 2010 that President Obama was a Muslim as believe today that undocumented immigrants should be expelled from the United States. Of course, that 18 percent can make a lot of noise. But for everyone else, immigration seems to be going the way of same-sex marriage, marijuana and the mohawk — it’s something that a handful of people freak out about but that the rest of us have long since come to accept.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:04AM

    by kaszz (4211) on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:04AM (#163404) Journal

    Who makes the big bucks on immigration? one could be tempted it's businesses that need a new underclass to exploit.
    H1-B-deja-vu?

  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:05AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:05AM (#163405)

    The problem with illegal immigrants isn't that they "steal" jobs, it's that they depress wages for the jobs they take. There is a perverse mythology in the US about the nobility of doing grinding, menial labor for almost no money, and there is an attitude that Americans should be ashamed for not wanting jobs that they think are beneath them... But you know, this is a first-world country. We can afford to pay agricultural workers a living wage, and we should. It's hard enough to get it done with fast food workers - we don't need people sneaking, and working for a wage that can support a family in Mexico. We need to pay people a wage that will support them here.

    An unwillingness to pay Americans at a rate commensurate with their skill is driving the same thing with legal, technological workers. The myth of the "STEM" worker shortage is driving H1B usage to levels that are absolutely having a negative peffect on American workers. I live near Microsoft. They're pushing H1Bs so hard, the demographics of the region have changed drastically in just ten years. This isn't my anecdotal opinion... NPR in the area recently had a , "Gee, that's interesting story" about the demographic change, and the fact that Microsoft is almost entirely responsible. I know people who were cut loose and replaced with cheaper, imported labor. I don't dislike Indians. What I dislike is corporate hijacking of the political system, and corporate hostility towards American workers and fair pay.

    CEO pay growth is the nail in the coffin.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:28AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:28AM (#163415)

      > The problem with illegal immigrants isn't that they "steal" jobs, it's that they depress wages for the jobs they take.

      That's true whether they are legal or illegal. But the the magnitude of the effect is still relatively small, on the order of just a 5% decrease for high-school dropouts. [thedailybeast.com] The other side of it is that immigrants are consumers too. Their purchasing supports a lot of service jobs.

      • (Score: 3, Disagree) by kaszz on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:41AM

        by kaszz (4211) on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:41AM (#163422) Journal

        Less salary, less consumption. And part of the money leaves the country so it won't benefit the country where they are earned.

        • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:02AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:02AM (#163428)

          > Less salary, less consumption.

          More people, more consumption. And if you read the linked the article you'll see that it can enable people higher up the salary ladder to work when they previously couldn't. A mother and housewife with a college degree can hire a nanny and/or housekeeper so that they can go from no work to part-time work.

          > And part of the money leaves the country so it won't benefit the country where they are earned.

          Drop in the bucket compared to the trade deficit.

          • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:26AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:26AM (#163436)

            Doesn't look like a troll to me. How the fuck are people defining "troll" now?

            • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:31AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:31AM (#163437)

              Its just one rogue moderator. Shit happens.
              (I am the author of the down-modded post in question)

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @07:21AM

                by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @07:21AM (#163468)

                Rogue moderator? One? How about a gaggle of us! And the Rouge Moderator!~
                Sarah Palin has taken jobs away from real Alaskans, ones with much larger mammilaries!

        • (Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday March 28 2015, @05:46AM

          by frojack (1554) on Saturday March 28 2015, @05:46AM (#163447) Journal

          And part of the money leaves the country so it won't benefit the country where they are earned.

          The size of that problem is enormous. 21 Billion to Mexico alone [toprightnews.com], and Migrants working in the United States sent a staggering $120 billion back to their families last year [dailymail.co.uk]
          One in 10 mexican households relies on money sent home

          All of it leaves the country Tax Free, very often with zero payroll withholding taxes, by people who don't pay income taxes.

          The US official foreign aid budget for 2016 is scheduled to be 22.3 billion. [usaid.gov] This isn't aid in the form of fighter jets and tanks to dictators, but rather USAID delivered directly to the poorest of the poor, in addition to food aid.

          --
          No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
          • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @06:04AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @06:04AM (#163450)

            > The size of that problem is enormous

            Compared to a trade deficit of over half a trillion.

            >All of it leaves the country Tax Free, very often with zero payroll withholding taxes, by people who don't pay income taxes.

            66% of illegal immigrants pay payroll taxes [reason.org] with no hope of ever collecting on it.

            > The US official foreign aid budget

            Bad comparison. Foreign aid is nearly all handouts to US companies. They don't send cash overseas, they buy goods and services from american companies for delivery to the poor. Its a good job if you can get it.

            • (Score: 3, Informative) by Immerman on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:48PM

              by Immerman (3985) on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:48PM (#163556)

              Just to put that in proper perspective, half a trillion = 500 billion, so that $120 billion money export is a wealth-flow imbalance roughly 1/4 the size of the trade deficit.

              • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:08PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:08PM (#163565)

                Just to put that in perspective, the Fed printed that much every couple months for a few years.
                And its still a drop in the bucket for a 16 Trillion dollar economy.
                $120 billion is about 6 months interest on the national debt.

