politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Let me just point out that losing 5% of the workforce like that will make inflation skyrocket, because we'll have to increase wages on a lot of jobs done for shit pay by undocumented migrants. (Should those jobs pay well now? Of course. But they don't.) You think houses are expensive now? Just wait until construction grinds to a standstill because there's no laborers available. Groceries cost too much? Guess who is working in those fields?
Again: we should be paying those people fair wages now. But without significantly raising those wages, which will also raise the cost of the goods they currently produce, you aren't going to get many citizens to do the jobs.
EDIT: one of the larger inputs for produce is labor. If we had to pay labor for picking, cleaning, and sorting produce $20/hr (which is the floor that I'd consider semi-acceptable for that kind of work), you would end up seeing a lot of prices rise sharply in the grocery store, particularly because we simply can't automate most of that. And believe me, companies are trying, because they won't want to pay the slave wages that they do now. If you had to pay all construction workers at least $20/hr--which is below the acceptable rate, IMO--housing costs would have to rise to accommodate the cost of the labor. Lots of restaurants still use undocumented labor; they'd have to increase menu prices. And so on, and so forth. We, all of in the US, benefit from the poor treatment of undocumented migrants, and it's largely invisible to us.
Well...yeah. But brown people will suffer.
So it's all good.
that will probably happen, but it's actually just rich people pocketing the made up price increase while waiting for poor people to be desperate enough to work for the same low wage as the lost workers
I mean, yes, but also no.
For that to really work, you need a labor surplus, i.e., more workers than jobs. As long as there are more jobs than workers, workers are incentivized to hop jobs to get better pay, perks, and working conditions. It's in the best interest of the capital-owning class to keep a certain level of the population unemployed so that there are always more workers than jobs; that allows them to pocket more of the value that the workers are adding, because the workers have less leverage to negotiate better wages.
But when you suddenly lost 5% of your workforce, and they're jobs that are physically demanding (and in the case of construction, are a genuinely skilled trade), then capital-owning class doesn't have the leverage over workers. That's especially true when the capitalist can't easily move operations to an area with cheap labor; if you're a contractor, you're going to operate where there's demand for construction, not where there's cheap labor. An e.g. contractor can't just not build; they lose money by sitting on land, or on equipment that isn't being capitalized.
they just make the workers work more hours and more jobs.
... oh and make their children work. almost forgot they yearn for the mines 😅