3 ms·

Wait a minute, how does free trade "jack up the size of the labor pool"? Did the foreigners who were previously forbidden from competing with natives not exist?

Wait a minute, how does free trade "jack up the size of the labor pool"? Did the foreigners who were previously forbidden from competing with natives not exist? Oh right, better to have folks born on the wrong side of an arbitrary line continue to live on $3k/year in order to make sure American wages continue to rise from $40k to $60k. Be honest - your actual complaint is that reducing inequality sucks when you are at the top of the heap. Actually "sucks" isn't even the right word, since I doubt you can name a single good or service that Americans have less of today than 20 or 30 years ago. (Expanding categories of goods, e.g. "health care", don't count.) https://www.gc.cuny.edu/CUNY_GC/media/CUNY-Graduate-Center/PDF/Centers/LIS/Milanovic/papers/2014/Where14.pdf https://www.gc.cuny.edu/CUNY_GC/media/CUNY-Graduate-Center/P...

mpyne 11y ago
> Oh right, better to have folks born on the wrong side of an arbitrary line continue to live on $3k/year in order to make sure American wages continue to rise from $40k to $60k. Be honest - your actual complaint is that reducing inequality sucks when you are at the top of the heap. Which is why I found it so funny that Bernie Sanders complains about Vietnamese workers (he even called them out by name!). I'm used to seeing race-baiting from politicians of all stripes. I just wasn't used to seeing it from self-described "actual socialists".
- crdoconnor 11y ago
  Was this something that actually happened or something that you saw on Hannity?
  - notworthmyjob 11y ago
    I believe he's referring to this. Of course Sanders is criticizing low wage offshoring, not Vietnamese people. https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bernie-sanders-to-obama-on-nike-trip-just-dont-118371547706.html https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bernie-sanders-to-obama-on-ni...
crdoconnor 11y ago
>Be honest - your actual complaint is that reducing inequality sucks when you are at the top of the heap. While we're being honest, if you're working for a living rather than living off investments (i.e. the labor of others) you are nowhere near to the top of the heap. If you're living off the labor of others, opening the immigration floodgates is great news. More workers to play off against one another. H1-Bs are even better news.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  tl;dr; I'm only in the top 3'rd percentile and I feel envy for the top 1'st percentile, and I'm willing to cause millions to suffer dire poverty in order to mitigate my feelings of envy.
  - crdoconnor 11y ago
    tl;dr you are primarily concerned with the exploitation of dire poverty in third world countries for personal gain. We both know that importing the best Bangladeshi talent to the United States because it's 50% cheaper than the average American is not going to help the average impoverished Bangladeshi. Quite the opposite, in fact.
    - yummyfajitas 11y ago
      you are primarily concerned with the exploitation of dire poverty in third world countries for mutual gain. Fixed that for you. FYI, I'm an American working for an Indian company. So according to your theory, I'm the one being happily exploited by global trade. By the way, according to your github profile, you live in Singapore. You were born there (Colm O'connor sounds like a very Singaporean name) and never plan to leave, right? Or is this a situation of "restrict their freedom to move, but not mine"?
      - dang 11y ago
        > Be honest - your actual complaint is that reducing inequality sucks when you are at the top of the heap. > [you're] willing to cause millions to suffer dire poverty in order to mitigate [your] feelings of envy > By the way, according to your github profile, you live in Singapore These things cross the line. It's fine to have a contrarian view but please don't put an acerbic and personal spin on it when posting here.
coldtea 11y ago
>Actually "sucks" isn't even the right word, since I doubt you can name a single good or service that Americans have less of today than 20 or 30 years ago. (Expanding categories of goods, e.g. "health care", don't count.) Jobs.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  Jobs are a cost, not a benefit. You seem to be agreeing with me - we have more benefits and fewer costs.
  - aswanson 11y ago
    C'mon man. Benefit is a weasel word here. Beneficial to whom? Are you implying, in the limit, that a society with zero employment is maximally beneficial, even for the reaper of said profits?
    - yummyfajitas 11y ago
      Yes, a society with zero employment where everyone has more goods and services than before sounds like utopia. You are basically describing robots meeting all our needs while we do whatever we like.
      - ReverendBayes 11y ago
        Really? You cannot imagine any scenario where employment approaches zero other than the robotic-utopia scenario? We have no historical example of employment approaching double digits without societal problems ensuing? The higher the unemployment, the closer to robo-utopia, in a smooth, monotonic fashion, right?
        yummyfajitas 11y ago
        I'm aware of situations where consumption and employment dropped. But in this thread, we are very specifically discussing a situation where employment (a cost) dropped and consumption (a benefit) increased. If you want to argue that consumption has dropped, do it. So far no one else here has.
wrk1 11y ago
Note that I didn't say that free trade was "good" or "bad". That's a different discussion. I was simply describing the labor pool here in the US. Similarly, I am not saying that illegal immigration, H1B, etc is "good" or "bad". Also, I am not complaining - I am doing pretty well for myself, thanks. My other answer (to thomasfoster96) has more details on how free trade with Asia jacks up the labor pool.

