Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
Your will would be impossible to enforce though, because your will doesn't supersede the law and murdering people is still illegal even if you dictate their deaths in your will. ***No no no where's the fun in that. I don't want to murder them. I want to give them a mean hickie. From Hell's depths I pinch at thee!
Also, realize that when you're eating a steak or a hamburger, the animal whose meat you're eating, while it was alive, was a bigger threat to your life than terrorism. ***Yes but that threat was delicious.
To the argument, whats the logical reason for taking refugees, when there is a a statistical certainty it will increase the overall amount of crimes?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/21 22:39:48
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Canadians are the same way, actually. We had the same problem with our infrastructure, but we started getting it fixed when we realized how serious the problem was.
Unfortunately, we only realized how serious the problem was when an overpass near Montreal killed five people when it collapsed on people who were driving on a highway due to lack of routine maintenance about a decade ago. Because the entire nation watched on the news as rescue workers tried for days to rescue people who had survived the collapse but were stuck under the concrete. We couldn't ignore it anymore.
It's even more unfortunate that simply relaying this story isn't enough, and the US will have to have their own version of that story before anything changes.
We all ready had that happen, but in typical American fashion we didn't do much about the root cause.
Is your country's science education so bad you literally attribute the existence of weather, animals, and humans to a deliberate attack on you by a supernatural deity?
Well yea. When you go outside to get your paper, see God standing there and he immediately punches you in the dick and says 'thats what you get!' You realize...mmm
Yet the fact your own neighbours are more of a threat to you than a terrorist seems to be a fact you're bizarrely okay with.
Um...you might want to review my posts before you make that statement....just saying...
Well, you should be more worried about your own citizens killing you, because it's much, much more likely.
No you misinterpret. I'm the guy who when he dies wants to be cremated, formed into bullets, and shot at a specific list of people. Its a long list.
Your hard on for terrorism and their threat, in the face of the far deadlier threats we face, betrays your actual intent. To label an entire people with a lable to satisfy your own anxiety because they are....oh shudder..different.
Are you talking to me sir?
So that I don't get aggravated and demand redress (whippy sticks at dawn you peasant). I will restate, the question was stated so I am arguing the position. It is not my position. I am concerned, but its about open borders permitting cartels carte blanche in the US-because THEY ARE HERE- and the impact of illegal immigration on working class salaries. I have personally helped sponsor a Syrian family so
I'll gladly race my corgi versus your wiener dog any day of the week.
Even if you were just making the argument for arguments sake it was a poor argument.
Industrialization and modernization has done more to harm the working and middle class. The entire "they took our jobs" argument is race baiting and nothing more. China (one of those often accused of taking our jobs) is now facing the same problem we are; decreased demand has lead to manufacturing and personnel efficiencies that have made homegrown workers too expensive.
Ender502
"Burning the aquila into the retinas of heretics is the new black." - Savnock
"The ignore button is for pansees who can't deal with their own problems. " - H.B.M.C.
Rodeny would go through a corgi like gak through a goose. Corgis are bute and fun. Badger Dogs were bred to killer badgers. They are means as gak. Thats why I love em.
Even if you were just making the argument for arguments sake it was a poor argument.
I never said it w as a good argument.
Industrialization and modernization has done more to harm the working and middle class. The entire "they took our jobs" argument is race baiting and nothing more. China (one of those often accused of taking our jobs) is now facing the same problem we are; decreased demand has lead to manufacturing and personnel efficiencies that have made homegrown workers too expensive.
Ender502
Its a combination. The jobs couldn't have gone to China if they weren't permitted to go. Manufacturing advances just jumped on that further.
But its basic math. that importing millions of low skilled workers decreases salaries for low skilled domestic workers. Just look at what happened to construction, agriculture, and light manufacturing.
All those non English speaking employees at the new Wendys who just replaced the high school kids who were working there, well thats jobs they don't get any more. Are the illegals hardworking-hell yes and I'd hire them over you too. But that doesn't help you, and neither did either party.
So Trump comes along and says he can fix it, and you go for it, because hope is all you have*
*Yes I have in fact been there.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Frazzled wrote: Your will would be impossible to enforce though, because your will doesn't supersede the law and murdering people is still illegal even if you dictate their deaths in your will.
