Thursday, October 3, 2019

GLOBALIST FOR OPEN BORDERS AND MORE "CHEAP" LABOR APPLE'S TIM COOK SAYS DACA ILLEGALS ARE AS AMERICAN AS ANY OF US.... Nope! The Mex flag wavers are as American as you Cook!



Apple’s Tim Cook: DACA Illegals ‘Are as American as Any of Us’

Apple CEO Tim Cook speaks with attendees during an Apple product launch event at Apple's headquarters in Cupertino, California on September 10, 2019. - Apple unveiled its iPhone 11 models Tuesday, touting upgraded, ultra-wide cameras as it updated its popular smartphone lineup and cut its entry price to $699. (Photo …
JOSH EDELSON/AFP/Getty Images
4:05

Apple Inc. should be allowed to hire ‘DACA’ illegal migrants because they are good for the company’s shareholders, according to a legal plea sent to the Supreme Court.

“They, and [legal] immigrants like them, are vital to Apple’s success,” said the plea by CEO Tim Cook and by the company’s human resources chief, Deirdre O’Brien. “They spark creativity and help drive innovation. They are among our most driven and selfless colleagues.”
The 16-page plea included one legal argument: that the 443 illegal migrants deserve relief because they submitted their names to the federal government to get DACA benefits. “This Court has recognized that ‘serious reliance interests’ like these carry significant legal weight, said the document.
However, the plea ignored the three main legal issues: Whether Barack Obama and his deputies had the legal authority to grant a blanket exemption from immigration law to roughly 800,000 young illegals, whether Obama has the legal authority to give work permits to illegals in the United States, and whether President Donald Trump has the legal authority to end Obama’s blanket policy.
Instead of addressing the legal issues, Cook offered broad business and moral claims that would sweep away Americans’ right to border and decent wages in an American-only labor market.
Cook’s plea described how several Apple DACA employees were brought into the United States illegally, yet he also said the migrants “have done everything right … [and] follow the rules.”
For example, the plea suggested that there is no moral distinction between Americans and foreigners that company executives are bound to respect, saying, “one of Apple’s core values is the belief that equal opportunities should be available for all, regardless of background.”
“In their patriotism, dedication to their families and communities, and commitment to making their country a better place, they are as American as any of us,” the plea said.
Cook lauded the migrants’ claimed “rich diversity” without defining diversity, and ignored the trade-offs between a demand for a “diverse” workforce and a most-skilled workforce:
Our recipe for success is simple: Hire the best people, from the most diverse backgrounds. They will solve the most challenging technological problems. They will find new ways to connect to the broadest population and new ways to provide the best customer experience. This is Apple’s innovation strategy. It is all about the people—and their rich diversity.


Cook did not mention the fact that the company can hire foreign workers — including former illegals — via the nation’s guest-worker and immigration programs. For example, the L-1 visa allows Apple executives to hire illegals back in their home countries and transfer them to U.S. locations. Executives can also get green cards and citizenship for their L-1 and H-1B visa workers.
Apple uses the legal immigration system to import thousands of foreign workers for jobs sought by Americans.
The federal date presented by MyVisaJobs.com suggests the company hired more than 2,000 foreign workers via the H-1B program and asked for green cards for another group of roughly 2,900 visa-workers. Almost 2,500 of the green-card recipients were H-1B workers, and 239 held L-1 visas which allows foreign-based employees of Apple to work in the United States
The vast majority of the imported workers came from India, according to the website:
India(1464); China(355); Canada(225); France(82); United Kingdom(80); South Korea(56); Taiwan(53); Germany(34); Sweden(32); Italy(31)
“Dreamers fuel creativity, broaden knowledge, and help drive innovation,” Cook says. “They inspire all of us. They make Apple better. They make our country better.”
Cook is one of the company’s largest shareholders and stands to gain when the company’s profits climb.
The case is Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, at the Supreme Court of the United States. The cases are numbered Nos. 18-587, 18-588, and 18-589.







Report: California’s Middle-Class Wages Rise by 1 Percent in 40 Years

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
3 Sep 2019172
6:24

Middle-class wages in progressive California have risen by 1 percent in the last 40 years, says a study by the establishment California Budget and Policy Center.

