6 ms·

> And native-born Americans aren’t interested in the job, even at wages that have soared at higher than average rates. Conspicuously absent in every single art

by xienze 9y ago

> And native-born Americans aren’t interested in the job, even at wages that have soared at higher than average rates. Conspicuously absent in every single article claiming that Americans "aren't interested" in farm work is exactly what constitutes "higher than average rates". You _will_ find Americans interested in this work at some rate, but it's going to be higher than what you think it "should" be. In a country where a $15 minimum wage is expected for relatively comfy fast food work, back-breaking outdoor labor is going to be significantly more expensive. But you will find takers at some price.

criddell 9y ago
In another comment on this thread, a farmer said he couldn't hire people at $25 / hour. If a machine can do it, then a machine should do it. Especially work that's difficult and can be dangerous - like farm work.
- rgbrenner 9y ago
  Yes, but farm workers only work part of the year, and only work on each farm for a few weeks.. then move onto another farm. So having 1 farm paying $25/hr, does not change much for the worker.. after they finish at that farm, they'll need to go to another that's paying near minimum wage (the average for a farm worker).. and the result is that they are still in poverty (the average farm worker lives below the poverty line). The result is that no one is going to move from even a minimum wage job to farm work unless the pay is even higher and/or other farms get onboard with the higher wages.
  - criddell 9y ago
    Exactly right. This work needs to be entirely automated.
    - rfrank 9y ago
      Okay, what's your proposition for the displaced workers?
      - criddell 9y ago
        Displaced workers? We're talking about how difficult it is to find people to do this work. Anyway, having people do work that could be automated feels like another version of the broken window fallacy.
        rfrank 9y ago
        > We're talking about how difficult it is to find people to do this work. * in California. So farmers don't matter, just like other workers who lose their jobs to automation. Got it, thanks for the help.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
        criddell 9y ago
        > So farmers don't matter, just like other workers who lose their jobs to automation. Nobody said that and I can't believe you would think anybody actually sees the world like that. I would hope that we can find more meaningful ways for people to spend their days than doing things that can be better accomplished via machinery. Otherwise we really are just paying one group to break windows so another group can be paid to fix them and that's not good for anybody.
        rfrank 9y ago
        Automating people's jobs away without meaningful replacements is how regions get decimated, and you end up with very large swaths of very angry people without much to lose.
        criddell 9y ago
  - rjsw 9y ago
    This basically requires the worker to be either homeless or that they can leave a house somewhere else empty while they are working on a farm. How does welfare in the US cover housing costs ?
    - InitialLastName 9y ago
      That's a funny joke you just told.
    - rgbrenner 9y ago
      They dont get welfare. Farms are heavily dependent on immigrants, mostly illegal immigrants from mexico (90% are foreign born) for crop workers. They work on our farms for very little pay (but probably more than they would have in mexico), work here for 10 years or so saving as much as possible, then go back to mexico. They may travel from CA > WA through the season; or on the east: FL > OH > ME (this prolongs their work season). They're on average very poor, with little education (6th grade is the average). With the more recent restrictions on the flow of illegal migrants, many are finding it's impossible to come back to the us (or they choose not to come back). Disrupting the flow of illegal migrants that the farms depend on. That is the source of the labor shortage that the farms are now complaining about. Essentially for years they have taken advantage of illegal immigrants to depress wages in their industry. And now they have been cut off, and theyre finding it difficult to adjust their wages to appropriate levels so they can compete in the domestic labor market. Farmers deserve no sympathy for the labor shortage.. it's an exploitative arrangement. They should automate as much as possible, and for everything else they should pay market rates (whatever those may be... even if it's $100/hr or more (remember its short term hard labor, 2nd most dangerous work in the US)). This shortage is actually a great thing, if it lasts. Whatever workers are left, might finally get paid a livable reasonable wage. Edit: if your curious about their conditions, here's the National Agriculture Workers Survey that covers all of this: https://www.doleta.gov/agworker/pdf/NAWS_Research_Report_12_Final_508_Compliant.pdf https://www.doleta.gov/agworker/pdf/NAWS_Research_Report_12_... It's currently "offline for maintenance", so here's google's cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HiRr7h03zkcJ:https://www.doleta.gov/agworker/pdf/NAWS_Research_Report_12_Final_508_Compliant.pdf+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HiRr7h...
- rfrank 9y ago
  Farm labor in other states earn $15-20 an hour [1], and will enjoy much higher purchasing power, and (almost certainly) a political climate they'll find less actively hostile than the one they'll find in California. Why would farm laborers want to come here? 1. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes452099.htm https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes452099.htm
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- yequalsx 9y ago
  I'm certain people will do the work for $1 million per hour. Thus it seems a valid conclusion that $25/hr in California for this work is not the market rate.
  - criddell 9y ago
    The market rate has to include the cost of doing the job with machines. If a person will do it for $1 million per hour but I can get a machine to do it for $1 / hour, then the market rate is $1 / hour.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
thephyber 9y ago
> But you will find takers at some price. At some point, the goods won't move unless they are inelastic goods (which individual foods aren't). There is no single food product which people can not live without.

