There's a principles flaw in Friedman's reasoning that disturbs me. All his points are valid one by one, but are not compatible. When talking inheritance and borders, he talks about families and nations, which is perfectly fine; but then you can't go like he goes to a "people have responsability, not nations" or an individualistic approach. You can't have it both ways.
@TheCynicalDude I think you're wrong. Nations have no responsibility in the sense that only the citizens óf that nation have responsibility. When it comes to borders; it's no matter of responsibility but rather of collective interest. The law of the land ought to ensure a system in which the citizens can thrive but this does not imply that the law itself carries any responsibility. The judicial branch has to make sure the law is obeyed or the system might collapse; which I'm sure is a bad thing.
LACK OF CAPITALISTS? LMAO!! What brings them here is the fact that our courts have given too much power to too little people, and what we have is a system that allows for multinational corporations to support oligarchs that creates the PUSH of immigrants HERE. So if you're honestly of the opinion that it is MEXICANS faults for immigration, you need to get schooled in a lecture of economics and foreign policy. BADLY.
MrLecam: if we bought only a few things, and were limited to a few things we could produce, then 'buying American' would make sense.
But we buy pretty much everything. And we can produce pretty much anything - especially when you consider we only play a very small part in the production of things now that our economy is so mature.
In the same way a successful lawyer outsources housecleaning work so he can focus on more productive work, skilled Americans outsource unskilled work. It works!
@stevemcgee99 depends for who and how it is done. 1) The point is that we have unemployed people here who could benefit it. 2) We do not produce in the us as in china. Our production would be more capital intensive (which by the way might stimulate progress). Look at what the japanese did. They have been trying to keep jobs at home and in order to do thus they improved their technology.
There is a flaw in what Friedman says. I am ready to pay more for my goods if I know that they are produce by Americans. This is what it mean to be a country, it is a choice. Furthermore immigration lowers the salaries of all the Americans how have low skilled jobs.
@MrLecam21 But in that instance you're paying for the product because it was made in America. The product is not identical (to you) as one made overseas. If you could buy a pencil made in America for $1 or one made in America for 50 cents, you would buy the cheaper one.
@RealRacer69 nop you fail to understand that my utility function gives more value to made in usa. Being a patriot means that you value your country men well being, your utility function depends on their (to some extend of course). Thus yes if it is not to much more expensive I am ready to pay more because I know that I am giving an American a job and help him to raise his family.
@MrLecam21 The unfortunate truth is that American workers have to be able to compete (in terms of wages) in a world wide market. Now they can compete with slaves in Thailand that get $2 a day, or they can compete with people in the US who are protected by US law, meaning they will get a fair price for their labour.
There is no longer such thing as "American jobs" The jobs are global now and the immigrant will get the job whether here or in their home country. Why not bring them here?
@RealRacer69 1) because if they are in and legal they become unemployed (they are protected).
2) if there are in and illegal that violates the law (you should still respect the law).
3) if they come in large number and you fail to integrate them then,in the long run, you might create internal tension (cf europe).
4) We should not have opened so quickly to international labor. It takes time to reorganize an industry and reform people. Beside there might be some strategic issues.
It appears that Milton Friedman had no respect for American minimum wage and labor laws and believed that violating them was a legitimate strategy in the "game" of capitalism.
@echatterwa He had respect for the long processes of history upon which nations are built and had a great understanding of the unpopular yet positive realities of Capitalism. At no point is he promoting illegal immigration, he is simply and rationally ( not emotionally ) explaining how both illegal immigrants and their employers both benefit from the practice.
That was brilliant: "What's keeping them (Mexicans) from staying in Mexico and making a better life for themselves in Mexico?" Answer: "There are no capitalists in Mexico." Excellent. God, we need to have all of these MF videos shown in every single high-school in America (or World, even)!
I think alot of people here are missing the point in what friedman is saying. He saying that we all go through stages much like the mexicans are doing. Taking jobs away from "americans" by accepting a lower wage is prime capitalisim. Why shouldnt people come here and compete for jobs? Thats capitalisim.
Yeah, exactly. You can look at American history to see proof of these "stages." For example the Irish and Italians in the 1800's were really on par with the status of Mexicans today. They did all the dirty and dangerous jobs and were vehemently looked down on by other Americans. These are stages that happen and will continue whether we like it or not.
The only thing he doesn't bring up is that the immigrants that landed at Ellis Island INTEGRATED into the existing society... the ones that are coming up from Mexico are SUBJUGATING the areas they move into the "culture" of Mexico, which is based on crime, corruption and graft.
But this only happened after the expansion of the welfare system. You create a culture of people that don't need to work. Their kids grow up knowing they don't fit into this society other than by hanging out, and this incites crime. BTW, crime and corruption are much the culture of Mexico as it is for any country. I hope you can understand that.
If you think that Irish Gangs and Italian Mafia was integration then sure fine. In my city just twenty years ago if you were a Fireman you were Irish. American's are very quick to want to move on but the idea of what to move on to is an abstract one, but that doesn't give us a free pass to forget or ignore what is so apparent. That there will be Mexican gangs and in thirty years if you are a farm hand or a Gardner or a whatever tradesman you will be Mexican and they will move on.
View the other part of this video, it's a good one. Illegal immigration is good, but because of the massive welfare state, massive legal immigration is bad. It gives the government an incentive to keep people out, purposefully, knowing they can't put as much money into the welfare system as they'll take out. If we want America to be prosperous again, many things are going to have to change. Illegal immigration is good because it's illegal, lol
Brilliant. (Sarcasm intended). American citizens are supposed to compete for labor on an even field with someone who probably is a drug addicted high school dropout, illiterate, and committing a felony by being here. And sure, employers want to cheat their fellow citizens by paying lower wages to people who have no right to work here.
@bddc201 There's no reason an American citizen should be competing for labor with a drug addicted, dropout, illiterate in the first place. If Americans are really so incompetent to not be able to compete, that's a problem with the education system or (God forbid) his/her personal choices. Illegal immigration is not a problem, it's a solution
@Grambino2012 So you don't mind being equal with a felon? You want to compete with a guy who doesn't pay taxes? You don't mind employers screwing you by undercutting your rightful wages with illegal slave labor? You don't deserve to call yourself an American.
@bddc201 You obviously have no faith in market forces or knowledge about simple economics, therefore you should move to a country like Cuba where people believe that government can micromanage every aspect of a person's life. There was not an immigration problem in this country until we started building walls in the 1960s and 70s. Walls were built out of irrational xenophobia and will never work. Market forces will always overwhelm feeble human attempts to control everything
@bddc201 I have no fear of competing with a Mexican for a janitorial job because I am educated. I am educated because I chose to read as a kid and do my homework. Through hard work and discipline, I was rewarded by our relatively free market system and do not have to worry about competing for lesser jobs or getting "undercut" by employers. I am treated well by my employer because I am a good employee with good ideas. In a free society, illegals should not pay taxes and neither should I
@Grambino2012 So you don't mind being victimized by criminals who undercut your wages? Yes, illegals do that across the board and bring the curve down for everyone. They come here and commit serious crimes and cost us billions if not trillions. And don't give me that "free market" bullshit. There is no such thing as a free market nor will there ever be. "Treated well by your employer"? You're in the minority. Just wait until someone comes along who will do your job for less. Educated idiot.