            • (Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday March 28 2015, @06:50PM

              by frojack (1554) on Saturday March 28 2015, @06:50PM (#163611) Journal

              Bad comparison. Foreign aid is nearly all handouts to US companies.

              Nope. You are thinking of military aid. Follow the links I posted to USAID.

              --
              No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @09:11PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @09:11PM (#163647)

                > Nope. You are thinking of military aid. Follow the links I posted to USAID.

                Nope. Try this for example. [usatoday.com]

          • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Saturday March 28 2015, @08:09AM

            by aristarchus (2645) on Saturday March 28 2015, @08:09AM (#163474) Journal

            Yeah, same thing with the Gringos! My cousin turned around an entire Aircraft carrier fleet just so he could get his re-enlistment bonus as during combat duty? If it wasn't for both money sent home and the VA benefits for my otherwise totally disabled and useless relatives, my family would be just as bad off as those Mexicans you mention. But, you know, we are not Mexicans, we are Americans. Notice the only difference is the first four or five letters.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by wantkitteh on Saturday March 28 2015, @10:47AM

          by wantkitteh (3362) on Saturday March 28 2015, @10:47AM (#163498) Homepage Journal

          Where someone who earned their money chooses to spend it is their own God-Given Star-Spangled All American Right(TM).

          • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:15PM

            by kaszz (4211) on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:15PM (#163550) Journal

            Exactly, and that's why every country should exercise their right to control their borders with care to not destabilize their society's long term sustainability.

        • (Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Monday March 30 2015, @02:41AM

          by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Monday March 30 2015, @02:41AM (#164028)

          Less salary, less consumption.

          It also leads to lower prices for food, without which many of us would struggle even more to pay for it. Food is not a luxury or a non-necessary service, it is needed by everyone and in our economy that cheap labor can probably never be replaced until we have robots doing it all.
          Many, many years ago, barely if even a teenager, I worked a summer at a family farm for 75 cents an hour. A few of the older kids got as much as $1.25 per hour. None of us were paid until after harvest, when we received what at the time we thought were fat wads of cash. The farmers certainly did not exhibit any signs of getting wealthy from our cheap labor. Those jobs for kids are gone now, not lost to cheap immigrant labor, but lost to land use costs, the farm I worked on has sadly long been a housing development.

    • (Score: 1) by wisnoskij on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:00PM

      by wisnoskij (5149) <{jonathonwisnoski} {at} {gmail.com}> on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:00PM (#163542)

      Seriously. Look at a field like construction in the US. Now travel 20 miles north into Canada and look at the wages. A completely different story.

      Or course they are not taking a native's job. Any field they get into they dominate completely. There are just some jobs, agriculture/taxi/construction/many factories, that have such bad conditions and such bad pay that no one else will work in them. But many of them only exist in the first place because there is an illegal subclass of people to exploit.

    • (Score: 1) by wisnoskij on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:08PM

      by wisnoskij (5149) <{jonathonwisnoski} {at} {gmail.com}> on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:08PM (#163547)

      I am not sure I agree with the agriculture worker example. I am a farmer. Even farm owners do not make minimum wage. It is the only area where I disagree that the pay and conditions are so bad because of a class of easily exploited people. I think that is just a truism; Agricultural work is hard, dangerous, and is not profitable enough to make any money on. Agricultural, in all societies above subsistence living, requires either robotized machinery or immigrants from subsistence level societies to be brought in to do the work. We simply have too much food and far too many food subsidies, for the end product to be worth any reasonable amount.

      • (Score: 2) by dry on Sunday March 29 2015, @04:04AM

        by dry (223) on Sunday March 29 2015, @04:04AM (#163709) Journal

        And yet Canadian farmers fly Central Americans in, pay them $12-$15 an hour, house them, and fly them home while making money with less subsidies then American farmers get.

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:15AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:15AM (#163409)

    I actually have a bigger problem with the educated H1-B immigrants who supposedly were the only candidates capable of taking a job (*cough* bullshit *cough*). I would imagine this works the same as graduate student assistants for professors (something I and many of my asian friends have direct experience with). Professors want Asian (south and east) as graduate students because they will allow themselves to be overworked, underpaid, and will never talk back or complain. In general, they allow themselves to be completely and totally taken advantage of. Of course, many people like to flip that script and say that non-asian graduate students are lazy or unfocused...but we all know what the truth is. Same dynamic applies to the hiring H1-B employees.

  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:17AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:17AM (#163411)

    Get a dictionary. That's not what "debunk" means.

    • (Score: 5, Insightful) by frojack on Saturday March 28 2015, @05:51AM

      by frojack (1554) on Saturday March 28 2015, @05:51AM (#163448) Journal

      Exactly.

      At best its anecdotal evidence leading to a personal conclusion, on the part a writer for the New York times.
      That reporter is probably the last person who will be edged out of a job by an Illegal.

