It's hard to know the truth, there is a lot of public posturing and a lot of closed doors negotiating. Most Venezuelans don't like Maduro but don't trust the opposition politicians.The Miami Herald says "Venezuela’s congress on Tuesday unanimously approved rejoining a hemispheric mutual defense agreement..." What it didn't say is that the pro government members no longer assist having formed their own "Constitutional Assembly." The fact is (in my opinion) that it's the military that is running the country with Maduro as their civilian puppet. The fact that Guaido is still free shows that they are not all that confident of their position/strength.There are also huge international stakes in play, billions owed to China and Russia, the ownership of Citgo, claims about illegal expropriations, the Venezuelan military running one of the world's largest drug cartels -- transhipment of Colombian coke to Europe. Supposed exports of uranium to Iran. The sale of gold reserves to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and others.For civilians like myself, the best one can do is to get out of the mess. I'm lucky that I can afford to. It's the poor refugees that bear the real burden in life and limb. Four to five million Venezuelans have left from a population of around 30 million.Another issue is destination. Venezuela, like the US, is a country of immigrants. Those of us who can show a legal right to other nationalities can get second passports. In Porto there are a huge number of Venezuelans of Portuguese ancestry. I have spoken to quite a few. I got my German passport 15 years ago just to be on the safe side, it would give me access the all of the European Union if needed. Those that don't have the proper documentation are not so lucky, my dentist with an Austrian mother and a cousin with a German father, for example. They just don't have the right papers!After over 20 years of mismanagement and neglect, should the Maduro regime be overthrown, how long will it take to recover Venezuela with so much damage and brain drain? At 80 I doubt I'll see the day. For over four decades Venezuela had been very good to us, a lovely country with a lovely welcoming people. All that lost to political ambition and corruption.Denny Schlesinger
That is just so sad. If only they could have gotten the right group of power hungry criminals in charge, it could have been the worlds first socialist success story. As is, just more of the usual suffering and death. What were the chances?
That is just so sad. If only they could have gotten the right group of power hungry criminals in charge, it could have been the worlds first socialist success story. As is, just more of the usual suffering and death. What were the chances?Are you meaning, that in VZ's case it "just wasn't done exactly right"?Like it has been done in ... wait for it, I'll find some place where it "has been done right"...Sorry, after five seconds of research, I'd have to say NO WHERE has it "been done just right"... (too bad so many millions of innocent lives have been sacrificed by those trying to get the process "just right"...Given the empirical evidence, even going back to America's history before we became colonies that became America, the chances of success in VZ were exactly 00.00% probability... one of the longest of long shots to say the least...
If only ... it could have been the worlds first socialist success story.There is no such thing as a "socialist success story." There never has been and there never will be.Denny Schlesinger Unless you believe in Unicorns, Santa Claus, and other fairy tales.... 😇
“There is no such thing as a "socialist success story." There never has been and there never will be.”http://blog.peerform.com/top-ten-most-socialist-countries-in...I’ve been to many of these countries and they seem to be pretty successful to me. Happy people, good economies, etc.
I’ve been to many of these countries and they seem to be pretty successful to me. Happy people, good economies, etc.With the exception of China, I would be willing to bet that the majority of the economic sector of those other countries are driven by the private sector. I wouldn’t call the socialist countries myself. If China hadn’t taken a major shift towards capitalism and remained a completely state controlled economy, it likely wouldn’t be so happy today.
Of the ten nine are welfare states, not socialists. Read up the definition of socialism.Definition of socialism 1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state 3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialismDenny Schlesinger
That article of the ten socialist countries is some of the worst propaganda I have ever seen in print. Happy people? Ask those who remember the thousands killed in Tiananmen Square or the people on the streets of Hong Kong! Or the countless Christians and Muslims in labor camps....some success story! There is so much wrong with that article it is difficult to fathom. The other countries are NOT socialist, dangerous misinformation! Hard for me to believe people swallow this without a thought.
“Of the ten nine are welfare states, not socialists. Read up the definition of socialism.“By that definition, are any Democrats or Democratic candidates in the United States “socialist”?
