The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
Trump’s Huge-Headed Tadpole Cabinet
DOJ and DHS Are All That Really Matter
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
kris-kobach-ready-to-get-new-immigration-plan-started

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

It was a joyous Thanksgiving for us immigration patriots, as our man continues interviewing for his executive team while the nation echoes to the festive sound of liberals’ heads exploding. [Bang!] Oh, there goes another one. Happy, happy days!

As we go to press, The Donald is taking a Thanksgiving break with the family down at his spread in Palm Beach, Florida. [Al fresco in Florida! Donald Trump shares a cozy dinner with Melania, son Barron and two friends on the second night of his ‘brief break in the action’ at Mar-a-Lago, By Geoff Earle, Dailymail.com, November 24, 2016] Sincere wishes from us here to them there for a cheerful and relaxing long weekend.

This follows a week of firming up some lower-level picks for the Trump cabinet. We got Kansas Congressman Mike Pompeo as nominee for CIA Director, a post which needs Senate confirmation, and General Michael Flynn as National Security Advisor, which doesn’t.

I can’t claim to know much about either person. But they are hated by all the right people, so that’s good. In the case of National Security Advisor, it’s also hopeful to look at who General Flynn is replacing: Mulatto Mafia diversicrat Susan Rice, eager camp follower of Mrs. Clinton and one of Radio Derb’s designated Three Horsegirls of the Libyan Apocalypse, the other two being Samantha Power and the Hildebeest itself. Gen. Flynn can only be an improvement.

Later in the week we got some more minor picks. Nikki Haley, Governor of South Carolina, is to be our ambassador to the United Nations.

I can’t say I’m a fan of Governor Haley. After a lunatic with a Confederate Battle Flag in his attic murdered nine people in Charleston last year, Governor Haley led the charge to eliminate the flag from public display, thereby ceding public policy to the whims of lunatics.

Ambassador to the U.N. is, however, such a joke of a posting that I can’t work up any feelings about the appointment. The U.N. is a waste of good New York real estate, as I hope President Trump will come to realize. My personal pick for this job would have been Pee Wee Herman.

Another diversity pick seems to be Ben Carson. I say “seems to be” because Dr. Carson is playing the shy bride, declining to say whether he’ll take the job or not. Apparently he wants to be courted. This confirms the dark suspicions about Dr. Carson that you hear in some quarters. But again, this is not a very consequential post, so nothing to get worked up about one way or the other.

I don’t even understand why the republic needs a Department of Housing and Urban Development. Isn’t this just a legacy of the mid-20th-century Planning craze—the philosophy that gave us Brasilia, Cabrini Green, and the chancrous housing projects of Liverpool where I worked for two years?

Again, though, Dr. Carson is at least an American of some professional accomplishment. He’d make a refreshing contrast with the current HUD Secretary, Affirmative Action mediocrity Julian Castro.

My dismissive feelings about the posts of U.N. Ambassador and HUD Secretary can be squared and cubed for the post of Education Secretary.

I wrote in We Are Doomed:

The whole culture of professional educators is addled with chicanery, corruption, rent-seeking, time-serving, and lies … Reading through the literature of present-day ed biz, every time you think you’ve found an argument, assertion, or proposal than which nothing could possibly be dumber, something dumber soon shows up.

I have since become much more negative. I have in fact progressed from being an education minimalist to an education nihilist. It’s all just a stupendous waste, to no purpose.

I’ll qualify my nihilism slightly. I’ll allow that up to about fourth or fifth grade, kids need to be sat at desks in rows under firm discipline and have the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic hammered into their silly heads.

Everything after that, though, is just child-minding.

Whether this has always been the case, I couldn’t swear. Nineteenth-century Britain, which built a vast and remarkably efficient world empire staffed by men whose education consisted entirely of memorizing Latin texts, suggests that it has been.

Regardless: In this age of cell phones and iPads, there is surely no doubt that any inquisitive child can learn anything he wants to learn without adult supervision.

A great many kids of course don’t want to learn anything, and won’t, under any system. They don’t learn anything now, as we see every time some TV show sends a reporter into the streets to ask passers-by the name of the Vice President, or to say which century the Civil War was fought in. My own two kids, both bright and witty, raised in a house full of books, did four years of school Spanish each. Neither can utter a complete sentence in Spanish.

Education is a crock. Federal supervision of education is just another layer of make-work bureaucracy—a fifth or sixth layer—of crock management.

I suspect, and hope, Donald Trump knows this. Whether he does or not, the President has no power to disband the Department of Education, which would be the most beneficial thing for the country. He has therefore nominated some fellow billionaire’s wife for the post of Education Secretary. [Betsy DeVos: Everything You Need to Know, By Corinne Cathcart, ABCNews, ,November 23, 2016] I’m sure she’ll do fine.

For those of us convinced that continuing mass Third World immigration is the major threat to our republic, with the malicious stoking of anti-white resentment as runner-up in the threat league, President Trump’s cabinet is anyway a tadpole: a huge and very important head attached to a not-very-consequential tail.

That head is comprised of the two posts that oversee most of our population policy: Attorney General and Secretary of Homeland Security.

ORDER IT NOW

Those two posts don’t encompass all of our population policy. The State Department has significant input to our refugee resettlement programs, a vast and corrupt money racket. State Department employees in our embassies and consulates abroad also issue visas—far too many, with far too little scrutiny.

