This isn't the first time and it won't be the last time workers were offered large wage increases to work themselves out of a job. That's exactly what this strike is about. Think not, look back at the UAW when automation first hit them in the face.
Ultimately the solution is found at the bargaining table. Concessions will be made on both sides. Working over the long term, retirements, buyouts and incentives will speed along adding innovations that allow for an automated workforce to displace them.
There will be less workers over time, something the union doesn't want to see, but the settlements offered will make it worth their while. History is and always will be one of the best teaching tools available.
I loved the fact David put in the link to the Universal Basic Income (UBI). We are a ways away from that day; but it is coming. The minute i saw the link, it i remembered the one most redeeming factor for Andrew Yang in 2016 was his forward approach on this topic.
I'm no futurist, but i did a presentation once at the World's Futurist Society (i was brutal BTW) and what i did see/learn was "forecasting" (their word for predicting) was not a perfect science.
We all see what is is coming with AI. While in some instances it will be a Godsend, in others it will change us in ways beyond my (our) imagination. It reminds me a lot of the birth of the internet. Incredible the ability to research and reach people; terrifying how ugly it can be.
AI will be 100 times more challenging. That's scary and one reason i am glad i am an old man.
And to get more explicit about it: it's going to require a change in thought in terms of how conservatives/Republicans think about welfare and the like.
The timing appears to be almost entirely related to Trump's attempts to delay his court cases. These cases would have been heard already if said delaying tactics had not been attempted.
Fun comments and even better, the workers are going back to work and putting the strike on hold until Jan 15. Kudos on somebody, everybody using some common sense.
Before concepts such as UBI turns the USA into a nation of deadbeats, maybe we should reconsider the supposition that we need a massive influx of immigrants to do the jobs that Americans won't unless we propose to train the illegals who are already here to operate cranes and forklifts and drive trucks and replace the strikers. Having experienced union violence and sabotage first-hand, I have no doubts that a sizable contingent of law enforcement and National Guard would be required to maintain some semblance of order.
The idea that we need more workers and a larger population is basically flawed.
We do need more workers now, but yes, it’s a changing world.
As to slowing or controlling immigration, it all goes back to passing an immigration compromise. Until the right realizes the status quo is going to remain unless they compromise, what you see is what you get.
There is no compromise on the left. The president can already close the border. He hasn't and he is ignoring a provision in the law that requires detention of illegals.
I see little or no compromise on the left. The "compromise" bill you support gives the President and the Homeland Security Secretary almost unlimited discretion to ignore its provisions. It's a democrat bill that could never be repealed or amended.
"TITLE VII—IMMIGRATION
PAROLE REFORM
SEC. 701. IMMIGRATION PAROLE REFORM.
Section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)) is amended to read as follows:
‘‘(5)(A) Except as provided in subparagraphs (B)
and (C) and section 214(f), the Secretary of Homeland
Security, in the discretion of the Secretary, may tempo
arily parole into the United States any alien applying for
admission to the United States who is not present in the
United States, under such conditions as the Secretary may
prescribe, on a case-by-case basis, and not according to
eligibility criteria describing an entire class of potential
parole recipients, for urgent humanitarian reasons or sig
nificant public benefit. Parole granted under this subpara
graph may not be regarded as an admission of the alien.
When the purposes of such parole have been served in the
opinion of the Secretary, the alien shall immediately re
turn or be returned to the custody from which the alien
was paroled. After such return, the case of the alien shall
be dealt with in the same manner as the case of any other
applicant for admission to the United States.
‘‘(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security may grant
parole to any alien who—
‘‘(i) is present in the United States without
lawful immigration status;
‘‘(ii) is the beneficiary of an approved petition
under section 203(a);
‘‘(iii) is not otherwise inadmissible or removable; and
‘‘(iv) is the spouse or child of a member of the
Armed Forces serving on active duty. "
And we do not need more illegal workers now. Allowing admittance only to a much smaller number of immigrants who can be fully vetted as law abiding and self-sufficient should fill our needs. We need citizens who actually work instead of whining because they don't get paid twice as much for operating a forklift.
Ultimately, we need birth control instead of illegal Hispanics and Muslims and others who give no thought to overpopulation.
Closing the border is all or nothing: that's not a compromise position, and one with far more negatives than positives.
Actually reforming our asylum laws will take legislation. Increasing funding for processing applications and securing the border requires appropriations.
True. Closing the border is not a compromise. But failing to do so in order to ameliorate the problem does not confer the right to blame the problem on others. Biden has the power.
Nonetheless, Biden had the power to prevent this disaster. My more conservative compromise is:
1. No captured or encountered illegals admitted. Knowing the border control can't be perfect.
2. Discovered illegals immediately deported. One exception for "dreamers" 16 years or older who were smuggled in by their parents when they were young (maybe as old as 13).
3. A fixed quota of legal immigrants who can be perfectly vetted knowing there will be mistakes. Mistakes before citizenship will be deported.
This isn't the first time and it won't be the last time workers were offered large wage increases to work themselves out of a job. That's exactly what this strike is about. Think not, look back at the UAW when automation first hit them in the face.
