So should we ban only those technologies that lower the number of jobs needed to complete a task? Would that make us better off?

Fly: Inference != implication.

It is absolutely not a net cost to most Americans. More Americans eat lettuce than there are Americans who have any interest in picking it for money. Cheaper labor makes the lives of the hundreds of millions of lettuce eaters better, compared to the maybe tens of thousands of citizens who might consider picking lettuce if wages were artificially inflated by restrictions in the labor market, but who now look for other jobs..

You argument is a very simple argument, illogical but simple.

There are more students than teachers.
There are more people seeking legal aid than lawyers.
There are more people eating in our restaurants than cooks.
There are more people who will need a carpenter this year than carpenters.

Your statement that there are more Americans who eat lettuce than would consider picking it is a trivial statement of no importance for any economy that has left the hunter gatherer stage.


Wookie, can't you do better? If not, can you be right?

Probably not. So we can put aside this apples and oranges comparison.

Incomplete. When the value of lettuce picking, hotel work, lawn mowing, drywalling, etc go down due to increased competition, other earnings tends to decrease at the same time due to increased supply when displaced labor goes looking for substitute employment.

So now please explain how technologies that reduce the number of American jobs needed helps us but immigrants that reduce the number of American jobs need hurts us.

You are thinking of this with a fixed supply of jobs. Plus you dont even take into account the increase of product demand as supply costs reduce.

Not to mention you dont even take into account that when supply of labour increases and wages decrease the price of virtually all goods go down as well, not just those directly associated with the immigrant industry.

This is an extremely complex system all networked together but when experts do analyse all of those they see a net benefit to the immigrants, the host country in general and the people who are citizens of that country. See post 119 in this thread for one such study.

And your criticism is just as incomplete. If the former lettuce pickers undercut the wages of workers in other industries, then the prices of goods produced by those other industries will also go down, again to the benefit of all consumers.

And to reiterate, citizen lettuce pickers and drywallers don't only compete with immigrants on wages. They can also compete on a basis of productivity and work quality, which is not an impossible thing for someone who likely has better English skills and a better overall education. If a citizen has to step up the quality of his work to keep his job in the face of increased competition, this is still a good thing for consumers, and the citizen gets to keep his job.

And Phill makes a good point: jobs aren't finite. If people save a bunch of money because fruits and vegetables and the costs of their home go down, they have more money left over to spend on amusement park visits, or iPods, or lawn furniture, or heck, just more fresh vegetables, necessitating more farms and thus creating more jobs.

It boggles my mind that the leftists of this forum are arguing econ 101 with the conservatives, and the leftists are the ones taking the free market positions.

Concerto,

Do you like unions? Do you think they're good for the economy?

Technology increases worker productivity.

So a drywaller who loses his job to an illegal alien at least has the consolation of getting his drywall done cheaper.

Unions are great (in principle at least).

see post #119 above. I believe it addresses your concerns.

Also- I think its funny the whole argument. Americans aren't being pushed out of lawn mowing and lettuce picking jobs. They don't want the jobs. Its too hard work for too little money. If the immigrants go away, they're not going to be filled by americans for the same cost. And if the cost goes up, then the price of the product skyrockets and the american product won't be able to compete with imports.

Heh. Guess I could have spent some more time reading post 119. Would have saved me some time arguing.

So, seriously guys, if immigration tends to both drive down the costs of fruits and vegetables and actually raise wages for native workers, what do we have to fear from immigrants again? And why should we be so concerned with limiting the numbers who come in?

It increases the likelihood that a beat up pinto will drive by your house late at night playing mariachi music. And the hot dog stand some people love so dearly may be replaced by a cart selling tacos and churros.

It would be interesting if all the dark skinned immigrants went away. How long until the right creates new boogie men to frighten their constituients? And when the price of goods skyrockets (or those immigrant jobs simply disappear) and the unemployed angry white guy is still unemployed and the price of US goods is even more out of his reach... will he admit he's wrong?

Eh, we might go back to hating the Irish. Or just blaming Obama for ruining the economy.

Forgot that point in my previous post but i mentioned it elsewhere in the thread. Whilst drywall instillation requires someone on site there is nothing to stop imports crippling an industry like farming which is supposedly being "saved" by having an artificial floor on wages so Americans decide to do the job.

I mean you guys always have those farm subsidies which are well loved in this forum () to offset those costs. I remember when the steel industry was doing badly in the US so Bush put up a steel import levy. The steel industry did have enough time to sort themselves out but it just happened to put a huge dent in all of the country's manufacturing who had no option but to pay this suddenly inflated price. I dont have a link to hand but i read it cost more jobs and harmed the economy more than if they hadnt "saved" the failing steel industry - which i assume is still not far ahead of the tidal wave of cheap imports wiping them out.

But its alright, the steel industry has the unions to make sure those wages down drop so they can compete with foreign imports.

I do often chuckle when i see the same people who complain about immigrants "coming over and taking our jobs" also complain about outsourcing where "those damn foreigners are taking our jobs without even coming here!". Maybe its just me but if it is one or the other id prefer them to "come here" so they are then pumping a lot of their wages back into the economy.

Mainly cause people who are coming in are willing to work in industries that pay very little. If you somehow legalize unlimited immigration you will be facing the same challenges in banking, engineering and IT industries. Why should it be incredibly easy to get a job at the farm for $5\h forcing a native worker out who is getting $10/h but not as easy to get a job working for a bank for 50k\y and forcing out natives who are getting 200k\y?

You don't think that the 200k/yr banker has any competition for his job right now? Wouldn't any old 50k/yr native worker leap at the opportunity to do that job for half the cost? Hell, why aren't the 10/hr native lettuce pickers taking the banker's job when they're willing to do it for only $20/hr?

Who exactly do you think is going to be competing for a 200k bank job that isnt able to get a work visa?

Surely you arent being serious here.

Also, that uppity 200k/yr banker probably took that job from some 400k/yr banker. He should probably be deported. That way he can be replaced by the 50k/yr worker at the banking job for 200k, and the lettuce picker can go from making 10/hr to 50k/yr by filling in that job. Higher wages for everyone!

So there are no out of work Americans that once had jobs where illegal aliens are currently employed?

That is funny, not.

yes. its that black and white. I'm glad you got the point and have considered all the evidence presented. Plenty of evidence has been presented to show that immigration may be a net positive but carry on. Your mind is set and that's what's most important.

I'll grant that there probably were some. But at the same time, why aren't there American citizens hanging out by the local Home Depot every day looking to make some quick, off-the-books cash? And of course what's more, this is not a good reason to deny immigrants from competing for jobs.

What you're basically advocating for is a backwards and very expensive form of welfare. These American citizens who lose their jobs to immigrants were the ones too lazy or incompetent to compete with someone who's likely less educated and likely doesn't speak English. You would rather have the American keep his job, though, so you have to pay more out of pocket to buy the goods or services he produces. Furthermore, you're advocating a border security plan and a mass deportation plan that could easily cost a trillion dollars or more to enforce that this American won't have to compete with other people in ways like "doing a better job". You're proposing a massive and expensive government intervention that you'll be paying for to make sure that these people get more money than they deserve. It's probably cheaper and better for the economy to just let the immigrants do the work and put the displaced workers on welfare.

Because they are sitting at home making on the books cash?

Actually, I don't care too much about those people until they get their acts together.

No, the American should keep his job so he'll have more money to buy what other Americans produce, increasing the general welfare. Not to mention the "wealth effect" which does not happen when workers' earnings dilute across borders, another factor in this mess.

Huh? Lol.