      I think Adam Davidson shoud put down the mouse and keyboard and pick up a skill saw or plumber's torch for a couple years.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 2) by wantkitteh on Saturday March 28 2015, @10:21AM

      by wantkitteh (3362) on Saturday March 28 2015, @10:21AM (#163495) Homepage Journal

      Read the rest of the article - badly chosen summary IMHO.

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Geezer on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:17AM

    by Geezer (511) on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:17AM (#163412)

    Another condescending salon socialist. Try telling this to the people with the layoff slips.

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:37AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:37AM (#163418)

      > Another condescending salon socialist.

      Indeed, the notoriously socialist Cato Institute [cato.org] and Reason Magazine [reason.com] are unbashedly in favor of immigration, including a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. Damn commies!

  • (Score: 2) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:27AM

    by MichaelDavidCrawford (2339) Subscriber Badge <mdcrawford@gmail.com> on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:27AM (#163413) Homepage Journal

    without any provocation whatsoever. What was at one time northwest Mexico is now the southwest united states.

    There are many Hispanics whose ancestors lived there before the US showed up with guns.

    --
    Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:39AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:39AM (#163419)

      Just follow the historic El Camino Real (US 101 on the West Coast), you see lotsa of these deep-rooted families.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by GungnirSniper on Saturday March 28 2015, @05:03AM

      by GungnirSniper (1671) on Saturday March 28 2015, @05:03AM (#163442) Journal

      Many of those Hispanics were colonizers just as the Texans were, and almost just as European.

      In any case, how many decades or centuries are we going to push back the world map? Shall we bring back Prussia as well?

      • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Saturday March 28 2015, @11:55AM

        by maxwell demon (1608) on Saturday March 28 2015, @11:55AM (#163505) Journal

        In any case, how many decades or centuries are we going to push back the world map?

        What about three centuries? ;-)

        --
        The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    • (Score: 2) by Geezer on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:09PM

      by Geezer (511) on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:09PM (#163523)

      Everything everywhere was taken by somebody somewhere sometime. There is no moral argument to be made for or against right of conquest, because all of the pots and kettles are black. Your Mexican territory was forcibly taken from various tribes/cultures (Aztec, Incan, American Native, etc.) by Spanish conquistadors and self-aggrandizing Catholic missionaries.

      Chill the misinformed self-righteousness and have a burrito.

      • (Score: 2) by dry on Sunday March 29 2015, @04:12AM

        by dry (223) on Sunday March 29 2015, @04:12AM (#163710) Journal

        Iceland wasn't.

        • (Score: 2) by Geezer on Sunday March 29 2015, @09:57AM

          by Geezer (511) on Sunday March 29 2015, @09:57AM (#163754)

          An unopposed conquest is still a conquest.

    • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:42PM

      by Grishnakh (2831) on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:42PM (#163528)

      The US took northwest Mexico by force without any provocation whatsoever. What was at one time northwest Mexico is now the southwest united states.

      Spain took large parts of Central and North America by force without any provocation whatsoever. What was at one time the Aztek empire and various other native American lands is now "Mexico", a former colony of Spain.

      Why is it OK when Spain does it, but not when England's colony does it?

      • (Score: 2) by dry on Sunday March 29 2015, @04:18AM

        by dry (223) on Sunday March 29 2015, @04:18AM (#163711) Journal

        In the case of America, as soon as the evil tyrant George III decided that all his subjects should be treated the same, well the English colonies revolted, led by the land speculators such as George Washington and with a lot of talk about rights and such so the common person would go along.
        Of course the colonies that didn't revolt ended up almost equaling the Nazis in how they treated the native population.

        • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Sunday March 29 2015, @08:21PM

          by Grishnakh (2831) on Sunday March 29 2015, @08:21PM (#163933)

          In the case of America, as soon as the evil tyrant George III decided that all his subjects should be treated the same, well the English colonies revolted, led by the land speculators such as George Washington and with a lot of talk about rights and such so the common person would go along.

          What are you talking about? The conventional wisdom is that the American colonies revolted because of high taxes and no representation. Taxing people without giving them representation in Parliament isn't akin to treating all subjects the same.

          • (Score: 2) by dry on Monday March 30 2015, @02:49AM

            by dry (223) on Monday March 30 2015, @02:49AM (#164029) Journal

            There was various reasons for the revolt and war of secession. The common people were riled up because their rights as Englishmen weren't being observed, which included taxation without representation. There was also the Royal Proclamation of 1763 which stopped western expansion by the colonies (and also gave rights to the Roman Catholics) and certain land speculators were not happy, which is why the rich wanted the revolt.
            As usual things were complex and as most of the history was/is written by the victors...
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Proclamation_of_1763#United_States [wikipedia.org]

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:28AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:28AM (#163414)

    Fifty years is ample time in which to change a world beyond recognition and its people almost beyond recognition. The only things required for the task are a sound knowledge of social engineering, a clear sight of the intended goal—and power.

