I have solved the soulution for creating new jobs and stiring the economy!

[liquid_cool]

..here comes the forum cannoneers now...

this is it in a nut shell........INFORCE the current imigration laws and raise the fines for employing anny ILLEAGAL worker to 1 million bucks per worker...companys not wanting to be forced out of biz will terminate the ILLEAGAL worker and replace them with a leagal one...if all companys would do this it would create a need for 12 MILLION new employees!...so goodbye to welfare..now every AMERICAN can have a job..and with such demand..the wages would rise...thats it..no stimulus needed..just LAW ENFORCMENT!...but wait..ill nip the comback in the toosh and rebute the arguement " They do jobs we wont!" bs...where i work..there are 3 leagal workers in the field out of 220 workers..making an average of $19. bucks an hour...thats rite $19. bucksd an hour...so if the arguement is correct..a $19. buck an hour job is a job Americans wont do...B.S....to to send em back to where ever they snuck in from...dont get me wrong..im all for LEAGAL imigration...but the illeagal type is crushing local economys "California" as an Example..

and yes my spelling sux..ohh well.

[CakeDaddy]

..here comes the forum cannoneers now...

this is it in a nut shell........INFORCE the current imigration laws and raise the fines for employing anny ILLEAGAL worker to 1 million bucks per worker...companys not wanting to be forced out of biz will terminate the ILLEAGAL worker and replace them with a leagal one...if all companys would do this it would create a need for 12 MILLION new employees!...so goodbye to welfare..now every AMERICAN can have a job..and with such demand..the wages would rise...thats it..no stimulus needed..just LAW ENFORCMENT!...but wait..ill nip the comback in the toosh and rebute the arguement " They do jobs we wont!" bs...where i work..there are 3 leagal workers in the field out of 220 workers..making an average of $19. bucks an hour...thats rite $19. bucksd an hour...so if the arguement is correct..a $19. buck an hour job is a job Americans wont do...B.S....to to send em back to where ever they snuck in from...dont get me wrong..im all for LEAGAL imigration...but the illeagal type is crushing local economys "California" as an Example..

and yes my spelling sux..ohh well.

The problem is that Americans are greedy and will demand the best healthcare, union, company cars, expense accounts, etc.... and then we are right back where we started. This is why businesses hire immigrants... because they work hard, do a good job and do not complain like most lazy a$$ Americans.

Example: I got a US brand land mgt team (all white crew) to do some land work (1500+ sq ft back yard). I will not mention the price, but long story short... The work was eff'd up, so I hired another group (immigrants) paid nearly 25% less and they got it done in near half the time, they showed up with less crew members, plus they corrected the mess from the other land scape group had made that was highly recommended. Kinda off the topic, but.....

As for you spelling, There is no need to formal or gramatically correct in this forum. It isn't that serious. I get your point, so fire away.


Modified by CakeDaddy at 7:40 AM 2/12/2009

[480sx]

and yes my spelling sux..ohh well.

Im gona level with you dude. I can deal with your lack of grammar and sentence structure in the Ka24 forums but not here. I take one look at your post and dont even bother trying to comprehend it. If you have a point you want to make here, take the time to use capitalization, and at least something close to normal sentence structure and grammar. A little goes a long way.

Anyway thats just my opinion. I know for sure it would help you be taken seriously here, and would be good for yourself if you tried to use normal english to express your ideas. Your not stupid from what i have seen, so cmon man, ENGLISH!

[audtatious]

He should use FireFox which will underline words that may need fixing or use the spell check function when posting. I do agree that opinions need to be clear here in the Politics forum.

[ishkabibble]

Solved the solution?

[mattblancarte]

Example: I got a US brand land mgt team (all white crew) to do some land work (1500+ sq ft back yard). I will not mention the price, but long story short... The work was eff'd up, so I hired another group (immigrants) paid nearly 25% less and they got it done in near half the time, they showed up with less crew members, plus they corrected the mess from the other land scape group had made that was highly recommended. Kinda off the topic, but.....