I’d dearly like to see an immigration patriot at State, but it doesn’t look as though I’m going to.

But Attorney General and DHS Secretary are the big ones—the head of the tadpole. The news that Senator Jeff Sessions is under serious consideration for A-G, and Kris Kobach for the DHS, is simply wonderful. These are two men who want the people’s laws on entry and immigration firmly enforced; and, in the many areas where the laws work against the interests of U.S. citizens, they want the laws changed.

With Senator Jeff as A-G there will also be a righteous cleaning-out of the stables at the Justice Department. The Civil Rights Division has degenerated into an ATM for anti-white activist groups, sluicing public money to them through grants and lawsuits.

With Sessions in charge, the race hustlers will have to find real jobs in the actual economy … if they can. Immigration issues aside, that will be something wonderful to see.

We don’t have either man in office yet, though. The cheap-labor lobbies and the anti-white activists will fight tooth and nail to prevent congressional confirmation of these patriots.

They could succeed. The Senate has to confirm both nominations. In the 115th Congress, which takes its seats on January 3rd, the Senate will likely have 52 Republicans, 46 Democrats, and two Independents. “Independent” is a fancy way of saying “left-liberal”; indeed, one of the two Independents is Bernie Sanders. The other is Angus King of Maine, graded F-minus on immigration by NumbersUSA. That’s worse than Bernie, who’s a C-minus.

So it’s 52-48 in the Senate. The 48 are of course all going to vote both Sessions and Kobach down. If the Third World immigration spigot is shut off, the Democratic Party has no future.

The 52 are problematic, though. Some high proportion of the GOP Senators are bought-and-paid-for shills for the cheap labor lobbies—what we at VDARE.com sometimes call the Slave Power. The mentality of Jeb Bush, who ran for the GOP nomination on a platform of preferring Mexicans to Americans, is widespread among Republicans.

This is going to be the fight of the century. We can win it, though. We have killed three attempts to force immigration amnesty through Congress. We can kill the efforts to block Sessions and Kobach using the same methods.

A tadpole without a head is a sorry sight.

John Derbyshire [email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjectsfor all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. ) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. He’s had two books published by VDARE.com: FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle) and From the Dissident Right II: Essays 2013. His writings are archived atJohnDerbyshire.com.

(Republished from VDare.com by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, Immigration, VDare Archives 
Hide 48 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. nsa says:

    Aztlan del Norte (formerly known as California) is now only 37% non-hispanic white….less if you include the millions of illegals. Every American should drive through SoCal and take a careful look and the filth, squalor, litter, loitering bald gangbangers, street signs in espanol…. and decide if they want that kind of a turd world future for their own communities.

    Read More
    • Replies: @godfree roberts
    Having driven through SoCal hundreds of times over the past 45 years, I'd say it's in the best shape I've seen it since the 1980s. Whether this is due to the hardworking Latino population there, I cannot say.
    , @SteveRogers42
    Did the tourist thing with the fam in Aztlan del Norte a couple years ago. It was like a kick in the groin to see shanty shops and miscellaneous lean-tos up against the beautiful buildings along Wilshire Blvd. Turd world entrepreneurs virtually blocking the sidewalks with their unlicensed antics. Blade Runner without the cool cyborgs -- but with plenty of signs in Korean, Spanish, and some kind of Russo-Armenian hieroglyphics.

    For someone visiting from America, it was a come-to-Nationalism moment.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /jderbyshire/trumps-huge-headed-tadpole-cabinet/#comment-1664131
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. @nsa
    Aztlan del Norte (formerly known as California) is now only 37% non-hispanic white....less if you include the millions of illegals. Every American should drive through SoCal and take a careful look and the filth, squalor, litter, loitering bald gangbangers, street signs in espanol.... and decide if they want that kind of a turd world future for their own communities.

    Having driven through SoCal hundreds of times over the past 45 years, I’d say it’s in the best shape I’ve seen it since the 1980s. Whether this is due to the hardworking Latino population there, I cannot say.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Dude, get out -- meaning actually out of the car and off main drags -- and look around more, especially at night. We have lived in LA 5 years and yes, the neighborhoods doing well are doing better than ever, more numerous and diverse restaurants than ever and decent jobs in those establishments, slightly improved train system, etc.

    Downtown LA (including the South Park area to the south) is absolutely booming with largely foreign-owned or foreign-financed hotel, apartment, and condo construction. It also still reeks of urine presents an almost national-high proportion of homeless hitting you up for money, more than occasionally getting intimidating or angry or belligerent or following you, camping on stretches that go block after block right near downtown. More mentally ill people, simply obnoxious pissed-off Africans, and hostile strange white lefties than you'll see in almost any city in North America.

    Outside downtown, the neighborhoods that would be hostile and ultimately unsafe for you and me and our families, are VERY numerous, widespread, and getting worse if anything.

    The territory you need to stay away from in LA and environs is huge.

    We very much enjoy the rest of LA and the LA area, but please have no illusions about your long-term safety, health, or level of civilization here -- pretty much anywhere outside the unaffordable neighborhoods.

    , @Wally
    "Driven through"? That's it?

    Where did you drive through, Bel Air? Malibu?

    I have lived in LA for forty, count 'em, forty years.
    I have seen nothing but the steady degradation of what was once a nice place to live.

