US Govt. to revisit penalty for employing illegal aliens

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Should we start exporting all our poor because they cost us too much?

No, but we probably shouldn't be importing other countries' poor either.

Exporting jobs overseas for cheap labor may not seem like a good idea either, but in the global scheme of things, its all part and parcel to having a global economy. Protectionism lost out long ago.

Exporting jobs and dropping protectionism is not the main problem here. How many countries, who have the highest standard of living in this world, do you think have an illegal immigration problem anywhere close to that of the United States? America seems to be importing poverty faster than any other developed nation in the world. The consequences of this speaks for itself.

In terms of exporting jobs, people have the choice on whether to buy goods and services from the US. There are companies who still manufacture goods and provide services from the US. What it comes down to is how many Americans give a ###### about buying American.

PS Also with regards to the exporting of jobs. If so many jobs have been exported then why the hell would America be importing more and more low to no skilled poverty stricken aliens.

No other country has aspired to liberal economics the way the U.S. has. We have led the way with visionaries such as Milton Friedman. Europe is much more protective when it comes to their economic policies.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Economic Liberalism

"economic liberalism" usefully describes theories of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries that defended the individual liberty to buy, sell, work, employ, and trade without restriction or governmental interference. The general tenor of economic liberalism is succinctly captured in the French phrase of the era, laissez-faire, or 'leave people alone'. This theory maintained that people should be left alone because their self-interested activities in the market were self-regulating, guided by natural economic laws that were far more conducive to social well-being than the directives of state authorities. Thus, economic liberalism was the doctrine typified by seventeenth-century English, French, and Dutch pamphleteers who were critical of state restraints on trade and regulation of interests rates; by the treatises of eighteenth-century French économistes (retrospectively designated Physiocrats); and best exemplified by Adam Smith's 1776 Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.

http://www.answers.com/topic/economic-liberalism

[Heracles 417]

No other country has aspired to liberal economics the way the U.S. has. We have led the way with visionaries such as Milton Friedman. Europe is much more protective when it comes to their economic policies.

Europe is also tougher, 100 fold, on illegal immigration and immigration as a whole. The only thing I would suggest the US do to curb people wasting their money on ####### is to introduce a federal consumption tax like Canada, UK, AUS etc. Lets say a 5% tax on all goods and services sold. This would be on top of whatever other state taxes are collected. This revenue could then be used to provide incentives for companies to setup and hire American workers.

I agree with some points people are making. Someone being able to buy a plasma for $1,300 from China rather than paying $2,000, if it was made in the US, provides absolutely no benefit to America. Something that should have happened a long time ago is the backlash against companies who simply look at lining the managements and shareholders pockets rather than balancing those needs with their responsibility to the people of America.

Some companies in the US need to be 'reminded' that neither they or their shareholders are protected under the constitution. The country was established for we the people..

Edited November 27, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

No other country has aspired to liberal economics the way the U.S. has. We have led the way with visionaries such as Milton Friedman. Europe is much more protective when it comes to their economic policies.

Europe is also tougher, 100 fold, on illegal immigration and immigration as a whole. The only thing I would suggest the US do to curb people wasting their money on ####### is to introduce a federal consumption tax like Canada, UK, AUS etc. Lets say a 5% tax on all goods and services sold. This would be on top of whatever other state taxes are collected. This revenue could then be used to provide incentives for companies to setup and hire American workers.

I agree with what some points people are making. Someone being able to buy a plasma for $1,300 from China rather than paying $2,000, if it was made in the US, provides absolutely no benefit to America. Something that should have happened a long time ago is the backlash against companies who simply look at lining the managements and shareholders pockets rather than balancing those needs with their responsibility to the people of America.

Some companies in the US need to be 'reminded' that neither they or their shareholders are protected under the constitution. The country was established for we the people..

The free flow of goods and services needs to be either fully embraced or abandoned altogether. Free market capitalists don't want the government to inhibit the market's potential, that includes cheap labor.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

No other country has aspired to liberal economics the way the U.S. has. We have led the way with visionaries such as Milton Friedman. Europe is much more protective when it comes to their economic policies.

Europe is also tougher, 100 fold, on illegal immigration and immigration as a whole. The only thing I would suggest the US do to curb people wasting their money on ####### is to introduce a federal consumption tax like Canada, UK, AUS etc. Lets say a 5% tax on all goods and services sold. This would be on top of whatever other state taxes are collected. This revenue could then be used to provide incentives for companies to setup and hire American workers.

I agree with what some points people are making. Someone being able to buy a plasma for $1,300 from China rather than paying $2,000, if it was made in the US, provides absolutely no benefit to America. Something that should have happened a long time ago is the backlash against companies who simply look at lining the managements and shareholders pockets rather than balancing those needs with their responsibility to the people of America.