“Earnings for California’s workers at the low end and middle of the wage scale have generally declined or stagnated for decades,” says the report, titled “California’s Workers Are Increasingly Locked Out of the State’s Prosperity.” The report continued:
In 2018, the median hourly earnings for workers ages 25 to 64 was $21.79, just 1% higher than in 1979, after adjusting for inflation ($21.50, in 2018 dollars) (Figure 1). Inflation-adjusted hourly earnings for low-wage workers, those at the 10th percentile, increased only slightly more, by 4%, from $10.71 in 1979 to $11.12 in 2018.
The report admits that the state’s progressive economy is delivering more to investors and less to wage-earners. “Since 2001, the share of state private-sector [annual new income] that has gone to worker compensation has fallen by 5.6 percentage points — from 52.9% to 47.3%.”
In 2016, California’s Gross Domestic Product was $2.6 trillion, so the 5.6 percent drop shifted $146 billion away from wages. That is roughly $3,625 per person in 2016.
The report notes that wages finally exceeded 1979 levels around 2017, and it splits the credit between the Democrats’ minimum-wage boosts and President Donald Trump’s go-go economy.
The 40 years of flat wages are partly hidden by a wave of new products and services. They include almost-free entertainment and information on the Internet, cheap imported coffee in supermarkets, and reliable, low-pollution autos in garages.
But the impact of California’s flat wages is made worse by California’s rising housing costs, the report says, even though it also ignores the rent-spiking impact of the establishment’s pro-immigration policies:
 In just the last decade alone, the increase in the typical household’s rent far outpaced the rise in the typical full-time worker’s annual earnings, suggesting that working families and individuals are finding it increasingly difficult to make ends meet. In fact, the basic cost of living in many parts of the state is more than many single individuals or families can expect to earn, even if all adults are working full-time.
Specifically, inflation-adjusted median household rent rose by 16% between 2006 and 2017, while inflation-adjusted median annual earnings for individuals working at least 35 hours per week and 50 weeks per year rose by just 2%, according to a Budget Center analysis of US Census Bureau, American Community Survey data.
The wage and housing problems are made worse — especially for families — by the loss of employment benefits as companies and investors spike stock prices by cutting costs. The report says:
Many workers are being paid little more today than workers were in 1979 even as worker productivity has risen. Fewer employees have access to retirement plans sponsored by their employers, leaving individual workers on their own to stretch limited dollars and resources to plan how they’ll spend their later years affording the high cost of living and health care in California. And as union representation has declined, most workers today cannot negotiate collectively for better working conditions, higher pay, and benefits, such as retirement and health care, like their parents and grandparents did. On top of all this, workers who take on contingent and independent work (often referred to as “gig work”), which in many cases appears to be motivated by the need to supplement their primary job or fill gaps in their employment, are rarely granted the same rights and legal protections as traditional employees.
The center’s report tries to blame the four-decade stretch of flat wages on the declining clout of unions. But unions’ decline was impacted by the bipartisan elites’ policy of mass-migration and imposed diversity.
In 2018, Breitbart reported how Progressives for Immigration Reform interviewed Blaine Taylor, a union carpenter, about the economic impact of migration:
TAYLOR: If I hired a framer to do a small addition [in 1988], his wage would have been $45 an hour. That was the minimum for a framing contractor, a good carpenter. For a helper, it was about $25 an hour, for a master who could run a complete job, it was about $45 an hour. That was the going wage for plumbers as well. His helpers typically got $25 an hour.
Now, the average wage in Los Angeles for construction workers is less than $11 an hour. They can’t go lower than the minimum wage. And much of that, if they’re not being paid by the hour at less than $11 an hour, they’re being paid per piece — per piece of plywood that’s installed, per piece of drywall that’s installed. Now, the subcontractor can circumvent paying them as an hourly wage and are now being paid by 1099, which means that no taxes are being taken out. [Emphasis added]
Diversity also damaged the unions by shredding California’s civic solidarity. In 2007, the progressive Southern Poverty Law Center posted a report with the title “Latino Gang Members in Southern California are Terrorizing and Killing Blacks.” In the same year, an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times described another murder by Latino gangs as “a manifestation of an increasingly common trend: Latino ethnic cleansing of African Americans from multiracial neighborhoods.”
The center’s board members include the executive director of the state’s SEIU union, a professor from the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, Berkeley, and the research director at the “Program for Environmental and Regional Equity” at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles.
Outside California, President Donald Trump’s low-immigration policies are pressuring employers to raise Americans’ wages in a hot economy. The Wall Street Journal reportedAugust 29:
Overall, median weekly earnings rose 5% from the fourth quarter of 2017 to the same quarter in 2018, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. For workers between the ages of 25 and 34, that increase was 7.6%.


