The Mexican Invasion and Occupation: Mexico &amp; Dems Build the LA RAZA UNIDOus Mex Welfare State

129 people are talking about this

While Americans have enjoyed significant wage growth in Trump’s economy for blue-collar and working-class Americans, corporate interests have increasingly suggested that the U.S. must continue importing millions of foreign workers every year to fill jobs.

In April 2019, former Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue said the U.S. needed more legal immigration because the country is “out of people.”

Extensive research by economists like George Borjas and analyst Steven Camarota has found that the country’s current legal immigration system — wherein 1.2 million mostly low-skilled workers are admitted annually — burdens U.S. taxpayers and America’s working and middle class while redistributing about $500 billion in wealth every year to major employers and newly arrived immigrants.

Camarota, director of research for the Center for Immigration Studies, has found that every one percent increase in the immigrant composition of American workers’ occupations reduces their weekly wages by about 0.5 percent. This means the average native-born American worker today has his weekly wages reduced by perhaps 8.5 percent because of current legal immigration levels.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

CBO: Immigration Has ‘Negative Effect on Wages’

PAUL RATJE/AFP via Getty Images

9 Jan 2020230

7:01

Immigration makes all of America richer, but it can make some Americans poorer, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says in a report issued January 9.

“Immigration, whether legal or illegal, expands the labor force and changes its composition, leading to increases in total economic output,” said the non-partisan report, titled “The Foreign-Born Population and Its Effects on the U.S. Economy and the Federal Budget—An Overview.”

But this national expansion does “not necessarily [deliver] to increases in output per capita,” or income per person, the report said:

For example, business leaders say the nation’s enormous population of immigrants has expanded the nation’s workforce, increased consumption, and driven up housing prices. But that inflow has also shrunk the wages of less-educated Americans, the report said:

Among people with less education, a large percentage are foreign born. Consequently, immigration has exerted downward pressure on the wages of relatively low-skilled workers who are already in the country, regardless of their birthplace.

The CBO report contradicts business claims that a bigger economy ensures bigger wages for everyone.

More ominously, the report also suggests that the American middle-class — including millions of young college graduates — may suffer a similar economic disaster if immigration policy is shifted to raise the inflow of foreign college graduates. The report says:

The effects of immigration on wages depend on the characteristics of the immigrants. To the extent that newly arrived workers have abilities similar to those of workers already in the country, immigration would have a negative effect on wages.

Many business advocates in Washington are calling for a dramatic increase in “high-skilled immigration” — meaning foreign college graduates who would compete for the same jobs as American college graduates. For example, Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) is trying to pass his S.386 bill that offers the prize of renewable work-permits — and eventual citizenship — to an unlimited number of foreign graduates.

Each year, up to 120,000 foreign graduates — and their spouses and children — can get green cards via their employer’s sponsorship, even as perhaps 800,000 Americans graduate from college with skilled degrees.

But Lee’s bill creates a new legal status called “Early Adjustment.” This status would allow an uncapped number of college graduate migrants to apply for renewable work permits long before they can get a green card to become a legal immigrant and citizen.

Existing law allows an uncapped number of foreigners to legally get short-term work permits and jobs after enrolling in U.S. colleges. The migrants can get jobs by first paying tuition to a university, and then getting short-term work permits via the uncapped “Curricular Practical Training” and the “Optional Practical Training” programs. These workers must leave the United States after a few years until they enroll themselves in work permit programs.

But Lee’s bill would remove any caps on this foreign worker population by allowing an unlimited number of foreign workers to get “Early Adjustment” status from their employers.

Neil Munro

The government has released videos of Indian migrants offering to buy and sell fraudulent work permit documents.

DHS posts videos of Indian migrants buying fake documents from ICE's Farmington U. sting operation.
The #OPT Optional Practical Training program is an estb.-run labor-trafficking scheme to sideline American graduates.
It will expand if #S386 becomes law http://bit.ly/39H2Zqh

Watch: ICE Lure and Sting Indian Illegal Labor 'OPT' Traffickers

8:12 AM - Jan 7, 2020

92 people are talking about this

Many migrants already use the CPT and OPT work permits to get jobs and to also compete for entry into the H-1B visa worker program. Once in the H-1B program — which accepts 85,000 new workers each year — many of the migrants also ask their employers to sponsor them for green cards.

