That wasn’t even true since it was first proffered in the mid 19th century. Immigration waves have expanded or created new markets, brought new skills and people buying their way into the system for themselves and future generations.
You are mixing cause and effect. Immigration increases when there already is an upswing in the economy. Labor doesn’t get “absorbed” markets expand to go along with it, bolstering growth.
No it can’t because there is far more to immigration than coming here for work or even having a means of coming here legally to work.
Primarily, because stopping immigration is not the actual goal - the actual goal is to find ways to keep labor costs as cheap as possible, so undocumented and prisoners are often embraced to fill in “gaps” that could easily be filled by having living wages with benefits. But then labor costs go up, and their is a loss of profits from the owners of the business and/or stockholders. This sort of thing really reveals what the whole system is all about, and it’s not building a better society.
No-one besides the right-wing’s straw-men liberals and progressives is actually calling for an open border. That’s because actual liberals and progressives are calling for a streamlined, efficient, and low-cost path to citizenship that will reduce the need for illegal and dangerous border crossings. The reason that immigration is so difficult now is attitudes like:
Which leads to underfunding and neglect and corruption when it comes to agencies that primarily serve non-citizens.
In practise, the U.S. extends many rights and privileges accorded to citizens to non-citizens (including visitors). But try to get the federal government to apply funds and it’s all “yer givin’ mah hard-earned taxpayer dollars to furriners!”
Both party establishments have issues in this regard, and both party establishments buy into the neoliberal consensus to one degree or another. The populist wing of the Dems would remedy the situation with mandatory E-Verify and harsh penalties for employers. The populist wing of the GOP “remedies” the situation by wasting billions of dollars on a useless wall while leaving employers free to continue to exploit undocumented immigrants.
Manual labor visas. So people can come here to do the work that they do here anyway yet still be documented. (will never fly with those who want to exploit illegal alien labor)
Reduce penalties for illegal alienage for people who don’t have a criminal record for violent crime to a stiff fine rather than deportation. Let the punishment be proportional to the offense. You pay you stay. (Will never fly with raving bigots whose motivation is keeping out POC)
Treat immigration offenses as criminal offense. Which means 8th Amendment limitations and due process rights for those detained. (Will never fly with raving bigots who WANT people of color in concentration camps and abused by ICE)
That is demonstrably false. Plenty of research has been done in the agricultural sector about this. Farmers literally can’t hire anyone in this country to do that work, even when they try. Even when migrant worker visas are cut and the choice is between hiring Americans or letting the produce rot, farmers are forced to let the produce rot. They literally cannot find Americans who will do the work even above minimum wage. For an approachable summary of this situation here’s a Planet Money story about it:
That’s totally impossible. At some price point, people will work. One difficulty is that we do have generous enough unemployment benefits that making farm work more desirable than getting unemployment, it has to pay pretty well. Oh well. Farmers don’t have a right to make a profit. If certain activities here are not profitable then they won’t happen. That’s ok.
One thing that would happen if cheap immigrant labor (illegal or through a guest worker program) were not available, is that farm land would become much less profitable so the value of it would drop. I’m totally ok with that. It would allow more people to buy it and even work on it, which is a desirable outcome in my opinion.
That’s simply impossible. At $1,000 an hour, they will have a long line of people (including me) ready to do the work. At $100 an hour, they will have a long line. At $50 an hour and below, they will have fewer people. At $15/hr they will probably have no one. That’s fine. Whatever they need to pay they need to pay. My company hires engineering staff and I don’t complain that I can’t find them for under $100/hr. Employers don’t have a right to cheap labor and companies and farm owners don’t have a right to make a profit.
On a side note, I can’t believe that BoingBoing readers are so worried about farm owners having sufficient access to cheap labor.
Not really, because in addition to a price point for labour there’s also a price point for the output of labour. The latter is determined in significant part by the former, and if it gets too high a business becomes unprofitable or prices itself out of the market. The outcome is then no employer and wages of $0.00.
More straw men, eh? The reality is, BoingBoing readers are more willing than most to accept a higher price for a good or service if it translates into a living wage and decent working conditions. But BoingBoing readers also understand basic economics and how they play out in the real world.
If they can’t afford to pay their workers properly, why are they in business? If they can’t figure out how to pay for their expenses and turn a profit, they are bad business people and should go out of business.
No one said that, so stop putting words in people’s mouths. Most of us believe that people should be paid properly for the labor they provide to employers rather than being exploited.
Here is an idea:
HANG SOLAR PANELS on the south side of the wall + let 50% of the electricity go to a Mexican town and the other half go an American town = sign of FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN COUNTRIES!
The opposite of the initial malicious intention…
What do you think?
