Addressing immigration

[StLucieBengal]

http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/19/sessions-brat-outline-forbidden-conversation-on-immigration/

Thought this was interesting. Seems to be advocating in slowing legal immigration. I like the sound of this since I am in favor of a 1924 style immigration act.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

[Rotobeast]

(10-20-2015, 09:14 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote:

[Mike M (the other one)]

I wish they'd tell us something we don't know and start lining up some legislation to fix the problem. I don't want more talk, I want to see the bills being presented, but that will never happen because it's almost voting time again.

[*PhilHos*]

"Addressing" immigration.

Anyone else enjoy the word play? You know because immigration is about changing one's address.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-21-2015, 12:43 PM)PhilHos Wrote: "Addressing" immigration.

Anyone else enjoy the word play? You know because immigration is about changing one's address.

No.  I was just throwing him a bone.  But, props to Rotobeast for recognizing a femur.

[fredtoast]

Immigrants are consumers.

Immigrants pay sales tax and often even pay some income tax.

Immigrants help keep labor costs low in the United States.

These are the reasons that we will not see anyone address the immigration problem. However there actually is an immigration problem for a portion of the population. That is the unskilled laborer who can't find work at a decent wage. But they are poor, so the politicians will not so a lot to help them.

[StLucieBengal]

(10-21-2015, 02:18 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Immigrants are consumers.  

Immigrants pay sales tax and often even pay some income tax.

Immigrants help keep labor costs low in the United States.

These are the reasons that we will not see anyone address the immigration problem.  However there actually is an immigration problem for a portion of the population.  That is the unskilled laborer who can't find work at a decent wage.  But they are poor, so the politicians will not so a lot to help them.

The fact they keep labour costs down is one of the principle reasons we need to close off a large portion of all immigration. The blue collar worker needs a chance to see their wage increase.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-21-2015, 03:23 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: The fact they keep labour costs down is one of the principle reasons we need to close off a large portion of all immigration.   The blue collar worker needs a chance to see their wage increase.

The capitalist can simply choose to pay a fair wage to US blue collar workers rather than choosing not to do so.  It's that simple.  Or are you suggesting the immigrants are holding their bosses at gun point forcing the captains of industry to provide lower wages and no benefits?

[StLucieBengal]

(10-21-2015, 06:26 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote:

The capitalist can simply choose to pay a fair wage to US blue collar workers rather than choosing not to do so.  It's that simple.  Or are you suggesting the immigrants are holding their bosses at gun point forcing the captains of industry to provide lower wages and no benefits?

No. But when they are used to working for pennies then it makes a difference. No business is going to pay more than they have to.... But the immigration policy currently is anti worker. which I do not think is right. When they closed off immigration before we saw a 30 year boon.

[Vas Deferens]

(10-22-2015, 02:07 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: No.   But when they are used to working for pennies then it makes a difference.  No business is going to pay more than they have to....   But the immigration policy currently is anti worker.  which I do not think is right.   When they closed off immigration before we saw a 30 year boon.

I'm going to say this as nicely and honestly as I possibly can Lucie...  I find it very difficult to follow your line of reasoning; often because you use general pronouns while replying to statements where said pronouns could reference multiple specific people / groups / ideas / etc.  It's ineffective communication stylistically and frustrating because it puts an onus on the reader to go back and figure out what you are attempting to say.  

Hope that makes sense.  Just some constructive feedback.  

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-22-2015, 02:07 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: No.   But when they are used to working for pennies then it makes a difference.  No business is going to pay more than they have to....   But the immigration policy currently is anti worker.  which I do not think is right.   When they closed off immigration before we saw a 30 year boon.

If you believe in personal responsibility, like you feign, then the business owners are personally responsible for the wages they choose to pay their employees.  The immigration laws don't determine wages, the business owners do.

We've discussed the logical fallacy of your 30 year boon and immigration connection.  The Great Depression occurred during that period.  What affect did that have on wages and the economy?  The boon was a result of WWII, not immigration.  Even you know your opinion is false so why do you keep repeating it?  I'm going to go out on a llimb and guess your reason rhymes with "trolling."  Just a guess, though.