Monday, September 17, 2018

BILL GATES, ZUCKERBERG, JEFF BEZOS, MICHAEL BLOOMBERG PARTNER TO WAR ON THE AMERICAN (LEGAL) WORKER

ALL billionaires, GATES, ZUKERBERG, 

BLOOMBERG, BEZOS, GEORGE SOROS, 

KOCH FASCIST BROTHERS and secretly, 

even TRUMP want wider open borders, no 

cap visas, and unlimited foreign of invasion 

of "cheap" labor. 

It's all about keeping wages depressed.




"GOP estb. is using the $5 billion border-wall fight to hide up 

to four blue/white-collar cheap-labor programs in lame-duck 

DHS budget. Donors are worried that salaries are too damn 

high, & estb. media does not want to know." MORE BELOW



Notable mentions of corporations not quite evil enough to make the top list:

Goldman Sachs TRUMP CRONIES
JPMorgan Chase OBAMA CRONIES
ExxonMobil
Halliburton
British American Tobacco
Dow Chemical
DuPont
Bayer
Microsoft
Google
Facebook
Amazon
Walmart
For more stories on economy & finance visit RT's business section


That flood of outside labor spikes profits and 

manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar 

and white-collar employees. The policy also 

pushes Americans away from high-tech careers,

and sidelines at least 5 million 

marginalized Americans and their families, 

including many who are now struggling 

with opioid addictions. Immigration also pulls 

investment and wealth away from heartland states 

because investment flows towards the large 

immigrant populations living in the coastal states.


TAKE THE INDIAN AND TAIWANESE OUT 

OF SILICON VALLEY, AND YOU WILL 

HAVE THOUSANDS OF JOBS FOR 

AMERICAN BORN LEGALS!



"Many reports show high levels of corruption in the H-1B program, reflecting the high levels of corruption in the home countries. For example, corruption in India is ranked as the 81st most corrupt country, partly because of caste vs. caste hostility, according to Transparency International. The corruption debilitates the country’s economic growth, say critics."

"The home-country corruption has ensured numerous arrests of Indian executives in the United States, plus a series of lawsuits against large Indian outsourcing companies. The lawsuits charge the Indian companies with discriminating against Americans to ensure the placement of more Indian workers in U.S. jobs.: MORE BELOW

Silicon Valley’s corrupt nexus: War, censorship and inequality

17 September 2018
On Wednesday, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, the world’s richest man, will give the keynote address to the US Air Force Association’s annual conference. Bezos will discuss “how industry can better partner” with the US military.
Bezos’ speech comes amid his Seattle-based firm’s lobbying to win a $10 billion contract, known as “Project JEDI,” to host large sections of the Pentagon’s operations infrastructure on the internet cloud. In a move that will likely win him points with the military brass awarding the contract, Bezos recently donated $10 million to a Virginia-based super PAC seeking to elect veterans to office and create a “less polarized government.”
The Amazon CEO will appear as the representative of the world’s second-largest company by market capitalization, the second-largest employer in the United States, the world’s biggest provider of cloud computing services, and America’s largest e-commerce retailer, with twice the sales of the next nine competitors.
Bezos, who also owns the Washington Post, is 

among America’s most powerful oligarchs. His 

speech to the Air Force Association embodies the 

corrupt nexus between the military, the financial 

oligarchy, the media and the high-tech companies, 

all of which are working to create a regime of 

censorship targeting left-wing, anti-war and 

socialist viewpoints.
This partnership expresses, in practice, the vision laid out in the Pentagon’s latest National Security Strategy, which calls for “the seamless integration of multiple elements of national power—diplomacy, information, economics, finance, intelligence, law enforcement and military.”
This is a formula for a society in which all of the mechanisms of social control are jointly harnessed to defend and expand the wealth and power of America’s financial oligarchy. Toward this authoritarian end, Bezos and company are mobilizing one of the critical mechanisms—the media.
Bezos’ Washington Post has prepared its owner’s appearance at the Air Force event with a series of op-eds and editorials calling for a closer partnership between the Pentagon and Silicon Valley. More than any other major US newspaper, the Post has argued for the fusion of America’s high-tech sector with its military, in line with the Pentagon’s so-called “third offset” strategy, which aims to regain America’s “military edge” by “harnessing a range of technologies, including robotics, autonomous systems and big data,” in the words of the Economist.
The Post’s campaign for a further integration of technology corporations with the military has been combined with attacks on tech workers who oppose the alliance of the firms for which they work with the US war machine.
Over the past two decades, hundreds of thousands of America’s brightest minds have gone to work in Northern California’s Silicon Valley and its offshoot in Seattle, lured by promises that “people with passion can change the world for the better,” in the words of former Apple CEO Steve Jobs, and the promise that they would help “organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful,” in the words of Google’s mission statement.
But each year, more and more technology workers have found themselves involved in developing the means to carry out mass murder, censorship and political repression, prompting protests by workers at Google, Amazon and Microsoft.
In June, Amazon workers issued an open letter opposing the company’s provision of facial recognition technology to police forces as well as its cloud computing contracts with the agencies carrying out Trump’s Gestapo-style attacks on immigrants.
That same month, Google announced that it would end its involvement in a Pentagon program to build artificial intelligence capabilities for military drones after more than a thousand Google employees signed a letter demanding that Google swear off building “weapons of war.”
The Washington Post has opposed these protests. In an August 8 op-ed, two executives from Anduril Industries, a military defense contractor seeking to sell virtual reality systems to the Pentagon, condemned the protesting workers. “We understand that tech workers want to build things used to help, not harm,” the executives wrote. “We feel the same way,” they continued. “But ostracizing the US military could have the opposite effect of what these protesters intend: If tech companies want to promote peace, they should stand with, not against, the United States’ defense community.”
The authors added: “The world is safer and more peaceful with strong US leadership. That requires the US government to maintain its advantage in critical technologies such as AI. But doing so will be difficult if Silicon Valley’s rising hostility toward working with Washington continues.”
The Post reiterated these points in an editorial last week entitled “Silicon Valley should work with the military on AI.” Bezos’s newspaper made the cynical argument that the technology companies should partner with the Pentagon because the result might be technologies with applications outside of mass murder. “DARPA [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency] contractors will probably develop products with non-lethal applications,” the Post declared.
The open secret of Silicon Valley’s collaboration with the Pentagon is that the wars to be fought with the help of artificial intelligence will not take place only beyond America’s borders—they will also include class and civil wars.
America’s financial oligarchy, whose wealth has more than doubled 

since the 2008 financial crash, is issuing warnings about the dangers 

posed to its wealth by an increasingly restive and angry working class. 

In a report published last week, JPMorgan 

Chase warned about the potential impact of a 

new financial crisis in fueling political 

opposition.

The balance sheet by the biggest US bank stated: 

“The next crisis is also likely to result in social 

tensions similar to those witnessed 50 years ago 

in 1968”—a year that saw urban rebellions and 

mass protests against the Vietnam war in the US, 

the May–June general strike in France, and a 

global radicalization of the working class.

“In 1968,” the report continued, “TV and investigative journalism provided a generation of baby boomers access to unfiltered information on social developments such as Vietnam and other proxy wars, civil rights movements, income inequality, etc. Similar to 1968, the internet today (social media, leaked documents, etc.) provides millennials with unrestricted access to information on a surprisingly similar range of issues. In addition to information, the internet provides a platform for various social groups to become more self-aware, polarized and organized.”
Such groups “span various social dimensions based on differences in income/wealth,” warned the bank. In other words, the looming financial crisis will likely spark a mass movement of the working class against social inequality.
Recognizing the immense power of the internet to mobilize opposition to the existing social order, under conditions where a mass audience for socialism is emerging among workers and young people, America’s leading technology companies, working with the state, are scrambling to impose political censorship.
At a congressional hearing last week, Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg pledged to replace “bad speech” with “alternative facts” in users’ news feeds. She boasted that her company now employs some 20,000 people to censor content.
Google, for its part, has continued and intensified its censorship of left-wing, anti-war and socialist websites. Since  we first reported last year that changes to Google’s algorithms had led to a sharp fall in the readership of 13 left-wing sites, the search traffic of these sites has plunged even further, hitting a combined decline of 50 percent.
The reactionary nexus between Silicon Valley, the CIA and the 

Pentagon must be—and will be—opposed. All over the world, workers are entering into struggle—from teachers and Amazon, UPS and postal workers in the United States, to pilots and cabin crew in Europe, to construction workers in Turkey. These workers must understand that they are the targets of censorship, and that they must mobilize to fight the drive to silence socialist and left-wing oppositional views.



Decade after financial crisis 


JPMorgan predicts next one’s 


coming soon





Published time: 13 Sep, 2018 14:00



© Ole Spata / Global Look Press

·          

With the 10th anniversary approaching of the catalyst for the last major global stock market crash – the Lehman Brothers’ collapse – strategists from JPMorgan are predicting the next financial crisis to strike in 2020.

Wall Street’s largest investment bank analyzed the causes of the crash and measures taken by governments and central banks across the world to stop the crisis in 2008, and found that the economy remains propped up by those extraordinary steps.

According to the bank’s analysis, the next crisis will probably be less painful, however, diminished financial market liquidity since the 2008 implosion is a “wildcard” that’s tough to game out.



“The main attribute of the next crisis will be severe liquidity disruptions resulting from these market developments since the last crisis,” the reports says.

Changes to central bank policy are seen by JPMorgan analysts as a risk to stocks, which by one measure have been in the longest bull market in history since the bottom of the crisis.

JPMorgan’s Marko Kolanovic has previously concluded that the big shift away from actively managed investing has escalated the danger of market disruptions.

“The shift from active to passive asset management, and specifically the decline of active value investors, reduces the ability of the market to prevent and recover from large drawdowns,” said JPMorgan’s Joyce Chang and Jan Loeys.

The bank estimates that actively managed accounts make up only about one-third of equity assets under management, with active single-name trading responsible for just 10 percent or so of trading volume.

JPMorgan referred to its hypothetical scenario 

as the “great liquidity crisis,” claiming that the 

timing of when it could occur “will largely be 

determined by the pace of central bank 

normalization, business cycle dynamics, and 

various idiosyncratic events such as escalation of

trade war waged by the current US 

administration.”

World’s top 5 ‘most evil’ corporations




Jeff Bezos, founder and chief executive officer of Amazon, poses as he stands atop a supply truck during a photo opportunity at the premises of a shopping mall in the southern Indian city of Bangalore © Abhishek N. Chinnappa / Reuters

Most companies become successful thanks to their stellar reputations. But not always. RT Business scraped the bottom of the barrel to find the most hated companies trending on the internet.

Monsanto

The company that needs no introduction, creator of DDT and Agent Orange, Monsanto is one the world’s largest pesticide and GMO seed manufacturers. It is known for being the first company to genetically modify a seed to make it resistant to pesticides and herbicides. Monsanto’s herbicides have been blamed for killing millions of crop acres, while its chemicals were added to blacklists of products causing cancer and many other health problems.

EU to approve ‘marriage made in hell’ between #Bayer & #Monsanto https://on.rt.com/903s 
·        
·        

Apple

Once the darling of Microsoft-hating gadget lovers, Apple more recently has been accused of mistreating or underpaying their employees, hiding money offshore, and not paying taxes. It has also been accused of violating health or environmental legislation, and misusing its position where they have a monopoly in the market. And, oh yes, deliberately slowing older iPhones and overcharging for its products to boot.

'No consent': #Apple sued for deliberately slowing down older iPhones https://on.rt.com/8ven 

Apple sued for deliberately slowing down older iPhones — RT Business News


·        
·        

Nestle

The world's largest food and beverage company Nestle says it is committed to enhancing quality of life and contributing to a healthier future. However, it has been dragged through numerous scandals involving slave labor. The multinational is one of the most boycotted corporations in the world, as violations of labor rights have been reported at its factories in different countries.
NestlĂ© admits possibility of slave labor in its coffee #supplychain http://hubs.ly/H02j9Hs0 
·        

·        

Philip Morris

The products of the American multinational cigarette and tobacco manufacturing company are sold in over 180 countries outside the United States. Philip Morris owns Marlboro, one of the world's biggest brands. Back in 1999, Philip Morris courted officials of the Czech Republic by explaining how smoking would in fact help their economy, due to the reduced healthcare costs from its citizens dying early.

BLOG: HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A NON-HISPANIC WORK AT McDONALD'S???

McDonald's

American fast-food company McDonald's was founded in 1940. The company serves more customers each day than the entire population of Great Britain, but has a long history of terrible labor practices. It has been constantly under fire for serving unhealthy junk food, which contributes health problems. Researchers have found that McDonald’s burgers cannot decompose on their own.

McDonald’s becomes weed users’ highest-ranking fast food joint. https://on.rt.com/8ofp 

McDonald’s becomes weed users’ highest-ranking fast food joint — RT US News


Notable mentions of corporations not quite evil enough to make the top list:

Goldman Sachs TRUMP CRONIESJPMorgan Chase OBAMA CRONIES
ExxonMobil
Halliburton
British American Tobacco
Dow Chemical
DuPont
Bayer
Microsoft
Google
Facebook
Amazon
Walmart
For more stories on economy & finance visit RT's business section

 

Ten years since the collapse of Lehman Brothers

15 September 2018
Ten years ago on this day, the global capitalist system entered its most far-reaching and devastating crisis since the Great Depression of the 1930s. A decade later none of the contradictions which produced the financial crisis has been alleviated, much less overcome. Moreover, the very policies carried out to prevent a total meltdown of the financial system, involving the outlay of trillions of dollars by the US Federal Reserve and other major central banks, have only created the conditions for an even bigger disaster.
The immediate trigger for the onset of the crisis was the decision by US financial authorities not to bail out the 158-year-old investment bank Lehman Brothers and prevent its bankruptcy. There is considerable evidence to suggest that this was a deliberate decision by the Federal Reserve to create the necessary conditions for what they knew would have to be a massive bailout, not just of a series of banks but the entire financial system.
The previous March, the Fed had organised a $30 billion rescue of Bear Stearns when it was taken over by JP Morgan. But as the Fed’s own minutes from that time make clear the Bear Stearns crisis was just the tip of a huge financial iceberg. The Fed noted that “given the fragile conditions of the financial markets at the time” and the “expected contagion” that would result from its demise it was necessary to organise a bailout. As Fed chairman Ben Bernanke later testified, a sudden failure would have led to a “chaotic unwinding” of positions in financial markets. The bailout of Bear Stearns was not a solution but a holding operation to try to buy time and prepare for what was coming.
While the demise of Lehman was the initial trigger, the most significant event was the impending bankruptcy, revealed just two days later, of the American insurance firm AIG, which was at the centre of a system of complex financial products running into trillions of dollars.
Due to the interconnections of the global financial system, the crisis rapidly extended to financial markets around the world, above all across the Atlantic to Europe where the banks had been major investors in the arcane financial instruments that had been developed around the US sub-prime home mortgage market, the collapse of which provided the immediate trigger for the crisis.
The value of every crisis, it has been rightly said, is that it reveals and starkly lays bare the underlying socio-economic and political relations that are concealed in “normal” times. The collapse of 2008 is no exception.
In the twenty years and more preceding the crisis, particularly in the aftermath of the liquidation of the Soviet Union in 1991, the bourgeoisie and its ideologists had proclaimed not only the superiority of the capitalist “free market” but that it was the only possible socio-economic form of organisation. Basing themselves on the false identification of the Stalinist regime with socialism, they maintained that its liquidation signified that Marxism was forever dead and buried. In particular, Marx’s analysis of the fundamental and irresolvable contradictions of the capitalist mode of production had proved to be false. According to the central foundation for what passed for theoretical analysis, the so-called “efficient markets hypothesis,” a financial meltdown was impossible because with the development of advanced technologies all information had been priced into decision making and so a financial collapse was impossible.
Rarely have the nostrums of the bourgeoisie and its ideologists been so graphically exposed.
Two days after the crisis erupted, President George W. Bush declared “this sucker’s going down.” Later, the high priest of capitalism and its “free market,” the now bewildered former head of the US Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan, testified to the US Congress that he had been completely confounded because markets had failed to behave according to his “model” and its assumptions.
The crisis also exposed in full glare another of the central myths of the capitalist order—that the state is somehow a neutral or independent organisation committed to regulating social and economic affairs in the interests of society as a whole.
It confirmed another central tenet of Marxism, expounded more than 170 years ago, that “the executive of the modern state is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the bourgeoisie.”
This was exemplified in the naked class response to the financial meltdown. The plans, already developed by the Fed and other authorities to cover the losses of the financial elite, whose speculative and in many cases outright criminal activities had sparked the crisis, were put into operation.
In the lead-up to the presidential election of November 4, Wall Street swung its support behind Obama—with the media promoting him as the candidate of “hope” and “change you can believe in”—over McCain. The Democrats had committed themselves to the bailout, securing the passage of the $700 billion TARP asset-purchasing program through Congress. This massive increase in the national debt of the United States was authorised with virtually no debate.
Of course, a new political fiction was immediately advanced. It was necessary to bail out Wall Street first, the public was told, in order to assist Main Street. However, this lie was rapidly exposed. The crisis was the starting point for a massive assault on the working class. While bankers and financial speculators continued to receive their bonuses, millions of American families lost their homes. Tens of millions were made unemployed.
In the following year, the rescue operation organised by the Obama administration of Chrysler and General Motors, with the active and full collaboration of the United Auto Workers union, resulted in the development of new forms of exploitation, above all through the two-tier wages system, paving the way for even more brutal systems such as those pioneered by Amazon.
This was the other side of a Wall Street bailout—a massive restructuring of class relations in line with the edict of Obama’s one-time chief of staff Rahm Emanuel to “never let a serious crisis go to waste” because it provides “an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”
The same class response was in evidence elsewhere. After the initial effects of the crisis had been overcome, the European bourgeoisie initiated an austerity drive forcing up youth unemployment to record levels. In Britain workers have endured a sustained decline in real wages not seen in more than a century.
The most egregious expression of this class logic has been seen in Greece with the imposition of poverty levels last seen in the Great Depression of the 1930s. The numerous bailout operations were never aimed at “rescuing” the Greek economy and its population but directed to extracting the resources to repay the major banks and financial institutions.
The crisis revealed the real nature of bourgeois democracy. The euro zone and the European Union were exposed as nothing more than a mechanism for the dictatorship of European finance capital. As one of the chief enforcers of its diktats, the former German finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble, declared, in the face of popular opposition, “elections cannot be allowed to change economic policy.”
As the working class in every country confronts stagnant and declining wages, falling living standards, the scrapping of secure employment and attacks on social services, leading to mounting health and other problems, innumerable reports and data chart the development of a global system in which wealth is siphoned up the income scale.
According to the latest Wealth-X World Ultra Wealth Report some 255,810 “ultra-high net worth” individuals, with a minimum of $30 million in wealth, now collectively own $31.5 trillion, more than the bottom 80 percent of the world’s population—comprising 5.6 billion people. Overall the wealth of this cohort increased by 16.3 percent in 2016–17, rising by 13.1 percent in North America, 13.5 percent in Europe and 26.7 percent in Asia.
The full significance of the bailouts of the financial system and the subsequent provision of trillions of dollars is clear. It has brought about the institutionalisation of a process, developing over the preceding decades, where the financial system, with the stock market at its centre, functions as a mechanism for the transfer of wealth to the heights of society.
In its analysis of the financial crisis, the World Socialist Web Site insisted from the outset that this was not a conjunctural development, from which there would be a “recovery,” but a breakdown of the entire capitalist mode of production.
That analysis has been completely confirmed. While a total financial meltdown was prevented, the diseases of the profit system that gave rise to the crisis have not been overcome. Rather, they have metastasised and mutated into new and even more malignant forms.
The actions of the US Federal Reserve and other major central banks in pumping trillions of dollars into the financial system in order to “rescue” it, and to enable the continuation of the very forms of speculation that led to the crisis, have only created the conditions for a new disaster in which the central banks themselves will be directly involved.
This fact of economic and financial life can even be seen in the comments by bourgeois analysts and pundits on the occasion of the upcoming anniversary. While they generally maintain that the financial system has been “strengthened” since 2008—a completely worthless assertion given that it was held to be strong in the lead up to the crash and any warnings of growing risks were dismissed as “Luddite” by such luminaries as former US Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers—no one dares to proclaim that the underlying problems have been resolved.
Rather, taking heed from the warning of JP Morgan chief Jamie Dimon that while the trigger for the next crisis will not be the same as the last but “there will be another crisis”, they nervously scan the horizon for signs of where it might strike.
Some analysts point to the rise in global debt, which is now running at 217 percent of gross domestic product, an increase of 40 percentage points since 2007, contrary to all expectations that, since debt was a major cause of the 2008 crisis, some deleveraging would have occurred.
Others single out the mounting problems in so-called emerging markets facing repayments on dollar-denominated loans, a source of speculation when interest rates were at record lows but which now present major refinancing problems as interest rates have started to rise.
The seemingly unstoppable rise of stock markets, fuelled by the provision of ultra-cheap money by the Fed and other central banks, is also an issue of concern. The increased use of passive investment funds tied to global indexes via computer trading systems tends to reinforce downswings as has been seen in a series of “flash crashes” such as that of last February when Wall Street fell by as much as 1,600 points in intraday trading.
The greatest source of anxiety, although it is not mentioned so much publicly, is the resurgence of the working class and the push for increased wages. To the extent it is discussed publicly, this fear, manifested in stock market falls generated by news of relatively small wage increases, is generally couched in terms of “political tensions” caused by increased social inequality.
A further expression of the ongoing and deepening breakdown of the capitalist order is the disintegration of all the geo-political structures and relationships that have constituted the framework within which the movements of capitalist economy and finance have flowed throughout the post-war period.
In the wake of the 2008 crisis, the leaders of the G20 gathered in April 2009, in the midst of a collapse in world trade taking place at a faster rate than in 1930. They pledged to never again go down the road of the protectionist tariff policies that had played such a disastrous role in the Great Depression and had worked to create the conditions for the outbreak of World War II, just ten years after the Wall Street crash of October 1929.
That commitment lies in tatters as the Trump administration, seeking to counter the economic decline of the US so graphically revealed in the 2008 collapse, embarks on ever widening trade war measures.
The principal target, at least to this point, is China. But the Trump administration has designated the European Union as an economic “foe,” and has already implemented trade war measures against it, with more in the pipeline.
The G7, the grouping of major capitalist powers set up in the wake of the world recession of 1974–75 and the end of the post-war boom to try to regulate the affairs of world capitalism, exists in name only following the acrimonious split at its meeting last June with the US decision to impose tariffs against its nominal “strategic allies.”
World war has not yet broken out. But there are innumerable flashpoints—in the Middle East, in Eastern Europe, in North East Asia and in the South China Sea to cite just some examples—where a conflict could erupt between nuclear-armed powers. The impetus for a new global conflagration is the drive by US imperialism to counter its economic decline by asserting its dominance over the Eurasian landmass at the expense of its enemies and allies alike.
It is of enormous significance that the civil war that has erupted in the American state apparatus between the state and military-intelligence apparatus, whose mouthpiece is the Democratic Party, and the Trump administration is over how this objective should be accomplished; that is, whether the American drive should be directed in the first instance against Russia or China. At the same time, all the major powers are boosting their military budgets in preparation for the escalation of military conflicts.
The political system in every country is beset by deep crisis. The very rapidity of the crisis is accentuating the contradictions between the objective dangers and the level of class consciousness. The chief obstacle to achieving the necessary alignment of working class consciousness with the objective reality of capitalist crisis on a world scale remains the reactionary political role of the old bureaucratised labour and trade union organisations, abetted by the various pseudo-left tendencies, in suppressing the class struggle. But the conditions are developing for these shackles to be broken.
In the founding program of the Fourth International, Leon Trotsky wrote: “The orientation of the mass is determined first by the objective conditions of decaying capitalism, and second, by the treacherous policies of the old workers’ organisations. Of these factors, the first, of course, is the decisive one: the laws of history are stronger than the bureaucratic apparatus.”
That perspective is now being confirmed in the resurgence of the class struggle internationally, above all in the centre of world capitalism, the United States.
Conscious of their profound weakness in the face of such a movement, and fully aware of its revolutionary implications, the ruling classes in every country have been developing ever-more authoritarian forms of rule.
Their greatest fear is the development of political consciousness, that is, the understanding in wider sections of the working class, and above all the youth, of its real situation, that its enemy is the entire capitalist system. Above all, the ruling elites fear the development of a revolutionary socialist movement, based on the principles and program of the Fourth International. This is why the World Socialist Web Site is the central target of internet censorship. It is also the reason for the escalation of attacks by the German coalition government on the Sozialistische Gleichheitspartei, the German section of the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI).
But the efforts to suppress the work of the International Committee will fail. The renewal of class struggle will provide new forces for the development of the working of the ICFI throughout the world.
The meltdown of 2008 demonstrated above all that the working class confronts a global crisis. The crisis can therefore be resolved only on a global scale through the unification of the working class across national borders and barriers on the basis of an international socialist program for the reconstruction of society to meet human need and not profit.
Nick Beams

