Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Will the U.S. Continue to be a Nation of Immigrants?

Immigration in U.S. Obama

  • Please log in to reply
237 replies to this topic

#221
Erowind

Erowind

    Anarchist without an adjective

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,039 posts

 

The War of Independence and the Civil War seem to have become far away

It's funny how we as Americans think this is the case when the Civil War was literally about two lifetimes ago. My grandpa's grandpa lived through the civil war and I think there was still a Civil War pensioner/widow as late as 2009.

 

 

 

As of 2016 it seems there's still one left actually. No telling if she's alive now though, she was 86 at the time of writing so that'd make her 88 today. If she lives to be a supercentenarian it's possible that a Civil War pensioner could still be receiving benefits in the early 2030s. 

 

https://www.usnews.c...last-shot-fired



#222
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,622 posts

Chief Justice John Roberts stands up to Trump

 

https://www.alternet...ing-stand-trump

 

Extract:

 

(Alternet) Despite claims to be in favor of 'law and order,' the Trump administration has been essentially trying to change American asylum law by fiat. But on Friday, the Supreme Court blocked the administration's attempt to jumpstart its cruel policies, which were previously blocked by a federal judge in California.

 

…The case involved the administration's attempt to revamp American asylum policy to automatically deny the claims of asylum-seekers who cross the border between authorized ports of entry. Many asylum-seekers have done just that because the Trump administration has forced them to wait for weeks or months at official entry points.

 

But U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar in California blocked the policy in November, finding that it contradicted the point of the asylum law. The legislation is designed to protect people who have been victimized by their own governments, and placing further barriers and boundaries on them even when their lives may be in danger is a heartless policy. More to the point, from the judge's perspective, it's not what Congress intended.

 

…And on Friday, Roberts…joined with the court's liberals to strike down the administration's request to lift Judge Tigar's injunction, which would have let Trump resume his callous asylum policy.

screen_shot_2018-12-21_at_3.04.44_pm.png

Photo Credit: Steve Petteway


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#223
lanci

lanci

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

The US immigration policy is a contradiction. Legal immigration is required, but as an Asian, they cannot find any channels and online links to apply for refugees. Only lying can enter the United States. The rich are more likely than the poor to immigrate to the United States, but in reality, many rich people are greedy, good at exploiting legal loopholes, and like to defraud benefits.



#224
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,622 posts

H-1B Changes Will Simplify Application Process

 

https://techcrunch.c...h1b-efficiency/

 

Introduction:

 

(Techcrunch)  The federal government yesterday published the final rule for changes to the H-1B visa program, which is one of the primary conduits for technical talent to come and work in the United States.

 

There are two key changes coming with the rule. First, the government will require applicants for an H-1B visa to electronically register with the immigration office for the H-1B lottery before they submit their applications or documentation, starting in 2020.

 

Due to hard caps imposed by Congress on the number of workers who can be admitted under the program, tens of thousands of people apply for a visa who ultimately do not attain it. Under the current process, applicants must submit their entire applications including supporting documentation in order to apply for a lottery run by USCIS, the immigration authority.

Last year, roughly 190,000 applicants applied for 85,000 total slots. That means 105,000 people put together complete applications but lost out on the lottery.

 

Under the new rule that will be in force for the 2020 H-1B process (i.e. two years from now), applicants will first register with USCIS electronically, which will process the lottery. If selected in the lottery, an applicant would then be invited to submit their application and supporting materials. The idea is that you only have to do all the work of applying when there is an actual slot available.


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#225
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,622 posts

 

The full text of House Resolution 489, which passed by a vote of 240-187 and strongly condemns Trump’s racist comments. Well worth a read.

-W.J. Fox

 

https://www.congress...lution/489/text


  • wjfox likes this

The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#226
ralfy

ralfy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts

Given population aging, yes.


  • Alislaws likes this

#227
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,999 posts
  • LocationLondon

Given population aging, yes.