mpyne 11y ago

> Oh right, better to have folks born on the wrong side of an arbitrary line continue to live on $3k/year in order to make sure American wages continue to rise from $40k to $60k. Be honest - your actual complaint is that reducing inequality sucks when you are at the top of the heap. Which is why I found it so funny that Bernie Sanders complains about Vietnamese workers (he even called them out by name!). I'm used to seeing race-baiting from politicians of all stripes. I just wasn't used to seeing it from self-described "actual socialists".

crdoconnor 11y ago
Was this something that actually happened or something that you saw on Hannity?
- notworthmyjob 11y ago
  I believe he's referring to this. Of course Sanders is criticizing low wage offshoring, not Vietnamese people. https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bernie-sanders-to-obama-on-nike-trip-just-dont-118371547706.html https://www.yahoo.com/politics/bernie-sanders-to-obama-on-ni...

crdoconnor 11y ago

>Be honest - your actual complaint is that reducing inequality sucks when you are at the top of the heap. While we're being honest, if you're working for a living rather than living off investments (i.e. the labor of others) you are nowhere near to the top of the heap. If you're living off the labor of others, opening the immigration floodgates is great news. More workers to play off against one another. H1-Bs are even better news.

yummyfajitas 11y ago
tl;dr; I'm only in the top 3'rd percentile and I feel envy for the top 1'st percentile, and I'm willing to cause millions to suffer dire poverty in order to mitigate my feelings of envy.
- crdoconnor 11y ago
  tl;dr you are primarily concerned with the exploitation of dire poverty in third world countries for personal gain. We both know that importing the best Bangladeshi talent to the United States because it's 50% cheaper than the average American is not going to help the average impoverished Bangladeshi. Quite the opposite, in fact.
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    you are primarily concerned with the exploitation of dire poverty in third world countries for mutual gain. Fixed that for you. FYI, I'm an American working for an Indian company. So according to your theory, I'm the one being happily exploited by global trade. By the way, according to your github profile, you live in Singapore. You were born there (Colm O'connor sounds like a very Singaporean name) and never plan to leave, right? Or is this a situation of "restrict their freedom to move, but not mine"?
    - dang 11y ago
      > Be honest - your actual complaint is that reducing inequality sucks when you are at the top of the heap. > [you're] willing to cause millions to suffer dire poverty in order to mitigate [your] feelings of envy > By the way, according to your github profile, you live in Singapore These things cross the line. It's fine to have a contrarian view but please don't put an acerbic and personal spin on it when posting here.

coldtea 11y ago

>Actually "sucks" isn't even the right word, since I doubt you can name a single good or service that Americans have less of today than 20 or 30 years ago. (Expanding categories of goods, e.g. "health care", don't count.) Jobs.

yummyfajitas 11y ago
Jobs are a cost, not a benefit. You seem to be agreeing with me - we have more benefits and fewer costs.
- aswanson 11y ago
  C'mon man. Benefit is a weasel word here. Beneficial to whom? Are you implying, in the limit, that a society with zero employment is maximally beneficial, even for the reaper of said profits?
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    Yes, a society with zero employment where everyone has more goods and services than before sounds like utopia. You are basically describing robots meeting all our needs while we do whatever we like.
    - ReverendBayes 11y ago
      Really? You cannot imagine any scenario where employment approaches zero other than the robotic-utopia scenario? We have no historical example of employment approaching double digits without societal problems ensuing? The higher the unemployment, the closer to robo-utopia, in a smooth, monotonic fashion, right?
      - yummyfajitas 11y ago
        I'm aware of situations where consumption and employment dropped. But in this thread, we are very specifically discussing a situation where employment (a cost) dropped and consumption (a benefit) increased. If you want to argue that consumption has dropped, do it. So far no one else here has.

wrk1 11y ago

Note that I didn't say that free trade was "good" or "bad". That's a different discussion. I was simply describing the labor pool here in the US. Similarly, I am not saying that illegal immigration, H1B, etc is "good" or "bad". Also, I am not complaining - I am doing pretty well for myself, thanks. My other answer (to thomasfoster96) has more details on how free trade with Asia jacks up the labor pool.