Some companies in the US need to be 'reminded' that neither they or their shareholders are protected under the constitution. The country was established for we the people..

The free flow of goods and services needs to be either fully embraced or abandoned altogether. Free market capitalists don't want the government to inhibit the market's potential, that includes cheap labor.

Free market capitalists don't necessarily have it all right. A bit of balancing is needed. Unless you're prepared to embrace a drop in your living standard to slightly above the level of at least all of the Americas. I don't think I'd like to advocate that. And if the free market capitalists want to do so, then let them lead by example and ditch their mansions and yachts.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

No other country has aspired to liberal economics the way the U.S. has. We have led the way with visionaries such as Milton Friedman. Europe is much more protective when it comes to their economic policies.

Europe is also tougher, 100 fold, on illegal immigration and immigration as a whole. The only thing I would suggest the US do to curb people wasting their money on ####### is to introduce a federal consumption tax like Canada, UK, AUS etc. Lets say a 5% tax on all goods and services sold. This would be on top of whatever other state taxes are collected. This revenue could then be used to provide incentives for companies to setup and hire American workers.

I agree with what some points people are making. Someone being able to buy a plasma for $1,300 from China rather than paying $2,000, if it was made in the US, provides absolutely no benefit to America. Something that should have happened a long time ago is the backlash against companies who simply look at lining the managements and shareholders pockets rather than balancing those needs with their responsibility to the people of America.

Some companies in the US need to be 'reminded' that neither they or their shareholders are protected under the constitution. The country was established for we the people..

The free flow of goods and services needs to be either fully embraced or abandoned altogether. Free market capitalists don't want the government to inhibit the market's potential, that includes cheap labor.

Free market capitalists don't necessarily have it all right. A bit of balancing is needed. Unless you're prepared to embrace a drop in your living standard to slightly above the level of at least all of the Americas. I don't think I'd like to advocate that. And if the free market capitalists want to do so, then let them lead by example and ditch their mansions and yachts.

I agree they don't have it all right. Government regulation is a necessary evil, however, we should all fear a government who intervenes by inhibiting the key factors of competition. Unless we're prepared to take a more Protectionist approach to our economic policy, we need an approach that is more welcoming to the importation of cheap labor as we are with cheap goods. I used to think it would ideal if the U.S. were completely self reliant....short of crude oil, we have an abundant supply of natural resources compared to a country like Saudi Arabia. But it's not realistic to imagine ourselves isolated from the rest of the world economically. We are already so immersed in an interdependency with countries such as China. All we can hope for, IMO, is to work towards fair labor and trade policies without inhibiting the free flow of goods and services. Milton Friedman wasn't all wrong either.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

No other country has aspired to liberal economics the way the U.S. has. We have led the way with visionaries such as Milton Friedman. Europe is much more protective when it comes to their economic policies.

Europe is also tougher, 100 fold, on illegal immigration and immigration as a whole. The only thing I would suggest the US do to curb people wasting their money on ####### is to introduce a federal consumption tax like Canada, UK, AUS etc. Lets say a 5% tax on all goods and services sold. This would be on top of whatever other state taxes are collected. This revenue could then be used to provide incentives for companies to setup and hire American workers.

I agree with what some points people are making. Someone being able to buy a plasma for $1,300 from China rather than paying $2,000, if it was made in the US, provides absolutely no benefit to America. Something that should have happened a long time ago is the backlash against companies who simply look at lining the managements and shareholders pockets rather than balancing those needs with their responsibility to the people of America.

Some companies in the US need to be 'reminded' that neither they or their shareholders are protected under the constitution. The country was established for we the people..

The free flow of goods and services needs to be either fully embraced or abandoned altogether. Free market capitalists don't want the government to inhibit the market's potential, that includes cheap labor.

Free market capitalists don't necessarily have it all right. A bit of balancing is needed. Unless you're prepared to embrace a drop in your living standard to slightly above the level of at least all of the Americas. I don't think I'd like to advocate that. And if the free market capitalists want to do so, then let them lead by example and ditch their mansions and yachts.

I agree they don't have it all right. Government regulation is a necessary evil, however, we should all fear a government who intervenes by inhibiting the key factors of competition. Unless we're prepared to take a more Protectionist approach to our economic policy, we need an approach that is more welcoming to the importation of cheap labor as we are with cheap goods. I used to think it would ideal if the U.S. were completely self reliant....short of crude oil, we have an abundant supply of natural resources compared to a country like Saudi Arabia. But it's not realistic to imagine ourselves isolated from the rest of the world economically. We are already so immersed in an interdependency with countries such as China. All we can hope for, IMO, is to work towards fair labor and trade policies without inhibiting the free flow of goods and services. Milton Friedman wasn't all wrong either.