“Of the ten nine are welfare states, not socialists. Read up the definition of socialism.”Well then Denny maybe you should go to the next Trump rally and get behind the podium and explain to all his supporters what a socialist country is. If anyone suggests anything like universal healthcare and free college education they are deemed a socialist. Unfortunately the definition of a true socialist country isn’t understood be the fat man leading this country or the white folks that stand behind him and show up to his rallies.
Unfortunately the definition of a true socialist country isn’t understood be the fat man leading this country or the white folks that stand behind him and show up to his rallies. That is both an offensive and a racist comment. Talk to me after you learn proper manners.Denny Schlesinger
By that definition, are any Democrats or Democratic candidates in the United States “socialist”? Most probably aren't but many like the title. I wonder why.There are lots of NPI posters who love "socialism" but confuse socialism with a welfare state.The welfare state can easily ruin an economy if taken too far because there is no free lunch. I know that Sweden, Germany, Britain, and the Venezuelan 4th Republic had to cut back on welfare transfer payments because their economies could not support the excessive cost.The problem with the word "Socialism" is that it has been widely abused and now it means anything the user wants it to mean so it lost it's ability to communicate. A better term is might be "central planning." Marx's core idea is that people can't or won't properly manage their affairs for the good of the community, that only an Elite can and this elite must impose its will on the masses. How are Central Banks any different from this Communist Elite?Fool notehound posted a piece by El-Erian on the subject Central Banks Lose-Lose Situation.https://boards.fool.com/el-eriancentral-banks-lose-lose-situ...In every case it's an abridgment of individual freedoms that is so odious.Denny Schlesinger
The problem with the word "Socialism" is that it has been widely abused and now it means anything the user wants it to mean so it lost it's ability to communicate.You mean like applying it to strong man governments and then citing this as evidence that socialism doesn't work?There is a difference between socialism, per se, i.e., an economy which runs entirely on socialist principles, and a socialist policy in which the principles are applied only to the one policy. There are lots of examples of the latter here and elsewhere in the world which people are quite happy about on the whole.
“That is both an offensive and a racist comment. Talk to me after you learn proper manners.”Now that’s hilarious. So if you asked me a simple question like, “who attends Trumps rallies” and my answer was “white folks”, that would be a racist comment? Or was it that I can’t call Trump a fat guy? I was at a concert at the Hollywood Bowl the other evening to see Gustavo Dudamel, the audience was 80% Latino. Oh was that a racist comment? I find it incredibly ironic that Trump supporters can accept the Fatmans constant racist actions and comments on one hand, and then in odd ways attempt to play the “your a racist card”.
So if you asked me a simple question like, “who attends Trumps rallies” and my answer was “white folks”, that would be a racist comment? Denny didn’t asked you that question. Clearly your statement was anti “white people” which is racist. You were denigrating the fat man and the white people who follow him. One doesn’t need to be Noam Chomsky to figure this out. AJ
“Clearly your statement was anti “white people” which is racist.”Again hilarious. Now I’m racist against my own ethnicity. Let me be more specific, I’m anti stupid people. These ones just happen to be mostly white just like the moron narcissist in the White House. And my history with the fat man goes back to the early 1980s when I didn’t even care to know what party he was aligned with(Democrat), not as a reality celebrity. I knew he was just an ahole plain and simple.If he was still a democrat and in the Oval Office, I’d be aligned with about every republican in the country, as we would all hate the fat man in the White House. That is the difference. I see an ahole as an ahole no matter what party they are aligned with. Trump, Clinton, Putin.
AJ, thanks but it's best not to feed the trolls. Just check the reply you got!Denny Schlesinger
ChrisThat is a disgusting statement. If you had any common decency you’d get your post pulled.From your past behaviour I doubt you’ll do it.Hold your head in shame.
Why would I hold my head in shame. On one side one person can call someone a racist and a troll, and on the other side the person just has to keep their mouth shut, not defend themselves. Sorry not me. Denny doesn’t get a pass in my book just because he’s been here for a long time. He’s able to nip and poke and insult but not anyone else? Please. And for you climate deniers just to take a different path. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/26/scorching-heatwave-causes-fl...Yep, hotter and hotter, historic record breaking heat pretty much every year.
