Posted by Tina
Another potential slap at the American worker, and the American notion of free and open competition for jobs, is embedded in the thousands of pages that make up Obamacare. If we get an immigration bill the fines kick in…The Washington Examiner explains:
An unnamed staffer for Sen. Marco Rubio has caused the latest stir over the immigration bill by telling the New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza that, “There are American workers who, for lack of a better term, can’t cut it…There shouldn’t be a presumption that every American worker is a star performer.” Rubio himself was quick to explain that the quote did not represent his own views. But in reality, the immigration bill Rubio is pushing, when combined with President Obama’s health care law, would actually do something much worse than make it easier for employers to hire immigrant workers over American citizens – it would provide a massive financial incentive to do so.
As I’ve outlined previously, under Obamacare, businesses with over 50 workers that employ American citizens without offering them qualifying health insurance could be subject to fines of up to $3,000 per worker. But because newly legalized immigrants wouldn’t be eligible for subsidies on the Obamacare exchanges until after they become citizens – at least 13 years under the Senate bill – businesses could avoid such fines by hiring the new immigrants instead.
Let’s be clear about something. In a free market, if a new immigrant worker can do a job better than an American worker for a cheaper price, there shouldn’t be a problem with a business hiring the immigrant. But when the immigration bill interacts with Obamacare’s employer mandate, it functions as a reverse tariff against hiring American citizens. It would be like subjecting Americans to a $3,000 tax on purchasing American cars, while allowing them to avoid that tax by purchasing cars from Germany, Japan, or any other country other than America. That’s not free trade. That’s government rigging the game against American citizens.
Unemployment for Americans has been over 7.6 percent for nearly five years while the economy bumps along at a dismal 1% to 2% growth. Inflation is now rearing its ugly head with interest rates on the rise and student loan rates nearly doubling to over 6%. There are more people in poverty today than ever before and the Democrats continue to blunt and discourage business at every turn while wasting tax dollars and increasing our debt.
OUR LEADERS NEED TO PAY FOR THE MESS THEY ARE MAKING OF AMERICA…
…only you can deliver the blow to remove the guilty from power.
But because newly legalized immigrants wouldn’t be eligible for subsidies on the Obamacare exchanges until after they become citizens – at least 13 years under the Senate bill – businesses could avoid such fines by hiring the new immigrants instead.
I think I heard a yawn, is AMERICA WAKING UP?
According to a caller on Rush’s show the illegal immigrants who are here already don’t want to become citizens. They don’t want to pay taxes and they don’t want their pay to go down because of a surge of immigrants, forcing them to compete against cheaper labor.
Isn’t that just a hoot? As Palin has said Rubio and the other Republicans that voted for this bill did for 30 pieces of silver. Now, to learn the Hispanic population those legally here and citizens don’t want amnesty for those here illegally. They sold the souls for votes just like the Democrats do to find out their votes were not for sale.
Rush Limbaugh: ‘Wait Until the Republican Party Hears About This’:
“There’s two things that they brought up that really scared me. They do not want to become United States citizens. I said, ‘Why not?’ They’re afraid that the United States government is going to take so much taxes out of their paychecks once they have to pay into the federal income tax.”
“Are you kidding me on this?” Limbaugh replied.
“I am dead serious. They do not want to become American citizens,” the caller said.
The Texas caller said the illegal immigrants are also concerned that immigration reform will lead to a surge of immigrants, forcing them to “compete against cheaper labor.”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/28/rush-limbaugh-wait-until-the-republican-party-hears-about-this/
The headline is misleading; there’s nothing that says businesses “must” hire newly legalized immigrants over other Americans, just that they may get a financial advantage by doing so. I’m too busy to look more into this right now though.
Peggy, I don’t understand the logic of that Rush caller. Most illegal immigrants are fairly poor, meaning they wouldn’t pay much, if anything, in income tax were they to become citizens. Most of them might get their income tax back. Then again, illegal immigrants don’t tend to be that educated, so I guess it’s possible they don’t know this?