by xienze 9y ago

criddell 9y ago

In another comment on this thread, a farmer said he couldn't hire people at $25 / hour. If a machine can do it, then a machine should do it. Especially work that's difficult and can be dangerous - like farm work.

rgbrenner 9y ago
Yes, but farm workers only work part of the year, and only work on each farm for a few weeks.. then move onto another farm. So having 1 farm paying $25/hr, does not change much for the worker.. after they finish at that farm, they'll need to go to another that's paying near minimum wage (the average for a farm worker).. and the result is that they are still in poverty (the average farm worker lives below the poverty line). The result is that no one is going to move from even a minimum wage job to farm work unless the pay is even higher and/or other farms get onboard with the higher wages.
- criddell 9y ago
  Exactly right. This work needs to be entirely automated.
  - rfrank 9y ago
    Okay, what's your proposition for the displaced workers?
    - criddell 9y ago
      Displaced workers? We're talking about how difficult it is to find people to do this work. Anyway, having people do work that could be automated feels like another version of the broken window fallacy.
      - rfrank 9y ago
        > We're talking about how difficult it is to find people to do this work. * in California. So farmers don't matter, just like other workers who lose their jobs to automation. Got it, thanks for the help.
        deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
        criddell 9y ago
        > So farmers don't matter, just like other workers who lose their jobs to automation. Nobody said that and I can't believe you would think anybody actually sees the world like that. I would hope that we can find more meaningful ways for people to spend their days than doing things that can be better accomplished via machinery. Otherwise we really are just paying one group to break windows so another group can be paid to fix them and that's not good for anybody.
        rfrank 9y ago
        Automating people's jobs away without meaningful replacements is how regions get decimated, and you end up with very large swaths of very angry people without much to lose.
        criddell 9y ago
- rjsw 9y ago
  This basically requires the worker to be either homeless or that they can leave a house somewhere else empty while they are working on a farm. How does welfare in the US cover housing costs ?
  - InitialLastName 9y ago
    That's a funny joke you just told.
  - rgbrenner 9y ago
    They dont get welfare. Farms are heavily dependent on immigrants, mostly illegal immigrants from mexico (90% are foreign born) for crop workers. They work on our farms for very little pay (but probably more than they would have in mexico), work here for 10 years or so saving as much as possible, then go back to mexico. They may travel from CA > WA through the season; or on the east: FL > OH > ME (this prolongs their work season). They're on average very poor, with little education (6th grade is the average). With the more recent restrictions on the flow of illegal migrants, many are finding it's impossible to come back to the us (or they choose not to come back). Disrupting the flow of illegal migrants that the farms depend on. That is the source of the labor shortage that the farms are now complaining about. Essentially for years they have taken advantage of illegal immigrants to depress wages in their industry. And now they have been cut off, and theyre finding it difficult to adjust their wages to appropriate levels so they can compete in the domestic labor market. Farmers deserve no sympathy for the labor shortage.. it's an exploitative arrangement. They should automate as much as possible, and for everything else they should pay market rates (whatever those may be... even if it's $100/hr or more (remember its short term hard labor, 2nd most dangerous work in the US)). This shortage is actually a great thing, if it lasts. Whatever workers are left, might finally get paid a livable reasonable wage. Edit: if your curious about their conditions, here's the National Agriculture Workers Survey that covers all of this: https://www.doleta.gov/agworker/pdf/NAWS_Research_Report_12_Final_508_Compliant.pdf https://www.doleta.gov/agworker/pdf/NAWS_Research_Report_12_... It's currently "offline for maintenance", so here's google's cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HiRr7h03zkcJ:https://www.doleta.gov/agworker/pdf/NAWS_Research_Report_12_Final_508_Compliant.pdf+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:HiRr7h...
rfrank 9y ago
Farm labor in other states earn $15-20 an hour [1], and will enjoy much higher purchasing power, and (almost certainly) a political climate they'll find less actively hostile than the one they'll find in California. Why would farm laborers want to come here? 1. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes452099.htm https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes452099.htm
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
yequalsx 9y ago
I'm certain people will do the work for $1 million per hour. Thus it seems a valid conclusion that $25/hr in California for this work is not the market rate.
- criddell 9y ago
  The market rate has to include the cost of doing the job with machines. If a person will do it for $1 million per hour but I can get a machine to do it for $1 / hour, then the market rate is $1 / hour.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

thephyber 9y ago

> But you will find takers at some price. At some point, the goods won't move unless they are inelastic goods (which individual foods aren't). There is no single food product which people can not live without.