You're assuming the USA won't go full Japan, and just ban immigrant regardless of the demographic effects.

 

Maybe they plan to automate their way out of the demographic timebomb this would create.



#228
ralfy

ralfy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts

 

Given population aging, yes.

You're assuming the USA won't go full Japan, and just ban immigrant regardless of the demographic effects.

 

Maybe they plan to automate their way out of the demographic timebomb this would create.

 

 

The catch with automation is that robots aren't consumers.


  • Alislaws likes this

#229
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,999 posts
  • LocationLondon

True, but a producer who doesn't consume (and can be switched off) is not a problem. Retirees are the problem, because effectively they do not produce anything, but they do consume stuff, so once they retire they act as a resource sink.  As the % of your population who are not doing anything useful increases then productivity per person drops.

 

If your economy and population grows consistently you have more workers than retirees by a wide enough margin that you can afford all the dead weight which is where most western nations have been since WW2. 

 

In places with below replacement fertility and no immigration you would get negative growth as your productive citizens stopped working and retired, and are not replaced. 

So you add robot workers to bring productivity back up to the point where you can support your elderly population in the style to which they have become accustomed, while also serving the needs of your working population. Your productivity per person is flatish through this period but your productivity per working person is increasing as automation advances. 

 

If your population stabilises at a lower level, then once it hits that point you have excess productive capacity unused due to the lower demand from consumers. You could just turn off the robots that are not needed, this would probably be good for sustainability! 

Unfortunately consumers wants are basically infinite, especially if you can bring costs down, which you can because your nation now has very low labour costs. 

 

If your population starts to grow again, robot numbers can be increased to meet demand, at whatever level it is sitting at and worker numbers will start increasing in 18-24 years or so. 

 

If your population just keeps shrinking then eventually the last couple of workers die of old age (They can't retire, which is their own fault for not having dozens of children), and then all the automated systems break down and the last of the other retires also die.  

 

You just need to keep productivity per person of your country stable or increasing and things will generally be ok because everyone is as well off, or better off than their parents.



#230
ralfy

ralfy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts

True, but a producer who doesn't consume (and can be switched off) is not a problem. Retirees are the problem, because effectively they do not produce anything, but they do consume stuff, so once they retire they act as a resource sink.  As the % of your population who are not doing anything useful increases then productivity per person drops.

 

If your economy and population grows consistently you have more workers than retirees by a wide enough margin that you can afford all the dead weight which is where most western nations have been since WW2. 

 

In places with below replacement fertility and no immigration you would get negative growth as your productive citizens stopped working and retired, and are not replaced. 

So you add robot workers to bring productivity back up to the point where you can support your elderly population in the style to which they have become accustomed, while also serving the needs of your working population. Your productivity per person is flatish through this period but your productivity per working person is increasing as automation advances. 

 

If your population stabilises at a lower level, then once it hits that point you have excess productive capacity unused due to the lower demand from consumers. You could just turn off the robots that are not needed, this would probably be good for sustainability! 

Unfortunately consumers wants are basically infinite, especially if you can bring costs down, which you can because your nation now has very low labour costs. 

 

If your population starts to grow again, robot numbers can be increased to meet demand, at whatever level it is sitting at and worker numbers will start increasing in 18-24 years or so. 

 

If your population just keeps shrinking then eventually the last couple of workers die of old age (They can't retire, which is their own fault for not having dozens of children), and then all the automated systems break down and the last of the other retires also die.  

 

You just need to keep productivity per person of your country stable or increasing and things will generally be ok because everyone is as well off, or better off than their parents.

 

The problem isn't retirees but the contradiction between automation and consumption. That is, businesses will automate because they expect to get more sales from greater production thanks to that. But more sales means more consumption, and with that not only availability of wages (to pay for what is purchased) but also more consumers and more consumption per capita.

 

About population shrinking due to aging, that was my point.