  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:43AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:43AM (#163423)

    I was having a conversation with a person working at my local grocery store. Turns out the construction company I once worked for as a crane operator was his past employer too. It is the sort of job where you can claim to be able to lift 30,000 and put it within a few inches of wherever it needs to be safely. Two ex-operating engineers talking shop. I asked the obvious question, "How did you go from a 80k a year job to working minimum wage putting soup cans on shelves?". Turns out that employer one day gave everyone the boot and brought in Latin-American immigrants. Some were illegal, some aren't. Apparently they pay about 20k for crane operators now. Occasionally they get word of immigration coming in, then they layoff all the operators and hire union guys until it blows over, then go back to the unqualified and, depending on the state illegally unlicensed operators.

    So there is one example where a couple dozen skilled 80k jobs were replaced with 20k immigrants that don't know what they are doing.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:59AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:59AM (#163427)

      While I believe your story I find it very difficult to believe that the government hasn't caught on by now. It would take a huge act of negligence and obliviousness to not notice this. Then again government is well known for being lazy and not doing its job.

      Wouldn't unions have noticed something was strange here and screamed by now and made this whole thing public.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:57PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:57PM (#163582)

        I find it very difficult to believe that the government hasn't caught on by now.

        And a few phone calls/posh dinners later its not a problem. We all know the score. The guys with money talk to the guys in power. The guys in power do the bidding of the dudes with money. The guys in power give the appearance 'they are doing something' notice how they get word first that it is happening? A month or two later its business as usual.

        This is why I am *FOR* immigration. This level of corruption is sickening. They are taking advantage of these people while putting on a nice smile saying they are doing their jobs. The fucking hell they are.

        Wouldn't unions have noticed
        An organization that has ties to criminal organizations known for taking bribes? They are looking the other way? The hell you say.

    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:05AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:05AM (#163430)

      You really can't name this place?
      What do you have to lose?

      Occasionally they get word of immigration coming in, then they layoff all the operators and hire union guys until it blows over, then go back to the unqualified and, depending on the state illegally unlicensed operators.

      That sounds impractical. You are telling me they have enough lead-time in their warning that la migra is coming that they can hire union people and then lay-off union employees immediately afterwards?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @06:26AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @06:26AM (#163459)

        Operating engineers aren't line workers. They are part of the union and work on a per-job basis. Need an operator for a buildout taking two months? Call the union and one will be onsite as soon as one of 'em accepts. The union is there mostly to set working conditions, standard pay, training, and take care of "suit business".

        And if you think people are so disconnected in any industry that they don't get an email or text about inspectors coming around, well then I can't help you.

        • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @07:51AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @07:51AM (#163473)

          Agreed. Thanks for the insight.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:37PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:37PM (#163527)

          Your response is all misdirection.

          Now you are saying they hire union people for entire jobs, previously you were saying they hired and fired when immigration came around. Do you contend that immigration only comes around to check out people at the start of a job?

          Furthermore, where is the union in this? If you know what's going on, they know what's going on. Why don't they boycott the employer in their time of need? Labor actions are the entire reason unions exist.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:58PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:58PM (#163541)

            Same thing. I'll say it again as a matter of politeness. Operating engineer's unions are separate from businesses. Businesses can still hire operators without the union. If a business is so inclined, they can layoff their own workforce and bring in union people. Union guys can work for any specific period of time and then they will 'go away'. This is standard practice. If you want a private guy one week and a union one the next that is doable. I was one of those private guys for a time. I was cheaper but in some circumstances union people do need to be brought in if workload is heavy or I was otherwise not available. Some shops are mandatory union, most aren't. Union workers are willing to work for either at their own discretion, but they are paid according to union rules either way. You, as an independent person can hire a union guy for a specific period of time and pay standard rates for that sort of work. You, as an independent person could also hire anyone else to do the same work for the same period and negotiate the pay, or you could even keep them on permanently if you have continuous work for them to do. The union does not know business cycles, they are independent. All they know is that sometimes their guys are needed and sometimes they are not. Immigration checks can happen at any time but generally it is regional and industry specific such that the first place to be audited will be surprised but no others will for that cycle. This is all very obvious.

            Is that enough for you? This could go on forever with you criticizing tiny irrelevant things that I would have to spend paragraphs like the previous one explaining. I am not going to tell you the meaning of life or the origin and purpose of the philosophy of language. At some point it isn't the writer's fault if the reader does not understand. You didn't get it. That is okay. Not everyone is knowledgeable in the goings-on of the working world outside of cubicles.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:11PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:11PM (#163549)

              > The union does not know business cycles, they are independent.

              Yet you are somehow able to know business cycles.

              I'll say it again as a matter of politeness. It is hard to believe that this is an open secret and yet the organizing power of the union is not used against the people employing illegal immigrants in the union's industry. Whether as a labor action or as a continuous stream of reports of immigration violations because everytime someone is laid off from a job they still know what work remains and figuring out that they've been replaced by illegals is not hard. Low-skill work I can see, the kind of high-skilled work that requires licenses, that's doubtful.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:34PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:34PM (#163572)

                LOL. It's amazing to listen to limp wristed tech dweebs talk about things they have absolutely no knowledge in whatsoever.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @06:05PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @06:05PM (#163599)

                  Equal parts sad, funny, and understandable. It takes a higher level of intelligence to do well in tech. Those with higher intelligence are generally idealists, capable of seeing the world as how it could be. That combined with the obsession with potentially perfect digital constructs reinforces their view that they know how things should be to such a degree that they lose sight of what actually is.