@bddc201 If capitalism is such a horrible system and liberty is such a terrible idea, what do you propose? Do you propose closing off all the borders and having the government centrally plan every single activity? The Soviet Union tried that experiment and it failed miserably. Most of the people starved to death and those who attempted to resist/escape were systematically slaughtered. Is that what you want? That is the only alternative to a free society
@Grambino2012 The only alternative? Hardly. It is illegal to cross the U.S. border with Mexico without permission. It is a felony for a reason. What do I propose? That people obey the law. Illegals bring diseases, commit fraud, rob us blind in myriad ways. Illegals undermine capitalism and freedom you claim to love.
@bddc201 illegals rob us blind??well, i don't think the guys at goldman and aig who received billions of blank cheques in form of taxpayer money for their bailouts were mexicans, moreso illegals.i dont thnk bernie maddoff or goerge bush or the enron execs were illegals.ur jst stupid white trash talking.
This kid didn't come across as cocky at all and I don't believe everyone should be excoriating him (something which is too frequent on the comment sections of Friedman’ videos). Obviously he was misguided and Milton took him apart but it seemed to me like he was more open minded and at times willing to admit his fallacious reasoning.
There is nothing wrong with having a genius like Milton pick you apart. This kid will have learned something and therefore benefitted by speaking.
"Nobody is holding a gun to the head of these people and saying they should come to California."
Seeing as he's talking about illegal immigration, someone IS actually holding a "gun to their head" to prevent them from coming to California. Still they choose otherwise.
This is PATHETIC, you can see the brain-washed teen's mind constantly revert to its 'default' setting: communism.
It's as though his 4 second attention span is all it takes to filter out any logical argument. This is the kind of moron who grew up to vote for Obama...
His Marxist professors must be proud of their 'work'.
@SuperRegisteredUser I think you mean classic liberalism. Today's liberalism descended from the tyrrany of the French Revolution and Marxism, and gave rise to the fascism of the 20th century.
@givinitsome What are you talking about? Liberalism is the exact, diametrical opposition to Marxism. It means government should be limited to protect peoples rights (police and military). Also, what is "classic liberalism"?
@SuperRegisteredUser Classic Liberals are the diametric opposites of modern liberals. Thomas Jefferson and the like were counted under the "classic liberal" side. Little government, sound money, free market etc etc. Today we call them "Libertarians" .... not to be confused with librarians. lol
Liberals = Modern Eco-Marxist-Hippie-tree hugging-politically correct-yuppie corporate scum
Neo-Conservative = Corporate Neo-Fascist Warmongering Gayphobe cross holding jesus freak
@ORACLE063 Liberalism = free market, limited government (police and military only). Individualism, right for individuals to carry weapons, do drugs and anything they want to do that doesn't hurt anyone else.
I have no idea how you can equate liberalism with Marxism, have you ever even read the manifesto of liberal political parties?
''milton friedman is like the orgasm for the brain''. Great comment. Wasn't that guy that the most typical lefty. Asked a question about what makes them want to leave mexico - without blinking 'capitalism'. That's how they roll. Was great seeing him get schooled and not be able to resort to the usual emotional screeching and ad homs you get nowadays for that lot.
So your "conservatives" are actually closer to liberals than your "liberals" are. If you follow the international and original definition of liberalism.
The difeerence beeween real liberalism and real conservatism is that conservatists wants the state to have a big influence over social matters for example gay marriage and stuff like that whilst the liberals dont want the government to decide stuff like that.
@unfad1ng I was tired of this argument the FIRST time I heard it. You know damned well that the "liberal" from John Locke's era is a totally different creature than today's liberal. See how concise that was? Try it out.
@unfad1ng Ok, and republicans in England are opposed to the Monarchy.....what's your point? Did you not know what I was referring to? Why waste the time in arguing over the word, rather than the issue?
There is a third option, Force the wine growers to pay the same wages to whoever works for them, Like Milton said U.S.A nationals have better alternatives, If so that would leave most of the jobs to the immirgrants right? Call their greedy bluff! Put the choice to the wine growers, Pay up or close! They will crack first.
Kids say the darnedest things don't they ;).. there are so cute when they contraindicate themselves in side 1 sentence lol That kids is defeating his arguments before he even tries to make them lol He thinks that the reason we have wealth is because we have wealth..lol like we didn't work for it and struggle first. That kids was a classic left ideologue who never bothered to examine his point of view in context and REALITY!
Suggesting that unfettered access to the US labour market would work as well today as it did back in the 1800s is just goofy, and it's one of the few times I have seen Friedman commit himself to a questionable position. Inflation-adjusted wages have remained stagnant since the 1970s, and in a 21st century context open door immigration would result in an unprecedented rise in the US population. The social ramifications would be unthinkable.
@gwangjuboy1 but there was, by then, an unprecedented rise in the US population pre 1920's. What's the difference? The problem is that, before that, no one was entitled to welfare and benefits as they are now. The large influx of poor people would inevitable mean higher gov't spending and higher taxes.
@ugboy1 There is a massive difference - international travel is much easier and cheaper in 2010 because of huge technological advances. Even if the provision of welfare was scaled back to pre-1920 levels, the country would still be overwhelmed by the numbers - central America would be emptied for a start. The social repercussions would be felt very strongly by the lower and middle classes, and wages would take a huge dive. We are talking about hundreds of millions of people.
Cheap labor = poor working conditions, lower standard of life, shorter life span, and a lack of civility and dignity. Milton always forgets to mention that the life span in the United States in 1800 was 30 years of age. It's only due to government regulation via union push that requires minimum standards of safety, working conditions, minimum wage, and minimum age of the workers. If you want you child to work in the factories again support Milton's theories.
@76uspatriot You're right, I mean I thought it had to do with technological advancements due to a generally free market having people looking for things to invent to make a profit... but it clearly was government regulation that led to an increase in lifespan. Yes that is sarcasm. Also the industrial revolution led to less children working in factories (as opposed to before where most worked on farms) because parents got more income to send them to school, which Friedman has proved.
@76uspatriot Also one more small point, cheaper labor leads to cheaper production which benefits the consumer (aka everyone). This is evident in the profitability of Standard oil (regarded as a monopoly). I won't deny that it can be seen as a monopoly, though it did have competition (albiet small levels of competion). However it' being a monopoly led to a decrease in prices, which had a net increase of the standard of living in the country. So don't be so quick to knock cheaper labor. Think big
@cooldude12w You seem to forget one important flaw in your cheap labor ideology. If you are the cheap labor, you won't be getting very much in life including an education, good health and healthcare, a good standard of living and so on. Don't be swayed by Milton's presumptuous speaking... his constant phrase of "of course" demonstrates that he is a pure demagogue.
@76uspatriot I respect where you're coming from and it's true if applied to a low earner in the current society, but the government runs and is at fault for the poor educational system in the country. Just as it inflates the costs of the other things you mentioned. Everything would be cheaper and easier for the little guy if they just stepped out of it, or at least reformed it. As is the case with health care and something as simple as tort reform for premiums doctors are forced to pay.
@76uspatriot but instead we once again see the government and it's unintended consequences rear it's ugly head again with the recent health reform that makes it even more expensive to have healthcare and more damaging to a low earner. What's worse they have made it really difficult for the middle income earner, since the lowest of the low are subsidized, but the middle class does not have this luxury. Again the fault of more government. We can't seem to have it all.
I'm surprised Friedman missed his favorite punching bag in his final response to the kid - minimum wage. The primary reason illegal immigrants are given preference over Americans in those jobs is because they can pay illegal immigrants below minimum wage more easily.