***No no no where's the fun in that. I don't want to murder them. I want to give them a mean hickie. From Hell's depths I pinch at thee!
Also, realize that when you're eating a steak or a hamburger, the animal whose meat you're eating, while it was alive, was a bigger threat to your life than terrorism.
***Yes but that threat was delicious.
To the argument, whats the logical reason for taking refugees, when there is a a statistical certainty it will increase the overall amount of crimes?
you can make the same argument for americans having kids, when americans have kids there is a a statistical certainty it will increase the overall amount of crimes.
there`s many logical reasons for bringing them in, in short, they`re great for the economy. Almost all of them will become tax paying citizens and might increase the population of the state they move to so they get some more EC votes.
Industrialization and modernization has done more to harm the working and middle class. The entire "they took our jobs" argument is race baiting and nothing more. China (one of those often accused of taking our jobs) is now facing the same problem we are; decreased demand has lead to manufacturing and personnel efficiencies that have made homegrown workers too expensive.
Ender502
Indeed, the real problem facing society is the future of work.
Within twenty or even ten years, automation is going to mostly replace service and transport jobs, which are two of the three last bastions of low-skill employment (Construction being third).
How will our "justify your existence with a job" society move forward with a vast underclass of basically unemployable citizens?
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
you can make the same argument for americans having kids, when americans have kids there is a a statistical certainty it will increase the overall amount of crimes.
Only if your population increases. Further, you have to have kids. You don't have to have immigrants.
there`s many logical reasons for bringing them in, in short, they`re great for the economy.
Studies have shown that to be a real mixed bag. It sucks balls if you're trying to compete with them. Democrats don't care about that. Republicans don't care about that.
Almost all of them will become tax paying citizens
Not if they are illegal.
and might increase the population of the state they move to so they get some more EC votes.
Definitely will increase the population. Look at the joy of Southern California.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
KILLING THE OVERTIME RULE: The Labor Department’s overtime rule, set to take effect Dec. 1, may get a cold reception from President-elect Donald Trump. The rule will double (to $47,476) the salary threshold under which virtually all employees are guaranteed time-and-a-half pay whenever they work more than 40 hours in any given week. Trump said in an August interview that he’d exempt small businesses from the rule (though it wasn’t entirely clear from the context that he understood how the rule worked).
Could Trump kill the rule outright? Not using the Congressional Review Act; the rule came out too far in advance of his Jan. 20 inauguration for that. In theory, says Judy Conti, federal advocacy coordinator for the National Employment Law Project, the Trump administration could propose a new regulation undoing the old one. But that would require a notice and comment period that could last a year or more, and to comply with the Administrative Procedures Act Trump’s Labor Department would have to demonstrate a change in economic circumstances. Undoing the overtime rule would be unpopular; a Morning Consult poll in May found support for the rule not only from Democrats (64 percent), but also from Republicans (57 percent) and independents (58 percent).
Congressional Republicans could introduce legislation to block the rule — but that, Conti said, wouldn’t likely survive a filibuster challenge from Senate Democrats. A more likely approach would be for the Trump DOL to propose a rule lowering the salary threshold somewhat. “They’ll get lobbied by the business community to figure out what [is] an appropriate threshold from their point of view,” said Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the Economic Policy Institute. “I think it’s unlikely that they would just repeal the rule and go back to the old threshold because it’s an absurd level and it would be hard to justify.”
But Lee Schreter, co-chair of the Wage and Hour Practice Group at the (management-side) law firm of Littler Mendelson, said the current threshold may be here to stay. Once employers implement a new threshold “it becomes hard as an employee-relations matter to take that away.” But a Trump Labor Department might, she said, issue a new regulation to eliminate a provision in the rule that indexes the salary threshold to inflation.
NEW TRUMP WEBSITE: A new website has gone live for the Trump presidential transition. “Greatagain.gov” doesn’t mention DOL specifically, but under the heading, “Getting America Back to Work Again,” it calls regulatory reform a “cornerstone of the Trump Administration.” Repeating promises Trump made during his campaign, the site pledges “a temporary moratorium on all new regulation, canceling overarching [we think probably they meant “overreaching”] executive orders, and a thorough review to identify and eliminate unnecessary regulations that kill jobs and bloat government.” Also, the Donald “will reverse decades of policies that have pushed jobs out of our country.” Immigration is tackled in a 10-point plan; Trump’s border wall is at the top of the list.
