Again,
Even Adam Smith allowed that Some govt and a few lawyers were needed. The discussion was about how much.
None of us are disagree on the end result. The discussion is the how. The discussion is “we can’t get a perfect fix, what will we live with to get what we REALLY WANT. There is way to much idealism here on FR.
We are up to our necks in law and regulation to fix problems. The market would have found a solution and the situation changed and we are still slaves to a law and that is no longer needed.
I am saying there is danger, be aware of the danger and don’t think your proposal will fix the problem, BECAUSE IT WON’T.
Your discussion again proves to me the answer here just like liberals, is more government.
"More" than what? A moratorium on immigration is not "more government" than limited immigration - just different government. (It is true that regulated immigration is "more government" than open borders; is open borders what you advocate?)
We have regulations and more which you and I either agreed to have, or voted against. Regardless, we are under that burden.
Hiring people for less from elsewhere doesn’t address anything here. It does bring in more people who, if from southern countries, love bigger government and welfare, and from the rest of the world, tend to mirror the political and religious perspectives the rest of the world likes. Do you really think these people, upon becoming permanent residents, are likely to become fiscal conservatives when they become citizens? No other country of consequence is showing “conservatism.”
The Invisible Hand you appear to relish is really a new name for atrophy and anarchy, with our government, since around 1915.
By the way, I have an MBA and, as a teen, bought a doubly-signed copy of “Free To Choose.” Milton and his wife were expressly against the Income Tax, but since it was an amendment, they shifted to other tax penalty concerns.
Milton maintained that free immigration CANNOT HAPPEN when a country promises any minimum level of benefits to its occupants. Why don’t you understand that? We have welfare and unemployment that is shunted to those who are allowed to become “unproductive.” Social Security and Disability payments follow. We have created a “safety net” that has engendered laziness. Bringing in others keeps these people on their situation. We can incentivize them to become productive again by making work look more attractive and reducing the welfare benefits they receive.
Does that mean businesses will have to do some remedial training? Yes, and this is what McDonalds has always has to do. Other companies offer to pay for college or trade school for those who will work for them later.
We need to pick up ourselves by our bootstraps, and the easy way out is what continues to screw us.
Actually controlling or stopping harmful immigration is one of the roles of the fedgov should do with abandon!