Trump Unveils Overhaul On 'Legal' Immigration... Bring Skills, Speak English...

Trump is keeping another campaign promise, he is putting in merit based immigration standards to new immigrants bill introduced today. Out goes the lottery system and in comes the merit based system.

"I campaigned on creating a merit-based immigration system that protects U.S. workers and taxpayers," President Trump said at the White House Wednesday. "[This bill] will reduce poverty, increase wages and save taxpayers billions and billions of dollars."

The legislation, called The Raise Act, aims to replace the current permanent employment-immigration framework, which has been characterized by the Trump administration as a “lottery system,” with what it is calling a skill-based system that operates on the basis of individual merits. The measure is based on a bill that was developed in the Senate by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and Sen. David Perdue (R- Ga.) and will greatly cut the number of legal immigrants admitted to the country, placing an annual 50,000 person cap on permanent resident refugees.

www.foxbusiness.com...

Preventing low skilled immigrants from coming into the US will create a balance that should ( I question that) raise wages of people who work with their hands. This maybe a start to stopping the exploitation of workers.

According to the Department of Homeland Security, more than 1,051,000 individuals became permanent residents in 2015.

Sen. Cotton said Wednesday the current system places "great downward pressure on people who work with their hands and work on their feet."

The Trump administration’s goal is to prevent low-skilled American workers from being undercut by immigrants with a comparable level of expertise. The White House also believes this transformation could raise wages and protect taxpayers by potentially decreasing the number of immigrant families that rely on welfare. More than 50% of all immigrant households receive welfare benefits, while 30% of native households do, according to the administration.

buenos días

a reply to: seasonal

Ask yourself do consumers want to pay more and can they?

That is the real question nobody talks about. But it's part of a real plan.

Eta immigration needs should reflect the actual labor market not a social engineering project. The market is supposed to be king not social planning how is this difference to than liberals deciding what an economy needs?

Rayyyycciiiiisss, xenophobia, non-inclusive, Nazis! Thought I would save the hysteric membership faction the trouble.

a reply to: luthier

The labor market is controlled by immigration. When we import commodities from 3rd world countries, in this case labor, it throws the free market off. But because it is a gain for corps and consumers it is counted as a win.

It is not a win. The true cost is hidden when wages are lowered artificially with labor being flooded with legal/illegal immigrant.

Common sense approach to immigration is refreshing to see.

I'm very happy with some of the decisions that Trump is making.

Good idea! Farmers/others who claim they can't find enough workers are lying. If they were willing to pay a fair wage, they'd find workers. We should be incentivizing immigration by those who bring real skills to America, not those who can only do jobs that literally anyone could do.

a reply to: seasonal

I don't think it's unidirectional. In fact I know it's not.

There are massive shortages of farm labor and things like carpentry. Literally not enough carpenters. I was a carpenter for years but as you stated the pay became very low.

However the pay is very low to control cost.

You need to research the cpi which is how we keep inflation in check.

Also look at deficits in the labor market before the massive illegal pushes that started in the late 80's..

How do you raise wages when grocery store bills are already maxed out for some working class people?

Also it's your belief that immigrants should take more high paying higher skilled jobs?

That sounds azz backwards and I make and repair guitars for a living so I am not a banker.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
Good idea! Farmers/others who claim they can't find enough workers are lying. If they were willing to pay a fair wage, they'd find workers. We should be incentivizing immigration by those who bring real skills to America, not those who can only do jobs that literally anyone could do.

You understand higher wages are higher costs correct?

I am not against solving this problem but it's not like turning a screw folks. It's pretty complicated and tied it the actual economy.

The illegals are largely present in necessity based commodity. Like food and housing. Increase in pay directly makes increase in cost for consumers.

a reply to: xstealth

That's right making sure the immigrants take the high skilled jobs should be a priority.

How about immigration should reflect the labor deficits in the labor market...what we need and can't find can immigrate....

I know thats pretty cintroversial.

a reply to: luthier
There has been no wage growth since the mid 1970's. This is why you can't afford a new car or medical or a house or college.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: seasonal

Ask yourself do consumers want to pay more and can they?

That is the real question nobody talks about. But it's part of a real plan.

