With Unemployment Rising, Is It Time to Stop Hiring Foreign Workers?

This is the time when anger about the sorry state of affairs for many unemployed or soon to be laid off American workers causes sever misplaced anger towards foreign workers and immigrants. It is worth noting that it is not the fault of these foreign workers who just like many of us want to make a decent living and have no intent whatsoever to cause suffering to anyone. The economic conditions under which companies operate dictate on the type of labor hired. Naturally, companies will seek the cheapest labor possible, and if American labor has become too expensive these companies will outsource. It is not fair for government to interfere in the market and dictate what type of labor needs to be hired because it does not mitigate unemployment risk at all. Seeing how prices and wages are related and a function of supply-demand, introducing any restrictions in the labor market will cause further depression of wages and lower labor demand.

The Senate passed a bill placing restrictions on banks which have received TARP money and who hire foreign workers:

Senate approves restriction on foreign hires

The Senate voted Friday to restrict the hiring of foreign workers by banks that are receiving government bailout funds while undergoing vast layoffs.

The legislation by Sens. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent, and Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, would require the banks to seek American workers before turning to foreign nationals when they're hiring. It aims to prevent replacement of Americans by foreigners working under the H-1B visa program, which allows employers to bring in workers for high-skilled and advanced-degree jobs.

The measure has a two-year life and if signed into law would apply to the more than 300 banks that are receiving money from the taxpayer-funded Troubled Asset Relief Program.

The Senate added the restriction as part of the massive economic stimulus package lawmakers are crafting as part of President Barack Obama's plan to reinvigorate the economy.

If it becomes law, banks seeking visas to bring in foreign workers would be barred from displacing or replacing American employees for three months before and three months after petitioning the government for the visas.

...

Partial data from the U.S. Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services suggests that the banks ultimately got visas for only about one-quarter of the number of workers they initially sought permission to employ. For example, the banks and their subsidiaries filed more than 5,000 visa applications with Labor Department officials during the 2006 budget year. After that step, they ended up with about 1,200 new workers approved by the Citizenship and Immigration agency.

From: AP

I would imagine that left alone banks would seek the cheapest labor possible. Given the current state of the economy and job market with unemployment surpassing 7% and climbing, it is only natural that wages will go down as long as prices remain depressed.

$2 Trillion Bet

In a feeble attempt at staving off what looks to be a pretty solid recession and restart the economy the Federal Government is planning to go on a spending spree. There's just one thing: the government is illiquid!

The prevailing belief in the Obama administration, and backed by the the Democratic controlled House as well as the Senate, is that pumping large amounts of cash into the economy in a myriad of senseless projects will prove to be the magic bullet. Dr. McTeer, previous president of the Dallas Federal Reserve, rightly notes that this current attempt at fixing the economy is akin to going wild hog hunting with a shotgun.

Secretary Geithner said he wants to spend upwards of $2 trillion to stabilize the private sector, mainly the banking sector, while the Senate was passing the Stimulus Act. Unfortunately for us Secretary Geithner is placing too much faith on the forecasting models his department is populating. The question that should be asked, however, is where is the Treasury going to find this money? If his department is forecasting an increase in government expenditure to stimulate the private sector, hence the economy, the money has to come either from the government borrowing, or increase the collection of taxes. Given that investment is hardly stimulated by an increase in taxes, and if the general economic model of supply-demand holds true, government can hardly afford to increase spending to generate growth while either borrowing or increasing taxes.

Additionally, there is no guarantee that the very large amounts of spending can be effective. The government would be falling into the exact same trap the financial services found themselves in. In effect, it would be over-leveraging its self. Ultimately, the taxpayers will be the ones who will suffer most, who unlike corporations, cannot reorganize financially as easily.

Dutch Politician to Be Charged with Incitement of Hatred and Discrimination

From BBC News: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7842344.stm

Islam film Dutch MP to be charged

Geert Wilders lives under police protection because of death threats

A Dutch court has ordered prosecutors to put a right-wing politician on trial for making anti-Islamic statements.

Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders made a controversial film last year equating Islam with violence and has likened the Koran to Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf.

"In a democratic system, hate speech is considered so serious that it is in the general interest to... draw a clear line," the court in Amsterdam said.

Mr Wilders said the judgement was an "attack on the freedom of expression".

"Participation in the public debate has become a dangerous activity. If you give your opinion, you risk being prosecuted," he said.

Not only he, but all Dutch citizens opposed to the "Islamisation" of their country would be on trial, Mr Wilders warned.

"Who will stand up for our culture if I am silenced?" he added.

'Incitement'

The three judges said that they had weighed Mr Wilders's "one-sided generalisations" against his right to free speech, and ruled that he had gone beyond the normal leeway granted to politicians.

I often marvel at the ideology of many Europeans especially as it concerns hate speech and discrimination. Every time I hear a European complain that America has become unjust, bigoted, and so forth, I think of all the stupidity of hypocrisy which enshrouds continental Europe.

This latest attempt by a liberal court to silence conservative voices is ridiculous. Have they ever considered that the Muslim call to jihad is hatred and discrimination? Do they ever think that chanting "Down with America," "Down with Britain," "Down with Israel" is not to be considered hateful speech?

I know what this is. This is liberal political maneuvering guised as legal ideology. It's amazing this type of thinking hasn't reached the American shores. Or has it?

One of pres. Obama's executive orders was to order Gitmo closed. While that might appeal to the liberal talking heads, one has to wonder where these people will wind up? Granted, torture is bad. But so is war. So is jihad against Americans. Are we to sit quietly and not defend ourselves? Why should we refrain from protecting our own? As intelligent beings all of humanity is not even close to the ideal being, where peace and love is the norm - no matter how cliche that might sound.

These recent events remind me of the political and ideological garbage the communist party used to spew out each day in defiance of reason.

Ugh, Global Warming Debate is Getting Annoying

First, I would like to say that although I am skeptical of the Global Warming hysteria (um Al Gore anyone?!), I do believe that we are heading towards a climate change event. Specifically, according to Dr. Scotese we are on the up-swing towards global warming which will lead to global cooling. Thing is, his chart has it occurring for the next 10,000 years before we peak.

Yes, global warming may cause an ice age. And if the oceans are indeed cooling, due to perhaps melting ice caps, it is possible to trigger an ice house effect. I do believe that climate change is possible within our life time. The cooling oceans could slow down and eventually stop the Gulf Stream, the conveyor belt which regulates global temperature. See here.

Without going into technical details, the gulf stream carries heat (in water) from the equator and moves it towards the north pole. To give you an idea of how think of where hurricanes originate - from the equatorial latitudes and move northwards towards North America. Given global warming, an introduction of cold water from the melting polar ice caps will slow down the gulf stream conveyor because there is less warm water to move (cold water sinks so it doesn't flow) and eventually the conveyor runs out of energy. Global cooling gets complicated but this conveyor stream also causes warm air to move northwards as well. Stopping this conveyor system means there is no way to move warm air northwards and the temperatures drop, the ice sheets thicken and eventually advance. New York eventually rests under 600 feet of glacier ice. Thus begins the ice age because of global warming.

This whole alarmist bs about human caused global warming may very well be a crock. Fortunately for us, the global warming crowd bears the burden of proof, but given the unique event of their claims (human accelerated global warming) it will be very difficult for them to prove that we are the culprits for global warming. If you took a look at the map at Dr. Scotese's website you will notice we already are on the upswing of warming global temperatures.

One can also refer to the Little Ice Age which occurred during the Middle Ages. Why isn't the global warming crowd blaming this event on humanity? After all, weren't Medieval societies agrarian raising large numbers of domestic animals which could theoretically induce global warming from their "methane emissions?" I swear, every time someone talks about how we are causing global warming I just want to fart and say "Ooops, I just melted 1 cubic yard of polar ice!"

The 44th President of the United States of America

'I've never really been into any inauguration until now. It speaks volumes that so many people are out here, witnessing this event, Obama is somebody who gives us hope for the future,' said Anthony Randolph, 28, an unemployed African-American from Brooklyn."

From: http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE50J6VP20090120

I agree with his emotional assessment but I'm not sure that everyone can agree that Obama gives hope for the future to everyone. Many of us recognize the importance of this day, but we have to be cautious about an untested and unproven young senator who today assumed the role of the leader of the free world. Whatever our political views we can be proud of one fact, at the very least: America has its first black president.

There are no nations in the Western world which can boast as much as we can. For all the rhetoric of France and liberals elsewhere, they remain the most prejudiced of peoples as of yet. They have never elected a minority of any kind to a position of ultimate leadership. What will they have to gripe about now? It's official, Europeans today have lost the moral high ground. Today America has once again showed the world that even for its imperfections it is still the nation those yearning for freedom must follow.