The sponsorship allows them to stay working in the United States until they eventually get their valuable green card, long after their temporary visas have expired. Congress has not set an annual limit on the number of visa workers who can be sponsored for green cards, so the resident population of permanent “temporary workers” is growing fast — and is helping to suppress wages for American graduates.

Roughly 1.5 million foreign visa workers hold white-collar jobs throughout the U.S. economy. This number includes at least 750,000 Indians who are allowed to work via the supposedly temporary CPT, OPT, L-1, and H-1B visa programs. Roughly 300,000 of these Indians — plus 300,000 family members — are being allowed to stay in the United States because they asked their employers to sponsor them for green cards.

The CBO report shows that immigrants comprise roughly 40 percent of the population of people who did not graduate from high school — and that immigrants already comprise roughly 20 percent of all people with a “graduate degree.”

Congressional Budget Office

The 20 percent share likely would quickly rise if the Senate approves Lee’s S.386 plan — and that rise could sharply reduce salaries for American college graduates.

“Wage trends over the past half-century suggest that a 10 percent increase in the number of workers with a particular set of skills probably lowers the wage of that group by at least 3 percent” as the extra workers compete for jobs, says George Borjas, a labor economist at Harvard. That extra labor does expand the economy — but that expansion is dwarfed by the transfer of the wage reductions to investors, he wrote in 2016:

I estimate the current “immigration surplus”—the net increase in the total wealth of the native population—to be about $50 billion annually. But behind that calculation is a much larger shift from one group of Americans to another: The total wealth redistribution from the native losers to the native winners [mostly employers] is enormous, roughly a half-trillion dollars a year.

“In low-skilled occupations, a one percent increase in the immigrant composition of an individual’s occupation reduces wages by [0].8 percent,” said a 1998 report by the Center for Immigration Studies.

A 2013 CBO report predicted that the 2013 “Gang of Eight” amnesty and immigration bill would reduce the share of income that goes to wage earners and increase the share that goes to investors. “Because the bill would increase the rate of growth of the labor force, average wages would be held down in the first decade after enactment,” the CBO report said.

But all that cheap labor would boost corporate profits and spike the stock market, the report said. “The rate of return on capital would be higher [than on labor] under the legislation than under current law throughout the next two decades,” says the report, titled “The Economic Impact of S. 744.”

Business leaders sometimes admit that an extra supply of workers forces down wages. “If you have ten people for every job, you’re not going to have a drive [up] in wages,” U.S. Chamber of Commerce CEO Tom Donohue told Breitbart News on January 9. But “if you have five people for every ten jobs, wages are going to go up.”

Neil Munro

Rising wages are good for politicians, for employees, and for the economy, said Tom Donohue, the president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Are rising wages good for national politics?
“You’re damn right they are,” US Chamber of Commerce CEO Tom Donohue said, adding: "They are good for national politics if you’re a politician, for sure."http://bit.ly/2FwwCg7

U.S. Chamber of Commerce: Rising Wages Are Good for Politicians

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-class-war-over-paying-living-wages.html

Claims of a Labor Shortage Are Just Not True

Bob Harden

America's September unemployment rate fell to 3.5 percent, the lowest level since 1969, according to the most recent Department of Labor report.

The tight labor market is forcing companies to hire disadvantaged Americans. For example, New Seasons Market, a West Coast grocery chain, is actively recruiting people with disabilities and prior criminal records. Similarly, Custom Equipment, a Wisconsin manufacturing firm, recently hired several prison inmates through a work-release program and intends to employ them full-time upon their release.

For the first time in decades, these disadvantaged Americans are finally winning significant pay increases. Over the past year, the lowest-paid 25 percent of workers enjoyed faster wage growth than their higher-paid peers.

Unfortunately, this positive trend could be short-lived. Corporate special interests are whining about a labor shortage -- and are spending millions to lobby for higher levels of immigration, which would supply companies with cheap, pliable workers.

Hardworking Americans need their leaders in Washington to see through this influence campaign and stand up for their interests. Scaling back immigration would further tighten the labor market, boosting wages and helping the most disadvantaged Americans find jobs.

