Trump Administration Plans to Raise Seasonal-Worker Cap

The Wall Street Journal ^ | 20 Feb 2020 | Michelle Hackman

[Theoria]

The Trump administration plans to allow 45,000 additional seasonal guest workers to return to the U.S. this summer, the highest number since the president took office, according to three administration officials.

The Department of Homeland Security plans to announce the additional seasonal-worker visas next week, an administration official said. They will become available in two waves: the first 20,000 will be immediately available, while employers can apply for the remainder for jobs beginning June 1.

It wasn’t clear whether the White House has fully signed off on the numbers, and an administration official cautioned they could change.

The additional visas are being made available ahead of the summer, when demand for short-term work is typically highest.

Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf “has made no decision yet on the issue,” a DHS spokesperson said. “Any numbers reported on at this time are being pushed to press by junior staff who are not privy to all of the discussions taking place.”

The seasonal worker program, known as the H-2B visa program, enables U.S. employers to hire as many as 66,000 foreign workers a year, with the allotments split evenly between the winter and summer seasons. Congress permits the Department of Homeland Security each year to raise that cap by as many as 64,000 additional visas.

In Mr. Trump’s first two years in office, DHS raised the cap by 15,000 visas to 81,000, and last year it raised the cap by 30,000 to 96,000.

[trebb]

Can’t force Americans into these seasonal jobs - else we wouldn’t have a ready market to import them.

[sausageseller]

The Government is to force people to take seasonal jobs?
How communist of you....

[trebb]

“The Government is to force people to take seasonal jobs?
How communist of you....”

??? Maybe yo got some of yer sausage for brains....

In context, the person I responded to said seasonal worker caps should be zero - I pointed out you can’t force folks to take the seasonal jobs (inferring that importing some wasn’t wrong-headed because there really are a number of jobs most Americans ain’t willing to do.).

And you call me a communist...
Ignorance is what ignorance says - and keeps some folks very blissful.

[NobleFree]

Can’t force Americans into these seasonal jobs

But you can bring them in by offering the market-clearing wage. Or if you're a globalist Free Traitor you can screw them over with foreign labor.

[semimojo]

Japan has had a negative birth rate for more than 10 years.

And look at what's happened to their GDP.

They have the third highest GDP in the world...

At this rate, not for long.

I am pursuing the modest goal of slowing down America's political suicide - nothing more, nothing less.

I'm a little more ambitious. I'd like to see the US continue to grow, prosper and kick ass in the world economy. Without growth we'll be overtaken and have very limited opportunities for our young people.

As older people it may feel comforting to hunker down, build a bunker and fend off the changing world but I think that fear of change is un-American. In the past we've handled much bigger challenges than modest immigration and I'm not ready to give up yet.

You are not looking at the same globe I am.

I'm looking at people, not the globe. The people with the vision, drive and courage to leave everything behind and emigrate in search of opportunity are the kind of people I want to help build my country, no matter where they were born.

[NobleFree]

The people with the vision, drive and courage to leave everything behind and emigrate in search of opportunity

Too many come in search of a handout, or a job they're only pretending to be qualified for.

[NobleFree]

Even the authors admit that their prescription would have a minimal impact on fertility rate:

"Although the elasticity of the birthrate with respect to the exemption is not large, it appears that the US can influence to a degree the fertility decisions of its citizens through deliberate changes in tax policies."

None of what they say adds up to "minimal." Using their figures and those from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/22/u-s-fertility-rate-explained/ I conclude that an increase in the tax value of the personal exemption of $130 would (all else held equal) get us at least back to replacement level, and $525 at least back to our 1960-ish peak.

In fact, the inflation adjusted personal exemption did increase from 1990 to 2017 but the birthrate continued to decline.

Straw man - the authors noted and accounted for other factors also affecting fertility rate.

[trebb]

That’s the thing about seasonal labor - it’s seasonal - and requires travel to extend it - how many friends/acquaintances you got that would be willing to do that vs. a regular job?
Raising wages/benefits for part time labor would also raise the cost of food - and get a whole new set of folks whining.

[NobleFree]

Raising wages/benefits for part time labor would also raise the cost of food

Better we know what we're paying at the cash register, rather than paying in higher taxes and lower wages for that 'cheap' foreign labor.

[sausageseller]

You didn't put it in quotes , thus making it seem like it was your words . Not someone else’s.

Yes making someone take a seasonal job is akin to a communist work camp.
Seems you would understand that with so much in dem brains you got.

[semimojo]

I conclude that an increase in the tax value of the personal exemption of $130 would (all else held equal) get us at least back to replacement level, and $525 at least back to our 1960-ish peak.