The New York Times laments that reduced immigration does force wages upwards and also does force companies to buy labor-saving, wage-boosting machinery. Instead, NYT prioritizes "ideas about America’s identity and culture.” http://bit.ly/2Zp2u2J 

NYT Admits Fewer Immigrants Means Higher Wages, More Labor-Saving Machines



.
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.S

THE INVITED INVADING HORDES: IT’S ALL ABOUT KEEPING WAGES DEPRESSED!
"In the decade following the financial crisis of 2007-2008, the capitalist class has delivered powerful blows to the social position of the working class. As a result, the working class in the US, the world’s “richest country,” faces levels of economic hardship not seen since the 1930s."

"Inequality has reached unprecedented levels: the wealth of America’s three richest people now equals the net worth of the poorest half of the US population."

Warren's core insight was fascinating: She argued that massive expansion of the labor force had actually created more stressful living and driven down median wages. BEN SHAPIRO

 

BLOG…. SO, WHAT DOES LA RAZA WARREN THINK WILL HAPPEN WHEN SHE HANDS 40 MILLION LOOTING MEXCIANS AMNESTY SO THEY CAN BRING UP THE REST OF THEIR FAMILY???

 

How the Quest For Power Corrupted Elizabeth Warren

I first met Elizabeth Warren when she was a professor at Harvard Law School, in 2004. She was fresh off the publication of her bestselling book, "The Two-Income Trap." There's no doubt she was politically liberal -- our only face-to-face meeting involved a recruitment visit at the W Hotel in Los Angeles, where she immediately made some sort of disparaging remark about Rush Limbaugh -- but at the time, Warren was making waves for her iconoclastic views. She wasn't a doctrinaire leftist, spewing Big Government nostrums. She was a creative thinker.
That creative thinking is obvious in "The Two-Income Trap," which discusses the rising number of bankruptcies among middle-class parents, particularly women with children. The book posits that women entered the workforce figuring that by doing so, they could have double household income. But so many women entered the workforce that they actually inflated prices for basic goods like housing, thus driving debt skyward and leading to bankruptcies for two-income families. The book argued that families with one income might actually be better off, since families with two incomes spent nearly the full combined income and then fell behind if one spouse lost a job. Families with one income, by contrast, spent to the limit for one income, and if a spouse was fired, the unemployed spouse would then look for work to replace that single income.
Warren's core insight was fascinating: She argued that massive expansion of the labor force had actually created more stressful living and driven down median wages. But her policy recommendations were even more fascinating. She explicitly argued against "more government regulation of the housing market," slamming "complex regulations," since they "might actually worsen the situation by diminishing the incentive to build new houses or improve older ones." Instead, she argued in favor of school choice, since pressure on housing prices came largely from families seeking to escape badly run government school districts: "A well-designed voucher program would fit the bill neatly."
Her heterodox policy proposals didn't stop there. She refused to "join the chorus calling for taxpayer-funded day care" on its own, calling it a "sacred cow." At the very least, she suggested that "government-subsidized day care would add one more indirect pressure on mothers to join the workforce." She instead sought a more comprehensive educational solution that would include "tax credits for stay-at-home parents."
She ardently opposed additional taxpayer subsidization of college loans, too, or more taxpayer spending on higher education directly. Instead, she called for a tuition freeze from state schools. She recommended tax incentives for families to save rather than spend. She opposed radical solutions wholesale: "We haven't suggested a complete overhaul of the tax structure, and we haven't demanded that businesses cease and desist from ever closing another plant or firing another worker. Nor have we suggested that the United States should build a quasi-socialist safety net to rival the European model."
So, what happened to Warren?
Power.
The other half of iconoclastic Warren was typical progressive, anti-financial industry Warren. In "The Two-Income Trap," she proposes reinstating state usury laws, cutting off access to payday lenders and heavily regulating the banking industry -- all in the name of protecting Americans from themselves. While her position castigating the credit industry for deliberate obfuscation of clients was praiseworthy, her quest to "protect consumers" quickly morphed into a quest to create the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau -- an independent agency without any serious checks or balances. But despite her best efforts, she never became head of the CFPB, failing to woo Republican senators. The result: an emboldened Warren who saw her popularity as tied to her Big Government agenda. No more reaching across the aisle; no more iconoclastic policies. Instead, she would be Ralph Nader II, with a feminist narrative to boot.
And so, she's gaining ground in the 2020 presidential race as a Bernie Sanders knockoff. Ironically, her great failing could be her lack of moderation -- the moderation she abandoned in her quest for progressive power. If Elizabeth Warren circa 2003 were running, she'd be the odds-on favorite for president. But Warren circa 2019 would hate Warren circa 2003.
Ben Shapiro, 35, is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School, host of "The Ben Shapiro Show" and editor-in-chief of DailyWire.com. He is the author of the No. 1 New York Times bestseller "The Right Side Of History." He lives with his wife and two children in Los Angeles.