The U.S. economy is the strongest it has been in years. Employers added 136,000 new jobs in September, marking 108 months of consecutive job growth.

But there's still more progress to be made. Approximately 6 million Americans are currently looking for jobs but remain unemployed. Another 4 million desire full-time positions but are underemployed as part-time workers. Millions more, feeling discouraged about their bleak prospects, have abandoned the job search altogether. Indeed, among 18 through 65-year-olds, 55 million people aren't working^.

Many of these folks have limited or outdated skills. Others have criminal records or disabilities. So they might require a bit more training than traditional job applicants.

Rather than put in this extra effort, some big businesses want to eliminate their recruiting challenges by importing cheap foreign workers. These firms have instructed their lobbyists to push for more immigration, which would introduce more slack into the labor market.

The CEO of the Chamber of Commerce recently claimed that America needs a massive increase in immigration because we're "out of people." Chamber officials said their lobbying efforts would center on sizeable increases to rates of legal immigration.

The National Association of Manufacturers, meanwhile, recently released a proposal which would effectively double the number of H-1B tech worker visas, import more seasonal low-skilled laborers on H-2A and H-2B visas, and grant amnesty to illegal immigrants.

And the agriculture industry is lobbying for a path to legalization for illegal laborers and is seeking to expand "temporary" guest-worker programs to include stable, year-round positions on dairy farms and meatpacking plants -- jobs that Americans will happily fill for the right wage. The Association of Builders and Contractors, Koch Industries, and dozens more companies have called for similar measures.

There are already 45 million immigrants in the United States -- 28 million of which are employed -- and counting. More than 650,000 people crossed into the United States illegally in the past eight months alone, already exceeding last fiscal year's totals. And the U.S. government grants an additional 1 million lifetime work permits to immigrants every year.

Those figures will skyrocket even higher if business groups get their way. Such an expansion would hurt hardworking Americans.

The majority of foreigners who cross the border illegally or arrive on guest worker visas lack substantial education. Naturally, they seek out less-skilled jobs in construction, manufacturing, agriculture, and service -- and directly compete with the most economically vulnerable Americans. The labor surplus created by immigration depresses the wages of native-born high school dropouts up to $1,500 each year.

Several proposals under consideration in Washington could alleviate American workers' woes.

A recent bill from Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) would mandate all businesses use a free, online system called E-Verify, which determines an individual's work eligibility in mere seconds.

The system would make it extremely difficult for employers to hire illegal immigrants, roughly 40 percent of whom have been paid subminimum wages at some point. Without a pool of easily abused illegal laborers, businesses would raise pay for Americans.

Several senators also recently introduced the Raise Act, a bill that would reduce future levels of legal immigration.

It's time for our leaders in Washington to scale back both legal and illegal immigration. By doing so, they can further tighten the labor market and force businesses to bring less-advantaged Americans back into the workforce.

OPEN BORDERS: 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."

PELOSI, FEINSTEIN, KAMALA HARRIS AND GAVIN NEWOMS’S MEXIFORNIA

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%.

Neil Munro

Americans are getting higher wages and more labor-saving machines because companies cannot get enough immigrants, laments the New York Times.

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

6:40 AM - Aug 26, 2019

34 people are talking about this

Immigration Politics Amnesty California housing immigration Migrant migration salaries wages

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

Free Trader Paul Krugman Admits Failure of Globalization for American Workers: ‘Major Mistake’

Jae C. Hong/Associated Press

JOHN BINDER

13 Oct 2019780

3:21

Economist Paul Krugman, the longtime defender of global free trade and a member of the failed “Never Trump” movement, now admits that globalization has failed American workers.

In a column for Bloomberg titled “What Economists (Including Me) Got Wrong About Globalization,” Krugman admits that the economic consensus for free trade that has prevailed for decades has failed to recognize how globalization has skyrocketed inequality for America’s working and middle class workers.