                  That is the stuff of existential depression. When someone talks in ways that reveal they have that sort of mind, tender sympathy is the right course. They have a hard life ahead of them despite their surface-level advantages. Fight to keep your sense of self and accepting reality as how it actually is. There is little anyone can do in practical terms of efficacy outside of exceptionally controlled specificities.

                  • (Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Sunday March 29 2015, @02:30AM

                    by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Sunday March 29 2015, @02:30AM (#163696) Journal

                    Yes, because everyone REALLY smart knows the following things are true:

                    1. Anytime anyone says anything cynical, it should be taken at face value, even when said person is an Anonymous Coward on a spinoff of Slashdot.
                    2. It's always a conspiracy, no matter how many people need to be in on it for the conspiracy to work.
                    3. Bribery in government is universal, never investigated, and never prosecuted. Expert surveys of corruption by organizations such as Transparency International indicating this is not so are to be immediately discarded using one of the Standard Arguments of Conspiracy:
                              - They're in on the conspiracy and are there to pacify the sheeple.
                              - They're naive idealists who aren't as smart and insightful as you are.
                    4. Any attempt to determine the truth value of a cynical assertion by analyzing the plausibility of its arguments should also be immediately discarded using the Standard Arguments of Conspiracy. See item 2.

                    Obligatory XKCD [xkcd.com]

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:18AM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:18AM (#163726)

                      I do not know what snarky remarks about assumed conspiracy theorists and biases has to do with a post talking about well understood [davidsongifted.org] psychological [hoagiesgifted.org] effects. [sengifted.org]

                      The world simply is. Go out and measure it. Just because someone has an expectation that the world should be different or ought to be different does not change what is. No conspiracy theorists, insults, or numbered lists required. A loose argument does not make for a cogent one, even more so when a counterclaim is presented to be true based on someone's first-hand account. Even if it did, cogent arguments do not refute reality. That is why we use Science to figure stuff out when we used to use pure rationality.

                      I also never claimed conspiracy, corruption, bribery, or anyone is a "sheeple". It was not my intent or insinuation either.

                      The word idealist does not in any way indicate naivety.

                      Finally, what is your point exactly? I did not do nor think any of the things you have presented as being attributable to me.

                      • (Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:32AM

                        by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:32AM (#163730) Journal

                        And a few phone calls/posh dinners later its not a problem. We all know the score. The guys with money talk to the guys in power. The guys in power do the bidding of the dudes with money. The guys in power give the appearance 'they are doing something' notice how they get word first that it is happening? A month or two later its business as usual.

                        Was that not you? It's hard to tell when two or more ACs are arguing with each other. Even if it wasn't you, you seem to be on the same "side" as that person. That's what I was criticizing. Even if existential depression is a thing (and I guess it probably is), attributing that or a tendency to that to anyone doubting the rather tall tale told by the OP of this thread is inappropriate.

                        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:41AM

                          by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:41AM (#163732)

                          Is it a tall tale? That needs to be proven. You talk of attributing generalities to a specific situation when reasonably appropriate. So do I. It is not the initial doubting that is the indicator, but the persistence in belief that reality is a specific way by using rationality to show that it should be that way even after an equally reasonable counterargument is presented. Well, that and the high rate of people amongst the demographics of this site facing that very issue.

                          • (Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:53AM

                            by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:53AM (#163735) Journal

                            Okay, which one are you now? You guys should really create accounts.

                            Tall tales can be true, they just seem subjectively unlikely to be so. I think the guy or guys arguing against the plausibility of the initial story has the better argument. And wishful thinking or existential depression has nothing to do with this because quite frankly there are bigger problems in the world than first world construction workers' wages being depressed, and I don't personally know any construction workers, and I really quite frankly just don't care that much. I mean, the OP is probably a nice guy and I hope things go well for him, but, like I said, North Korean prisoners have it much worse.

                            Also, saying there are a large number of people on this site who struggle with existential depression is something you would have to make a much better argument for to convince me. Handwaving and saying gifted children struggle with existential depression doesn't cut it, for many reasons including but not limited to that the users of this site are unlikely to be "children" in the strict sense (13).

                            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 29 2015, @07:10AM

                              by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 29 2015, @07:10AM (#163738)

                              Considering you don't care and are not at all knowledgeable about any of this, why do you matter? Why should anyone spend the time convincing you?

                              • (Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Sunday March 29 2015, @07:21AM

                                by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Sunday March 29 2015, @07:21AM (#163740) Journal

                                It's relevant that I have no personal involvement with construction workers because your approach appears to be to accuse anyone who disagrees with you of wishful thinking to avoid falling into existential depression. And perhaps I should have said that your argument about existential depression being at all relevant to SoylentNews "wasn't convincing"; however, it's somewhat customary not to make sweeping passive voice statements like that in order not to seem arrogant. I was saying I don't agree with you and giving one reason why. I didn't specify the other reasons because I don't have an unlimited time to spend on these comments, I don't think your argument is likely to convince others; I thought one was enough.