These stupid, cocky kids are supposed to ask questions and they just try to make statements. I love Miltons unassuming, humble and simple responses to the answers. He is a logical genius arguing the only logical solution for poverty.
This kid was not cocky. I think his concerns were legitimate, but misguided. The kid on the other video was a cocky little punk, the one with the example about the car and the old man getting his electricity turned off.
@XCritonX you can just see whats going on in these kids heads. Its like "no but if youre right then I cant believe in socialism, and its cool to believe in socialism. Nancy over there wont sleep with me if im not a socialist. Therefore you must be wrong. So im gonna make some stupid statement given to me by my socialist teacher to prove how wrong you are"
The key statement comes at the end of this video. Friedman's right. Illegal aliens undercutting wages paid to American workers is a weapon. And it is a weapon used against American taxpayers and laborers. He hit it on the head. This is the manner in which we are being attacked, and it's costing us billions.
You display a fundamental misunderstanding of economics with this statement in that you only comprehend local, short-term equilibrium and then make a hasty conclusion without going further on from which you'd see that the global equilibrium is more beneficial overall (lower price of goods and services to consumers). The problem we have today that makes it difficult for people to diagnose correctly the economic situation is that there is a myriad of gov't distorting private behavior.
What? Try translating that into English. I'll be much more impressed with a cogent argument rather than a display of terms strung together that you think sound intelligent.
Indeed, if your logic was sound, all matter of competition of labor lowering wages would be "destructive." And by that claim, we must indefinitely raise wages ad absurdum and "create" wealth, right?
It's a fair point to say minimum wage laws lock out American citizens from competing for these illegal jobs, but don't blame the illegal alien for that.
One of the main reasons why we have immigration laws is to protect American workers from unfair foriegn competition in the labor market.
Our government refuses to enforce these laws and as a consequence millions of Americans are unemployed or else working at an unsustainable wage because of the huge influx of illegal foriegn labor.
Under the weight of illegal immigration, America is fast becoming a third world cesspool. SAY NO TO AMNESTY!
Isn't it funny that the young guy understands that Mexico's problem is that there are not enough capitalists? I'm not sure what year the video was recorded, but if you filmed that video today with young kids in the crowd like that we would see a totally different viewpoint riddled with ideas of social justice and victimology. Isn't it funny what a little time can do when the government media complex is running 24/7 and the commies are running the schools?
So you are saying that laws don't exist and do not need to be followed? You want a lawless society. The are illegal because they have broken the law of the country they have entered! You should try to get an education before you make comments that prove your ignorance.
You need and education.. 1st of all the white man came to this land.. The true illeagal immagrant.. So if your gonna talk law how about following them and starting with them 1st if you want somebody out of this country...
Americans do want to do those jobs because they don't pay enough.
The wages are so low because there are millions of illegal immigrant workers willing to do them. Simple supply and demand.
If you remove the illegal immagrant workers, the supply of workers plummets while the demand remains the same. Either wages will increase until legal citizens are willing to do them, or the tasks can be automated, thus fillign those jobs.
You know, I see Im getting a lot of thumb downs, all you have to do is look at the short history since we have NAFTA, you all are getting what you want, no trade tariffs, and the countrys just about done. Why do you think that is???
Id really LOVE to know what you geniuses think on how we lost all our production capacity, and how that is fucking good for us.
For starters, NAFTA is not "free trade." It is several thousand pages long full of exceptions and rules and regulations. NAFTA didn't drive our industry over-seas - high taxes, over-regulation, lawsuits, and unionized workers drove our industry over-seas. Why would a company pay 25% corporate income taxes, 15% payroll tax, 35% personal income tax,etc, when they could go to China and pay a much lower rate? Isn't it sad that a COMMUNIST country has lower taxes that the "land of the free"?
@strongbadXCP are you suggesting that cheap labour in China and India plays know part in the export of jobs? Living costs in China and India are infinitely cheaper than in the US, so in a free market labour in these countries can work for much less than is the case in the US. Sure, tighter regulations and larger taxes may contribute to the problem, but the cost of labour is arguably the main driver here.
You will always find people willing to work for less, but its not in the best interest of the nation, if a head of lettuce cost .50 more the world will not end.
The whole "The Mexicans do the work the Americans don't want is a lie, Americans are hard workers, they just need to be paid a living wage for that hard work.
If a single head of lettuce costs $.50 more, you are correct. But if every head of lettuce costs $.50 more than you would be talking about millions of dollars. Those millions of dollars would have to come from somewhere. In reality they come from the consumers, who now need to cover that extra cost in their individual paychecks and so they now charge more for their services. In turn those original field hands' cost of living would increase, making their increase in pay pointless.
We could all just add several 0's to the end of our paychecks and lie to ourselves and say that we are somehow richer. That doesn't produce more wealth or increase anyone's standard of living. All improvements to the average standard of living has come from technological and industrial breakthroughs that have increased production at lower costs. This allows more goods and services to be available to the public at large for less work, i.e. cheaper.
The owners of these companies see the profits to be had on selling out this country, so until we see the problems inherent with letting other countries do all the work we can possibly give them on the cheap, we will continue to decline as a nation.
If anyone here thinks other countries dont use trade tariffs, they need to do a little research on it, the most successful countries, (like companies) know they need to protect their best interests first, all others come second.
Also the idea of a TRADE imbalance is a misnomer. You cannot have a trade imbalance, because every time a trade occurs both parties give and both parties receive. By the very definition of trade, an imbalance cannot occur. What really is happening is deficit spending on behalf of our government and our banks as a result of our currency policies. Chinese workers have no use for American dollars except to spend it on American goods. The loss occurs in the set exchange rates between currencies.
@asperin Anyone who understands history knows this... And even our modern counterparts in Europe i.e. Liberals in Europe are more like Conservatives in the US.... but all labels aside, whatever they label themselves is what we must call them or take the chance that most people won't understand or know who or what we are talking about.
Whenever you have the chance to talk about "Liberals" you could include the point I just made, it doesn't take long and it influences the listener nonetheless.
@asperin don't be obtuse! It is a useless endeavor to try and take back the label... and a waste of valuable time that you COULD be using to talk about Liberty, true economic freedom and equality of opportunity and not of outcome, taking the time to try and convince people that LIBERAL means for Liberty is not only an unwanted distraction... but it is exactly why they used propaganda and lies to steal the label in the first place... to get us arguing over minutiae. Only the stupid fall for that.
It's not about trying to take back the label, I don't go around calling myself a "liberal", I am liberal because I support the cause of Liberty.
I will not try to convince people of nothing either, just make a brief comment about the incorrectness of the word. How much will it take me? 5 to 10 seconds? And I have the chance of people seeing how much hypocritical and deceptive these collectivists are.
Using these code words is the tribalizing game of the establishment.
@asperin How much space and time have you already wasted on this ridiculous and useless topic while taking away from the main point? Nobody cares about your points... and if you argue them... you will lose those sitting on the fence on the topic at hand. Take one topic... debate that one topic... don't get distracted by the minutia or you will end up with a bunch of messages that are akin to mental masturbation.
I heard Ron Paul on national TV making the point I made more than once, so for you it would seem that he's stupid too. Why you think he made it for? To educate. Did he get to everyone? No, that would be unrealistic but he surely changed the minds of many about the term "liberal".
