Refuting Ombugge's left wing rhetoric


#322

You don’t “get it”. What I’m saying is that there should be equal pay for equal skills and equal work.
If, as stated earlier there are such rules, then they should be enforced, not allowing greedy Employers to underpay somebody because of the nationality, ethnicity or gender.

If there are not enough nationals with the right skills to fill the available jobs it make sense to import foreigner on temporary work permit to fill the positions and allow the business to thrive, thus bringing in tax $$ and jobs for for nationals in other positions, both higher and lower.

If a person on such visa proves not to be suitable, he/she can be kicked out w/o much ado.
If, however, the person should prove to be a valuable asset for the country and are willing to take up permanent residence, or eventually citizenship, that is a positive, not a negative.


#323

And here is how not to handle foreign relations:


#324

We have such rules and there are many lawyers chomping at the bit to get paid to enforce them.

I don’t want to retype the same thing I did above (you didn’t absorb it anyway apparently), so I’ll sum it up by saying it’s about supply and demand.

A suitable solution would be that if a company was required show that they’ve had to increase the salaries they offered by a certain percentage (significantly greater than inflation), then that PROVES there’s a labor shortage. Not just “I tried and couldn’t find anyone”.

In a capitalist society, ALL employers are greedy because their purpose is to make profit. If they’re not greedy, their competitor will be and will put them out of business. Because of this there have to be controls instituted that are in the best interests of the citizenry as opposed to the best interests of business.


#325

Yes demand for certain skills and abilities and supply of people without those.


#326

To fill a job, it just has to pay competitive wages and benefits for people with the needed skills. If it doesn’t pay people will work elsewhere, or stay home. If the job involves dirty, nasty, dangerous work, or physically or mentally draining work, or odd hours, or time away from home, it has to pay more. Especially if it requires people with education and specialized skills.

If work is seasonal or cyclical, or subjust to layoffs, the job must pay more or skilled people will move on to more stable employment.

A friend fixes computer hardware, software, electronics, and anything electrical. He solves problems that dealers and manufacturers reps can’t. He can fix anything. He charges $100 per hour. He travels for projects. On average, he probably only works 10 hours a week, but he has the satisfaction of knowing he’s getting paid what he is worth.

There are only two reasons why skilled jobs remain vacant: (1) it does not pay enough for what’s involved; and (2) the employer’s recruiting process is defective.

My observation is that HR departments screen out the most capable applicants with arbitrary software and checklists. They don’t know how to identify people that can actually do the work.


#327

This is a pointless discussion, you have your opinion, we have the experience. What does one do when the skills are just not available…irregardless of the pay…And then, we have the customers that need our help to get them out of port and/or released from CG hold.


#328

Really? Show me where you posted for the position at 500k per year. You can’t because you didn’t.

My beef is not with you and others like you. You’re allowed a legal way to hire people cheaper and you utilize it… It’s smart business… If you don’t do it, your competitors will.

All I’m saying is that the process should be made much more strict so that it is not abused. There should be a standard of proof any company has to meet to show that they have actually attempted in good faith to fill the position with a domestic applicant at and above the market wage. Then and only then should a foreigner be brought in.


#329

I have no doubt you have tons of experience in the fine art of undercutting the American worker hence your passionate defense of it here.


#330

That’s exactly the rule applied by the INS my friend…lots of applicants… no skills and tons of paperwork to proof it…you have an impenetrable skin…for me this discussion is closed…safe sailings


#331

Agree… You and I aren’t going to have any effect on the outcome of this issue anyway. The elections of 2018 and 2020 will determine how this goes.

In the interim, you continue your paper chase with the INS and I’ll keep advocating for change.


#332

500k per year for a technician to repair marine electronics. Are you serious??
If anybody offered that kind of pay for that kind of job they should have their business license revoked.

Are you sure that just offering more money will produce capable applicants, or just more unqualified ones trying their luck?


#333

He’s the one who said ‘irregardless of pay’… And plus I don’t know what the going rate for that job is. The team lead from MAN Primeserv-Houston that we had onboard strongly suggested to me that he made 300k/year just as a reference.