TRUMP’S MISSING MUSLIM BAN: We could have sworn that Trump said during the election that he’d impose a short-term ban on Muslim immigration, but for a few days this week we thought maybe we imagined that. That’s because, as the Washington Post’s Jose DelReal reported, Donaldjtrump.com was redirecting visitors away from a webpage where Trump called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” Beginning on Election Day, DelReal reported, that web link took readers instead to a page inviting them to donate to Trump’s campaign.Trump’s ban on admitting all Muslim immigrants later evolved into a ban on immigrants from countries with a connection to terrorism. After a media inquiry from the Post, the webpage was restored Thursday. More here.
TRUMP’S DHS CANDIDATES: Border security will be one of three top priorities for the new administration, Trump said Thursday (the other two are economy and healthcare reform). In addition to building that U.S.-Mexico border wall, Trump’s said he will ramp up deportations--two complex and expensive undertakings. Who will carry out those orders as DHS secretary? Morning Shift has heard a few names mentioned:
Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke is a possible candidate, POLITICO’s Nancy Cook and Andrew Restuccia reported this week. Clarke — a lifelong Milwaukee resident with nearly four decades of law enforcement experience — has a reputation for being tough on immigration. He opposes birthright citizenship (“There is no constitutional or legal claim to that citizenship,” he said in 2015). At the local level, he’s vowed to honor requests by the federal government to hold accused immigration violators an extra 48 hours before release.
Former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has also gotten a nod from the Great Mentioner — he campaigned for Trump — but an Arpaio pick seems unlikely. He faces criminal contempt charges in Arizona and he just lost a reelection bid, ending 23 years in office.
More thoughts? Send them our way.
NLRB AND RACIAL SLURS: The National Labor Relations board’s general counsel filed a brief Thursday in a case addressing whether Cooper Tires violated federal labor law when it fired an employee who shouted racial slurs at African-American replacement workers during a 2012 strike. The general counsel argued that speech, no matter how hateful, was still protected by the National Labor Relations Act. Under the NLRB’s Clear Pine Mouldings test, the general counsel argued, employers may fire workers for picket-line misconduct only if the misconduct “would reasonably tend to coerce or intimidate employees in the exercise of their rights under the Act.” Although the worker’s statements were “offensive to the dignity of African-American replacement workers,” the brief argued, they were 1) directed at fellow picketers, not the workers themselves; 2) not “violent in nature,” and 3) “unaccompanied by any threatening behavior.” Read the full brief here.
PA CAMPAIGN WORKERS SUE DNC: Campaign organizers in Pennsylvania sued the Democratic National Committee and the Pennsylvania Democratic Committee this week for failing to pay overtime. According to the complaint, the organizers were expected to work long hours and weekends and “regularly worked in excess of 80 to 90 hours per workweek.” The organizers allege that the DNC and PDC “unlawfully and erroneously” classified organizers as exempt from overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and asked the court to designate the DNC and PDC joint employers; to certify a class of at least 40 other organizers; and to repay lost earnings. Read the full complaint here.
MCDONALD’S STORE SETTLES WITH EEOC: A McDonald’s restaurant in Bentonville, Ark., agreed to pay $103,000 to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. EEOC alleged that the restaurant fired an employee after learning of his HIV-positive status, and required employees, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, to report the use of prescription medication. The restaurant is owned by Mathews Management Company, which owns 33 other McDonald’s stores in Arkansas, Missouri and Oklahoma. More here.
OSHA RELEASES SILICA GUIDE FOR SMALL BIZ: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration released a compliance guide Thursday aimed at helping small businesses in the construction industry to comply with the agency’s final rule for exposure to crystalline silica. The rule, issued in March, lowers the exposure limit to 50 milligrams per cubic meter over an eight-hour period, but exempts construction companies that “fully and properly implement [certain] exposure control methods.” Read the guide here.