Munro: Cornell Study Shows Stagnant Wages Hurting Marriage in U.S.

Getty Images
 6 Sep 2019334
4:14

Fewer women get married when fewer men earn a decent salary in an unstable economy, says a study from Cornell University.

“Most American women hope to marry but current shortages of marriageable men—men with a stable job and a good income—make this increasingly difficult, especially in the current gig economy of unstable low-paying service jobs,” said lead author Daniel Lichter, a professor at Cornell University. He continued:
Marriage is still based on love, but it also is fundamentally an economic transaction. Many young men today have little to bring to the marriage bargain, especially as young women’s educational levels on average now exceed their male suitors.
The study looked at wages and marriage rates from 2008 to 2017, and concluded that “promoting good jobs may ultimately be the best marriage promotion policy,” says the study, which is titled “Mismatches in the Marriage Market,” and was published in the Journal of Marriage and Family.
The study is useful for the populist wing of the GOP, because it shows that rising wages for men in President Donald Trump’s low-immigration economy is good for women’s romantic aspirations and marriage rates. Other data shows that married people — especially women — are far more likely to vote GOP than single people.
Correspondingly, the bad news about wages and marriage is good news for the Democratic Party, which will get extra votes from women if federal policies continue to suppress wages for American men.
The study did not try to show how marriage rates have been impacted by the various federal policies which have flatlined men’s wages for 40 years.
For example, the federal policy of flooding the labor market with immigrants has flatlined wages nationwide for at least two decades. Also, President Barack Obama’s failure to curb opioids — and his reluctance to favor American workers over ‘DACA’ illegals — helped to push millions of Americans out of the workforce and many into their graves.
The Cornell study validated conservatives’ view that women are different from men, and prefer to marry men who earn a higher wage or salary. The press statement said:
The study’s authors developed estimates of the sociodemographic characteristics of unmarried women’s potential spouses who resemble the husbands of otherwise comparable married women. These estimates were compared with the actual distribution of unmarried men at the national, state, and local levels.
Women’s potential husbands had an average income that was about 58% higher than the actual unmarried men currently available to unmarried women. They also were 30% more likely to be employed and 19% more likely to have a college degree.
Middle-class women have the best chance of finding a man who earns more money, the study says.
Low-income women live among men with very little income, partly because they are in jail or are suffering from drugs. And the many women who earn above $40,000 a year face intense competition for the relatively fewer number of men who make more than $65,000 a year.
This shortage of prosperous men means that many high-income women must marry down, the study said. “Women may instead ‘settle’ for a marital match that falls short of their aspirations in a spouse ... This will be expressed in new patterns of marital hypogamy or downward marital mobility,” the study said. 
The problem is worse for women who seek husbands later in life, for example, after spending years in university education:
For example, older women on average were much less likely a suitable marital match ... This is especially true among women who were highly educated ... A 10% increase in age among women with a college degree was associated with a 24.48 percentage point decrease in the likelihood of a suitable match. In contrast, age mattered much less among the least-educated women—those with a high school degree or less who had only a 4.47  percentage point decrease in finding a match. One implication was that delaying marriage, for whatever reason but perhaps especially if pursuing college degrees, had the effect of reducing women’s local-area access to demographically suited marital partners.
Future studies will examine divorce rates among marriages where women recognize that they earn more than their husbands. 