An increase from what level? The personal exemption went away two years ago and was replaced by a much higher standard deduction. Shouldn't that alone have been enough?

Straw man - the authors noted and accounted for other factors also affecting fertility rate.

Ha! We have 20 years of higher personal exemptions and declining birth rate, but of course that doesn't mean anything.

It sounds like their theses is "increasing the exemption will increase the fertility rate provided all of the other factors driving the rate lower go away."

Remember, this started because you claim we can get the rate back up in the real world, but there will always be other factors, as our experience clearly shows.

[NobleFree]

The personal exemption went away two years ago and was replaced by a much higher standard deduction. Shouldn't that alone have been enough?

Obviously not - a flat standard deduction by definition gives no tax advantage for having a(nother) child.

Ha! We have 20 years of higher personal exemptions and declining birth rate, but of course that doesn't mean anything.

A multivariate analysis means more.

It sounds like their theses is "increasing the exemption will increase the fertility rate provided all of the other factors driving the rate lower go away."

It sounds like you have no idea what a multivariate analysis is about. Please note that this is not my problem to solve for you.

there will always be other factors

Which means only that the per-child tax credit (no longer an exemption - thanks for reminding me) would have to be increased that much more to counter other variables tending to decrease fertility rates.

[zeestephen]

Re: “I pointed out you can’t force folks to take the seasonal jobs (inferring that importing some wasn’t wrong-headed because there really are a number of jobs most Americans ain’t willing to do).”

The Center for Immigration Studies (cis.org) has been publishing worker national origin data on USA job categories for two decades.

The Census Bureau identifies and surveys more than 100 USA job categories. At least 50% of the workers in EVERY job category is a native born American.

Bottom Line - when employers fill any USA jobs with foreign workers, USA citizens in that same job category take a pay cut.

The law of supply and demand is still in charge - flood a country with foreign labor, wages and salaries will go down.

[zeestephen]

Re: “Japan has had a negative birth rate for more than 10 years. And look at what’s happened to their GDP.”

Your bar chart is worse than useless - it is deliberately deceptive.

First - it starts in 2010. What was Japan’s GDP during the 2008-2009 Great Recession?

Second - what currency and what adjustments are represented?

Third - the bars are WILDLY out of proportion. 6203 is the highest bar. 4389 is the lowest. 6203 is 42% higher than 4389.

However - the bar for 6203 is almost 400% higher than the bar for 4389!

I will respond to the rest of your post later - heading out the door.

[semimojo]

Your bar chart is worse than useless - it is deliberately deceptive.

It's the first one I came across and it's from Trading Economics.

Their data is from the World Bank and it's in current USD.

Not sure why you think they're conspiring to deceive you or to what end, but whatever.

What was Japan’s GDP during the 2008-2009 Great Recession?

$5.04B in 2008 and $5.2B in 2009. Both higher than the $4.98B in 2018 (all current USD).

Third - the bars are WILDLY out of proportion. 6203 is the highest bar. 4389 is the lowest. 6203 is 42% higher than 4389.

Good Lord.

Your math would make sense if the Y axis started at zero, but as you can see it starts at 4000. The proportions are correct.

[semimojo]

It sounds like you have no idea what a multivariate analysis is about. Please note that this is not my problem to solve for you.

You're the one calculating the effect of the exemption/credit.

What other factors did you include in your multivariate analysis that leads you to believe a net $10/month is going to lead to an increase in the fertility rate?

Or didn't you try to model the real world either?

[NobleFree]

What other factors did you include in your multivariate analysis

It's the authors' analysis. For the other factors, read the link - move your lips if it helps.

[semimojo]

It's the authors' analysis.

Perhaps you could review the appropriate use of quotation marks or other ways to indicate that you're posting someone else's words?

[NobleFree]

By replying to your moronic misstatement of "their theses [sic]" with a reference to "a multivariate analyis," I made clear to fully literate readers that the analysis was theirs. That you're not among that number is, again, not my problem.

[zeestephen]

Re: “The proportions are correct.”

The purpose of a bar chart is to establish VISUAL proportions.

The numbering is correct.

The proportion is absurd.

The lower 80% of the chart has been chopped off.

Re: “Not sure why you think the World Bank is conspiring to deceive you or to what end, but whatever.”

I don't think that. I thought you deliberately sectioned off the chart to create a sensational visual impact.

Re: Currency

It looks like your World Bank chart is expressing Japanese GDP in nominal US Dollars, which means the wild swings are due mostly to the relative trading value of the Dollar-Yen.

Here is a link to a 30 year World Bank line chart that tracks Japanese GDP per capita in constant Purchase Parity Dollars.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD?locations=JP

Since the 2009 Recession crater, inflation adjusted Japanese GDP has increased every year for nine consecutive years.