tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post2869071953814872244..comments2024-03-27T18:24:19.683-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: L.A. Times: "Immigration bill would spark surge of legal arrivals"Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger68125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-85696634214803063412013-11-29T11:57:55.998-08:002013-11-29T11:57:55.998-08:00I'm impressed, I have to say. Actually hardly ...I'm impressed, I have to say. Actually hardly ever do I encounter a weblog that's equally educative and entertaining, and let me inform you, you may have strike the nail on the head. Your concept is outstanding the issue is one thing that not sufficient individuals are speaking intelligently about. I am very joyful that I stumbled throughout this in my find for anything referring to this.<br /><a href="http://www.gncdrivingschool.com" rel="nofollow">driving lessons</a><br /><a href="http://www.gncdrivingschool.com" rel="nofollow">affordable driving school</a><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06815232396438905943noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-35638012705071983102013-04-16T05:09:31.340-07:002013-04-16T05:09:31.340-07:00Angry Spaniard Fop said...
...
The alien says th...<i>Angry Spaniard Fop said...<br />...<br /></i><br /><br />The alien says the never-ending flood of his fellow aliens is good for us, the people he thinks should be hacked to death with machetes.<br /><br />Well that settles it. I don't see how anyone could doubt that he has our best interests at heart.<br /><br />Pointing out how terrible you folk are at governing yourselves, creating functioning economies, and feeding yourselves, and so you should all get to come here isn't really bringing your A game.<br /><br /><i>Me complaining about the unfair treatment that Southern European immigrants received in the U.S</i><br /><br />Yet bunches of Southern Euros still came to the US instead of to Latin/Lusitanian America, which is larger, has more resources (or had, y'all might have stripped it like locusts), and languages closer to their own. Despite (arguendo) being treated badly by Anglos, y'all wanna come here, cuz when left to self-determination, ya starve? Surely you can see why we're concerned that having lots of you here will make the US more like the trash holes the Latinoas created and are now fleeing? You hope that we'll lift you up, but what if you just drag us down? When America becomes super-hispanicky, where will the Hispanics go to pick fruit, mow lawns and live on the social, political and economic capital that you couldn't create? The US already has a black population that we can't uplift. Why do you think we can civilize y'all? There aren't enough Whites to carry another burden.<br /><br />When waves of Northern Europeans immigrated to South America, how were they received?robnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-54993434200177250992013-04-16T04:03:26.774-07:002013-04-16T04:03:26.774-07:00@Rohan Swee
"I see you've changed you... @Rohan Swee<br /><br /> "I see you've changed your schtick, Nick. What happened to the teary-eyed Compassionate Democrat drama queen berating everyone else here for their bigotry and lack of concern for their fellow man? Now you're a noble steely-eyed Randian, ready to reduce the 20% to the degraded living standards that reflect the real value of their labor."<br /><br /> You show a complete lack of understanding what libertarianism is. I NEVER claimed to be in favor of economic equality; I have always stated that I am in favor of LEGAL and social eqality, which are the tenets of libertarianism.<br /><br /> You talk about fairness? What about being fair to poor Mexican workers? How fair is it to deny Mexican workers a chance to spport their families and due to their nationality and FORCE emplyers to pay 10 X more to an American worker just because he was LUCKY to be born in America? How come is this fair? Who are you to talk about fairness? Can't you see how UNFAIR this is to Mexican workers?<br /><br /> "So I assume a born-again libertarian like yourself, who's agin' "taking money from others" to pay for "artificial"* wage increases, is also going to be against any public programs that aim to provide some minimum decent level of housing, medical care, diet, education, etc. for these people who, let's face it, just aren't worth their keep? Because they sure as hell can't afford any of that stuff on what they make, unless their employers' labor costs are heavily subsidized by "other people's money", as they are now."<br /><br /> This paragraph is extremely convolted, so I will try my best to address the points I think you are making here.<br /><br /> I am a libertarian who believes in human equality in terms of RIGHTS and OOPORTUNITY. As a very nice man, I am also, however, in favor of taking care of people who cannot take care of themselves.<br /><br /> You talk about taking care of the indigents, but of course, you are only concerned with AMERICAN indigents. You couldn't care less about starving people in Mexico. To you, they are inferior to Americans, even though that is only a legal formality and they have the same capacity for pain and human feelings that Americans have. So what moral grounds do you have to judge me?