Yep. It's not that American citizens won't do the WORK that Mexican immigrants do. There are many Americans willing to work hard. They're just not willing to do it for the WAGE the immigrants will do it at.
iron- exactly. They myth often repeated, "the mexicans do the work the Americans don't want" has always been a lie except for agriculture. They took my construction job (and everybody elses) for 50 cents on the dollar, living 8 workers per house. Third World here we come.
only around 20% of construction workers are foreign born...what are you talking about Americans not wanting to do construction jobs if the overwhleming majority of construction workers in the U.S. are Americans?
its being phased out, it used to be less than 20% right? ideally, americans would be moving into more high tech jobs that foreigners CANT do yet, then we'll invent NEW stuff and have NEW industries based around THAT stuff and americans will move to THOSE jobs, and so on into the future....
trust me dude, there are plenty of mexicans doing jobs i would do but were talking about economics, not mine and your lack of a government accredited education certificate.
what the hell are you talking about, it used to be less than 20% because we didn't have an illegal immigration problem back in the 1960's and before...now that companies know they can get cheap labor and get away with it, they have been choosing these illegal immigrants over legal immigrants and American citizens which is why that number has increased to 20%...back in the 60's, poor whites and ethnic minorities such as African Americans worked in those fields...
Americans move into new and high-tech industries but we still will forever have a large poor population that will always fill the need for contruction jobs and other jobs like that...logically, we've never needed illegal immigrants because poor Americans have always filled those jobs...for over 200 years this nation was built up by American citizens but it was only until the 1970's that the flood of illegal immigrants came and companies chose cheap labor over poor Americans...
It's not about your need or the need of the United States. It's about the freedom of individuals to hire whom they want and to work where they want. A freedom that the US was built on and became great on, until the protectionists came
What the hell is wrong with people like you?!!! Do you idiots have no respect for law and order? They broke the law...they aren't even suppose to be here...you can't justify breaking the law, therefore, nothing you can ever say will justify illegal immigrants being here...we cannot support the world's poor or else we will become a third world country...Everything you said in your comment is based on emotional thought, not logic, reasoning, rational thinking, and common sense...
He wasn't picking his nose???
Zoravar0v0 1 week ago
There's a principles flaw in Friedman's reasoning that disturbs me. All his points are valid one by one, but are not compatible. When talking inheritance and borders, he talks about families and nations, which is perfectly fine; but then you can't go like he goes to a "people have responsability, not nations" or an individualistic approach. You can't have it both ways.
TheCynicalDude 1 week ago
@TheCynicalDude I think you're wrong. Nations have no responsibility in the sense that only the citizens óf that nation have responsibility. When it comes to borders; it's no matter of responsibility but rather of collective interest. The law of the land ought to ensure a system in which the citizens can thrive but this does not imply that the law itself carries any responsibility. The judicial branch has to make sure the law is obeyed or the system might collapse; which I'm sure is a bad thing.
BroodjeEend 1 week ago
I wish all ideological exchanges were as polite as the one in this video.
mriegger 1 month ago
AMERICAN FOOD SUBSIDIES are the gun held to the head of the Mexicans who are unable to earn a living growing food in Mexico!!!
donteatthefishsticks 1 month ago
I actually really liked that questioner. Very polite and articulate, though I do disagree with him
theraccoun 1 month ago 3
LACK OF CAPITALISTS? LMAO!! What brings them here is the fact that our courts have given too much power to too little people, and what we have is a system that allows for multinational corporations to support oligarchs that creates the PUSH of immigrants HERE. So if you're honestly of the opinion that it is MEXICANS faults for immigration, you need to get schooled in a lecture of economics and foreign policy. BADLY.
erik4727 1 month ago
MrLecam: if we bought only a few things, and were limited to a few things we could produce, then 'buying American' would make sense.
But we buy pretty much everything. And we can produce pretty much anything - especially when you consider we only play a very small part in the production of things now that our economy is so mature.
In the same way a successful lawyer outsources housecleaning work so he can focus on more productive work, skilled Americans outsource unskilled work. It works!
stevemcgee99 1 month ago in playlist Milton Friedman - Understanding Economics
@stevemcgee99 depends for who and how it is done. 1) The point is that we have unemployed people here who could benefit it. 2) We do not produce in the us as in china. Our production would be more capital intensive (which by the way might stimulate progress). Look at what the japanese did. They have been trying to keep jobs at home and in order to do thus they improved their technology.
MrLecam21 1 month ago
There is a flaw in what Friedman says. I am ready to pay more for my goods if I know that they are produce by Americans. This is what it mean to be a country, it is a choice. Furthermore immigration lowers the salaries of all the Americans how have low skilled jobs.
MrLecam21 1 month ago
@MrLecam21 But in that instance you're paying for the product because it was made in America. The product is not identical (to you) as one made overseas. If you could buy a pencil made in America for $1 or one made in America for 50 cents, you would buy the cheaper one.
RealRacer69 1 month ago
@RealRacer69 nop you fail to understand that my utility function gives more value to made in usa. Being a patriot means that you value your country men well being, your utility function depends on their (to some extend of course). Thus yes if it is not to much more expensive I am ready to pay more because I know that I am giving an American a job and help him to raise his family.
MrLecam21 1 month ago
@MrLecam21 The unfortunate truth is that American workers have to be able to compete (in terms of wages) in a world wide market. Now they can compete with slaves in Thailand that get $2 a day, or they can compete with people in the US who are protected by US law, meaning they will get a fair price for their labour.
There is no longer such thing as "American jobs" The jobs are global now and the immigrant will get the job whether here or in their home country. Why not bring them here?
RealRacer69 1 month ago
@RealRacer69 1) because if they are in and legal they become unemployed (they are protected).
2) if there are in and illegal that violates the law (you should still respect the law).
3) if they come in large number and you fail to integrate them then,in the long run, you might create internal tension (cf europe).
4) We should not have opened so quickly to international labor. It takes time to reorganize an industry and reform people. Beside there might be some strategic issues.
MrLecam21 1 month ago
It appears that Milton Friedman had no respect for American minimum wage and labor laws and believed that violating them was a legitimate strategy in the "game" of capitalism.
echatterwa 3 months ago
@echatterwa He had respect for the long processes of history upon which nations are built and had a great understanding of the unpopular yet positive realities of Capitalism. At no point is he promoting illegal immigration, he is simply and rationally ( not emotionally ) explaining how both illegal immigrants and their employers both benefit from the practice.
gmensah2008 3 months ago
@echatterwa Of course, because they largely lead to unemployment
ElJefer 3 months ago
RONPAUL2012
ski2thelimit 4 months ago 2
That was brilliant: "What's keeping them (Mexicans) from staying in Mexico and making a better life for themselves in Mexico?" Answer: "There are no capitalists in Mexico." Excellent. God, we need to have all of these MF videos shown in every single high-school in America (or World, even)!
maxbps8 5 months ago 4
did every college student in the 70s wear ridiculous coke bottle glasses?
aem945532 5 months ago in playlist 'Milton Friedman Speaks' Lecture Series
@aem945532 bahaha
TheMichael408 5 months ago
I think alot of people here are missing the point in what friedman is saying. He saying that we all go through stages much like the mexicans are doing. Taking jobs away from "americans" by accepting a lower wage is prime capitalisim. Why shouldnt people come here and compete for jobs? Thats capitalisim.
cesar333 5 months ago
@cesar333
Yeah, exactly. You can look at American history to see proof of these "stages." For example the Irish and Italians in the 1800's were really on par with the status of Mexicans today. They did all the dirty and dangerous jobs and were vehemently looked down on by other Americans. These are stages that happen and will continue whether we like it or not.
briandee 5 months ago
The only thing he doesn't bring up is that the immigrants that landed at Ellis Island INTEGRATED into the existing society... the ones that are coming up from Mexico are SUBJUGATING the areas they move into the "culture" of Mexico, which is based on crime, corruption and graft.
banter2345 6 months ago
@banter2345
But this only happened after the expansion of the welfare system. You create a culture of people that don't need to work. Their kids grow up knowing they don't fit into this society other than by hanging out, and this incites crime. BTW, crime and corruption are much the culture of Mexico as it is for any country. I hope you can understand that.