Krugman writes:

In the past few years, however, worries about globalization have shot back to the top of the agenda, partly due to new research and partly due to the political shocks of Brexit and U.S. President Donald Trump. And as one of the people who helped shape the 1990s consensus — that the contribution of rising trade to rising inequality was real but modest — it seems appropriate for me to ask now what we missed. [Emphasis added]

…

The pro-globalization consensus of the 1990s, which concluded that trade contributed little to rising inequality, relied on models that asked how the growth of trade had affected the incomes of broad classes of workers, such as those who didn’t go to college. It’s possible, and probably even correct, to think of these models as accurate in the long run. Consensus economists didn’t turn much to analytic methods that focus on workers in particular industries and communities, which would have given a better picture of short-run trends. This was, I now believe, a major mistake — one in which I shared a hand. [Emphasis added]

Krugman, though, writes that he and his fellow free trade economists “had no way to know” that globalization of the American economy or a surge in trade deficits “were going to happen,” though the anti-globalization movement had warned for years of the harmful impact free trade would have on U.S. workers — including Donald Trump.

In an interview with SiriusXM Patriot’s Breitbart News Tonight, economist Alan Tonelson said that Krugman’s acknowledging that he and the free trade economic consensus has been wrong is “better later than never,” but “the damage has already been done.”

LISTEN:

“There’s been an even more startling, in fact jaw-dropping, development on that front. Paul Krugman, the famous Never Trumper, the famous pro-free trade economist, the Nobel Prize winner just published an article … saying that for the past 20 years, he and his other globalist, free trade economist friends have been substantially wrong about the effect of globalization, particularly more trade with low income, low wage countries like China,” Tonelson said.

“They’ve been substantially wrong about its effects on the American economy and American workers in particular,” Tonelson said.

Meanwhile, decades of free trade have spurred mass layoffs, unemployment, and offshoring of high-paying American jobs while surging trade deficits. Since China entered the World Trade Organization (WTO), the U.S. trade deficit with China has eliminated at least 3.5 million American jobs from the American economy. Millions of American workers in all 50 states have been displaced from their jobs, which have been lost due to U.S.-China trade relations.

John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder.

In Immigration Debate, Trump Says We Don’t Have Enough American Workers to Fill Skilled Labor Jobs

JASON REDMOND/AFP/Getty Images

12 Jan 20201,181

11:11

President Donald Trump told Fox News TV host Laura Ingraham on Friday his 2021 plans to welcome more foreign graduates will not flood the labor market for U.S. college graduates.

“I have so many companies coming into this country, you’re not going to have to worry about it,” Trump said in the interview, adding, “It is always going to be a shortage … We have so many companies coming in, from Japan … [and] China now is going to start building a lot of things.”

Trump and Ingraham did not find common ground, likely because they were talking about different parts of the immigration problem. Also, neither mentioned Ivanka Trump’s campaign to prod companies to train their own American employees for high-tech jobs.

Ingraham began the exchange by noting American graduates’ salaries have been suppressed by the flood of foreign graduates:

We don’t have a tight labor market. If we had a tight labor market, we would be seeing real increases in wages. I hear that your team is planning on advocating more foreign workers coming in for some of these high-tech companies.

Ingraham rejected business claims of shortages: “We’re seeing a plateauing of wages … There’s a never-ending appetite on the part of corporate America to bring in as much cheap labor as possible to drive down wages.”

“I’m not talking about cheap — I’m talking about brainpower,” Trump responded. “They want to hire smart people. And those people are thrown out of the country — we can’t do that,” he said, referring to foreign graduates of U.S. colleges.

Trump seems to want to help companies import a relatively small number of very clever people, such as Ivy League valedictorians. In contrast, Ingraham is trying to block companies’ effort to cut payrolls by replacing well-paid American professionals with cheap foreign graduates who have just enough skills to get the job done, regardless of quality.

“We have to allow smart people to stay in our country — if you graduate number one in your class at Harvard, [if] you graduate from the Wharton School of Finance,” Trump said. “If we tell smart people to get the hell out, that’s not America first.”

“Yes, that’s a small percentage of what [ccompanies] want,” said Ingraham.

” No, it’s not. It’s a lot,” said Trump.

But business has hired very few valedictorians among the pool of roughly 1.5 million visa workers who now hold jobs sought by American graduates.

In fact, the government does not require U.S companies to hire Americans first, and it does not screen out unskilled foreign workers. The government does not cap foreign hires and does not enforce the loopholed rules which supposedly require foreign workers to be skilled and to be paid market-level wages. Nor does the government even try to curb the large scale nepotism that allows foreign born managers in the United States to import huge numbers of foreign workers who will kick back some of their salaries to their bosses.