<br /><br /> Me complaining about the unfair treatment that Southern European immigrants received in the U.S does not make me a "liberal" as upholding legal equality is one of the axioms of libertrianism and not necessarily liberalism. This is COMPLETELY different from complaining about economic equality, something that I have NEVER done. So you can't acuse me of being "flipping". <br /><br /> "The difference being that the actual cost of those things would now be transparent to the consumer. As they were back in pre-Mexodus days, when, astonishingly, Americans of modest means were not wandering the streets hungry and naked. I distinctly recall abundant food on the table and quite sufficient and rather better-quality clothing in my closet.<br /><br />You can pay for your lettuce at the check-out counter, or you can pay a great deal more for it through all the opaque blood-sucking channels of the current open-borders welfare state."<br /><br /> This is all BS and speculation.Nick Diaznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-13406152494046010732013-04-16T03:45:16.249-07:002013-04-16T03:45:16.249-07:00@David
"Wow, Nikki D is giving an actual a...@David<br /><br /> "Wow, Nikki D is giving an actual argument now. Too bad it's terrible."<br /> <br /> I make NOTHING but arguments here, and I always pawn you gys very badly. All you have is name-calling, hominem invective and ganging up on me. You think that ad populum, that patting each other in the back and agreeing with each other makes you "win"the arguent. It's pathetic.<br /><br />"So the bottom line is, [...] the increase in the cost of fresh fruits and vegetables for an average family would be about $10 a year, or about the price of a movie ticket."<br /><br /> Wow, you are not the sharpest pencil in the box, are you? 10 Dollars a year? More along the lines of 6 THOSAND Dollars more a year. It's simple arithmatic.Nick Diaznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-86156518184631185392013-04-16T02:12:47.598-07:002013-04-16T02:12:47.598-07:00I understand the callousness and indifference of t...I understand the callousness and indifference of the Masters of the Universe to janitors and meatpackers. It's a bit more surprising that the "Masters are breezily undermining the futures of the offspring of the upper middle class, who would seem to qualify as PLU.<br /><br />Let's hope that supporters' own kids aren't aspiring to careers in, say, STEM fields. Which are plenty tough enough as it is, without adding further downward pressures on wages and prospects."<br /><br />I know Steve is real big on noticing how extended families are more powerful than the sum of their parts and stuff like that, but many, if not most white, non-Jewish "masters of the universe types" are selfish, hyper individualists who often show a shocking lack of concern for their own children and other relatives. I can think of specific examples of what you describe among people I know: the rich white dad who demands open borders and cheap labor, while his own children can't find summer jobs or have to suffer through an 80% foreign engineering program. The good news is that younger white Americans from affluent families are increasingly aware of how various other groups are using "collectivist" strategies to out compete them. <br /><br />One trait of rich baby boomer white males is that they seem to not be able to grasp that the labor market has changed since 1971 or whenever they had their last job that didn't involve being rich. They will often cite some summer jobs they had in college to prove they "know that unions are bullshit because I was in one for three months." They don't seem to understand that their unionized supermarket or factory summer job paid something like the equivalent of $30 an hour in today's money, while people with those same sort of jobs today, if they can find one, are making $8-10 an hour.ATBOTLnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-40136768145744436382013-04-15T18:16:22.066-07:002013-04-15T18:16:22.066-07:00Surely newspapers would welcome low wage immigrant...Surely newspapers would welcome low wage immigrants to do their reporting chores. I keep hearing that they don't have enough money to pay their current employees. And everyone working their likes more immigration.Robert Holmgrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01692106097414753527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-71588455894249061822013-04-15T15:18:49.164-07:002013-04-15T15:18:49.164-07:00Complete amnesty if and only if:
1. Immigration m...<i>Complete amnesty if and only if:<br /><br />1. Immigration moratorium<br /><br />2. National ID</i><br /><br />How could you leave out: No affirmative action or preferences for any amnestied illegal or for Hispanics or Asians of any stripe?<br /><br />Would still not be good enough, but that would have to be a condition.ben tillmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-39855228523466816162013-04-15T14:46:22.914-07:002013-04-15T14:46:22.914-07:00"Complete amnesty if and only if:"