Who Can We Blame For The Great Recession?


|
This year marks the tenth anniversary of the “Great Recession” and the media are trying to determine if we have learned anything from it. The Queen visited the London School of Economics after the “Great Recession” to ask her chief economists why they hadn’t seen this disaster coming. They told her they would get back to her with an answer.  Later, they wrote her a letter saying that the best economic theory asserts that recessions are random events and they had successfully predicted that no one can predict recessions.  
Still, George Packer, a staff writer at the New Yorker magazine since 2003, thinks he knows more than the LSE academics. He wrote the following in the August 27 print issue:
"It was caused by reckless lending practices, Wall Street greed, outright fraud, lax government oversight in the George W. Bush years, and deregulation of the financial sector in the Bill Clinton years. The deepest source, going back decades, was rising inequality. In good times and bad, no matter which party held power, the squeezed middle class sank ever further into debt...
"In February, 2009, with the economy losing seven hundred thousand jobs a month, Congress passed a stimulus bill—a nearly trillion-dollar package of tax cuts, aid to states, and infrastructure spending, considered essential by economists of every persuasion—with the support of just three Republican senators and not a single Republican member of the House."
Typically, journalists will defer to an expert on matters in which they aren’t trained, which is most subjects. But Packer didn’t bother to ask an economist as the Queen did. Had he done so, he would have received the same answer from mainstream economists – recessions are random events and can’t be predicted. If economists knew the causes of recessions they could predict them when they see the causes present. 
So where did Packer get his “causes” for the latest recession? In the classic movie Casablanca, the corrupt and lazy policeman Renault is “shocked” to find gambling going on at Rick’s place and orders the others to round up the “usual suspects.” That’s what Packer does. People have blamed greedy businessmen and bankers for crises for centuries. Since the rise of socialism they added capitalism and the politicians who support it. The only new suspect in the socialist line up is inequality, even though inequality has varied little since 1900 and is near its record low since then.
Had Packer consulted the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, he wouldn’t have received much help. Keep in mind that mainstream economists think recessions are random events. After the storm subsides, they can identify likely contributors for the latest disaster, but those differ with each recession. Recently Chicago Booth queried experts for the top contributing factors of the latest recession. The top answer was flawed regulations, followed by underestimating risk and mortgage fraud. 
The “flawed regulations” excuse assumes that bitter bureaucrats who write the regulations are wiser than the actual bankers and ignores the fact that banking is one of the most regulated industries. One analyst described the recent recession as the perfect storm of regulations so massive no one group could understand them all and many of them working against other regulations. 
Blaming “underestimated risk” is good Monday morning quarterbacking. Everyone has 20/20 hindsight, or 50/50 as quarterback Cam Newton said. The same economists don’t explain why banks that took similar risks didn’t fail or why what seems risky now didn’t seem so risky in 2007. As for fraud, the amount was negligible and is always there; why did it contribute to a recession this time? Sadly, the correct answer to what caused the Great Recession– “Loose monetary policy” – came in next to last among Chicago Booth’s experts. 
Perspective is vital. A magnifying glass can make a lady bug look terrifying. Let’s pull back and put the latest recession in a broader context. There have been 47 recessions/depressions since the birth of the nation. Before the Great Depression economists called crises “depressions” and since then they are “recessions.” They’re the same thing; economists thought “recession” was less scary. 
Recessions before the Great Depression were mild compared to it. It took the Federal Reserve and the US government working together trying to “rescue” us to plunge the country into history’s worst economic disaster. Journalists like Packer have convinced people that the Great Recession of 2008 was second only to the Great Depression, but if we combine the recessions of 1981 and 1982, separated only by a technicality and six months, that recession would have been worse. The Fed did not reduce interest rates after that recession because it was still battling the inflation it has caused in the 1970s, yet the economy bounced back and recovery lasted almost a decade. 
I want to drive home the fact that the three worst recessions in our history assaulted us after the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. 
The best explanation of the causes of recessions, because it enjoys the greatest empirical support, is the Austrian business-cycle theory, or ABCT. Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek are most famous for refining and expounding it, but the English economists of the Manchester school were the first to write about it. They discovered that expansions of the money supply through low interest rates motivated businesses to borrow and invest at a rapid rate. That launches an unsustainable boom because businesses are trying to deploy more capital goods than exist. Banks raise rates to rein in galloping inflation and the boom turns to dust. 
Banks don’t control interest rates today as they did in the past. That’s the Federal Reserve’s job. The Fed generally reduces interest rates or expands the money supply through “quantitative easing,” or buying bonds from banks, in order to force an economy in the ditch to climb out. The recovery from the Great 

Recession remained on its feet for so long 

because the Fed’s policy of paying interest on 

reserves at banks soaked up much of the new 

money it created out of thin air. Also, much of the money went overseas to buy imports or as investments. 
The lesson – don’t ask medical advice from your plumber or economics from a journalist. And if you ask an economist, make sure he follows the Austrian school. 
NO PRESIDENT IN HISTORY SUCKED IN MORE BRIBES FROM CRIMINAL BANKSTERS THAN BARACK OBAMA!

“Records show that four out of Obama's top five contributors are employees of financial industry giants - Goldman Sachs ($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207) and Citigroup ($358,054).”

OBAMA and HIS BANKS: THEIR PROFITS, CRIMES and LOOTING SOAR

This was not because of difficulties in securing indictments or convictions. On the contrary, Attorney General Eric Holder told a Senate committee in March of 2013 that the Obama administration chose not to prosecute the big banks or their CEOs because to do so might “have a negative impact on the national economy.”

 


Why the swamp has little to fear


The midterm elections will either halt or hasten the current soft coup whose aim is to overthrow a legally elected President now being conducted by the swamp.   And if the history of Washington, D.C. corruption is any indication of what will happen after the midterms, the swamp will survive regardless of its coup's success or failure.  But the efforts to expose the treasonous plot will fade away into the dustbin of political history after being seen as just another waste of time and taxpayer money.  The seemingly endless parade of corruption scandals and mind-numbing criminal activity will go on unabated and continue to escalate to unimaginable heights because of an inescapable fact of human nature. 
In a Forbes 2015 article entitled "The Big Bank Bailout," author Mike Collins mentions several ways to prevent another housing bubble crisis from destroying the world economy when he writes, "But perhaps the best solution is to make the CEOs and top managers of the banks criminally liable for breaking these rules so that they fear going to jail.  These people are not afraid to do it again so if you can’t put some real fear in their heads, they will do it again."
What Collins has honed in on is accountability and punishment, the very things lacking in today's dealings with the swamp.  Just as the major banking institutions will soon, if not already, re-enter into risky, corrupt, and illegal lending practices because there was not a "smidgen" of accountability for the trillions of dollars they lost in the housing bubble catastrophe, so too will the past and presently unknown criminals within the IRS, FBI, and DOJ continue to thumb their noses at the law.
What the American people have been subjected to over the past 18 months since President Trump took office is a series of crimes that have been painstakingly unearthed but little else.  "Earth-shattering," "bombshell," and "constitutional crisis" are just some of the words and phrases used by media outlets to describe the newest update regarding the many ongoing investigations.  These words are meant to shock the audience but no longer have the impact they once did because of their overuse and because of the likely lack of any substantive outcome.  What Americans have seen are trials without consequences, clear proof of guilt with no punishment.  Draining the swamp without any repercussions to the swamp creatures inside is like going on a diet but eating the same foods.  
Americans witnessed no accountability regarding exhaustive investigations into the deadly circumstances surrounding the swamp's gun-walking campaign named Fast and Furious, a program where U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry and hundreds of innocent Mexican citizens were killed with guns the government sold to criminals.  The swamp continued on its power mission and attempted the deceitful confiscation of America's health care with Obamacare, whose real aim was a redistribution of the nation's wealth.  After little pushback and the passage of Obamacare,  Americans witnessed Benghazi in 2012, and when nothing was accomplished over the investigations of that tragedy, the swamp trampled on the rights of conservatives in what became known as the IRS scandal of 2013.  Nothing was done about that.  And on and on, with the swamp committing one bigger and bolder crime after the next with impunity. 
So we have arrived at the doorstep of the Russian collusion investigation farce by first traveling through the swamp of unsolved crimes perpetrated inside the Obama administration.  With the passage of time, swamp-dwellers like Eric Holder and Lois Lerner, knee-deep in the mud with congressional contempt charges, continue to be financially enriched and will slowly be forgotten, while more recognizable swamp royalty like Hillary Clinton get to run for president. 
Until Americans see guilty members within the United States government wearing orange jumpsuits and serving time, the investigations and congressional hearings are mere sideshow spectacles to appease the masses.











Google Executive Profile: VP for Global Affairs Kent Walker



Google VP Kent Walker
Getty/ Alex Wong
 140

In a recently leaked video of a Google all-hands “TGIF” meeting, the company’s Senior Vice President for Global Affairs and Chief Legal Officer, Kent Walker, made a number of disparaging comments about President Trump and other populist movements — so who is Kent Walker?

In a recently leaked video from a Google meeting, Kent Walker, the company’s Senior Vice President for Global Affairs and Chief Legal Officer, can be heard making a number of comments about the election of President Trump and the broader populist movement worldwide.
During the meeting Walker stated that “Fear… xenophobia, hatred” is responsible for “self-destructive” populist victories around the world, such as President Trump’s election. Walker later states: “History teaches us that there are periods of populism, of nationalism that rise up, and that’s all the reason we need to be in the arena… That’s why we have to work so hard to ensure that it doesn’t turn into a World War or something catastrophic, but instead is a blip, is a hiccup.”
So who is Walker? Walker is Google’s Senior Vice President for Global Affairs and Chief Legal Officer — one of the most senior executives in the company — and is known for recently being rejected to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee. When Google was asked to testify on the topic of possible interference in the 2016 election by the Senate Intelligence Committee, they put Walker forward to testify on behalf of the company instead of CEO Sundar Pichai or co-founder Sergey Brin, a selection that the committee was not happy with.
Senator Richard Burr, Chairman of the committee at the time, rejected Google’s offer to send Walker to testify stating: “I told them I wasn’t accepting the senior vice president.” In response, Walker published his entire planned testimony online which included quotes such as:
We believe that we have a responsibility to prevent the misuse of our platforms and we take that very seriously. Our efforts in this area started many years before the 2016 election. We work to detect and minimize opportunities for manipulation and abuse, constantly tackling new threats and bad actors that arise. Google was founded with a mission to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful; the abuse of the tools and platforms we build is antithetical to that mission.
Walker also delivered a speech at the IAPP Privacy Summit in 2015 where he stated that “protecting privacy is tough” and discussed how Google regularly deals with privacy issues on a daily basis:
Walker has not previously discussed his own political views that openly before, his comments during the leaked Google all-hands “TGIF” meeting provided some of the first direct examples of Walker’s personal views. During the meeting, Walker made statements such as: “We do think that history is on our side in a profound and important way … the moral arc of history is long but it bends towards progress… While it may be that the Internet and globalization were part of the cause of this problem, we are also fundamentally an essential part of the solution to this problem.”
The full meeting including Walker’s comments can be found here.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or email him at lnolan@breitbart.com

‘Silent Donation’: Corporate Emails Reveal Google


Executives’ Efforts to Turn Out Latino Voters Who 


They Thought Would Vote for Clinton 


https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/10/silent-donation-corporate-emails-reveal-google-executives-efforts-to-swing-election-to-hillary-clinton-with-latino-outreach-campaign/

 









AFP/Getty Images
Washington, D.C.10,524

An email chain among senior Google executives from the day after the 2016 presidential election reveals the company tried to influence the 2016 United States presidential election on behalf of one candidate, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton.

In the emails, a Google executive describes efforts to pay for free rides for a certain sect of the population to the polls–a get-out-the-vote for Hispanic voters operation–and how these efforts were because she thought it would help Hillary Clinton win the general election in 2016. She also used the term “silent donation” to describe Google’s contribution to the effort to elect Clinton president.
The main email, headlined, “Election results and the Latino vote,” was sent on Nov. 9, 2016—the day after Clinton’s loss to Trump in the 2016 presidential election—by Eliana Murillo, Google’s Multicultural Marketing department head.
The four page email begins with Murillo claiming she and others at Google were engaged in non-partisan activities not designed to help any one candidate or another—only to undercut her own commentary in later passages in the emails by openly admitting the entire effort to boost Latino turnout using Google products with official company resources was to elect Clinton over Trump.
The critical miscalculation, Murillo wrote in a stunning admission in the email, was that Latino voters backed Trump by higher margins than any experts had forecast in the lead-up to the election. Trump’s 29 percent among Hispanics nationally blew prognosticators away, and he hit even higher numbers—about 31 percent—in the key battleground state of Florida, Murillo admitted.
Murillo wrote at the outset of the lengthy message:
We worked very hard. Many people did. We pushed tp get out the Latino vote with our features, our partners, and our voices. We kept our Google efforts non-partisan and followed our company’s protocols for the elections strategy. We emphasized our mission to give Latinos access to information so that they can make an informed decision at the polls, and we feel very grateful for all the support to do this important work. Latinos voted in record-breaking numbers, particularly with early votes. A large percentage of Latino voters in Florida were new voters who had become citizens just in time to vote. We saw high traffic for the search queries ‘votar,’ ‘como votar,’ and ‘donde voter,’ in key states like Florida and Nevada. We will be pulling in more info in the coming hours/days but so far we definitely know there was high traffic on search in Spanish. Without translating our tools the users wouldn’t have found the information they needed. Objectively speaking, our goal was met — we pushed and successfully launched the search features in Spanish, and we thank Lisa for her support in advocating  for this work. I sent Philipp a note yesterday to thank him because he and others voiced their support for this too, and we greatly appreciate it. Even Sundar gave the effort a shout out and a comment in Spanish, which was really special.
“Sundar” presumably refers to Google’s chief executive officer Sundar Pichai, who took the reins of the massive search giant in October 2015. “Lisa” presumably refers to Lisa Gevelber, the vice president of Global Marketing for Google—who forwarded Murillo’s entire four-page email to several other Google executives in another chain also obtained by Breitbart News in which Gevelber praises Murillo’s activities with official company resources as having made a “great difference.” “Philipp” presumably refers to Philipp Schindler, a senior vice president and Google’s chief business officer per his LinkedIn page.
The emails were first revealed on Fox News on Monday evening on Tucker Carlson Tonight by anchor Tucker Carlson in a special report. Breitbart News also obtained them, and has reached out to Google with a number of questions about the emails.
Carlson, in his exclusive report on Fox News Monday night, compared the revelations in the Google emails to the probe of Russian interference in the U.S. election to Special Counsel Robert Mueller—raising the question about how much influence tech giants like Google and Facebook have on election outcomes in the United States.
Carlson cited Dr. Robert Epstein, a social scientist and an expert on Google, who has said, in Carlson’s words, “Google alone could determine the outcome of almost any election just by altering its search selections and we would never know it.”
Epstein has published research detailing how 

Google could influence the results of U.S. 

elections. Breitbart News has exclusively 

published several of Epstein’s reports, including a 

recent one showing that Google search 

manipulation can swing huge swaths of voters.