The welfare state can easily ruin an economy if taken too far because there is no free lunch. I know that Sweden, Germany, Britain, and the Venezuelan 4th Republic had to cut back on welfare transfer payments because their economies could not support the excessive cost. I just found another welfare state that almost went broke! Canada!X-post at METaR https://boards.fool.com/the-giverment-could-cut-down-on-spen...Lessons from Canada's 'basket case' moment https://business.financialpost.com/uncategorized/lessons-fro...Denny Schlesinger
"There are lots of NPI posters who love "socialism" but confuse socialism with a welfare state.The welfare state can easily ruin an economy if taken too far because there is no free lunch."Hi Denny,Would you agree that the United States today is a welfare state? Would you agree that a welfare state, if not taken too far, is desirable, but only so long as its (dis)incentives and costs are appropriately recognized and accounted for? Thanks.-Kyoami
Would you agree that the United States today is a welfare state?It certainly is ... for the wealthy.
“The welfare state can easily ruin an economy if taken too far because there is no free lunch."Agreed. Lots of people don’t want to work. More jobs available then people to work. The construction industry, agricultural industry, manufacturing industry, hospitality industry all being hard hit by a worker shortage. I know this first hand. We can’t find workers. It’s been going on for a couple of years now as the Mexican economy has improved, less workers coming into the states. Now that the border is much more cut off all those people desperate for work can’t get to the jobs we need filled. It’s a real problem. A group of biz owners I know are now looking into sponsorship of Hondurans caught at the border to help fill needed job positions. It’s crazy. Welfare state? Not my thing, but there are people that do need help. The other problem is finding able bodied people that are willing to do the jobs that most Americans are no longer willing to do.
The other problem is finding able bodied people that are willing to do the jobs that most Americans are no longer willing to do.I have often wondered why the free market and labor shortage does not/cannot increase pay enough to create job demand. Inflationary, of course, and consumers do love the relatively cheap produce and lawn maintenance, etc. Cranking up the wages would provide cover for tougher qualification requirements for financial assistance. How many of these jobs would then disappear as sourcing moved out of the country?KC
Would you agree that the United States today is a welfare state? Would you agree that a welfare state, if not taken too far, is desirable, but only so long as its (dis)incentives and costs are appropriately recognized and accounted for? Thanks.-Kyoami Today is a beautiful Sunday in Porto but is also "wash day." The self-service laundry offers free Wi-Fi so it's also a good place to reply to NPI posts while the clothes wash and dry. To answer your question, yes, and yes. But first let's define "welfare state" and its place in history. The welfare state is institutionalized charity and has existed throughout history. In early Mesopotamia and Israel there was debt forgiveness, an early form of bankruptcy protection. In India a beggar with a begging bowl gets food just about anywhere. The literary Robbin Hood was a welfare state fairytale. Monks and churches gave aid and comfort to the poor and destitute. The Ottoman Janissaries was a way to incorporate foreign subjects into the Ottoman elite. Patrons of the art. Modern philanthropists like Andrew Carnegie, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffett are private practitioners of the welfare state. Pioneers helped each other build their houses. My father supported various charities for which he was criticized. I paid for the surgery of a friend of mine. The list is unending.But charity can also be a scam. I knew an American in Caracas who organized charitable donations and skimmed them heavily. The monumental buildings of religion are an ostentation but they do provide jobs. At METaR they posted about a charity regulation that is simply a tax evasion loophole. 5% rule for Donor Advised Funds? https://boards.fool.com/5-rule-for-donor-advised-funds-34259...Even the basis of Communism is ostensibly altruistic, the problem being that it is unnatural -- against human nature -- and hence cannot exist without en enforcer. One frequent NPI political poster keeps bringing up dictatorship to prove that the failure is not of socialism but of strong-arm despots. The socialist societies that have been tried by willing participants without a dictator, several in the US whose name I do not recall and Israeli kibbutzim, have all failed.The history of Marxism is interesting, it's an offshoot of Anarchism! Anarchists originally wanted to do away with organized government but in the end Marx, who favored a strong elite to guide the proletariat, won out. As a curious footnote, early anarchists were individualists very much in the spirit of Ayn Rand. Hard to believe without reading their history.To conclude, as long as the welfare state