KP23anda 6 months ago
@banter2345
If you think that Irish Gangs and Italian Mafia was integration then sure fine. In my city just twenty years ago if you were a Fireman you were Irish. American's are very quick to want to move on but the idea of what to move on to is an abstract one, but that doesn't give us a free pass to forget or ignore what is so apparent. That there will be Mexican gangs and in thirty years if you are a farm hand or a Gardner or a whatever tradesman you will be Mexican and they will move on.
dibaterman 4 months ago
Friedman 1, Everyone else 0
iluvpoliticzz 6 months ago
the guy who asked the question would be happy to raped by any elected democrat, and still vote for them.
AmandaFeetJeansFan 7 months ago
We all looked at Friedman nose for an inspiration. Ohh, i wish he was here to day.
Mishkafofer 7 months ago
he looks like a nerdy matt damond
sniped101 8 months ago 16
Silly Liberals,...Facts are for smart people!
pfcwar5150 8 months ago 2
Owning hippies and picking his nose. Just the way we like him! :D
YRohanm 8 months ago 49
@YRohanm too true and too funny
monkeytree5 8 months ago
@YRohanm i as well pick my nose and own hippies. RON PAUL 2012!!!!!!!
iluvpoliticzz 4 months ago
View the other part of this video, it's a good one. Illegal immigration is good, but because of the massive welfare state, massive legal immigration is bad. It gives the government an incentive to keep people out, purposefully, knowing they can't put as much money into the welfare system as they'll take out. If we want America to be prosperous again, many things are going to have to change. Illegal immigration is good because it's illegal, lol
s0beit 9 months ago
Comment removed
mba2ceo 9 months ago
@mba2ceo fool!! government encourages exploitation! government is the epitome of concentrated power
and concentrated power is the bane of freedom
please, just try to listen to the vids you troll for once
2dum2getsocialism 9 months ago 2
@2dum2getsocialism well ... at least U state your intellectual level in your handle :)
mba2ceo 9 months ago
Brilliant. (Sarcasm intended). American citizens are supposed to compete for labor on an even field with someone who probably is a drug addicted high school dropout, illiterate, and committing a felony by being here. And sure, employers want to cheat their fellow citizens by paying lower wages to people who have no right to work here.
bddc201 10 months ago
@bddc201 There's no reason an American citizen should be competing for labor with a drug addicted, dropout, illiterate in the first place. If Americans are really so incompetent to not be able to compete, that's a problem with the education system or (God forbid) his/her personal choices. Illegal immigration is not a problem, it's a solution
Grambino2012 9 months ago
@Grambino2012 So you don't mind being equal with a felon? You want to compete with a guy who doesn't pay taxes? You don't mind employers screwing you by undercutting your rightful wages with illegal slave labor? You don't deserve to call yourself an American.
bddc201 9 months ago
@bddc201 You obviously have no faith in market forces or knowledge about simple economics, therefore you should move to a country like Cuba where people believe that government can micromanage every aspect of a person's life. There was not an immigration problem in this country until we started building walls in the 1960s and 70s. Walls were built out of irrational xenophobia and will never work. Market forces will always overwhelm feeble human attempts to control everything
Grambino2012 9 months ago
@bddc201 I have no fear of competing with a Mexican for a janitorial job because I am educated. I am educated because I chose to read as a kid and do my homework. Through hard work and discipline, I was rewarded by our relatively free market system and do not have to worry about competing for lesser jobs or getting "undercut" by employers. I am treated well by my employer because I am a good employee with good ideas. In a free society, illegals should not pay taxes and neither should I
Grambino2012 9 months ago
@Grambino2012 So you don't mind being victimized by criminals who undercut your wages? Yes, illegals do that across the board and bring the curve down for everyone. They come here and commit serious crimes and cost us billions if not trillions. And don't give me that "free market" bullshit. There is no such thing as a free market nor will there ever be. "Treated well by your employer"? You're in the minority. Just wait until someone comes along who will do your job for less. Educated idiot.
bddc201 9 months ago
@bddc201 If capitalism is such a horrible system and liberty is such a terrible idea, what do you propose? Do you propose closing off all the borders and having the government centrally plan every single activity? The Soviet Union tried that experiment and it failed miserably. Most of the people starved to death and those who attempted to resist/escape were systematically slaughtered. Is that what you want? That is the only alternative to a free society
Grambino2012 9 months ago
@Grambino2012 The only alternative? Hardly. It is illegal to cross the U.S. border with Mexico without permission. It is a felony for a reason. What do I propose? That people obey the law. Illegals bring diseases, commit fraud, rob us blind in myriad ways. Illegals undermine capitalism and freedom you claim to love.
bddc201 9 months ago
@bddc201 illegals rob us blind??well, i don't think the guys at goldman and aig who received billions of blank cheques in form of taxpayer money for their bailouts were mexicans, moreso illegals.i dont thnk bernie maddoff or goerge bush or the enron execs were illegals.ur jst stupid white trash talking.
madscientistify 9 months ago
This kid didn't come across as cocky at all and I don't believe everyone should be excoriating him (something which is too frequent on the comment sections of Friedman’ videos). Obviously he was misguided and Milton took him apart but it seemed to me like he was more open minded and at times willing to admit his fallacious reasoning.
There is nothing wrong with having a genius like Milton pick you apart. This kid will have learned something and therefore benefitted by speaking.
eriksmith617 10 months ago
Anyone else think of the little bully's helper from A Christmas Story when you see the first questioner?
thegillotine09 10 months ago
"Nobody is holding a gun to the head of these people and saying they should come to California."
Seeing as he's talking about illegal immigration, someone IS actually holding a "gun to their head" to prevent them from coming to California. Still they choose otherwise.
fab006 11 months ago
This is PATHETIC, you can see the brain-washed teen's mind constantly revert to its 'default' setting: communism.
It's as though his 4 second attention span is all it takes to filter out any logical argument. This is the kind of moron who grew up to vote for Obama...
His Marxist professors must be proud of their 'work'.
givinitsome 11 months ago
Milton Friedman is liberalism
SuperRegisteredUser 1 year ago 3
@SuperRegisteredUser I think you mean classic liberalism. Today's liberalism descended from the tyrrany of the French Revolution and Marxism, and gave rise to the fascism of the 20th century.
givinitsome 11 months ago
@givinitsome What are you talking about? Liberalism is the exact, diametrical opposition to Marxism. It means government should be limited to protect peoples rights (police and military). Also, what is "classic liberalism"?
SuperRegisteredUser 11 months ago
@SuperRegisteredUser Classic Liberals are the diametric opposites of modern liberals. Thomas Jefferson and the like were counted under the "classic liberal" side. Little government, sound money, free market etc etc. Today we call them "Libertarians" .... not to be confused with librarians. lol
Liberals = Modern Eco-Marxist-Hippie-tree hugging-politically correct-yuppie corporate scum
Neo-Conservative = Corporate Neo-Fascist Warmongering Gayphobe cross holding jesus freak
ORACLE063 10 months ago
@ORACLE063 Liberalism = free market, limited government (police and military only). Individualism, right for individuals to carry weapons, do drugs and anything they want to do that doesn't hurt anyone else.
