-31
The past 2 weeks really have just been the Democrats doubling down and saying the quiet part out loud.
(i.redd.it)
Yes, it's a PCM meme, but still accurate as fuck.
this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
-31 points (19.6% liked)
Conservative
389 readers
64 users here now
A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff
-
Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
-
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
-
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.
A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Neither of those things are laws that raise wages.
The first one will reduce supply of all sorts of things, which will raise prices. And it's back to hope again that the suppliers raise wages.
The second one is a tool to raise prices, with no direct way of raising wages so that's kinda the opposite actually.
Any Republicans out there putting forth laws that directly raise wages?
You're half right. Tariffs are likely to lower wages actually. But deporting illegal immigrants would probably raise the average wages of the people working in the fields that had those displaced jobs, either through supply and demand (few employees so there's more money to go around), or by citizens replacing non-citizens and getting paid full wages as a result.
All of that is in the realm of "hopefully" and none of it is in the realm of "will happen because a law says it must."
If citizenry is the magic spell that makes employees pay people more money, why not make all the undocumented citizens with jobs citizens?
Creating a sudden and violent work shortage across a large swath of industries sounds like blowing a hole in the country's foot when the requested results is just a few dollars higher wages. Why not make those industries pay higher wages by law? You could even mandate that those industries verify citizenship before hiring new people if you really wanted to, and provide a path to citizenship for the people who are already here and proving they can do a job and pay taxes.
Paying more wages is going to raise prices in either case, why choose to leave positive outcomes to chance when lawmakers can literally mandate the positive outcomes.
See and you're wrong here too because minimum wages are higher than the wages illegal immigrants get paid. Hiring illegals is illegal, there's no incentive for the company to hire them over citizens unless it saves them money.
Wouldn't it be in everyone's best interest to make those workers legal and pay them a fair wage? They're already doing the job, so if they're bad at it and not worth the wage increase to the business owner, wouldn't that mean other people could now out compete the immigrants for those same jobs?
Doing this would avoid a sudden labor market upset, extend amnesty to the businesses AND their underpaid employees (avoiding violence and suffering for everyone involved), guarantee a fair wage for all the workers involved (current and future), and make those positions competitive on the market.
The only downside is an increase in prices which is going to happen in every other case anyway.
This is why I support amnesty for nonviolent illegals.
Good! But do the people you vote for support that?
Not enough of them do. It's hard to find pro-amnesty folks on the right.
To be clear, it's not that I oppose deporting illegals, I just think amnesty is better. And I'm not a single issue voter, so amnesty honestly wasn't a factor in my voting decisions this time around.
Well, just to loop back around, this means all those "probably"'s up there are very likely "probably not"'s.
Why?
That's a great question, and one for the people you voted for to answer.
You can't just say that something is probably not going to happen and then say it's other people's job to say why lolllll