In his report on Monday night, Carlson then described the emails he obtained, which Breitbart News also obtained. Carlson said:
This wasn’t a get-out-the-vote effort or whatever they say. It wasn’t aimed at all potential voters. It wasn’t even aimed at a balanced cross-section of subgroups. Google didn’t try to get out the vote among say Christian Arabs in Michigan or say Persian Jews in Los Angeles—they sometimes vote Republican. It was aimed only at one group, a group that Google cynically assumed would vote exclusively for the Democratic Party. Furthermore, this mobilization effort targeted not only the entire country but swing states vital to the Hillary campaign. This was not an exercise in civics, this was political consulting. It was in effect an in-kind contribution to the Hillary Clinton campaign.”
Carlson noted that in communication with Google, the company “did not deny that the email was real or that it showed a clear political preference.”
“Their only defense was that the activities they described were either non-partisan or were not officially taken by the company,” Carlson said  Monday night, describing Google’s official response to his requests for comment, before challenging the company’s response: “But of course they were both. Plenty of people in Google knew what was going on and we haven’t seen any evidence anyone at Google disapproved of it and tried to rein it in.”
The email from Murillo continues by explaining just how expansive the efforts the company undertook to achieve its objective were:
We had our partners help spread the word about our features on social media, including YouTubers and influencers like Dulce Candy, Jorge Narvaez, Jessie y Joy, Barbara Bermudo, and Pamela Silva of Univision, Jackie Cruz aka La Flaca from Orange is the New Black, and more. We promoted our partner the Latino Community Foundation’s non-partisan #YoVoyaVotaryTu (I’m going to vote, are you?) campaign and leveraged our social media influencer friends’ reach to hit over 11M impressions with that hashtag. We hosted an event with over 200 people and a hangout with social media influencers about the power of the Latino vote and the new research Nielsen published about the Latino electorate. This reached 4.4M social media impressions and signaled to many that Google and our partners value the Latino community and our role in this election. We brought the same research to the LATISM conference, where people were beyond thrilled to see Google’s support and acknowledgment of the Latino community.
If Murillo had ended her email there, this probably would not amount to the level of a national news story. But she did not: She went on for another several paragraphs on the first page and an extra three pages to admit the openly partisan intent of Google’s actions, including a remarkable in-writing confirmation that at least one of Google’s actions amounted to a “silent donation”—something that could raise Federal Election Commission (FEC) red flags if authorities decide to launch an official investigation into this matter, now that these emails have been publicly revealed.
It is in the next paragraph that Murillo openly admits that Google made a “silent donation,” in her words, paying for rides to polls via leftist organization Voto Latino. Murillo wrote in the next paragraph:
We also supported partners like Voto Latino to pay for rides to the polls in key states (silent donation). We even helped them create ad campaigns to promote the rides (with support from HOLA folks who rallied and volunteered their time to help). We supported Voto Latino to help them land an interview with Senator Meza of Arizona (key state for us) to talk about the election and how to use Google search to find information about how to vote. They were a strong partner, among many in this effort.
The next paragraph is where Murillo begins to make her next major admission: that the effort was not just to increase voter turnout generally but to elect Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump.
“Ultimately, after all was said and done, the Latino community did come out to vote, and completely surprised us,” Murillo wrote. “We never anticipated that 29% of Latinos would vote for Trump. No one did. We saw headlines like this about early voter turn out and thought that this was finally the year that the ‘sleeping giant’ had awoken.”
On the next page, the email continues with a headline from an article in The Atlantic by James Fallows: “2016: The Year Latinos Saved America?”
Under that was a tweet from Jon Ralston of Ralston Reports in Nevada saying, among other things, that “Trump is dead” because of Latino turnout in early voting in the state. Trump did not end up winning Nevada in the end, but he did beat Clinton in 30 and a half other states.
Here is the Ralston tweet contained in Murillo’s internal Google email, as well as in the Atlantic piece. by Fallows:


Final (almost) NV early #s are in:
Trump is dead.
GOP in big trouble in #nvsen, two House seats and #nvleg control.http://www.ktnv.com/news/ralston/the-nevada-early-voting-blog 

EARLY VOTING BLOG: Early voting kills Trump in NV


·        
·        
At that point, after the Ralston tweet, Murillo openly admits the partisan motives of Google’s electioneering efforts.
“On personal note, we really thought we had shown up to demonstrate our political power against a candidate who had vehemently offended our community by calling us rapists and drug dealers,” Murillo wrote. “We read the headline and thought WOW, we did it!”
Murillo’s email continues by including another headline, this time from the New Yorker’sBenjamin Wallace-Wells: “Latino Voters Show Trump What It Means to Be American.” That piece was written on Nov. 7, 2016, the day before the election.
Then she begins writing again: “But then reality set in. Only 71% of Latinos voted for Hillary, and that wasn’t enough.”
The third page of the email begins with another headline and image of a Latina woman in a red Make America Great Again hat and “Latinos for Trump” sign. The story, from Ruben Navarette, Jr., published in the Daily Beast, is headlined: “Why the Latino Vote Didn’t Save America.” The sub-headline, “Hispanic voters were supposed to be one of Clinton’s blue firewalls—but one in three ended up splitting for Trump,” is also included in Murillo’s Google email.
From there, Murillo continues writing for another page and a half:
The voters we wanted to reach did end up having an influence in the end, most notably in Florida. Latino voters voted for Trump more in Florida than in other states (31%), and FL was critical by popular vote and the electoral college. We’ll keep an eye on any other results that can show us the influence that our efforts had on the election. We know we gave this our best and are now figuring out what comes next. Thanks again for all your help and support in this effort.
In the next paragraph, Murillo again openly admits she was not “objective” when it came to the election.
“I have tried to stay objective, but I ask that you please give us some time to pause and reflect,” Murillo wrote. “This is devastating for our Democratic Latino community. After all these efforts and what we thought was positive momentum toward change, the results are not what we expected at all. We are afraid for our families, and especially for the millions of immigrants who now don’t know what the future holds for them.”
After that, Murillo says she cannot communicate with key organizers of the effort by Google and its partners—a project known as HOLA—because she is afraid of secret pro-Trump spies on the listservs created. She also admits ongoing discussions among these people about meeting to give grieving Hillary Clinton supporters hugs after Trump crushed her on election day. She also says those involved in Google’s get-out-the-vote efforts were openly seeking consolation after Clinton lost, and that she and another person cried after Trump won – for the first time they have  cried due to an election result. Murillo wrote:
What’s most difficult for us is we can’t even email the HOLA list to reach our community and discuss what this means for us because we know that apparently some may actually be Trump supporters. There is a thread right now among the core HOLA group where people are sharing how much they hurt, how much they need support right now, and that they are coordinating in different offices to meet up to just hold each other. One in a remote office said ‘If you guys do any sort of meetings, I’d love to join virtually. I think I’m currently the only Latinx in my office. It’s kinda hard.’ #understatement. Another said, ‘I’ve never cried after an election until last night.’ Same here.
She was not done there. In the next paragraph, Murillo wrote that this election result hurt her badly. She also admits the election result was a “loss,” another indication that Google’s efforts were clearly attempting to use company resources to elect Democrat Clinton over Republican Trump and influence the results of the election. She also says that the company—and herself in particular—will redouble efforts in the future to get a different and more desired result in future elections.
“I’m in shock and it hurts more than I could have ever imagined, but trying to stay optimistic and keep my head high,” Murillo wrote. “Loss is a part of life, and I do think frustrations challenge us to work smarter and get creative. My partners have sent notes and are saying the same thing — time to keep working harder.”
At the top of the fourth page of the email, Murillo asks her colleagues at Google to give out a “smile” to grieving leftist Latinos who work at the company.
“If you see a Latino Googler in the office 

(California/New York), please give them a 

smile,” Murillo wrote. “They are probably 

hurting right now. It’s tough to handle now that

we know not all of us were against this, so we 

may be even more divided than ever. At least in

CA/NY though, you can rest assured that the 

Latinos of these blue states need your thoughts 

and prayers, at least for them and their 

families.”
Then, she continues by stating she is going on a planned vacation she thought she was taking to “celebrate” a Clinton win, but after Trump won, she says, her vacation “will be time to reflect on how to continue to support my community through these difficult times.”
Murillo, in the next line, reveals that she thought she was sharing her viewpoints on these matters in a tight circle that would not leak.
“I’m not sharing my personal opinions very broadly, but wanted to share openly here in the circle of trust,” she wrote.
This email leaked to Fox News and Breitbart News and is now likely to become a centerpiece in the case that Google is throwing its weight around to interfere in elections in the United States in a partisan manner against the duly elected President of the United States.
This email from Murillo was not just from some rogue staffer inside Google. Her original email was forwarded on to other Google executives by the aforementioned Gevelber, according to another email obtained by Breitbart News.
“Thought you all would want to read this,” Gevelber wrote in her own message endorsing Murillo’s email in a message to other Google bigwigs. “It’s from Eliana Murillo who runs US Hispanic Marketing on my team and who helped found HOLA our Hispanic ERC.”
Gevelber continued by commending everyone she said, “worked so hard to ensure all the Get out the Vote were done in Spanish” that their efforts “made a giant difference” in the election “to Googlers and beyond.”
President Trump and Republicans have just begun scratching the surface of bias against them among Silicon Valley’s elite, including, perhaps foremost alongside Facebook, from Google. A source close to the White House who has reviewed these emails ahead of their public release told Breitbart News that in a just world this would amount to, at a minimum, a clear violation of campaign finance law governing in-kind contributions to campaigns and causes.
“How is this any different than Michael Cohen’s alleged conduct?” the source close to the White House told Breitbart News. “Did Google disclose their contribution? No, they didn’t. I guess Bob Mueller is too busy chasing extortionist porn star fairy tales to do anything about it.”
Technically, this would not fall into Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s wheelhouse, but if authorities do end up investigating, it would more likely come from the Justice Department generally speaking or any number of federal agencies like the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) or Federal Election Commission (FEC). It remains to be seen where this goes from here.
“The views expressed in this email are the employee’s personal political views and are not representative of any official stance from the company,” a Google spokesperson told Breitbart News. “Google’s elections efforts — both in 2016 and leading up to this year’s midterms — have been entirely nonpartisan. We will continue to use our products in an informative, nonpartisan way to engage voters leading up to November’s election.”
But it may not matter what the company’s official spokesperson says now about these damning emails, as at least one other Google executive flagged the original email for company executives, warning that Murillo’s email demonstrates just how “partisan” her work with official company resources was.
“Forwarding this not because of the original sender but rather how explicitly it references that her work was 100% partisan,” Google Search Product Marketing official Mackenzie Thomas wrote in another company email.










VIVA LA RAZA SUPREMACY?

“Free my anchor baby breeding unregistered Democrats!” La Raza Hillaria Clinton

ENDORSED BY MEXICO, HISPANDERING HILLARIA CLINTON VOWS THAT MEXICO WILL ELECT ALL FUTURE U.S. PRESIDENTS!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/07/la-raza-hillary-clinton-backs-mexican.html

In 1994, Voz Fronteriza received $6,000 from UC student activity funds and many of its writers are members of the Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, which refers to the American Southwest as “occupied Mexico.” California attorney general Xavier Becerra, a former congressman once on Hillary Clinton’s short list as a running mate, boasts of his involvement with the militant group. 

 (DO A SEARCH FOR THE CLINTON’S LONG HISTORY WITH THE MEXICAN FASCIST PARTY of LA RAZA “The Race” NOW CALLING ITSELF UNIDOSus.)


SWAMP EMPRESS HILLARY CLINTON 


Leaked Julian Assange Message: 


Hillary Is A ‘Well Connected, Sadistic Sociopath’



"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now."  ----  Patricia McCarthy - AMERICANTHINKER.com

THE DIRTY DEALS of DIRTY HILLARY….. looting anything that moves!
Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA

Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN THINKERcom

"But what the Clintons do is criminal because they do it wholly at the expense of the American people. And they feel thoroughly entitled to do it: gain power, use it to enrich themselves and their friends. They are amoral, immoral, and venal. Hillary has no core beliefs beyond power and money. That should be clear to every person on the planet by now."  ----  Patricia McCarthy - AMERICANTHINKER.com


THE LIFE OF HILLARY CLINTON: AMORAL PSYCHOPATH and GLOBAL LOOTER OF THE POOR….. But she served Obama’s crony bank$ter$ well!

Harvey Weinstein has been exposed in the media as the sexual predator he is, and Hillary Clinton has been exposed as the craven money-grubber she is; money over morality is the mantra she lives by. PATRICIA Mc CARTHY – AMERICAN THINKERcom

Revolving Door: Dozens of 

Clinton Staffers Hired by 

Google — and Vice-Versa









YouTube
YouTube
   65


Dozens of people who used to work for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and a number of Clinton initiatives went on to work at Google, and vice-versa.

At least twelve employees from the Clinton Global Initiative, the Clinton Foundation, and the Clinton Health Access Initiative went on to work for Google, while at least fifteen Google employees went on to work for Hillary For America. The list was originally developed by Adam Townsend on Twitter.
Pls look at thread and behold “we’re the good, evil company” This list is employees of Google & Groundworks (goog co built to help HRC elex) that have been swapped in/out of Dept of State/ Foundation/ Prez campaign/New America (dem org)
Here is the list of employees:
Peter Albers, former Finance and Operations Director at the Clinton Foundation, before moving to Google Fiber as Head of Partnerships and Market Development in 2015. In 2017, he became Google’s Global Head of Business Development and Head of Americas Retail Partnerships for Google Play Retail.
Shannon Jones Newberry, former Deputy Director of Communications at the Clinton Global Initiative, before becoming Communications and Public Affairs Manager at Google in 2012.
Jeff Lawi, a former analyst at the Clinton Health Access Initiative, before joining Google in 2013 where he has held a number of positions, including Product Support Manager, Senior Product Support Manager, and Principal, Strategy, and Business Operations.
Nathan Allen, a former consultant at the Clinton Foundation, before becoming a Senior Creative Producer and Launch Manager at Google in 2015. Allen is currently an Executive Producer at Google.
Puiyan Leung, a former consultant for the Clinton Foundation through Stern Consulting Corps. Leung had been an intern at Google before serving as a consultant for the Clinton Foundation, and he returned to Google in 2013 as a financial analyst, before becoming a program manager in 2015. Leung left Google to work for Facebook in 2016.
Felicia Yep Salinas, former Employment and Labor Commitment Maker at the Clinton Global Initiative before joining Google in 2015 as a Talent Hacker. She then became a Technical Sourcer in 2016, before moving to Facebook months later.
John Lyman, according to the website for GV where he now works, “helped launch the Clinton Global Initiative,” worked as Deputy Chairperson, and focused on “progressive policy and advocacy,” before joining Google for “a decade” where he served as Head of Partnerships and Marketing for Google for Entrepreneurs.
Scot Frank, a former mentor at the Clinton Global Initiative, joined Google as a product manager in 2014.
Theodore Przybyla, former Working Group Manager at the Clinton Global Initiative, joined Google as an engagement manager in 2015, before leaving for the Brookings Institution in September 2017.
Justin Pang, former Deputy Chief Operating Officer at the Clinton Health Access Initiative, joined Google in 2012. Having served as Strategic Partner Lead of Global Partnerships and Team Lead of Global Partnerships, he is currently the Head of Partnerships.
Maria Wang-Faulkner, former Country Support Manager at the Clinton Health Access Initiative, joined Google as a Strategic Partner Manager in 2016, and currently serves as Strategic Partner Development Manager for Google Assistant.
Paul Lee, a former consultant for the Clinton Foundation, joined Google in 2007 as a Senior Product Manager, before leaving in 2015.
Stephanie Hannon, former Group Product Manager at Google, left the company in 2011 before becoming a Product Manager at Facebook in 2012. Hannon then moved back to Google in 2013 as a Director of Product Management for just over two years, before she became the Chief Technology Officer for Hillary For America in April 2015.
Osi Imeokparia, former Product Management Director at Google, left the company in 2015 to become Chief Product Officer at Hillary For America. Imeokparia currently works at the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, which is owned by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan.
Derek Parham, former Technical Lead of Google Apps, joined Hillary For America in 2016 as Deputy Chief Technology Officer.
Jason Rosenbaum has worked in a number of Democrat Party-affiliated positions, including as Deputy Director of Online Communications for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee between April 2007 and March 2009, and Digital Director for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee between March 2009 and June 2013. Rosenbaum then became Director of Elections and Advocacy at Google in July 2013, before leaving to become Director of Digital Advertising at Hillary For America in July 2015.
Nathaniel Welch, a former Site Reliability Engineer at Google, joined Hillary For America as Staff Site Reliability Engineer in January 2016.
Henry Bridge, former Product Manager at Google, left to join Facebook in June 2011, before becoming Director of Product at Hillary For America in January 2016.
Fred Wulff, a former software engineer at Google, joined Hillary For America in March 2016 as a software engineer and manager.
Divina Videna Chung, former Operations Point of Contact at Google Express, joined Hillary For America in February 2016 as California Phone Bank Captain and Nevada Precinct Captain. She also worked at Uber, before moving to Facebook as an Oculus VR Brand Ambassador.
Danny Bowman, a former Product Specialist at Google, joined Hillary For America in July 2016 as a software engineer.
James Plummer, a former User Experience Designer at Google, joined Hillary For America in January 2016 as Lead Product Designer and Manager.
Andrea Frome, a former software engineer at Google, joined Hillary For America in May 2016 as a senior software engineer.
Maxwell Nunes, a former Political Advertising Fellow at Google, joined Hillary For America’s digital team in June 2015. Nunes currently works in digital policy at Airbnb.
Remy DeCausemaker, a former mentor at Google Summer of Code, joined Hillary For America in June 2016 as Open Source Community Manager, before becoming Open Source Program Manager at Twitter in June 2017.
Dina Lamdany, a former software engineering intern at Google, joined Hillary For America in June 2015 as a data analyst, before moving back to Google as an Associate Product Manager.
Corey Bertram, a former software engineering intern at Google, worked with Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and claimed to be “responsible for building backend platform and infra for Hillary Clinton 2016.”
This year, Breitbart Tech also discovered that dozens of former Clinton and Obama staffers were now working at Facebook.
In 2016, WikiLeaks claimed Google was “directly engaged” with and working for the Clinton presidential campaign, while leaked emails showed that former Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt wanted to be the “Head Outside Advisor” to the Clinton Campaign.
Schmidt was also “instrumental” in creating the “The Groundwork,” a company that sought to put Clinton into the White House, and Google worked to hide negative search results of Clinton during the presidential campaign.
In a leaked video released by Breitbart Tech of an internal meeting at Google shortly after Clinton’s presidential campaign defeat in 2016, Google executives, including CEO Sundar Pichai, co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, Chief Financial Officer Ruth Porat, and Vice Presidents Kent Walker and Eileen Naughton expressed strong and negative reactions to the results.
Brin announced that the meeting is “probably not the most joyous we’ve had” and claimed to find the election results “deeply offensive,” claiming it “conflicts with many of [Google’s] values.”
After an employee asked if Google would “invest in grassroots, hyper-local efforts to bring tools and services and understanding of Google products and knowledge” so Americans can “make informed decisions that are best for themselves,” Pichai claimed the company would ensure that “educational products” reach “segments of the population [they] are not [currently] fully reaching,” and expressed that “investments in machine learning and AI” could stop “misinformation” shared by “low-information voters.”
The executives also applauded an employee who made a remark about needing to recognize “white privilege” following the election.
Charlie Nash is a reporter for Breitbart Tech. You can follow him on Twitter @MrNashington, or like his page at Facebook.









