Job Hyperinsecurity: The REAL Ticking Time Bomb

[Tysyacha]

I'd like to start off with one thing I know for a fact: Nothing's guaranteed

in life except for death and taxes. Let's take that as a given. If this is

true, then no one's job is permanently secure.

 

However, it gives me chills to ponder what I think is the real ticking

time bomb in America: job HYPER-insecurity. Not only are U.S. citizens

worried about losing their jobs due to illness or inability to work due

to injury, but now they're also worried that their jobs could be

outsourced to China, India, Mexico, or any other country where

companies can hire the most workers for the least amount of money

possible. "You can be replaced" is the new motto in the U.S. workplace.

No wonder we're so stressed out and have trouble getting good sleep.

 

Or maybe that motto is not so new. I don't know. What I do know

is that everyone in the world needs some sort of way to pay for food,

clothing, and shelter. Warmth, too, in colder and temperate climates.

 

In America, we pay for those things through currency, and to get

currency, we (ideally) have jobs. If we lose our jobs, there is no

solid guarantee that we'll find a new one right away. Thus, if we

have no jobs, then where will we get the money to meet our needs?

 

Welfare is the answer for some, but the U.S. government is getting

ready to tighten the restrictions on Medicare and Medicaid. Also,

President Bush wants to save American dollars by cutting these

social programs by a very significant amount. These days, even

"getting on the dole" is not much of a "safety net" for people.

 

So, what can we do to cure our "hyper-insecurity" about our jobs?

I propose three ideas (I won't presume to call them 'solutions'):

 

1. Stop companies from hiring illegal immigrants. Note: I said ILLEGAL.

2. Cut corporate tax breaks, not Medicare and Medicaid, to save $$$.

3. Encourage innovative and level-headed people to reform politics!

 

*steps down from her soapbox*

[JediMaster12]

While you propose a good strategy, I'd hate to be the one that busts the balloon.

 

1. Stop companies from hiring illegal immigrants. Note: I said ILLEGAL.

While you did say illegal, the companies could deny that they knew nothing of their status. Of course this could be construed as bull seeing that it is law to produce a green card, some official form of documentation. The fake IDs that may be tougher to catch seeing if you have a REALLY good person to do that.

 

2. Cut corporate tax breaks, not Medicare and Medicaid, to save $$$.

Dare to dream Tys. In reality what has ended up running the lobbyists are the big corporations. I'd hate to point out the decades following the Civil War and the Roaring 20's. Still this is good cry for justice so to speak since it always seems the big man is trodding upon the little man.

 

3. Encourage innovative and level-headed people to reform politics!

Again dare to dream. Obviously the only way to get elected is that you have money. The joke in my family is that you have to be an actor. My mom remembers Reagan and in response to the Governator. We could put people that are honest and ideal up there but even the big boys in Washington will tell you that you have to be a killer to get ahead. Often that comes through making deals and the like. Seriously our political system is a reflection of how our monetary system rules us. The haves make the rules whiile the have nots have to sit and flounder.

[Emperor Devon]

1. Stop companies from hiring illegal immigrants. Note: I said ILLEGAL.

 

Ah, but here we go into the old problem of moral interests versus economic interests.

 

While personally I agree companies shouldn't hire illegal immigrants, few of them share my sentiments. The fact is, illegals are economic. They are often at a poor financial status upon arriving, and and are denied many jobs that legal immigrants could have. They're hardly at a position to bargain what jobs to take, or what wages they will receive. Whether it's by their intent or not, they are cheaper workers. Thus the 'whip and the carrot' philosophy comes into play - metaphorically, they are being whipped quite hard. They often take incredibly menial jobs no one else wants (strawberry picking), and often have some of the lowest standards of living in the U.S. Since the government cannot help them in this instance, they have a much greater incentive to work hard - not only for the regular reasons you and I do, but because they have little way out of their current situations.

 

Take cheap workers, a greater incentive to work, heavy reliance on their employers, and you have for yourself the perfect employee. Not something companies want to give up easily. But that's capitalism for ya.

 

2. Cut corporate tax breaks, not Medicare and Medicaid, to save $$$.

 

Pulling out of Iraq could save us far more dollars... but that's a separate topic.

 

Cutting down corporate power before their tax breaks is more important IMO. It's good business for them, for instance, if we completely rely on a finite source of fuel - and they have more than enough power to push around the companies that want to change that.

 

3. Encourage innovative and level-headed people to reform politics!

 

I would hope.