No w..."Complete amnesty if and only if:"<br /><br />No way.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-57422647848271458312013-04-15T14:19:11.950-07:002013-04-15T14:19:11.950-07:00From the NY Times, here is an OP-Ed by Philip Mart...From the NY Times, here is an OP-Ed by <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/08/17/could-farms-survive-without-illegal-labor/the-costs-and-benefits-of-a-raise-for-field-workers" rel="nofollow">Philip Martin</a>, a labor economist at UC-Davis. <br /><br /><i>Consumers who pay $1 for a pound of apples are giving 30 cents to the farmer and 10 cents to the farm worker; those spending $2 for a head of lettuce are giving 50 cents to the farmer and 16 cents to the farm worker. <br /><br />If the influx of immigrant workers were slowed or stopped and farm wages rose, what would happen to expenditures on fresh fruits and vegetables? A case study from 1966 could give us some idea.<br /><br />That year, the United Farm Workers union won a 40 percent wage increase for some table grape harvesters, largely because the end of the Bracero program had cut off a supply of Mexican workers. The average earnings of U.S. field workers were $10.07 an hour in 2009, according to a U.S.D.A. survey of farm employers. If pressure to verify employees’ legal status resulted in a labor crisis similar to the one in 1966 and a similar 40 percent wage increase, average hourly earnings would rise to $14.10. If this were passed on to consumers, the 10 cent farm labor cost of a pound of apples would rise to 14 cents, and the $1 retail price would rise to $1.04. </i>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-30455403680687330392013-04-15T13:49:29.415-07:002013-04-15T13:49:29.415-07:00The U.S. admits about 1 million legal immigrants p...<i>The U.S. admits about 1 million legal immigrants per year, more than any other country.</i><br /><br />Sure that is true, and I'm surprised that even that made it in the story. <br /><br />But your average reader thinks, well the U.S. is a big country, so naturally we have lotsa immigrants. We also probably eat more big macs than any other country in the world.<br /><br />However, how about this truth, which puts the situation in a somewhat different light: <br /><br />The U.S. already admits about 1 million legal immigrants per year, more than all the other countries of the world combined.<br /><br />Ex Submarine Officernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-21543013786739992912013-04-15T13:40:35.774-07:002013-04-15T13:40:35.774-07:00Wow, Nikki D is giving an actual argument now. Too...Wow, Nikki D is giving an actual argument now. Too bad it's <a href="http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/guestworkertranscript306.html#MR.%20MARTIN:" rel="nofollow">terrible</a>.<br /><br />"Suppose we were to have a 40-percent wage increase [in farm work]. What would happen? Well, if those wages were totally passed through -- that is, if there were no labor-saving changes -- then that roughly 6-cent cost of a pound of apples would rise to about 7.5 cents.[...F]or the average family, you would spend about $10 a year more on all fresh fruits and vegetables.<br /><br />"So the bottom line is, [...] the increase in the cost of fresh fruits and vegetables for an average family would be about $10 a year, or about the price of a movie ticket."Davidhttp://david-passingparade2.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-73910668223286976422013-04-15T13:23:36.439-07:002013-04-15T13:23:36.439-07:00Will the Boston explosions cause the obtuse politi...Will the Boston explosions cause the obtuse political class to secure the borders and deport everyone who should not be in the country?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-13093524790384958722013-04-15T09:11:28.064-07:002013-04-15T09:11:28.064-07:00Nick Diaz,
Labor only accounts for a minute fract...Nick Diaz,<br /><br />Labor only accounts for a minute fraction of the price of food. I for one wouldn't mind paying an extra 3 cents a pound for tomatoes in exchange for less crowding, less traffic congestion, lower rent, less crime, better schools, higher wages, and waking up in a country that I can recognize. <br /><br />I eat more tomatoes than the average American, so a moratorium may cost me the ungodly sum of 25 cents a month. It's a major sacrifice.<br /><br />- The Judean People's Front Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-40477747638863401432013-04-15T08:50:24.053-07:002013-04-15T08:50:24.053-07:00Comprehensive immigration reform:
Complete amnest...Comprehensive immigration reform:<br /><br />Complete amnesty if and only if:<br /><br />1. Immigration moratorium<br /><br />2. National IDLuke Leahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11290760894780619646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-62043669155500409542013-04-15T08:11:16.943-07:002013-04-15T08:11:16.943-07:00Nick Diaz: You CAN practice economic "citize...Nick Diaz: <i>You CAN practice economic "citizenism" but there is a price to pay, and in this case the price is increasing the living standards of part of your citizenry at the cost of decreasing it for the remainder of your citizens. You choose. Artificially raising wages of people who's labor is not worth that means taking money from others to pay for it. </i><br /><br />I see you've changed your schtick, Nick. What happened to the teary-eyed Compassionate Democrat drama queen berating everyone else here for their bigotry and lack of concern for their fellow man? Now you're a noble steely-eyed Randian, ready to reduce the 20% to the degraded living standards that reflect the real value of their labor.<br /><br />So I assume a born-again libertarian like yourself, who's agin' "taking money from others" to pay for "artificial"* wage increases, is also going to be against any public programs that aim to provide some minimum decent level of housing, medical care, diet, education, etc. for these people who, let's face it, just aren't worth their keep? Because they sure as hell can't afford any of that stuff on what they make, unless their employers' labor costs are heavily subsidized by "other people's money", as they are now.