Zuckerberg's Advocacy Group Warns US Families They Can't Afford Immigration Policy Changes 182
theodp writes: FWD.us, the immigration and criminal justice-focused nonprofit of Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg -- the world's third richest person, according to Forbes with an estimated $250B net worth -- has released a new research report warning that announced immigration policies will hurt American families, who can't afford it with their meager savings.
The report begins: "Inflation remains a top concern for the majority of Americans. But new immigration policies announced by President Trump, and already underway, such as revoking immigrant work permits, deporting millions of people, and limiting legal immigration, would directly undermine the goal to level out, or even lower, the costs of everyday and essential goods and services. In fact, all Americans, particularly working-class families, are about to unnecessarily see prices for goods and services like food and housing increase substantially again, above and beyond other economic policies like global tariffs that could also raise prices. Announced immigration policies will result in American families paying an additional $2,150 for goods and services each year by the end of 2028, or the equivalent of the average American family's grocery bill for 3 months or their combined electricity and gas bills for the entire year. Such an annual increase would represent a tax that would erase many American families' annual savings, and amount to one of their bi-weekly paychecks each year. Unlike past periods of inflation, Americans have not been saving at the same rate as earlier years, and can't as easily absorb these price increases, squeezing American budgets even further."
In 2021, Zuckerberg's FWD.us teamed with the nation's tech giants to file a brief with the Supreme Court case to help crush WashTech (a tiny programmers' union), who challenged the lawfulness of hiring international students under the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program. "Striking down OPT and STEM OPT," FWD.us and its tech giant partners argued in their filing, [PDF] "would create a sudden labor shortage in the United States for many companies' most important technical jobs" and "hurt U.S. workers." The brief also dismissed WashTech's contention that the programs coupled with a talent surplus would shut U.S. workers out of the labor market, citing Microsoft's President Brad Smith's claim of an acute talent shortage and a 2.4% unemployment rate for computer occupations (that was then, this is now).
The report begins: "Inflation remains a top concern for the majority of Americans. But new immigration policies announced by President Trump, and already underway, such as revoking immigrant work permits, deporting millions of people, and limiting legal immigration, would directly undermine the goal to level out, or even lower, the costs of everyday and essential goods and services. In fact, all Americans, particularly working-class families, are about to unnecessarily see prices for goods and services like food and housing increase substantially again, above and beyond other economic policies like global tariffs that could also raise prices. Announced immigration policies will result in American families paying an additional $2,150 for goods and services each year by the end of 2028, or the equivalent of the average American family's grocery bill for 3 months or their combined electricity and gas bills for the entire year. Such an annual increase would represent a tax that would erase many American families' annual savings, and amount to one of their bi-weekly paychecks each year. Unlike past periods of inflation, Americans have not been saving at the same rate as earlier years, and can't as easily absorb these price increases, squeezing American budgets even further."
In 2021, Zuckerberg's FWD.us teamed with the nation's tech giants to file a brief with the Supreme Court case to help crush WashTech (a tiny programmers' union), who challenged the lawfulness of hiring international students under the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program. "Striking down OPT and STEM OPT," FWD.us and its tech giant partners argued in their filing, [PDF] "would create a sudden labor shortage in the United States for many companies' most important technical jobs" and "hurt U.S. workers." The brief also dismissed WashTech's contention that the programs coupled with a talent surplus would shut U.S. workers out of the labor market, citing Microsoft's President Brad Smith's claim of an acute talent shortage and a 2.4% unemployment rate for computer occupations (that was then, this is now).
Layoffs (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Layoffs (Score:5, Insightful)
Because indenture is cheaper than employment.
Re: (Score:2)
more $$s for americans (Score:2)
Immigrants make America Great (Score:5, Informative)
We are all immigrants (except the few remaining original inhabitants who we haven't killed.)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't know why parent is modded "Troll" because it's accurate.
If you want to be pedantic, everyone everywhere is an immigrant except the people in Africa who can trace their ancestry all the way to the emergence of homo sapiens. Of course, the very first immigrants to North America came to a continent that wasn't yet populated by humans.
Re: Immigrants make America Great (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We are all immigrants (except the few remaining original inhabitants who we haven't killed.)