 

That's why economies cannot "automate their way out of the demographic timebomb this would create," and businesses won't automate unless their investments translates to more sales, which is assured through the presence of more wage earners and higher wages.

 

And then there's limits to growth, which can't allow for continuous increases in production motivated by increasing sales and consumption.


  • Alislaws likes this

#231
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,999 posts
  • LocationLondon

 

The problem isn't retirees but the contradiction between automation and consumption. That is, businesses will automate because they expect to get more sales from greater production thanks to that. But more sales means more consumption, and with that not only availability of wages (to pay for what is purchased) but also more consumers and more consumption per capita.

Businesses will automate to reduce their rising labour costs. 

 

Cutting labour costs is almost always the main reason for automation. If you want to increase capacity you can just expand operations with your existing methods which is probably much faster and cheaper than completely reworking parts of your production process.  

 

 

About population shrinking due to aging, that was my point.

 

That's why economies cannot "automate their way out of the demographic timebomb this would create," and businesses won't automate unless their investments translates to more sales, which is assured through the presence of more wage earners and higher wages.

I just explained how a country could automate its way out of any economic difficulties caused by the demographic timebomb though?

 

Of course if your population keeps shrinking indefinitely it will eventually result in 0 population, the only solution to that is for people to choose to have more children or for some sort of handmaids tale type authoritarian state to start forcing people to breed.

 

Fortunately the idea that a human population would just stop breeding until everyone is dead (without some weird new religion or something) is fantasy.



#232
ralfy

ralfy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts

 

 

The problem isn't retirees but the contradiction between automation and consumption. That is, businesses will automate because they expect to get more sales from greater production thanks to that. But more sales means more consumption, and with that not only availability of wages (to pay for what is purchased) but also more consumers and more consumption per capita.

Businesses will automate to reduce their rising labour costs. 

 

Cutting labour costs is almost always the main reason for automation. If you want to increase capacity you can just expand operations with your existing methods which is probably much faster and cheaper than completely reworking parts of your production process.  

 

 

About population shrinking due to aging, that was my point.

 

That's why economies cannot "automate their way out of the demographic timebomb this would create," and businesses won't automate unless their investments translates to more sales, which is assured through the presence of more wage earners and higher wages.

I just explained how a country could automate its way out of any economic difficulties caused by the demographic timebomb though?

 

Of course if your population keeps shrinking indefinitely it will eventually result in 0 population, the only solution to that is for people to choose to have more children or for some sort of handmaids tale type authoritarian state to start forcing people to breed.

 

Fortunately the idea that a human population would just stop breeding until everyone is dead (without some weird new religion or something) is fantasy.

 

 

Lower labor costs also means decreased income for workers who are also consumers of what is produced. That means lower sales as well. Thus, you have increased production but also fewer buyers.

 

The point isn't population reaching zero or that humans will stop breeding but that sales won't continue rising because of population aging, which means fewer buyers of what is produced.

 

That's why there's no way to automate out of economic difficulties unless there's no profit motive.


  • Alislaws likes this

#233
Alislaws

Alislaws

    Democratic Socialist Materialist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,999 posts
  • LocationLondon

 

...

 

Lower labor costs also means decreased income for workers who are also consumers of what is produced. That means lower sales as well. Thus, you have increased production but also fewer buyers.

 

The point isn't population reaching zero or that humans will stop breeding but that sales won't continue rising because of population aging, which means fewer buyers of what is produced.

 

That's why there's no way to automate out of economic difficulties unless there's no profit motive.

 

But the labour costs are inflated because there are not enough workers, which is the whole demographic issue. As demand falls the least efficient companies go out of business, which helps the labour shortage. Even with a shrinking market, market share could still be increasing (unless you have a monopolistic economy I guess). The ideal effect of a shrinking economy from a capitalist perspective is a mass die off of inefficient companies with only the very best surviving. 

 

Normally these job losses would be a disaster but your working population is shrinking the whole time too so finding other work will likely not be that big an issue for most people (if you're old retie early, if you're young, you just need to wait a bit).