Leaked Video: Google Executives Admit to Importing 10K Foreign Workers to Take U.S. Jobs



   410



Silicon Valley giant Google employs nearly 10,000 foreign workers, importing them to the United States on visas, a newly leaked video obtained by Breitbart News reveals.
The video is a full recording of Google’s first all-hands meeting following the 2016 presidential election in which President Trump historically beat out Democrat Hillary Clinton. These Google meetings occur on a weekly basis and are known inside the company as “TGIF” meetings, short for “Thank God It’s Friday.”
In the Google meeting, Vice President of People Operations Eileen Naughton reveals the extent to which the tech conglomerate has imported and currently employs close to 10,000 foreign workers with plans to expand their foreign workforce population.
Naughton tells the room full of Google employees, who are called “Googlers” by the company:
First and foremost is immigration. We have nearly 10,000 Googlers in the U.S. on visas. Very understandably, those of you who are working here and have families here or are in the process of renewing or getting visas are probably very concerned.
Naughton then explains how President Obama’s administration readily allowed and invited Google and other tech corporations to import foreign workers instead of hiring American citizens.
“So here’s what we know, there is, for the time being, an absent any policy recommendation from the Obama administration, right, there’s no change,” Naughton says. “Googlers should not expect to be hassled, entering the border, there should be no change in your status.”
Google intends on importing to the U.S. and employing even more foreign workers, Naughton discloses:
We also know that the nature of the U.S. immigration system is such that it makes — and there are legal limitations — it makes immediate changes after January’s inauguration of the new administration highly unlikely. But we of course will keep a close watch on this. Our policy office in D.C. is all over it. And we will keep you informed, but we will keep Googlers’ interests at heart and we will of course fight to retain all the visas and then some, because we keep adding to this. [Emphasis added]
Every year, more than 100,000 foreign workers are brought to the U.S. on H-1B visas and are allowed to stay for up to six years. That number has ballooned to potentially hundreds of thousands each year, as universities and non-profits are exempt from the cap. With more foreign workers entering the U.S. through the visa system, Americans are often replaced and forced to train their foreign replacements. In the last decade, more than 2.6 million H-1B foreign workers were approved to take high-paying U.S. jobs.
The Trump administration has sought to clamp down on corporations outsourcing U.S. to cheaper, foreign workers through the H-1B visa. The pro-American reforms to the H-1B visa are expected to open up about 80,000 high-paying, white collar jobs for Americans over the next two years.
Naughton and Senior Vice President for Global Affairs and Chief Legal Officer Kent Walker also promoted the corporation’s use of the H-1B visa to import and employ foreign workers, rather than Americans.
“I would believe, being pro-business as a Republican, [Trump] would understand the need of certain sectors to have H-1B visas, etc,” Naughton said.
Walker noted the monolithic, corporate open borders viewpoint among the Republican and Democratic political establishments on the H-1B visa and national immigration policy.
“The other thing to add to that, ever since we’ve been debating immigration reform, there’s been strong bipartisan consensus in both houses of Congress that H-1B visas are a great thing for the United States, as well as for the people that use it,” Walker said. “So I don’t see those majorities changing, in Congress changing.”
This year, alone, Google tried to import more than 5,200 foreign workers to take coveted, high-paying tech jobs in Silicon Valley. This would have added to the already nearly 10,000 foreign workers who are currently employed at Google, as revealed in the leaked video.
Google, along with other tech corporations like Cisco, Microsoft, and Facebook have been exposed for using Indian outsourcing firms like Tata Consulting Services and Infosys to hide the number of H-1B foreign workers they import annually.
Last year, Eric Schmidt — the top executive of Google’s parent company, Alphabet before leaving in January 2018 — said corporations should be allowed to import as many foreign workers as they want, without regard for whether Americans are replaced and displaced in the process.
“The stupidest policy in the entire American political system was the limit on H-1B visas,” Schmidt said at the time.
Analysis conducted last year revealed that despite the growing number of American STEM graduates every year, Americans are vastly outnumbered in Silicon Valley’s tech industry. About 71 percent of tech workers in Silicon Valley are foreign-born, while the tech industry in the San Francisco, Oakland, and Hayward area is made up of 50 percent foreign-born tech workers.
In 2017, the Trump administration set up an H-1B visa abuse hotline for American workers to email if they or their coworkers were being replaced by foreign workers. Last year, a total of more than 5,000 cases of H-1B visa abuse was reported.
Four million Americans turn 18 years old every year and begin looking for good jobs in the American economy, or enter higher education with the same goal. For decades, the federal government has inflated the supply of new labor by annually admitting more than 1.5 million new legal immigrants, providing work-permits to roughly 3 million resident foreigners, and by not effectively enforcing national immigration laws to block the employment of about 8 million illegal aliens.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder

Rep. Yoder’s India Lobby 

Offers $$$ to Jump Line for 

Green Cards








Yoder
AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi, File
    144

A group of Indian visa-workers is offering to pay the federal government $1,500 per family to jump the line for green cards, according to a friendly report by the McClatchy news bureau.

The proposed trade would send just $1,500 from each Indian family to the federal treasury in exchange for a fast-track to the hugely valuable prize of citizenship for at least 100,000 outsourcing-workers and their family members.
That small payment would save the Indians from paying lawyers’ fees, allow them to compete directly against American professionals for jobs, and allow them to quickly begin the chain-migration process for their many parents and siblings. The money could be used to fund the Federal Emergency Management Agency, say the advocates, who are also hoping their proposal will be supported by their ally, Kansas GOP Rep. Kevin Yoder.
“It goes from insulting to preposterous to propose such a thing,” countered Jessica Vaughan, policy director at the Center for Immigration Studies.  She continued:
It is insulting for them to think they should get to jump in line ahead of others for paying a ridiculously low sum of money, and it is preposterous [for them] to think they somehow are preferred immigrants over millions of others who have been sponsored and are waiting their turn in line.
The McClatchy news service reported the offer from the Indian group, Immigration Voice:
Immigration lobbyists are pitching a plan to pay for disaster relief by charging high-skilled workers from India and China a fee to obtain green cards.
And they’re leaning hard on Rep. Kevin Yoder, R-Kansas, to help …
under this proposal green card applicants from certain countries could pay an additional fee to bypass the green card backlog. The money would be would be earmarked for disaster relief, which [the group’s lawyer also] said would increase the chances of passing green card policy reforms.
An additional $1,500 green card fee for all employment-based Chinese and Indian immigrants would raise $1.5 billion over 10 years, according to an analysis by Immigration Voice. A fee of $2,500 would raise another $1 billion …
In January, the group said their funds could be used to pay for a border wall, said McClatchy:
Mexico refuses to pay for President Donald Trump’s wall, but advocates representing another group of foreign workers legally in the U.S. say they would eagerly raise billions for the barrier if it’d help them get green cards faster.
Who? Under the proposal, Indian and Chinese tech workers would step up and kick in $2,500 each or more in fees if it meant they could get their green cards after five or six years instead of waiting decades as some do now.
“The Indian high-skilled workers will gladly, enthusiastically and happily pay for the wall if given an opportunity to do so in order to get fair treatment on green card waiting times,” said Leon Fresco, an attorney for Immigration Voice, an advocacy group working with members of Congress on the measure.
The Immigration Voice group says it represents up to 300,000 Indian outsourcing workers, plus up to 300,000 family members, who are waiting for green-cards that have been sponsored by their employers. The group is already working closely with Yoder to pass a fast-track green-card bill in the 2019 appropriations bills.
Indian advocates say some Indians visa-workers face a waiting line of up to 150 years to get a green card. The problem, they say, is the so-called “country caps” on the distribution of the 140,000 employer-based visas awarded each year. Those caps theoretically limit nationals of each country to just 7 percent of the annual 140,000 visas, chiefly to ensure a wide distribution of the visas to diverse countries.
But most of the Indians get through the green-card line in several years, partly because the complex visa rules allow roughly 23,000 Indian workers and families get green cards every year. That actual inflow is far higher than the notional 9,800-per-year limit set by the 7 percent country cap.
There are roughly 300,000 Indians in the green-card line because brand-name U.S. companies, hospitals, banks, and universities have outsourced millions of U.S. jobs to Indian subcontractors, such as Infosys, Cognizant or Wipro. Most of the 300,000 Indians in the line were imported for temporary U.S.  jobs via the L-1 and H-1B visa-worker programs and were later rewarded when their employers sponsored them for the huge prize of green cards.
Nationwide, the U.S. government helps companies keep a population of roughly 1.5 million visa-workers in American white-collar jobs. The various visa programs — H-1BL-1, J-1, H4 EADOPT, TN — allow employers to hire cheap foreign doctorstherapists, programmers, engineers, accountants, designers, architects, managers, recruitment specialists, P.R. experts, and many other professionals.  These huge labor programs boost the stock market by lowering salaries for many American college graduates and also push many Americans into lower-tech, lower-wage careers, such as journalism.
For example, Northwestern University is using the H-1B program to hire roughly 170 foreign graduates each year to fill science and teaching jobs for just $65,000 a year, according to government data provided by MyVisaJobs.com. U.S. science grads — whether young or old, male or female, Asian, Latino, African-American, or European-American — were not offered those university jobs.
The university is paying its H-1Bs workers just above Chicago’s “living wage” of $59,215, as estimated by CNBC.
In July, Yoder worked with the Indian group to win initial approval for a bill that would abolish the country caps.
If the country caps are removed by Yoder’s bill late this year, U.S. Fortune 500 companies and Indian outsourcing firms will be able to offer fast-track green cards to roughly five times more Indian hires each year. That giveaway will help investors greatly accelerate the organized outsourcing of middle-class healthcare and technology jobs to lower-wage Indian employees, so boosting the investors’ stock values.
The new green-cards-for-cash plan is being offered to Yoder because he chairs the House homeland defense appropriations committee, which oversees immigration and emergency management. Immigration Voice’s political advisor, Leon Fresco, told McClatchy:
“At the end of the day, Yoder has a massive hand here because he needs to write the FEMA legislation,” said Leon Fresco, the strategist and general counsel for Immigration Voice. “One way or another there’s no way this doesn’t go through Yoder.”
Fresco notes that Yoder plan to eliminate the country caps will not raise the annual distribution of green cards to H-1B workers.
But Yoder’s plan will allow U.S. and Indian companies to recruit and import more workers via the L-1 visa program. The program has no cap and it allows visa-workers to be paid minimum wages, even for white-collar jobs.
The State Department is already issuing almost 80,000 multi-year L-1 visas each year, creating a resident population of perhaps 400,000 L-1 workers. Some L-1 visa-workers are used to set up new businesses in the United States, but many are used for outsourcing work, alongside H-1B visa-workers.
The resident population of H-1B workers with three-year visas is at least 500,000 and may reach 900,000.
Yoder’s dive into the middle-class outsourcing controversy comes as he faces a difficult election campaign in a district that voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. His district already includes employers who have outsourced white-collar jobs to 1,400 H-1B workers, according to H-1BFacts.com.
GOP Rep. Kevin Yoder tells his Kansas voters he's moderate b/c he is pushing a law to help CEOs & investors outsource families' blue-collar and white-collar jobs. But many polls show voters want fedl. immigration policy to put working Americans before CEOs http://bit.ly/2CiGtaz 
Amnesty advocates rely on business-funded “Nation of Immigrants” push-polls to show apparent voter support for immigration and immigrants.
But “choice” polls reveal most voters’ often-ignored preference that CEOs should hire Americans at decent wages before hiring migrants. Those Americans include many blue-collar Blacks, Latinos, and people who hide their opinions from pollsters. Similarly, the 2018 polls show that GOP voters are far more concerned about migration — more properly, the economics of migration — than they are concerned about illegal migration and MS-13, taxes, or the return of Rep. Nancy Pelosi.
Yoder’s office did not dismiss the cash-for-green-cards plan. According to McClatchy:
“We are still in the early stages of looking into this specific proposal, but we remain committed to ensuring that (a green card bill) gets across the finish line and becomes law,” Yoder’s spokesman C.J. Grover said in an email.
Yoder is expected to push his country-caps plan in the must-pass homeland defense budget, during the lame-duck session after the voters have cast their votes and as retiring legislators look for lobbying jobs with business.
GOP estb. is using the $5 billion border-wall fight to hide up to four blue/white-collar cheap-labor programs in lame-duck DHS budget. Donors are worried that salaries are too damn high, & estb. media does not want to know. http://bit.ly/2oR6DHS 
Many reports show high levels of corruption in the H-1B program, reflecting the high levels of corruption in the home countries. For example, corruption in India is ranked as the 81st most corrupt country, partly because of caste vs. caste hostility, according to Transparency International. The corruption debilitates the country’s economic growth, say critics.
The home-country corruption has ensured numerous arrests of Indian executives in the United States, plus a series of lawsuits against large Indian outsourcing companies. The lawsuits charge the Indian companies with discriminating against Americans to ensure the placement of more Indian workers in U.S. jobs.
“The most objectionable result of lifting the country caps would be to reward the [American] companies that have used the [temporary] guest-workers to replace Americans,” said Vaughan. “It completes the process for them … it institutionalizes this in a way that will cause permanent harm to Americans who aspire to white-collar jobs.”
Moreover, the “guest-worker visas are not meant to be a stepping stone for green cards,” she added. But for Indian visa-workers, “that was their expectation, and it was wrong, and now they are demanding their expectations be filled … They think adding a little money to the discussion might be enough to grease the way, but that is not the way Americans see their immigration system,” she added.
“Americans value fairness in our immigration system,” along with the need for some diversity, minimal corruption and a first-come-first-served policy, she said.
Also, the Indians’ offer to pay for approval by Yoder and other legislators to jump the line “shows the disdain they have for other categories” of would-be immigrants, said Vaughan. “To suggest for a mere $1,500 they should be allowed to jump in line, that they are somehow more worthy … in the way you would try to buy off a police officer for not writing a ticket — it smacks of the same kind of mentality,” said Vaughan.
The $1,500 payment is also trivial, she said, because the acceleration of green cards would be extremely valuable, she said. It would allow the visa-workers to quit their low-wage outsourcing jobs sooner, and also accelerate the arrival of their elderly parents via chain-migration rules, she said. Parents “are one of the most expensive demographic groups [for taxpayers] because of their likely need for health care benefits, and the fact that they have not contributed over a lifetime to Social Security or any other social welfare program through taxes,” she said.
The promised payment of $1.5 billion is enough to keep the federal government operating for four hours. In 2017, the federal government’s budget was $3,664 billion.
But the Indian lobby has managed to win sponsorship from more than 80 percent of the House for Yoder’s H.R. 392 bill to remove the country caps. Their lobbying campaign relies on frequent group visits to member’s district offices, plus the persuasive power of the Indian doctors from local hospitals and the wives of visa-workers, Fresco told Breitbart News.
Yoder’s bill might get passed this Fall, Vaughan said. “I don’t think most members of Congress understand the implications [of the country cap removal] and they are attracted [to the argument] that it is somehow more fair to do away with the per-country caps,” she said.
“Per-country caps ensure a diverse flow of immigrants from many countries,” said RJ Hauman,  government relations director at the Federation for American Immigration Reform. He continued:
Without those caps in place, India will consume the lion’s share of the permanent skilled visas, creating a discriminatory system that favors a single foreign nation. H.R. 392 shreds any pretense that programs like the H-1B and L visa [programs] are anything but a track for intending immigrants – not a short-term foreign labor program. No one promised [these Indian] temporary guest workers that they would ever have the chance to immigrate permanently.
“Allowing temporary guest workers the opportunity to pay for green cards – no matter where the money goes – completely undermines the integrity of our immigration system,” said Hauman, adding:
The last thing we need is another pay-for-play route to citizenship like the fraud-ridden EB-5 program.
Immigration Economics
Overall, the Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via immigration shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the market with cheap white-collar and blue-collar foreign labor.
Four million young Americans will join the workforce this year, but the federal government will also import 1.1 million legal immigrants, and allow an army of at least 2 million visa-workers to work U.S. jobs, alongside asylum-claiming migrants and illegal aliens.
That flood of outside labor spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. The policy also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions. Immigration also pulls investment and wealth away from heartland states because investment flows towards the large immigrant populations living in the coastal states.

HERITAGE FOUNDATION:

AMNESTY WOULD DOUBLE U.S. POPULATION, POVERTY, HOUSING AND HOMELESS CRISIS

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2010/03/heritage-foundation-amnesty-would-add.html

"Critics argue that giving amnesty to 12 to 30 million illegal aliens in the U.S. would have an immediate negative impact on America’s working and middle class — specifically black Americans and the white working class — who would be in direct competition for blue-collar jobs with the largely low-skilled illegal alien population." JOHN BINDER

"Additionally, under current legal immigration laws, if given amnesty, the illegal alien population would be allowed to bring an unlimited number of their foreign relatives to the U.S. This population could boost already high legal immigration levels to an unprecedented high. An amnesty for illegal aliens would also likely triple the number of border-crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border." JOHN BINDER
“At the current rate of invasion (mostly through Mexico, but also through Canada) the United States will be completely over run with illegal aliens by the year 2025. I’m not talking about legal immigrants who follow US law to become citizens. In less than 20 years, if we do not stop the invasion, ILLEGAL aliens and their offspring will be the dominant population in the United States”…. Tom Barrett 
U.S. Immigrant Numbers Hit 

44.5 Million, Near 108-Year 

Record








immigrants
AP Photo/Jae C. Hong
     638

The immigrant percentage of the U.S. population has hit 13.7 percent, near the 1910 record of 14.7 percent, according to the latest release by the Census Bureau.

In 2017, 13.7 percent of people (one in 7.3 people) in the United States were immigrants, up from 13.5 percent in 2016, and up from 5 percent (one in 20 people) in 1970, according to the bureau’s data.
The rising share means 44.5 million people in a population of 325.7 million people were born abroad. That 44.5 million includes roughly 22 million naturalized citizens,  11 million other residents, including more than 1.5 million foreign temporary visa-workers, plus roughly 11 million illegal immigrants, according to the bureau:
The millions of migrants are concentrated in the coastal metropolises, such as Los Angeles and New York, but many are migrating into interior states. According to the New York Times:
New York and California, states with large immigrant populations, both had increases of less than six percent since 2010. But foreign-born populations rose by 20 percent in Tennessee, 13 percent in Ohio, 12 percent in South Carolina and 20 percent in Kentucky over the same period.
The recent inflow includes a rising percentage of Asians from China, Vietnam, India, said the New York Times.
Brookings Institution analysis of that data shows that 41 percent of the people who said they arrived since 2010 came from Asia. Just 39 percent were from Latin America. About 45 percent were college educated, the analysis found, compared with about 30 percent of those who came between 2000 and 2009.
The Asian inflow include includes many college graduates because many of them are immigrating via the various business-backed programs for college-graduate visa-workers.
The Census Bureau may have undercounted the number of illegal immigrants, ensuring the immigrant population now exceeds the 1910 percentage, NBC News reported:
Illegal immigrants can be more difficult for surveyors to locate due to informal living arrangements, and some may avoid being included in surveys for fear of being reported to the government, researchers say.
Jeffrey Passel, a demographer at Pew Research Center, has estimated that the actual immigrant population is likely 3 percent to 5 percent higher than the number in the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
chart by the Washington Post suggests that this huge wave of migrants has changed politics by giving Democrats’ identity-politics ideology an electoral lock in counties where immigrants comprise more than 20 percent of the population:
The New York Times report, however, demurely ignored the political and economic impact of this huge wage of workers, consumers, and renters.
Some economic impacts are obvious, for example, immigrants expand the economy by working, consuming and renting real-estate. Some also raise the productivity of Americans by inventing new products, importing new goods, or develop novel services that allow Americans to produce more wealth or enjoyment per hour.
But many less-skilled migrants play their largest role by simply shifting small slices of wealth from person to person, for example, by competing up rents in their neighborhood or by competing down wages in their workplace. The crudest examples can be seen in agriculture.
European farms tend to buy labor-saving machines from well-paid European manufacturing workers because their farmworkers’ wages are high, but many U.S. farm companies simply use cheap legal and illegal immigrant labor while sharing the savings from not buying machines between profit-seeking investors and penny-counting consumers.

























Next time you enjoy radishes in your salad, remember the farmworkers like these Oxnard workers, who harvest the food that we eat.

Of course, that cheap-labor business practice leaves Americans taxpayers to carry the off-work costs of immigrants, such as welfare programs, civic turmoil, Diversity, education costs for migrants’ children, and the occasional murder of an Iowa jogger, a massacre in a Florida nightclub, or the destruction of the Twin Towers in 2011.
But the immigration is not happening in a vacuum — it is happening as a vast wave of technology allows companies and investors to move products and assets (such as cheap migrant labor) around the world, at very low cost. This technological change has liberated societies to vastly enrich themselves — see China for example — even as it also seems to centralize power and wealth.
There is plenty of data to suggest that this combination of technological change and Congress’ passage of the 1965 immigration law have together since shifted a huge volume of wealth from younger, working Americans towards the older Americans who own real-estate, stocks, or companies.
That wage-pressure process began first among the interchangeable, blue-collar, unskilled Americans — such as farm workers — but it is shifting up the economic ladder to hit interchangeable, college-educated Americans. In President Donald Trump’s economy, blue-collar Americans are gaining amid modest restrictions on immigration while middle-class Americans are seeing slower gains as companies import more cheap college-graduates and also export their jobs to expanding foreign populations of clever, hardworking college-graduates.
This economic shift is reflected in another important economic change — the declining importance of Americans’ wages and salaries compared to other Americans’ dividends and stock prices. As the New York Times noted September 12:
Data from the Federal Reserve show that over the last decade and a half, the proportion of family income from wages has dropped from nearly 70 percent to just under 61 percent. It’s an extraordinary shift, driven largely by the investment profits of the very wealthy. In short, the people who possess tradable assets, especially stocks, have enjoyed a recovery that Americans dependent on savings or income from their weekly paycheck have yet to see. Ten years after the financial crisis, getting ahead by going to work every day seems quaint, akin to using the phone book to find a number or renting a video at Blockbuster” …
In 2016, net worth among white middle-income families was 19 percent below 2007 levels, adjusted for inflation. But among blacks, it was down 40 percent, and Hispanics saw a drop of 46 percent. For many, old-fashioned hard work has simply not been a viable path out of this hole. After unemployment peaked in the fall of 2009, it took years for joblessness to return to pre-recession levels. Slack in the labor market left the employed and unemployed alike with little leverage to demand raises, even as corporate profits surged.
Maybe it was inevitable that when half the population watches its wages stagnate while the other half gets rich in the market, the result is President Donald Trump and Brexit.
Unsurprisingly, many legislators are under severe pressure from donors to preserve the current national economic strategy of growth-by-immigration. In February 2018, for example, a loose alliance of business-first Republicans, pro-migration Democrats, and progressive media blocked President Donald Trump’s “Four Pillars” immigration reforms which would shift the United States back towards a low-immigration/high-wage economy.
Economists, investors, talking heads and political advocates in the Democratic and Republican parties are deeply reluctant to draw any connection between the immigration inflow of consumers, workers, and renters, and the economic shift from wages to stocks.
But the linkage is often hinted at. For example, Noah Smith, a pro-immigration, pro-diversity writer for Bloomberg News empire, wrote a column in July 2018 saying that the 1924 immigration cutbacks helped create the 1929 crash:
The housing crash of the mid-1920s might well have been a direct result of the curtailment of immigration. And if the Great Depression and/or the stock crash of 1929 was caused or exacerbated by that housing crash, there’s a clear and direct link between immigration restriction and the U.S.’s worst economic crisis of the 20th century. The reduction in agglomeration effects reported by Ager and Hansen probably also contributed to lower corporate earnings and sapped vitality in American cities.
Yet Smith is silent about the flip-side of immigration cuts — the impact of the 1965 immigration expansion law, which has added up to 44.5 million consumers, workers and renters to the United States’ marketplace.
Immigration Economics
Overall, the Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via immigration shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the market with cheap white-collar and blue-collar foreign labor.
Four million young Americans will join the workforce this year, but the federal government will also import 1.1 million legal immigrants, and allow an army of at least 2 million visa-workers to work U.S. jobs, alongside asylum-claiming migrants and illegal aliens.
That flood of outside labor spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. The policy also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions. Immigration also pulls investment and wealth away from heartland states because investment flows towards the large immigrant populations living in the coastal states.