    • (Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Sunday March 29 2015, @12:51AM

      by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Sunday March 29 2015, @12:51AM (#163680) Journal

      ...then go back to the unqualified and, depending on the state illegally unlicensed operators.

      I'm suspicious of the truth of this story in any case, given that it's third-hand, but, if the crane operators were actually unqualified, wouldn't there be an enormous increase in construction accidents caused by incorrect operation of cranes? And wouldn't state and federal regulatory agencies take interest in accidents causing loss of life or destruction of property, when the cranes drop things on other people's buildings etc.?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:26AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:26AM (#163728)

        if the crane operators were actually unqualified, wouldn't there be an enormous increase in construction accidents caused by incorrect operation of cranes?

        Yes [precast.org] of course. [cicb.com]

        You might be on to something. [nydailynews.com]

        • (Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:39AM

          by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:39AM (#163731) Journal

          We'd need accident data from before and after the alleged replacement of skilled with unskilled workers, and we'd need data on total numbers of cranes in operation (perhaps proxied by construction activity in general), in order to determine whether the true accident rate had increased or whether the increase was due to there just being more construction.

          But my point really was that an investigation into a crane accident would be likely to reveal that the crane operator was an illegal immigrant.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:51AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 29 2015, @06:51AM (#163734)

            It appears you have found a specific unknown stance and will defend it without evidence even when evidence proving presented points are provided. Moving the goalposts on your part even after I agree with you and do the legwork to prove your point is disheartening.

            What discussion can be had if nothing satisfies and you are unwilling to accept anything but the impossibly flawless in regard to a stance that you change?

            Nomatter, there is fun in technicalities. Even if someone spent the millions on an authoritative, academic survey with a team of top tier SMEs with all flawlessly accurate and authoritative data and even if that does indeed lead to not showing any trends whatsoever that still does not refute the original story as a specific case of immigrants displacing native workers. Oh and there was nothing claimed about illegal immigrants, that is on you. The claim was immigrants replacing native workers and that some of those immigrants may or may not be illegally operating based on licensing.

            • (Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Sunday March 29 2015, @07:08AM

              by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Sunday March 29 2015, @07:08AM (#163737) Journal

              How are you even responding so fast as an AC? You must be sitting there refreshing the page to see if someone replied. If you'd create an account, you could get emails sent to you when someone responds. Also, your posts are pretty good, and ACs post with a moderation penalty. The site would be richer for it if you made an account.

              It appears you have found a specific unknown stance and will defend it without evidence even when evidence proving presented points are provided. Moving the goalposts on your part even after I agree with you and do the legwork to prove your point is disheartening.

              I'm sorry, I meant no offense. Your links were interesting, just not really enough by themselves to really show that there's a trend of increasing numbers of crane accidents caused by lack of skill of the operators. But they were interesting, and that's certainly troubling if it's true.

              Given that (from your links) the construction company could be liable for injuries caused by a negligent operator, it seems like it would be pretty dumb to just hire any guy with no training and have him operate a crane. That would come out in discovery in a personal injury lawsuit pretty fast.

              Oh and there was nothing claimed about illegal immigrants, that is on you.

              That's not true:

              Turns out that employer one day gave everyone the boot and brought in Latin-American immigrants. Some were illegal, some aren't.

              ...that still does not refute the original story as a specific case of immigrants displacing native workers.

              Well, the guy in the story was working in a grocery store after he got fired. If it was an isolated case, presumably he would have been able to find another job as a crane operator elsewhere, instead of taking an unskilled job.

  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by TheGratefulNet on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:04AM

    by TheGratefulNet (659) on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:04AM (#163429)

    but we don't do that with h1b's. we let them in at full force and we don't even make them citizens. probably most don't want that, anyway, they often move back home rather than making the US their new permanent home.

    the influx is unbalancing many areas of the US and its causing problems, backlash, resentment (on both sides) and its just too much, too fast in too short a period of time.

    yes, it very much is displacing those of us who were born and raised here. the social contract used to include us. it does not seem to, anymore. this causes indirect resentment and that's not good, either.

    all we need is HONEST h1b style programs where a very few are allowed to enter the US to work, and those are individually monitored to ensure that they really did exhaust all attempts to find local US talent, first.

    hey, I have an idea. many of us are not currently employed (count me in on that list, sadly) - how about I go to work for the US gov as a h1b 'fake detector'. I can apply for jobs and when I'm turned down, I can report it to the government so they can truly verify that the guy who DID get the job is really heads and shoulders above me. lots of people like me could help out like that. if there were many like us doing this, the companies would not take the risk of being caught (because there really is not much enforcement right now, its a bad joke, in fact) and then there would be balance again.

    there is no one really keeping the companies honest. and greedy entities (ie, companies) will do what they always do; whatever they can GET AWAY WITH that will save them money, no matter what, even if it cuts their own legs out from under them. companies are very short-sighted and they don't see that the destruction of the middle class is going to hurt THEM sooner or later, directly or indirectly. but if we had people helping to police this, maybe the h1b program would be restored to what it was meant to be; importing TRULY EXCEPTIONAL people, not just workers willing to be indentured servants.

    if the h1b program was honest, life would be better for EVERYONE, including the few h1b's that truly do qualify to be here. their wages would be higher, too!