For example, the “Optional Practical Training” program was expanded by President G. Bush and President Barack Obama to provide employers with an extra stream of foreign graduates. Foreigners get these OPT work permits by simply enrolling in U.S. colleges, ranging from the elite Stanford University down to the so-called “visa-mill” colleges where many students can speak little English and may do very little study.

Neil Munro

The government has released videos of Indian migrants offering to buy and sell fraudulent work permit documents.

Watch: ICE Lure and Sting Indian Illegal Labor 'OPT' Traffickers

103

8:12 AM - Jan 7, 2020

95 people are talking about this

In 2017, for example, federal data shows Northeastern University provided OPT work permits to 4,359 foreign graduates– or far more than the number of valedictorians. Harvard sold access to the OPT work permits to 1,875 foreigners, and Columbia University sold access to 5.59o work permits.

But even more work permits were sold to foreign students by many little known colleges. For example, in 2017, Northwestern Polytechnic University sold access to 6,060 work permits, Silicon Valley University sold 3,127 work permits, and the Illinois Institute of Technology sold 2,678.

Nationwide, universities earned roughly $30 billion a year from this labor-trafficking business, so they have little incentive to exclude low-quality migrants.

New 2018 data provided to Breitbart News by the Department of Homeland Security shows that universities provided 215,000 OPT work permits in 2018. This total consisted of 145,586 one-year OPT work permits and 69,650 three-year OPT-STEM work permits in 2018.

In 2017, the matching “Curricular Practical Training” program provided one-year work permits to roughly 100,000 foreign students at U.S. colleges — including colleges that require little or no attendance.

DHS officials have recently changed how they count the OPT and CPT work permits, so the estimated workforce now ranges from 400,000 to roughly 300,000. The older 2017 methodology was used to produce this DHS chart:

Many of these OPT graduates are hired by prestigious U.S. firms, — and by foreign managers in those elite firms — so demoting skilled U.S. graduates in lower-tier jobs, in lower-tier cities, at lower-tier wages.

The other major visa-worker program is the H-1B program. This program keeps roughly 750,000 foreign workers in U.S. college-graduate jobs. These foreign workers will often accept very low wages for these jobs — and will underbid American graduates — partly because they are hoping their employers will sponsor them for the hugely valuable prize of a green card.

Federal agencies have never released a full count of the resident H-1B workforce, but federal data shows that a huge percentage are not valedictorians and that many come from no-name universities in India.

The federal data for 2017, for example, shows that 39 percent of the H-1Bs sought by New York employers were rated as “entry-level” workers, similar to U.S. graduates. Another 26 percent were rated as just “qualified,” and only 6 percent were rated “competent.” These cheap workers have pushed hundreds of thousands of American professionals out of jobs.

This is the visa worker program which is used by companies to replace many Americans graduates. In 2016, for example, Disney outsourced Americans’ jobs to an Indian company that imported low-wage H-1B workers to do the Americans’ jobs. The American graduates were forced to train the Indians, torpedoing the claims of a shortage of skilled U.S. workers.

Ingraham reminded Trump of the Disney H-1B scandal. “You ran on people training their foreign replacements, that you ran against that. It’s humiliating for an American worker who works for a company for 30 years … to train your replacement,” Ingraham said.

“No, no, that’s different, I would never do that,” said Trump.

“Why shouldn’t we have American graduates of colleges and universities taking those jobs? Ingraham said.

“We do,” answered Trump. “But we don’t have enough of them … and we have to be competitive with the rest of the world too.”

But Trump’s deputies have done little to shrink the H-1B program. In fact, his deputies are defending the OPT program in court. Officials have also blocked a DHS plan to end the “H4 EAD” program that Obama created to persuade temporary H-1B workers to stay in U.S. jobs. The result is that many Americans are still being forced to train their workers, for example, at an AT&T finance office in North Carolina.

Neil Munro

Walmart is outsourcing 569 accounting jobs in North Carolina to Indian contract workers, as the H-1B program expands beyond software jobs.