Ultimately the solution is found at the bargaining table. Concessions will be made on both sides. Working over the long term, retirements, buyouts and incentives will speed along adding innovations that allow for an automated workforce to displace them.
There will be less workers over time, something the union doesn't want to see, but the settlements offered will make it worth their while. History is and always will be one of the best teaching tools available.
Yes you have it right. Spoken with experience at your back.
I loved the fact David put in the link to the Universal Basic Income (UBI). We are a ways away from that day; but it is coming. The minute i saw the link, it i remembered the one most redeeming factor for Andrew Yang in 2016 was his forward approach on this topic.
I'm no futurist, but i did a presentation once at the World's Futurist Society (i was brutal BTW) and what i did see/learn was "forecasting" (their word for predicting) was not a perfect science.
We all see what is is coming with AI. While in some instances it will be a Godsend, in others it will change us in ways beyond my (our) imagination. It reminds me a lot of the birth of the internet. Incredible the ability to research and reach people; terrifying how ugly it can be.
AI will be 100 times more challenging. That's scary and one reason i am glad i am an old man.
And to get more explicit about it: it's going to require a change in thought in terms of how conservatives/Republicans think about welfare and the like.
Not just republicans and conservatives SGman, but a realignment within our society as a whole. Thank God i am old.
I agree on a societal change, but suffice to state I think that's a bit less an issue on the Democratic side of things - at least, typically speaking.
The timing appears to be almost entirely related to Trump's attempts to delay his court cases. These cases would have been heard already if said delaying tactics had not been attempted.
Fun comments and even better, the workers are going back to work and putting the strike on hold until Jan 15. Kudos on somebody, everybody using some common sense.
Before concepts such as UBI turns the USA into a nation of deadbeats, maybe we should reconsider the supposition that we need a massive influx of immigrants to do the jobs that Americans won't unless we propose to train the illegals who are already here to operate cranes and forklifts and drive trucks and replace the strikers. Having experienced union violence and sabotage first-hand, I have no doubts that a sizable contingent of law enforcement and National Guard would be required to maintain some semblance of order.
The idea that we need more workers and a larger population is basically flawed.
We do need more workers now, but yes, it’s a changing world.
As to slowing or controlling immigration, it all goes back to passing an immigration compromise. Until the right realizes the status quo is going to remain unless they compromise, what you see is what you get.
There is no compromise on the left. The president can already close the border. He hasn't and he is ignoring a provision in the law that requires detention of illegals.
I see little or no compromise on the left. The "compromise" bill you support gives the President and the Homeland Security Secretary almost unlimited discretion to ignore its provisions. It's a democrat bill that could never be repealed or amended.
"TITLE VII—IMMIGRATION
PAROLE REFORM
SEC. 701. IMMIGRATION PAROLE REFORM.
Section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5)) is amended to read as follows:
‘‘(5)(A) Except as provided in subparagraphs (B)
and (C) and section 214(f), the Secretary of Homeland
Security, in the discretion of the Secretary, may tempo
arily parole into the United States any alien applying for
admission to the United States who is not present in the
United States, under such conditions as the Secretary may
prescribe, on a case-by-case basis, and not according to
eligibility criteria describing an entire class of potential
parole recipients, for urgent humanitarian reasons or sig
nificant public benefit. Parole granted under this subpara
graph may not be regarded as an admission of the alien.
When the purposes of such parole have been served in the
opinion of the Secretary, the alien shall immediately re
turn or be returned to the custody from which the alien
was paroled. After such return, the case of the alien shall
be dealt with in the same manner as the case of any other
applicant for admission to the United States.
‘‘(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security may grant
parole to any alien who—
‘‘(i) is present in the United States without
lawful immigration status;
‘‘(ii) is the beneficiary of an approved petition
under section 203(a);
‘‘(iii) is not otherwise inadmissible or removable; and
‘‘(iv) is the spouse or child of a member of the
Armed Forces serving on active duty. "
And we do not need more illegal workers now. Allowing admittance only to a much smaller number of immigrants who can be fully vetted as law abiding and self-sufficient should fill our needs. We need citizens who actually work instead of whining because they don't get paid twice as much for operating a forklift.
Ultimately, we need birth control instead of illegal Hispanics and Muslims and others who give no thought to overpopulation.
Closing the border is all or nothing: that's not a compromise position, and one with far more negatives than positives.
Actually reforming our asylum laws will take legislation. Increasing funding for processing applications and securing the border requires appropriations.
It's Congress's responsibility.
True. Closing the border is not a compromise. But failing to do so in order to ameliorate the problem does not confer the right to blame the problem on others. Biden has the power.
This could all have already been dealt with, but for one man's hold on the GOP.
It being all or nothing means no travel in or out. 'cause the border is closed.
How about trade? Border is closed: nothing in or out.
Nonetheless, Biden had the power to prevent this disaster. My more conservative compromise is:
1. No captured or encountered illegals admitted. Knowing the border control can't be perfect.
2. Discovered illegals immediately deported. One exception for "dreamers" 16 years or older who were smuggled in by their parents when they were young (maybe as old as 13).
3. A fixed quota of legal immigrants who can be perfectly vetted knowing there will be mistakes. Mistakes before citizenship will be deported.