- Joined
- Feb 1, 2006
- Messages
- 20,120
- Reaction score
- 16,169
- Location
- Cheyenne, WY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Because he knew it would bring down wages for migrant farm workers most likely. Like I said, he didn't care about the plight that his programs incurred on those south of the border, he had his special group that he was going to help and didn't care who it hurt.
In other words, the man had his priorities in order.
What's the difference between an American and someone outside of the country, except for the mere area where they live?
There is more to being an American than living here. There is an American culture, a sense of identity, that comes with being a citizen. There is nothing wrong with being a Mexican, but it is not the same as being an American and they have their own nation to be concerned with-- just as Americans should be concerned with our nation first and foremost.
Wikipedia said:This common argument against the use of restricted working hours to reduce unemployment has recently been questioned, with one scholar arguing that "substituting a dubious fallacy claim for an authentic economic theory may have obstructed fruitful dialogue about working time and the appropriate policies for regulating it".[3] Walker argues that the idea that the lump of labour is a fallacy often goes unsubstantiated, and that the reduction of working hours can have similar labour-saving impacts as the introduction of technology into the production process.
This "lump" looks and smells an awful lot like economists labeling an argument a "fallacy" simply because they do not like its implications.
It is true that there is neither a fixed demand for labor nor a fixed supply of labor, but this does not change the fact that labor is a commodity and it is still governed by the laws of supply and demand. When supply far outstrips demand, as it has for all unskilled labor since the Industrial Revolution (save World War II), there is no effective competition for workers.