Yes, this is Walmart. See http://bit.ly/2ZoVQJB https://twitter.com/S1S1B1/status/1109459333023174656 …

Walmart Outsources Accounting, Office Jobs to Indian H-1Bs

@4US_Workers @Troup1998

This is just one floor of Walmart out 3 floors where 1000 and 1000 opt(bentonville, AR)students(mostly fake) are working under 20 to 30$/h and killing white color jobs.
TCS, COGNOZANT, INFOSYS,only hire Indians. How many more proof do we need. ?

Agram Bagram bhooo@S1S1B1

6:23 AM - Aug 29, 2019

51 people are talking about this

Polls show the public strongly prefers rules which require companies to hire Americans before importing more workers.

Neil Munro

Voters overwhelmingly want companies to train and hire Americans before importing more legal immigrants or visa workers.

A Rasmussen survey shows likely voters by 2:1 want Congress to make companies hire & train US grads & workers instead of importing more foreign workers.
The survey also shows this $/class-based view co-exists w/ much sympathy for illegal migrants. #S386 http://bit.ly/2ZA6WIE

Rasmussen Shows 2:1 Opposition to Cheap Labor Legal Immigration

441

3:15 PM - Dec 30, 2019

261 people are talking about this

Some of Trump’s supporters say his comments are demoralizing. “I gotta say just put myself through one hell of a three year period,” said one Twitter user, titled “Presto.” “Going to school for IT, working a fulltime meat cutting job all cause of the hope Donald Trump gave me. This clip kinda hurt a bit. This hurt me worse than any hit piece. Give me a spot in the middle class.”

But Trump’s focus on a relatively few valedictorians is a much lesser threat to Americans than the bipartisan push by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, to pass his pending S.386 bill.

The bill would offer foreign OPT and H-1B workers a fast-track to a new status, dubbed “Early Adjustment,” once they can persuade — or pay — their employers to sponsor them for green cards. There is no limit on the number of OPT, CPT, or H-1Bs that can be awarded each year, nor any limit on the number of foreign graduates who can be sponsored for green cards by their employers. The lack of limits ensures that Lee’s bill would allow an unlimited flood of foreign college-graduates into the jobs needed by “Presto” and other Americans to get into or to stay in the middle-class.

Notably, Trump’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, has dismissed employers’ demands for more workers and insists they step up their training programs.

“I love what’s happening because it’s forcing employers to get creative,” Trump told Gary Shapiro, the longtime CEO of the Consumer Technology Association, during a January 7 interview at its annual meeting in Las Vegas. She added:

When I hear employers [who] would come to me and they’d say, ‘We need more skilled workers, we need more skilled workers,’ and then I’d read about them laying off segments of their workforce because they were investing in productivity, and not having spent the time — when they had known three years prior they’d be making that investment and upgrading those systems — not taking the time to take those workers and reskill and then retrain them into their job vacancies, well, I have very little sympathy for that.

Her push seems to be working.

Many U.S. companies are upgrading their training programs, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently showcased a company that uses software to identify and hire ordinary Americans — including truckers — who may have the intellectual skills to succeed in the software business.

Neil Munro

A tight labor market is good because it forces companies to train workers and recruit sidelined Americans, Ivanka Trump told CEOs.

Ivanka tells CEOs to train Americans before asking for more immigrants.
She stood up for unemployed, ex-cons, old ppl, blacks, disabled, & non-grads.
But she was diplomatic & pleasant, so many journos simply missed her decent & strong populist message. http://bit.ly/2T6BwbI

Ivanka Trump: Executives Must Train Americans Before Immigrants

351

2:53 PM - Jan 8, 2020

184 people are talking about this

Before serving as President, Trump was an employer, and he has repeatedly shown his sympathy for fellow employers who complain about supposed labor shortages that would force them to compete for employees by offering higher wages. But he was elected on a pro-American promise — and he has raised Americans’ wages by repeatedly rejecting business demands for more, and yet more, imported workers.

Business leaders sometimes admit that an extra supply of workers helps them force down wages. “If you have ten people for every job, you’re not going to have a drive [up] in wages,” U.S. Chamber of Commerce CEO Tom Donohue told Breitbart News on January 9. But “if you have five people for every ten jobs, wages are going to go up.”

NYT Op-Ed: ‘I’m a Liberal Who Thinks Immigration Must Be Restricted’

John Moore/Getty Images

Immigration can invigorate the country. But when it is poorly managed, it can cause social division — just as it’s doing right now.