UNIONS, WELLS FARGO AND THE DAKOTA PIPELINE: Union workers rallied Thursday outside Wells Fargo in Oakland, calling on the bank to stop funding the embattled Dakota Access Pipeline. The AFL-CIO has backed the pipeline, causing a rift with other labor unions that oppose its construction on the grounds that it threatens the water supply on the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. Wells Fargo invested over $467 million in the pipeline, the unions said. The rally featured members from 25 local unions, including the California Nurses Association and the SEIU United Services Workers West.
BROWNING FERRIS: THE FINAL BRIEF: Browning Ferris Industries filed its final brief in a court case challenging the NLRB’s revised “joint employer” standard. The NLRB, in its 2015 decision against Browning Ferris, loosened the board's definition of joint employment, making it easier for the NLRB to hold companies accountable for the labor practices of subcontractors or franchisees. In its brief, Browning Ferris said that when Congress passed Taft-Hartley in 1947, it “made clear that the ‘employee’ definition is to be grounded in a common-law assessment. Importantly, Congress emphasized that the governing standard’s essential requirement is ‘direct supervision,’ i.e., direct and immediate control.” Since then, Browning Ferris said, Congress has not modified the NLRA’s treatment of joint-employer relationships. The company said that in this case, the NLRB “ignored Congress’ directive and rejected 30 years of its own precedent.”
Just what the working class wanted when they voted for him!
The next four/eight years are going to make me so happy that I am a student of the Theater of the Absurd!
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
you can make the same argument for americans having kids, when americans have kids there is a a statistical certainty it will increase the overall amount of crimes.
Only if your population increases. Further, you have to have kids. You don't have to have immigrants.
there`s many logical reasons for bringing them in, in short, they`re great for the economy.
Studies have shown that to be a real mixed bag. It sucks balls if you're trying to compete with them. Democrats don't care about that. Republicans don't care about that.
Almost all of them will become tax paying citizens
Not if they are illegal.
and might increase the population of the state they move to so they get some more EC votes.
Definitely will increase the population. Look at the joy of Southern California.
You have to have kids? Is that some sort of Texas law?
The argument is that we already have murderers here. Bringing in more murderers seems antithetical to logic.
The odds of a Syrian Refugee being a terrorist are about 1 in 50,000.
Imagine if you had a town of 50,000 people, 49,999 of whom are completely ordinary people. 1 is a nutjob builds a bomb completely on his own and kills people with it. Would you start saying that you can no longer trust the other 49,999 people who lived in that town where one guy was a nutjob and killed people, simply because they lived in the same town he did?
You have a citation for this 1:50,000 number you keep bringing up?
Even if true (and I doubt it is, I think you pulled it from your ass) it ignores other factors. Kids/1st generation citizens of the immigrants/refugees are more prone to radicalization than their parents. Refugee and other non-integrated immigrants are more likely to be coerced into aiding that 1 in 50k or sympathetic. See the recent attacks in France and others in Europe. See the San Bernardino shooting. See several of the incidents others have brought up to include the Ft Hood shooting and the Pulse nightclub shooting.
When even the Feds admit they cannot fully vet the incoming population, and when DaIsh and other groups have stated they intend to use refugee movements to infiltrate Western nations, it is understandable when folks want to limit the intake of those refugees.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/21 23:05:58
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
Industrialization and modernization has done more to harm the working and middle class. The entire "they took our jobs" argument is race baiting and nothing more. China (one of those often accused of taking our jobs) is now facing the same problem we are; decreased demand has lead to manufacturing and personnel efficiencies that have made homegrown workers too expensive.
Ender502
Indeed, the real problem facing society is the future of work.
Within twenty or even ten years, automation is going to mostly replace service and transport jobs, which are two of the three last bastions of low-skill employment (Construction being third).
How will our "justify your existence with a job" society move forward with a vast underclass of basically unemployable citizens?
This man speaks the truth. It is going to be a raucous half-century or so. I foresee a great deal of political uncertainty, civil unrest, and violence. Societal transitions like this are rough on a country.
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
The argument is that we already have murderers here. Bringing in more murderers seems antithetical to logic.
The odds of a Syrian Refugee being a terrorist are about 1 in 50,000.