Census: Population to 420 million in 2060, 2/3rds immigrants, 79 million

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/census-population-to-420-million-in-2060-2-3rds-immigrants-79-million

 by Paul Bedard

An immigrant woman from Honduras carries her baby inside the Catholic Charities of the Rio Grande Valley on Saturday, June 23, 2018, in McAllen, Texas. Families, who have been processed and released by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, wait inside the facility before continuing their journey to cities across the United States.
The U.S.-born baby is, of course, a U.S. citizen, whose illegal alien parents are eligible to receive, on the baby’s behalf, food stamps, nutrition from the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, and numerous tax benefits, including the EITC.
Most importantly, the newborn is deportation insurance for its parents. Illegal aliens facing deportation can argue that to deport one or more parents would create an “extreme hardship” for the new baby. If an immigration officer agrees, we’ve added a new adult to the nation’s population. At age 21 the former birthright citizen baby can formally apply for green cards for parents and siblings, and they, in turn, can start their own immigration chains.

5 Techniques Google Will Use to Ensure MAGA Is a ‘Hiccup in History’s Arc’









Trump vs. Google
  239

In a recently leaked video of a Google all-hands “TGIF” meeting following the election of President Trump, the tech giant’s leadership discussed plans to thwart President Trump’s agenda — here are some of tools and techniques the Masters of the Universe plan to utilize.
recently leaked video from a Google TGIF meeting shortly after the election of President Trump showed Google executives and employees dismayed at the victory of Trump and discussing plans to thwart Trump’s agenda and the larger populist movement worldwide. Here are just some of the ways that Google could attempt to make sure, to use the words of Google VP for Global Affairs Kent Walker, that “this election and others around the world” are just a “hiccup in history’s arc towards progress.”
1: Google Jigsaw
During the leaked TGIF meeting, one of the projects discussed was Jigsaw. Jigsaw is Alphabet’s think tank department or “social incubator.” Initially branded Google Ideas in 2010, the project was renamed Jigsaw in 2016 with then Alphabet CEO Eric Schmidt explaining that the new name “reflects our belief that collaborative problem-solving yields the best solutions” and that the team’s mission “is to use technology to tackle the toughest geopolitical challenges, from countering violent extremism to thwarting online censorship to mitigating the threats associated with digital attacks.”
However, so far most of what Jigsaw has produced has been new ways to censor information online, such as their “Perspective” A.I. product which attempts to crack down on “abusive” comments online. Perspective is used to filter and compile comments on websites for human review. To learn what exactly counts as a “toxic” comment, the program studied hundreds of thousands of user comments that had been deemed unacceptable by reviewers on websites like the New York Times and Wikipedia. “All of us are familiar with increased toxicity around comments in online conversations,” said Jigsaw president Jared Cohen. “People are leaving conversations because of this, and we want to empower publications to get those people back.”
Even those on the left appeared uneasy about the idea of censoring comments online based on an arbitrary number score assigned to “toxic” words. Feminist author Sady Doyle told Wired in 2016: “People need to be able to talk in whatever register they talk… imagine what the Internet would be like if you couldn’t say ‘Donald Trump is a moron,’” a phrase that registered a 99/100 on the AI’s personal attack scale.
2: Filter bubbles
A filter bubble is described by Technopedia as: “the intellectual isolation that can occur when websites make use of algorithms to selectively assume the information a user would want to see, and then give information to the user according to this assumption… A filter bubble, therefore, can cause users to get significantly less contact with contradicting viewpoints, causing the user to become intellectually isolated… Personalized search results from Google and personalized news stream from Facebook are two perfect examples of this phenomenon.”
This essentially means that Google only returns certain results based on a user’s browsing habits, which means that users may only be suggested content from the sources that reinforce their preconceived ideas. Given the nature of the Google algorithm, this means that users can be manipulated based upon what content the search function returns to them.
This phenomenon becomes particularly worrying around elections, when people are most likely to Google information about prospective candidates. Filter bubbles can mean that a user only receives positive results about a candidate they like and negative results about a candidate they dislike. This type of manipulation is a prime concern of big tech whistleblower Dr. Robert Epstein.
3: “Fake news”
Another way that Google could affect the content that users see is through the marking of certain websites or articles as “fake news.” Dr. Robert Epstein, a senior research psychologist at the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology, discussedthis at the Breitbart Masters of the Universe Town Hall stating:
“If Breitbart published a nice sarcastic, satire, satirical piece, brilliantly written, wouldn’t that look like a fake news story? On the surface, wouldn’t it? Wouldn’t it get automatically censored because the algorithms, and for that matter the people who are making these decisions, they would look at something that he just said,” point to Marlow, “as some that’s false, invalid, unreasonable, right? And it would get censored.”
“Now, this kind of power should not be in the hands of a handful of executives in Silicon Valley who are not accountable to us the general public, they’re accountable only to their shareholders.”
Christian satire website The Babylon Bee faced the exact issue that Epstein discussed when Facebook threatened to censor the site for spreading “fake news.” The supposed “fake news” was a satirical article which claimed that CNN had purchased an “industrial-size washing machine to spin news before publication.” Yet, partisan “fact-checking” service Snopes felt the need to publish a correction of the article that clarified that  CNN had not “made a significant investment in heavy machinery.” After Snopes published the article Adam Ford, who runs the Babylon Bee, received a notification from Facebook which warned him that if he continued to publish “fake news” corrected by Snopes on Facebook, he could have his page demonetized and his page reach severely reduced.
Similar tactics could easily be employed by Google to permanently blacklist certain websites or articles to influence voters.
4: Autocomplete suggestions
Further research from Dr. Epstein showed that Google appeared to favor positive autocomplete search results relating to Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election, even when search terms critical of Clinton were actually more popular at the time. Epstein’s report revealed that Google manipulated search results related to Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election that had the potential to “shift as many as 3 million votes” according to Epstein.
Epstein along with his colleagues at the American Institute for Behavioral Research (AIBRT) became interested in a video published by Matt Lieberman of Sourcefed which claimed that Google searches suppressed negative information about Hillary Clinton while other search engines such as Bing and Yahoo showed accurate results.
Epstein and AIBRT tested hundreds of different search terms related to the 2016 election, using Yahoo and Bing search as a control. Epstein’s report stated:
It is somewhat difficult to get the Google search bar to suggest negative searches related to Mrs. Clinton or to make any Clinton-related suggestions when one types a negative search term. Bing and Yahoo, on the other hand, often show a number of negative suggestions in response to the same search terms. Bing and Yahoo seem to be showing us what people are actually searching for; Google is showing us something else — but what, and for what purpose?
As for Google Trends, as Lieberman reported, Google indeed withholds negative search terms for Mrs. Clinton even when such terms show high popularity in Trends. We have also found that Google often suggests positive search terms for Mrs. Clinton even when such terms are nearly invisible in Trends. The widely held belief, reinforced by Google’s own documentation, that Google’s search suggestions are based on “what other people are searching for” seems to be untrue in many instances.
Google tries to explain away such findings by saying its search bar is programmed to avoid suggesting searches that portray people in a negative light. As far as we can tell, this claim is false; Google suppresses negative suggestions selectively, not across the board. It is easy to get autocomplete to suggest negative searches related to prominent people, one of whom happens to be Mrs. Clinton’s opponent.
Epstein then hypothesized that Google directly altered search results in an attempt to influence the 2016 election:
Without whistleblowers or warrants, no one can prove Google executives are using digital shenanigans to influence elections, but I don’t see how we can rule out that possibility. There is nothing illegal about manipulating people using search suggestions and search rankings — quite the contrary, in fact — and it makes good financial sense for a company to use every legal means at its disposal to support its preferred candidates.
5: Cutting off ad revenue to sites Google disagree with ideologically
Google could also curtail free speech by cutting off ad revenue to sites with which they disagree on an ideological level. In February of 2018, current and former Google employees confirmed to Breitbart that leftists at the company were actively working to damage Breitbart’s advertising revenue. In leaked screenshots obtained by Breitbart News, Google ad account manager Aidan Wilks can be seen advising a client of Google’s that advertising on Breitbart may impact their “brand safety.”
Wilkes then linked the client to Sleeping Giants, a far-left organization which has repeatedly targeted Breitbart News and other conservative websites with false claims of racism and bigotry. In the same screenshots, another Google employee named Matthew Rivard can be seen telling the client that Wilkes email was a “nice template” for those who wished to “call out” the issue to other clients.
This list includes just some of the tools and techniques Google could use to influence the political opinions of their users. The only thing that can be done to guard against these sort of attacks is to constantly be on the lookout for manipulation by the Masters of the Universe and bring it to the attention of the public. As government scrutiny of Google continues to increase despite the companies claims that it is not ideologically biased, it will  require a combined effort to counter the search giant’s plans to make populist governments a “hiccup” in history.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering issues of free speech and online censorship. Follow him on Twitter @LucasNolan or email him at lnolan@breitbart.com

U.S. Immigrant 


Numbers Hit 44.5 


Million, Near 108-Year 


Record



immigrantsAP Photo/Jae C. Hong
 14 Sep 2018638

The immigrant percentage of the U.S. population has hit 13.7 percent, near the 1910 record of 14.7 percent, according to the latest release by the Census Bureau.

In 2017, 13.7 percent of people (one in 7.3 people) in the United States were immigrants, up from 13.5 percent in 2016, and up from 5 percent (one in 20 people) in 1970, according to the bureau’s data.
The rising share means 44.5 million people in a population of 325.7 million people were born abroad. That 44.5 million includes roughly 22 million naturalized citizens,  11 million other residents, including more than 1.5 million foreign temporary visa-workers, plus roughly 11 million illegal immigrants, according to the bureau:
https://media.breitbart.com/media/2018/09/Screen-Shot-2018-09-14-at-1.25.57-AM.png
The millions of migrants are concentrated in the coastal metropolises, such as Los Angeles and New York, but many are migrating into interior states. According to the New York Times:
New York and California, states with large immigrant populations, both had increases of less than six percent since 2010. But foreign-born populations rose by 20 percent in Tennessee, 13 percent in Ohio, 12 percent in South Carolina and 20 percent in Kentucky over the same period.
The recent inflow includes a rising percentage of Asians from China, Vietnam, India, said the New York Times.
Brookings Institution analysis of that data shows that 41 percent of the people who said they arrived since 2010 came from Asia. Just 39 percent were from Latin America. About 45 percent were college educated, the analysis found, compared with about 30 percent of those who came between 2000 and 2009.
The Asian inflow include includes many college graduates because many of them are immigrating via the various business-backed programs for college-graduate visa-workers.
The Census Bureau may have undercounted the number of illegal immigrants, ensuring the immigrant population now exceeds the 1910 percentage, NBC News reported:
Illegal immigrants can be more difficult for surveyors to locate due to informal living arrangements, and some may avoid being included in surveys for fear of being reported to the government, researchers say.
Jeffrey Passel, a demographer at Pew Research Center, has estimated that the actual immigrant population is likely 3 percent to 5 percent higher than the number in the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.
chart by the Washington Post suggests that this huge wave of migrants has changed politics by giving Democrats’ identity-politics ideology an electoral lock in counties where immigrants comprise more than 20 percent of the population:
https://media.breitbart.com/media/2018/09/Screen-Shot-2018-09-14-at-1.40.38-AM.png
The New York Times report, however, demurely ignored the political and economic impact of this huge wage of workers, consumers, and renters.
Some economic impacts are obvious, for example, immigrants expand the economy by working, consuming and renting real-estate. Some also raise the productivity of Americans by inventing new products, importing new goods, or develop novel services that allow Americans to produce more wealth or enjoyment per hour.
But many less-skilled migrants play their largest role by simply shifting small slices of wealth from person to person, for example, by competing up rents in their neighborhood or by competing down wages in their workplace. The crudest examples can be seen in agriculture.
European farms tend to buy labor-saving machines from well-paid European manufacturing workers because their farmworkers’ wages are high, but many U.S. farm companies simply use cheap legal and illegal immigrant labor while sharing the savings from not buying machines between profit-seeking investors and penny-counting consumers.


https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/306656052/Flag_twitter1_normal.jpg
Next time you enjoy radishes in your salad, remember the farmworkers like these Oxnard workers, who harvest the food that we eat. #WeFeedYou #Calor #Ovetime4FarmWorkers
·        
·        
Of course, that cheap-labor business practice leaves Americans taxpayers to carry the off-work costs of immigrants, such as welfare programs, civic turmoil, Diversity, education costs for migrants’ children, and the occasional murder of an Iowa jogger, a massacre in a Florida nightclub, or the destruction of the Twin Towers in 2011.
But the immigration is not happening in a vacuum — it is happening as a vast wave of technology allows companies and investors to move products and assets (such as cheap migrant labor) around the world, at very low cost. This technological change has liberated societies to vastly enrich themselves — see China for example — even as it also seems to centralize power and wealth.
There is plenty of data to suggest that this combination of technological change and Congress’ passage of the 1965 immigration law have together since shifted a huge volume of wealth from younger, working Americans towards the older Americans who own real-estate, stocks, or companies.
That wage-pressure process began first among the interchangeable, blue-collar, unskilled Americans — such as farm workers — but it is shifting up the economic ladder to hit interchangeable, college-educated Americans. In President Donald Trump’s economy, blue-collar Americans are gaining amid modest restrictions on immigration while middle-class Americans are seeing slower gains as companies import more cheap college-graduates and also export their jobs to expanding foreign populations of clever, hardworking college-graduates.
This economic shift is reflected in another important economic change — the declining importance of Americans’ wages and salaries compared to other Americans’ dividends and stock prices. As the New York Times noted September 12:
Data from the Federal Reserve show that over the last decade and a half, the proportion of family income from wages has dropped from nearly 70 percent to just under 61 percent. It’s an extraordinary shift, driven largely by the investment profits of the very wealthy. In short, the people who possess tradable assets, especially stocks, have enjoyed a recovery that Americans dependent on savings or income from their weekly paycheck have yet to see. Ten years after the financial crisis, getting ahead by going to work every day seems quaint, akin to using the phone book to find a number or renting a video at Blockbuster” …
In 2016, net worth among white middle-income families was 19 percent below 2007 levels, adjusted for inflation. But among blacks, it was down 40 percent, and Hispanics saw a drop of 46 percent. For many, old-fashioned hard work has simply not been a viable path out of this hole. After unemployment peaked in the fall of 2009, it took years for joblessness to return to pre-recession levels. Slack in the labor market left the employed and unemployed alike with little leverage to demand raises, even as corporate profits surged.
Maybe it was inevitable that when half the population watches its wages stagnate while the other half gets rich in the market, the result is President Donald Trump and Brexit.
Unsurprisingly, many legislators are under severe pressure from donors to preserve the current national economic strategy of growth-by-immigration. In February 2018, for example, a loose alliance of business-first Republicans, pro-migration Democrats, and progressive media blocked President Donald Trump’s “Four Pillars” immigration reforms which would shift the United States back towards a low-immigration/high-wage economy.
Economists, investors, talking heads and political advocates in the Democratic and Republican parties are deeply reluctant to draw any connection between the immigration inflow of consumers, workers, and renters, and the economic shift from wages to stocks.
But the linkage is often hinted at. For example, Noah Smith, a pro-immigration, pro-diversity writer for Bloomberg News empire, wrote a column in July 2018 saying that the 1924 immigration cutbacks helped create the 1929 crash:
The housing crash of the mid-1920s might well have been a direct result of the curtailment of immigration. And if the Great Depression and/or the stock crash of 1929 was caused or exacerbated by that housing crash, there’s a clear and direct link between immigration restriction and the U.S.’s worst economic crisis of the 20th century. The reduction in agglomeration effects reported by Ager and Hansen probably also contributed to lower corporate earnings and sapped vitality in American cities.
Yet Smith is silent about the flip-side of immigration cuts — the impact of the 1965 immigration expansion law, which has added up to 44.5 million consumers, workers and renters to the United States’ marketplace.
Immigration Economics
Overall, the Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via immigration shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the market with cheap white-collar and blue-collar foreign labor.
Four million young Americans will join the workforce this year, but the federal government will also import 1.1 million legal immigrants, and allow an army of at least 2 million visa-workers to work U.S. jobs, alongside asylum-claiming migrants and illegal aliens.
That flood of outside labor spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. The policy also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions. Immigration also pulls investment and wealth away from heartland states because investment flows towards the large immigrant populations living in the coastal states.