17 Jan 2020156

10:00

The nation’s immigration policies are built on a back-room corporatist bargain between Democrats and cheap-labor businesses, says an op-ed published in the New York Times.

The op-ed is headlined, “I’m a Liberal Who Thinks Immigration Must Be Restricted.” The January 16 article was authored by Jerry Kammer, a former journalist who now works with the Center for Immigration Studies:

In 2001, when I was the new Washington correspondent for The Arizona Republic, I attended the annual awards dinner of the National Immigration Forum. The forum is a left-right coalition that lobbies for unauthorized immigrants and expansive immigration policies. Its board has included officials of the National Council of La Raza, the American Civil Liberties Union and the American Immigration Lawyers Association, as well as the United States Chamber of Commerce, the National Restaurant Association and the American Nursery and Landscape Association.

After dinner, the group’s executive director, Frank Sharry, made a pitch to business allies who wanted Congress to allow them unfettered access to foreign workers. “You guys in business get all the workers you want, whenever you want them,” he proposed. “No bureaucracy.”

“Sold!” yelled John Gay, a lobbyist for the American Hotel and Lodging Association. Mr. Sharry quickly added that the deal must include advocacy for “three little, tiny pieces of paper: a green card, a union card and a voter registration card” for unauthorized immigrants.

The hotel industry is eager to use much imported cheap labor, partly because wages and salaries add up to roughly 50 percent of the sector’s annual costs. Any increase in labor supply and any reduction in workers’ wages helps the shareholders boost their stock values.

Sharry is now the head of America’s Voice, a pro-immigration group that works with the Democratic Party. In 2013 and 2014, he worked closely with business groups as well as ethnic and racial lobbies in a failed effort to pass the wage-cutting amnesty and cheap-labor bill. The “Gang of Eight” bill was strongly backed by the New York Times, which repeatedly described it as “comprehensive immigration reform.”

Business groups are denouncing the New York Time‘s decision to publish Kammer’s op-ed.

David Bier, a pro-migration advocate at the business-funded Cato Institute chimed in by tweet: “We must restrict immigration because it’s causing social division.” But no, “immigration” isn’t causing social division. It’s you, sir–Mr. Jerry Kramer of the org that thinks V-DARE is the same as the NY Times–who is causing social division.”

The op-ed was also denounced by Todd Schulte, the director of the FWD.us advocacy group created by billionaire investors, including Mark Zuckerberg. He used Twitter to stigmatize Americans who are worried about the impact of imported labor on their wages, housing, and children, tweeting:

Coming off Bret Stephens race-science column, The New York Times Opinion Section gives a massive amount of real estate too… The Center for Immigration Studies, funded and founded by John Tanton. John Tanton who wrote “The Case for Passive Eugenics.”

Todd Schulte

✔@TheToddSchulte

Coming off Bret Stephens race-science column, The New York Times Opinion Section gives a massive amount of real estate too...

The Center for Immigration Studies, funded and founded by John Tanton.

John Tanton who wrote "The Case for Passive Eugenics."https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/16/opinion/immigration-democrats.html …

Opinion | I’m a Liberal Who Thinks Immigration Must Be Restricted

nytimes.com

6:26 PM - Jan 16, 2020

36 people are talking about this

The elite effort to stigmatize criticism “works – it works like a charm,” says Kevin Lynn, the founder of Progressives for Immigration Reform. He continued:

It is thrown out as a red herring when they really don’t want to discuss the pros and cons of immigration … as a way to shut down the debate.

[The impact of migration] is self-evident when you look at California. If unbridled immigration is somehow a plus for the productive class [and] is a boon to the environment, then California should be paradise right now. But California has the highest level of inequality … The jobs that once paid a good middle-class living now don’t. You’re scraping by in your construction job.

The impact of the racism charge may even reach the editorial board at the New York Times, which has interviewed most of the Democrats’ 2020 competitors.

In interviews with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Tom Steyer, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), the board members denied a connection between labor supply and wages. In a back-and-forth conversation about exploitation and immigration with Sanders, for example, board member Binyamin Applebaum said:

You said that the exploitation of undocumented workers results in lower wages for domestic workers … I think that there’s a lot of research suggesting that that’s not actually the case.