takes care of humanity's minimum needs, it's a proper function of society. Once the welfare state becomes the maintenance of freeloaders, it's an abomination. Where is the dividing line? Equal opportunity is a human right, equal outcome is NOT. The problem in America is that the left (not to call them socialists) have invented a slew of so called "Human Rights." Your only human rights are "life, liberty, and the pursuit (not the attainment) of happiness." Free food, free medical care, and free housing are not human rights. Minimum wage is not a human right. Copyright, patents, and trade names are not human rights. The limitation of responsibility of joint stock owners is not a human right. Bankruptcy protection is not a human right. Many of these rights have been legislated and have been useful for the economic development of societies. And many have also been terribly abused like copyright which now no longer protects the author during his lifetime buy the purchasers of the estate seemingly to perpetuity, Disney is a prime example!It's a fine line dependent on who wins elections. Unfortunately Mark won during the international Anarchist convention.The First International The original International Workingmen's Association (IWMA), often known today as the First International, grouped together workers' societies of various socialist tendencies, including Mutualists, Blanquists, Owenites and republicans, though the most prominent were undoubtedly the Collectivists, grouped around Mikhail Bakunin and the Communists, led by Karl Marx. Towards the end of the First International, the Collectivists adopted Communist positions, but differed from the Marxists in their absolute rejection of authority, both within the International and in their strategic vision for the social revolution, which must immediately abolish the State and not, as with the Marxists, use it in order to gradually establish a communist society.In these early years of the international socialist movement, the IWMA held 5 congresses attended by both these latter tendencies, at which the differences between the various ideologies clearly emerged. After the 5th Congress, the movement split, with the anarchist communists establishing an anti-authoritarian International. The IWMA was dissolved after its 6th Congress https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Anarchist_Congre...Denny Schlesinger
Thank you for recommending this post to our Best of feature....A group of biz owners I know are now looking into sponsorship of Hondurans caught at the border to help fill needed job positions. It’s crazy. Actualy it makes perfect sense ... on condition that minimum wage laws apply to these sponsored workers (we actually call them temporary foreign workers). McDonalds in Vancouver area got caught giving all the hours to sponsored workers who were getting minimum wage over locals who were receiving "living wage" (which was over $3 an hour higher). They were not allowed to use temporary foreign workers" and paid fines. Tim https://settlement.org/ontario/immigration-citizenship/immig...
I have often wondered why the free market and labor shortage does not/cannot increase pay enough to create job demand. I can see three reasons, 1) the free market is not perfect, 2) employers are wary of future consequences of increased labor costs, 3) in commodities the low cost producer wins, you can price yourself out of the market if you raise wages before other do it. In addition I would posit that there are lots of people employed illegally with rock bottom wages. People love to save on wages and taxes.Denny Schlesinger
Denny:I appreciate your commentary on the bigger picture of failed economic systems like the one you were forced to flee from earlier this year.You often mention that such systems go against human nature. I recall a few years back when France mandated that people must work 30 hours a week instead of 40. The idea was to reduce chronic 10+% unemployment. If one had a business with 8 employees that would equal 320 work hours per week. By capping hours at 30, it was thought that it would force the employer to bump up his workforce from 8 people to 10 or 11. What ended up happening was that so many business owners decided to cut down the hours that they were open for business. They didn't add anybody and current employees were now being paid for fewer hours. So the very thing that the whole plan was designed to do failed epicily because it too went against human nature. One can usually see these things a mile away, but they still get attempted anyway. It turned out that the only new jobs created from this dumb policy were in the labor hour enforcement bureau. One of the things that make it difficult to run a business in many parts of Europe is that it is incredibly difficult to reduce the number of employees one has even if the needs of the business change. So there is a built in reluctance to hire new people in the first place unless you absolutely know you will need every one of them long term. Such policies also go against human nature. Thank you again for all of your contributions. BG