Wrong. You can't be an immigrant if you were born at that location. The people that we call "natives" also immigrated here, just a lot further back than the majority did. Your statement is only true from one perspective: from around 1500 AD.
Quick History lesson (Score:3, Insightful)
For someone that helped put Trump into power, he sure doesn't like him - at least not after he got what he wanted by destroying the regulations that affected him.
Over time, conservatives despised all the new ideas. Basically they took 'conservatism' to the extreme. College graduates became more and more liberal, seeing that the new ideas made sense. They took over the universities. Some liberals took it to extremes, but they are surrounded by college graduates. So the college graduates mocked them, and the moderates continue to rule the democrats (with a few lunatics making noise on the left)
More and more conservatives became enchanted by old lies. They embraced old prejudiced against immigrants, minorities, gays, etc. They embraced old ideas like lower taxes can make fix the budget deficit (did not work, not once). They embraced the oldest idea of 'strong leader' rather than 'strong checks and balances'. They embraced the concept of 'religion = moral', all the while ignoring the clear examples of Muslim terrorists and 'Christians' like: Fred Phelps Sr, Jim Jones, David Koresh, Matthew Hale, etc. (Look them up if you don't know their names)
Now they finally put someone into office that believes his own statements and is putting them into practice. So far, I am less than impressed by the results. Three more years till we find out if there is anything of value left in the Republican Ideology.
Perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps the deficit will vanish, Americans will become wealthy and employed, crime will drop. Or, perhaps none of that will happen and the GOP will try to lie their way out of the massive mistake they are committing.
One way or the other, America is going to be a very different country before Trump is done.
Re:Quick History lesson (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump will continue to violate the laws, our constitution, and our rights until he is indeed King of America.
Re: (Score:3)
With the ruling from SCOTUS today that Federal judges can't enforce Federal law nationally...
The case this is revolving around is a clear cut case of why judges need to be able to do this too. Trump wants to end birthright citizenship without a constitutional amendment when it's clear as day what the constitution says about this. If the courts hadnt been able to put a hold on this Trump would have been deporting American citizens for the "crime" of having illegal immigrant parents for months as the case made its way through the courts.
Re:Quick History lesson (Score:4, Insightful)
Tellingly, the Trump administration asked SCOTUS to stop injunctions against its birthright-citizenship campaign, rather than rule on its constitutionality. The analysis I read from news sources indicate this was a deliberate strategy, aimed at slowing down court action on the matter. Ultimately I predict the Trump administration will lose on the birthright-citizenship issue, because the Constitution is quite clear. But in the meantime, they get to keep executing their campaign against it.
Re: (Score:2)
Tellingly, the Trump administration asked SCOTUS to stop injunctions against its birthright-citizenship campaign, rather than rule on its constitutionality. The analysis I read from news sources indicate this was a deliberate strategy, aimed at slowing down court action on the matter.
They don't care about birthright citizenship. They care about crippling the law so other "executive orders" can't be fought quickly. This was an astoundingly large blow against the Constitution. We were hanging on with 5 fingers above a thousand foot cliff. 3 of our fingers were just removed from holding on.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The wording is incredibly clear and was intended to be as absolute as it is so as to leave no uncertainty on the status of former slaves.
When any attempt to bring down our country's sky high murder and gun violence rates by controlling gun ownership (note, not eliminating it) is shot down by the courts enforcing the 2nd amendment without considering how massively different the guns of today are relative to the 18th century (their conceptualization of "arms" would have been frick'n muskets after all) as well
Re: (Score:2)
You can complain about it, but it just demonstrates your ignorance to do so.
Re:Quick History lesson (Score:4, Insightful)
America is going to be a very different country before Trump is done
Hate to tell you this, but Trump is a symptom of what the USA has been for a long time. He or the GOP won't change the country, the country created these people.
Always go to the source.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: Quick History lesson (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
1) There has been no report of 'gays' actually grooming children. There were accusations but it has been several years and none of the so called groomed children had any sexual conduct with people like that.
2) The conservatives have sung far worse than 'coming for your children', and liberals decried the few people that sang that.