I have no idea how you can equate liberalism with Marxism, have you ever even read the manifesto of liberal political parties?
SuperRegisteredUser 10 months ago
@ORACLE063 Great comment! not many people seem to realize that!
bastardchildofmary 10 months ago
I wish Milton was my grandpa:(
8av8today 1 year ago
Man that first kid was goofy looking. Milton ate him up too haha
HamsterFueledRocket 1 year ago
''milton friedman is like the orgasm for the brain''. Great comment. Wasn't that guy that the most typical lefty. Asked a question about what makes them want to leave mexico - without blinking 'capitalism'. That's how they roll. Was great seeing him get schooled and not be able to resort to the usual emotional screeching and ad homs you get nowadays for that lot.
Underground906 1 year ago 2
@Underground906 .Mr Friedman would not even get to have this discourse today, he would be picketed and boycotted by every lefty do-gooder out there.
joeycusack80 11 months ago 2
Socialists on the other hand wants the government to control the capital and the means of production and distribute it to equally to everyone,
This is ofc a stupid ideology.
unfad1ng 1 year ago
lol at 0:22! What a typical liberal douche!
GodotheInfantry 1 year ago
@GodotheInfantry
He is a socialist douche not a "liberal"
unfad1ng 1 year ago
@unfad1ng Same thing.
GodotheInfantry 1 year ago
@GodotheInfantry
Actually that is not true, its just that the socialists in your country call themselves liberals, in every other country a liberal is a right winger.
The original definition of liberal is the one john lock described in his book two treatieries of a government.
John Rauwls attempted to combine socialism and liberalism under the name social-liberalism which is an ideology which has a welfare state.
Liberalism values freedom higher than anything and does not belive in welfare
unfad1ng 1 year ago
@GodotheInfantry
((continued))
So your "conservatives" are actually closer to liberals than your "liberals" are. If you follow the international and original definition of liberalism.
The difeerence beeween real liberalism and real conservatism is that conservatists wants the state to have a big influence over social matters for example gay marriage and stuff like that whilst the liberals dont want the government to decide stuff like that.
Economically they are the same
The real difeerence
unfad1ng 1 year ago
@unfad1ng I was tired of this argument the FIRST time I heard it. You know damned well that the "liberal" from John Locke's era is a totally different creature than today's liberal. See how concise that was? Try it out.
GodotheInfantry 1 year ago
@GodotheInfantry
The liberals in europe are not leftists, they are rightists. So if you go to Europe and talk about liberals you are talking about rightists.
Its only in america that leftists are refered to as liberals
unfad1ng 1 year ago
@unfad1ng Ok, and republicans in England are opposed to the Monarchy.....what's your point? Did you not know what I was referring to? Why waste the time in arguing over the word, rather than the issue?
GodotheInfantry 1 year ago
@GodotheInfantry
well use whatever word you liek then however it is confusing
unfad1ng 1 year ago
There is a third option, Force the wine growers to pay the same wages to whoever works for them, Like Milton said U.S.A nationals have better alternatives, If so that would leave most of the jobs to the immirgrants right? Call their greedy bluff! Put the choice to the wine growers, Pay up or close! They will crack first.
xmoroseguyx 1 year ago
Kids say the darnedest things don't they ;).. there are so cute when they contraindicate themselves in side 1 sentence lol That kids is defeating his arguments before he even tries to make them lol He thinks that the reason we have wealth is because we have wealth..lol like we didn't work for it and struggle first. That kids was a classic left ideologue who never bothered to examine his point of view in context and REALITY!
carlindelco 1 year ago
@carlindelco wow aren't you cool.
MinGophers 1 year ago
@MinGophers Thanks..
carlindelco 1 year ago
Suggesting that unfettered access to the US labour market would work as well today as it did back in the 1800s is just goofy, and it's one of the few times I have seen Friedman commit himself to a questionable position. Inflation-adjusted wages have remained stagnant since the 1970s, and in a 21st century context open door immigration would result in an unprecedented rise in the US population. The social ramifications would be unthinkable.
gwangjuboy1 1 year ago
@gwangjuboy1 but there was, by then, an unprecedented rise in the US population pre 1920's. What's the difference? The problem is that, before that, no one was entitled to welfare and benefits as they are now. The large influx of poor people would inevitable mean higher gov't spending and higher taxes.
ugboy1 1 year ago
@ugboy1 There is a massive difference - international travel is much easier and cheaper in 2010 because of huge technological advances. Even if the provision of welfare was scaled back to pre-1920 levels, the country would still be overwhelmed by the numbers - central America would be emptied for a start. The social repercussions would be felt very strongly by the lower and middle classes, and wages would take a huge dive. We are talking about hundreds of millions of people.
gwangjuboy1 1 year ago
Comment removed
gwangjuboy1 1 year ago
What was the kids point?
benkurz1 1 year ago
@benkurz1
That employers should be forced by the State to pay higher wages.
asperin 1 year ago
Cheap labor = poor working conditions, lower standard of life, shorter life span, and a lack of civility and dignity. Milton always forgets to mention that the life span in the United States in 1800 was 30 years of age. It's only due to government regulation via union push that requires minimum standards of safety, working conditions, minimum wage, and minimum age of the workers. If you want you child to work in the factories again support Milton's theories.
76uspatriot 1 year ago
@76uspatriot You're right, I mean I thought it had to do with technological advancements due to a generally free market having people looking for things to invent to make a profit... but it clearly was government regulation that led to an increase in lifespan. Yes that is sarcasm. Also the industrial revolution led to less children working in factories (as opposed to before where most worked on farms) because parents got more income to send them to school, which Friedman has proved.
cooldude12w 1 year ago 3
@76uspatriot Also one more small point, cheaper labor leads to cheaper production which benefits the consumer (aka everyone). This is evident in the profitability of Standard oil (regarded as a monopoly). I won't deny that it can be seen as a monopoly, though it did have competition (albiet small levels of competion). However it' being a monopoly led to a decrease in prices, which had a net increase of the standard of living in the country. So don't be so quick to knock cheaper labor. Think big
cooldude12w 1 year ago
@cooldude12w You seem to forget one important flaw in your cheap labor ideology. If you are the cheap labor, you won't be getting very much in life including an education, good health and healthcare, a good standard of living and so on. Don't be swayed by Milton's presumptuous speaking... his constant phrase of "of course" demonstrates that he is a pure demagogue.
76uspatriot 1 year ago
@76uspatriot I respect where you're coming from and it's true if applied to a low earner in the current society, but the government runs and is at fault for the poor educational system in the country. Just as it inflates the costs of the other things you mentioned. Everything would be cheaper and easier for the little guy if they just stepped out of it, or at least reformed it. As is the case with health care and something as simple as tort reform for premiums doctors are forced to pay.
cooldude12w 1 year ago
@76uspatriot but instead we once again see the government and it's unintended consequences rear it's ugly head again with the recent health reform that makes it even more expensive to have healthcare and more damaging to a low earner. What's worse they have made it really difficult for the middle income earner, since the lowest of the low are subsidized, but the middle class does not have this luxury. Again the fault of more government. We can't seem to have it all.
cooldude12w 1 year ago
I'm surprised Friedman missed his favorite punching bag in his final response to the kid - minimum wage. The primary reason illegal immigrants are given preference over Americans in those jobs is because they can pay illegal immigrants below minimum wage more easily.