“To conclude, as long as the welfare state takes care of humanity's minimum needs, it's a proper function of society. Once the welfare state becomes the maintenance of freeloaders, it's an abomination. Where is the dividing line? Equal opportunity is a human right, equal outcome is NOT. The problem in America is that the left (not to call them socialists) have invented a slew of so called "Human Rights." Your only human rights are "life, liberty, and the pursuit (not the attainment) of happiness." Free food, free medical care, and free housing are not human rights. Minimum wage is not a human right. Copyright, patents, and trade names are not human rights. The limitation of responsibility of joint stock owners is not a human right. Bankruptcy protection is not a human right. Many of these rights have been legislated and have been useful for the economic development of societies. And many have also been terribly abused like copyright which now no longer protects the author during his lifetime buy the purchasers of the estate seemingly to perpetuity, Disney is a prime example!”Thanks Denny. I guess the challenge is to figure are what the minimum needs are today of our fellow human beings, so that their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness can be safeguarded and their opportunities are truly equal. And it appears that you would agree that, even if not a “human right”, intelligent legislation of other legal protections such as limitations in liability of shareholders or bankruptcy forgiveness can also be beneficial for economic development. Seems that this then would be a more fruitful basis for discussing politics and policy, I.e., what are the minimum needs of our fellow human beings to ensure their basic rights and what is the best way to further the development of our economy for the whole of our society (which are complex questions because of the perennial risk of freeloading and abuse), rather than to debate who is a socialist and who is intending the destruction of America (which generally generates more heat and enmity than light and practical solutions).—Kyoami
I recall a few years back when France mandated that people must work 30 hours a week instead of 40. The idea was to reduce chronic 10+% unemployment. If one had a business with 8 employees that would equal 320 work hours per week. By capping hours at 30, it was thought that it would force the employer to bump up his workforce from 8 people to 10 or 11. It's a curious coincidence that you cite a French example. It was the French economist and politician, Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850), who I believe was the first to write about unexpected consequences (only in the economic sense). The Parable of the Broken Window orThat Which is Seen, and That Which is Not SeenIntroductionIn the department of economy, an act, a habit, an institution, a law, gives birth not only to an effect, but to a series of effects. Of these effects, the first only is immediate; it manifests itself simultaneously with its cause — it is seen. The others unfold in succession — they are not seen: it is well for us, if they are foreseen. Between a good and a bad economist this constitutes the whole difference — the one takes account of the visible effect; the other takes account both of the effects which are seen, and also of those which it is necessary to foresee. Now this difference is enormous, for it almost always happens that when the immediate consequence is favourable, the ultimate consequences are fatal, and the converse. Hence it follows that the bad economist pursues a small present good, which will be followed by a great evil to come, while the true economist pursues a great good to come, — at the risk of a small present evil. http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.htmlbut there are other unexpected consequences when policies ignore human nature. People are not automata.BTW, the 32 hour week was also proposed in Britain. An Australian wag asked "How are you going to get the Brits to work the extra day?" ;)Denny Schlesinger
the whole of our society actually very difficult to forecast or even to measure, our "society" is in fact very diverse . For instance our "society" consists of people from a few seconds old to over 100 years old, except for a few thing like public health measures something that benefits some may likely hurt others. Expecting today's politicians to put society's good ahead of their pwn efforts to stay onboard the gravy train is to expect a miracle. One need go no further than today's headline https://finance.yahoo.com/video/baby-bonds-bill-aims-childre... to see blatant vote buying at work. We don't live in some future utopian world where resources are unlimited, we live in a real world where almost every welfare plan has costs, both to those who pay for it and those who use it. The feasible compromise is a moving target, wealthy societies can do nanny welfare things today that would have been impossible a hundred years ago and still function. There are limits which we see to an extreme in Venezuela and to a lesser extent in the lagging growth of some developed countries like France . https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.KD.ZG?locat...