Eta immigration needs should reflect the actual labor market not a social engineering project. The market is supposed to be king not social planning how is this difference to than liberals deciding what an economy needs?

I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused.

Are you arguing that we should allow unfettered immigration based on the assumption that lower wages to immigrants allows for lower costs in the marketplace to consumers?

Would you be willing to take that a step further and not pay them anything at all? That could substantially lower our monthly grocery bill one would assume.

Eliminating masses of unskilled laborers from the workforce drives up the demand, which in turn drives up the wages. Those wages are spent in the United States which helps the economy (rather than portions being sent to foreign countries). Hiring Americans cause local economies to thrive, which increases the tax base for the state. The increase in taxes creates a larger revenue for the country (both in income tax and sales tax).

Why would anyone champion the cause of hiring foreign workers over Americans? Especially with the argument that they work for less so we need them more? They are one step above chattel as it stands and who would argue for such an existence?

As I said, I am confused by your response and perhaps that is not what you meant. If so I apologize (and claim brain damage).

a reply to: seasonal

Well I have a brain and hustled for 20 years so I can afford all of that...but if I stayed as a journeyman carpenter I would probably be a divorced alcoholic.

Your chart doesn't show the increased cost in the market of making these illegals legal jobs.

So of you pay a carpenter 35 an hour instead of 12 how does that effect the same carpenter trying to buy things in this market?

All this smoke and mirrors is from our deficit budget economy. Inflation will slam us in the face when we bring it all back home.

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
Good idea! Farmers/others who claim they can't find enough workers are lying. If they were willing to pay a fair wage, they'd find workers. We should be incentivizing immigration by those who bring real skills to America, not those who can only do jobs that literally anyone could do.

You understand higher wages are higher costs correct?

I am not against solving this problem but it's not like turning a screw folks. It's pretty complicated and tied it the actual economy.

The illegals are largely present in necessity based commodity. Like food and housing. Increase in pay directly makes increase in cost for consumers.

Watch and worry. These are the facts that I don't like to think about, but we need to be.

There aren't enough tomato pickers and landscapers already here?

You should all look into going expat pretty much anywhere in South America. Half those nations you just about have to own a business that you're bringing with you to move down.

a reply to: 200Plus

I am making no argument for this...

This is reality. And it sucks.

Your increase in wage travels to the consumer.

We have printed off money and binds to pay for deficits for decades..the last balanced budget was when?

The cpi is used to control these printing and market spikes by giving consumers low cost products without raising wages...raising wages means raising cost at the store. It's a cycle. Like raising min wage.

This is a complex problem. My personal opinion is a push for backround checke and naturalization should happen for a period while you arrest and seize assets of employers to pay for some of this and after the grace period you deport hard and fast with bipartisan support.

Use the military to survey the boarder with modern equiptment, and make the punishment for employers mandatory asset seizure.


Or we will just go back and forth between libs and conservatives like we have. The next president will undo it all etc.

This is the real-world consequence of what they are always trying to argue with gender pay gap. We see it with the illegal pay gap. If you hire someone here illegally, you can readily bypass lots of taxes and fees you have to pay on legal labor and pay less in real wages too.

Since employers can hire far more cheaply on both ends, they do whether it's legal for them or not because it's how they have to stay in business with their competitors.

It's the model women should look at when they argue that they are getting paid less. If that were really true, businesses would hire women like they hire illegals because it would be the only way to become competitive and stay in business/ Female illegals would literally be the only ones working in some segments of the economy.

a reply to: seasonal

I don't need to watch that video doesn't have the solution. .

Complaining and using scapegoats does not equal a solution.

a reply to: luthier

You might pay more, but you are missing the side where you would also have to be making more.

It would theoretically balance out. The main difference would be that we would be keeping our money inside the country rather than seeing so much of it be paid out tax-free and then get cabled back to other various countries of origin meaning the actual tax base inside the US and teh various states would grow.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

The reason there are none is because the wages were depressed. No one can work for less than it takes to live for very long.

The market will do one of 3 things.

1 Price go up-people will pay and more people do lawns (or tech will mow it) prices go down if too many companies mow lawns.

2 People will mow their own lawns

3 Up til now we "cheat" the market by importing labor (illegally) and prices stay artificially low.