Imagine if you had a town of 50,000 people, 49,999 of whom are completely ordinary people. 1 is a nutjob builds a bomb completely on his own and kills people with it. Would you start saying that you can no longer trust the other 49,999 people who lived in that town where one guy was a nutjob and killed people, simply because they lived in the same town he did?
You have a citation for this 1:50,000 number you keep bringing up?
Even if true (and I doubt it is, I think you pulled it from your ass) it ignores other factors. Kids/1st generation citizens of the immigrants/refugees are more prone to radicalization than their parents. Refugee and other non-integrated immigrants are more likely to be coerced into aiding that 1 in 50k or sympathetic. See the recent attacks in France and others in Europe. See the San Bernardino shooting. See several of the incidents others have brought up to include the Ft Hood shooting and the Pulse nightclub shooting.
When even the Feds admit they cannot fully vet the incoming population, and when DaIsh and other groups have stated they intend to use refugee movements to infiltrate Western nations, it is understandable when folks want to limit the intake of those refugees.
The Feds have admitted no such thing, all refugees are vetted, some taking up to 10 years to complete the process.
3 incidences? Wow, so 3 attacks is enough to cause fear in all refugees and demand action, the other 365 by americans is just another day in america. Nothing you can do about that.
1:50k is low balling it, it's a whole lot closer to nil.
Including those murdered in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11), the chance of an American perishing in a terrorist attack on U.S. soil that was committed by a foreigner over the 41-year period studied here is 1 in 3.6 million per year
Industrialization and modernization has done more to harm the working and middle class. The entire "they took our jobs" argument is race baiting and nothing more. China (one of those often accused of taking our jobs) is now facing the same problem we are; decreased demand has lead to manufacturing and personnel efficiencies that have made homegrown workers too expensive.
Ender502
Indeed, the real problem facing society is the future of work.
Within twenty or even ten years, automation is going to mostly replace service and transport jobs, which are two of the three last bastions of low-skill employment (Construction being third).
How will our "justify your existence with a job" society move forward with a vast underclass of basically unemployable citizens?
This man speaks the truth. It is going to be a raucous half-century or so. I foresee a great deal of political uncertainty, civil unrest, and violence. Societal transitions like this are rough on a country.
By raucous you mean I'll be glad my side of the family dies first so I don't have to see too much of it, then I agree with you. Elysiam wasn't a movie. Elysiam is now.
Almost all of them will become tax paying citizens
Not if they are illegal.
I'm confused, I thought that you guys were talking about refugees going through the system, which means they would all be legal.
Fair point. I am personally noting illegal immigration and the impacts therein.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2016/11/21 23:24:21
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
The argument is that we already have murderers here. Bringing in more murderers seems antithetical to logic.
The odds of a Syrian Refugee being a terrorist are about 1 in 50,000.
Imagine if you had a town of 50,000 people, 49,999 of whom are completely ordinary people. 1 is a nutjob builds a bomb completely on his own and kills people with it. Would you start saying that you can no longer trust the other 49,999 people who lived in that town where one guy was a nutjob and killed people, simply because they lived in the same town he did?
You have a citation for this 1:50,000 number you keep bringing up?
Even if true (and I doubt it is, I think you pulled it from your ass) it ignores other factors. Kids/1st generation citizens of the immigrants/refugees are more prone to radicalization than their parents. Refugee and other non-integrated immigrants are more likely to be coerced into aiding that 1 in 50k or sympathetic. See the recent attacks in France and others in Europe. See the San Bernardino shooting. See several of the incidents others have brought up to include the Ft Hood shooting and the Pulse nightclub shooting.
When even the Feds admit they cannot fully vet the incoming population, and when DaIsh and other groups have stated they intend to use refugee movements to infiltrate Western nations, it is understandable when folks want to limit the intake of those refugees.
The Feds have admitted no such thing, all refugees are vetted, some taking up to 10 years to complete the process.
3 incidences? Wow, so 3 attacks is enough to cause fear in all refugees and demand action, the other 365 by americans is just another day in america. Nothing you can do about that.
1:50k is low balling it, it's a whole lot closer to nil.
Including those murdered in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11), the chance of an American perishing in a terrorist attack on U.S. soil that was committed by a foreigner over the 41-year period studied here is 1 in 3.6 million per year
Refugees and immigrants do not have the right to go to whatever country they want, the countries really do have a say in who they let in, and it is not subject to international debate.
... and it is not subject to international debate.
Yet here we are, debating it on an international forum
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
No, the nation requires a population. It could just as easily function without children, through replacing its dying population with immigrants.
But why would a country do that? You Brits (at least the ones who voted out of the EU) have decided you dont want that either. Manchester has always been a toilet, but now there are neighborhoods where even a local Englishman cant go (and not just because he loves Liverpool)
No, the nation requires a population. It could just as easily function without children, through replacing its dying population with immigrants.
But why would a country do that? You Brits (at least the ones who voted out of the EU) have decided you dont want that either. Manchester has always been a toilet, but now there are neighborhoods where even a local Englishman cant go (and not just because he loves Liverpool)
Because often as the population becomes better educated (or at least more people are accessing higher education), it has less children due to people choosing to focus on careers etc.
So in order to maintain the population the country needs to fund itself, it uses immigration. If you want an example of what happens when a country doesn't use immigration to counter a declining workforce population, look at Japan.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
No, the nation requires a population. It could just as easily function without children, through replacing its dying population with immigrants.
But why would a country do that? You Brits (at least the ones who voted out of the EU) have decided you dont want that either. Manchester has always been a toilet, but now there are neighborhoods where even a local Englishman cant go (and not just because he loves Liverpool)
Because often as the population becomes better educated (or at least more people are accessing higher education), it has less children due to people choosing to focus on careers etc.
So in order to maintain the population the country needs to fund itself, it uses immigration. If you want an example of what happens when a country doesn't use immigration to counter a declining workforce population, look at Japan.
I have lived more than 5 years in Japan, it definately needs less people. While it is the size of California its population is much larger and the Kanto plain is packed full.
Japan could be ok with that population, it might even do better for their environment. Even 80 million is a lot for that country. They would have to change their mentality about lifetime employment and how they handle it, but thats up to them to decide. They are not very welcoming of non-Japanese as it is.
Refugees and immigrants do not have the right to go to whatever country they want, the countries really do have a say in who they let in, and it is not subject to international debate.
thekingofkings wrote: Japan could be ok with that population, it might even do better for their environment. Even 80 million is a lot for that country. They would have to change their mentality about lifetime employment and how they handle it, but thats up to them to decide. They are not very welcoming of non-Japanese as it is.
It would not be okay unless it forces those old people to work and then that is just delaying the inevitable. No country is sustainable when over a third of its population is beyond the working age.
Japan either needs to massively increase its birthrate (it is currently around 1.4 and would need to go up to around 2.1 to reach a sustainable population of around a hundred million, which is the governments aim) or bring in more immigrants to plug the gaps in its labour supply.
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
thekingofkings wrote: Japan could be ok with that population, it might even do better for their environment. Even 80 million is a lot for that country. They would have to change their mentality about lifetime employment and how they handle it, but thats up to them to decide. They are not very welcoming of non-Japanese as it is.
It would not be okay unless it forces those old people to work and then that is just delaying the inevitable. No country is sustainable when over a third of its population is beyond the working age.
Japan either needs to massively increase its birthrate (it is currently around 1.4 and would need to go up to around 2.1 to reach a sustainable population of around a hundred million, which is the governments aim) or bring in more immigrants to plug the gaps in its labour supply.
Or build more robots. They are quite advanced in the field of robotics over there.
What I have
~4100
~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
KILLING THE OVERTIME RULE: The Labor Department’s overtime rule, set to take effect Dec. 1, may get a cold reception from President-elect Donald Trump. The rule will double (to $47,476) the salary threshold under which virtually all employees are guaranteed time-and-a-half pay whenever they work more than 40 hours in any given week. Trump said in an August interview that he’d exempt small businesses from the rule (though it wasn’t entirely clear from the context that he understood how the rule worked).
Could Trump kill the rule outright? Not using the Congressional Review Act; the rule came out too far in advance of his Jan. 20 inauguration for that. In theory, says Judy Conti, federal advocacy coordinator for the National Employment Law Project, the Trump administration could propose a new regulation undoing the old one. But that would require a notice and comment period that could last a year or more, and to comply with the Administrative Procedures Act Trump’s Labor Department would have to demonstrate a change in economic circumstances. Undoing the overtime rule would be unpopular; a Morning Consult poll in May found support for the rule not only from Democrats (64 percent), but also from Republicans (57 percent) and independents (58 percent).