3) Harvey milk had a long term consensual sexual relation that started with a 17 year old man who was left his parents because they hated the fact he was gay. Hardly a 'runaway
Don't take way our exploitble labor class? (Score:5, Interesting)
So funny how exploitation is "ok" depending on how you lean.
Of course the brief ends with a "deflection", but the rest is about economic concerns of eliminating the exploitation of people.
Deservedly so (Score:2)
Then they'll know not to vote for criminal morons in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Deservedly so (Score:2)
Translated from billionaire-speak (Score:2)
Some people just want an underclass to exploit. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When you say Democrats, of course you actually mean conservatives.
Conservatism has always been about preserving hierarchy. Not just in a vague social sense, but in a very real, very deliberate way, making sure a certain group stays on top and others stay down. Before the Civil War, that meant slavery. White plantation owners built their entire world on the idea that Black people were inferior, and the system was set up to keep it that way.
When slavery ended, the goal didn’t change. Conservatives
Gardeners and Nannys are modern slaves (Score:2)
Pay illegal immigrants far below t
Re: (Score:2)
Pay illegal immigrants far below the min wage for the "untouchable" jobs, Nanny, Gardener, the less than automated parts of food production.
None of those are untouchable jobs. I know American Citizens who have done all those jobs, and enjoyed it. The only reason Americans aren't lining up to do those jobs is because the pay is low.
Re: (Score:2)
Revert Federal marginal income tax rate to the '80 (Score:2)
I want to see the Federal marginal income tax rate reverted to that of 1980, adjusted for inflation.
Re: (Score:2)
>> Trump is actually a bit more like Lincoln than we gave him credit for
That made absolutely no sense.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
>> Trump is actually a bit more like Lincoln than we gave him credit for
That made absolutely no sense.
Oh I didn't realise I needed to spell it out. Here let me help:
Trump: Repeatedly compares himself to Lincoln.
Lincoln: Freed the Slaves from American oppression
Trump: Deported the modern day slaves thereby freeing them from American oppression.
And if you don't think the idea that costs are going to go up because you can't pay immigrants so little that Americans won't take the job is modern slavery then I suggest you do some reading on the topic.
Re: (Score:2)
What a ridiculous comparison.
Re: The quiet part: (Score:2)
Solution - more mechanization.
But farmers are now in the situation where they can't repair their own machinery because they need special tools and vendor locked in software that only dealers have access to even for minor repairs.
New alternator - you need to 'pair' it with the machine.
Re: (Score:3)
>> Trump: Deported the modern day slaves thereby freeing them from American oppression
Utter bullshit. Immigrant labor in the US is overwhelmingly voluntary, and the immigrants have undertaken significant risks in order to be able to do it. The reason is obvious, they earn far more money in the US.
>> costs are going to go up because you can't pay immigrants so little that Americans won't take the job is modern slavery
Meaningless word salad. The average pay for farm labor in Mexico is $143/month;
h [economia.gob.mx]
Re: (Score:2)
voluntary
Thankyou for broadcasting to the world you didn't look up what modern day slavery actually means.
Re: (Score:2)
>> what modern day slavery actually means
Pretty sure it doesn't mean voluntarily working for pay.
Re: (Score:2)
"Most ag workers who are paid by the hour in California receive $11 to $12."
It's not necessarily true because there are a lot of tricks for paying illegal immigrants less.
Re: (Score:2)
You are welcome to show better evidence as to what the average wage is, go for it. Meanwhile farm labor in Mexico pays about $1/hour.
Re: (Score:2)
>> attempting to justify open borders & 3 million illegals a year.
Obvious lie. The borders have never been open and nowhere near that number have been admitted.
Re: The quiet part: (Score:2)
It was around 2 million a year during the Biden admin.
Re: (Score:2)
>> It was around 2 million a year during the Biden admin.
Too bad you have zero evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
The GOP sure does a lot of whining when they are in control of government, don't they. And notice that it says "Inadmissible Encounters", dimwit. Where does it say "3 million illegals a year" were allowed in. Or anywhere near it.
Re: (Score:2)
Really, this Fox/CNN/NYT propaganda didn't trigger anybody else?
Correction: Kidnapped the modern-day 'slaves', sent them to a foreign gulag where they work as literal slaves to buy their 'freedom'.