Sure he wasn't. I'd just like to see the re-emergence of the American middle class. It is that middle class that made the country and it's economy strong. As the middle class is being destructed, the country is and it's overall economic outlook doesn't exactly improve. Unfettered import of cheap labor won't do one bit of good in re-building the foundation of a strong America. Hence, I don't think it would be a wise policy to pursue. Neither does the vast majority of Americans. Milton Friedman's theories notwithstanding.

[Heracles 417]

I agree they don't have it all right. Government regulation is a necessary evil, however, we should all fear a government who intervenes by inhibiting the key factors of competition. Unless we're prepared to take a more Protectionist approach to our economic policy, we need an approach that is more welcoming to the importation of cheap labor as we are with cheap goods. I used to think it would ideal if the U.S. were completely self reliant....short of crude oil, we have an abundant supply of natural resources compared to a country like Saudi Arabia. But it's not realistic to imagine ourselves isolated from the rest of the world economically. We are already so immersed in an interdependency with countries such as China. All we can hope for, IMO, is to work towards fair labor and trade policies without inhibiting the free flow of goods and services. Milton Friedman wasn't all wrong either.

Closed border policies have always failed the people of that nation. They have always reduced the standard of living for those living in that nation. Hence one of the many reasons for the failure of communism. NK is a great example of the outcome of closed border policies as is the great depression. Australia on the other hand is highly dependent on importing and exporting and trade. Consequently it has one of the highest standards of living in the world. Certainly the highest when compared to any other English speaking nation. The middle class are thriving.

America's continuing economic woes has a lot to do with poor leadership, focusing and prioritizing irrelevant issues and being complacent about its previous success. I am just in Melbourne (AUS) at the moment and was in Sydney last week. You just have to see the amount of construction and the general progress of these two cities to believe it for yourself. Every x months I visit I see huge improvements. It would take LA and NYC at least 20 years to catch up. Australia has strict immigration policy. Which not only protects the middle class, the majority, but also gives anyone disadvantaged the chance and opportunity to prosper and build a better life for themselves.

Investing in your country, in its infrastructure on its people creates jobs. So many in the US just don't seem to get that. As well as changing with the times. Detroit, for example, had all of its eggs in one basket with producing cars. Now that that has stalled the city has died. Does it take a genius to realize they should have been diversified. Look at the money Microsoft and Bungie made from one freakin game. This is where I give the west coast credit as it seems to get it more that the rest of the nation.

Time to vote for real leaders with a vision rather than just the status quo or someone with a personality..

Edited November 27, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[mawilson 2,133]

I partially agree. However, the free market is driven by the dollar which in turn advocates cheap labor to maximize profit. The supposed grace of liberal economics was that eventually, the quality of life would level off for all. I don't think it's realistic to try and close the barn door now.

If the quality of life "levels off for all", we will all be dragged into the abyss of third-world existence.

You may be ok with it, but I'm not. I hope it never ever happens.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The supposed grace of liberal economics was that eventually, the quality of life would level off for all.

If the quality of life "levels off for all", we will all be dragged into the abyss of third-world existence.

You got that right.

[Heracles 417]

I partially agree. However, the free market is driven by the dollar which in turn advocates cheap labor to maximize profit. The supposed grace of liberal economics was that eventually, the quality of life would level off for all. I don't think it's realistic to try and close the barn door now.

If the quality of life "levels off for all", we will all be dragged into the abyss of third-world existence.

You may be ok with it, but I'm not. I hope it never ever happens.

To be honest it is already happening. Much like Mexico, the rich are extremely rich while everyone else is slipping and barely making ends meet. The middle class are being absorbed by the poor. The problem with this is that once a country goes down the 3rd world route, it takes decades to reverse.

Whereas countries with a high standard of living have a strong and growing middle class and a responsible policy on low skilled immigration. Therefore they can slowly absorb the poor and raise their standard of living.

Edited November 27, 2007 by Boo-Yah!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I partially agree. However, the free market is driven by the dollar which in turn advocates cheap labor to maximize profit. The supposed grace of liberal economics was that eventually, the quality of life would level off for all. I don't think it's realistic to try and close the barn door now.

If the quality of life "levels off for all", we will all be dragged into the abyss of third-world existence.

You may be ok with it, but I'm not. I hope it never ever happens.

Then what economic philosophy do you think we should embrace? Laissez-faire or Keynesian? How can you be for protection of jobs but not in favor of regulating trade?

[mawilson 2,133]

I partially agree. However, the free market is driven by the dollar which in turn advocates cheap labor to maximize profit. The supposed grace of liberal economics was that eventually, the quality of life would level off for all. I don't think it's realistic to try and close the barn door now.

If the quality of life "levels off for all", we will all be dragged into the abyss of third-world existence.

You may be ok with it, but I'm not. I hope it never ever happens.

Then what economic philosophy do you think we should embrace? Laissez-faire or Keynesian? How can you be for protection of jobs but not in favor of regulating trade?

Define "regulating trade".