You're admitting to hiring illegal immigrants?

[CakeDaddy]

You're admitting to hiring illegal immigrants?

You got daym right! You live in Scottsdale AZ, correct? Dont get all noble and righteous on me You know exactly what Im talking about. I spend lots of time in Phoenix,Scottsdale and the surrounding areas during the spring and summer and during football season, so bow down We all pay for services from immigrants rather we know it or not.

[Cold_Zero]

Solved the solution?

Maybe figured out a solution to the problem?But good catch Ish, at least someone is paying attention in the forum.

[audtatious]

You got daym right! You live in Scottsdale AZ, correct? Dont get all noble and righteous on me You know exactly what Im talking about. I spend lots of time in Phoenix,Scottsdale and the surrounding areas during the spring and summer and during football season, so bow down We all pay for services from immigrants rather we know it or not.

Interesting. When I'm hiring companies to do work on my house I make it a point that they do not have illegals. I'd rather pay more to support a company that uses US citizens than simply save a couple of bux while the company owner is making more profits due to using illegal workers. Sounds like you are part of the problem with our economy.

[Cold_Zero]

I know Cake and I have duked it out over what I am about to say, but I would still like to see a study done on the amount of money that is wired outside of the borders of the United States by legal and illegal foreign workers. I would love to tax the **** out of that money leaving the US, especially if it has never been taxed before. That is money that is being taken out of our economy and invested in another Nation's economy. Here is an example; we monetize spending for a bridge to be built in Maryland. The money is added to our nation's debt load, so that we can build the bridge now. A foreign general worker is hired through an American construction company to help build the bridge. On Friday (payday) he goes down to the Western Union and takes a portion of his paycheck and wires it back home to his parents in Dakar. Now if the worker is legit and paid his taxes, at least the state, local and Federal Governments to get their tax revenue to reinvest (hopefully) back into the infrastructure of this country. But we are still loosing out on that money being reinvested by the work back into his local economy, which rolls up to the state and national economies. If the worker is illegal, we have compounded the problem even worse, obviously the local, State and Federal Governments are not getting the tax revenue to reinvest in the country's infrastructure and the money is not being re-invested in the local, state and national economies, but also the guy taxing the infrastructure of this country and not paying his fair share.

[mattblancarte]

You got daym right! You live in Scottsdale AZ, correct? Dont get all noble and righteous on me You know exactly what Im talking about. I spend lots of time in Phoenix,Scottsdale and the surrounding areas during the spring and summer and during football season, so bow down We all pay for services from immigrants rather we know it or not.

That's correct. I do live in North Scottsdale. Excuse me, but I will get all noble and righteous on you. I happen to own a business which legally contracts people for work, and pays them a fair market wage. All domestic contractors that I work with provide to me their information so that I can submit to them a 1099 tax form.

What you're doing is illegal. You already knew that, though. I won't waste my time making the case.

[CakeDaddy]

That's correct. I do live in North Scottsdale. Excuse me, but I will get all noble and righteous on you. I happen to own a business which legally contracts people for work, and pays them a fair market wage. All domestic contractors that I work with provide to me their information so that I can submit to them a 1099 tax form.

What you're doing is illegal. You already knew that, though. I won't waste my time making the case.

Yeah sure... Illegal should be doing bad work and charging full price for it! You want to talk illegal? Wait til you see my tax return , but I commend you for your business practices and paying taxes, but keep in mind that I did hire the “right” guys for the job in the beginning only to be let down and not to mention the $$$$’s of dollars I’m out of. This entire immigrant work status in the US topic has been beaten to death by certain groups and honestly…. In my opinion; It’s over exaggerated. This country can be the biggest hypocrite at times.

Example:Pledge of Allegiance Star Spangle Banner

edit:... and get off my jock, leave me alone. Comment on the original post. thx
Modified by CakeDaddy at 5:51 PM 2/12/2009

[audtatious]

Your opinion seems to go against current law. Until your party changes it you are a criminal just like they are.