 

The problem is that our current political system is not very receptive to reformation or the people who want to reform it. Propose a bill for national health care, and the populace will starting shouting "COMMIE!1!!1!11"

 

All the ethical choices aren't the most economical ones, plainly. Alternative fuels hurt oil corporations. Having Americans eat healthy bashes the fast food industry. Allowing abortion generates controversy... etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

 

Level-headed people alone can't do everything. The general populace has to do something as well.

[JediMaster12]

The problem is that our current political system is not very receptive to reformation or the people who want to reform it. Propose a bill for national health care, and the populace will starting shouting "COMMIE!1!!1!11"

Or as my grandpa would say: Leftie Commie Pinko People.

Sad but true. It behooves me to say that we still live in the remnants of the McCarthy era were you were labeled a Commie just for saying that the fed govt was infringing upon your rights. Whose the commie now?

 

Level-headed people alone can't do everything. The general populace has to do something as well.

So you think factions would do it? Often to work it requires a group of people with a common set of goals.

[Emperor Devon]

So you think factions would do it? Often to work it requires a group of people with a common set of goals.

 

Factions aren't a good thing, despite what some of our founding fathers may say.

 

But better one group that believes in what's right and one that doesn't instead of one entirely of the later.

[SilentScope001]

1. Stop companies from hiring illegal immigrants. Note: I said ILLEGAL.

 

But why are they declared illegal? Simple, because the quotas for having legal Mexicans here are too low. Since one cannot legally immigrate into Mexico until they fill out tons of paperwork and wait lots of years for the quotas to open up...one has to go illegally from Mexico to get a job.

 

Surely, all we can do is increase the quotas, and volia, more legal immigrants, less illegal immigrants. But that kinda defeats the purpose of having the quotas...which is to decrease the amount of immigrants coming into America to take our jobs .

 

The main argument therefore is not about "illegal" immigrants, it's immigrants in general who take up jobs. But, well, I don't want to harm immigrants (I guess I'm pro-immigration, sorry ED). I don't know really what to say, but, I'm not sure if it actually matters on this point.

 

2. Cut corporate tax breaks, not Medicare and Medicaid, to save $$$.

 

And harm the economy by oppressing the rich? Maybe, but well, er...I posted in the National Debt topic already about what I believe should be done. Something has to be cut, but I don't know what.

 

3. Encourage innovative and level-headed people to reform politics!

 

Innoviative and level-headed people usually note it's a good idea not to go into politics to begin with.

 

I offer a fourth "idea":

 

4. Do Nothing.

 

The unemployment rate is currently around 5-6%. It's a lot of people that are unemployed when you add in that there are 300 million people, but for the most part, everything is fine for the rest of the people who are indeed employed. If the economy booms, less people are unemployed. If the economy bust, more people are unemployed. It's a cycle, really, people are always going to have to be insecure about their job.

 

It's capitalism. The people who are valuable get jobs, and the people who have no skills or are too expensive to manitan are 'laid off'. Giving these people help in finding jobs might be nice, but we're always going to have this unemployment anyway. It's best therefore to make yourself valuable by holding tons of degrees and experience so that you don't get fired. (Tell me, can an unskilled illegal immigrant work as a professor? ) There is nothing you CAN do if your company decides to move to China and India...expect, well, move to China and India and get back your job. Shrugging off the problem may be the only solution that can really be good.

 

In fact, job hyperinsecurity can be useful for America. It can help boost job productivitiy.

 

Factions aren't a good thing, despite what some of our founding fathers may say.

 

Isn't it "especially what some of our founding fathers may say". George Washigition, in his Farewell Address, spoke bad of factions. Of course, Alexander Hamilition and Thomas Jefferson ended up founding factions (aka, political parties) anyway...

[Samnmax221]

And harm the economy by oppressing the rich? Maybe, but well, er...I posted in the National Debt topic already about what I believe should be done. Something has to be cut, but I don't know what.

The Rich aren't being oppressed if they're taxed just as much as everybody else.

But better one group that believes in what's right and one that doesn't instead of one entirely of the later.

Oh boy! Now we can start talking in Doublespeak too!

[SilentScope001]

The Rich aren't being oppressed if they're taxed just as much as everybody else.

 

America has a progressive tax system (the more money you make, the more % of your money get taxed). The rich pay much more tax proportionally than a poor person. I admit, the tax system is a bit mild compared to other progressive tax systems, especially in Europe. But it is because of this progressive tax system, this is why people are arguing for tax cuts for the rich...since they see it as unfair that the rich pay more than the poor.

 

Just playing Devil's Advocate here.