Young Americans got a pay raise of 7.6 percent from late 2017 to late 2018 -- bigger than other groups -- b/c they are more likely to switch jobs in Trump's low-immigration economy. http://bit.ly/2lWHQUD 

Job-Hopping Young Workers Getting Huge Wage Gains, Says Business Center | Breitbart






Self-Destruction in the Golden State

 

Written by  John F. McManus

Relocating to California was once the goal of many Americans. But in recent years, the luster of living in the “Golden State” has dimmed considerably. Those who still desire to move to what was once widely viewed as a semi-paradise on the West Coast might want to assess what they’ll find before pulling up stakes and heading there.
The Los Angeles Times has surveyed and published some unnerving California developments. In the area served by this newspaper, Times investigators discovered what certainly should be termed failing grades if the region were an educational institution. It’s not, of course, but over recent months, the hard truths they found include:
• 95 percent of warrants for murder in Los Angeles and 75 percent of those on the “most wanted” list contain the names of illegal immigrants.
• Over two/thirds of the births in L.A. County are from illegal immigrant parentage and are paid for by taxpayers.
• Nearly 35 percent of inmates in the state’s detention centers are illegal immigrants.
• According to the FBI, half of the gang members in Los Angeles are illegal immigrants from south of the state’s border.
• In Los Angeles County, 5.1 million people speak only English and 3.1 million speak only Spanish.
This information came from the mass-circulation newspaper known for its liberal stance on almost all issues. Featuring information about the effects of illegal immigration isn’t its usual practice. The numbers we have cited didn’t appear in a single article. The bad news compiled in this column was spread out over time. The bad news has led many Californians to relocate themselves and their businesses to other parts of the Golden State, even to other states.
Rather than simply accept the conclusions reached above, I decided to ask a close friend who lives in Los Angeles County if all of it was verifiable. He responded: “Yes it is. But there are bigger problems that weren’t mentioned.” For instance, he pointed to the growing number of vagrants living — and defecating — in the streets. He said the water at the beaches is becoming hazardous to health and dangerous for swimming. He told of business owners who have to get their sidewalks cleaned each morning. And he reported that rats and disease-carrying insects have proliferated. Los Angeles, he assured me, is filled with tents and absolute filth.
He then added the following:
Illegals are registered to vote. Many are without a driver’s license and they get around in dilapidated autos without insurance. A large number of these individuals find jobs and demand to be paid only in cash. That way, there are no taxes paid or reported. While many illegals are hard-working and otherwise model citizens, they are encouraged to skirt the laws that everyone is supposed to obey. Even they would confirm what the LA Times reported.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has responded to the situation by calling for the imposition of a new “windfall tax” on retirement incomes and stock market gains. She wants to distribute the funds to unemployed illegal immigrants. Wasn’t it Karl Marx who suggested this as the way to solve such problems (“From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.”)?
Pelosi regularly scoffs at President Trump’s plan to build a wall at the border. She never airs the most important reason for her opposition to keeping illegals from simply walking into the United States. But her reason for such a stance is obvious: She expects that the illegals who have already arrived and those who continue to cross into the United States will vote for Democrats. And she’ll do whatever she can to care for them, protect them, and urge their relatives to cross the border as well. Illegal immigrants, like many legal immigrants and native-born Americans, are overwhelmingly ignorant of limitations on government that made America great. As soon as they are given the privilege of voting, they will speed the conversion of California and the entire United States into a duplicate of Venezuela or Cuba where central governments have total power.
Sad to state, California isn’t alone in suffering from these problems. Pelosi’s home city of San Francisco is close behind Los Angeles in its degradation. Other cities are close behind. The entire nation seems determined to commit suicide. Illegal immigration must be eliminated.

John F. McManus is president emeritus of The John Birch Society.


No comments: