Monday, December 12, 2005

Immigration, contd.

They come and take our jobs away, they lower the wage rates for employment, they crowd the cities and stretch public resources, there are fewer resources and an increasing number of players competing for those resources. "Our jobs"? Is anybody entitled to a job? If there is any entitlement, shouldn't that be based on meritocracy? If I own a business with jobs to give away, I will certainly want the best that I can buy with the lowest amount of wages I can give out. It's a labor market just like any other consumer market. Should jobs go defacto to Americans by virtue of their citizenship, even if they are not as good as the immigrant with a better work ethic, more qualifications, higher suitability, fewer demands? Yes because this is America. These are American jobs. It's the ownership rights of citizens to demand that their American businessman counterparts choose Americans first over non-Americans. But does that make good business and economic sense? Why does Microsoft employ a majority of their workforce from abroad? Should patriotism, or collective ownership rights take primacy over individual capabilities, merits, differences? What's the difference between Communism and the concept of collective ownership of American assets? Merely a logical extension? Or a real and practical imitation? "They lower wages for employment". Low costs of production mean higher profits for businessmen and companies -- who, we oftentimes forget -- are consumers themselves, also investors, risk-takers, etc. Companies, stockholders, CEO's get richer with higher profits. Consequently, their spending margins increase on a variety of things. Typically, the more one earns, the more one begins to spend. Profit-making is a right of every business -- that is the sole purpose for which they exist. The effects of higher profits and higher spending should invariably ripple across the entire market at some point. Wages for employment should be based organically on such market forces -- not on some perceived entitlement demanded by Unions and other idiots. Case in eg.: Union of Auto Makers trying to fight to hold on to their "entitlement" wages of $115,000 annually, which have now been brought down to about $89,000 annually. Apparently, this major slash in their wages as auto-makers are forcing them to live "meager" lives! Ofcourse, the ripple effect of such entitlement mentality -- GM is on its way to bankruptcy. Detriot is a ghosttown with the only industry keeping it afloat (the automotive industry) now caught up in heckling with Unions. They crowd the cities and stretch thin public resources. That is a cyclical argument. That is the very result of the inhumane and immoral immigration policies. Those laws themselves have created the situation where the new immigrants cannot find cover, comfort and solace unless they are surrounded by clans of their own members -- in ghettos, nonetheless. The one's that wish to leave, that wish to move up in education and careers, cannot because they do not have the legal and societal permissibilities like an SSN, or recourse to citizen aid, driver's licenses, etc. They visit ER's because they cannot get legitimate health insurance under current laws. This entire argument is cyclical... there's no need for me to delve into them anymore. Increasing number of players competing for resources You're living in a fools land if you expect to not compete for resources that always have been limited and are steadily decreasing. The only rational and intelligent solution is to accelerate human acheivement in technology and production, to produce and create new resources or new and efficient methods of gaining/using/spending them. Trying to adopt some kind of population control simply reduces your chances of getting more brains to work on social challenges. Also, population control clearly does NOTHING to produce or create anything new. It may merely slow down the rate at which resources deplete, but it does not change the status quo. Moreover, increased competition for resources also helps to reveal inefficient systems. They help identify and eliminate waste, unwanted loads, unharmonious systems... the "flowchart" gets streamlined when the pressure to minimize waste is high.


Blogger Semperviva said...

thanks for calling we should talk tonight... love, soph

12/13/2005 09:11:00 AM  
Blogger S.R. Deardorff said...

i like yer style man-g...

the question i have is this:

how are we going to make our american system more efficient so it doesn't cause its own demise?

do you think we'll be bright enough to change before we fall, or shall history repeat itself here as well?

peace n whatnot,


12/13/2005 09:24:00 AM  
Blogger Ergo Sum said...

Sasca! Apparently you are an ALCOHOLIC! You are so damp drunk EVERY single night! That's crazy.

12/13/2005 10:20:00 AM  
Blogger Semperviva said...

no i'm not that was the first time ever literally

12/13/2005 10:35:00 AM  
Blogger Ergo Sum said...

The most efficacious way to make the american system more efficient is to get the State out of the picture. We should mimick the natural, organic, and efficient system of things. Let there be no more artificial licensings, permits, regulations, censures, price-controls, etc.
Let individuals be autonomous, self-determined, self-governed, and let the market forces dictate behavior.
The sole purpose of the government should be to own the monopoly of just force and arbitration.

This is not the anarchical position that many mistake it to be... borders will still remain and be protected, government will still retain the responsibility to maintain law and order through the protection of human rights and the prosecution of those who violate them.

Ultimately, whether or not anything will succeed depends on each individual.

12/13/2005 01:09:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home