Sure as a cat’s got climbing gear, I guessed that ol’ chris would be puttin in sumtin dumb as a load o’ cobblers. round these parts boy, jobs a job, ya either got one or not!
Chris: “Peggy, I don’t understand the logic of that Rush caller.”
Chris, Maybe this will help you understand.
Cesar Chavez was against illegal immigration and undocumented migrants.
From Wikipedia:
Immigration
The UFW during Chavez’s tenure was committed to restricting immigration. Chavez and Dolores Huerta, cofounder and president of the UFW, fought the Bracero Program that existed from 1942 to 1964. Their opposition stemmed from their belief that the program undermined U.S. workers and exploited the migrant workers. Since the Bracero Program ensured a constant supply of cheap immigrant labor for growers, immigrants could not protest any infringement of their rights, lest they be fired and replaced. Their efforts contributed to Congress ending the Bracero Program in 1964. In 1973, the UFW was one of the first labor unions to oppose proposed employer sanctions that would have prohibited hiring undocumented immigrants. Later during the 1980s, while Chavez was still working alongside Huerta, he was key in getting the amnesty provisions into the 1986 federal immigration act.[22]
On a few occasions, concerns that undocumented migrant labor would undermine UFW strike campaigns led to a number of controversial events, which the UFW describes as anti-strikebreaking events, but which have also been interpreted as being anti-immigrant. In 1969, Chavez and members of the UFW marched through the Imperial and Coachella Valleys to the border of Mexico to protest growers’ use of undocumented immigrants as strikebreakers. Joining him on the march were Reverend Ralph Abernathy and U.S. Senator Walter Mondale.[23] In its early years, the UFW and Chavez went so far as to report undocumented immigrants who served as strikebreaking replacement workers (as well as those who refused to unionize) to the Immigration and Naturalization Service.[24][25][26][27][28]
In 1973, the United Farm Workers set up a “wet line” along the United States-Mexico border to prevent Mexican immigrants from entering the United States illegally and potentially undermining the UFW’s unionization efforts.[29] During one such event, in which Chavez was not involved, some UFW members, under the guidance of Chavez’s cousin Manuel, physically attacked the strikebreakers after peaceful attempts to persuade them not to cross the border failed.[30][31][32]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Abernathy
Chris: “The headline is misleading; there’s nothing that says businesses “must” hire newly legalized immigrants over other Americans, just that they may get a financial advantage by doing so.”
God you are naive! Ever heard of the IRS? How about OSHA?…and the NLRB?
Even if this only represents a “financial advantage”…what the HELL is the federal government doing creating incentives that act AGAINST the interests of out of work citizens to favor newly created citizens?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Have you noticed the job picture in America over the last 4.5 years?
Why not give incentives that actually have the potential to improve the economy and increase opportunity for all Americans? Obama’s polices have failed to do this. His (The Democrat Party’s) policy of picking winners and losers has got to STOP!!!!
I just noticed this in my above post from Wikipedia. “In 1973, the United Farm Workers set up a “wet line” along the United States-Mexico border…”
Could the UFW been referring to another name commonly used to describe Mexicans who came to the US by swimming across the border? Isn’t it just as bigoted as the n-word? Or is it once again acceptable since it was used by Mexican members of the UFW?
Peggy, that info was interesting, but what does it have to do with the Rush caller saying that undocumented immigrants don’t want to become citizens because they think they will have to pay income tax? I have to say that didn’t help me understand that claim at all.
Chris, guess you missed this part. “The Texas caller said the illegal immigrants are also concerned that immigration reform will lead to a surge of immigrants, forcing them to “compete against cheaper labor.”
The caller was expressing the same concerns as Cesar Chavez and the UFW. More competition for jobs drives down the employment opportunities and also brings down the wage. I believe it’s called supply-side economics.