 

Automation brings its own set of issues as it progresses (if it goes far enough it looks like it will pretty much break capitalism) but it would keep your people from starving to death with a rapidly aging population

 

Also, even if capitalism does break down you are still in the enviable position of production massively outstripping demand, which is not a bad problem to have! If you're willing to rethink your economic system then that's how you get post scarcity.

 

We've been sort of assuming a closed economy too, there's no reason the country would need to stop exporting to other nations unless there was a world wide demographic issue?



#234
ralfy

ralfy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts

 

 

...

 

Lower labor costs also means decreased income for workers who are also consumers of what is produced. That means lower sales as well. Thus, you have increased production but also fewer buyers.

 

The point isn't population reaching zero or that humans will stop breeding but that sales won't continue rising because of population aging, which means fewer buyers of what is produced.

 

That's why there's no way to automate out of economic difficulties unless there's no profit motive.

 

But the labour costs are inflated because there are not enough workers, which is the whole demographic issue. As demand falls the least efficient companies go out of business, which helps the labour shortage. Even with a shrinking market, market share could still be increasing (unless you have a monopolistic economy I guess). The ideal effect of a shrinking economy from a capitalist perspective is a mass die off of inefficient companies with only the very best surviving. 

 

Normally these job losses would be a disaster but your working population is shrinking the whole time too so finding other work will likely not be that big an issue for most people (if you're old retie early, if you're young, you just need to wait a bit).

 

Automation brings its own set of issues as it progresses (if it goes far enough it looks like it will pretty much break capitalism) but it would keep your people from starving to death with a rapidly aging population

 

Also, even if capitalism does break down you are still in the enviable position of production massively outstripping demand, which is not a bad problem to have! If you're willing to rethink your economic system then that's how you get post scarcity.

 

We've been sort of assuming a closed economy too, there's no reason the country would need to stop exporting to other nations unless there was a world wide demographic issue?

 

 

That's why companies in industrialized countries have been outsourcing since the late 1970s. At the same time, workers in the same countries have been moving to the service industry, where they can make more money. In developing economies where these countries outsource, workers are earning more money than they did in smaller, local businesses or even farming, and for some, are now following counterparts in industrialized countries by moving to growing service industries. That's why, as I recall, around 60 pct of manufacturing in China now involves assembly, as they've in turn outsourced part of manufacturing to other nations.

 

This also explains why globally there has been no shrinking market. If any, present businesses can likely not even meet the demands of a growing global middle class. That may also be the main reason why they have automation, and not to deal with a demographic time bomb, as many of these countries that will soon take over the global economy have young populations.

 

Meanwhile, population momentum is taking place, which negates that time bomb for some time, and which explains why even with lower birth rates the world population will continue to grow to 9 to 11 billion.

 

The catch is that all these involve globalization, which is why the U.S. and many other countries will continue to be nations of immigrants, if not increasingly reliant not only on outsourcing but even on foreign markets. That's the only way to forestall population aging, and is likely the main reason why it was offset in the U.S.



#235
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,622 posts

Temporary Agricultural Employment of H-2A Nonimmigrants in the United States

 

https://www.foreignl...nimmigrants.pdf

 

Summary:

 

(Federal Register) SUMMARY: The Department of Labor (Department or DOL) proposes to amend its regulations regarding the certification of temporary employment of nonimmigrant workers employed in temporary or seasonal agricultural employment and the enforcement of the contractual obligations applicable to employers of such nonimmigrant workers. This notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM or proposed rule) streamlines the process by which the Department reviews employers’ applications for temporary agricultural labor certifications to use in petitioning the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to employ a nonimmigrant worker in H-2A status. Amendments to the current regulations focus on modernizing the H-2A program and eliminating inefficiencies. The Department also proposes to amend the regulations for enforcement of contractual obligations for temporary foreign agricultural workers and the Wagner-Peyser Act regulations to provide consistency with revisions to H-2A program regulations governing the temporary agricultural labor certification process.

