Democrats and Rural Voters

Walt said:
Is that what you tell yourself when you cannot get a job? All the business world is lying about job opens, just to mess with you?

I have not seen the empty grocery shelves that the alt right claims, and I will hazard a guess that no one else has. I have seen businesses closed for a day or two because they cannot find staff, and I will hazard a guess that everyone else has too.
Click to expand...

That's because all you've seen are the 4 walls of Momma's basement and the meals she prepares for you. ;)

She sees all that, though.
 
Mina said:
My own approach would be to boost low-skill immigration, while restricting H1B immigration. Low-skill workers are more likely to take the kinds of bottom-rung jobs that might not even exist without them. For example, consider someone who'd hire someone to come in and clean her house if it were cheap enough, but if it costs what native-born labor demands, she'll just clean it herself (or live in a dirtier house). Yardwork, landscaping, a lot of janitorial work, and some elder services are like that: if the labor isn't there to do it cheaply, a lot of it won't get done at all, or it'll get done less frequently, or automated. Similarly, a lot of low-level manufacturing jobs are things that if they can't be done at near minimum wage, such as by a low-skill immigrant, that doesn't mean they'll be done by some higher-paid worker -- instead, it means they'll be automate, or the whole damned factory will just move to some other country where labor is cheap. Because of that, there's less downside to bringing in low-skill workers. They improve quality of life for those here, while doing less to compete for their jobs. In fact, they can effectively create jobs here (e.g., if you've got that cheap immigrant labor to do low-level manufacturing stateside, that also creates middle-management jobs for others in that field, which otherwise would go abroad, too).

By comparison, when you bring in coders, engineers, etc., you're often going to create downward pressure on wages for skilled native workers. And many of those workers need higher pay than the immigrants can get away with, because Americans are saddled with huge student loan debt when they get those skills, whereas the immigrant worker doing the same thing is more likely to be debt-free or have very low debt.
Click to expand...

:palm: You are part of the problem. The thing is, foreign laborers depress the wages for entry-level jobs and it should be Americans doing those.

Stick your "jobs are beneath me" bullshit right up the wazoo; I started working when I was 15.

It should be American kids living at home and American people room-mating with others while they save money to try to get ahead in life doing those entry-level jobs and not sucking up social services because they

came here illegally and have 5 kids already. :rolleyes:


It used to be high school kids and blacks picking watermelons in the summer. Not illegal immigrants.

Not only do they depress wages, but they suck up social services as well; Hospitals, schools, housing, low-income benefits and free food from Uncle Sugar.

They're a double drain on the economy, and many send the money they make out of the country.
 
Last edited:
Walt said:
Is that what you tell yourself when you cannot get a job? All the business world is lying about job opens, just to mess with you?

I have not seen the empty grocery shelves that the alt right claims, and I will hazard a guess that no one else has. I have seen businesses closed for a day or two because they cannot find staff, and I will hazard a guess that everyone else has too.
Click to expand...

so you cant acknowledge a labor glut drives down wages.

you actually suck at economics and honesty.

you're not for the working class. you're an elitist globalist traitor through and through.
 
Last edited:
Matt Dillon said:
:palm: You are part of the problem. The thing is, foreign laborers depress the wages for entry-level jobs and it should be Americans doing those.

Stick your "jobs are beneath me" bullshit right up the wazoo; I started working when I was 15.

It should be American kids living at home and American people room-mating with others while they save money to try to get ahead in life doing those entry-level jobs and not sucking up social services because they

came here illegally and have 5 kids already. :rolleyes:


It used to be high school kids and blacks picking watermelons in the summer. Not illegal immigrants.

Not only do they depress wages, but they suck up social services as well; Hospitals, schools, housing, low-income benefits and free food from Uncle Sugar.

They're a double drain on the economy, and many send the money they make out of the country.
Click to expand...

yes. that situation where they claim its a win win is not happening. some corporation gets their labor, meanwhile social services paid for by everyone pick up their slack.

classic cost externalization.

walmart employees being directed by walmart to go get food stamps is pretty disgusting.
 
Matt Dillon said:
:palm: You are part of the problem. The thing is, foreign laborers depress the wages for entry-level jobs and it should be Americans doing those.


They're a double drain on the economy, and many send the money they make out of the country.
Click to expand...
we have a glut of unskilled workers now.More and more low skilled jobs (cashiers/clerks) are also going automatic. even janitorial
letting in millions (Biden border too) who cant peak English with no real skills is a drain on the economy
 
Walt said:
You keep going back to the January 11th article. I am fairly sure it is May 4th.



Shutter stock has stock photos of anything, real and imagined.

https://www.shutterstock.com/search/unicorn
Click to expand...

Still living under a rock, Walter?

Grocery stores are struggling to stock their empty shelves - CNN
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/11/business-food/grocery-store-shelves-empty/index.html
Jan 13, 2022 — New York (CNNBusiness) Grocery store shelves across America are wiped clean, and they're staying empty as stores struggle to quickly restock .


https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/06/business/convenience-stores-supply-chain-struggle/index.html
New York (CNNBusiness)Frustrated shoppers are already dealing with unpredictable product shortages and empty shelves at their favorite grocery stores.
But if they're hoping to pivot to a neighborhood convenience store to fill in some everyday necessities, they might be out of luck there, too.
 