[Samnmax221]

America has a progressive tax system (the more money you make, the more % of your money get taxed). The rich pay much more tax proportionally than a poor person. I admit, the tax system is a bit mild compared to other progressive tax systems, especially in Europe. But it is because of this progressive tax system, this is why people are arguing for tax cuts for the rich...since they see it as unfair that the rich pay more than the poor.

I wasn't stating things "as they are", I was stating things "as they should be".

[Tysyacha]

Here's another idea:

 

5. Offer companies larger incentives to hire Americans and legal immigrants

than they would ever get if they hired illegals or outsourced to other countries.

 

May not work, but if I were a gadtrillionaire, that's what I would do.

[JediMaster12]

But better one group that believes in what's right and one that doesn't instead of one entirely of the later.

Did you mean latter?

But isn't that in a sense a faction. Say they do believe in what's right and they want to fight for it. Wouldn't that constitute it as a faction?

[Samnmax221]

5. Offer companies larger incentives to hire Americans and legal immigrants

than they would ever get if they hired illegals or outsourced to other countries.

It'd be better if the Government just stayed the hell out of private enterprise. Basically you hire whoever you want, and live with the consequences.

[Tysyacha]

It's a hard truth that none of us can count on either the government or

private enterprise to do the ethical thing every time. The government can

over-regulate and overtax, making things hard for businesses so that they

are forced to pass the extra cost onto customers. On the other hand,

businesses can "pull an Enron" and actually be in the toilet while everything

looks rosy on the surface. The solution for this is honest self-analysis.

 

Let's face it--asking anybody to do an honest self-analysis of their

business, economic, or personal motives is very tough, though. Even

tougher to do on oneself, but eventually it has to be done if we're not

to descend into an "every man for himself", Titanic-style anarchy. If

we're not in one right now.

 

By the way, we also know that there are too many people in America right

now and not enough jobs for everyone (especially jobs that offer benefits)

these days. So what do you do with the "surplus population" (a.k.a the

unemployed who are 18 and older? Lock 'em up in prison? Put them on

welfare? Let them live on the streets? Not an accusation; I'm just curious.

[Emperor Devon]

since they see it as unfair that the rich pay more than the poor.

 

They obviously don't grasp the logic of it. Proportionate taxing is a fair thing, for obvious reasons. it's just as big a loss percentage-wise for everyone, and the rich can tolerate losing more money than the middle or lower class. (Personally I think the rich should pay higher taxes, but that's another topic)

 

5. Offer companies larger incentives to hire Americans and legal immigrants than they would ever get if they hired illegals or outsourced to other countries.the poor.

 

The only for that to happen is to make them cheaper or skilled enough to be worth the extra cost for companies to hire them. Capitalism, again.

 

Did you mean latter?

 

 

But isn't that in a sense a faction. Say they do believe in what's right and they want to fight for it. Wouldn't that constitute it as a faction?

 

Having two groups of people with differing opinions is having factions. While it would be preferable for everyone to hold a moral opinion, it would be better for some people to than none at all.

 

So yes, factions are better than everyone agreeing on something bad.

 

It'd be better if the Government just stayed the hell out of private enterprise. Basically you hire whoever you want, and live with the consequences.

 

Wouldn't do at all. Nothing like that to worsen the illegal immigration problem.

 

Or are you saying the government should stay uninvolved in all parts of private enterprise, rather than who gets hired?

[JediMaster12]

Or are you saying the government should stay uninvolved in all parts of private enterprise, rather than who gets hired?

Wouldn't that harm economy in of itself it it weren't regulated? Also it would make us look bad concerning foreign relations.

 

So yes, factions are better than everyone agreeing on something bad.

How many is that we have a consensus on?

I do remember something from Amer. Govt. We were reading parts of the Federalists papers and if I remember correctly, a strong minority such as a faction could overcome the majority.

[lukeiamyourdad]

This is a problem with every single western nation. The shift from a manufacturing economy to one based on services is the only thing that can be done. Specialized products are also unable to be made in those emerging countries. For example, they might make regular freighters ships but the West makes cruise ships. There are other elements to think off. Western nations produce more food then they need. China, due to the demographic shift from rural regions to urban ones, might end up with food supply problems due to the lack of competent workers handling the fields. New market for Western agriculture.

 

Overall, higher education is the only thing we can aim for. At the moment, those emerging economies don't have the expertise needed to build up their infrastructures. Western companies provide this. For example, some hydroelectric dams in China were made in collaboration with Hydro-Quebec. Outsourcing is just an unstoppable phenomenon. Hey, I get cheaper crap made in China, why would I, consumer, pay more because it's somehow morally right? Yeah, I'm not an upper-middle class caviar leftist. I can't buy myself some morals.