<br /><br />*Is there some new school of economics in which rates set by supply and demand are conceptualized as "artificial"?<br /><br /><i>Well, except that someone will have to pay for it. You are DELUSIONAL if you think that the added cost won't be repassed to the consumer. You think that crops picked by the expensive American worker won't cost more? You think clothes stores where the customer personnel is composed of nothing but American workers won't charge more for their products? What about the factories that make the clothes? Think again.</i><br /><br />The difference being that the actual cost of those things would now be transparent to the consumer. As they were back in pre-Mexodus days, when, astonishingly, Americans of modest means were not wandering the streets hungry and naked. I distinctly recall abundant food on the table and quite sufficient and rather better-quality clothing in my closet.<br /><br />You can pay for your lettuce at the check-out counter, or you can pay a great deal more for it through all the opaque blood-sucking channels of the current open-borders welfare state.Rohan Sweenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-27683189108816497512013-04-15T06:55:40.294-07:002013-04-15T06:55:40.294-07:00Let me so. At 1M a year plus their offspring, in a...Let me so. At 1M a year plus their offspring, in about 500 years we will have a population the size of China, but they won't be as smart.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-22857898573888770772013-04-15T06:17:22.976-07:002013-04-15T06:17:22.976-07:00My mother worked at Armour, when I was a child in ...My mother worked at Armour, when I was a child in the 50s. I've picked fruit as an adult and my husband worked for awhile as a janitor. Please explain to me again why we need to bring in people from another country to do these jobs. We have a lot of unemployed people, especially people out of work for more than 6 months. Secure the borders, deport people in this country illegally, and stop extending unemployment benefits. The jjob market will start to work again.Terihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13382050215676302342noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-3706611904287414232013-04-15T06:07:14.649-07:002013-04-15T06:07:14.649-07:00Yes, Nick is just being an idiot as usual. The pr...Yes, Nick is just being an idiot as usual. The price increase on most items would be closer to 5% than "5 times." On most food it would be even less than that. I'll use dairy as an example, since it has one of the highest percentages paid to the farmer of any food:<br /><br />Right now, of the $3-4 you pay for a gallon of milk, the farmer gets about $1. (That may not seem like much, but it's far higher than the percentage of retail that a meat or vegetable farmer gets.) So even if the farmer got twice as much, your milk would only go up the additional $1 to $4-5.<br /><br />But we're not talking about the farmer's whole $1; we're only talking about the amount of that he pays to his immigrant laborers. He will have about 100 cows per employee, and a cow produces over 2000 gallons of milk per year. So doing the math, each employee produces 200,000 gallons of milk per year.<br /><br />Let's say you've got some really desperate immigrants who work for $5/hour and no benefits whatsoever, and to get a fat, lazy American to take the same job, you have to pay $30/hour in salary and benefits. That's <em>six times</em> the labor cost, even higher than Nick's wild-ass guess. But look at how it breaks down: an additional $25/hour is $50,000/year, divided across 200,000 gallons of milk, adds <em><b>25 cents</b></em> to each gallon.<br /><br />So, using conservative estimates, we could pay unskilled dairy laborers as well as many entry-level jobs requiring a college degree, and it'd raise your gallon of milk $0.25. The horror!Cail Corishevhttp://cailcorishev.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-78243062496592854782013-04-15T06:04:14.397-07:002013-04-15T06:04:14.397-07:00The labor costs for harvesting food crops are only...The labor costs for harvesting food crops are only about five percent of the production costs. We could double what we pay, hiring only citizens and existing LPR's and see almost no increase in food costs.<br /><br />Joe H.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-37448979297804828362013-04-15T06:02:36.769-07:002013-04-15T06:02:36.769-07:00While immigrants have had some impact on these low...<i>While immigrants have had some impact on these lowered food prices, the effect has been minimal compared to changes in technology and the conduct of agriculture.</i><br /><br />Salow already figured this out and won a Nobel for it: capital investment increases productivity, not more people. Pro-immigrant fanatics are like the old Southern planters decreeing ruin without teams of darkies to do backbraking labor. Drive by a cotton field today and you'll see a harvester and a pickup truck.The Anti-Gnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04386593803225823789noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-65184780796528623602013-04-15T05:53:30.209-07:002013-04-15T05:53:30.209-07:00And the rise in food prices would be temporary, as...And the rise in food prices would be temporary, as the long-postponed automation of agriculture would come online.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-86889921125382907562013-04-15T04:56:02.337-07:002013-04-15T04:56:02.337-07:00"Anonymous Nick Diaz said...