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:11AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:11AM (#163432)

      > they often move back home rather than making the US their new permanent home.

      Given that half of them are working for offshoring companies [computerworld.com] AND given how much of a PITA it is to go through the process of getting a green card, [nytimes.com] you can't really blame them.

      > how about I go to work for the US gov as a h1b 'fake detector'.

      There is literally zero budget allocated for H1B enforcement.

      • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:45PM

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:45PM (#163531)

        given how much of a PITA it is to go through the process of getting a green card,

        That doesn't prove that they actually want to stay here. It's easy for them to save up a bunch of $USD working here and living cheap, and then go back home after a while and live like a king with servants. Why would they even want to stay here long-term, with the high cost of living and lack of their own culture?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:57PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @01:57PM (#163540)

          > That doesn't prove that they actually want to stay here.

          I didn't say it does.

          What it does prove is a strong system-imposed incentive to leave. For which you literally can't blame them.

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by khchung on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:23AM

    by khchung (457) on Saturday March 28 2015, @04:23AM (#163434)

    The summary quoted two full paragraphs from the article, but didn't include this?! (emphasis mine)

    And yet the economic benefits of immigration may be the ­most ­settled fact in economics. A recent University of Chicago poll of leading economists could not find a single one who rejected the proposition. [...] Rationally speaking, we should take in far more immigrants than we currently do.

    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @06:29AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @06:29AM (#163461)

      That is a poll of economists, a group of people that also believe both markets and people are rational. If they were right about half of their opinions within their own field, not a one wouldn't be a billionaire. Think about that.

      • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:01PM

        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:01PM (#163543) Journal

        That is a poll of economists, a group of people that also believe both markets and people are rational. If they were right about half of their opinions within their own field, not a one wouldn't be a billionaire. Think about that.

        Economists don't believe that. Second, why in the world would their field have billions of dollars of personal gain in it?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @05:48PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @05:48PM (#163595)

          Um, forewarned=forearmed much? Kind of like ivory tower insider trading, only on a macro scale.

          Really, the only people worth listening to in finance are the ones with bank accounts to show for their expertise. The rest are dilettantes.

          • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday March 28 2015, @10:14PM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday March 28 2015, @10:14PM (#163655) Journal

            Um, forewarned=forearmed much? Kind of like ivory tower insider trading, only on a macro scale.

            So what? Where's the billions of dollars that an economist can allegedly get?

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:03PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @02:03PM (#163544)

        That is a poll of economists, a group of people that also believe both markets and people are rational. If they were right about half of their opinions within their own field, not a one wouldn't be a billionaire. Think about that.

        That's the same sort of fallacious logic that conflates weather with climate.

        Also you've over-simplified the "rational" thing to a ridiculous level. No one, other than retards on internet forums, believes that people are perfectly rational, if for no other reason than the fact that no one has perfect knowledge.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:39PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:39PM (#163573)

          And your comments are what I'd expect to hear from someone who hasn't worked in HFT their entire careers. I have, and let me assure you, economists DO believe that human beings are rational actors in the economy. So many forms of economic theory are based upon that fact. Every economist and quant I work with believes the same thing.

          But a guy on an internet forum claims it's not true. Who am I to believe?

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:57PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:57PM (#163577)

            And your comments are what I'd expect to hear from someone who hasn't worked in HFT their entire careers. I have

            So in order to post a comment to a story about the effects of immigration on the economy, one has to have worked in the field of HFT.

            Think before you post.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @05:13PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @05:13PM (#163587)

          One thing is for certain: Economics is not a science, and isn't even close to being one. "Social science" is almost a synonym for "pseudoscience."

  • (Score: 4, Funny) by tonyPick on Saturday March 28 2015, @08:54AM

    by tonyPick (1237) on Saturday March 28 2015, @08:54AM (#163482) Homepage Journal

    Unless you were thinking his name ran along the lines of "Great Chief Dances with Horses", then you wouldn't have to go very far back to find an immigrant in his family tree.

  • (Score: 2) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:50PM

    by PizzaRollPlinkett (4512) on Saturday March 28 2015, @03:50PM (#163574)

    The problem isn't immigration as much as temporary workers who rotate into and out of America. No American who lives in this society, wants to put down roots, and have a career can possibly compete with a constant rotation of temporary workers who earn money for a few years, live minimally, and go home. These people don't need to survive for the long term. As long as there is a constant rotation of these people every few years, they'll depress wages and allow companies to have a constant stream of crappy 3-month and 6-month contract jobs. That's really the crux of what is wrong with H-1B visa labor. If the H-1B people had to come to America and maintain lives over the long term, they'd need (and want) more money. But as long as this rotation of H-1B labor keeps happening, then the information technology field is largely closed to natives who need to support themselves and families. Life in America is very expensive when you consider what a native American in a middle-class job has to pay to maintain a residence, transportation, insurance, taxes, and so on. As long as jobs are paying what someone needs to live temporarily in America with no long-term obligations, then Americans can't make it.