    You like the 3rd world and all of the crime, violence, & rundown graffiti laced neighborhoods? Then SoCal is the place for you.
    , @No_0ne
    Great parody of an oblivious leftist, unable to see the real world, only the narrative. Kudos.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. KenH says:

    The 52 are problematic, though.

    Hugely problematic. The Senate repubs usually have 4-6 people who reliably vote with the Democrats on many issues. So a majority in the case of the Republican party is pretty meaningless. However, Trump should have momentum and tail win his first 100 days and I hope he can bully any would be turncoat Republican Senators while the wrath of Trump’s supporters might do the rest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    I have visions of a couple thousand Bikers for Trump doing laps around the Capitol during the run-up to a contentious vote.
    , @SteveRogers42
    "The wrath of Trump supporters..."

    Sumpin' like dis:

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/11/one-thousand-veterans-protest-liberal-hampshire-college-removal-us-flag-video/
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  4. Svigor says:

    If the Senate refuses to confirm Sessions, Trump should nominate unknown Republicans, until one is confirmed. Then he should name Sessions “the AG’s boss.” Or he could just put Sessions into the AG seat, confirmation or no confirmation.

    Read More
    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    Or appoint "czars" to oversee the positions, with the same powers and responsibilities but without the formal title. It seems to me that the precedent has been established.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Ash says:

    Although I appreciate Sessions’ tough stance on immigration, I fear he’s going to also try and restart the ridiculous drug war.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    Restart??
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  6. “Tadpole-headed”?

    At least 1066 & All That was funny.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    “Tadpole-headed”?

    At least 1066 & All That was funny.
     

    We live in a fallen world, dear boy. We must take our jests where we can find them....

    Sadly, I'm not at all sure that importing Mexican Mestizos will improve the comedy situation ( wit not being a Mexican virtue). On the other hand, they do make excellent butts of satire....

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  7. I hadn’t heard the Kris Kobach for DHS; that would be wonderful. And I wouldn’t underplay the importance of HUD or Education secretaries: HUD is trying to move feral Negroes from inner cities to white suburbs and small towns, and Education is trying to prevent the imposition of discipline on feral Negroes in public schools. A secreatry that goes native in either department could be a huge problem.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. @nsa
    Aztlan del Norte (formerly known as California) is now only 37% non-hispanic white....less if you include the millions of illegals. Every American should drive through SoCal and take a careful look and the filth, squalor, litter, loitering bald gangbangers, street signs in espanol.... and decide if they want that kind of a turd world future for their own communities.

    Did the tourist thing with the fam in Aztlan del Norte a couple years ago. It was like a kick in the groin to see shanty shops and miscellaneous lean-tos up against the beautiful buildings along Wilshire Blvd. Turd world entrepreneurs virtually blocking the sidewalks with their unlicensed antics. Blade Runner without the cool cyborgs — but with plenty of signs in Korean, Spanish, and some kind of Russo-Armenian hieroglyphics.

    For someone visiting from America, it was a come-to-Nationalism moment.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. @Svigor
    If the Senate refuses to confirm Sessions, Trump should nominate unknown Republicans, until one is confirmed. Then he should name Sessions "the AG's boss." Or he could just put Sessions into the AG seat, confirmation or no confirmation.

    Or appoint “czars” to oversee the positions, with the same powers and responsibilities but without the formal title. It seems to me that the precedent has been established.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    Yeah, yeah, Czars! Did not Obama have a "Czar" for each region of the world under which Hillary labored as SecState? At least, for a period of time? He kept her on a short leash for quite awhile, but she did enormous damage anyway.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. @KenH

    The 52 are problematic, though.
     
    Hugely problematic. The Senate repubs usually have 4-6 people who reliably vote with the Democrats on many issues. So a majority in the case of the Republican party is pretty meaningless. However, Trump should have momentum and tail win his first 100 days and I hope he can bully any would be turncoat Republican Senators while the wrath of Trump's supporters might do the rest.

    I have visions of a couple thousand Bikers for Trump doing laps around the Capitol during the run-up to a contentious vote.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @KenH

    The 52 are problematic, though.
     
    Hugely problematic. The Senate repubs usually have 4-6 people who reliably vote with the Democrats on many issues. So a majority in the case of the Republican party is pretty meaningless. However, Trump should have momentum and tail win his first 100 days and I hope he can bully any would be turncoat Republican Senators while the wrath of Trump's supporters might do the rest.
    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. Marcus says:
    @Ash
    Although I appreciate Sessions' tough stance on immigration, I fear he's going to also try and restart the ridiculous drug war.

    Restart??

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    I suspect Ash is referring to a possible re-ramp of the War On Weed. I'm curious to see if Obama waves The Pen on Schedule One status and gets weed off the Federal enforcement menu. All these weed-grows, labs and shops operate without banking support because they haven't removed weed from the Schedule. It was actually a big fat middle finger to the Feds that States allowed legal weed. You have scads of cash hidden everywhere in weed-legal states because Federal Reserve Banks aren't permitted to do business with "illegal" enterprises, the States-be-damned. Everyone in the industry is cash-and carry right down to the electric bill. Obama has ordered them to look the other way as regards the possession/manufacturing/selling (for now), but the banks aren't permitted to do business with weed enterprises. Being a nut, Sessions might easily turn the entire enterprise on its head in probably 25 States and we're talking tens of billions of dollars a month, maybe more, no one knows because it's all cash..