[Samnmax221]

Wouldn't do at all. Nothing like that to worsen the illegal immigration problem.

Not if you stop seeing it as a problem. We have people who are willing to do jobs that most Americans don't want to do, in exchange they are able to support themselves and possibly move on to better jobs and a higher standard of living, if not them then the next generation.

Or are you saying the government should stay uninvolved in all parts of private enterprise, rather than who gets hired?

Enforcement of Contracts only.

[Emperor Devon]

Not if you stop seeing it as a problem. We have people who are willing to do jobs that most Americans don't want to do, in exchange they are able to support themselves and possibly move on to better jobs and a higher standard of living, if not them then the next generation.

 

And there you run into the problem of the entire thing being illegal. In order to get into the country in the first place, Mexico (or El Salvador, etc) lose citizens (and therefore workers) who they think are still living there. Not to mention some of the things they do to get into the country in the first place - quite a few immigrants enter the U.S. via gangs that do things entirely unethical (such as practically robbing the people they smuggle in, sometimes kidnapping or murdering them...)

 

They don't just the menial jobs Americans don't want, either. They also take ones commonly done by the working class - various forms of factory labor for instance, leaving them without a job. What's to be done with them? You can't just say 'then let them find another'.

 

Not too much chance of advancement with jobs like those, either. Many families that take the worst ones (strawberry picking again) often need their own children to work in the fields alongside them to help support the family, which obviously cuts them off from an education. Conditions rarely improve for families like that.

 

Enforcement of Contracts only.

 

You've been reading too much Ayn Rand.

 

Would make for an interesting thread, though.

 

Wouldn't that harm economy in of itself it it weren't regulated? Also it would make us look bad concerning foreign relations.

 

Indeed. Would've taken us decades to recover from the Depression that way.

 

How many is that we have a consensus on?

 

3.

[Samnmax221]

And there you run into the problem of the entire thing being illegal. In order to get into the country in the first place, Mexico (or El Salvador, etc) lose citizens (and therefore workers) who they think are still living there. Not to mention some of the things they do to get into the country in the first place - quite a few immigrants enter the U.S. via gangs that do things entirely unethical (such as practically robbing the people they smuggle in, sometimes kidnapping or mudering them...)

Welcoming in all peaceful immigrants is a perfectly acceptable policy, certainly easier to administer than the current state of things. If Drugs and Prostitution were legalized the bottom would drop out of organized crime in this Country, that destroys the major incentive for criminals to come here. NEXT.

They don't just the menial jobs Americans don't want, either. They also take ones commonly done by the working class - various forms of factory labor for instance, leaving them without a job. What's to be done with them? You can't just say 'then let them find another'.

Well now, that sounds like a major incentive to work hard. Your employer can't be expected to keep you around if you can easily be replaced by an immigrant who is brand new to the Country.

Not too much chance of advancement with jobs like those, either. Many families that take the worst ones (strawberry picking again) often need their own children to work in the fields alongside them to help support the family, which obviously cuts them off from an education. Conditions rarely improve for families like that.

Obviously its better here than where they came from, otherwise they wouldn't have left. Here at least they have an opportunity to improve their lives.

You've been reading too much Ayn Rand.

You've read too much Flamebait for Dummies, constantly trying to provoke a flame war isn't doing much for your already foolish arguments.

[martmeister]

With <5% unemployment, leaving it alone might be the best bet. It's one of the lowest unemp rates in the world, if not the least in the Western world. And we are factoring that US workers work 40 hrs/week, not some pissant 30-34 THEN begging for time off? Not everyone that's unemployed is permanently unemployed; some work just during harvest season, others are changing jobs, taking a break, etc.

 

Having low-skill jobs go to immigrants IN country, I'm fine with; having production or service jobs going OUT of country is a problem.

 

Corporate lobbyists have this special weapon called money. While I consider myself sane and wouldn't vote/choose something, if given the right incentive, I would justify a bill getting passed or ignored.

 

As inflation goes up, so does wages and cost of living. The true cost of milk has gone down over the years, but inflation is the reason why it costs at least 5x (assuming an individual carton is the same size as a glass bottle).

[Emperor Devon]

Welcoming in all peaceful immigrants is a perfectly acceptable policy, certainly easier to administer than the current state of things. If Drugs and Prostitution were legalized the bottom would drop out of organized crime in this Country, that destroys the major incentive for criminals to come here. NEXT.

 

It's a common conception that legalizing illicit substances is helpful (most turn to the prohibition of alcohol to support that argument), but the negative side effects are often ignored.