    --
    (E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Justin Case on Saturday March 28 2015, @08:27PM

    by Justin Case (4239) on Saturday March 28 2015, @08:27PM (#163636) Journal

    When I go to the grocery store and see three different brands of peanut butter on the shelf, I like having the freedom to choose the least expensive one. So I understand when my employer wants that same freedom.

    Furthermore I think everyone should have the right to live in whatever country they choose, as long as they obey that country's laws.

    So it is hard to reconcile my political views with my personal experience. Back in the late 1990s when the web was really starting to catch on, I worked for a large employer who had maybe 100 web developers. Mind you this was back when web developers wrote well designed server-based code, instead of dragging and dropping candy bars and cartoons like they do now.

    We were good, but we were expensive. So after a while the Indians started appearing by the dozens. At first they worked side by side with us in the USA but before long "offshoring" was the thing and management discovered they could ship bits to India and back for much less than moving people around. Let a couple years pass and the USA based staff got trimmed back by 90% while the work went to Indians.

    Mind you, we originally had the corporate web sites running on four redundant IBM servers. Take any one down, nobody noticed. After the Indians did their thing, we had hundreds of PCs in the data center. The code had so many memory leaks that there was actually a full-time rebooter who walked around and rebooted each PC once a day. Yes, that's all he did. So I guess the plan did create one job. Of course, when a PC based webserver went down, all the users lost their active sessions, but who cares?

    Here we are coming up on 15-20 years later and my income is finally creeping back near what I made before the Indians showed up, not considering inflation. This after a decade of cleaning the crap out of Microsoft's pipes for almost no pay.

    So while I think immigration and the global economy is "the right thing" and good for the world at large, it surely hasn't been good for me personally. I hope all that money went to India and raised their grindingly awful standard of living a bit. That's how it's supposed to work, right?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @09:41PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @09:41PM (#163652)

      I don't doubt the facts of your post, but the fact is that your employer in the '90s found it more economical to use cheap labor, even if it meant that the service they were offering was less reliable.

      Isn't that what posters on SN and /. advocate when they're consumers? Stop protecting inefficient corporations with laws, let consumers vote with their dollars, or just download copyrighted material without paying.

      People want it both ways. People in the film, music, journalism, and publishing businesses don't deserve protection from the government, but IT workers do. I just find that stupid.

    • (Score: 2) by linuxrocks123 on Sunday March 29 2015, @02:50AM

      by linuxrocks123 (2557) on Sunday March 29 2015, @02:50AM (#163701) Journal

      I think the problem is that quality simply isn't valued in web programming, perhaps outside of niches like financial or trading websites where speed, reliability, and (one would hope) security are useful qualities. I'm not sure if Facebook does this anymore, but it's well-known that their coders used to simply upload new code to the running production server with minimal testing. Because no one really cares if Facebook goes down for a few minutes while they figure out what went wrong. Similarly, no one cares if a cat picture website goes down for a few minutes or customers randomly lose their active sessions once a day.

      I think web programming has an outsized percentage of bottom-feeders compared to the rest of the field. There are certainly areas in software engineering where quality, for various facets of quality, are valued. If you run into trouble again, you might want to look at another part of the field. Maybe embedded software, OSes, compiler development, or anything safety-critical. Programmers don't like it when their compilers crash; no one likes it when their OS crashes; and, I can guarantee you that either the code that runs in pacemakers or airplane cockpits isn't being fed out to the lowest bidder from India, or, if it is, that someone needs to blow the whistle on that company immediately before someone dies.

  • (Score: 1) by iWantToKeepAnon on Monday March 30 2015, @09:23PM

    by iWantToKeepAnon (686) on Monday March 30 2015, @09:23PM (#164493) Homepage Journal

    This sentence is clumsy and irrelevant

    According to Pew, roughly as many people (18 percent of Americans) believed in 2010 that President Obama was a Muslim as believe today that undocumented immigrants should be expelled from the United States

    Correlation and causation and blah blah blah. You're mixing religion into a race issue for one, and is it the EXACT SAME 18 percent of people? If not, why bring it up? Is this a veiled Godwin's law invocation? Throw out Obama and instant controversy? Clumsy and Irrelevant.

    --
    "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." -- Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 02 2015, @09:17PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 02 2015, @09:17PM (#165946)

    One in five is 20% (close enough to 18% for me...) It's a minority that could conceivably swing an election. It's a whole lot more than one or two out of one hundred. And, as part of that one in five I ask anyone who supports a route to naturalization: What will stop the next wave from coming over if not the threat of being expelled?

    Oh, and anyone who tried to make this about H1B's.... you should be modded severely offtopic. There's a big damn divide between legal and illegal immigration.