    As a member of the Choom Gang and a major consumer of Hawaiian buds in his youth (not to mention Obama has a daughter that has taken up the habit), I find it one of his larger hypocrisies not to have cleared this one up. Trump being an abstainer of all intoxicants might loose the Federal dogs on the States that legalized.

    DEA has never said weed was legal to them and Federal Law was never changed and so they'd LOVE for Trump to enforce once again. Hey, I like weed ok, but then, they do testing in my work in case of an accident, so I have to lay off the stuff, most people do. Also, the shit is so strong it paralyzes ya. Think 150-proof, except weed. Still and all, it is mostly a way to hassle the Blacks.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. @SteveRogers42
    Or appoint "czars" to oversee the positions, with the same powers and responsibilities but without the formal title. It seems to me that the precedent has been established.

    Yeah, yeah, Czars! Did not Obama have a “Czar” for each region of the world under which Hillary labored as SecState? At least, for a period of time? He kept her on a short leash for quite awhile, but she did enormous damage anyway.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @Marcus
    Restart??

    I suspect Ash is referring to a possible re-ramp of the War On Weed. I’m curious to see if Obama waves The Pen on Schedule One status and gets weed off the Federal enforcement menu. All these weed-grows, labs and shops operate without banking support because they haven’t removed weed from the Schedule. It was actually a big fat middle finger to the Feds that States allowed legal weed. You have scads of cash hidden everywhere in weed-legal states because Federal Reserve Banks aren’t permitted to do business with “illegal” enterprises, the States-be-damned. Everyone in the industry is cash-and carry right down to the electric bill. Obama has ordered them to look the other way as regards the possession/manufacturing/selling (for now), but the banks aren’t permitted to do business with weed enterprises. Being a nut, Sessions might easily turn the entire enterprise on its head in probably 25 States and we’re talking tens of billions of dollars a month, maybe more, no one knows because it’s all cash..

    As a member of the Choom Gang and a major consumer of Hawaiian buds in his youth (not to mention Obama has a daughter that has taken up the habit), I find it one of his larger hypocrisies not to have cleared this one up. Trump being an abstainer of all intoxicants might loose the Federal dogs on the States that legalized.

    DEA has never said weed was legal to them and Federal Law was never changed and so they’d LOVE for Trump to enforce once again. Hey, I like weed ok, but then, they do testing in my work in case of an accident, so I have to lay off the stuff, most people do. Also, the shit is so strong it paralyzes ya. Think 150-proof, except weed. Still and all, it is mostly a way to hassle the Blacks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bugg
    IF Obama were to do that. Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds will have mass-produced pot cigs to market as soon as legally possible. They have the plans in place already since tobacco consumption drops every day. In a twisted way the quasi-nonenforcement situation right now works to the little guy pot producers' and marketers' benefit.
    , @OutWest
    Since this works so well, I was thinking of starting a local referendum to opt out of the income tax.

    But as to the weed thing, by opting out the FDA is taken out of the picture. Lots of untested food products out there. As a cautionary comment, the FDA got some muscle back in the late 1930s when a drug company marketed tincture of sulfa. Trouble was that sulfa wouldn’t dissolve in ethanol. But ethylene glycol worked just fine. Killed lots of kids.

    How’s your state regarding FDA-style testing of medicines and foodstuffs?
    , @dahoit
    Marijuana is a wonder drug,which should be legalized immediately.
    And no,there is no weed that paralyzes one,as I've been searching wo success for it for 50 years.:)It's possible a non regular imbiber might get a little numb from some good shite though.
    As far as work debilitation,it depends on the job,don't try to do your bills post toke,but motor skills are sometimes heightened,as you dig your work.
    Alcohol sucks,comparatively,but each to their own.
    And yes,there are billions floating underground from weed,its Americas largest cash crop,24-7-365.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. I knew little of Senator Sessions until I came across his brilliant Senate speech in 2014 that I posted in my blog:

    Sep 15, 2014 – Opposition to Open Borders

    I rarely repost outside things. However, a reader sent one of the most important political speeches this decade, which was ignored by the corporate media. Opening America’s borders with another amnesty would devastate the USA since it would encourage another 20 million poor, desperate refugees to flood across within a decade. If the Republicans were not so closely allied with big business, they would run on this issue and easily win the Senate and Presidency. Senator Sessions is very popular in his state due to vocal opposition on this issue so is less afraid of scorn from corporate lobbyists.

    NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE http://www.nationalreview.com
    September 11, 2014 2:38 PM

    Don’t Give the Masters of the Universe Their Amnesty

    The Senate isn’t doing anything to stop Obama’s plans — thank the plutocrats.

    By Jeff Sessions

    Senator Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.), the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, delivered a speech on the Senate floor Wednesday evening about Senate Democrats’ refusal to support legislation to block the president’s proposed executive actions on immigration policy, and the interests supporting amnesty. Following is an adapted version of his remarks.

    [MORE]

    ________________________________________

    Earlier this week I spoke about the president’s promise that he would issue an executive amnesty to 5 or 6 million people. The planned amnesty would include work permits, photo IDs, and Social Security numbers for millions of people who illegally entered the U.S., illegally overstayed their visas, or defrauded U.S. immigration authorities.