Seems that this then would be a more fruitful basis for discussing politics and policy... rather than to debate who is a socialist and who is intending the destruction of America... Like mauser says, this is utopian. Headlines from The Financial Times:‘Savage capitalism’ takes hold in crisis-hit Venezuela Business leaders point to extension of market freedoms under socialist government...After years of expropriations, hyperinflation, bankruptcies and financial collapse, what remains of Venezuela’s private sector might be forgiven for giving up hope.But business people in Venezuela say the economic crisis in the South American nation has hastened moves by President Nicolás Maduro’s government away from the full-blooded socialism of his predecessor Hugo Chávez towards a freer market.“As business people we have wanted free prices and a free flow of dollars for many years,” one senior executive at a consumer goods said. “Now prices have effectively been freed and you can pay with dollars.” https://www.ft.com/content/47f07086-ae0f-11e9-8030-530adfa87...When socialism runs out of other people's money, the "natural economy" rises again, i.e. CAPITALism. By coincidence today there was another article about capitalism in Colombia giving work to Venezuelan refugees. After you read it I have another message for youVenezuela migrants propel billion-dollar delivery app BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — It’s six in the morning and Samuel Romero is already pulling his bicycle out of a small garage.The 21-year-old Venezuelan migrant turns on his phone and logs on to Rappi, an app through which freelance cyclists get paid to make deliveries around Bogota, a traffic-clogged city of 8 million. He checks his brakes and rides into the chilly streets. It’s the beginning of a 15-hour workday, in which Romero is hoping he can make around $15 — the equivalent of Venezuela’s monthly minimum wage but barely enough to get by in costlier Colombia.“I am grateful to have some work” says Romero, who arrived in Colombia last year. “But you really have to devote tons of time to this to make any decent money.” https://www.apnews.com/218d7b66992e4cb6aa806eeab9ea7e09Did you read where it says: But the gig economy can also be perilous for migrants, who end up working long hours in occupations that provide modest pay, no benefits and few opportunities for career advancement....But Rappi — like similar companies — has also come under criticism for its modern-day labor practices, which reflect some of the shortcomings of the gig economy....“This company grew so fast that it forgot about our welfare” said Lina Hernandez......But cyclists in Colombia complain that payments are falling as more freelancers join the platform and compete for each delivery, forcing them to work longer hours to make similar or even smaller amounts of money. ---------------------This is a beautiful example of contradictions. You flee Venezuela and find a job, WONDERFULYou want more, Rappi is unfair...The Law of Supply and Demand, the cornerstone of Capitalism, is the culprit. We need more central planning, Socialism, to make life fair.We live in the real world where utopian solutions don't work.Denny Schlesinger
“Cranking up the wages would provide cover for tougher qualification requirements for financial assistance. How many of these jobs would then disappear as sourcing moved out of the country?”KC, At least from my viewpoint it’s not a wage issue. We are paying top wages. It’s the type of work that people no longer want to do. I pay my landscaper 100.00 a week and he is here for less then two hours. Our housekeeper is here with her daughter a couple of hours a week. We pay her 35.00 an hour. No American is going into a field to pick lettuce at any reasonable price. My contractor friends can’t find workers at 20.00 an hour for day labor. The workers just aren’t around.I won’t even get into the shortage of skilled workers like carpenters and electricians.Talk to anyone in the wine industry. They have grapes dying on the vine and they can’t find labor to pick the fields. On the other end I have a management position open right now paying 120,000 a year plus healthcare and we can’t find a qualified person to take the job. It’s crazy. Every business owner I know is having the exact same issues. We want to expand, consumers are spending, but we are not able to find the workers needed to grow right now.
Certainly, there is less slack in the work force by all accounts as almost any time in history. This is a consequence of a very healthy economy. It doesn’t mean that all those living in the economy are successful. There had been wage stagnation for quite some time and costs continue to rise with healthcare being the most virulent culprit. It was only a matter of time before wages had to go up with unemployment trending downward. Is the answer to bring in more immigrants? Maybe for the business owner, but not for those looking for a good paying job. And I’m not by any means anti legal immigration. It is a large part of the heart and soul, not to mention, the best economy in the world for quite some time. So while it is nice that fellow business owners are sponsoring Honduran immigrants, I just don’t see that as the answer. But back to wages. They have been moving upward and businesses will have to continue doing the same. What was the top rate today, may quickly become too low. I realize this is a conundrum. And it could very well mean the economic worm is starting to turn. There is a balance between wages and successful businesses and inflation. The more businesses have to pay, the more they have to charge in a break even scenario. While higher wage earners can afford higher costs, it is only to a certain point especially if costs such as healthcare eat into that equation. A.J.
