SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
During Thursday night's televised US Presidential debate between the four remaining candidates for the Republican nomination, front-runner Donald Trump acknowledged that he was "softening" his stated position against H1-B immigration visas, because "we have to have talented people in this country".
Trump's web site describes the candidate's hard-line stance against several types of immigration, particularly undocumented workers from Mexico, but also the H1-B program for guest workers in IT and other STEM-related fields:
Increase prevailing wage for H-1Bs. We graduate two times more Americans with STEM degrees each year than find STEM jobs, yet as much as two-thirds of entry-level hiring for IT jobs is accomplished through the H-1B program...
Requirement to hire American workers first. Too many visas, like the H-1B, have no such requirement. In the year 2015, with 92 million Americans outside the workforce and incomes collapsing, we need companies to hire from the domestic pool of unemployed.
Asked point blank by debate moderator Megyn Kelly whether he was changing the policy described on his web site, Trump acknowledged that he was:
I'm changing. We need highly-skilled people in this country. If we can't do it, we will get them in.
In fairness, Trump's rivals for the GOP nomination have also flip-flopped on immigration issues in recent years.
Trump's new position brings him closer to the views of financial media tycoon Mike Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City, who is reportedly considering an independent run for the US Presidency. Bloomberg is a vocal advocate for unlimited H1-B visas, an idea which is popular in the executive suites and boardrooms of Silicon Valley but is anathema to many rank-and-file US engineers.
Trump has clarified his statement in a post on his Facebook page:
Megyn Kelly asked about highly-skilled immigration. The H-1B program is neither high-skilled nor immigration: these are temporary foreign workers, imported from abroad, for the explicit purpose of substituting for American workers at lower pay. I remain totally committed to eliminating rampant, widespread H-1B abuse and ending outrageous practices such as those that occurred at Disney in Florida when Americans were forced to train their foreign replacements. I will end forever the use of the H-1B as a cheap labor program, and institute an absolute requirement to hire American workers first for every visa and immigration program. No exceptions.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Sunday March 06 2016, @11:22PM
As a member of the "marxist wing" of the Democrat party as Luis CK would put it (well, actually, I consider myself a Green), I'm not afraid of Trump. He's a blowhard to be sure but the media response against him has been overwhelmingly obvious partisanship. Kind of like how when Sanders wins 2/3 of the states up for Super Saturday, you can hardly find a positive headline on it in any news aggregator -- it's all Hillary this and Hillary that as if Sanders doesn't exist. The Washington Post is so partisan and ugly, I added it my /etc/hosts just to prevent myself accidentally giving them traffic.
What we are seeing is the corporate reaction against engaging in a little economic nationalism, and the bosses hate that because if workers ever regain any power, they will find that their ability to bleed the middle class dry for their own benefit will be thwarted to some degree. I really suggest people watch this interview with Sir James Goldsmith (a self-made billionaire capitalist) from 1994 regarding NAFTA and GATT to understand this issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PQrz8F0dBI&list=PLD255EEFDD0D9F07E [youtube.com]
There was for a long time some semblance of balance between Capital and Labor, regarding how to divide up the profits on any particular good or service. But when you engage in free trade with the third world, and where capital is totally portable, you eviscerate the ability of Labor to effectively negotiate, transfer all power to Capital, and you end up with low wages and unemployment. That's just a fact. The economy is a tool that should benefit society, not destroy it.
Back to Trump, I'll not be voting for him -- I'll vote for Bernie if he wins the primary and for Jill Stein if he doesn't -- but I would rather see him beat Hillary because if he did engage in some economic nationalism, for all his warts, that would be a good thing. If HRC is elected, we'll be looking at 4-8 more years of slowly bleeding to death. The Problem With Hillary, Chez, Is I Don't Vote Republican. [huffingtonpost.com]
As for the comparisons to Hitler, I think that's pretty over the top. Trump has clearly indicated that he thought Iraq was stupid and GWB lied (and a "yo momma" quip to the latest Bush) -- during a Republican debate! Hitler wrote about living space and war and clearly outlined his intentions in that sphere. Trump has said he would not have done that war -- that's just not very Hitleresque. Trump has of course made some pretty nasty comments, but I think that in actual practice, he'd end up being a bit more thoughtful. It's a negotiating tactic -- shoot for the stars and settle on the moon. If one was to presume that the DNC isn't just the NewGOP, it seems that its tactic is to shoot for the foothills and settle for death valley. Lastly, I figure if Trump wins, he'll either turn out to be a relatively OK president, or he'll suck, in which case an actual liberal will win 2020.
Anyway, the media is just godwinning itself in its attempt to protect Capital from ever having to share with Labor any of the proceeds of business.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 07 2016, @05:22AM
wrt to hitler - no fucking duh! Of course he isn't literally hitler, no one will ever be literally hitler again.
But if you don't see the strong parallels, then you are just being willfully blind. First and foremost is his appeal to xenophobia - hitler didn't make the disenfranchaised germans hate the jews (and gypsies and all non-aryans), he just gave voice to their discontent.
> Trump has of course made some pretty nasty comments, but I think that in actual practice, he'd end up being a bit more thoughtful.
Read this:
A sophisticated politician credited Hitler with peculiar political cleverness for laying emphasis and over-emphasis on anti-Semitism, saying: "You can't expect the masses to understand or appreciate your finer real aims. You must feed the masses with cruder morsels and ideas like anti-Semitism. It would be politically all wrong to tell them the truth about where you really are leading them.
New York Times, 1922 [nytimes.com]
Funny how similar that sounds, no?
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Monday March 07 2016, @06:17AM
Pogroms in Germany and Eastern Europe were common long before Hitler. Secondly, if you are going to tell me that Trump is Hitler, show me his Mein Kampf.
Does he say stupid shit about waterboarding? Yeah. Are Bush and Cheney Hitler because they actually did it you know? Is Obama Hitler for excusing all of that with his "look forward not backward" horseshit? Is HRC who actively destabilized Libya so that all kinds of people could die, a Hitler? The Hitlerishness of any of these four I've mentioned is much higher than Trump who has not publicly cackled at killing someone or lied to start a war or drone bombed half the planet.
So really, the Establishment has godwinned itself with this. You lose. Fuck off.
(no I'm not a Trump voter -- no chance of that (Bernie if he makes it, Jill Stein otherwise) -- but it is blindingly obvious that the GOP establishment is shitting its pants and screaming any smear it can because the basis of its power, like that of the DNC's, is eviscerating the American job market so that 0.1% can continue to ridiculously prosper on the backs of everyone else and buy themselves some good little government officials.)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 07 2016, @03:10PM
Mein Kampf was published in 1925, 3 years after that NY times article. There were pogroms in russia and other states too but no hitler there. Meanwhile islamaphobia is growing problem in the US. Something like 70% of republicans and 40% of democrats believe islam is incompatible with american values. History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday March 07 2016, @03:20PM
Something like 70% of republicans and 40% of democrats believe islam is incompatible with american values.
To be fair, the terrorists have been doing their best to convince us of this same point with their "America the Great Satan" talk etc.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"