    The Senate Democratic conference has supported and enabled the president’s unlawful actions and blocked every effort to stop them. Not even one of our Democratic colleagues has backed the House legislation that would stop this planned executive amnesty or demanded that Senator Reid bring it up for a vote. Every Senate Democrat is therefore the president’s partner in his planned lawless acts.

    Tonight I would like to talk about the influence of special interests on our nation’s immigration system. How did we get to the point where elected officials, activist groups, the ACLU, and global CEOs are openly working to deny American workers the immigration protections to which they are legally entitled? How did we get to the point where the Democratic party is prepared to nullify and wipe away the immigration laws of the United States of America?

    Just yesterday Majority Leader Reid wrote in a tweet something that was shocking. He said: “Since House Republicans have failed to act on immigration, I know the President will. When he does, I hope he goes Real Big.”

    Let this sink in for a moment. The majority leader of the Senate is bragging that he knows the president will circumvent Congress to issue executive amnesty to millions, and he is encouraging the president to ensure this amnesty includes as many people as possible. And the White House has acknowledged that 5 to 6 million is the number they are looking at.

    Has one Senate Democrat stepped forward to reject Mr. Reid’s statement? Has one Senate Democrat stepped forward to say: I support the legislation passed by the House of Representatives that would secure the border and block this executive amnesty? Have they ever said they support that? Have they ever said: I will do everything in my power to see that the House legislation gets a vote in the Senate so the American people can know what is going on? No. All we hear is silence.

    This body is not run by one man. We don’t have a dictator in the great Senate. Every member has a vote. And the only way Senator Reid can succeed in blocking this Senate from voting to stop the president’s executive actions is for members to stop supporting him.

    Every senator needs to stand up and represent their constituents — not big business, not the ACLU, not activist groups, not political interests, but the American interests, the workers’ interests. That is what we need to expect from them, and we don’t have but a few weeks, it looks like, to get it done.

    In effect, the entire Senate Democratic conference has surrendered the jobs, wages, and livelihoods of their constituents to a group of special interests meeting in secret at the White House. They are surrendering them to executive actions that will foist on the nation what Congress has refused to pass and the American people have rejected. They are plotting at the White House to move forward with executive action no matter what the people think and no matter what Congress — through the people’s House — has decided.

    Politico reports that “White House officials conducted more than 20 meetings in July and August with legal experts, immigration advocates and business leaders to gather ideas on what should be included in the order.”

    So who are these so-called expert advocates and business leaders? They are not the law-enforcement officers; they are not our ICE officers; they are not our Border Patrol officers; they are not the American working man and woman; they are not unemployed Americans. They weren’t in the room. You can be sure of that. Their opinions weren’t sought.

    No, White House officials are meeting with the world’s most powerful corporate and immigration lobbyists and activists who think border controls are for the little people. The administration is meeting with the elite, the cosmopolitan set, who scorn and mock the concerns of everyday Americans who are concerned about their schools, jobs, wages, communities, and hospitals. These great and powerful citizens of the world don’t care much about old-fashioned things like national boundaries, national sovereignty, and immigration control — let alone the constitutional separation of powers.

    Well, don’t you get it? They believe they are always supposed to get whatever it is they want. They are used to that. They spent hundreds of millions of dollars. In fact, one report says they have spent $1.5 billion since 2007 trying to pass their desired immigration bill — $1.5 billion. They tried and tried and tried to pass the bill through Congress, but the American people said: No, no, no. So they decided to just go to the president. They decide to go to President Obama, and they insist that he implement these measures through executive fiat. And Senate Democrats have apparently said: Well, that is just a wonderful idea. We support that. Just do it. Go big. But, Mr. President, wait a little bit. Wait until after the election. We don’t want the voters to hold us accountable for what you are doing. We want to pretend we in the Senate have nothing to do with it.

    One of the groups that have joined the chorus of special interests demanding executive action on immigration is FWD.us, run by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. He just turned 30, and I understand he is worth about $30 billion.

    Mr. Zuckerberg has been very busy recently. One of his fellow billionaires, Mr. Carlos Slim — maybe the world’s richest man — invited Mr. Zuckerberg down to Mexico City to give a speech. What did Mr. Zuckerberg promote in his speech? Well, this is a report of it.

    I guess I will first note that young Mr. Zuckerberg maybe doesn’t know there is a deep American tradition — a tradition in most developed nations — that you don’t go to a foreign capital to criticize your own government. I suppose he doesn’t know about that. They probably didn’t teach him about that when he was at one of the elite schools he attended.

    This is what he said in Mexico City: “We have a strange immigration policy for a nation of immigrants. And it’s a policy unfit for today’s world.”

    Well, the “masters of the universe” are very fond of open borders as long as these open borders don’t extend to their gated compounds and fenced-off estates.

    I have another article from late last fall that was printed in Business Insider about Mr. Zuckerberg’s actions. The headline is “Mark Zuckerberg Just Spent More than $30 Million Buying 4 Neighboring Houses for Privacy.” The article says:

    Mark Zuckerberg just made an unusual purchase. Well, four purchases. Facebook’s billionaire founder bought four homes surrounding his current home near Palo Alto, Mercury News Reports. The houses cost him more than $30 million, including one 2,600 square-foot home that cost $14 million. (His own home is twice as large at 5,000 square-feet and cost half as much.) Larry Page made a similar move a few years ago so he could build a 6,000-square-foot mansion. But Zuckerberg’s reason is different. He doesn’t want to live in excess, he just wants a little privacy.