That claim that supply does not affect wages is often made by investors’ lobbyists and business-tied consultants.

But the vast majority of people who deal with the issue plainly say that worker shortages spur wage raises.

That responses come from independent academics, the National Academies of Science, the Congressional Budget Office, executives, more academics, New York Times reporters, state officials, unions, more business executives, lobbyists, employees, the Wall Street Journal, federal economists, Goldman Sachs, oil drillers, Wall Street analysts, fired professionals, legislators, construction workers, NYT subscribers, plus Robert Rubin, the Bank of Ireland. and 2015 Bernie Sanders:

But the NYT‘s board trusts that immigration does not affect wages. In the interview with Warren, board member Kathleen Kingsbury asked: “Throughout America, many jobs that were once held by American union members have been replaced and are now held by undocumented immigrants. Does that drive down wages in the United States? … But do you know of any specific evidence that immigrants drive down wages?”

The NYT posted Kingsbury’s question with an italicized note denouncing the supply-effects-wage connection:

Over several decades, it’s become increasingly clear that how immigration debates are framed is important. One of the more subtle anti-immigration tactics — employed by the Trump, Kennedy and Johnson administrations, as well as some on the political left — is to suggest that reducing immigration could preserve more jobs for American workers and lead to higher wages, but economic research has consistently disputed the notion that limiting immigration would increase domestic employment or raise average wages. The prevailing view of economists is that immigration increases economic growth [but] while some workers might benefit from immigration restrictions, more would suffer.

The NYT‘s links go to a 2017 article that tries to contradict the 2016 National Academy of Sciences report on immigration.

Kingsbury seems to support the claim that immigration does not affect wages — even though she won a prize for writing about low wages in a sector flooded by migrant workers: “She was awarded the 2015 Pulitzer Prize for distinguished editorial writing for a series on low wages and the mistreatment of workers in the restaurant industry.”

She wrote in February 2014:

meet Hope Shaw, the 38-year-old single mother of three who is assistant manager at Dunkin’ Donuts on Boston Street. She, too, likes to serve. But her life is one of unrequited toil. She lives paycheck to paycheck. Her heating gas was shut off last winter for failure to pay; the electric bill for her Dorchester apartment is consistently three months overdue. She’s gone without health insurance for more than a year. “My rent is $1,100 a month,” she says. “Every month I feel like I’m choosing between paying that or putting food on the table.”

Yet, six days a week, Shaw leaves her home before 4 a.m. to work a nine-hour shift overseeing the sale of donuts, bagels, and flat-bread sandwiches, while coping with customers who expect their coffee to be prepared exactly as they please and only sometimes drop a penny in the tip can. She’s been promoted twice in the five years she’s worked at the store, and her hourly pay has gone from $8 to $10. She made slightly less than $24,000 last year.

In Trump’s economy, where CEOs cannot easily import extra workers, Dunkin’ Donuts now pays its assistant managers almost $14.00 in Salisbury, MA. Admittedly, the crush of low-skill migrants and high-tech money moving into major cities has pushed up housing costs for assistant managers, so the rent for two-bedroom apartments in Dorchester now exceeds $2,000 per month.

But elites have always been reluctant to admit the economic and civic distortions caused by government-imported labor, said Lynn. “They never will,” he said, citing a quote by union leader Samuel Gompers in 1924:

Every effort to enact immigration legislation must expect to meet a number of hostile forces and, in particular, two hostile forces of considerable strength. One of these is composed of corporation employers who desire to employ physical strength at the lowest possible wage and who prefer a rapidly revolving labor supply at low wages to a regular supply of American wage-earners at fair wages. The other is composed of racial groups in the United States who oppose all restrictive legislation because they want the doors left open for an influx of their countrymen

That year, Gompers won his battle when Congress drastically cut the inflow of immigrants into the United States. By 1950, American wage-earners earned roughly 65 percent of each year’s economy. But that share declined after 1980 in an increasingly high-immigration, high-tech economy.

McKinsey.com

In the great recession, wage-earners’ share of new wealth fell below 57 percent as cheap labor and spreading technology flushed Americans’ money towards the stock market and the coastal cities.

The New York Times‘ editorial board denies immigration’s role in that incoming tide of wealth.

Neil Munro