6 ms·

Correct. Labor shortages have conspicuously caused an increase in wages at all times even as far back as the middle ages [1]. The people in power today respond

Correct. Labor shortages have conspicuously caused an increase in wages at all times even as far back as the middle ages [1]. The people in power today respond exactly as they have in every case since the dawn of times: to suppress it. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Labourers_1351 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_Labourers_1351

notahacker 12y ago
Except in this case, it's the people in power continuing to impose restrictions on the international movement of labour to keep wages in the developed world artificially high...
- coldtea 12y ago
  No, they're not. Most people in power like businessmen, big corporations, neo-liberal funded think tanks, the E.U. etc, are against those restrictions and pro immigration (that doesn't mean they want immigrants in their gates communities and country clubs -- but they do like them working for cheap in their industry). The "imposing resctrictions" serves a two-fold purpose: 1) Politicians have to balance being re-elected by going what their voters want, which in most cases is less immigration or more tight control on it, and the interests of businesses that fund them who want immigrant workers. So, at least they have to put on a show of being against immigration. 2) For businesses it makes sense to want immigration ALONG with strict rules against immigration and a general anti-immigrant sentiment. That's so they can exploit cheap immigrant labor without having to pay the same amounts as they would do to locals. It's not just about increasing job supply to lower wages, it's also about using the immigrant (and illegal immigrant) status of some workers to pay them even less than they would a native citizen. Kind of like the strawberry picking jobs in California, where they bring in Mexicans from Mexico, with semi-legal status, in order to pay them as little as they can, and use force and special laws to ensure they don't get paid as much. E.g.: At a time of high unemployment, many Americans are convinced that these aliens take American jobs. As a test, this summer the United Farm Workers (UFW), the main agricultural union, launched a campaign called “Take Our Jobs”, inviting willing Americans to work in the fields. In the following three months 3m people visited takeourjobs.com, but 40% of the responses were hate mail, says Maria Machuca, UFW's spokesman. This included e-mails such as one reading: “We're becoming more aggressive in our methods. Soon it may come to hands on, taping bitches to light posts.” Only 8,600 people expressed an interest in working in the fields, says Ms Machuca. But they made demands that seem bizarre to farmworkers, such as high pay, health and pension benefits, relocation allowances and other things associated with normal American jobs. In late September only seven American applicants in the “Take our jobs” campaign were actually picking crops. That was the point, says Arturo Rodriguez, the UFW's president. America's farm jobs, which are excluded from almost all federal and state labour regulations, are not normal jobs. Americans refuse to do them. The argument about stolen jobs is “just a façade” for a coarser scapegoating, says Mr Rodriguez, and “we demonstrate the hypocrisy.” http://www.economist.com/node/17722932 http://www.economist.com/node/17722932
  - whybroke 12y ago
    Also, in the past, farm labor wages were high enough to fund an endless road trip including gasoline, cheap hotels, restaurant food etc. To such an extent that it is how Jack Kerouac and friends paid for the journey in "On the Road" without thinking about it. The same suppression applies to all wages from lab technician to programer from the twenty-first century to the fourteenth.
    - cryofan 12y ago
      no matter how this site tries to suppress and censor, some great comments still get through. What is your background?
  - notahacker 12y ago
    Immigrant farm workers used to much lower pay and no healthcare or pension benefits wouldn't unionise to demand the same minimum wages as locals if migration was free and unrestricted either; firms dependent on immigrant labour would be the last people to complain if mass permanent immigration was encouraged. As you pointed out, the existence of a visa system keeps things stable and voters - rich and poor - happy, just like the Black Death-era laws kept things stable and the landed gentry happy. But the argument I responded to that implied neoliberal arguments for loosening restrictions on migration are analogous to fourteenth century laws prohibiting the movement of labour was frankly bizarre.

notahacker 12y ago

Except in this case, it's the people in power continuing to impose restrictions on the international movement of labour to keep wages in the developed world artificially high...

coldtea 12y ago
No, they're not. Most people in power like businessmen, big corporations, neo-liberal funded think tanks, the E.U. etc, are against those restrictions and pro immigration (that doesn't mean they want immigrants in their gates communities and country clubs -- but they do like them working for cheap in their industry). The "imposing resctrictions" serves a two-fold purpose: 1) Politicians have to balance being re-elected by going what their voters want, which in most cases is less immigration or more tight control on it, and the interests of businesses that fund them who want immigrant workers. So, at least they have to put on a show of being against immigration. 2) For businesses it makes sense to want immigration ALONG with strict rules against immigration and a general anti-immigrant sentiment. That's so they can exploit cheap immigrant labor without having to pay the same amounts as they would do to locals. It's not just about increasing job supply to lower wages, it's also about using the immigrant (and illegal immigrant) status of some workers to pay them even less than they would a native citizen. Kind of like the strawberry picking jobs in California, where they bring in Mexicans from Mexico, with semi-legal status, in order to pay them as little as they can, and use force and special laws to ensure they don't get paid as much. E.g.: At a time of high unemployment, many Americans are convinced that these aliens take American jobs. As a test, this summer the United Farm Workers (UFW), the main agricultural union, launched a campaign called “Take Our Jobs”, inviting willing Americans to work in the fields. In the following three months 3m people visited takeourjobs.com, but 40% of the responses were hate mail, says Maria Machuca, UFW's spokesman. This included e-mails such as one reading: “We're becoming more aggressive in our methods. Soon it may come to hands on, taping bitches to light posts.” Only 8,600 people expressed an interest in working in the fields, says Ms Machuca. But they made demands that seem bizarre to farmworkers, such as high pay, health and pension benefits, relocation allowances and other things associated with normal American jobs. In late September only seven American applicants in the “Take our jobs” campaign were actually picking crops. That was the point, says Arturo Rodriguez, the UFW's president. America's farm jobs, which are excluded from almost all federal and state labour regulations, are not normal jobs. Americans refuse to do them. The argument about stolen jobs is “just a façade” for a coarser scapegoating, says Mr Rodriguez, and “we demonstrate the hypocrisy.” http://www.economist.com/node/17722932 http://www.economist.com/node/17722932
- whybroke 12y ago
  Also, in the past, farm labor wages were high enough to fund an endless road trip including gasoline, cheap hotels, restaurant food etc. To such an extent that it is how Jack Kerouac and friends paid for the journey in "On the Road" without thinking about it. The same suppression applies to all wages from lab technician to programer from the twenty-first century to the fourteenth.
  - cryofan 12y ago
    no matter how this site tries to suppress and censor, some great comments still get through. What is your background?
- notahacker 12y ago
  Immigrant farm workers used to much lower pay and no healthcare or pension benefits wouldn't unionise to demand the same minimum wages as locals if migration was free and unrestricted either; firms dependent on immigrant labour would be the last people to complain if mass permanent immigration was encouraged. As you pointed out, the existence of a visa system keeps things stable and voters - rich and poor - happy, just like the Black Death-era laws kept things stable and the landed gentry happy. But the argument I responded to that implied neoliberal arguments for loosening restrictions on migration are analogous to fourteenth century laws prohibiting the movement of labour was frankly bizarre.