    That is a world the average American doesn’t live in.

    So Mr. Zuckerberg — who has become the top spokesman for expanding the admission of foreign workers — championed the Senate immigration bill for which all of our Democratic colleagues voted. One of the things the bill did was double the supply of low-wage foreign workers brought into the United States for companies such as Facebook.

    Many of us have heard for a long time the claim that there is a shortage of STEM and IT workers. This has been the central sales pitch used by those making demands for massive increases in foreign-worker programs across the board — programs that bring in workers for every sector in the U.S. economy. But we know otherwise from the nation’s leading academics, people who studied this issue and are professionals in it. I have a recent op-ed here from USA Today which reports that there is actually not a shortage but a surplus of Americans who have been trained in the STEM and IT fields and that this is why wages for these fields have not increased since 1999.

    If you have a shortage of workers in a field such as information technology or science and mathematics, wages go up, do they not? If wages are not up, we don’t have a shortage.

    So rich high-tech companies are using the H-1B visa program to keep wages down and to hire less expensive workers from abroad. Indeed, the same companies demanding more guest workers are laying off American workers in droves.

    I would like to read some excerpts from that op-ed published in USA Today. The article was co-authored by five of the nation’s experts on labor markets and the guest-worker program. I think it tells a story that has not been refuted. We have partisans and advocates who have been claiming there is a shortage in these fields, but the experts say no. And since they have been speaking out on this issue, we have seen no real data that would dispute what they say in this article dated July 27, 2014.

    Headline: “Bill Gates’ tech worker fantasy.” Sub-headline: “Silicon Valley has created an imaginary staffing shortage.”

    Business executives and politicians endlessly complain that there is a “shortage” of qualified Americans and that the U.S. must admit more high-skilled guest workers to fill jobs in STEM fields: science, technology, engineering and math. This claim is echoed by everyone from President Obama and Rupert Murdoch to Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates.

    Yet within the past month, two odd things occurred: Census reported that only one in four STEM degree holders is in a STEM job, and Microsoft announced plans to downsize its workforce by 18,000 jobs.

    The five writers of this article — referring to themselves — go on to say:

    None of us have been able to find any credible evidence to support the IT industry’s assertions of labor shortages.

    The article was written by Ron Hira, Paula Stephan, Hal Salzman, Michael Teitelbaum, who has recently written a book on this subject, and Norm Matloff. These are labor-economics experts who have studied these issues for years. Many of them have testified before Congress. They say:

    None of us have been able to find any credible evidence to support the IT industry’s assertions of labor shortages.

    What a statement that is.

    They go on to write — they all signed this article together — that:

    If a shortage did exist, wages would be rising as companies try to attract scarce workers. Instead, legislation that expanded visas for IT personnel during the 1990s has kept average wages flat over the past 16 years. Indeed, guest workers have become the predominant source of new hires in these fields.

    The “predominant source of new hires” in information-technology fields is guest-worker programs from abroad.

    They go on to say:

    Those supporting even greater expansion seem to have forgotten about the hundreds and thousands of American high-tech workers who are being shortchanged — by wages stuck at 1998 levels, by diminished career prospects and by repeated rounds of layoffs.

    They go on to say:

    There is an ample supply of American workers who are willing and qualified to fill high-skill jobs in this country. The only real disagreement is whether the supply is two or three times larger than the demand.

    There is no doubt we have a surplus of IT workers. The question is whether the supply is two or three times as big as the number of job openings.

    They go on to say:

    Unfortunately, companies are exploiting the large existing flow of guest workers to deny American workers access to STEM careers and middle-class security that should come with them. Imagine, then, how many more Americans would be frozen out of the middle class if politicians and tech moguls succeeded in doubling or tripling the flow of guest workers into STEM occupations.

    That is exactly what the bill before this Senate — the bill the House of Representatives rejected — would have done. It would have doubled the number of guest workers coming into America just to take jobs — coming in for the very purpose of taking a job that we need Americans to be taking.

    The article goes on: “Another major, yet often overlooked, provision in the pending legislation” — that is the bill President Obama is pushing for, the Gang of Eight bill — “would grant automatic green cards to any foreign student who earns a graduate degree in a STEM field, based on assertions that foreign graduates of U.S. universities are routinely being forced to leave. Such claims are incompatible with the evidence that such graduates have many paths to stay and work, and indeed the ‘stay rates’ for visiting international students are very high and have shown no sign of decline. The most recent study finds that 92 percent of Chinese Ph.D. students stay in America to work after graduation.”

    So there is this myth that we have thousands and thousands of students graduating from schools and being sent home. That is not accurate, according to the experts who study the data.

    The article continues:

    The tech industry’s promotion of expanded temporary visas (such as the H-1B) and green cards is driven by a desire for cheap, young and immobile labor. It is well documented that loopholes enable firms to legally pay H-1Bs below their market value and to continue the widespread age discrimination acknowledged by many in the tech industry.

    I talked to a gentleman whom I knew a little bit who worked at a computer company. He is well into his 40s, maybe close to 50. I asked him what kind of security there is. He said, well, in the tech industry these companies go and fall. I said, what happens if you were to lose your job? He said, at my age, it would be very difficult.