UN report on food security

One in every nine human beings goes hungry

By Patrick Martin 
13 September 2018
The number of hungry people in the world continues to grow, reaching 821 million in 2017, or one in every nine people, according to the report, “The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2018,” released Tuesday in Rome by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, the World Health Organization, UNICEF and other groups.
The figures are horrific: 151 million children under five years old, 22 percent of the world’s total, are “stunted” by malnutrition; one in every ten children in Asia is described as “wasting,” with weights well below what they should be given their heights; a staggering one in three women of child-bearing age suffers from anemia, in large measure from poor diet.
The report’s authors warn of “alarming signs of increasing food insecurity and high levels of different forms of malnutrition,” but offer no prescription to resolve the deepening crisis except the pious wish that more should be done to bring an end to the military conflicts, including civil wars, which are the primary cause of food insecurity, and to counteract climate change, the second most important cause.
The 821 million hungry people in the world include an estimated 515 million in Asia, 256.5 million in Africa, 39 million in Latin America and the Caribbean, and perhaps 20 million in the rest of the world.
The last figure is undoubtedly a gross underestimate, since it largely accepts the claims of governments in the advanced capitalist countries that hunger and malnutrition are non-existent. If accurate figures could be obtained for the number living on the brink of starvation in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and the European Union, the total for the world would likely top 1 billion people.
Credit: World Food Program
These figures demonstrate the utter failure of capitalist system. The productive forces—land, machinery, agricultural technique—are more than adequate to feed the human race. There is a super-abundance of food on the planet. But the profit drive of giant agribusiness corporations, and the reactionary nation-state system, dividing humanity with its artificial and completely outmoded boundaries, keep a billion human beings from obtaining the food they need as a minimum condition of a decent existence.
The UN report found that 2017 was the third year in a row in which the number of people who aren’t getting enough to eat has risen. This figure has risen from 783.7 million in 2014, for a total rise of more than 38 million. In 2017, severe food insecurity, defined as a family running out of food and going at least a day without eating, was up in every region of the world except Europe and North America.
The sharpest increases in malnutrition were in Africa and South America, as well as in the country of Yemen, on the Arabian Peninsula across the Red Sea from East Africa, which has been ravaged by war and a blockade imposed by Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates with US backing. High levels of malnutrition were found in South Asia as well, but these were largely unchanged from 2016 to 2017.
Over a longer time frame, since 2005, the FAO found that the number of malnourished people in Africa had increased by 60 million, while the number in Asia declined significantly.
Particularly striking was the change in North Africa, once a comparatively prosperous area, where the number facing malnutrition fell from 9.7 million in 2000 to 8.5 million in 2010, before soaring to 20 million last year. Similarly, the number facing malnutrition in Western Asia—the Middle East—rose from 20.1 million in 2010 to 30.2 million in 2017.
The combined increase across this vast region, extending from Morocco to Iran, is more than 20 million people added to the rolls of those on the brink of starvation, during the period that coincides with the US-NATO attack on Libya, the revolutionary uprising and its bloody suppression in Egypt, the ongoing civil wars in Syria and Yemen, and the aftermath of the war in Iraq.
The FAO’s 2017 report on food security focused largely on the impact of these wars, as well as similar conflicts in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Sudan and Somalia in driving up the number facing hunger. The agency’s 2018 report focuses mainly on the impact of the second most important cause of hunger in the twenty-first century, climate change.
According to the report, “climate variability—extreme droughts and floods—are already undermining production of wheat, rice and maize in tropical and temperate regions, and that the trend is expected to worsen as temperatures increase and become more extreme.”
It continued, “Hunger is significantly worse in countries with agricultural systems that are highly sensitive to rainfall and temperature variability and severe drought, and where the livelihood of a high proportion of the population depends on agriculture.”
Drought, linked to the long-term changes in weather patterns associated with climate change, has devastated four different population centers: southern Africa, including South Africa, the enclaves of Lesotho and Swaziland, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Malawi and Madagascar; the Horn of Africa, including Ethiopia, Somalia, Kenya, South Sudan and Uganda; West Africa, from Mali to Senegal; and parts of the Indian subcontinent, especially southern Sindh province in Pakistan and neighboring regions in India, which are densely populated.
Wasting is a syndrome that has the most pernicious effect on children’s health, both short-term and long-term. Children affected by wasting accounted for 875,000 deaths in 2013, the last year when studies are available, 12.6 percent of all deaths of children under five years of age. Of these, 516,000 were related to severe wasting, essentially deaths by starvation and related diseases.
Half of all the children afflicted by wasting live in South Asia, and the countries with a prevalence of 15 percent or more include India and Sri Lanka. Also in this category are Papua New Guinea, Yemen, and four countries in East Africa: Eritrea, Djibouti, South Sudan, and Sudan.
What all these countries have in common—although there is not a word of this in the UN report—is that they are former colonies of the world’s imperialist powers, which continue to dominate the world economy and exploit the resources of the “less developed countries,” whether through direct investment, loans, or austerity demands enforced by the International Monetary Fund.
Among the worst-off countries are those like Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan and Somalia, subjected to imperialist wars and imperialist-instigated civil wars, which in some cases have extended for more than a generation.
Nutrition is an increasing concern, not just for the billions in Asia, Africa and Latin America, who constitute the majority of the world’s population, but for the working class in the advanced capitalist countries, where living standards have been driven down for more than three decades.
According to the UN report, the second-largest nutritional crisis involves the spread of obesity, particularly in North America. This too is a disease of poverty. “Food insecurity contributes to overweight and obesity, as well as undernutrition, and high rates of these forms of malnutrition coexist in many countries,” the report explains. “The link between food insecurity and overweight and obesity passes through diet, which is affected by the cost of food. Nutritious, fresh foods often tend to be expensive. Thus, when household resources for food become scarce, people choose less expensive foods that are often high in caloric density and low in nutrients, particularly in urban settings and upper-middle- and high-income countries.”
Some 13 percent of the world’s adults, or 672 million, are medically obese, about one person in eight, with the highest rates by far in the United States. The lowest rates of obesity are in Africa and Asia, although rates are rapidly increasing.


CEO pay up 17 percent while US workers’ wages stagnate

By Matthew Taylor and Barry Grey 
18 August 2018
Average compensation for CEOs at the 350 largest companies in the US increased by 17.6 percent in 2017 over the previous year, soaring to $18.9 million. Workers’ wages, meanwhile, continued to stagnate, rising a paltry 0.3 percent.
These indices of the relentless growth of economic inequality are reported in a new study published Thursday by the Economic Policy Institute (EPI), a Washington-based think tank.
The increase in US chief executive compensation brought the ratio of CEO to workers’ pay to 312-to-1. This means that the typical CEO of a large firm makes in a single day almost as much as the typical worker earns in an entire year. By contrast, the ratio in 1965 was 20-to-1.
The surge in CEO pay is largely driven by the record rise in stock prices, with corporate bosses benefiting from massive stock buybacks, increased dividend payouts and other forms of financial parasitism. The policy of the Federal Reserve and Democratic as well as Republican administrations over the past four decades has been calculated to drive up stock prices, enabling the stock market to serve as the primary mechanism for redistributing wealth from the working class to the corporate-financial elite—the top 5 percent income earners, and, particularly, the top 1 percent, 0.1 percent and 0.01 percent.
This redistribution of wealth was greatly accelerated under the Obama administration, which responded to the financial crash of 2008 by instituting a series of policies whose net result was the greatest transfer of wealth from the bottom layers of society to the top in history. These policies included the multitrillion-dollar bank bailout, near-zero percent interest rates, and the money-printing operation known as “quantitative easing.” These measures pumped trillions of dollars into the financial markets and provided the banks and hedge funds with virtually free credit, enabling them to mount new speculative operations similar to those that triggered the financial meltdown and Great Recession in 2008.
The vast inflation of stocks and other financial assets was made possible by the continuing suppression of the class struggle and workers’ wages by the trade unions, which all but banned strikes in the aftermath of the Wall Street crash. Wage cutting and the growth of low-paying part-time and temporary jobs in the place of decent-paying jobs wiped out in the Great Recession dramatically lowered the social position of the working class. This was combined with cuts in health care, pensions, education, housing, food stamps and other vital social programs.
The orgy of self-enrichment of the financial oligarchy has continued and accelerated under Trump with the enactment last December of a multitrillion-dollar package of tax cuts for corporations and the rich. Trump’s tax cuts have triggered a new round of mergers and acquisitions, stock buybacks and dividend payments that will increase the wealth of CEOs and investors by an estimated $2.5 trillion by the end of 2018.
According to the EPI, the average compensation of American CEOs has grown by 71.7 percent since 2009, while compensation for the average worker has grown only 2.1 percent in the same period.
The CEO compensation documented by the EPI report is 586 times the annual pay of a UPS warehouse worker under the sellout contract the Teamsters union is seeking to ram through over rank-and-file opposition. That agreement caps the pay of warehouse workers at $15.50 an hour.
The total 2017 compensation of CEOs at the country’s 350 largest firms was $6,615,000,000. This is enough to grant every one of UPS’s 230,000 workers in the US a bonus of $28,760.
Between 1978 and 2017, according to the EPI, CEO compensation rose in the US by 1,070 percent. The typical worker’s compensation over these 39 years rose by a mere 11.2 percent. This points to the most important factor in the colossal growth of social inequality over this period—the suppression of the class struggle by the trade unions.
The span of 1978 to 2017 roughly corresponds to the period when the trade unions began collaborating in wage cuts and other concessions to the corporations and, after betraying a series of bitter strikes against wage cutting and union busting in the 1980s, all but ended strike activity in the US.
The suppression of class struggle by the unions has been particularly pervasive in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. In 2017, major work stoppages in the US fell to seven, the second-lowest level since records began in 1947. This has enabled the ruling class to carry out a fundamental restructuring of class relations, with labor’s share of nonfarm national income in the US falling from 66.4 percent in 2000 to 58.9 percent in 2018—a transfer of wealth that will equal $1.4 trillion in 2018 alone.
A second factor in the suppression of wages is the immense consolidation and concentration of corporate power, particularly in the US. In an article published Friday on next week’s annual Jackson Hole, Wyoming conference of central bankers, the Financial Times reported that a major topic will be the role of accelerated corporate monopolization in wage stagnation as well as low productivity and slowing capital investment.
The article cites a measure of corporate concentration—the Herfindahl-Hirschman index—which is up 48 percent since 1996. It notes that there has been greater concentration in some 75 percent of US industries over the past two decades.
Although not part of the official agenda, one can be certain that foremost on the minds of the bankers who gather at Jackson Hole will be the resurgence of strike activity this year in the US and internationally. In the first six months of 2018 there were 12 major work stoppages in the US, involving 444,000 workers, more than the total number of strikers over the last six years combined.
The surge in strike activity, and the fact that teachers in West Virginia, Oklahoma and Arizona initiated their statewide strikes independently of the unions, have struck fear in the American and international ruling class.
In all of these struggles workers have confronted not only the intransigence of the capitalist class, but also the treachery of the trade union bureaucracy, which seeks to suppress, contain and derail any action by workers that imperils the privileged position the union executives enjoy as the policemen of the working class.
This is nowhere more apparent than in the current contract negotiations between UPS and the Teamsters union. In June, 93 percent of UPS workers voted in favor of a nationwide strike when their contract expired on July 31. Rather than prepare for a strike and appeal to other sections of workers to join them, the Teamsters extended the contract indefinitely so as to wear down opposition to the new contract.
The new five-year contract “negotiated” by the union maintains poverty-level wages for warehouse workers, 70 percent of whom are part-time. It also creates a new “hybrid” class of drivers who will both deliver packages and work in the warehouses, earning $6 less per hour than regular drivers.
The conditions are rapidly developing for a massive eruption of working-class resistance in the US. In addition to the contract covering 230,000 UPS workers, labor agreements will expire in the coming days for hundreds of thousands of workers at the US Postal Service and in the steel, telecom and entertainment industries. At the same time, teachers will be returning to their classrooms under conditions where none of the issues that sparked strikes in West Virginia, Oklahoma, Arizona and other states have been resolved.
The growth of militancy is combined with increased disgust with capitalism and interest in socialism. What is required is a struggle to break the grip of the pro-corporate, nationalist trade unions and mobilize the working class against the entire political establishment and the corporate oligarchs it represents.
The Socialist Equality Party urges UPS workers, postal workers, teachers and all other workers to establish new organizations of struggle independent of the unions—factory, workplace and neighborhood committees—to organize strike action and expand the fight for decent wages and conditions nationally and internationally.
This industrial offensive must be combined with a new political strategy to unite all of the various struggles—for jobs, wages, schools, health care, housing, against war—in a single unified political movement directed against the capitalist profit system and all of its political representatives. 

Jeff Bezos makes over $11,000,000 an hour, lowest paid Amazon worker gets $12

Jeff Bezos makes over $11,000,000 an hour, lowest paid Amazon worker gets $12
The founder and CEO of one of the world’s largest marketplaces is a very, very rich man. But how deep are Jeff Bezos’ pockets compared to average Amazon employees?
Earlier this week, e-commerce giant Amazon briefly became the world's second trillion-dollar company after Apple, adding $434 billion to its market value. It goes without saying that nobody benefitted more than its founder. Jeff Bezos added $67 billion to his net worth in 2018, bringing his total fortune to $167 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index.
Simple calculations show that Bezos, who made $67 billion in 250 days of the current year, earns $268,000,000 per day, or a whopping $11,166,666 per hour. And this calculation is based on a 24-hour day, not Bezos's actual working hours.
The number is nearly a million times higher than the average Amazon warehouse worker's pay of just $15 for an hour, according to the Glassdoor.com, a website for anonymous reviews of companies and their management by employees and former employees.

Annual salaries at Amazon range from $58,703 to $146,455. Employees with the job title Chief Creative Officer make the most, getting $360,462 a year, according to PayScale - a provider of information about salary, benefits and compensation information. The company’s employees with the title Picker reportedly earn the least with an average annual salary of $25,944, or $12 per hour.
Whether working or sleeping, Jeff Bezos earns an astonishing $3,101 per second. It takes Bezos just over 8 seconds to make the annual salary of his lowest paid employee.
Earlier this week, Vermont Democratic Senator Bernie Sanders proposed a ‘Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies Act’ - informally the ‘Stop BEZOS’ Act. The bill targets the corporations with 500 or more employees, including some of America’s largest corporations such as Amazon, Apple and Walmart.
Sanders proposes a 100 percent tax on companies equal to the amount of money the companies’ employees receive from federal welfare programs such as food stamps or Medicaid. The tax would target both full and part-time employees as well as independent contractors.
For more stories on economy & finance visit RT's business section











Amazon Hits $1 Trillion


Bezos
AFP
   189
















Amazon became the second U.S. company to reach a $1 trillion market valuation, one month after Apple became the first.

The company’s stock gained 2 percent on Tuesday, hitting $2,050.27 per share. That puts the company’s market capitalization–the number of its outstanding shares multiplied by share price–at $1 trillion.
Amazon’s shares debuted at $18 on May 15, 1997. At $2,050.27 its shares are up around  136,584% since its IPO.
Amazon founder Jeff Bezos is the world’s richest man, worth over $150 billion. Bezos, Amazon, and the Bezos owned Washington Post have become frequent targets of criticism from President Donald Trump.

“Amazon thinks I’m a piece of trash on the ground and they’ll walk all over me”

Amazon Nightmare: Grandmother injured on the job goes homeless, suffers pneumonia

By Eric London and Zac Corrigan 
3 September 2018
From a bird’s-eye view, the Dallas-Fort Worth area—“the metroplex”—looks nothing like it did 20 years ago. The hundreds of distribution centers and warehouses that have been built since the turn of the century appear as indistinct white and gray rectangles from above.
But up close, these massive facilities are a bustling hive of activity. Both day and night, hundreds of thousands of workers unload, pick, stow, sort, bin, inject, move and pack the millions and millions of products constantly flowing in and out of the region, where over 125 million square feet of new warehouse space has been built in the last seven years alone.
Two of the many warehouse districts in Dallas-Fort Worth metro area
Carol, who did not want to use her real name for fear of retribution, works at one of Amazon’s eight Dallas-Fort Worth distribution centers. It would be more precise to say she worked at Amazon, because although she is still on the employment roll at the company, she says she was injured on the job and became homeless when Amazon fought her workers’ compensation claim, throwing her away like so much garbage. Her story exposes the nightmarish conditions and brutal exploitation that has fueled the growth of online retailers like Amazon.
Carol exudes toughness, but combines an animated “don’t mess with me” attitude with a softness for her children and, especially, for her grandchildren, whom she takes care of and cheers on at their football games. She is a NASCAR fan and jokingly explains that it broke her heart when her favorite driver, Dale Earnhardt, Jr., got married.
She keeps her small apartment neat and organized. Photos of her family line the mantel and she apologizes for the sound of her barking dog. She talks about her father who was killed in a forklift accident on the job many years ago.
She told the World Socialist Web Site she only recently moved in after over six months of living in her car on the street. She had to brave the elements through a cold North Texas winter and contracted a dangerous case of pneumonia.
“The dog is the only thing that kept me going,” she says. She doesn’t know how much longer she can afford to stay in her current apartment. “My nightmare is still going on.”
When Carol first started at Amazon, she was awed by the size of her fulfillment center. Its 20-acre frame hides a maze of conveyor belts weaving for miles and miles throughout the building. The fulfillment center—or “FC”—employs enough workers to constitute a small town.
Amazon has received $287 million in gifts and tax abatements from local governments in Texas alone, according to Good Jobs First, allowing it to construct a network of massive warehouses. Put another way, workers have often paid with their own tax dollars to build the facilities in which they labor.
Carol soon found out that Amazon demands every last drop of sweat from its workers, who are forced to meet “rate” by moving a certain number of items each hour. Packers, who wrap the items after they have been processed, must pack and tape 189 products per hour, she explains.
Carol reports that many workers cannot keep up and are fired after missing rate three times. In the warehouse, the company rules like a dictatorship. Beyond the constant stress of making rate, workers cannot bring in cell phones and are forced to undergo humiliating security checks when leaving their FCs.
By 2017, Carol had been working at Amazon longer than many. Although she was a certified nursing assistant for nearly two decades before starting at Amazon, she is a savvy worker and figured out ways to save time and make her rates. When new hires come in, she would tell them the tricks of the trade to help them make their rates, too.
One day, Carol says she was lifting up an item that weighed about 50 pounds when she felt a sharp pain travel up and down her spine. She knew immediately that something was terribly wrong. She tried to work through the problem, knowing that she couldn’t afford to miss work. But she couldn’t keep up with the fast pace demanded by the company. A coworker tried to help her get caught up to make rate, but when Carol told him she was in too much pain, he found the PA (assistant manager), who informed her manager.
When she told her manager that the pain was too great to continue, she says the manager gave her “VTO”—voluntary time off without pay—and Carol drove herself to the emergency room. The ER doctor told her it was unsafe to work with her injury and instructed her to rest for five days. The next day, Carol gave Amazon the paperwork from her ER visit and explained to Human Resources (HR) that she could not work.
As Carol recalls, an HR representative responded: “We don’t put people off work for five days just because of a doctor’s orders.” She says Amazon then provided her with a paper called a “certificate of fitness,” which she was expected to have her doctor sign to show that she could return to work. The doctor filled out the certificate of fitness but wrote that Carol was not fit to work. He took an x-ray and found that two of the discs in Carol’s spine were herniated.
When he later performed an MRI, Carol says he found a third disc was herniated. An orthopedic surgeon also found a fourth broken disc in her lower back that pinched a nerve. For these doctor visits, Carol forked over a $1,000 deductible.
When Carol took these results to Amazon to prove her injury, she says the company responded by forcing her to switch to a different “company-approved” doctor. They did so on the pretense that HR had erred by not asking Carol initially whether her injury was work-related, which they apparently claimed invalidated her own doctor’s findings.
The Amazon-approved doctor said she was fit to work and that her injury was just a strain. She says this doctor only glanced at the MRI and that Amazon ignored the note from her original doctor.
Amazon’s doctor suggested she take “light duty” for the rest of the year. Soon after, however, Carol explained that Amazon called her off the floor to speak to “Amcare,” Amazon’s notorious in-house medical and injury program. Carol said an Amcare representative told her that her workers’ compensation request had been denied and that she was going back on full, heavy-lifting duty.
Carol told Amcare, “You’re screwing my body up more than it is already,” but Amazon told her that her only other option was to go on unpaid medical leave. Carol told Amazon they should expect to hear from her lawyer. Carol took Amazon to court for her workers’ compensation claim. She says Amazon’s lawyer claimed her back problems pre-dated her employment at the FC and tried to blame her for her injury on the witness stand. Earlier, however, Carol says an HR representative told her that they saw the injury take place on security cameras and told her it looked very painful.
Carol won her workers’ compensation case when the judge found that her injury was work-related, establishing that Amazon had been wrong in denying her payments. Though months have gone by since this decision, she still has not received any money through the workers’ compensation system.
The court decision in Carol's favor
Though roughly a year has passed since she was injured, the pain remains difficult for Carol to bear.
“I have nerve damage in both legs and feet since one of my discs is pinching a nerve in my back. I can’t stand for more than 15 to 20 minutes at a time because it hurts my back, it hurts my legs, it hurts my feet. My legs feel like pins and needles are getting stabbed into them. I can’t sleep a full night. If I go grocery shopping I can’t get more than a few items because I can’t walk around the store. I can’t eat a home cooked meal anymore because cooking is too difficult. Microwaved stuff is all. I can’t eat healthy and I can’t afford good food.”
She used to take care of her grandchildren, but now they take care of her. Her high school-age grandson has an important football season coming up—he may be recruited to play in college and would he be the first in Carol’s family to attend higher education—but she is worried it will be too difficult for her to climb the bleachers and sit still for all four quarters.
“My life has pretty much come to a halt,” she says. “I don’t have a life.”
Carol’s back condition was made even less bearable by the fact that she slept in her car all last winter. Before her injury, she was living with one of her adult children, but with her income cut off, she couldn’t contribute to the household. All of her children work hard and struggle to provide for their own children, so Carol and her dog moved into her car, moving from park to park each night.
At first, Carol thought she would only be in her car for a week or two until she resolved the confusion with the company. It soon became clear there was no “confusion” on Amazon’s part—just the ruthless drive for profit.
She says she received no support for two months as a result of Amazon’s efforts to block her workers’ compensation. Then meager short-term disability payments from Amazon kicked in at $501 per month for about six months, which was not enough to cover her cost of living.
When her long-term disability triggered in June, that helped her partly pay back debt she had accumulated and gave her just enough to find an apartment. Now, her long-term disability is coming to an end and she is not sure when her workers’ compensation payments will begin. She is no longer covered by Amazon’s medical plan and was denied Medicaid because she does not have a child living in the house. She currently does not have healthcare.
“I hate Obamacare,” she says, noting that deductibles and premiums are far too high for her to afford and it is unfair to tax people who cannot afford to buy a plan. “I think healthcare should be free for everyone.”
Around the time of her injury, Carol had several shares of Amazon stock that she says were due to “vest” and become available to her to sell. When she hired in, Amazon provided two shares of stocks to each new worker that only become available when a worker passes a certain seniority threshold. Carol says she had accumulated six total shares and that each was worth roughly $1,000 at the time. For Carol, the $6,000 would have allowed her to put a roof over her head.
But two or three weeks before the shares were scheduled to become available to her, in March 2018, she says Amazon changed the vesting date to the years 2099, 2100 and 2101 [sic].
Carol's stock vesting dates were changed to the next century
“Don’t tell me they’re not vindictive,” she says.
That same month, Carol was diagnosed with pneumonia. Winter temperatures in North Texas can drop to the 20s or 10s (Fahrenheit) and Carol was living and sleeping in her car. Her doctor told her she would have been hospitalized if she had waited to go to the doctor. “I could have died from that,” she says.
As the weeks turned into months, Carol got into a routine: “I couldn’t keep cold food in the car or it would spoil and I couldn’t heat anything, so I just ate cold cans of soup and SpaghettiOs. I slept in parks and picnic areas.”
She describes what it was like to be homeless after being employed for her entire adult life.
“I had no dignity, I had no pride. I stopped caring. That’s how Amazon made me feel. They walked all over me. I couldn’t sleep—I was afraid to go to sleep. I was afraid the cops were going to take me to jail for trespassing. It could be a week or two between showers. Can you imagine how that felt?
“My ex-daughter-in-law and her new husband let me take a shower. I thought, ‘This should not be happening.’ They fed me before I left. I was losing a lot of weight and was down to about 110 pounds. For someone who has always done things for herself I was broken. I don’t think I would have made it if I had to stay homeless for much longer. I would have given up on everything.”
She thinks of the parks where she slept and says: “Driving past the picnic areas still brings back memories. It is like PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder]. I don’t want to see those places ever again.”
Carol remembers one morning in particular. “Two or three weeks before I got this apartment I was sleeping in a parking lot when my dog woke me up at 2 or 3 in the morning. She was over the top of me growling and barking. At first I tried to get her to be quiet but when I opened my eyes I saw a man standing right there outside my window in the dark. It was a hot night so I had my window down and I got terrified. I turned my car on and sped off. If my dog hadn’t have been with me I don’t know what would have happened that night.”
She thinks about this event for a moment, closes her eyes, and says: “There were plenty of times I thought of giving up my dog, but she was all I had. I have a lot of anxiety now but I didn’t have any before. It’s hard and it’s bad now. I keep telling myself its OK, but Amazon doesn’t care. They say, ‘We’ll just replace that person with another person.’ Amazon thinks I’m a piece of trash on the ground and they’ll walk all over me. I don’t have the money to fight Bezos and he knows it, and that’s why he pulls his weight the way he does.”
One morning, Carol got a call from her daughter, who reported that a repossession team had come by the daughter’s house looking for Carol’s car. Without a full income, Carol wasn’t able to keep up with her car payments and the lender was trying to find her to take away what had become her home.
She remembers hearing the news. “In my heart it was a panic.”
Fearful that a repo team was looking for her, she asked a step-cousin, who offered her help. “They told me they knew someone who would let me park in his barn way out in the middle of nowhere so the repo people couldn’t find me. I was there for two weeks. There were wild animals, rabid raccoons, skunks. It was scary.”
Carol took this photo of the inside of the barn where she lived for two weeks
Finally, when she was able to rent a modest apartment with her long-term disability, her new neighbors were shocked by her story and are furious at Amazon for what they did to Carol.
But Carol is uncertain about the future. Her long-term disability payments are about to end and her workers’ compensation payments are about to begin—a complex process that often leaves many workers without an income for weeks or months. “It’s still iffy,” Carol says. “Am I going to end up homeless again? I don’t know. My nightmare is still going on. If I had those stocks that Amazon has tied up, that would go so far to help me. It’s my stock and I own it and they say I can’t sell it.”
Carol decided to speak out after seeing videos of homeless Amazon worker Shannon Allen, who has given many workers the confidence to speak out about their stories of abuse and exploitation. Now, she wants other workers to have the confidence to tell their stories and expose Amazon for what it really is.