Last edited:
AssHatZombie said:
see. if you really want an international moral order, you can't have "a place where labor is cheap". that just means corporatists/feudalists have created slavery.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of protectionists try to pose as people who care about exploited foreign workers. But then their "solution" isn't an idea to bring those other workers gradually up to our levels, but just to cut them off entirely, leaving them to starve. I think for most of the protectionists, the international humanitarian angle is a bad-faith argument and they don't honestly care even a little about people abroad.

In my own case, what I've advocated is all the wealthy consumer economies coming together and setting a single set of import tariff rules with regard to poorer export economies. The idea would be to set a minimum floor, with regard to pay and work conditions (and environmental protection and perhaps other factors). Set the floor at a level where it's achievable immediately with little effort. Then gradually raise that floor, year after year. That would speed the process of poorer nations rising to our standards. If, instead, you just shut down that trade until pay is as good there as here, you'll just postpone that day indefinitely, and doom billions of people to much deeper poverty and worse labor exploitation than they have today.
 
Mina said:
I think a lot of protectionists try to pose as people who care about exploited foreign workers. But then their "solution" isn't an idea to bring those other workers gradually up to our levels, but just to cut them off entirely, leaving them to starve. I think for most of the protectionists, the international humanitarian angle is a bad-faith argument and they don't honestly care even a little about people abroad.

In my own case, what I've advocated is all the wealthy consumer economies coming together and setting a single set of import tariff rules with regard to poorer export economies. The idea would be to set a minimum floor, with regard to pay and work conditions (and environmental protection and perhaps other factors). Set the floor at a level where it's achievable immediately with little effort. Then gradually raise that floor, year after year. That would speed the process of poorer nations rising to our standards. If, instead, you just shut down that trade until pay is as good there as here, you'll just postpone that day indefinitely, and doom billions of people to much deeper poverty and worse labor exploitation than they have today.
Click to expand...

right. i care first about americans.

but slavery is still a bad deal for chinese slaves. i care about them second.
 
AssHatZombie said:
right. i care first about americans.
Click to expand...
economic nationalism - it's how every country runs including China

Nation states trade and negotiate to gain every advantage - IOW it's a competitive world
Meaning there are winners and losers. Good politicians work for their country's own best interest
 
Walt is the board liar as he leads two completely different lives and has become good at shielding the other one from the public. It is so sad, maybe one day he will be shamed
 
Mott the Hoople said:
As someone raised in the country I can tell you right now that reason rural folk don’t vote Democrat is because Democrats have done little to nothing for rural folks. Not economically or in a civic manner.

Yet they definitely have. For example, who pushed through minimum wage hikes? Child tax credits? The recent infrastructure investment plan? The Affordable Care Act?

Be specific. Can you think of a particular bill that would benefit rural people that Democrats opposed and Republicans supported?

Democratic identity politics is has also shown that Democrats place rural and working class white guys as people to be despised and ridiculed as opposed to the reality that they largely built this country with their productive abilities.
Click to expand...

I think that comes closer to the truth of the matter. Democrats can fight all day long for policies that will help rural people, but if they don't emotionally support notions of white superiority and structures of white supremacy, they're going to have trouble with rural whites.

Yet Republicans are at least respectful towards them and stand by them on mostly on social issue.
Click to expand...

I think both parties are elaborately respectful towards rural people. You never hear any major politicians talk about rural areas with the contempt Republicans regularly use when talking about urban areas. But on social issues,, you're likely right. Republicans, for example, are friendlier to theocratic initiatives, land that plays well in rural areas. If you think the governments proper role is to punish gay people, force women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term, and promote the Protestant faith in public schools, then Democrats have little to offer there. The Democrats may have a very big tent, but they haven't been inviting those particular initiatives into it. The GOP may be a small-tent party (which is why they lose with Blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, Arabs, Indians, immigrants, gays, and pretty much any religious minority). But their tent has ample room for theocrats.

In the last 50 years productivity in our nation has exploded while the standard of living for working and middle class folks has not and is declining.
Click to expand...

In what sense is the standard of living worse than 50 years ago?
Click to expand...
 
PostmodernProphet said:
gosh, lib'ruls know what rural people think better than rural people do......and despite that, rural people still don't vote for them........
Click to expand...

Try to focus, little one. The argument here isn't that liberals know what rural people think. The argument is that the NYT provided a soap box to a particular claim by a rural voter, WHICH CLAIM WAS DEFINITIVELY UNTRUE. As a simple matter of fact, Clinton did talk about working people at her convention. The NYT let the lie to the contrary stand unchallenged, because it harmonized with a favorite corporate-media talking point (that Democrats don't engage with rural people and ignore their problems).
 
Matt Dillon said:
The thing is, foreign laborers depress the wages for entry-level jobs and it should be Americans doing those.
Click to expand...

They may depress them when it comes to low-skill entry-level jobs. But unless we bring in higher-skill labor, it won't have that impact on higher-skill entry-level work.

Stick your "jobs are beneath me" bullshit right up the wazoo
Click to expand...

Deal with your crippling inferiority complex. I said nothing of the sort, so your wacky response just puts your damaged self esteem on display.

Not only do they depress wages, but they suck up social services as well
Click to expand...

Not only do they provide valuable services, but they provide tax revenues as well, and thus are a double boost on the economy.
 
dukkha said:
economic nationalism - it's how every country runs including China

Nation states trade and negotiate to gain every advantage - IOW it's a competitive world
Meaning there are winners and losers. Good politicians work for their country's own best interest
Click to expand...

yes. and bad one's sell them out for their own personal gain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top