this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2024
385 points (95.7% liked)

News

23259 readers
4576 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The country’s aging population and low fertility rate jeopardizes the solvency of Social Security and the Medicare program, according to a new study by Brookings

The immigration crisis  has become a recurring theme in social gatherings and political debates, and is the main issue of the U.S. presidential election. Amid this discussion, one certainty stands out: while it’s well known that migrants have a need to live in the United States, a study has highlighted that the country needs them too.

Twenty percent of U.S. workers were not born in the United States, and it is expected that in the near future more than seven million more migrants will be needed for the labor market. That’s according to a study by Brookings, which warns about how the higher-than-expected increase in pensioners following the Covid-19 pandemic will affect the U.S. economy.

As the baby boomer generation approaches age 80, two challenges are facing the U.S. economy: providing staff to care for the elderly and ensuring the solvency of Social Security and the Medicare program.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bye@lemmy.world 32 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Why do they need immigrants? There are people here now who need jobs, they can do it.

If I hear “immigrants will accept lower wages” one more fucking time I’m going to lose it, that’s just an intentional creation of a lower class, it’s feudalistic and coercive. Same thing with farm labor. Pay a reasonable amount and local people will do it.

[–] Bassman1805@lemmy.world 26 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Because unemployment isn't really that low. When we talk about "people here now who could use those jobs", we're usually talking about people in dead end jobs that could use a career job.

So great, pull them into our elder care system, give them a career level up...now their old jobs are still unfilled. And while we're super shitty as a country towards entry level service workers, we also as a country really want those jobs to be filled. So we'd need to fill that gap in the employment pool somehow.

[–] almar_quigley@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Maybe we shouldn’t have the idea of a dead end job in the first place. Almost all work should be valid and provide livable wages. There shouldn’t be a class of jobs “just for kids”. As if their time is less valuable anyways. This is a super late stage capitalist viewpoint.

[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

A job can be well paid and still be considered "dead end". Just means there's no room for advancement or growth. Has nothing to do with capitalism or wages, really.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Only if constant growth and expansion of capital IE capitalism is your goal. If it's a job you simply enjoy or people you enjoy working with Etc there may not be room for advancement. But why would you want to? Granted many people do not have that. They're wage slaves for capitalists. Point is the whole concept of a dead-end job is inherently a capitalist thing. If a job takes care of your needs and is Pleasant enough. Who cares if there's room for advancement.

[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 months ago

You're hearing what you want to hear. "Growth" is not financial growth. It's not wages, I thought that was made clear in the end sentence. Growth is like personal growth or professional growth. Learning things. Becoming more. No stagnating.

But hey, if you're happy in a "dead end" job more power to you. I wasn't necessarily arguing against it. I was just trying to clarify that "dead end" does not refer (solely) to wages.

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Only if constant growth and expansion of capital IE capitalism is your goal. If it's a job you simply enjoy or people you enjoy working with Etc there may not be room for advancement. But why would you want to? Granted many people do not have that. They're wage slaves for capitalists. Point is the whole concept of a dead-end job is inherently a capitalist thing. If a job takes care of your needs and is Pleasant enough. Who cares if there's room for advancement.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago (2 children)

It also gets corporations of the hook and uses immigrants as a scapegoat. The argument shouldn't be "immigrants will accept lower wages," it should be "companies should be paying higher wages." Even for immigrants.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

It's the same shit with offshoring. They do it because they can pay people less.

It's always fucked with me.

Because no, no human is worth less than others based on geographic location or local economy or where you came from originally.

If you're educated enough to do the same job as a US citizen, and you're working for a company based in the US, you should get equivalent pay to your US counterparts. You're not worth less as a human because you're from a different area.

It's fucking disgusting, I've thought it was disgusting my whole life. It's nothing but exploitation.

It hurts people in the USA by driving down wages and it hurts people internationally because these companies pat themselves on the back for "lifting up" these people and economies when the real reason they're doing is they're cheap fucking bastards. If they really wanted to lift up those economies, they'd pay people equivalent US wages in the local currency.

If that means you make a society of local millionaires overnight, oh well. This whole paying people less because their local economy is smaller is fuckstupid hateful hurtful bullshit.

See also: how orchard owners don't pay minimum wage to harvest, they pay "by the tree" to skirt minimum wage laws.

[–] Bye@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Yes exactly, thank you.

[–] MelonYellow@lemmy.ca 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Right! Long-term care sucks for a myriad of reasons - low pay, chronic short staffing, physical demand, dealing with combative demented patients, wiping asses all day. But if you PAY people enough, they will work it.

[–] vxx@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Our whole capitalistic system is built around endless growth. That's the reason population has to grow endlessly too.

[–] CobblerScholar@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Increasing social security taxes would be very unpopular, increasing the age for retirement would be very unpopular. There's no way to reduce the amount of money social security costs without pissing a lot of people off.

The obvious solution to the problem is to make more citizens out of people who want to work here and benefit from everything our taxes pay for. Even aside from how much they would be paid (which should be a fair honest wage) the taxes off the top would go up faster than social security costs as long as people kept coming in and costs stayed stagnant

[–] Bye@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago (1 children)

How about a wealth tax for people with over $10 million dollars of assets

How about tripling the size of the IRS (or more) so that the government actually gets what it’s supposed to

How about cutting foreign defense spending

How about increasing the corporate tax rate even just a little bit

Or only paying social security to people who need it

Or getting rid of insanely wasteful farm subsidies

But yes, I think we actually agree, that people who come here need to be paid a fair wage. That was really my point. When people talk about immigration to fix labor shortages, they almost always mean minimum wage or thereabouts (or even lower like for farm workers).

[–] IHeartBadCode@kbin.run 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

But, but, that would be ... ˢᵒᶜⁱᵃˡⁱˢᵐ

GASP

How about cutting foreign defense spending

We could, but remember that a lot of that defense spending are people in the US' job. About 2M would be on the block for chopping.

Or getting rid of insanely wasteful farm subsidies

I mean don't stop there. Especially at just that point. Relax the restrictions for crop insurance. Reduce the barriers between farmers and grocers. Literally break up the giant grocery stores. Kroger's is a fucking bitch ass. One of the reasons we have to pay massive subsidies is because there's distinctly a lack of a free market in the farming and grocery business.

And while we're at it. Tell John Deere to fuck off.

[–] Bye@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

No that’s why I clarified foreign spending instead of domestic