    The USA Today op-ed concludes by saying:

    IT industry leaders have spent lavishly on lobbying to promote their STEM shortage claims among legislators. The only problem is that the evidence contradicts their self-interested claims.

    So I would pose a question to Mr. Zuckerberg. I read in the news that Facebook is now worth more than $200 billion. Is that not enough money to hire American workers for a change? Your company now employs roughly 7,000 people. Let’s say you want to expand your workforce 10 percent, or hire another 700 workers. Are you claiming you can’t find 700 Americans who would take these jobs if you paid a good wage and decent benefits?

    Let me just say one more thing: Facebook has 7,000 workers. Microsoft just laid off 18,000. Why doesn’t Mr. Zuckerberg call his friend Mr. Gates and say: Look, I have to hire a few hundred people; do you have any résumés you can send over here? Maybe I will not have to take somebody from a foreign country for a job an unemployed U.S. citizen might take.

    There is this myth that we have surging employment in the high-tech industry.

    As Byron York reported, Hewlett-Packard, a high-tech company, “laid off 29,000 employees in 2012” — 29,000. “In August of 2013, Cisco announced plans to lay off 4,000 workers in addition to the 8,000 cut in the last 2 years,” and Cisco was right in the White House this summer with a group of other companies demanding more workers from abroad. Cisco was signing a letter with a bunch of other companies: “United Technologies has announced 3,000 layoffs this year”; “American Express cut 5,400 jobs”; “Procter and Gamble announced 5,700 jobs cut in 2012”; “T-Mobile announced plans to lay off 2,250 employees in 2012.”

    “According to a recent Reuters report,” York writes, overall “U.S. employers announced 50,000 layoffs in August of 2013, up 34 percent from the previous month, then up 57 percent through August 2012.”

    There is no shortage of workers.

    But FWD.us and other immigration lobbyists are working with the White House to extract executive orders from the president that provide them with the same financial benefits that were included in the Senate bill that was rejected by the House of Representatives. One proposal would increase by as much as 800,000 the number of foreign workers admitted for the explicit purpose of taking jobs in the United States.

    A recent Associated Press article, entitled “Obama Weighs Broader Move on Legal Immigration” reports that “President Barack Obama is considering key changes in the nation’s immigration system requested by tech, industry and powerful interest groups.” Not by the American people was he being requested to do this, not by the national interest, but by “powerful interest groups” that are referred to here.

    It goes on to say:

    After recent White House meetings, top officials have compiled specific recommendations from business groups and other advocates.

    “Other advocates.” Who are they? We know the ACLU has been there. We know La Raza has been meeting there on a regular basis. It goes on. The article says:

    One of the more popular requests is a change in the way green cards are counted that would essentially free up some 800,000 additional visas the first year, advocates say. . . . Other requests would extend work permits to the spouses of all temporary H-1B skilled workers who have not been able to work.

    But how about the fact that a single mom might like that job? An unemployed single mom or a single mom who has a job prospect that would pay $3 more than the job she is now working while trying to raise a family? Or an unemployed father? Maybe they would like those jobs first.

    So these actions fall on the heels of previous executive action in which the president already acted unilaterally earlier this year to grant companies an additional 100,000 guest workers. He has already done that. In just the first year of this order, it adds 100,000 guest workers by providing work authorizations to the foreign spouses of temporary guest workers. It would increase the supply of guest workers by approximately 30,000 each year thereafter — this at a time when we have 58 million working-age Americans who are not working. Since 2009 the number of adults has increased by 13 million, while the number of people actually working has decreased by 7 million.

    Median household income has dropped $2,300 since 2009. According to the National Employment Law Project, wages are down across all occupations.

    A CBS report titled “Why American workers feel increasingly poor” writes of the NELP’s study:

    Real median hourly wages have declined across low, middle and high income levels from 2009 to 2013, the study found. No matter if workers were in the lowest bracket ($8.84 to $10.85 an hour) or the highest ($31.40 to $86.34) median hourly wages declined when you take into account the impact of inflation.

    It goes on: “Across all occupations, real median hourly wages slipped 3.4 percent since 2009. While even better-paid workers saw median hourly earnings erode, the worst hit segments were at the bottom” — the people who got hurt the most were at the bottom — “with declines in their wages of more than 4 percent.”

    We have business CEOs, lobbyists, activists, immigration groups, and clever politicians who demand that we have to have even more workers brought into America even when we have a decline in wages and a decline in jobs. But what does the president do? His administration issues an executive order to provide foreign spouses — the citizens of other countries, not American citizens — with 100,000 jobs in the United States, precious jobs that many Americans would love to have. How many American spouses struggling to support their families would benefit from one of those jobs? How many single moms would benefit from a chance to earn a better paycheck?

    Our Senate Democratic friends talk about paycheck fairness repeatedly. Yet they are supporting policies that take jobs and wages directly from American women by the millions.

    Immigration policy is supposed to serve the national interest and the people of the United States, not the interests of a few activist CEOs and the politicians who are catering to them. We have had 40 years of mass immigration combined with falling wages, a shrinking workplace, and exploding welfare rolls. We know that, don’t we, friends and colleagues? It is time for a shift in emphasis. It is time to get our own people back to work, and our communities out of poverty, and our schools back on their feet.