[smockers83]

Your solution sounds good, but it doesn't work for a couple of reasons.

First, at the wage rates the illegals are paid, many Americans aren't willing to do those jobs at those rates, or even do the jobs at all. But hypothetically, if we replaced the illegals with US citizens in these jobs, not much is going to change besides people being off of welfare. There are still going to be unemployed people, in fact the same amount or more. So there isn't going to be any stimulus to the economy whatsoever.

Secondly, wages aren't going to rise because of a rise in demand, at least in this case, and I'll tell you why. You have supply and demand mixed up in this instance. We as employees are a supply of labor even though what we demand is a job. So a rise due to demand of labor isn't going to happen because you change the structure of the labor force because what you're doing is changing the structure of the supply of labor. Wages, however, may rise due to the fact that they are US citizens but now less are going to be demanded from the company.

If an increase in wages was due to an increase in demand, it would be because the company demands, or needs, more labor, not because more people want jobs. In fact, as more and more people become unemployed and more people want jobs, this forces wages down because of the increase in the supply of labor.

So no, no solution, no stimulus found in this idea.

[liquid_cool]

Your solution sounds good, but it doesn't work for a couple of reasons.

First, at the wage rates the illegals are paid, many Americans aren't willing to do those jobs at those rates,

As an example..where i work currently..there are over 220 employee's making and average wage of $18. an hour..thats a decent wage in this economy..98% of them...are illegal..and they brag about it..so i have to take this part of your arguement away...just 10 years earlyer an equipment operator make to start no experience $19. an hour..with experience..$25-35 an hour...now they start out @$9. an hour and $16. with experience...the price to build using ither labor is the same..but you can see where the profits get larger for the company breaking the laws..to there defence thou i will state that it is the responcibility of the employee when hired to provide documentation to the company..even if it is fake..the company now has no way of knowing....we can go on and on..but in reallity..if we wanted to get people back to work like i keep hearing on the news and from this administration..then this would be a fix to do that ..that is guarantee'd to work.

[liquid_cool]

.

Quote » Secondly, wages aren't going to rise because of a rise in demand, at least in this case, and I'll tell you why. You have supply and demand mixed up in this instance. We as employees are a supply of labor even though what we demand is a job. So a rise due to demand of labor isn't going to happen because you change the structure of the labor force because what you're doing is changing the structure of the supply of labor. Wages, however, may rise due to the fact that they are US citizens but now less are going to be demanded from the company.

If an increase in wages was due to an increase in demand, it would be because the company demands, or needs, more labor, not because more people want jobs. In fact, as more and more people become unemployed and more people want jobs, this forces wages down because of the increase in the supply of labor.

So no, no solution, no stimulus found in this idea.[/quote]supply and demand work when the markets bare for the wage..if there are 12 vacant jobs but only 3 qulifyed employee's ..the pay to intice the rite employess will be larger than one that must be traind or is not availible...if you free like in my industry..1million construction jobs..then you must replace them with new labor that is qualifyed..if not it creates a vacume and an increase in wage to attract the employee's needed...verry basic and simple concept.

[smockers83]

Umm, sorry, no it's not going to work. And you can't take my argument away because it is right. I'm not following your rebuttal because I can't tell what you're trying to say and where you're trying to take it. Just because 10 years ago they were paid less and now they're paid more doesn't mean a darned thing. At all. If you want to argue this point with me, you're going to have to go into much more detail than just stating wage increases.

Just because you replace an illegal workforce with a legal workforce doesn't mean it's going to stimulate the economy. You still have the same amount of people working, maybe a little bit less even. The same amount of money is still going to go out into the economy. Illegals don't take their paychecks and just sit on them. They take them, cash them, and spend them. If you got rid of them and put US citizens in their place, they're going to cash them and spend them, but they're also going to have to pay taxes on them as well. So now even less money is going into the economy whereas the illegals probably weren't getting taxed so they couldn't be traced and found.

I know, that tax part blows you away right? Many illegals don't pay taxes, period. Their wages are not taxed at all. That puts tax free money into the economy whereas a legal workforce has a portion of their paychecks taken away in the form of taxes, leading, as to I said just earlier, less money into the economy than before.

[mattblancarte]

You have supply and demand mixed up in this instance.

Indeed he does. If supply increases, the price of goods and services decreases. Categorizing a larger labor force as higher demand is incorrect. This is an increase in supply, as you've said.

[smockers83]

supply and demand work when the markets bare for the wage..if there are 12 vacant jobs but only 3 qulifyed employee's ..the pay to intice the rite employess will be larger than one that must be traind or is not availible...if you free like in my industry..1million construction jobs..then you must replace them with new labor that is qualifyed..if not it creates a vacume and an increase in wage to attract the employee's needed...verry basic and simple concept.

You sir, are very confused. What you just described there is what I said here:

If an increase in wages was due to an increase in demand, it would be because the company demands, or needs, more labor, not because more people want jobs. In fact, as more and more people become unemployed and more people want jobs, this forces wages down because of the increase in the supply of labor.

Here's some of the difference. If I get rid of 100,000 people and can turn around and hire 100,000 people no problem, pay isn't going to change because those people were attracted due to the fact that the job openings were there. However, if I get rid of those 100,000 people and can only get 90,000 to come replace them, then yes, I need to to raise my wages to attract an additional 10,000 to get to 100,000.

Lets play with your example a little bit. I have a construction company. I need 12 specialized people to do a certain job. Currently I know of 3 people out there that can do it. The labor I need and know of is in short supply according to my demands, so I have to pay a higher price for that labor because those 3 people, as suppliers of labor are the only 3, and they can then command a higher pay. That higher pay is a price for labor. Someone looking to sell their time to do work for me is looking for a price that is high enough to entice them to do the work. So that high wage attracts them to my construction company. As more people get wind of this opportunity, my supply of labor for this job increases. As it increases, the wage for all of my hires decreases because I can find more people to do it. As I can find more people to do it, in order for them to compete with other people in order to get hired, they lower their wage expectations, therefore I can capture the lower price.

Lets say I have a need for the same 12 jobs and I know there are hundreds of people already able to do it. This forces the wage down because the supply of those people is far in excess of my needs and in order for those people to compete against each other, they need to lower their wage expectations, or their asking hourly rate. If a guy out of hundreds coming in wants $25/hour and 10 come in wanting $18/hour for the same job, I'm going to take those 10 at $18/hour. This is what I'm talking about in terms of competing.

Now lets say the economy is doing very well and most people are in their jobs and have settled and at this very moment I'm not looking for anyone. This creates a wage that is high enough to attract only so many people and to dissuade all the others. Now the very next moment I need 12 more people. This is an increase in demand for labor. This causes the wage rate for the position I am now hiring to increase because of my increased demand for labor. This will entice an additional 12 people to possibly leave their other jobs to come work for me or the couple that are unemployed to now become employed, just because of the simple change in demand causing the price to rise. There was no increase in the amount of people I had to choose from.

If I were the only person who could play Moonlight Sonata on the piano in the whole world and the only way to hear the song is to come and hear me play, I could essentially charge the highest price I wanted. This is because this talent/job is in such low supply and in such high demand. I have a very specialized skill as I am the only person in the world that can do it, so I can sell that skill for insane amounts of money. Same can be said in the opposite manner.

A change in the labor supply is a change in population. If I were to have magical sex and have thousands kids all at once that were old and smart enough to work right away, this is an increase in the supply without a real change in demand. This forces wages down. If I were to send my country into a bloody war and they all died, this is a decrease in the supply of labor without a real change in demand. This forces wages up. Of course these instances require everything else besides the population increases to remain the same.

Now, if I can hire a more "qualified" workforce for my construction company, I may in fact need fewer workers than before because they can do it at the same speed and quality as my previous workers. This is an increase in productivity, which then allows me to pay them more based on their productivity, which is due to them being more qualified.
Modified by smockers83 at 1:01 AM 2/13/2009

[smockers83]

Now, if I can hire a more "qualified" workforce for my construction company, I may in fact need fewer workers than before because they can do it at the same speed and quality as my previous workers. This is an increase in productivity, which then allows me to pay them more based on their productivity, which is due to them being more qualified.

I just realized how confusing this statement could be and how confusing my whole post may be...it was almost 1am. So if you need something explained further, just let me know.

But for starters I want to explain the quoted point further to clarify. What I was trying to get at is that a more qualified workforce allows me to hire less people than before when I had my lesser qualified workforce. This is because the more qualified workforce, at say 100, can do the job just as fast with the same quality as my lesser qualified workforce, which was 150. This is the increase in productivity due to their being more qualified.

[liquid_cool]

so your saying that "if" you had a construction company in this economy you would hire the more experienced employee to increase your profits and use less labor to do it?...or are you saying to hire the inexperienced illegals to do the work at a cheeper price? ..becouse..where i work..we are down to 3 american citizens and the rest of the work force is illegal..we just had a raid by imigration only to see the whole lot run and the job becom a ghost town..with our verry welthy boss screaming at us to pick up all the tools..just so ya know..i have 18 years experience in underground pipeline/natural gas/power..most of the employee's where i work..have no experience..and are trained in the field by what was the former american citizen...so to you again sir..i say..if we ENFORCE current imigration laws...it would stir the economy due to the fact that the workers who at one time worked in the construction industry and are now layedoff and sitting on there duff makin 1150. bucks off unemployment..would find them selves suddenly in demad again..due to illegals unable to work in that industry due to enforcement of the law.

[smockers83]

I'm not saying either one actually. If one were to actually do it, they would have to look at the cost of labor, which is different from the wage paid. It all depends on who can get the most work done and earn me the highest profits. Sometimes that's the more skilled force, sometimes that's the illegals, it just depends.

Again, replacing illegals with US citizens in the job force is not going to stimulate the economy. As a man in economics, it just won't. I don't know how else to explain it to you. I'll give you that it may put a little bit more money into American hands that will stay in America, but to stimulate the economy with that, it isn't going to be very much at all. As I said before, the illegals aren't sitting on their cash and not spending it. They send about 33% of it back to their families across the border. The rest of it they save and spend here in the US. With a legal worker, their money is going to be taken out in taxes, somewhere in the neighborhood of 15-25%. So you do gain a little bit, but you're only dealing with a very small fraction of the national population so there isn't going to be any stimulus to the economy.

It's not that I agree with illegals being here. I'm definitely against that, so don't get me wrong.

[Armelius]

I can't follow your argument one bit. Taking out illegals will hurt the economy. Our economy is artificially built around illegal and legal immigration.

More people more demand for houses and apartments or rentals. Funds leaving the country don't necessarily help or hurt a country like ours

We k

I know Cake and I have duked it out over what I am about to say, but I would still like to see a study done on the amount of money that is wired outside of the borders of the United States by legal and illegal foreign workers. I would love to tax the **** out of that money leaving the US, especially if it has never been taxed before. That is money that is being taken out of our economy and invested in another Nation's economy. Here is an example; we monetize spending for a bridge to be built in Maryland. The money is added to our nation's debt load, so that we can build the bridge now. A foreign general worker is hired through an American construction company to help build the bridge. On Friday (payday) he goes down to the Western Union and takes a portion of his paycheck and wires it back home to his parents in Dakar. Now if the worker is legit and paid his taxes, at least the state, local and Federal Governments to get their tax revenue to reinvest (hopefully) back into the infrastructure of this country. But we are still loosing out on that money being reinvested by the work back into his local economy, which rolls up to the state and national economies. If the worker is illegal, we have compounded the problem even worse, obviously the local, State and Federal Governments are not getting the tax revenue to reinvest in the country's infrastructure and the money is not being re-invested in the local, state and national economies, but also the guy taxing the infrastructure of this country and not paying his fair share.