Yes I am sure there is a pricepoint where he could get his job filled. But that point will never be found as long as there’s the H1-B copout available. (Depression of the market wage)


#334

You are an impossible debatant. I’m joining ak44 and terminating this fruitless argument.


#335

Yeah it’s pretty much boiled all the way down the core tenant which is that you are a globalist who believes there should be no restrictions on who can come in and take American jobs.

I, my whole family, and everybody I know would be directly and catastrophicly impacted by this policy and thus am against that idea.

Like I told your bretheren, the elections of '18 and '20 will determine how this is going to go.


#336

Hawsepiper, It is 2018. There is no taking America back to 1950, 1960 or 1970. The USA is now part of a global economy. Study economics and the progression of nations.
A starter reading would be “Capital in The 21st Century” by Piketty. It is based on 10 years of research. The book is rather scholarly and long but it will be worth your time. It has not been refuted by anyone in depth by a similarly researched study.
I would also recommend “White Trash: The 400 Year Old History of Class in America” by Isenberg. It is the narrative of the 99.9% who came to the USA during its establishment. It is another well researched book.


#337

When will we be reading a book that says we need to start reducing the population to survive?
The current debt fueled system we live in says we need growth permanently and the cheap ass way to get that is just dump more people in your country.
Can that work forever?

I think Japan is writing that book now, ageing population and getting automated to deliver services with less working


#338

The majority of the debt in the debt fueled economy is driven by the banks as I am sure you know. They gamble with a dollar of debt backed by a ten cents of capital. This will end but not without pain…
Dumping of people [immigration] is currently driven by war in the middle east to a great extent for Europe. People are economically being “dumped” into other countries in the far east, Europe and North America. That will soon reach an end too. Remember, Europe dumped their poor and uneducated many years ago into a country now known as the USA.
The life expectancy in the USA is falling so there is hope for the population control you mentioned.


#339

Studying history on any topic is valuable as to try and avoid the mistakes that others made and adjust your track accordingly. On this topic (economic rise and fall) specifically, I agree wholeheartedly what others have posted about the 4 stages (hard times make strong men, strong men make good times, good times make weak men, weak men bring on hard times) and firmly believe we are in early stage 4. Reading books about how the Romans (for example) went through this, continued making bad decisions, which continued/accelerated their decline, and ultimately were overtaken should be constructive to all of us as an example of what not to do.

What I am saying is that we have the power to make our own future and are not “destined” to crash and burn. If we do ultimately crash and burn, it will be because of the things we did and didn’t do along the way to facilitate that outcome. The problem is that to effect a change in our current trajectory will require short term sacrifice with the understanding and belief that there is long term prosperity to be had.

The argument can certainly be made that at our current state we have journeyed too far through the cycle and have an overabundance of weak men who will not willingly sacrifice their easy convenient lifestyle for the long term betterment of the nation. It’s hard to determine in real time exactly where you are in the cycle, but like I keep saying, the elections this year and 2020 will be VERY telling.

What I advocate isn’t a return to those years. It is simply to pass policy that puts the best interests of Americans first. Since those who make policy are elected by Americans and those policies are executed using the taxes of Americans, I don’t think that’s too much to ask. Is that going to cause the cost of goods here to go up? Yes. That’s an example of the short term sacrifice in pursuit of long term gain that I mentioned before.

You may consider what you advocate as “progress” but I sure as hell don’t.


#340

My brother and all his investment banking mates, used to say, have you retired to your farm yet, meaning you need to be able to feed yourself when it all goes wrong and now they add you need your own power and water as well.
The level of debt as a percentage of the global economies that have generated it is so much higher than anytime in history nobody can even guess how badly it can go wrong.
Its either paid eventually or cancelled in a war.


#341

The personal level of debt is not anywhere near a historical high. National debt as GDP is about average across the board. Bank debt, among those the USA and EU determined too big to be allowed to fail is at an all time high. They are betting with and against each other with more money than the total GDP of planet earth. Synthetic debt instruments, credit default swaps etc; aka shit made out of thin air are at an all time high. Tip one domino, it will crash. The 99.95% will pick up the tab because?? The financial institutions are too big to fail and no one has the courage to break them into smaller pieces.