The statistical evidence does not bear this theory out. Low-skilled jobs are the easiest of all to fill in the current economic climate. Generally the employers who still can't find qualified workers even in this economic climate are those at the TOP of the education pyramid (e.g. health care workers, engineers). The unemployment rate is 13.2% among those with less than a high school education, and only 4.4% among those with a bachelor's degree.
nothing that you have posted in any way corresponds to what I was arguing. with one notable exception - I have argued that those with less education are still unwilling to take hot, sweaty, difficult work unless they have no choice... and you have responded that their unemployment numbers are higher. To which I can only respond: "well, yeah."
it is most certainly not discrimination to expect our employers to
follow the law.
on the contrary. rule of law is a good in and of its' own right; and beyond that this frees up millions of jobs for those most desperately (as you point out) in need of them.
who did you
think our highschool-and-less educated crowd was competing against for employment, anywho?
What is the rationale for having someone with a law degree picking tomatoes because he couldn't afford to wait a few weeks to look for a job in his field?
most people who find a job already have one - ergo having a job does not keep you from looking. however, if you wish I am fine with creating a 3 month cut-off point. young lawyer (of which we have a glut), you have three months to find a job or hang up a shingle and be self-employed, and after that, you are on your own. you are college educated and then some, after all, and your unemployment rate is 4.4%, meaning you won't find it all that difficult at all to find employment.
everyone else in society who has just lost a net drain and replaced him with a net producer.
Furthermore, why should the government be involved in targeting specific workers (e.g. healthy 20-somethings) with draconian policies for the benefit of specific industries?
no one said any specific industry was to be the specific benefactor - I merely use one in particular to point out that jobs are available, but because they are hot and sweaty and Americans were all raised to believe that A) we deserve a trophy for showing up and B) we should all be middle managers or overpaid art critics, they remain unfilled even in high unemployment. because we are subsidizing sloth.
Many of those jobs will just disappear entirely, as it isn't cost-effective to pay someone $7 per hour for work that's only worth $2 per hour.
actually most farming jobs of this type are paid by productivity. you pick X bushels of strawberries, you get Y dollars. though the cost of regulation for legal employees will indeed be far more prohibitive.
Scapegoating illegal immigrants as the cause of high unemployment doesn't make any more sense than blaming extensive unemployment benefits.
a large illegal populace is absolutely a cause of unemployment among our lower-educated populaces. they compete with them for jobs, and they have an advantage because on them the employer owes no taxes, must follow no bureaucratic labyrinth, and can hire and fire freely without fear of being sued by someone convinced they are Gods' Gift To Existence.
If we want to reduce unemployment, we need to increase the number of legally available jobs
fixed that for you, and of course I agree. currently we have many illegal jobs. let's turn those into legal jobs by not allowing employers to break the law, and pushing them to hire our poor.
The problem, generally speaking, isn't that people aren't looking hard enough. The jobs simply aren't there.
except, of course, that there they are.