Congressional Republicans could introduce legislation to block the rule — but that, Conti said, wouldn’t likely survive a filibuster challenge from Senate Democrats. A more likely approach would be for the Trump DOL to propose a rule lowering the salary threshold somewhat. “They’ll get lobbied by the business community to figure out what [is] an appropriate threshold from their point of view,” said Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the Economic Policy Institute. “I think it’s unlikely that they would just repeal the rule and go back to the old threshold because it’s an absurd level and it would be hard to justify.”
But Lee Schreter, co-chair of the Wage and Hour Practice Group at the (management-side) law firm of Littler Mendelson, said the current threshold may be here to stay. Once employers implement a new threshold “it becomes hard as an employee-relations matter to take that away.” But a Trump Labor Department might, she said, issue a new regulation to eliminate a provision in the rule that indexes the salary threshold to inflation.
NEW TRUMP WEBSITE: A new website has gone live for the Trump presidential transition. “Greatagain.gov” doesn’t mention DOL specifically, but under the heading, “Getting America Back to Work Again,” it calls regulatory reform a “cornerstone of the Trump Administration.” Repeating promises Trump made during his campaign, the site pledges “a temporary moratorium on all new regulation, canceling overarching [we think probably they meant “overreaching”] executive orders, and a thorough review to identify and eliminate unnecessary regulations that kill jobs and bloat government.” Also, the Donald “will reverse decades of policies that have pushed jobs out of our country.” Immigration is tackled in a 10-point plan; Trump’s border wall is at the top of the list.
TRUMP’S MISSING MUSLIM BAN: We could have sworn that Trump said during the election that he’d impose a short-term ban on Muslim immigration, but for a few days this week we thought maybe we imagined that. That’s because, as the Washington Post’s Jose DelReal reported, Donaldjtrump.com was redirecting visitors away from a webpage where Trump called for “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” Beginning on Election Day, DelReal reported, that web link took readers instead to a page inviting them to donate to Trump’s campaign.Trump’s ban on admitting all Muslim immigrants later evolved into a ban on immigrants from countries with a connection to terrorism. After a media inquiry from the Post, the webpage was restored Thursday. More here.
TRUMP’S DHS CANDIDATES: Border security will be one of three top priorities for the new administration, Trump said Thursday (the other two are economy and healthcare reform). In addition to building that U.S.-Mexico border wall, Trump’s said he will ramp up deportations--two complex and expensive undertakings. Who will carry out those orders as DHS secretary? Morning Shift has heard a few names mentioned:
Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke is a possible candidate, POLITICO’s Nancy Cook and Andrew Restuccia reported this week. Clarke — a lifelong Milwaukee resident with nearly four decades of law enforcement experience — has a reputation for being tough on immigration. He opposes birthright citizenship (“There is no constitutional or legal claim to that citizenship,” he said in 2015). At the local level, he’s vowed to honor requests by the federal government to hold accused immigration violators an extra 48 hours before release.
Former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio has also gotten a nod from the Great Mentioner — he campaigned for Trump — but an Arpaio pick seems unlikely. He faces criminal contempt charges in Arizona and he just lost a reelection bid, ending 23 years in office.
More thoughts? Send them our way.
NLRB AND RACIAL SLURS: The National Labor Relations board’s general counsel filed a brief Thursday in a case addressing whether Cooper Tires violated federal labor law when it fired an employee who shouted racial slurs at African-American replacement workers during a 2012 strike. The general counsel argued that speech, no matter how hateful, was still protected by the National Labor Relations Act. Under the NLRB’s Clear Pine Mouldings test, the general counsel argued, employers may fire workers for picket-line misconduct only if the misconduct “would reasonably tend to coerce or intimidate employees in the exercise of their rights under the Act.” Although the worker’s statements were “offensive to the dignity of African-American replacement workers,” the brief argued, they were 1) directed at fellow picketers, not the workers themselves; 2) not “violent in nature,” and 3) “unaccompanied by any threatening behavior.” Read the full brief here.
PA CAMPAIGN WORKERS SUE DNC: Campaign organizers in Pennsylvania sued the Democratic National Committee and the Pennsylvania Democratic Committee this week for failing to pay overtime. According to the complaint, the organizers were expected to work long hours and weekends and “regularly worked in excess of 80 to 90 hours per workweek.” The organizers allege that the DNC and PDC “unlawfully and erroneously” classified organizers as exempt from overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and asked the court to designate the DNC and PDC joint employers; to certify a class of at least 40 other organizers; and to repay lost earnings. Read the full complaint here.
MCDONALD’S STORE SETTLES WITH EEOC: A McDonald’s restaurant in Bentonville, Ark., agreed to pay $103,000 to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. EEOC alleged that the restaurant fired an employee after learning of his HIV-positive status, and required employees, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, to report the use of prescription medication. The restaurant is owned by Mathews Management Company, which owns 33 other McDonald’s stores in Arkansas, Missouri and Oklahoma. More here.
OSHA RELEASES SILICA GUIDE FOR SMALL BIZ: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration released a compliance guide Thursday aimed at helping small businesses in the construction industry to comply with the agency’s final rule for exposure to crystalline silica. The rule, issued in March, lowers the exposure limit to 50 milligrams per cubic meter over an eight-hour period, but exempts construction companies that “fully and properly implement [certain] exposure control methods.” Read the guide here.
UNIONS, WELLS FARGO AND THE DAKOTA PIPELINE: Union workers rallied Thursday outside Wells Fargo in Oakland, calling on the bank to stop funding the embattled Dakota Access Pipeline. The AFL-CIO has backed the pipeline, causing a rift with other labor unions that oppose its construction on the grounds that it threatens the water supply on the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. Wells Fargo invested over $467 million in the pipeline, the unions said. The rally featured members from 25 local unions, including the California Nurses Association and the SEIU United Services Workers West.
BROWNING FERRIS: THE FINAL BRIEF: Browning Ferris Industries filed its final brief in a court case challenging the NLRB’s revised “joint employer” standard. The NLRB, in its 2015 decision against Browning Ferris, loosened the board's definition of joint employment, making it easier for the NLRB to hold companies accountable for the labor practices of subcontractors or franchisees. In its brief, Browning Ferris said that when Congress passed Taft-Hartley in 1947, it “made clear that the ‘employee’ definition is to be grounded in a common-law assessment. Importantly, Congress emphasized that the governing standard’s essential requirement is ‘direct supervision,’ i.e., direct and immediate control.” Since then, Browning Ferris said, Congress has not modified the NLRA’s treatment of joint-employer relationships. The company said that in this case, the NLRB “ignored Congress’ directive and rejected 30 years of its own precedent.”
Just what the working class wanted when they voted for him!
The next four/eight years are going to make me so happy that I am a student of the Theater of the Absurd!
I can only speak from personal experience but that overtime law didn't seem to have much of an impact. At our company it led to all the salaried positions under the threshold switched to using time cards to record their hours and any and all overtime had to be preapproved in writing by department heads. The law isn't making companies want to pay more overtime it's just pushing them to pay more scrutiny to employees' hours.
You definitely have very little experience with Texans then. Let me try and explain Texas and it's people through one of my own experiences with them:
I was in a fairly large brawl between a group of Irishmen and a group of Texans. Two particularly brawny Irishmen tagged the same Texan on both sides of the head at once. Down he goes, and I think to myself 'Damn, we killed that guy'. Nope, three min later, he pops up again, grins like he's really grateful we did that to him, and starts right back into the brawl.
Now do you understand why you will get no where with a Texan telling him that his 'neighbors are dangerous'. Because he's just as dangerous. The lot of them work really well together because everyone knows that everyone else is just as bad as the next guy, so they tend to get along. Anyone who starts gak usually ends up shot. Texas has been that way since the Republic, and I doubt they're gonna change any time soon. And I admire that about them.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/22 00:50:12
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
that importing millions of low skilled workers decreases salaries for low skilled domestic workers. Just look at what happened to construction, agriculture, and light manufacturing.
~4100
~1660
