Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Anti-Immigration Laws Create Labor Crisis for American Farmers


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
35 replies to this topic

#25 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,795
  • Reputation: 2,493
Moderators

Posted 08 June 2011 - 07:38 AM

It's gonna take time to fill any jobs. I don't know where all these farms are located but I imagine some will require folks to relocate and that doesn't happen overnight for a farming job. I don't know how much farming pays. Probably nothing if illegal immigrants were doing it.


Arturo S. Rodriguez, president of United Farm Workers, said migrant farm workers are exposed to blistering heat with little or no shade and few water breaks. It's skilled work, he said, requiring produce pickers to be exact and quick. While the best mushroom pickers can earn about $35,000 to $40,000 a year for piece work, there's little chance for a good living and American workers don't seem interested in farm jobs.

"It is extremely difficult, hard, dangerous work," Rodriguez said.

Last year Rodriguez's group started the "Take Our Jobs" campaign to entice American workers to take the fields. He said of about 86,000 inquiries the group got about the offer, only 11 workers took jobs.


http://www.taiwannew....php?id=1619304

Surprisingly the Huddle's own rape-supporting, MLK dissing poster makes yet another wrong assumption. On all counts.

#26 Catalyst

Catalyst

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 04-May 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 4,107
  • Reputation: 612
HUDDLER

Posted 08 June 2011 - 08:12 AM

Cut welfare/foodstamps and you'll have a work force pickin berries in a heartbeat.
Why work when you can get a cheap hand out? Check this out, what if the Gov matched
what poor folks made in a week? Say you made 300 bucks for a weeks work. The Gov cuts you another 300$ check. You know, helping those who help themselves kind of thing. I can get behind a deal like that.


I agree with your plan for helping those who help themselves - it's the way I feel wellfare should be.

However, I continue to find it troubling how easy some folks seem to think getting on wellfare actually is. Let me tell you from experience, it's near impossible to get a government 'hand out' unless you have kids, are unemployed for long periods of time, are female, are disabled, or some combination of those factors.

I tried to apply or medicaid once during college as I couldn't begin to afford insurance and they basically told me it wasn't even worth my time to apply as I was a single male with no kids. Now, what being male/female has to do with it is beyond me. I suppose it's because poor single parents tend to be women. but I was told that does factor in.

It's not as if anyone can quit their job, wait a week, apply for full wellfare benefits and have the government cut them a check for all their expenses every month. It actually is a rather difficult system to get into. The problem is the loopholes that allow illegals to receive the maximum benefits just because they come here and have kids, and the fact that the system isn't designed to help people out in the long-term.

For example, if someone is on wellfare and is receiving $500 worth of food stamps per month, medicaid for themselves and their kid(s), and getting assistance paying their bills (which is extremely difficult to get on a monthly basis actually; that type of assistance is once/twice a year max in most cases). Anyway, if that person were to then get a job working 30 hours per week at roughly minimum wage, their benefits would be cut almost completely.

As a result, that person would actually end up worse off working than they were on wellfare. If they did, as GritsRgreat suggested, continue helping those who find work and are making an effort - lower their benefits, but don't cut them out completely - and deny benefits to those who stay unemployed for years at a time and don't bother trying then the whole system would be more effective in helping people to move on to better things as opposed to staying on wellfare.

#27 Toolbox

Toolbox

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 22-May 11
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,871
  • Reputation: 475
HUDDLER

Posted 08 June 2011 - 11:12 AM

As a result, that person would actually end up worse off working than they were on wellfare. If they did, as GritsRgreat suggested, continue helping those who find work and are making an effort - lower their benefits, but don't cut them out completely - and deny benefits to those who stay unemployed for years at a time and don't bother trying then the whole system would be more effective in helping people to move on to better things as opposed to staying on wellfare.


This badly needs to happen but our government is too inept to do anything of the sort.

#28 pantherfan49

pantherfan49

    Angry inventor

  • Joined: 02-December 08
  • posts: 5,643
  • Reputation: 191
SUPPORTER

Posted 08 June 2011 - 11:17 AM

So our founders owning slaves directly discredits individualism, and the notion laid down by law that each man ought to be sovereign over his own being? The very notion conservatives ignore in trying to keep Mexicans out of the country?

The answer is no.


The fact that our founding fathers owned slaves discredits individualism for certain segments of the population (i.e., the ones that weren't citizens and were instead slaves). This is a wrongdoing of our founders that we have to live with. It took constitutional amendments to overturn this basic premise.

#29 King

King

    A Cell of Awareness

  • Joined: 20-December 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,765
  • Reputation: 49
HUDDLER

Posted 08 June 2011 - 02:15 PM

The fact that our founding fathers owned slaves discredits individualism for certain segments of the population (i.e., the ones that weren't citizens and were instead slaves). This is a wrongdoing of our founders that we have to live with. It took constitutional amendments to overturn this basic premise.


The ideals were good. How they were put in practice was not.

That's why many consider our Civil War to be our Second Revolutionary War. It completed the first revolution.

#30 MadHatter

MadHatter

    The Only Voice of Reason

  • Joined: 30-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 20,321
  • Reputation: 5,870
HUDDLER

Posted 08 June 2011 - 02:26 PM

I agree with your plan for helping those who help themselves - it's the way I feel wellfare should be.

However, I continue to find it troubling how easy some folks seem to think getting on wellfare actually is. Let me tell you from experience, it's near impossible to get a government 'hand out' unless you have kids, are unemployed for long periods of time, are female, are disabled, or some combination of those factors.

I tried to apply or medicaid once during college as I couldn't begin to afford insurance and they basically told me it wasn't even worth my time to apply as I was a single male with no kids. Now, what being male/female has to do with it is beyond me. I suppose it's because poor single parents tend to be women. but I was told that does factor in.

It's not as if anyone can quit their job, wait a week, apply for full wellfare benefits and have the government cut them a check for all their expenses every month. It actually is a rather difficult system to get into. The problem is the loopholes that allow illegals to receive the maximum benefits just because they come here and have kids, and the fact that the system isn't designed to help people out in the long-term.

For example, if someone is on wellfare and is receiving $500 worth of food stamps per month, medicaid for themselves and their kid(s), and getting assistance paying their bills (which is extremely difficult to get on a monthly basis actually; that type of assistance is once/twice a year max in most cases). Anyway, if that person were to then get a job working 30 hours per week at roughly minimum wage, their benefits would be cut almost completely.

As a result, that person would actually end up worse off working than they were on wellfare. If they did, as GritsRgreat suggested, continue helping those who find work and are making an effort - lower their benefits, but don't cut them out completely - and deny benefits to those who stay unemployed for years at a time and don't bother trying then the whole system would be more effective in helping people to move on to better things as opposed to staying on wellfare.


Exactly what I have been saying.

Turn the sytem into a bridge to help people who are working ot help themselves. End the gravy train that it has often become by supporting people for their entire lives.

The benefits need to be reduced as the person's income rises. Make it adventageous for them to work....not a cut in pay.

#31 pantherfan49

pantherfan49

    Angry inventor

  • Joined: 02-December 08
  • posts: 5,643
  • Reputation: 191
SUPPORTER

Posted 08 June 2011 - 03:54 PM

The ideals were good. How they were put in practice was not.


Not sure I agree with that. The ideals at the founding were to have a second class of people. The practice was entirely consistent with the ideals of the founding fathers.

#32 Hawk

Hawk

    Banned

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 15,652
  • Reputation: 2,122
Moderators

Posted 08 June 2011 - 04:00 PM

two thoughts....

1 - there are more than enough able bodied Americans sitting at home doing fug all because the government hand outs and the lack of incentive to actually work for a living

2 - there are prisons full of people that broke the law and are getting free room and board while serving their time. Perhaps they could get out there and do some of the less desirable jobs instead and work for their keep.

#33 Floppin

Floppin

    Smooches

  • Joined: 10-May 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 12,957
  • Reputation: 3,466
HUDDLER

Posted 08 June 2011 - 04:35 PM

two thoughts....



2 - there are prisons full of people that broke the law and are getting free room and board while serving their time. Perhaps they could get out there and do some of the less desirable jobs instead and work for their keep.


Almost all prisons have internal work programs where inmates work for pennies on the dollar, for instance the Statesville prison has a pantyhose factory in it.

#34 Hawk

Hawk

    Banned

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 15,652
  • Reputation: 2,122
Moderators

Posted 08 June 2011 - 04:40 PM

thats a good thing Floppin...I just believe there is room to do more!

#35 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,795
  • Reputation: 2,493
Moderators

Posted 08 June 2011 - 08:27 PM

I agree with Hawk. Bank of America and Goldman Sachs should work in the fields rather than live off of government handouts.

#36 bredy087

bredy087

    The Comeback Kid

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,003
  • Reputation: 21
HUDDLER

Posted 08 June 2011 - 08:34 PM

I agree with Hawk. Bank of America and Goldman Sachs should work in the fields rather than live off of government handouts.


Hey now hommey watch what you say, who would get the mcbillion dollar bonuses!