From Wikipedia – Supply-side Economics:
“As in classical economics, supply-side economics proposed that production or supply is the key to economic prosperity and that consumption or demand is merely a secondary consequence. Early on this idea had been summarized in Say’s Law of economics, which states: “A product is no sooner created, than it, from that instant, affords a market for other products to the full extent of its own value.” John Maynard Keynes, the founder of Keynesianism, summarized Say’s Law as “supply creates its own demand.” He turned Say’s Law on its head in the 1930s by declaring that demand creates its own supply.[8]
However, Say’s Law does not state that production creates a demand for the product itself, but rather a demand for “other products to the full extent of its own value.” A better formulation of the law is that the supply of one good constitutes demand for one or more other goods.[9] This requires that the original good has some value to another party and it is through willingness to trade this value that the producer of the new good can express his demand for another good.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply-side_economics
Chris, Correction. Change supply-side to supply and demand.
Here’s a better explanation of what the caller and Chavez were addressing.
Supply and demand
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The price P of a product is determined by a balance between production at each price (supply S) and the desires of those with purchasing power at each price (demand D). The diagram shows a positive shift in demand from D1 to D2, resulting in an increase in price (P) and quantity sold (Q) of the product.
In microeconomics, supply and demand is an economic model of price determination in a market. It concludes that in a competitive market, the unit price for a particular good will vary until it settles at a point where the quantity demanded by consumers (at current price) will equal the quantity supplied by producers (at current price), resulting in an economic equilibrium for price and quantity.
The four basic laws of supply and demand are:[1]
1.If demand increases and supply remains unchanged, a shortage occurs, leading to a higher equilibrium price.
2.If demand decreases and supply remains unchanged, a surplus occurs, leading to a lower equilibrium price.
3.If demand remains unchanged and supply increases, a surplus occurs, leading to a lower equilibrium price.
4.If demand remains unchanged and supply decreases, a shortage occurs, leading to a higher equilibrium price.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand
Peggy you bring up one of the very important reasons for immigration control. No nation will survive, much less flourish, with a “ya’ll come” policy. No matter how “nice” free flowing immigration may seem it hurts the low wage worker, the uneducated, the high school graduate looking for his first job, the seasonal worker, the part time college kid, etc.
A great example the failure of demand economics: I can demand an alternative form of energy equivalent to petroleum but that doesn’t mean that my demand will produce the desired product. Solar and wind and even the batteries to push a vehicle are still a long way off from competing.
Supply, on the other hand involves persons being creative, sensing there will be demand because he believes in his product/service, and taking a risk. We have been very successful with this approach and seen amazing products built that benefit, enrich, and entertain. Competition ensures that we get the best possible price. This is the entrepreneurial spirit that drives a robust economy but there is a catch…the blasted federal, state, and city governments have to get out of the way to unleash it.
Reagan said it best! (video 1 @ 8:32 through video 2 and most of 3)
(God I wish we could post video!)
Tina, Exactly right. It’s all about the Free Market. The value of the service or product is dependent upon what the customer is willing to pay.
If the supply is plentiful the price/wage will be low. If there is a shortage the price/wage will be high. Chavez and the UFW knew this and it’s why they were advocates of keeping workers from Mexico out.
Don’t you find it strange that this immigration bill is being sold as good for workers already here? With unemployment still so high how can people believe that increasing the competition for a job will help the economy or getting a job. Going from say 10 people applying for a position to 100 people will only reduce ones chance and put more on the unemployment line.
Could there not possibly be another motive, like increasing the pool of voters who believe the empty promise of a better life while they live on gov’t assistance and extended unemployment checks for years?
It’s hard to believe so many people are willing to believe what they’re told and not stop to figure it out for themselves. All they have to do is look at the past to Chavez, the UFW leaders and even MLK. They understood what would help people have a better chance for a better life and adding more to the pool to take away that chance was the wrong way to go.
Side note: I had two nieces and a nephew of Cesar Chavez’s work for me at that college in San Jose. Great people, hard workers and a wonderful family. Even went to one of their weddings.