What happens in 10 years, when those slaves are released into a foreign country? Will the hosting country really want them? The ex-slaves will probably return to their families in the USA.
His war-mongering, ignorance and stupidity is closer to Reagan (wants to invade allies, hating Iran, protecting Israel's
Re: (Score:2)
Well, Lincoln was in favour of shipping all the black people back to Africa or to other places. Hmm, according to https://www.politifact.com/fac... [politifact.com] he hoped that they would go voluntarily and around 1862 switched to using them as cannon fodder, I mean allowing them to stay as free men.
Previously he backed the Corwin Amendment, which was the opposite of emancipation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
How a MAGA views Lincoln is likely complicated.
Re: The quiet part: (Score:2)
I am positive, 175 years ago, there were folks arguing that if we end slavery in this country (US) the price of clothing and many agricultural would become unaffordable for poorer Americans. We ignored those calls and ended slavery.
"We can't curtail illegal immigration because we'll have to pay the workers that replace them more money!" Seriously? I mean really?
So the argument is we need to keep illegal workers here and pay them less than a legal worker because it makes everyone's life more affordable?
That'
No change happens in a vacuum. (Score:4, Informative)
The logic here seems to be: exporting the illegal immigrants will reduce the supply of cheap labor, thus increasing the cost of labor, thus motivating businesses to pass those increased costs along in the form of higher prices, thus costing legal (non-illegal-immigrant) families more than they can afford.
On the flip side, the exportation of workers will increase the demand for labor, which will in turn create more jobs that regular citizens can have and also increase wage competition to drive wages up, thus increasing household income, thus making the higher prices affordable.
Most of our markets for common everyday items like groceries and such are cartel-controlled at this point. These cartels already have nice fat profit margins due to the lack of bona fide competition. That makes this problem worse, as they absolutely will punish the country with higher prices in retaliation for a policy like this. Their ability to do so would be reduced if we focused our trust-busting laws on them and allowed real competition to pull prices back down to realistic levels. This is, of course, easier said than done.
Re:No change happens in a vacuum. (Score:5, Interesting)
"Most of our markets for common everyday items like groceries and such are cartel-controlled at this point. These cartels already have nice fat profit margins due to the lack of bona fide competition."
You have no fucking clue. Do you *know* what the profit margin is at the average grocery store? Less than 2%.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Indeed. Now go look at the profit margins for their suppliers.
Re: (Score:2)
The other two are still over 16 percent. Sure it isn't Apple grotesque, but that is quite a tidy little profit margin.
Re: (Score:3)
You are looking at net profit margin. That is the profit they list AFTER they have paid their top execs huge salaries (and other book-cooking that goes into "operating costs.").
Gross profit margins tell a different story, and it varies by company. This is not gross income, it is still gross profit, which means its the money made beyond the cost of goods sold. This is what they are paying their amazing salaries with.
Kroger, for example, is reporting a huge 22% [macrotrends.net] gross profit margin.
The discussion is a bit a
Re: (Score:2)
Regulated utility companies in the US have an average profit margin around 9-10%, according to my very brief research.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
An article in 2024 quoting 2020 numbers on livestock to drive a point home, while the rest of the numbers are relatively stable. Their idea of "similar results" is a gross margin dropping by 80%+ being the same as a drop of 1% for the other companies listed. And like the other commenter mentioned, the huge drop is relating to COVID highs vs bird flu lows.
Re: (Score:2)
Local owners were NOT being discussed. If you follow the money, you will see that control of all products is limited to one or two pools of money. All of those brands? Same pool of money. All of those stores? Same pool of money. The local owner? Will be disposed of when convenient.
Re: (Score:3)
Or that men are women if they say so, and what were once women are now "birthing people", "lactating people" and the latest - "menstruating people."
So remind me again why trans people acting on their own fundamental and unchangeable mental processes that don't hurt anyone are bad? Maybe also explain again why respecting these people is "identity politics" while hating on them isn't as I didn't follow your logic there. I also don't follow how struggling to find new terminology to cover a minority group that has only been recently recognized (despite having always been there) is hateful.
I wonder why Martin Luther king would think of the modern Day Democrats and tether identity politics. After all, he said: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."?
I would imagine he'd be awfully bothered by your insistence on hatin
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
For grown adults...no one gives a fuck if they want to play dress u
Re: (Score:2)
Teachers unions definitely don't own our kids
Nobody said they did. Strawman much?
Re: (Score:2)
This is not about something intrinsic or unchangeable, you can learn and unlearn most anything and you can look up neuroplasticity to figure this out. The unchangeable part is their DNA and even if you chop of their equipment they are who they are just with modifications
So you're saying someone could change you into a self identifying person of the opposite gender? I ask because I find that hard to believe.
To further this point, there isn't a first world psychiatric organization out there that thinks gender dysphoria is in anyway "treatable". Go ahead and look for yourself if you like though.
Being respectful is optional otherwise it is not respect but subservience.
Oh god, the drama!
Why on earth do you have a driving need to be disrespectful to someone who hasn't done anything to you? That's like the basis of decent morality.
Re: (Score:3)
Name me a first world psychiatric organization that categorizes gender dysphoria as a reversable condition. You cant because there isnt one.
If gender dysphoria isnt reversable then it's just who these people are and treating them poorly for acting on said identity when it doesn't hurt anyone else is just cruel.
Re: (Score:2)
and not simply a treatable mental illness
Even assuming gender dysphoria as solely a treatable mental illness, the best treatment is not to cause further trauma. That would harm them far more than it harms everyone else involved.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It's weird that you understand that Trump is a nutcase and yet you also buy into every manufactured culture-war controversy that his party excretes.
It sounds like you'd like a President who does all the anti-woke culture-war crap that Trump does but with more level-headed economic policies.
The "racism and sexism" you have a problem with is largely a strawman constructed by the right for the right.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
show us on the doll were the nasty preacher touched you!
I'm an ex Catholic, you insensitive clod!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am suspecting you might be projecting a bit, perhaps indicative of your own interests. It doesn't happen too often, but there is a segment of slashdot readers who seem to have an interest in, but perhaps unhealthy fantasy about me and my sexual proclivities, some have even made comment about the size of my penis, wh
Re: (Score:2)
Markup is not the same as profit margin. Duh! And you were a manager???
Re:No change happens in a vacuum. (Score:4, Insightful)
On the flip side, the exportation of workers will increase the demand for labor, which will in turn create more jobs that regular citizens can have
There is an inherent assumption in this statement that creating these jobs will be desirable by regular citizens. This is not true. Right now, the total number of national job openings exceeds the number of unemployed workers. This suggests we need to import labor, not export it.
and also increase wage competition to drive wages up, thus increasing household income, thus making the higher prices affordable.
In a fantasy world - yes. In the real word - no, employers simply will not hire at those higher wages. Either they will force the additional work upon their current employees without increasing those wages, or, they will choose to update their business in some other manner to lower their costs (AI as a more recent trend, many others historically). Better to remain in business than be bankrupt. This is why you cannot afford to pay every person $500+/hr.
Most of our markets for common everyday items like groceries and such are cartel-controlled at this point. These cartels already have nice fat profit margins
Grocery stores have a 1-3% profit margin. That is hardly a "nice fat profit margin"
This is, of course, easier said than done.
Agreed. Its trivial to put more money in the pockets of working families - change the tax brackets and require those in upper brackets to pay more in taxes. We can also look at other changes, such as taxing capital gains the same as ordinary income. However, few in US Congress wants to touch this topic as their source of funding will dry up overnight and they will be replaced with another individual "more receptive" to policies that benefit the wealthy. This goes for both D's and R's. Only a handful - Bernie Sanders, AoC, Rand Paul - can actually touch this topic because they aren't worried about funding or their constituents rebelling against them. Agreed - "easier said than done".
Re: (Score:2)
This. Mod up, please.
Re: (Score:2)
As I said in a prior post, you are looking at the net profit margin. That number is reduced by the enormous salaries that these companies pay themselves. Gross profit margins (which are profits beyond the costs of goods sold) are above 20% for grocery store chains. Nice and fat, if you ask me.
Incidentally, the existence of unpleasant work is not in-and-of-itself justification for allowing illegal immigration. The whole "can't afford to eat" thing is supposed to motivate Americans to do those jobs. And,
Re: (Score:2)
I think that it's also important to consider how government spend
Re: (Score:2)
On the flip side, the exportation of workers will increase the demand for labor, which will in turn create more jobs that regular citizens can have and also increase wage competition to drive wages up, thus increasing household income, thus making the higher prices affordable
Except it appears "regular citizens" already have jobs and are not interested in the jobs the undocumented immigrants are leaving, even at higher wages. And the increasing cost of producing products in the U.S. further advantages products from other countries, which now also have a flood of new cheap labor returning to their countries. Which means that the U.S. businesses, even with tariffs, can't compete, and so they go out of business and close and those jobs disappear.
Good plan.
It's his methods, not his goal. (Score:5, Insightful)
Trump's immigration changes threaten American's ability to exploit "others".
Illegal immigration is indeed a problem and it is in fact very exploitive.
The problems so many people have with Trump's current policies in regards to illegal immigration arent with his goal, it's how he's trying to accomplish it. It's the rabid demonization of illegal immigrants while ignoring the Americans regularly flouting the law to get cheap labor. It's the morality of ripping people out of communities who have spent decades integrating into them both socially and economically thanks to non-solutions to illegal immigration by both Democrats and Republicans (both political parties are responsible for letting this happen). It's the economic disruptions that will be caused by Trump needing to solve this problem NOW. It's the dark imagery of masked government men snatching people off the streets. It's leaving in place everything that brought illegal immigrants into this country while acting with maximum hostility towards those who came here for the work Americans were offering them.
Basically, most people's problems with Trump's immigration platform are his methods, not his goal.
Re: (Score:2)
It's the rabid demonization of illegal immigrants
You're not helping and you're actively contributing to it. The reality is the vast majority of the "undesirable others" are in America legally. Illegal immigration isn't actually a problem at all because the actual illegal immigrants make up an infinitesimal proportion of people and all of them could have been deported just fine without Trump waving his magic racist pen.
Re: (Score:2)
Illegal immigration isn't actually a problem at all because the actual illegal immigrants make up an infinitesimal proportion of people and all of them could have been deported just fine without Trump waving his magic racist pen.
Illegal immigrants made up 3.3% of our country in 2022 https://www.pewresearch.org/sh... [pewresearch.org] and it's likely more today. That's not "infinitesimal", it's an underclass without the rights of the rest of us who do all our manual labor for us. They are an easily abused underclass and you're in favor of this? Pointing to this glaring problem is contributing to the demonization of these people? I don't think so. I want these people here, just not as second class citizens.
I should add, we should have long since addre
Re: (Score:2)
Is that why we punish the victims?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes it is. Where's the outrage over the Americans hiring them?
Re:It's his methods, not his goal. (Score:4)
If they wanted to "integrate" into American society they would have become naturalized citizens; as you say they had decades to do it but didn't.
Most of these people have had friends, family, and jobs here for years and years. They are integrated into our society whether you like it or not.
Illegal immigrants don't go for naturalization because it takes forever and cant be done while living in the US illegally. Meanwhile both parties have failed for decades to effectively address our immigration problems so working here illegally was relatively easy up until recently.
Re: (Score:2)
Obtaining citizenship has never been a requirement of anyone living in the country. Their only obligation is maintaining legal status, whether that is on a temporary or permanent basis.
Re: (Score:2)
Hahaha, it's like you didn't even read my post.
Re: (Score:2)
Not exactly. It would just open up a lot of underpaid positions, so a company that hires underpaid workers would have to pay more.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's not about "hate". It's about simply enforcing the fucking law. You know, the law that was created by the much touted "democracy" that people are so worried about?
If we need low paid people from Mexico (and wherever) to come here to do shit jobs, then change the law to make that legal. Don't just ignore the fucking law.
Should I be allowed to go to a bank and make an "undocumented withdrawal" because I have no money? No. That's called "bank robbery" and you go to jail for it. The same should be true fo
Re:The quiet part: (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not about "hate". It's about simply enforcing the fucking law. You know, the law that was created by the much touted "democracy" that people are so worried about?
So then why do we never hear about the Americans breaking the law by hiring illegal immigrants? Why is Trump's "solution" to inflict maximum suffering on illegal immigrants while not addressing any of the structural reasons that they are here.
