3 ms·

Regarding your point about immigration: it would be in the interest of both immigrants and non-immigrants to agree on reasonable minimum working standards (sala

Regarding your point about immigration: it would be in the interest of both immigrants and non-immigrants to agree on reasonable minimum working standards (salary and other benefits) which would largely avoid them being pitted against one another. Typically, when a group of people has a common interest like this, it makes sense for each individual to join forces with the others. Ideally they'd then get this sort of rule codified as a law. Of course, the joining of forces of individuals somehow has a bad rap in the US...

ldjkfkdsjnv 5y ago
Theres no way to get around the adversarial relationship between immigrants and host workers. You can claim it doesnt exist, which is a common move in american politics, but the diminishing middle class points to the contrary.
unglaublich 5y ago
When there's an oversupply of employees, they are not in a good position to set such requirements: they cannot NOT work. That's why unions are needed. But the US has declared them "enemy of the state". This holds for all essential services: housing, medical services. These are no real 'free markets', and if not regulated, suppliers can raise prices as much as they want, which will further exaggerate the gap between low- and upper-class. That's why regulation is needed. But the US has declared regulation the "enemy of the state". That's why the US is a "free country" in its most literal sense: if you can't make it, you are free to rot away.
- vladvasiliu 5y ago
  I'm not completely convinced by the lack of regulation argument. I live in France, where unions are a thing, there's a minimum wage, plenty of regulations for everything. But I still see the same issues. The middle class is disappearing, income inequality rises, people can't afford to buy a shoebox to live in, etc... But there are also the same exact issues GP complained about: moving of industry to Asia / Eastern Europe / North Africa, outsourcing of services to the same (think call centers), money printing like there's no tomorrow, financialization of housing. Unions can only do so much. At the end of the day, if the factory closes to move two countries over, union or no union, you're still out of a job. So short of introducing tariffs or outright banning commerce with other countries, there's not much the government can do.
  - unglaublich 5y ago
    Yes, you can't buy a house because rich folks are buying all real estate in cities to rent out. It's the same everywhere, and it would need to be regulated imo. But it won't, because poor people vote like they're rich. Unions can do so much. And the consumer can do the rest. We can choose to buy from companies that we trust. For example, in the clothing industry there are more and more companies that solely produce in EU countries. Same holds for electronics, food, etc. If we, workers, consumers, voters, would work together and think a bit more before we work, buy, vote we could change a lot.
    - vladvasiliu 5y ago
      > If we, workers, consumers, voters, would work together and think a bit more before we work, buy, vote we could change a lot. Sure. The issue, though, is that people are very price-sensitive because of the above reasons. So retailers bring in the cheaper off-shored products, and the cycle continues. I think this could be regulated, but it would go against the various free-trade agreements. Which means that maybe we should rethink those.
DangitBobby 5y ago
If you increase the labor pool, the value of individuals in the pool goes down. There's no other way to slice it. If unskilled laborers are somewhat scarce, they may stand a slight chance of receiving a wage higher than the legal minimum (reasonable or otherwise).

ldjkfkdsjnv 5y ago

Theres no way to get around the adversarial relationship between immigrants and host workers. You can claim it doesnt exist, which is a common move in american politics, but the diminishing middle class points to the contrary.

unglaublich 5y ago

When there's an oversupply of employees, they are not in a good position to set such requirements: they cannot NOT work. That's why unions are needed. But the US has declared them "enemy of the state". This holds for all essential services: housing, medical services. These are no real 'free markets', and if not regulated, suppliers can raise prices as much as they want, which will further exaggerate the gap between low- and upper-class. That's why regulation is needed. But the US has declared regulation the "enemy of the state". That's why the US is a "free country" in its most literal sense: if you can't make it, you are free to rot away.

vladvasiliu 5y ago
I'm not completely convinced by the lack of regulation argument. I live in France, where unions are a thing, there's a minimum wage, plenty of regulations for everything. But I still see the same issues. The middle class is disappearing, income inequality rises, people can't afford to buy a shoebox to live in, etc... But there are also the same exact issues GP complained about: moving of industry to Asia / Eastern Europe / North Africa, outsourcing of services to the same (think call centers), money printing like there's no tomorrow, financialization of housing. Unions can only do so much. At the end of the day, if the factory closes to move two countries over, union or no union, you're still out of a job. So short of introducing tariffs or outright banning commerce with other countries, there's not much the government can do.
- unglaublich 5y ago
  Yes, you can't buy a house because rich folks are buying all real estate in cities to rent out. It's the same everywhere, and it would need to be regulated imo. But it won't, because poor people vote like they're rich. Unions can do so much. And the consumer can do the rest. We can choose to buy from companies that we trust. For example, in the clothing industry there are more and more companies that solely produce in EU countries. Same holds for electronics, food, etc. If we, workers, consumers, voters, would work together and think a bit more before we work, buy, vote we could change a lot.
  - vladvasiliu 5y ago
    > If we, workers, consumers, voters, would work together and think a bit more before we work, buy, vote we could change a lot. Sure. The issue, though, is that people are very price-sensitive because of the above reasons. So retailers bring in the cheaper off-shored products, and the cycle continues. I think this could be regulated, but it would go against the various free-trade agreements. Which means that maybe we should rethink those.

DangitBobby 5y ago

If you increase the labor pool, the value of individuals in the pool goes down. There's no other way to slice it. If unskilled laborers are somewhat scarce, they may stand a slight chance of receiving a wage higher than the legal minimum (reasonable or otherwise).