We have been ov..."Anonymous Nick Diaz said...<br /><br />We have been over this. Immigration is good FOR MOST AMERICANS."<br /><br />A completely baseless assertion. Who has been "over it"? When? Something does not become true because you type it in caps, you stupid horse's ass.Mr. Anonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-23697703062462797202013-04-15T04:03:42.922-07:002013-04-15T04:03:42.922-07:00Nick Diaz said:
"You may be willing to pay 5...Nick Diaz said:<br /><br />"You may be willing to pay 5 times more for the same goods and services than other Americans to help the bottom 20% of Americans, Steve, but most of the other 80% of Americans are not. This includes most of the conservatives who read your blog, who praise citizenism and claim to be in favor of paying the American worker more, but if they had to actally fit the bill, they would instantly give up on the idea."<br /><br />You've got a rational argument on this, but you are pulling numbers out of your ass.<br /><br />I might add that while this actually is an argument, a lot of things can used as counterarguments.<br /><br />Now as regards your numbers. Five times? That is hyperbole. Did food cost 5 times as much in the 1950's and early 1960's?<br /><br />Don't get me wrong, food I think is cheaper in general now than then (food prices went down a long time, then started rising with the oil price shock around 2006 or 2007), but the decline was mostly due to changes in the way agriculture is conducted.<br /><br />Not all of these changes have been for the better as far as food is concerned, but we do grow an assload more calories and corn than we did.<br /><br />While immigrants have had some impact on these lowered food prices, the effect has been minimal compared to changes in technology and the conduct of agriculture.<br /><br />If we kicked every illegal out of the country, food prices would rise, but not by a factor of 5.<br /><br />And savings would be realized in other areas, my guess being a net benefit to American society.<br /><br />This argument can be extended to areas besides agriculture such as manufacturing and nannying, and the argument is still valid.sunbeamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16540822135478202229noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-67167149287085982092013-04-14T23:32:20.746-07:002013-04-14T23:32:20.746-07:00@Steve Sailer
"Just keep repeating to your... @Steve Sailer<br /><br /> "Just keep repeating to yourself: "But it's good for The Economy. Who am I to stand in the way of The Economy? The Economy doesn't exist for me, I exist for The Economy."<br /><br /> What you don't understand is that what you envision only benefits a tiny fraction of the populus. <br /><br /> We have been over this. Immigration is good FOR MOST AMERICANS. It is bad for the bottom 20% of Americans in the earning bracket, but is very, very good indeed for the other 80% of the poplation.<br /><br /> Suppose you stop immigration. Now all those low-level obs will have to be filled by American workers, and because their numbers are paultry compared to the demands for these jobs so their wages will rise dramatically. Supply and demand. Adam Smith. So far so good, right? Well, except that someone will have to pay for it. You are DELUSIONAL if you think that the added cost won't be repassed to the consumer. You think that crops picked by the expensive American worker won't cost more? You think clothes stores where the customer personnel is composed of nothing but American workers won't charge more for their products? What about the factories that make the clothes? Think again.<br /><br /> You CAN practice economic "citizenism" but there is a price to pay, and in this case the price is increasing the living standards of part of your citizenry at the cost of decreasing it for the remainder of your citizens. You choose. Artificially raising wages of people who's labor is not worth that means taking money from others to pay for it. <br /><br /> "Citizenism" is just another term for populism. It was tried in Latin América under Peron in Argentina and Golart in Brazil, as well as in Italy in the 1940s and 1950s and most of South Asia in the 1970s and 1980s. In every society it was tried, irrespective of cultural background, it was a failure.<br /><br /> You may be willing to pay 5 times more for the same goods and services than other Americans to help the bottom 20% of Americans, Steve, but most of the other 80% of Americans are not. This includes most of the conservatives who read your blog, who praise citizenism and claim to be in favor of paying the American worker more, but if they had to actally fit the bill, they would instantly give up on the idea.<br /><br /> This is why economic citizenism and the concomitant limitation of immigration necessary to enforce it are doomed to failure: because human beings think of themselves first, and MOST Americans benefit from it, inclding the conservatives who read you, Steve.Nick Diaznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-17937334167358976532013-04-14T22:59:07.890-07:002013-04-14T22:59:07.890-07:00Luke Lea for president in 2016.
-The Judean Peop...Luke Lea for president in 2016. <br /><br />-The Judean People's FrontAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com