Re: (Score:2)
Illegal immigrants don't have money. The people who hire the illegal immigrants do. Money is sacrosanct. Why is there any confusion about who is arrested and who pays the fines?
Re: (Score:2)
Good to know you are consistent. The problem is it isn't enforced the way you propose, it is enforced (apparently) single-way against the immigrants. Which makes it NOT about "enforcing the fucking law", it makes it "maximum suffering" against the immigrant. It's a Beat the Weak policy.
Re:The quiet part: (Score:5, Informative)
Undocumented immigrants just want to get paid for a day's work. Equating them with bank robbers is sheer lunacy.
Re: (Score:3)
Undocumented immigrants don't need someone else's SSN. They can get their own, or get an ITIN. [thedream.us]
They can also get driver's licenses in 19 states.
You tried to equate being an undocumented immigrant to robbing a bank. The latter can get you up to 20 years in the slammer. Do you think undocumented immigrants should receive the same punishment? All 11 million of them?
Re:The quiet part: (Score:5, Insightful)
The people who elected a 34-time felon who also instigated a violent mob into attempting to overturn the previous (lawful) election have some nerve lecturing anybody on "following the law".
Re: (Score:2)
That has been a long standing Neo-liberal progressive lie from the elite upper class as they are the ones exploiting the labor markets.
It's always shocking when some poor moron like you spouts it like gospel.
Re: (Score:2)
How are people being "exploited" if they're being paid and have a place to stay?
You have no workplace protection rights - if you get injured on the job, such as someone dropping a crate of strawberries on your head, it could be very difficult to get workers compensation for that injury. The employer could also just decide to not pay you for awhile, with the threat that if you don't do what they want (such as working extra hours for free or doing certain dangerous jobs without proper protective equipment) they will report you to ICE and have you deported.
Re: (Score:2)
There ARE no jobs Americans won't do! (Score:2)
What there are is: jobs Americans won't do for insanely low wages and poor or no benefits.
There's a difference.
Has it really been too many years since Mike Rowe was doing his "Dirty Jobs" show?
As a matter of historical record, Americans will do nearly any awful job, as long as the wages for it are subject to market forces. When a job is too awful for most people, there'll be SOME Americans who will go to it because they CAN tolerate it and in doing it they can get higher wages, better schedules, better bene
Re: (Score:2)
One interesting thing about Slashdot is that specific humourless trolls only show up on the weekend. Friday and Saturday my posts get moded down, every other day they get moded up. It's not like I change political allegiance 2 days a week.
Maybe it's that people on Friday and Saturday are grumpy after a week of work. :-)
Re:LOL (Score:4, Interesting)
OP is pro MAGA
OP here. BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. That's the funniest thing I've ever seen posted on Slashdot. You brought a tear to my eye by posting something so equal parts hilarious and dumb. I've been accused of many different things, but his truly a first for me.
I feel partially honoured, but mostly disgusted.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh maybe it's the part where I called Trump a racist for how he is targeting specific immigrants, or the bit how I mocked him for comparing himself to Lincoln in the past, but I bet that nuance in my comment is lost on you.
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like a lot of people missed your "nuance". In my case, I'm an autistic nerd and english is not my native language, so that might explain it. But it won't prevent me from offering you my apologies. But you might want to go easy on the "nuance" on this site. Slashdot is not kind to shades of grey that are not black or white.
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm... Naw, not worth the requote against the censor trolls. But I know that censor moderation is sometimes evidence of important points they lack other response for...
Re: (Score:2)
NAK.
But I think you're a racist, too, and not the first one in America's brief history.
Re: (Score:2)
Buy American? OK, sure... except there's a lot of stuff that is simply not made in the USA, or if it is, it's waaaay more expensive and/or inferior to the stuff made elsewhere.
And even if you buy an end product made in America, odds are very good that some of its inputs were imported and thus subject to tariffs.
"Higher quality" products is a laugh. Japanese and Korean cars beat the crap out of American cars in terms of quality any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Especially if they're actually ma
Re: (Score:2)
The USofA is big enough to do more by themselves but it'll take years and/or a lot of pain to replace all the foreign input.