Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (246104)	4/29/2010 1:24:52 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

>>At some point we must come to terms with the equivalent full cost of labor, and I would rather see that directly born by employers, rather than socialized, given that we don't socialize the profits (and should not IMHO).<< That's really the central point. The reason the bill is popular is that most Arizonans are not employers, but most ARE taxpayers. As you say there has been a huge cost shift here. This isn't only an R vs D issue, it's also a populist one in that taxes are going up, unemployemnt is going up. Taxes on J6P will not increase because the illegals leave due to reduced claims on entitlements. If businesses who hired illegals get hurt, too f'n bad, they were breaking the law anyway. Thus the fairly wide spread support of the bill. The "rules" I was referring to are rules for immgrating legally vs illegally. The system was originally designed so that immigrants with necessary skills (and obviously that phrase can be debated ad nauseum) would be allowed in, but others would not (at least on a long term basis). The problem is, none of it is working, illegals pour in and that does not serve the US well, from a security point of view or as "economic policy". Whether some of the illegals have qualities that may be admirable is not the point. Borders serve a purpose. Citizenship status serves a purpose. The process is broken, and that's why the law is popular here. It's not a fix for anyone but Arizona, but we've been screaming for help for the last 20 years and no one gets it (including that numbnut McCain). Meanwhile the strain on our schools, medical facilities, social/family services, jails increases daily. That lame bitch Napolitano was all for putting the Guard on our border until she became DHS chief, now everythings hunky-dory AFA she's concerned. Riiiiiighhhhttt.

To: neolib who wrote (246104)	4/29/2010 1:48:29 PM
From: No Mo Mo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

"At some point we must come to terms with the equivalent full cost of labor, and I would rather see that directly born by employers, rather than socialized, given that we don't socialize the profits (and should not IMHO)." You could say the same thing about costing for natural resources or externalities of production e.g. pollution. We don't pay a fair price for fossil fuels, or water or topsoil for that matter, so we're profligate with them. DuPont isn't responsible for the life cycle of its plastics or Union Carbide for its batteries so they sell them at a discount with the costs to be born by the taxpayer somewhere down the line. Incorrectly costed labor is one more tragedy of the commons, as it were.