Republicans are at it again

why not ask the EPA why foundries left the USA

 

or, especially since most industry was at a standstill, we could just increase the number after the pandemic has subsided and industry has resumed, in order to catch up what was lost in those months.

 

Well, you were the one who through that out there, so apparently you think it was a winning argument. On the other hand, every economist in existence . . . and everyone who has passed econ 101 . . . knows that economics is not a zero sum game. They also understand this thing called "elasticity." Would you like to know more?

 

That, by any conceivable measure, is a MASSIVELY more expensive "solution."

 

False

 

H1B is like indentured servitude. The company sponsors the immigrant and it is difficult for him to change jobs. They are often paid less.

 

But they are still often paid well. I agree that the restrictions are bull ****, though. As far as I'm concerned, if someone wants to move here and someone wants to hire them, then as long as they don't have a criminal record, let them in. My own ancestors had to jump through fewer hoops than that. As did the ancestors of 99.99% of the reactionary nativists now complaining about immigration.

 

Then point out anything about it that's false. Be specific.

 

You do realize that we've done this dance multiple times?






...because of course the supply and demand for labor only existed in 2001 because Cato and Heritage blah blah blah...

 

And yet you still don't understand the concept of elasticity? Nor do you account for the demand side of the equation? Weird.

Hell, your own "75%" says that wages are UP in these fields.

 

Psychology isn't STEM, it's a Social Science

 

Why is that?

 

Well, even if psychology isn't included in medicine and life sciences (it typically is), then can you actually take a read of the study you keep referring to?

 

Because the demand is already here. Delaying the labor just adds additional compounding risks for the things currently being demanded. Have you ever met a project manager? You're meeting one now.

 

It passed laws that sent those jobs overseas. It's allowed, AND promoted student loans while stopping work study and pell grants. It's time to invest in America ... AGAIN ... in the (not so) long run it will pay for itself.

 

The world changes. Immigration policies from a century ago may not be suitable today.

 

True. I'm just going with . . . well, basically every economist in existence here. Trade creates wealth, and that includes immigration. Aside from some special interest considerations, there's no argument for restricting immigration. Security? Sure. Let's keep people out who we can confirm are an actual security risk. Other than that, I see no real argument for restricting immigration. I tend to like liberty. Not sure why others hate it so much.

 

Have you ever met a Medical Sales Director? You're meeting one now.

Who cares? Your being a project manager adds nothing to this conversation, nor does me being a Sales Director, other than perhaps concluding that we both have a business background. Id much rather prefer to let my words speak for me rather than my self-reported credentials.

Anyway, the answer to what you are referring depends upon a lot of factors. It wholly depends upon what type of industry and positions you are talking about. With the massive unemployment that existed at the time, I am not so sure that labor was in a massive shortage for all that many positions,especially not until late in 2020 when things were starting to open up a bit.

At any rate, if it inflicted some costs ( and surely it did), compared to everything that was going on at that time, that cost would have been miniscule in comparison. That cost would have also been offset somewhat by employing more people in country that were otherwise collecting unemployment. I am not going to pretend to know all numbers involved as you seem to be (project mgr or not), but surely that calculation is far more complex than just saying delaying labor adds additional compounding risks.

 

So, as a sales director, the timing of resources does not matter to you? Say yes and I'm calling bull **** right now.

Meanwhile, we are talking about STEM. That means projects.

Your imaginary scenario in which there is just unlimited domestic supply of specialized labor is a pure fantasy.

Yes, delaying labor on a project DOES add compounding risks. It isn't a complex concept. Imagine, for a moment, you are building a bridge. You have a timeline for when you are supposed to build this bridge. You have cost, time, and scope restraints. Stretching my time constraint is going to involve added risks.

You also still haven't explained why we couldn't just TEST these people for COVID. TEST. TEST. TEST. Why do you think testing is impossible?

 

The study you posted about Trump reducing legal immigration? How is that relevant?

 

No, friend. I'm talking about the study that YOU are referring to. The "75%" one. If your own study isn't relevant to your own claims, then I appreciate the white flag.

 

While that would not be the term that one would use in my profession, sure of course having necessary resources in a timely manner makes a difference, and I am not so sure I said anything to the contrary?

Are you arguing against another point that was not raised? Seriously, you need to stop. I said nothing of the sort.

Did I say there was an unlimited domestic supply of specialized labor? LOL. Sincerely, you need to STOP. I tell you what, if you can show where I made this claim I will donate $1000 to the charity of your choice.

You are seemingly impossible to have a productive conversation with. Of course a shortage of labor creates a problem, but this shortage did not exist with every project that exists, which means that this economic impact is far less than if it were. Yes we rely upon new STEM immigrants, but those new immigrants still only impact a comparatively scant few positions that are open. You are acting as if this stopped a large percentage of projects when surely it did not.

I correctly pointed out that there are some costs that would have been saved, and some that would have increased. This does not mean that you need to condescendingly act as if I do not understand the notion for not making a timeline for making a bridge and how that would increase costs. In fact, I acknowledged as much when I said surely some costs would increase.

You are doing nothing but mindlessly bickering. This is a waste of time.

I am putting you in time out and am done conversing with you for the rest of the day and any topic from today. It is what is best for the board. Undoubtedly, you will once again throw in one more dig to try to get me to engage.

You can hump my leg another day.

 

Okay, so the issue here is that you have no familiarity with STEM demand and domestic STEM supply. That's an easy problem to solve with a little education.

 

It looks like your title is a pile of crap. I did a word search for "Republican" and got zero hits.

For GOP, I got one:

From the GOP Report:

• Increasing coordination and funding for STEM education to create a more capable, skilled workforce

Do you just make stuff up and then post links that don't support your fabrications?

 

The link was in my post.