ASRIBEIRIO 1 year ago
PWNED!
syghur 1 year ago
Mr friedman does a great job
goodyear19 1 year ago
College douchebag=OWNED by Friedman.
grumblekin 1 year ago
Oh wow. Look at that douche bag.
321lawc 1 year ago
@321lawc put down the mirror, fool!
fzqlcs 1 year ago
Where can I find this full video because it seems to have been cut short
frostedpornflakes 1 year ago
@frostedpornflakes All of these Friedman videos are available (for sale) at the ideachannel website.
fzqlcs 1 year ago
milton friedman is like the orgasm for the brain
Freedom21stCenturi 1 year ago 86
@Freedom21stCenturi Truly
tjohn1986 11 months ago
@Freedom21stCenturi so true :D
nicazzo 11 months ago
generational progress. A concept my generation has mostly forgotten. Shame.
4lifejackhammer 1 year ago
These stupid, cocky kids are supposed to ask questions and they just try to make statements. I love Miltons unassuming, humble and simple responses to the answers. He is a logical genius arguing the only logical solution for poverty.
XCritonX 2 years ago 60
This kid was not cocky. I think his concerns were legitimate, but misguided. The kid on the other video was a cocky little punk, the one with the example about the car and the old man getting his electricity turned off.
Elasaltaculos 1 year ago
@XCritonX dont blame the kids its good to make arguments and then understand why those arguments are not accurate.
MrBigEnchilada 10 months ago
@XCritonX you can just see whats going on in these kids heads. Its like "no but if youre right then I cant believe in socialism, and its cool to believe in socialism. Nancy over there wont sleep with me if im not a socialist. Therefore you must be wrong. So im gonna make some stupid statement given to me by my socialist teacher to prove how wrong you are"
Porojukaha 10 months ago
0.50 - Milton uses Socratic method to its fullest brilliance!
Myndir 2 years ago 2
You can tell that kid at 0:30 sucked his thumb as a kid (i.e. coddled momma's boy).
selfrealizedexile 2 years ago
Good job at refuting his arguments there bud.
InternetArgument 2 years ago
The key statement comes at the end of this video. Friedman's right. Illegal aliens undercutting wages paid to American workers is a weapon. And it is a weapon used against American taxpayers and laborers. He hit it on the head. This is the manner in which we are being attacked, and it's costing us billions.
DerailAmnestydotcom 2 years ago
You display a fundamental misunderstanding of economics with this statement in that you only comprehend local, short-term equilibrium and then make a hasty conclusion without going further on from which you'd see that the global equilibrium is more beneficial overall (lower price of goods and services to consumers). The problem we have today that makes it difficult for people to diagnose correctly the economic situation is that there is a myriad of gov't distorting private behavior.
selfrealizedexile 2 years ago
What? Try translating that into English. I'll be much more impressed with a cogent argument rather than a display of terms strung together that you think sound intelligent.
DerailAmnestydotcom 2 years ago
Translation of Derail's response:
"I either can't understand economics on this level or can't counter it."
selfrealizedexile 2 years ago
Indeed, if your logic was sound, all matter of competition of labor lowering wages would be "destructive." And by that claim, we must indefinitely raise wages ad absurdum and "create" wealth, right?
It's a fair point to say minimum wage laws lock out American citizens from competing for these illegal jobs, but don't blame the illegal alien for that.
selfrealizedexile 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
YOUTUBE SEARCH: CITIZEN ME
djlistenandlearn 2 years ago
One of the main reasons why we have immigration laws is to protect American workers from unfair foriegn competition in the labor market.
Our government refuses to enforce these laws and as a consequence millions of Americans are unemployed or else working at an unsustainable wage because of the huge influx of illegal foriegn labor.
Under the weight of illegal immigration, America is fast becoming a third world cesspool. SAY NO TO AMNESTY!
SuperEnoughAlready 2 years ago
As white as snow
As fit as a fiddle
As gentle as a lamb
As easy as abc
As smart as Milton Friedman
insightfu 2 years ago 5
True!
hugstime 2 years ago
Isn't it funny that the young guy understands that Mexico's problem is that there are not enough capitalists? I'm not sure what year the video was recorded, but if you filmed that video today with young kids in the crowd like that we would see a totally different viewpoint riddled with ideas of social justice and victimology. Isn't it funny what a little time can do when the government media complex is running 24/7 and the commies are running the schools?
Iregretmostofmyposts 2 years ago
What is an illegal immigrant?? No such thing.. You have NORTH CENTRAL AND SOUTH AMERICA'S.. How is anybody illegal?? They are not.
Genoside5 2 years ago
So you are saying that laws don't exist and do not need to be followed? You want a lawless society. The are illegal because they have broken the law of the country they have entered! You should try to get an education before you make comments that prove your ignorance.
Bigw3260 2 years ago
You need and education.. 1st of all the white man came to this land.. The true illeagal immagrant.. So if your gonna talk law how about following them and starting with them 1st if you want somebody out of this country...
Genoside5 2 years ago
Americans do want to do those jobs because they don't pay enough.
The wages are so low because there are millions of illegal immigrant workers willing to do them. Simple supply and demand.
If you remove the illegal immagrant workers, the supply of workers plummets while the demand remains the same. Either wages will increase until legal citizens are willing to do them, or the tasks can be automated, thus fillign those jobs.
shamgar001 2 years ago
oops. I meant Americans do not want to do the jobs.
shamgar001 2 years ago
Before the 70's, foreigners made up less than 10% of construction workers...
caliguy92 2 years ago
You know, I see Im getting a lot of thumb downs, all you have to do is look at the short history since we have NAFTA, you all are getting what you want, no trade tariffs, and the countrys just about done. Why do you think that is???
Id really LOVE to know what you geniuses think on how we lost all our production capacity, and how that is fucking good for us.
phantomcharger 2 years ago
For starters, NAFTA is not "free trade." It is several thousand pages long full of exceptions and rules and regulations. NAFTA didn't drive our industry over-seas - high taxes, over-regulation, lawsuits, and unionized workers drove our industry over-seas. Why would a company pay 25% corporate income taxes, 15% payroll tax, 35% personal income tax,etc, when they could go to China and pay a much lower rate? Isn't it sad that a COMMUNIST country has lower taxes that the "land of the free"?
strongbadXCP 2 years ago 29
Comment removed
gwangjuboy1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@strongbadXCP are you suggesting that cheap labour in China and India plays know part in the export of jobs? Living costs in China and India are infinitely cheaper than in the US, so in a free market labour in these countries can work for much less than is the case in the US. Sure, tighter regulations and larger taxes may contribute to the problem, but the cost of labour is arguably the main driver here.
gwangjuboy1 1 year ago
@strongbadXCP extremely sad my man :((
jjmdirector 1 year ago
You will always find people willing to work for less, but its not in the best interest of the nation, if a head of lettuce cost .50 more the world will not end.
The whole "The Mexicans do the work the Americans don't want is a lie, Americans are hard workers, they just need to be paid a living wage for that hard work.
phantomcharger 2 years ago
If a single head of lettuce costs $.50 more, you are correct. But if every head of lettuce costs $.50 more than you would be talking about millions of dollars. Those millions of dollars would have to come from somewhere. In reality they come from the consumers, who now need to cover that extra cost in their individual paychecks and so they now charge more for their services. In turn those original field hands' cost of living would increase, making their increase in pay pointless.