I like your quote the best though. Just to make a point that we have had constant funding of foreign countries through the Marshal Plan or aid sent to Middle East so that they can have free welfare. Some say this returns to us and creates a demand for the dollar. Whatever it is we are artificially propping up foreign governments/people through those policies and through our military bases in places like Asia and Europe. WWII is supposed to be over and having our troops in foreign states for peaceful purposes is a bigger drain on our economy.

[joker350gt]

id rather pay 15 workers $5 an hour than $19.

Dont blame it all on the illegals, after all its the Americans that hire them.

How about they give them some type of 6 month pass and start collecting tax and instead of making them eligable for filling income tax they agree to fork over than income tax for another 6 month stay.

And charge a more to get into this counrty the right way.

[smockers83]

How about they give them some type of 6 month pass and start collecting tax and instead of making them eligable for filling income tax they agree to fork over than income tax for another 6 month stay.

And charge a more to get into this counrty the right way.

What?

[joker350gt]

What?

tax illegals for being here, theres 12 million on them tell em if they wanna stay they gotta pay charge them $1000 each a year

[audtatious]

So, you are saying that the 12 billion they would pay to be here is going to solve the problem? Do you know what their current cost to the taxpayer is? Almost 340 Billion! That's almost 1/2 of the stimulus that just passed the House!

[joker350gt]

Thats 12 billion the US needs, who else is gonna give 12 billion, you, me? ima already paying to keep crappy cars on the road and people form losing their houses, I say if there is the potential to get an extra 12 billion then get it plus that 12 billion evey year give or take.

Cant deport 12 million people, thats imposible and certainly cant keep them from coming, might be able to slow them down but they will get in so minus well charge them and start paying our bills than keep trying to postpone it for future genarations to pay.

Now is that so hard to understand?

[smockers83]

So you're saying that we should charge illegals $1000 each for being in the country?

That opens up a lot of doors for people who are citizens. The $1000 is a tax. You tell illegals to pay that as their taxes, everyone else in the US is going to want to only have to pay $1000. I say this because $1000 is not representative of their income like the rest of the tax structure. We would get more money out of them if we let them just pay taxes.

Now, somewhere you were mentioning 6 months and I hope I follow this correctly, and I think I am because I think this is what you're trying to say. If we let them wait 6 months to pay the $1000 charge plus their income taxes, then yes, we've got a plan that would potentially work.

[joker350gt]

So you're saying that we should charge illegals $1000 each for being in the country?

That opens up a lot of doors for people who are citizens. The $1000 is a tax. You tell illegals to pay that as their taxes, everyone else in the US is going to want to only have to pay $1000. I say this because $1000 is not representative of their income like the rest of the tax structure. We would get more money out of them if we let them just pay taxes.

Now, somewhere you were mentioning 6 months and I hope I follow this correctly, and I think I am because I think this is what you're trying to say. If we let them wait 6 months to pay the $1000 charge plus their income taxes, then yes, we've got a plan that would potentially work.

$1000 for every stay plus collect all that tax money that the IRS does from every check and NOT give it back.

$1000 is just a genarl number, It could be higher or lower or what ever.

Now i understand that US citizen part that your saying but if you get what im saying is that at the end of the Day the US go there money and the US citizen still has more benifits and the illegals are only here on a temp basis.

With this plan every illegal gets register and granted a pass to stay aslong as they pay and if they dont we have info to go find them and kick them out. Some will be like no im not paying so they will leave on there own and others will pay to stay. And for those that want to come in the right way then they will have to pay but they can have the better part of becoming a Citizen or resident but only if they waited in their orign country and did the paper work instead of hoping the border.