Is the answer to bring in more immigrants? Maybe for the business owner, but not for those looking for a good paying job. And I’m not by any means anti legal immigration.Wrong questions. I offer (YES OR NO):1. Should the US, a sovereign nation, have laws regarding immigration? Yes or no.2. Should the US, a sovereign nation, have the right to enforce our laws regarding immigration? Yes or no.Yes or no... no need to go into all the smoke, mirrors, and verbose persiflage...Too simple for many, apparently...
Too simple for many, apparently... Don’t disagree with you at all. I was responding to a comment made up thread. AJ
“Is the answer to bring in more immigrants? Maybe for the business owner, but not for those looking for a good paying job. And I’m not by any means anti legal immigration.”Scratching my head as well on this point. Makes no sense simply because when we place an ad for say construction workers to build a new site we don’t get anyone answering the ads. It’s not about those looking for a good paying job, it’s that there isn’t anyone showing up for those good paying jobs. Of 25.00 and hour isn’t good enough for American workers to work at entry level unskilled labor jobs then we need to find other people willing to do that work. There is something wrong when an 8 hour day paying someone 200.00 for that day doesn’t want to do the job. There is also something wrong when that same person won’t do the unskilled job and also refuses to learn a skill that pays more. There are thousands upon thousands of jobs out there that can’t be filled when people on this side of the border don’t want to do them. What are you going to pay an unskilled worker on this siege of the border 50.00 and hour? 75.00 and hour? Ask the car companies and Detroit how that worked out. The answer is to let people in to this country that want to work. It helps our economy in every way.
As seems often the case reductio ad absurdum ... there are immigration laws ... could be they could use some adjustment as many laws can ... the laws are being enforced ... it is a question of how they are being enforced that is in question. One of the big tell tales in the recent immigration issues is how focused they are on the southern border. Given the larger number of people who are overstaying visas from Asia and Europe, this is transparently racial bias. Another big tell tale is that a large number of people presenting at the southern border are requesting asylum. There are some very understandable reasons for this in the situation in the Northern Triangle, just as there are many understandable refugee asylum requests elsewhere in the world from nearby countries in terrible circumstances. An asylum seeker is not a criminal! For that matter, a border crosser who is not an asylum seeker is *at most* a person guilty of a misdemeanor ... who is only accused, not yet convicted. This is a reason for dumping both asylum seekers and accused misdemeanors into concentration camp level conditions for weeks at a time? There is no reasonable ethical justification for this behavior.
The answer is to let people in to this country that want to work. It helps our economy in every way.And maybe part of the answer is to also stop paying people who are physically and mentally able, not to work.Cheers!Murph
Don’t disagree with you at all. I was responding to a comment made up thread. AJAJ: My apologies!... I, too, was referring to up thread.Sorry for the misinterpretation.BB
Scratching my head as well on this point I’ll expound. I actually think we may not be far off in views on this, but let me try to explain. There are processes in place (whether or not one likes them is a different story) for immigrants to gain entry into the country. Provided they follow those processes, they are free to work here. Also, a labor shortage in one industry or one area may not be at all the same as is happening in the majority of the country so we need to take our own experiences with a grain of salt. I, too, know plenty of business owners who are experiencing increasing labor costs. But many of them are thriving right now at the same time. They are passing the additional costs along to consumers. But...In regard to immigration, do we propose to allow anyone in who wants in? I don’t think that is fair at all. Think about all of the immigrants who have made their way through the system successfully. Think about all of those going through the process. Does it make sense to allow anyone in the country? Do we know who those people are and have the exhibited what we as a country look for in immigrants. Remember, we have the right to pick and choose just like any other country does. I consider myself a relatively upstanding, employable, intelligent and productive individual in society. But if France, thinks otherwise, then I guess I’m not allowed to stay there (if I so desired which I don’t!).A.J.