 

Such effects are quite harmful on a country's youth. Nothing sends the wrong message about an illegal substance than making it acceptable. I don't know about you, but I find the image of normal people being able to buy marijuana or crack at the local drug store and have sex for a few bucks on their way back home repulsive. Yes, making those things legal would be the easier route - but the right thing usually isn't.

 

Those reasons aren't entirely related to gangs, anyway. Smuggling people in for a fee and possibly hurting others in the process doesn't have to be tied to illegal substances or human trafficking. Granted gangs can be heavily involved in that, but they can make a living off theft and murder.

 

Well now, that sounds like a major incentive to work hard. Your employer can't be expected to keep you around if you can easily be replaced by an immigrant who is brand new to the Country.

 

Work isn't always the issue - cost is one as well. If you have two workers that are about as efficient as each other but one is willing to work for less dollars an hour, you'd obviously hire the cheaper one.

 

Of course, that's the materialistic rather than the ethical side of the issue. It's not very fair to the more expensive worker if he's out of a job when the cheaper one shouldn't even have been here in the first place. Economic reasons should be put aside for moral ones

 

Obviously its better here than where they came from, otherwise they wouldn't have left. Here at least they have an opportunity to improve their lives.

 

And what of the people they're affecting? It's bad for the countries they're leaving to lose workers, (about 1/3rd of El Salvador's populace lives outside its borders) bad for the ones in the U.S. who lose their jobs, only encourages crime alongside the border, can possibly harm the ones who are trying to come in, violates the law, does nothing to help relations with the countries involved, and quite a few of them will still lead rotten lives. Such a thing is plain egotism.

 

You've read too much Flamebait for Dummies, constantly trying to provoke a flame war isn't doing much for your already foolish arguments.

 

When people use the '' smiley after something, they are usually joking about it. In my case, I was.

[lukeiamyourdad]

It's one of the lowest unemp rates in the world, if not the least in the Western world.

 

 

It's actually 3.3% in Switzerland as opposed to 4.6% in the US.

 

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/sz.html

https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/print/us.html

 

PS: There could be lower unemployment rates somewhere else, I just took Switzerland because I knew that it had a lower rate.

[JediMaster12]

Work isn't always the issue - cost is one as well. If you have two workers that are about as efficient as each other but one is willing to work for less dollars an hour, you'd obviously hire the cheaper one.

 

Of course, that's the materialistic rather than the ethical side of the issue. It's not very fair to the more expensive worker if he's out of a job when the cheaper one shouldn't even have been here in the first place. Economic reasons should be put aside for moral ones

Looking at it, it isn't fair. Being a person who likes fair play, it is wrong and I don't like it. However reailty is that most businesses tend to push aside the moral issues. From my basic understanding of economics, the goal is to maximize your profits with the least amount of costs. True that we have the federal and state safeguards that put in minimum wage and the like but make no mistake, they still are willing to get more for less.

[SilentScope001]

Work isn't always the issue - cost is one as well. If you have two workers that are about as efficient as each other but one is willing to work for less dollars an hour, you'd obviously hire the cheaper one.

 

Of course, that's the materialistic rather than the ethical side of the issue. It's not very fair to the more expensive worker if he's out of a job when the cheaper one shouldn't even have been here in the first place. Economic reasons should be put aside for moral ones

 

But it's unfair for the cheaper worker since the cheaper worker can't fill out the paperwork, and can't legally get a job. Not to mention that he can't get a job in Mexico itself...at least not at a high price that he would get selling his labor to America. Increasing quotas is nice...but...er...I just know it's going to unpopular and misses the whole point of quotas.

 

I think the only real way to actually decrease illegal immigration is to take away the incentive for illegally immigranting to America, that is, the American economy. If the American economy tanks, and we turn into a Third-World nation, then no more illegal immigrants. We just have to worry about illegal emigration, but I think it's less of an issue, no?

 

5. Offer companies larger incentives to hire Americans and legal immigrants

than they would ever get if they hired illegals or outsourced to other countries.

 

Ooh, maybe a good idea. But, what would be the incentive?

 

I thinking a lower miniumum wage could be good, at least hypothetically. US Workers will scream at it, yes, but by bringing the wages lower, it will make Companies willing to hire more legal work, since they can afford it, and looking for illegal work cost more money.

[JediMaster12]

I thinking a lower miniumum wage could be good, at least hypothetically. US Workers will scream at it, yes, but by bringing the wages lower, it will make Companies willing to hire more legal work, since they can afford it, and looking for illegal work cost more money.

Other factors figure in. For one, experience is the main factor. The more experience you have, the more you are paid for it. It's like what they tell you about college degrees and what's after.