 witter at @JxhnBinder

Tucker Carlson on Activist 


Corporations: 


‘There’s Nothing Free About This 

Market,’ Corporate America 

Enables ‘Progressive Lunacy’

https://www.breitbart.com/video/2018/08/30/tucker-carlson-on-activist-corporations-theres-nothing-free-about-this-market-corporate-america-enables-progressive-lunacy/

 

Thursday on Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” host Tucker Carlson explained how corporate America was using the social welfare safety net to subsidize at taxpayer expense its employees without having to pay a higher wage.
According to Fox News host, the top earners at those companies were raking in billions while those they hire have to receive government assistance to get by.
BLOG: THE ENTIRE REASON FOR OPEN BORDERS, AMNESTY or NON-ENFORCEMENT, NO E-VERIY IS TO KEEP WAGES DEPESSED. THE MASSIVE MEX WELFARE STATE ON OUR BACKS IS TO KEEP THEM COMING AND BREEDING FUTURE GENERATIONS OF “CHEAP” LABOR!
Transcript as follows:
Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, is worth about $150 billion. That’s enough to make him the richest man in the world, by far, and possibly the richest person in human history. It’s certainly enough to pay his employees well. But he doesn’t. A huge number of Amazon workers are so poorly paid, they qualify for federal welfare benefits. According to data from the nonprofit group New Food Economy, nearly one in three Amazon employees in Arizona, for example, was on food stamps last year. Jeff Bezos isn’t paying his workers enough to eat, so you made up the difference with your tax dollars. Next time you see Bezos, make sure he says thank you.
Same with the Waltons. The Walton family founded Walmart. Collectively they’re worth about $175 billion. That’s more than the entire gross domestic product of Qatar, the oil-rich Gulf state. The Waltons could certainly afford to be generous with their workers. Instead, they count on you to take up the slack. In 2013, taxpayers sent more than $6 billion to Walmart’s workers, for food stamps, Medicaid, and housing assistance.
And if you think that’s shocking, meet Travis Kalanick. He’s the youthful founder of Uber. His personal fortune is close to $5 billion. His drivers, by contrast, often make less than minimum wage. One recent study showed that many Uber drivers lose money working for the company. That’s not a sustainable business model. The only reason it continues is because of your generosity. Because you’re paying the welfare benefits for Uber’s impoverished drivers, child billionaires like Travis get to keep buying bigger houses and more airplanes. He’s someone else who definitely owes you a thank you note.
If you can think of a less fair system than that, send us an email. We’d love to hear it. It’s indefensible. Yet almost nobody ever complains about it. How come? Conservatives, like us, support the free market, and for good reason. Free markets work. But there’s nothing free about this market. A lot of these companies operate as monopolies. They hate markets. They use government regulation to crush competition. There’s nothing conservative about that, just as there’s nothing conservative about most big corporations. Just the opposite. They’re the backbone of the left. Pick a leftwing cause that you think is hurting the country. Check the donor list, and you’ll find the name of some corporation. Often many corporations. Corporate America enables the progressive lunacy you see every night on this show. They’re funding the revolution now in progress.
That’s why liberals say nothing as oligarchs amass billions by soaking the middle class. Because they’ve been paid off. For example, you probably assumed the people who founded Walmart were conservative. Most of their customers certainly are. Yet the bulk of the Walton family backed Hillary Clinton in the last election. They gave the Democratic Party more than $700,000 during the 2016 cycle. Almost every billionaire in Silicon Valley did the same. In return, they got immunity from criticism, and you got to keep paying their employees. Not a bad deal for them.
There is one person in Washington who’s offended by this arrangement, and we’re sorry to say he’s wrong on pretty much everything else. But this is a weird moment, so you take allies where you can find them. Bernie Sanders, of all people, is trying to get your money back from Jeff Bezos. This is especially amazing since Bezos is on Bernie’s side on most things. They’re both leftwing activists. But on this question, Bernie’s right. He’s planning legislation that would force big corporations to return the taxpayer-funded welfare benefits you’ve paid to their workers. It’s not a perfect solution, and it probably won’t pass. No matter what they claim in public, liberals in Congress would never support something like that. Their loyalty isn’t to you. It’s to Uber and Jeff Bezos. But at the very least it might awaken a sleepy population to the new reality of activist corporate America. And that’s a good thing.
America has changed enormously in the last 20 years. A lot of people you thought were your allies are in fact working against your interests. They have contempt for you and your family, your customs and your faith. Included in this group, I’m sorry to say, are a lot of big corporations. They have no use for you or the country you grew up in. Stand in their way, and they’ll crush you. It’s all shocking enough that I recently wrote a book about it. It’s called “Ship of Fools,” and it explains what happened and who did it. The book is out in a month, the first week of October, but you can preorder a copy now, and I hope you will.
Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

ASSAULT ON THE AMERICAN WORKER…. Amazon’s JEFF BEZOS PLAN FOR A NEW AMERICAN SLAVERY

"Amazon is a massive wrecking machine consuming American retail. It's looting the economy and leaving behind rubble. " --- DANIEL GREENFIELD FRONTPAGE MAG

MODERN SLAVER JEFF BEZOS
AMAZON’S ASSAULT ON AMERICA CONTINUES
Amazon, the multinational online retail conglomerate, is importing more foreign workers to the United States to take coveted tech industry jobs than Facebook and Google combined. JOHN BINDER

"Amazon is a massive wrecking machine consuming American retail. It's looting the economy and leaving behind rubble. " --- DANIEL GREENFIELD FRONTPAGE MAG

"Today, each of the top 5 billionaires owns as much as 750 million people, more than the total population of Latin America and double the population of the US."
“A comprehensive new report released Sunday by the New York-based labor rights watchdog China Labor Watch (CLW) has shed new light on the barbaric and illegal practices that Amazon employs to boost its profits by driving down production costs on the backs of factory workers at the company’s electronics assembly plants in China.”


JEFF BEZOS of AMAZON DECLARES THAT AMERICAN-BORN SLAVES ARE NOT CHEAP ENOUGH. CHINA MUST DELIVER THE REAL SLAVE LABOR!

“A comprehensive new report released Sunday by the New York-based labor rights watchdog China Labor Watch (CLW) has shed new light on the barbaric and illegal practices that Amazon employs to boost its profits by driving down production costs on the backs of factory workers at the company’s electronics assembly plants in China.”

Amazon, the multinational online retail conglomerate, is importing more foreign workers to the United States to take coveted tech industry jobs than Facebook and Google combined. JOHN BINDER

"Amazon is a massive wrecking machine consuming American retail. It's looting the economy and leaving behind rubble. " --- DANIEL GREENFIELD FRONTPAGE MAG
       
AMAZON’S JEFF BEZOS IS THE FACE OF MODERN SLAVERY!


The gains for employees are a novel pain for the investors and employers who have been able to hold down wages for decades because the federal government is trying to grow the economy via cheap-labor legal immigration.

“INVESTORS” HAVE AND WILL DESTROY THIS NATION IF IT WOULD IMPACT THE NEXT QUARTER’S EARNINGS!

Amazon, the multinational online retail conglomerate, is importing more foreign workers to the United States to take coveted tech industry jobs than Facebook and Google combined. JOHN BINDER

















Justice Dept. Charges Indian CEO With Massive H-1B Fraud


GettyImages-814283172
MANJUNATH KIRAN/AFP/Getty Images
      417

The Department of Justice arrested an Indian CEO when he flew into Sea-Tac airport and charged him with using the H-1B visa-worker program to “compete unlawfully in the market.”



The secret investigation and arrest highlight what critics say is endemic fraud and corruption in the Indian-dominated H-1B visa-worker program.

“The criminal complaint describes how two companies incorporated by [CEO Pradyumna Kumar Samal] in 2010 and 2011, engaged in a scheme sometimes referred to as a ‘bench-and-switch’ scheme, to exploit foreign-national workers, compete unlawfully in the market, and defraud the U.S. government,” said the statement from the Department of Justice.

The CEO, Pradyumna Kumar Samal, allegedly lied to federal agencies when he said the visa-workers were imported for existing contracts, and he allegedly effectively forced his Indian employees to work for less than the promised wage-levels, said the statement:


Nearly 200 workers may have been brought in under the phony applications. The employees were forced to pay SAMAL’s companies a partially-refundable “security deposit” of as much as $5,000 for the visa filings, regardless of whether they were assigned to any projects that provided them with income.

Since 2014, Samal’s two companies have asked for roughly 700 H-1B visas and six green cards, according to MyVisaJobs.com. The 700 requests are likely to have gotten 200 visas for foreign workers who can be subcontracted at very low rates out to other technology firms in the Seattle area.

One of the companies, Divensi, says it has worked with Amazon, Alaska Airlines, Microsoft, Physicians Interactive, Tesla, Nordstrom and the University of Washington.





The H-1B visa program was created to allow companies to import temporary workers until Americans could be trained for the jobs. But lobbyists persuaded Congress to gradually convert the program into an outsourcing program that imports roughly 100,000 low-wage foreign college-graduates per year. The estimated number of H-1B workers in the United States ranges from 450,000 up to 900,000, partly because many H-1B workers will extend their work visas — even when they are working for lower wages — because they hope to get the huge bonus of green cards.

The number of former H-1B workers who now have green cards or citizenship is also very large, and it includes the current CEOs of Google and Microsoft.

The cheap-labor program is widely used and strongly defended by many companies, including Amazon and Microsoft, by many universities and hospitals, and by investors’ lobby groups, such as FWD.us. These CEOs and investors can use the visa programs to spike their stock prices by outsourcing the jobs held by many mid-career Americans to the Indian companies, which then use their U.S.-based visa-workers to outsource the work to even cheaper workers living in India.

Many GOP and some Democratic legislators support this double-outsourcing program, including Kansas GOP Rep. Kevin Yoder. He is pushing his HR 392 legislation into the 2019 spending bill that would put roughly 400,000 Indian and Chinese H-1B visa-workers — plus their families and relatives — on a fast-track to green-cards. If passed, the Yoder legislation would further increase the supply of white-collar workers competing for jobs in the United States.

The various visa programs, including H-1B, OPT, H4 EAD, L-1, TN, and J-1 programs, keep a population of roughly 1.5 million foreign graduates employed in the United States as managers, recruiters, scientists, programmers, engineers, doctors, accountants, therapists, and designers. These huge labor programs help to lower salaries for many American college graduates and to push many skilled American workers into new, low-tech, lower-wage careers, such as journalism.

The visa-worker programs allow the Indian-born CEOs in the U.S. to transfer many Indian tech-workers to the United States for subcontracting jobs, including many contracts that the companies hope to win during the next year. But the H-1B rules bar this “bench and switch” practice and require companies to justify each new request for a visa against an existing job.

Nonetheless, many Indian and U.S. companies import H-1B workers and use their very low salaries to win a variety of contracts that would otherwise have gone to American consultants.

The Seattle Times cited the federal indictment’s description of Samal’s alleged violation of those visa rules:


Samal appeared to get pushback from a client after the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), part of the Department of Homeland Security, started investigating Samal. The CEO of a client company used in the [H-1B visa] application letters emailed Samal after USCIS contacted him, according to the case.

“I received this email from the Visa office asking if I signed this,” the email from a CEO, identified in court documents as V.K., reads. “I did not. I don’t even know who this resource is. This is concerning? Pls advise on how this happened?”

Sarah Blackwell, the founder of a pro-American group, Protect US Workers, Tweeted:

“Bench and switch” - It has a phrase it is so common. We need more policing. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/technology/redmond-ceo-charged-with-fraud-on-more-than-100-h-1b-visa-applications/ …



The American critics of the visa-worker programs are trying to block Yoder’s HR 392 fast-track legislation, partly by arguing that it will allow Indians managers to discriminate against Americans, and so push more Americans away from technology careers. The American groups include Protect US Workers and U.S. Tech Workers.

Much of the criticism is aimed at Indian firms which receive a huge slice of the H-1B visas each year. For example, QZ.com reported in June about a discrimination lawsuit:


A former senior executive at Infosys [Technologies Ltd.] has accused Indian software major Infosys of a racist bias that favors Indian techies over others.

Erin Green, who worked at Infosys’s Texas office from October 2011 to July 2016, has alleged that his former employer tilted the scales too far towards Indians in its 200,000-strong workforce in the US. In a lawsuit filed (paywall) with the district court in eastern Texas on June 19, Green cites the lack of diversity at the firm as proof of discrimination …

Since then, the lawsuit claims, “…Plaintiff (Green) was not promoted, and no white or black employees on Plaintiff’s teams were ever promoted, progressed, or given salary increases.” Only the careers of south Asians progressed. Binod Hampapur, whom Nayak reported to, is also called out in the complaint for not curbing the discrimination.

Infosys is the largest user of the H-1B program, and paid a small fine for discrimination in 2013:

A U.S. government cable released via Wikileaks said that:


H-1B fraud is one of the top two visa categories for fraud throughout Mission India. All posts regularly encounter inflated or fabricated educational and employment qualifications. The vast majority of these documents come from Hyderabad. In the 18 months prior to the start-up of consular operations in Hyderabad, FPU Chennai investigated 150 companies in Hyderabad, 77 percent of which turned out to be fraudulent or highly suspect (ref F). Most of those cases slated for site visits were to verify the experience letters for H-1B applicants who did not meet minimum educational qualifications.

Some Indian business leaders admit problems. For example, Infosys’ co-founder, N.R. Narayana Murthy, said in February 2017 that Indian managers need to learn skills from American graduates:


I think by and large, the Indian mindset is always to take the soft option. … Our managers will have to learn with non-Indian professionals … how to make sure that we understand the rules of crossing cultures. So therefore I think this is a learning opportunity for our senior people. This is not an easy option, it is s very tough option, but the earlier we start, the better it is for us.

But U.S. firms are also facing charges of anti-American discrimination. Bloomberg reported this month that Cisco Systems is being investigated by the Department of Labor for using the H-1B visa program to enable discrimination against Americans


The DOL’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs determined that the technology firm secured visas for foreign workers instead of hiring U.S. citizens for certain jobs and paid the visa holders at a lower rate than their American counterparts, according to the sources. The federal contractor watchdog, which uncovered the alleged discrimination as part of a routine audit, is currently discussing the settlement of a violation notice issued to Cisco earlier this year …

The probe is one of several ongoing investigations into possible discrimination by federal contractors against visa holders. The OFCCP considers that a form of national origin bias, banned by an executive order first issued in 1965 by President Lyndon Johnson …

American workers are also using Twitter to share evidence of Indian cheating and resume-padding. For example one video shows an Indian in a video job-interview mouthing the answers provided by a hired coach:



Many ads are posted on Indian websites offering people to coach job-seekers during job interviews.




Fresh proxy interview postings. Apparently there are separate forums for providers and receivers. 100’s of such posting a day folks!






More proxy requests!



Critics and news outlets have frequently reported widespread resume fraud and legal gaming of the federal rules used to allocate work visas and green cards.





















BM Laid Off 20K Older Americans, Sought to Import 37K Foreign Workers



Indian-Nationals-on-H-1B-Visas
PUNIT PARANJPE/AFP/Getty
      1,514




































Outsourcing corporation IBM laid off about 20,000 older Americans in the last five years, a new investigation reveals, while the tech multinational sought to import at least 37,000 foreign workers to take U.S. jobs.

joint investigation by ProPublica and Mother Jones reveals that about 60 percent of the Americans that were laid off by IBM in the last five years were workers over the age of forty. This amounts to about 20,000 40-years-old and older Americans being laid off by IBM since 2014.
At the same time, IBM has attempted to import at least 37,000 foreign workers on H-1B visas since 2016.
Every year, more than 100,000 foreign workers are brought to the U.S. on the H-1B visa and are allowed to stay for up to six years. That number has ballooned to potentially hundreds of thousands each year, as universities and non-profits are exempt from the cap. With more entering the U.S. through the visa, Americans are often replaced and forced to train their foreign replacements.
Publicly available data reviewed by Breitbart News reveals that in 2018, alone, IBM was one of the top three multinational corporations trying to import more than 10,000 H-1B foreign workers to take American jobs.
In 2017 and 2016, combined, IBM sought to import nearly 26,000 H-1B foreign workers to take coveted, high-paying jobs in the tech industry.
As Breitbart News has chronicled, American workers have been readily laid off from outsourcing firms like IBM, Infosys, Tata Consulting, and Capgemini, all of which are responsible for allegedly forcing their laid-off Americans employees to train their H-1B foreign replacements.
In cases highlighted by 60 Minutes, American workers laid off and replaced by H-1B foreign workers revealed that many of their offices, once entirely made up of Americans, had shifted to primarily male, Indian nationals.
Despite laying off thousands of American workers, and now having more employees on the payroll in India rather than the U.S., IBM CEO Ginni Rometty’s salary has continued to climb.
For example, Rometty’s salary has climbed to now upwards of $33 million a year. In 2014, Rometty’s salary was roughly $18 million, though that was before she gave herself a raise in 2015 when she raked in close to $20 million.
As Breitbart News most recently reported, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has tightened rules to try to prevent multinational corporations from outsourcing American jobs to H-1B foreign workers.
Since President Trump’s administration set up a hotline for Americans to report H-1B visa abuse, there have been more than 5,000 cases of alleged abuse within the visa program reported.
Tech conglomerates like Amazon, Microsoft, and Apple hide their H-1B foreign worker hires through outsourcing firms like Cognizant, Tata, and Infosys, as Breitbart News has reported. The practice allows the corporations to claim they are not undercutting or replacing American workers at extraordinary rates, as they simply contract the foreign workers through the outsourcing firms.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.