"we have the right to pick and choose just like any other country does"within our recognized human rights. We don't get to choose/reject based on race, religion, sexual orientation etc.
There are processes in place (whether or not one likes them is a different story) for immigrants to gain entry into the country.Recognize that there are two entirely separate things happening here, possibly three.One is immigrants. There are a number of different programs for immigrants based on contribution to the US economy, relatedness to existing citizens, lotteries for otherwise disfavored countries, etc. which provide programs by which people can aspire to move to the US. Another is asylum. People who are in untenable circumstances in their native countries have a globally recognized right to apply for asylum in another country. A large percentage of the people involved in the southern border issues are asylum seekers. Historically, we have handled these by giving people an initial quick hearing to judge whether there is a reasonable case and then giving them an ankle bracelet until their hearing date in court (to which almost all appeared) and deciding in a court environment whether their circumstances deserved asylum. Now, we are throwing these people in concentration camps or denying them access to the country with no basis.There are, of course, people who come here that fit in neither category. Numerically, the largest group of these are people who came here legally and overstayed their visas ... i.e., have nothing to do with crossing the southern border.
within our recognized human rights. We don't get to choose/reject based on race, religion, sexual orientation etc. While I don’t disagree with your assertion, how on earth is anyone going to know the reason someone doesn’t get accepted into a country?Using my very same example above, France can just say no. They don’t have to have a reason and that is their right as a sovereign nation. Notice that I never brought up anything about race or religion or whatever about myself. I’m a qualified guy that could go be productive anywhere. Doesn’t mean I’m going to be granted entry. Some countries might simply ask, “Can you speak our language” to which I would have to reply, “Unless it is English, no.” Based on that alone, I could be shown the door. AJ
"Some countries might simply ask, “Can you speak our language” to which I would have to reply, “Unless it is English, no.” Based on that alone, I could be shown the door. "Of course, other countries may do that. I was simply referring to the US.In our country, we shouldn't be choosing/rejecting based on criteria that we have specifically stated that we don't discriminate on. That would go against our stated value system.And for any properly processed application which is rejected, the reasons should be stated.That's the way a country of laws must work or it is not really living by its stated values.
Don’t disagree with you at all. I was responding to a comment made up thread. AJAJ: My apologies!... I, too, was referring to up thread. Good reason to always quote the post being replied to. ;)Denny Schlesinger
Does it make sense to allow anyone in the country? The Pilgrims and the Conquistadores didn't ask for permission....I'm in the process of establishing residency in Portugal. Fifteen years ago I applied to regain my German citizenship, just in case. It would give me access to the European Union, no questions asked. But residency outside Germany is only valid for three months after which you need to do some paper work to extend it to five years after which you can make it permanent. Four documents required, identification (passport), tax number, certification of residence, certification of means of support. Some of these need to be gotten in other offices where you need more papers. Right now I'm looking for two witnesses with the right documentation, residents in a certain parish. Then I need to go to Lisbon to notarize a form at the US Embassy so that I can sign up with a mail forwarder in the US. Bureaucracy -- UGH! PITA but not a real hardship, what about those in dire need?They Survived Colonization and War. But Venezuela’s Collapse Was Too Much. PARENSTU, Colombia — They had lived off the land for hundreds of years, before Venezuela or Colombia had even been founded. The Wayuu, an indigenous group of shepherds in South America, had survived war, upheaval, revolution and even being separated from one another by the creation of national borders.Yet for the Wayuu living in Venezuela, the breaking point finally came with the economic devastation under President Nicolás Maduro and the American sanctions against his government.As the country plunged into the world’s worst economic collapse outside of war in decades, the Wayuu began leaving on foot to Colombia — in the desperate hope that they might find a new home with their brethren. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/30/world/americas/venezuela-...Denny Schlesingerwayuu mochila bagshttps://www.google.com/search?newwindow=1&rls=en&q=w...
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |