The Trump Presidency – 2016

[tarcone]

Who really thought the Trump could/would force Mexico to pay for a wall? I mean what was the plan? I guess boycotting them economically, but wouldnt that have hurt US companies as well? And you Trump wasnt going to harm US corporations.

[NobodyHere]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Who really thought the Trump could/would force Mexico to pay for a wall?

Tens of millions of MAGAssholes

[bronconick]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Unfortunately the Dems didn't want to go along with the master plan to have Mexico pay for the wall.

I forget the amount but Trump had a brief opportunity to get much more funding for the Wall early in his 4 years if he was willing to negotiate. He obviously gambled and lost that one.

But then again, he did play hardball with Mexico and Mexico did use their troops to stop many illegals at their southern border and at the US border ...

I think the Dems offered more wall money in exchange for basically legalizing the Dreamers in 2017 and Stephen Miller marched his Nazi self to the White House to put a stop to that.

[GrantDawg]

Yup. Trump could have had his wall, but they proved his policies were more about punishing brown people than securing the border

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[JPhillips]

The WH was also insistent on reducing legal immigration.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

And when is Mexico going to pay for the wall?

As soon as Trump reveals his health care plan.

[albionmoonlight]

Giuliani is helping Trump with his impeachment defense.

Giuliani claims Trump didn't incite the crowd to violence.

Then Giuliani explained his definition of incitement, and it is a precise description of what Trump did on January 6https://t.co/2zwdz80gb6 pic.twitter.com/p7o1Hd2UWj

— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) January 17, 2021

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Who really thought the Trump could/would force Mexico to pay for a wall? I mean what was the plan? I guess boycotting them economically, but wouldnt that have hurt US companies as well? And you Trump wasnt going to harm US corporations.

Mexico paying for the Wall was always BS. I've said this before but apparently my sarcasm was missed.

Admittedly, I do wish he had built the beautiful wall with all the trimmings with tax payer's money. But he missed that opportunity in the early days. If I recall, he was asking for $40-$50B which, relative to what's happening now, is chump change.

However, Trump bullying Mexico to do more about illegals crossing into Mexico and at the US border had a real effect. So there is a win there. Yet to be seen how well that continues though.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by bronconick

I think the Dems offered more wall money in exchange for basically legalizing the Dreamers in 2017 and Stephen Miller marched his Nazi self to the White House to put a stop to that.

Yes they did. I don't remember all the nuances but do remember thinking that Trump should have taken the deal.

A President's initiatives on the first (approx) 100 days are incredibly important. That's when they have the best chance of getting what they want. There's no doubt dealing with coronavirus is top priority but sure hope he is able to get most of his top priorities done also.

My guess is Reps come back in 2022 so he has to make best use of his short window.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The WH was also insistent on reducing legal immigration.

WH was trying to make a shift into skills-based/point-based immigration vs family. Absolutely makes sense to me, ask Canada and EU.

[Lathum]

It still blows my mind anyone thinks a wall would be even remotely effective, especially relative to the ROI, but we can agree to disagree.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

WH was trying to make a shift into skills-based/point-based immigration vs family. Absolutely makes sense to me, ask Canada and EU.

Full disclosure I haven't looked up economic output from either, but I suspect the US needs a much larger pool of unskilled laborers to do the jobs immigrants do here than the EU and certainly Canada.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

Mexico paying for the Wall was always BS. I've said this before but apparently my sarcasm was missed.

Admittedly, I do wish he had built the beautiful wall with all the trimmings with tax payer's money. But he missed that opportunity in the early days. If I recall, he was asking for $40-$50B which, relative to what's happening now, is chump change.

However, Trump bullying Mexico to do more about illegals crossing into Mexico and at the US border had a real effect. So there is a win there. Yet to be seen how well that continues though.

But it's a huge mistake for the Biden admin to not clarify the $1600~2000 amount. Feels like a double standard there.

Not to tromp on trumps Mexico plan, but Covid has probably done more to stem illegal immigration, vis-a-vis, skyrocketing unemployment, than anything he's done in the previous three years prior.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

It still blows my mind anyone thinks a wall would be even remotely effective, especially relative to the ROI, but we can agree to disagree.

Yup, I do think this has been beaten to death and agree about agreeing to disagree. I do appreciate the cordiality.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Full disclosure I haven't looked up economic output from either, but I suspect the US needs a much larger pool of unskilled laborers to do the jobs immigrants do here than the EU and certainly Canada.

That, or else pay the going market rate for labor, which would drive major cost increases for businesses and consumers, which would be both good and bad. Just like Chinese manufacturing, it's benefited the middle and lower class by allowing them to have more for less, raised quality of life and yet allowed businesses to keep pay lower, profits higher, because of that very thing.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Full disclosure I haven't looked up economic output from either, but I suspect the US needs a much larger pool of unskilled laborers to do the jobs immigrants do here than the EU and certainly Canada.

I agree. I was responding to the statement that US is trying to reduce legal immigration. This is true because Trump/Miller was trying to shift family based immigration and move more towards skills/point-based immigration. So just providing context.

I can easily believe their intent was racist. But the policy of skills/point-based itself is not ... well maybe it is (based on your definition) but then you'll have to proclaim Canada and many of the EU having this racist policy also.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

But it's a huge mistake for the Biden admin to not clarify the $1600~2000 amount. Feels like a double standard there.

I don't know if you are referring to me specifically, if so I don't think I have a double standard. I never expected Trump to pay for the Wall, believed it was BS, and I did not vote for him (either times). For Biden, I did vote for him and do contend he was not clear (not lying) on the $1,600 vs $2,000 especially in the GA senate races and I dinged him & communications team for not doing a better job.

So easily agree that Trump BS (lied) and Biden didn't do a good job of communicating.

Not to tromp on trumps Mexico plan, but Covid has probably done more to stem illegal immigration, vis-a-vis, skyrocketing unemployment, than anything he's done in the previous three years prior.

Coronavirus for sure impacted 2020 but Trump's bullying Mexico and his anti-illegal public sentiments did have an effect in 2019. But Obama also does get credit for reducing illegal immigration, a trend that accelerated in 2007-2008 with the Financial crisis but continued on.

How Mexico Beefs Up Immigration Enforcement To Meet Trump's Terms : NPR

In June 2019, in the weeks following the deal the Trump administration reached with Mexico's government, the U.S. saw a 28% drop in the number of people detained after crossing the Southwest border, the first decrease in a year. A number of factors including, summer heat, were probably at work, but the decline was likely driven in part by Mexican enforcement.

Mexico detained more than 29,000 migrants that month, up 200% compared with June 2018. Deportations totaled nearly 22,000 in June 2019, up 180% from June 2018. Both are Mexico's highest monthly totals in more than a decade.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

That, or else pay the going market rate for labor, which would drive major cost increases for businesses and consumers, which would be both good and bad. Just like Chinese manufacturing, it's benefited the middle and lower class by allowing them to have more for less, raised quality of life and yet allowed businesses to keep pay lower, profits higher, because of that very thing.

I remember GWB was pushing for increased guest worker programs way back when and then 9-11 hit and that (and privatizing a part of social security) was no longer a priority.

There is no doubt we need workers from south of the border, Americans will just not do some jobs. For me, the answer is not turn a blind eye to illegals, it's to reduce it (supply & demand) but also increase legal guest workers.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I remember GWB was pushing for increased guest worker programs way back when and then 9-11 hit and that (and privatizing a part of social security) was no longer a priority.

There is no doubt we need workers from south of the border, Americans will just not do some jobs. For me, the answer is not turn a blind eye to illegals, it's to reduce it (supply & demand) but also increase legal guest workers.

But were we really turning a blind eye to it, or is that just the narrative set forth by Miller and these other ghouls to vilify brown people? Genuinely asking because the message has gotten so mucked up.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I remember GWB was pushing for increased guest worker programs way back when and then 9-11 hit and that (and privatizing a part of social security) was no longer a priority.

There is no doubt we need workers from south of the border, Americans will just not do some jobs. For me, the answer is not turn a blind eye to illegals, it's to reduce it (supply & demand) but also increase legal guest workers.

I am for increasing the guest worker program, along with the number of refugees allowed into the county. We also ought to allow people already here an amnesty so they can apply for green cards and tie that to increased border to security (even a wall, though I think that is stupid waist of money). You can add even more severe penalties for anyone here illegally after the amnesty period, including speedy deportations. That would greatly decrease the numbers crossing the border illegally (reduces the need), while allowing those who are working illegally now enter into the system, be registered, and be fully paying taxes, have legal driver licenses and auto insurance, have full worker protections, etc.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by Edward64

WH was trying to make a shift into skills-based/point-based immigration vs family. Absolutely makes sense to me, ask Canada and EU.

They also were committed to reducing the number of legal immigrants and basically zeroing out refugees. They could have gotten a deal, but they weren't just interested in illegal immigration, they wanted to greatly reduce legal immigration.

This has been the story of the GOP since 2000. The Bush immigration plan had plenty of Dem support and even passed the Senate, but the House GOP wouldn't bring it up for debate because the anti-immigrant folks in the GOP don't want a deal that trades legalization for future enforcement. They will only be satisfied with large reductions in legal as well as illegal immigration.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I am for increasing the guest worker program, along with the number of refugees allowed into the county. We also ought to allow people already here an amnesty so they can apply for green cards and tie that to increased border to security (even a wall, though I think that is stupid waist of money). You can add even more severe penalties for anyone here illegally after the amnesty period, including speedy deportations. That would greatly decrease the numbers crossing the border illegally (reduces the need), while allowing those who are working illegally now enter into the system, be registered, and be fully paying taxes, have legal driver licenses and auto insurance, have full worker protections, etc.

This is basically what I've been a proponent of forever. Ease limits on legal immigration, crack down hard on illegal immigration, and give like a 1 year grace period for anyone already here to get to an immigration office. Anyone here illegally after that gets sent packing immediately.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

I remember GWB was pushing for increased guest worker programs way back when and then 9-11 hit and that (and privatizing a part of social security) was no longer a priority.

There is no doubt we need workers from south of the border, Americans will just not do some jobs. For me, the answer is not turn a blind eye to illegals, it's to reduce it (supply & demand) but also increase legal guest workers.

It's such a complicated issue, because the moment that the government creates a some system that allows people to come in and get paid below market wages for work, it runs the danger of creating a 'second class' of worker and where do you draw the line on them being indentured servants. It's got to be defined, and it's a very hard sort of policy to simply write without full thought given to it.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

It's such a complicated issue, because the moment that the government creates a some system that allows people to come in and get paid below market wages for work, it runs the danger of creating a 'second class' of worker and where do you draw the line on them being indentured servants. It's got to be defined, and it's a very hard sort of policy to simply write without full thought given to it.

Why below market wages? Most of those jobs they can't find people to WITH market wages. Illegal chicken processors were making $12-15 dollars an hour almost 20 years ago (this was in Alabama). They hired illegals because no one else would do the job. Farmer workers are the ones that are treated the worst, but there is really no reason they shouldn't be paid closer to market.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by Lathum

But were we really turning a blind eye to it, or is that just the narrative set forth by Miller and these other ghouls to vilify brown people? Genuinely asking because the message has gotten so mucked up.

IMO the answer is both. Trump/Miller is definitely spouting BS but the problem existed long before Trump & Miller, see below with 2014 & 2019 stats.

Yes, the no. of illegals coming into the country has slowed quite a bit (starting with the 2007-2008 Financial crisis) but "Pew estimated the total population to be 11.1 million in 2014, or approximately 3 percent of the U.S. population". Note, this is down to about 10.5M in 2019 but provides scale of the issue. This is all illegals, but south of the border is the majority at approx 75+%.

Mexicans decline to less than half of US undocumented immigrant population | Pew Research Center

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Why below market wages? Most of those jobs they can't find people to WITH market wages. Illegal chicken processors were making $12-15 dollars an hour almost 20 years ago (this was in Alabama). They hired illegals because no one else would do the job. Farmer workers are the ones that are treated the worst, but there is really no reason they shouldn't be paid closer to market.

I'm not sure what you mean by "market wages" but because of the unending supply of south of the border, I'm guessing the chicken processors & agricultural farmers will still be able to pay low wages.

But PM is right. There needs to be some sort of controls where everything is legal, out in the open, everyone knows the rules, and there is a minimum/acceptable living and health & safety standards.

Let me also add, there are plenty of folks in Asia (and assume Africa) that would come over as guest workers and do the jobs-that-Americans-don't want. Let's not forget the others less fortunate that deserve a legal "path" also.

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

Why below market wages? Most of those jobs they can't find people to WITH market wages. Illegal chicken processors were making $12-15 dollars an hour almost 20 years ago (this was in Alabama). They hired illegals because no one else would do the job. Farmer workers are the ones that are treated the worst, but there is really no reason they shouldn't be paid closer to market.

What I meant was that yes, they are making less now, in this system, because the system isn't legit. If the government makes it legit, if they don't fix the pay, they create a 'below market' pay structure. If they DO fix the pay (and should) it will be seen as a massive attack on Americans by driving the cost of labor up and prices as a result, or companies end up out of business. That's why you're not seeing more legit moves in that direction, no administration wants to be the one that has that on them.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

This is basically what I've been a proponent of forever. Ease limits on legal immigration, crack down hard on illegal immigration, and give like a 1 year grace period for anyone already here to get to an immigration office. Anyone here illegally after that gets sent packing immediately.

Yes

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Giuliani is helping Trump with his impeachment defense.

Giuliani claims Trump didn't incite the crowd to violence.

Then Giuliani explained his definition of incitement, and it is a precise description of what Trump did on January 6https://t.co/2zwdz80gb6 pic.twitter.com/p7o1Hd2UWj
— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) January 17, 2021

Does it meet Merriam-Webster's definition? Or how about the Oxford English dictionary?

SI

[PilotMan]

The Times broke a story today where an Associate of Giuliani told a former CIA officer a presidential pardon was "going to cost $2M." Another one of the least surprising developments of this presidency.

[GrantDawg]

I have this very serious doubt that paying people, whether it is low wage jobs or immigrants, a living wage will drive prices so high that is going to be majorly felt. It will also drive general wages up, so we can better afford the higher prices. The extreme fear of rising prices if we actually pay people is driven by the wealthy because cheap labor is the main way they pad their wealth.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[PilotMan]

Labor is one of the highest costs in food production, and the profit margins are already tight. Even if you look at restaurants with profit margins that are between 5-10% a substantial increase in the cost of labor can be the difference between profit and loss. That we still have places where tipped labor can still be paid $2.13/hr is a disgrace.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I have this very serious doubt that paying people, whether it is low wage jobs or immigrants, a living wage will drive prices so high that is going to be majorly felt. It will also drive general wages up, so we can better afford the higher prices. The extreme fear of rising prices if we actually pay people is driven by the wealthy because cheap labor is the main way they pad their wealth.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

From what I can gather labor costs at restaurants typically run from 30-40% of total costs. Clearly, prices will have to go up to cover increased labor costs, but it isn't going to double prices.

[lungs]

FWIW, I recently saw a discussion among former dairy farming colleagues. $15/hour is pretty much bare minimum these days to hire from a pool of mostly undocumented applicants. The workers have more bargaining power these days, at least in agriculture. Ten years ago you could pay $8.00/hour and if they asked for more you could always point to a steady stream of new immigrants ready to work for $7.50/hour. Not so much today and that was something I was trying to stay ahead of when I threw in the towel.

[GrantDawg]

When I managed restaurants, labor was (and corporate made it have to be) under 25%. Most shifts it was more like 16-20%. I am sure some restaurants run it more and some run it less.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[GrantDawg]

Just looked it up. On average, labor is 20-30% of cost.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Does it meet Merriam-Webster's definition? Or how about the Oxford English dictionary?

SI

Doesn't really matter. Many people just make up their own definitions or misuse words anyway for that "gotcha".

[GrantDawg]

Of course, California among many other states already have $13-14 dollars minimum wage. Anybody there have a report of large restaurant closing (before covid)? Was the food at McDonald's too expensive to afford?
Most resurants in my area, including McDonald's are offering $10-12 dollars an hour to start.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

Labor is one of the highest costs in food production, and the profit margins are already tight. Even if you look at restaurants with profit margins that are between 5-10% a substantial increase in the cost of labor can be the difference between profit and loss. That we still have places where tipped labor can still be paid $2.13/hr is a disgrace.

If tipped labor goes up to $15/hr, are you still okay with the traditional 15-20% tip?

I'm actually okay with it but do expect overall cost of a meal to increase. But am a little concerned that if tip goes significantly down that service quality will suffer (e.g. my general experience in Europe).

[PilotMan]

Originally Posted by Edward64

If tipped labor goes up to $15/hr, are you still okay with the traditional 15-20% tip?

I'm actually okay with it but do expect overall cost of a meal to increase. But am a little concerned that if tip goes significantly down that service quality will suffer (e.g. my general experience in Europe).

That rule was implemented as tipped labor can be paid at 50% of minimum wage (back to when it was $4.25/hr), and the R's allowed it to be stripped from that standard. If we raise min wage to $15, then at the min, tipped pay should be $7.50/hr and tipping allowed on top of that.

[henry296]

I'd rather raise their wages to normal minimum wage, raise the price and get rid of tipping. It is uncomfortable and isn't how almost any other industry works where I'm responsible for determining the employees salary.

[albionmoonlight]

Yup. Eliminate tipping. Raise server salaries. Raise prepared food prices.

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

That rule was implemented as tipped labor can be paid at 50% of minimum wage (back to when it was $4.25/hr), and the R's allowed it to be stripped from that standard. If we raise min wage to $15, then at the min, tipped pay should be $7.50/hr and tipping allowed on top of that.

This seems reasonable to me.

[GrantDawg]

I think tipping depends. It should still be common but at a lower rate. Let make 5% the average and 10% the top end.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[PilotMan]

I would like to see that. This idea that we need to tip our wait staff for the somewhat decent jobs they do, or just merely taking our order, because they 'rely on tips, and it's all they can do' is bullshit. It keeps their own pay lower and puts the onus on customers to be guilted into 'helping service workers out', when all that does is keep the profit margins for the business. I still like to tip well for good service, but the concept has been manipulated over the last 25 years too. It's not 'important' to tip every time, and now we're tipping 18-25%, when for a long, long time, it was 10-15%, and that chaps my ass too. It's not ON customers to make sure employees get paid. So now pay raises come from customers, because employers 'will never raise pay for tipped employees'. We're seeing tip jars literally everywhere and for everything. It's gone too far.

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by PilotMan

I would like to see that. This idea that we need to tip our wait staff for the somewhat decent jobs they do, or just merely taking our order, because they 'rely on tips, and it's all they can do' is bullshit. It keeps their own pay lower and puts the onus on customers to be guilted into 'helping service workers out', when all that does is keep the profit margins for the business. I still like to tip well for good service, but the concept has been manipulated over the last 25 years too. It's not 'important' to tip every time, and now we're tipping 18-25%, when for a long, long time, it was 10-15%, and that chaps my ass too. It's not ON customers to make sure employees get paid. So now pay raises come from customers, because employers 'will never raise pay for tipped employees'. We're seeing tip jars literally everywhere and for everything. It's gone too far.

are you Mr Pink?

yeah I agree that the whole tipping scam is an awful excuse not to pay wait staff.

[molson]

Even if servers make $20/hour, people would still tip and ruin it. It's too engrained in culture.

It's more likely to spread further into other services.

[GrantDawg]

The big pardon day is coming tommorow with over 100 names. They don't expect anyone in the inner circle, but he could hold that until Wednesday. Thge biggest splash name expect? Julian Assange. https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/17/polit...ted/index.html

[Edward64]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

The big pardon day is coming tommorow with over 100 names. They don't expect anyone in the inner circle, but he could hold that until Wednesday. Thge biggest splash name expect? Julian Assange. https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/17/polit...ted/index.html

Assange is not expected to get a pardon per the article. (It may have changed/updated though).

I am okay with Assange spending the rest of his life hiding in an embassy (or wherever is he now). I know there was something about a minor (?) but personally, it would have been fascinating for it to play out in US courts re: wiki leaks and 1A argument.

[Lathum]

Wonder if Kyle Rittenhouse gets a pardon.