Congress Floods White-Collar Labor Markets



ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images
28 Aug 2018234

Federal data shows that legal immigrants are filling a growing share of several white-collar professions which have seen little salary growth since 2000.

The data was posted by the Center for Immigration Studies, and it shows how Congress imports foreign-born immigrants and visa-workers to raise the labor supply by roughly 50 percent in several white-collar science and technology jobs, ensuring much lower salaries for Americans in those flooded job markets.
The CIS study looked at the percentage of foreign-born workers in 474 separate occupations defined by the Department of Commerce.  The group reported:
There are 65 occupations in which 25 percent or more of the workers are immigrants (legal and illegal). In these high-immigrant occupations, there are still 16.5 million natives — accounting for one out of eight natives in the labor force…
there are just 24 occupations out of 474 in which illegal immigrants comprise at least 15 percent of workers …
we find that only 4 percent of illegal immigrants and 2 percent of all immigrants work on farms.
The loss of wages and status is obvious in the jobs where migrants have doubled or nearly doubled the supply of labor. For example, legal and illegal migrants hold a slight majority of jobs in blue-collar agricultural sorting, construction plasterers, sewing-machine operators, tailors, and miscellaneous agricultural workers. Immigrants also comprise 40 percent or more of eight additional jobs as maids, textile workers, taxi drivers, translators, roofers, and painters.
But the government-delivered flood of new labor has reached up to many once-prestigioushigh-tech white-collar jobs that were widely seen as a hard-earned pathway to a prosperous and secure future.
Foreign-born workers comprise 43 percent of medical and biological scientists, 38 percent of physical scientists, 38 percent of software developers, 36 percent of computer engineers, 31 percent of economists, 28 percent of physicists and doctors, 27 percent of clients, 27 percent of electronics engineers and 25 percent of software programmers, according to the CIS data.
These are huge inflows. For example, if 33 percent of people in a career are immigrants, then the government has raised the labor supply in that career by 50 percent.
Those percentages are likely to increase further if Congress approves the HR 392 proposal by GOP Rep. Kevin Yoder to lift the “country caps” on employer-sponsored immigrants, or implements donor demands for more visa-workers, or if President Donald Trump drops his Four Pillars immigration reform plan or quits his regulatory efforts to shrink the visa-worker programs.
In February 2018, an alliance of Democrats and business-first Republicans — backed by business groups — blocked Trump’s Four Pillars pro-American reform in the Senate.

US President Donald Trump listens to Apple CEO Tim Cook speak during an American Technology Council roundtable at the White House in Washington, DC, on June 19, 2017.

The high inflow of extra workers ensured by Congress has a large impact on wages, according to Economics 1o1 calculations. For example, the 2016 report on immigration by the National Academy of Sciences reported that Americans lose 5.2 percent of their wages and salaries when the government uses immigrants to raise the labor supply by 16.5 percent.
The lost 5.2 percent of income does not go to immigrants or disappear into the air — it is transferred to employers and investors in the form of almost $500 billion in extra profits per year. Those transfers supercharge New York’s stock market.
One of the academics serving on the NAS group, George Borjas of Harvard, used his blogto translate the academies’ overly complex description of the immigration tax:
The calculation of the immigration surplus reported in Chapter 4 of the NAS report assumes that GDP is $17.5 trillion; that 65% of GDP goes to workers; and that 16.5% percent of the workforce is foreign-born. The report also says that “the current stock of immigrants lowered wages by 5.2 percent.”
Because only 65% of GDP goes to workers, that means that the total earnings of all workers is $11.4 trillion (or 0.65 × 17.5). But because only 16.5% of workers are foreign-born, the fraction of total earnings that goes to native workers is $9.5 trillion (or 0.835 × 11.4). The NAS report says that native earnings fell by 5.2 percent, so that the wage transfer from native workers to employers is $494 billion (or 0.052 × 9.5).
So the 5.2 percent transfer tax is imposed when where government-supplied immigrants or visa-workers — such as H-1Bs, L-1s or H-2As — provide 16.5 percent of the labor. But the immigrant population is far higher in the high-tech careers where government-supplied immigrants and visa-workers can jointly add 30 percent or 40 percent of the labor.
Legal immigrants are equally impacted by this government-arranged transfer because they work under similar economic pressure as Americans. They gain by moving to the United States but lose when the government moves another cohort of immigrants into their sector.
The growing economic impact of white-collar immigration helps explain why blue-collar wages are rising faster than white-collar wages in the current economic expansion. Jason Furman, a former economic advisor to President Barack Obama, used orange bars to show the white-collar slump:
Overall, salaries for technology jobs have barely kept ahead of pre-inflation average salaries nationwide over the last decade, according to Payscale:

But the government data provided by CIS shows that many culture-intensive jobs have largely escaped the diversity that many progressives promote for others.
So far, immigrants comprise just 5 percent of business fundraisers,  7 percent of lawyers, P.R specialists, and archivists, 8 percent of writers and authors, urban planners, editors, technical writers, law clerks, and religious directors, 9 percent of psychologists, event planners, therapists and human-resources people, and 10 percent of advertising managers, camera operators, social workers and paralegals.
Nonetheless, the rising inflow of immigrants is also beginning to flood into many of these culture-related jobs.
Twelve percent of photographers, actors, social scientists, clergy, and “news analysists, reporters and correspondents” are immigrants. “Native-born reporters who work at English-language media outlets face …  modest levels of competition from immigrants,” CIS reported.
Thirteen percent of chief executives, human resources managers, and artists are immigrants.
Fourteen percent of therapists are immigrants.
Fifteen percent of designers, 19 percent of architects, financial analysts, and computer managers are immigrants.
Twenty percent of pharmacists and 22 percent of teachers are immigrants.
However, people who work for government and regulated industries face little competition. The jobs with the fewest percentage of immigrants include firefighters, soil-conservation scientists, jailers, powerline installers, detectives, country clerks, air traffic controllers, police officer, and teachers.
Each year, four million young Americans enter the workforce — and the government imports 1 million legal immigrants, replenishes the population of roughly 1.5 million white-collar guest workers, and does little to repatriate the resident population of roughly 8 million illegal immigrants.
Overall, the Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via immigration shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the market with cheap foreign labor.
That process spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. The policy also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions. Immigration also pulls investment and wealth away from heartland states because investment flows towards the large immigrant populations living in the coastal states.

Got any tips about the H-1B, L-1 and OPT programs?  Email Neil Munro here or at NMunro@Breitbart.com. 
















AT&T Continues Layoffs of More than 16K Americans to Outsource Jobs



workers at a call-centre
Findlay Kember/AFP/Getty Images
      1,610
































Multinational conglomerate AT&T is continuing layoffs of more than 16,000 American workers since 2011 to outsource those jobs to foreign countries while it rakes in record profits.

revealing report by The Guardian‘s Michael Sainato uncovers the extent to which multinational corporations like AT&T have profited from the GOP’s tax cuts passed last year, and yet they continue to lay off Americans to send their jobs to counties like Mexico, India, and the Phillippines.
Though AT&T executives were heralded for giving their workers $1,000 bonuses after the tax cuts were passed by the Republican-controlled Congress and signed into law by President Trump, Americans keep losing their jobs to outsourcing.
Since 2011, AT&T has outsourced or eliminated more than 16,000 U.S. jobs, including the closure of 44 call centers. Just this year, AT&T has shuttered four call centers in the U.S. and sent those American jobs to foreign countries.
Americans like Cindy Liddick, who was interviewed in depth by The Guardian, have had to struggle with the prospect of having their job sent overseas. Liddick told The Guardian:
“My husband is very ill, I’m about to lose my health insurance and starting over in the job market at my age is going to be tough,” Liddick said. [Emphasis added]
It’s hitting me really hard financially,” she said. “I could lose my house.” [Emphasis added]
At a call center in Appleton, Wisconsin, the number of American workers employed have been reduced from 500 to just 30. The Guardian spoke with an AT&T worker who was forced to take a different position at the company in Cleveland, Ohio after her local call center was shut down and the jobs were outsourced:
My center closed in 2011. It was a shock to all of us. At the time we had an area manager telling us we had plenty of work to sustain our office,” said Laleelah Hunter, an AT&T call representative in Cleveland for 19 years. [Emphasis added]
Those Cleveland call center workers were given the option of having to relocate to Detroit, Michigan. Most were forced into unemployment.
AT&T worker Betsy LaFontaine, who spoke to The Guardian, noted that despite all the layoffs across the U.S. and American jobs being outsourced, the executives continue raking in record profits that keep growing.
LaFontaine’s call center in Appleton, Wisconsin was cut from 500 workers to now just 30 workers.
Meanwhile, AT&T is trying to merge with Time Warner, a move that would likely further cut the number of Americans employed at the multinational corporation. As Breitbart News noted, The Department of Justice (DOJ) Antitrust Division is fighting the merger after it was approved by federal District Judge Richard Leon.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.






Bokhari — Google’s ‘Values’: 60-Minute Video Reveals Political Zealotry in Tech Corporate Culture



GoogCollage
222

Many moments in the Google Tape were revealing, but also illuminating was what consistently failed to appear: dissent. Not one Google employee dared to challenge the one-party mindset displayed in the room. And why would they?

Conservative and Trump-supporting employees in the audience (and we know at least one of them was there) heard the company’s co-founder link their motivations to “extremism” and “fascism,” saying he was “deeply offended” by their decision. Google VP for Global Affairs Kent Walker said populism and nationalism were motivated by “hatred and xenophobia.”
Why would anyone have spoken up, when their company’s management made it clear that their democratic decision was xenophobic and offensive?
The closest anyone came to challenging the groupthink on stage was at the very end, when an employee asked if Google’s leadership had anything positive to say about Trump’s election. They all laughed.
Google didn’t develop groupthink by accident. After all, moments before calling for a group hug over the election results, CFO Ruth Porat repeatedly referred to the Clinton campaign as “we,” choking back tears as she recalled the moment she realized “we were going to lose.”
The executives on stage made it very clear that the company has a set of “values” that they expect all employees to follow. “The election conflicts with many of our values,” says Google co-founder Sergey Brin.
Google will “use the great strength and resources and reach we have to continue to advance really important values” promises Chief Financial Officer Ruth Porat.
“[It was] a very hard cycle, especially with our values,” says CEO Sundar Pichai “We are so deeply committed to our values… Nothing will change… We will stand up always for the values we believe in.”
And what are those values? Watch the whole video, and they quickly become apparent:
  1. Globalism: Google VP Kent Walker insists that despite its repeated rejection by electorates around the world, “globalization” is an “incredible force for good.”
  2. Hillary Clinton’s Democratic party: An executive nearly broke down cryingbecause of the candidate’s loss. Not a single executive expressed anything but dismay at her defeat.
  3. Immigration: Maintaining liberal immigration in the U.S is the policy that Google’s executives discussed the most.
  4. Coddling: Google’s campus seems very much like a college campus. Instead of encouraging emotional self-sufficiency, executives encourage group hugs, public displays of emotion, and “healing.”
  5. Opposing “white privilege”: at the very end of the video, a Google employee goes on a rant about white privilege, calling for white males to attend special “bias busting” training. Every Google executive on stage applauded the race-baiting speech.
  6. Dissent is just irrational bigotry: Sergey Brin compared the motivations of Trump voters to those of fascists. Kent Walker said populists and nationalists are motivated by hatred, xenophobia, and fear.
The uniformity of opinions among the company’s top executives would be unusual even in a partisan media publication. In a supposedly neutral corporation, that wields more power over the flow of information than any other organization in history, it is shocking.
A newspaper like the New York Times, with its well-known liberal editorial line, has displayed more diversity of opinion than Google. Indeed, the Times even ran a column defending politically centrist Google employee James Damore, after Damore was fired by the tech giant after he disagreed with the company’s far-left policies.
How is the far-left New York Times – which, as a publisher, is allowed to have an editorial slant – more politically tolerant than Google? Given its vast power over information, and the trust it requires from users of all political stripes, you’d think the search giant’s executives would work extra hard to display an attitude of non-partisanship.
Instead, they’re crying on stage over a Democrat’s defeat and emphasizing a cult-like commitment to shared “values.”
Only one executive on stage — People Operations VP Eileen Naughton — explicitly referenced conservative employees within the company, saying they “haven’t felt entirely comfortable revealing who [they] are.” But she herself cracked jokes about employees moving to Canada following the election, and made no effort to contradict fellow executives who compared Trump supporters to fascists and xenophobes.
Despite’s Naughton’s admission that conservatives at the company feel uncomfortable, Google told Breitbart News that “everyone at Google has been able to freely express their opinions at these meetings.
The company also denied their executives’ biases ever trickled down into their product.
“Nothing was said at that meeting, or any other meeting, to suggest that any political bias ever influences the way we build or operate our products. To the contrary, our products are built for everyone, and we design them with extraordinary care to be a trustworthy source of information for everyone, without regard to political viewpoint.”
Again, that contradicts what the company’s own executives say in the leaked video. Sergey Brin and Pichai both reference “Jigsaw,” Google’s anti-extremism project, which among other things develops tools to redirect people away from extremist material in search results. But they aren’t discussing the project in the context of an actual extremist group, like ISIS — they discuss it in the context of Trump’s election.
Pichai, responding to a question about “low-information voters” sharing “fake news,” says that the company’s work on “machine learning” is an area of opportunity.
Meanwhile, Ruth Porat talks about using the “great strength and resources and reach we have to continue to advance really important values.”
Kent Walker says Google must ensure that the rise of populism and nationalism around the world doesn’t turn into “a world war or something catastrophic … and instead is a blip, a hiccup.”
How can anyone believe Google’s assurance that it doesn’t bias its products, when the company’s executives actively brainstormed ways to stop the populist movement, just days after Trump’s election? Especially when they reference Google tools like Jigsaw and machine learning?
But even if, by some miracle, Google hasn’t intentionally tweaked its products to harm the populist movement, that doesn’t mean they won’t do it by accident. Remember, the company had to withdraw a fact-checking feature earlier this year after it was revealed that it almost exclusively fact-checked conservatives. Intent or no, groupthink at Google will affect Google’s products. And in that video, the groupthink is overwhelming.
Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News. You can follow him on TwitterGab.ai and add him on Facebook. Email tips and suggestions to allumbokhari@protonmail.com.






Big Tech, Outsourcing Firms, Farm Lobby Behind Attacks on Trump Tariffs



Indian High Tech Workers
Associated Press
129










The executives of Silicon Valley’s tech conglomerates, outsourcing firms, and the farm lobby have joined together to fight President Trump’s tariffs on imported steel, aluminum, and Chinese-made products.

The big business lobby is now fronting the organization known as “Tariffs Hurt the Heartland,” — where tech giants and Indian firms responsible for outsourcing American jobs have joined forces with the Big Agriculture lobby — to fight Trump’s tariffs.
Through a group called “Americans for Free Trade,” Big Tech, including Amazon, Facebook, Google, Twitter, and Microsoft, is fighting Trump’s tariffs alongside outsourcing firms like IBM and Cognizant.

(Screenshot via Americans for Free Trade)
As Breitbart News has chronicled, IBM has laid off about 20,000 older Americans in the last five years while attempting to import nearly 40,000 mostly Indian male foreigners to take U.S. jobs. Despite laying off thousands of American workers, and now having more employees on the payroll in India  than in the U.S., IBM CEO Ginni Rometty’s salary has continued to climb.
Cognizant, responsible for outsourcing thousands of Americans’ jobs to foreign nationals, is currently involved in a lawsuit where three former American workers allege that the firm is discriminatory against white Americans, favoring Indian nationals instead.
Google, as Breitbart News exclusively reported, has imported about 10,000 foreign nationals to take high paying, white collar jobs at the company, and executives say they intend to import more foreign workers. The Google outsourcing business model has been repeated so much in Silicon Valley that Americans are now vastly outnumbered by foreigners in the tech industry despite there being more than 500,000 U.S. graduates in the STEM fields every year.
In an effort to stop Trump’s tariffs, these big business giants have joined forces with the farm lobby under a group known as “Farmers for Free Trade.”
While the organization presents itself as a grassroots effort by U.S. farmers, it is primarily funded by pro-mass immigration and outsourcing groups like the American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Pork Producers Association.
The American Farm Bureau Federation has continuously lobbied the Trump administration for more imported low-skilled foreign workers to take U.S. farming industry jobs.
Meanwhile, the National Pork Producers Association lobbies for more foreign workers for meatpacking plants, an industry that has a history of employing foreign refugees and illegal aliens to do grueling jobs.
The free trade lobbying effort by Big Tech, outsourcing industry, and farm lobby is similar to that of the “Never Trump” pundits’ attempts to stop Trump’s tariffs by creating the group known as “Republicans Fighting Tariffs” and the Chamber of Commerce and billionaire Koch brothers’ free trade advocacy efforts.
Trump’s tariffs, as Breitbart News reported, has created more than 11,000 American jobs in the economy in the last six months, according to research by the Coalition for a Prosperous America. This means that there are 20 times as many American jobs that have been created thanks to Trump’s tariffs on imported foreign goods than jobs that have been lost.
Since 2001, free trade with China has cost millions of Americans their jobs. Between 2001 and 2015, about 3.4 million U.S. jobs were lost due to the country’s trade deficit with China, as Breitbart News reported.
Of the 3.4 million U.S. jobs lost in that time period, about 2.6 million were lost in the crippled manufacturing industry, making up about three-fourths of the loss of jobs from the U.S.-Chinese trade deficit.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder


GEORGE SOROS PARTNERS WITH BARACK OBAMA and ERIC HOLDER TO CREATE A GLOBALIST REGIME FOR THE BILLIONAIRE CLASS and CRONY BANKSTERS…. Open borders and endless hordes of illegals will make it happen!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/04/monica-showalter-soros-banksters-and.html 

YOU WONDERED WHY OBAMA-HOLDER WORKED SO HARD TO SABOTAGE AMERICAN VOTING FOR MORE ILLEGALS???

Those are the subliterate, low-skill, non-English-speaking indigents whose own societies are unable or unwilling to usefully educate and employ them. Bring these people here and they not only need a lot of services, they are putty in the hands of leftist demogogues as Hugo Chavez demonstrated - and they are very useful as leftist voters who will support the Soros agenda.

ILLEGALS VOTING ILLEGALLY

Of course, the game of the Democrats is to avoid at all costs any of the safeguards against fraud, such as photo ID requirements.  That should tell anyone with integrity what they are up to.  But most media continue to ignore this stain on democracy.  THOMAS LIFSON – AMERICAN THINKER

 BARACK OBAMA AND ERIC HOLDER’S SABOTAGE OF HOMELAND SECURITY: THE “ZERO TOLERANCE” PROGRAM WAS DISMANTLED BY ATTORNEY GENERAL ERC HOLDER ONCE IT HAD SUCCESSFULLY CUT THE TRANSIT OF MIGRANTS BY ROUGHLY 95 PERCENT. INITIALLY, OFFICIALS MADE 140,000 ARRESTS PER YEAR IN THE MID-2000S, BUT THE NORTHWARD FLOW DROPPED SO MUCH THAT OFFICIALS ONLY HAD TO MAKE 6,000 ARRESTS IN 2013, ACCORDING TO A 2014 LETTER BY TWO PRO-MIGRATION SENATORS, SEN. JEFF FLAKE AND JOHN MCCAIN. NEIL MUNRO


 


No comments: