Who is the Cheap Labor Lobby?

Front Page Magazine ^ | January 24, 2003 | Ellen Almer

[A. Pole]

[...]
America was founded on the concept – well understood by Alexander Hamilton and the other economic sophisticates among the founders – of a middle-class society, i.e. a society organized to minimize the number of people who constitute cheap labor. Cheap labor was the proletariat which drove Europe’s class-ridden and undemocratic politics, the nightmare of revolution and reaction America was founded to escape.

Contrary to libertarian myth, America’s economy was never, ever, based on a totally free market in labor. It was based on a labor market constricted by limited immigration and a small population relative to national resources, and a free market in everything else. This was designed to produce high wages. We have always been an explicitly high-wage nation relative to other societies, and this did not happen by accident. (This is the key story in Pat Buchanan’s book The Great Betrayal, and he is right about this, even if he is wrong about other things.)
[...]

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

Cheap labor was the proletariat which drove Europe’s class-ridden and undemocratic politics, the nightmare of revolution and reaction America was founded to escape.

Considering that the above-mentioned "revolution and reaction" didn't start until well AFTER America's founding, this statement is questionable in the extreme.

[angkor]

Cargill
Hormel
Purdue
Tyson
Archer Daniels

[staytrue]

Total population, population density or natural resources have absolutely nothing to do with total gdp or per capita gdp.

Let's take the US, Japan, and Canada vs. Russia, South Africa, Madagascar.

This article is crap. Besides, if you follow this argument, after we stop immigration, we should start self extermination to really get the per capita gdp numbers up.

[staytrue]

Hey Hey, Ho Ho, let's all start abortion NOW.

[saganite]

Rush had a good segment on this today when he read an E-mail from a subscriber taking him to task for supporting NAFTA and free trade but not open borders. Articles like this help people see the difference between the free exchange of goods and the importation of cheap labor. Open borders don't equal free trade.

One aspect not mentioned by Rush was that there is a treaty regarding the exchange of goods but the exchange of labor is one way only. Its not possible for me or you to go to Mexico and get a job even if they have a crying need for our skills. Mexico has laws which prevent that.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

This article is crap. Besides, if you follow this argument, after we stop immigration, we should start self extermination to really get the per capita gdp numbers up.

But you should shoot the poor people first.

There was, in the 1960s, an article that made an analysis of ten major cities in the West.

The analysis concluded that moderate-yield nuclear airbursts over those cities would destroy approximately 75% of the asset value (not including return on salvage from the wreckage), but would kill over 90% of the population, thus increasing per capita wealth in those cities.

Therefore, the article concluded, a nuclear exchange would be good for the economy.

[saganite]

The cheap labor he's presumably referring to here was the peasants trapped in countries ruled by an unelected elite. Those governments certainly predated the formation of this country and if I remember my history correctly provided a major impetus to migration to this country.

[staytrue]

Therefore, the article concluded, a nuclear exchange would be good for the economy.

You have to wonder about the sanity of some people.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

The cheap labor he's presumably referring to here was the peasants trapped in countries ruled by an unelected elite.

Go back and reread the quote I cited, and my comment on it. If you are unwilling to respond to what I posted, kindly quit wasting my time.

[Regulator]

Cheap labor is not real capitalism, it is corporatism, for cheap labor is subsidized by the government, which ends up paying the health and welfare costs of these workers. All taxpayers bear the cost.

The riposte to those who regurgitate the WSJ dicta of "there shall be open borders".

Privatizing profit, socializing costs.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

Any time people start saying "the world is overpopulated," I ask them what they're willing to do about the problem.

The answers are revealing--once you scrub away the PC language, their definition of "overpopulation" frequently comes down to "there's just too many brown-skinned folks around here for my taste."

[Reactionary]

"Considering that the above-mentioned "revolution and reaction" didn't start until well AFTER America's founding, this statement is questionable in the extreme."

The author may be referencing The Terror, not the Revolution of 1917.

[RKV]

One significant cause of differences in economies, is the relative productivity of labor compared to their competitors. Americans are highly productive, but relatively costly compared to others. We also have a relatively benign political and regulatory environment (say compared to the EC). That can change, particularly as certain of our political parties adopt a mercantilist (picking winners through the political process, as opposed to the market) strategy. We could end up like France, if we are not careful - subsidized high cost agriculture, insane regulatory complexity, etc. which would destroy our ability to grow the economy.

[narby]

It was based on a labor market constricted by limited immigration and a small population relative to national resources

Lost me right there. "Natural Resources" in relation to wealth may have been true in some historial period, but it doesn't work that way any more. Places like Japan have almost zero natural resources, and have a huge population (which is the opposite, I suppose, of the goal of "limited immigration") and yet are rich. While places like Brazil and many african countries have limited population and huge natural resources and are third world.

This writer is a big-labor propagandist.

[saganite]

Reread it and you're still wrong. I'll not waste any more of your precious time.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

The author may be referencing The Terror, not the Revolution of 1917.

Even The Terror post-dates America's founding. Hell, the French Revolution itself postdates it.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"The answers are revealing--once you scrub away the PC language, their definition of "overpopulation" frequently comes down to "there's just too many brown-skinned folks around here for my taste."

You're going to need one of these.

[Reactionary]

True enough.