 

67742317_146995363163661_304332039752201


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#236
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,622 posts

'We Will Fight': Over 40 Arrested as Jewish Activists and Allies Confront Amazon for Profiting Off ICE Terror

 

https://www.commondr...mazon-profiting

 

Introduction:

 

(Common Dreams) "Amazon collaborates with ICE, and everyone needs to know that. When we say never again we mean it. Never again to camps, never again to roundups, and never again to profiting from misery."

 

More than 1,000 Jewish activists and allies gathered at an Amazon book store in New York City on Sunday to protest the online retail behemoth's collaboration with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which swept up nearly 700 people last week in what was reportedly one of the agency's largest-ever raids.

 

Over 40 demonstrators were arrested during Sunday's action, which included a sit-in inside the Amazon store.

 

As Gizmodo reported, the activists rallied "to draw attention to [Amazon Web Service's] cloud contracts with ICE and Palantir Technologies, which provides the agency with data for use in immigration raids and other enforcement actions."

 

Amazon, run by world's richest man Jeff Bezos, has been described as a the "the invisible backbone of ICE's immigration crackdown" due to its lucrative government contracts.

amazon.png?itok=msTMD77n

Over 1,000 Jewish activists and allies took part in a demonstration at an Amazon book store in New York City on Sunday August 12, 2019.

(Photo: Naomi Dann/Twitter)


  • Erowind likes this

The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls


#237
ralfy

ralfy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts

Likely due to population aging.



#238
caltrek

caltrek

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,622 posts

Texas Border Sheriffs: There is No Crisis and We Don’t Want Trump’s Wall

 

https://www.texasobs...vC2G_HrO0bN20ss

 

Extract:

 

(Texas Observer) President Trump visited McAllen earlier this month to drum up support for spending $5.7 billion to build more border wall segments on the U.S.-Mexico border. He staged a press conference surrounded by piles of confiscated drugs, guns and cash, describing the situation at the border as “a national emergency.” With the government partially shut down over Trump’s funding dispute with Congress, the president is trying to prove that there’s a new, growing “crisis” on the border to pressure Democrats to cave. But law enforcement leaders in at least two border counties, including the sheriff who patrols McAllen, say the picture Trump is painting of the Texas borderlands is inaccurate.

 

… In 2017 (the latest year for which data is available), there were 4.4 murders per 100,000 people in Hidalgo County — about half the rate of other metro areas in Texas and a quarter of the murder rate in Washington, D.C. It’s also lower than the 6.3 murders per 100,000 people in 2017 in Palm Beach County, Florida, where Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort is located.

 

In addition to fewer murders, the violent crime and property crime rates in Hidalgo County are less than half of what they were in 1999. Guerra, a Democrat who has lived in the RGV his entire life, said the majority of immigrants entering the county without papers are Central American asylum-seekers fleeing violence and poverty who turn themselves over to Border Patrol agents as soon as they can.

 

…“The Guatemalans and Hondurans are not carrying drugs,” Dodson said. “For the most part, they just go on through.”

 

Trump has claimed in speeches and tweets that a wall would “have a huge impact on the inflow of drugs coming across” the border. But data shows this is unlikely. The majority of hard drugs, like cocaine, fentanyl and heroin, are smuggled through the mail or through ports of entry, not by individuals crossing the border illegally. The amount of marijuana seized along the U.S.-Mexico border has dropped in recent years, especially in California, where voters legalized the sale of cannabis in 2016. In other words, a wall wouldn’t do much to stem the trafficking of drugs into the United States; however, it would require the federal government to seize land along the border, a move Dodson vehemently opposes.

 


The principles of justice define an appropriate path between dogmatism and intolerance on the one side, and a reductionism which regards religion and morality as mere preferences on the other.   - John Rawls






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Immigration in U.S., Obama

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users