President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[Uncle Ted]

Can someone please get entry level employees to Utah. I am going through a large expansion to my manufacturing facility but the labor pool is non-existent. Every business owner I know is struggling for labor. Wages are rising everywhere but it does not matter, there is nobody to hire.

The Republican party's current war on immigration is about to drive me out of the party. Hopefully the bright light being shown on the despicable practices happening with families now will get something to change.

My sister works in the construction industry (commercial industrial flooring). They can't find labor right now either.

In short, you may to raise wages even higher.

[Walter Sobchak]

6 months ago.... on drug decriminalization:

I think this situation perfectly illustrates the hypocrisy in politics. The problem here is that congress doesn't have the nerve or ability to advocate for and adopt decriminalization measures, which include revisions to a host of federal statutes, so they allowed an executive to direct a lack of enforcement of those laws. This allows states to do what they want with no political danger for congressman but also encourages disrespect for the law and proper process. It boggles my mind that we think Sessions or Trump is at fault here. It amazes me that a Senator from Colorado is incensed that the federal government would enforce its laws, the very laws that the Senate passed! Look, if we want to decriminalize it then we should decriminalize as opposed to un-enforce. The current approach is nothing more than looking the other way most of the time while leaving open the occasional instance of selective enforcement (which then allows racists and jerks to act like such while doing so entirely within the law). We could also leave it up to the states to do what they want, which is what Trump first said on the campaign trail. But any of the proper solutions requires congress to have the courage of its convictions and to legislate from a leadership role, instead of from a following role. Either way, it should never be the president's or the DOJ's job to decide which set of laws to enforce or which ones to ignore. They should enforce all the laws to the extent possible. It is Congress' job to create or amend the laws.

I think Ted's point was that this will force Congress to finally decide if it is going to decrim or not. Which it should have done a long time ago.

there was nothing wrong with the look the other way policy. It worked just fine

No it doesn’t. It is a completely wrongheaded approach in our system. We like to say we are a system of laws and we should be and we can only succeed when we are. The ‘look the other way’ approach is absolutely the opposite of that ideal. It was created because congress was hamstrung between those for and against decrim and so refused to act and because we had an administration who wanted to be popular among its base and so just went ahead and told justice to act like congress had acted. This undermines the legitimacy of not only drug laws but of ALL federal laws you might disagree with. But it simultaneously and ironically still undermines the states rights position because states can only do what justice chooses to allow them to do not as a result of a legislated limit but as a result of an arbitrary choice by justice itself! Plus, the laws can also be arbitrarily enforced as a punitive measure or a selective measure to coerce unrelated behaviors. Taken together this creates an environment where respect for our laws, law enforcement and our system itself is lost.

[...]

You know, honestly, I am surprised you think this is a fine approach. This is a greater threat to the balance of powers in our government than almost all of the other things we whine about put together. Like currency, the notions of balanced powers and of a fair process only work if we believe in them. Selective non-enforcement completely undermines faith in our laws and steals both the power and responsibility of congress (and thus the people) and imbues it in the executive which, as we have seen in this cycle, may not be the best place for it.

After 6 months of BlueK and frank's apocalyptic posts... creek is still being creek.

I think this entire episode (maybe even the Trump presidency) is a result of lack of respect for process. The democrats ignored the proper process but no one squawked too much because we all felt comfy and warm with the result. Trump is exploiting the process, forcing the issue, and we are all aghast, even though it is exactly what the law specifies, even if prosecutorial discretion allows us to ignore the law when convenient.

Prosecutorial discretion is no way to govern. Broad and vague powers allowed to exist in the executive are never a good idea, even if they are not abused or misused. Trump is wrong for pursuing this particular approach, IMO, but we should not let that blind us from the fact that we have lost our way on these issues. The laws should reflect what we want, not what the current prosecuting authority thinks makes the most sense.

We need more creek... less BlueK, less frank. Not just on this site, but in the world at large. God bless creekster.

[BlueK]

In short, you may to raise wages even higher.

Why not just let the government decide what the fair price is just like they can decide how many people to allow into the country, without regard to free market forces that would want that labor?

Both are examples of that concept that worked so well under Communism called "government central planning."

And yes, I'm being sarcastic. I'm also making a libertarian argument.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Is that due to immigration issues or full employment in the labor market? (sincere question)

Pretty sure it is the latter.

[Maximus]

Broad prosecutorial discretion is and always has been a bad idea. A dictatorship by analogy is and has always been a bad idea, even if one is governed by a benevolent dictator from time to time.

Creekster makes valid points, and rolling back this discretion is a long time in coming.

I agree it should be rolled, back but congress is unable to do anything bipartisan.

[BlueK]

6 months ago.... on drug decriminalization:







After 6 months of BlueK and frank's apocalyptic posts... creek is still being creek.



We need more creek... less BlueK, less frank. Not just on this site, but in the world at large. God bless creekster.

I like Creekster too. God bless him. That BlueK guy needs to go straight to hell though.

[Maximus]

BTW, saying illegals are infesting the country is racist, is it not?

[snowcat]

In short, you may to raise wages even higher.

The labor supply curve looks like the y axis on your graph.

There is also a supply and demand curve for the products we produce. If I can't produce at a price the market demands, I will have no demand at my price point and I can close my plant and these jobs as well as the jobs for the engineers, scientists and office staff will all go to other countries who will now be able to produce at a significantly lower cost. Then we can tariff the hell out of those countries. I guess we will then have a labor supply pool. Yippeee!

[BlueK]

BTW, saying illegals are infesting the country is racist, is it not?

I think the argument is Trump isn't a racist. He just knows how to say things to get the real racists to vote for him.

[BlueK]

Pretty sure it is the latter.

one affects the other.

[Uncle Ted]

The labor supply curve looks like the y axis on your graph.

There is also a supply and demand curve for the products we produce. If I can't produce at a price the market demands, I will have no demand at my price point and I can close my plant and these jobs as well as the jobs for the engineers, scientists and office staff will all go to other countries who will now be able to produce at a significantly lower cost. Then we can tariff the hell out of those countries. I guess we will then have a labor supply pool. Yippeee!

Yeah, that would help JL's sister out... Do it!

[snowcat]

Is that due to immigration issues or full employment in the labor market? (sincere question)

Full employment. We need to import labor.

[Maximus]

I think the argument is Trump isn't a racist. He just knows how to say things to get the real racists to vote for him.

if it looks like shit and smells like shit...

[BlueK]

Full employment. We need to import labor.

To the party in control right now, keeping America looking a certain way ethnically and culturally through immigration policy seems to be more important than the economy. The one difference under Trump than in the past is that they're less inclined to hide those social reasons. Many have felt that way for a long time but usually tried to couch most arguments under economics.

[Commando]

So under the current law any one that declares they are wanting to be a citizen because they are seeking asylum is automatically admitted? And those crossing the southern borders with their children how are they usually being persecuted (based on the race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or particular social group thing)? Shouldn't our CIA be assassinating these heartless basturd dictators that are doing the persecution and meddling in their election process (like they usually do)?

lol if the CIA could keep it in their pants, we'd have more Central American countries like Costa Rica and fewer like El Salvador and this discussion would be moot.