TracyII77 2 years ago
We could all just add several 0's to the end of our paychecks and lie to ourselves and say that we are somehow richer. That doesn't produce more wealth or increase anyone's standard of living. All improvements to the average standard of living has come from technological and industrial breakthroughs that have increased production at lower costs. This allows more goods and services to be available to the public at large for less work, i.e. cheaper.
TracyII77 2 years ago 4
tracyll77, OMG...
phantomcharger 2 years ago
The reason Americans wont do that work is they are on welfare. Reduce welfare and people will go back to work.
ka7krz 2 years ago 2
I second that
DNATS 2 years ago
The owners of these companies see the profits to be had on selling out this country, so until we see the problems inherent with letting other countries do all the work we can possibly give them on the cheap, we will continue to decline as a nation.
If anyone here thinks other countries dont use trade tariffs, they need to do a little research on it, the most successful countries, (like companies) know they need to protect their best interests first, all others come second.
phantomcharger 2 years ago
Also the idea of a TRADE imbalance is a misnomer. You cannot have a trade imbalance, because every time a trade occurs both parties give and both parties receive. By the very definition of trade, an imbalance cannot occur. What really is happening is deficit spending on behalf of our government and our banks as a result of our currency policies. Chinese workers have no use for American dollars except to spend it on American goods. The loss occurs in the set exchange rates between currencies.
TracyII77 2 years ago 2
wow, that guy in the hat is such a meatball...
oiuoiu988 2 years ago 5
Comment removed
jisangNY1 2 years ago
Liberals are the same now as they were then.... complete morons.
PatriotsRepublic 2 years ago 14
@PatriotsRepublic Careful, Milton Friedman considered himself liberal... in the classic meaning of the word.
tonytoy1776 1 year ago
@PatriotsRepublic
"Liberal" is a hijacked term. Real Liberals are Libertarians and Anarchists, the now called "Classical Liberals".
Today's "Liberals" are not liberal when it comes to the economy, they are simply Socialists, some Communists, all Statists.
asperin 1 year ago
@asperin Anyone who understands history knows this... And even our modern counterparts in Europe i.e. Liberals in Europe are more like Conservatives in the US.... but all labels aside, whatever they label themselves is what we must call them or take the chance that most people won't understand or know who or what we are talking about.
PatriotsRepublic 1 year ago
@PatriotsRepublic
Whenever you have the chance to talk about "Liberals" you could include the point I just made, it doesn't take long and it influences the listener nonetheless.
asperin 1 year ago
@asperin no!
PatriotsRepublic 1 year ago
@PatriotsRepublic
Come on, don't be lazy.
asperin 1 year ago
@asperin don't be obtuse! It is a useless endeavor to try and take back the label... and a waste of valuable time that you COULD be using to talk about Liberty, true economic freedom and equality of opportunity and not of outcome, taking the time to try and convince people that LIBERAL means for Liberty is not only an unwanted distraction... but it is exactly why they used propaganda and lies to steal the label in the first place... to get us arguing over minutiae. Only the stupid fall for that.
PatriotsRepublic 1 year ago
@PatriotsRepublic
It's not about trying to take back the label, I don't go around calling myself a "liberal", I am liberal because I support the cause of Liberty.
I will not try to convince people of nothing either, just make a brief comment about the incorrectness of the word. How much will it take me? 5 to 10 seconds? And I have the chance of people seeing how much hypocritical and deceptive these collectivists are.
Using these code words is the tribalizing game of the establishment.
asperin 1 year ago
@asperin How much space and time have you already wasted on this ridiculous and useless topic while taking away from the main point? Nobody cares about your points... and if you argue them... you will lose those sitting on the fence on the topic at hand. Take one topic... debate that one topic... don't get distracted by the minutia or you will end up with a bunch of messages that are akin to mental masturbation.
PatriotsRepublic 1 year ago
@PatriotsRepublic
I heard Ron Paul on national TV making the point I made more than once, so for you it would seem that he's stupid too. Why you think he made it for? To educate. Did he get to everyone? No, that would be unrealistic but he surely changed the minds of many about the term "liberal".
asperin 1 year ago
Can you post more segments from his debates with these 70's liberals, please?
The bits I've seen so far are hilarious.
AshillaBeige 2 years ago 5
What denies them the opportunity?
"The capitalists in Mexico"
*facepalms*
So I suppose their repressive government and our war on drugs (which causes a ton of violence there) has nothing to do with it...
Surhotchaperchlorome 2 years ago 3
he said theres No capitalists in mexico
fdny9682 2 years ago
My bad.
I misheard.
Surhotchaperchlorome 2 years ago
@Surhotchaperchlorome
Wha? He said there weren't enough capitalists in Mexico...
EGarrett01 2 years ago
As I said to fdny, I misheard.
Surhotchaperchlorome 2 years ago
Yep. It's not that American citizens won't do the WORK that Mexican immigrants do. There are many Americans willing to work hard. They're just not willing to do it for the WAGE the immigrants will do it at.
Brilliant.
ironclad452 2 years ago 4
What he was really saying is they dony HAVE to. My mother scrubed floors so I wouldnt have to
fdny9682 2 years ago
iron- exactly. They myth often repeated, "the mexicans do the work the Americans don't want" has always been a lie except for agriculture. They took my construction job (and everybody elses) for 50 cents on the dollar, living 8 workers per house. Third World here we come.
HelmutVonSphincter 2 years ago
most americans DONT want to do construction jobs. people like you shouldnt have good jobs because prosperity will cause you to want to reproduce...
if they took your job for half of your pay then why dont you just offer to work for less than what they make??
because youre a greedy self-entitled american.
oiuoiu988 2 years ago
only around 20% of construction workers are foreign born...what are you talking about Americans not wanting to do construction jobs if the overwhleming majority of construction workers in the U.S. are Americans?
caliguy92 2 years ago
its being phased out, it used to be less than 20% right? ideally, americans would be moving into more high tech jobs that foreigners CANT do yet, then we'll invent NEW stuff and have NEW industries based around THAT stuff and americans will move to THOSE jobs, and so on into the future....
trust me dude, there are plenty of mexicans doing jobs i would do but were talking about economics, not mine and your lack of a government accredited education certificate.
oiuoiu988 2 years ago
what the hell are you talking about, it used to be less than 20% because we didn't have an illegal immigration problem back in the 1960's and before...now that companies know they can get cheap labor and get away with it, they have been choosing these illegal immigrants over legal immigrants and American citizens which is why that number has increased to 20%...back in the 60's, poor whites and ethnic minorities such as African Americans worked in those fields...
caliguy92 2 years ago
haha, so hows it workin out for cleveland??
oiuoiu988 2 years ago
Americans move into new and high-tech industries but we still will forever have a large poor population that will always fill the need for contruction jobs and other jobs like that...logically, we've never needed illegal immigrants because poor Americans have always filled those jobs...for over 200 years this nation was built up by American citizens but it was only until the 1970's that the flood of illegal immigrants came and companies chose cheap labor over poor Americans...
caliguy92 2 years ago
It's not about your need or the need of the United States. It's about the freedom of individuals to hire whom they want and to work where they want. A freedom that the US was built on and became great on, until the protectionists came
asalade 2 years ago
What the hell is wrong with people like you?!!! Do you idiots have no respect for law and order? They broke the law...they aren't even suppose to be here...you can't justify breaking the law, therefore, nothing you can ever say will justify illegal immigrants being here...we cannot support the world's poor or else we will become a third world country...Everything you said in your comment is based on emotional thought, not logic, reasoning, rational thinking, and common sense...
caliguy92 2 years ago