    Harvard professor Dr. George Borjas — who is probably the leading academic in this entire area and has been for many years — estimates that our current immigration rate results in an annual loss of more than $400 billion in wages for Americans competing with immigrant labor. Between 2000 and today the government issued nearly 30 million visas to temporary foreign workers and permanent immigrants, largely lower-skilled and lower-wage.

    A recent Reuters poll showed that Americans wish to see the record rate of immigrant admissions reduced, not increased (as the Gang of Eight bill would have done), by a huge 3-to-1 margin.

    Another poll from pollster Kellyanne Conway recently showed that 80 percent of Americans think companies should hire from among the existing unemployed rather than bringing in new workers from abroad to fill these jobs. Yet Senate Democrats have unanimously supported legislation to double the annual supply of labor brought into the United States. These workers would be brought in to take jobs in every field, occupation, and industry in America.

    So what about the good, decent, and patriotic citizens of our country who fight our wars, who obey our laws, who follow our rules, and want a better future for their children? Should their needs not come first?

    As National Review explained, we are “a nation with an economy, not an economy with a nation.” We cannot put the parochial demands of a few powerful CEOs ahead of an entire nation’s hopes, dreams, and aspirations.

    The basic social contract is that citizens agree to follow the law, pay their taxes, and devote their love and loyalty to their country, and in exchange the nation commits to preserve and protect and serve their interests, safeguard their freedom, and return to them in kind their first allegiance and loyalty.

    The job of elected officials is to answer to the people who sent them to Washington — not to scorn them, not to demean them, not to mock them, and not to sell their jobs and dreams to the highest bidder.

    I yield the floor.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Aschwin
    Excellent.
    , @NoseytheDuke
    Thanks for posting that. Cheers
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. anon says: • Disclaimer

    Does Treasury Sectetary matter?

    Steven Mnuchin

    Goldman, Hollywood, Soros, Trump fundraiser

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  17. RW says:

    “I don’t even understand why the republic needs a Department of Housing and Urban Development. Isn’t this just a legacy of the mid-20th-century Planning craze…”

    No. HUD also has programs like lead poisoning prevention and abatement. Europe outlawed the use of lead-based paint four or five decades before the business-friendly US did. This left substantial amounts of poison flaking off the walls and being inhaled as dust particles into the lungs of young children where it permanently damaged their neural development (the growing body treats lead as calcium). HUD had a necessary program that worked out the most cost-effective way to avoid even more brain damage to young children who grow up in these areas: All that could be done was to put on new coats of paint over old ones.

    But boy did the paint industry really have some boom years!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  18. DHS and DOJ are centrally important, but don’t ignore other highly important positions.

    On your reader’s observation that E-Verify is useless without the will to pursue violators (http://www.vdare.com/posts/is-e-verify-worth-a-damn-cont), the Department of Labor is also a vital position.

    Welcome news, then, that immigration patriot Lou Barletta may end up as Labor Secretary. http://www.politicspa.com/barletta-discusses-labor-secretary-position-with-trump/80232/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  19. Aschwin says:
    @Carlton Meyer
    I knew little of Senator Sessions until I came across his brilliant Senate speech in 2014 that I posted in my blog:

    Sep 15, 2014 - Opposition to Open Borders

    I rarely repost outside things. However, a reader sent one of the most important political speeches this decade, which was ignored by the corporate media. Opening America's borders with another amnesty would devastate the USA since it would encourage another 20 million poor, desperate refugees to flood across within a decade. If the Republicans were not so closely allied with big business, they would run on this issue and easily win the Senate and Presidency. Senator Sessions is very popular in his state due to vocal opposition on this issue so is less afraid of scorn from corporate lobbyists.

    NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE www.nationalreview.com
    September 11, 2014 2:38 PM

    Don't Give the Masters of the Universe Their Amnesty

    The Senate isn’t doing anything to stop Obama’s plans — thank the plutocrats.

    By Jeff Sessions

    Senator Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.), the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, delivered a speech on the Senate floor Wednesday evening about Senate Democrats’ refusal to support legislation to block the president’s proposed executive actions on immigration policy, and the interests supporting amnesty. Following is an adapted version of his remarks.

    ________________________________________

    Earlier this week I spoke about the president’s promise that he would issue an executive amnesty to 5 or 6 million people. The planned amnesty would include work permits, photo IDs, and Social Security numbers for millions of people who illegally entered the U.S., illegally overstayed their visas, or defrauded U.S. immigration authorities.

    The Senate Democratic conference has supported and enabled the president’s unlawful actions and blocked every effort to stop them. Not even one of our Democratic colleagues has backed the House legislation that would stop this planned executive amnesty or demanded that Senator Reid bring it up for a vote. Every Senate Democrat is therefore the president’s partner in his planned lawless acts.

    Tonight I would like to talk about the influence of special interests on our nation’s immigration system. How did we get to the point where elected officials, activist groups, the ACLU, and global CEOs are openly working to deny American workers the immigration protections to which they are legally entitled? How did we get to the point where the Democratic party is prepared to nullify and wipe away the immigration laws of the United States of America?

    Just yesterday Majority Leader Reid wrote in a tweet something that was shocking. He said: “Since House Republicans have failed to act on immigration, I know the President will. When he does, I hope he goes Real Big.”

    Let this sink in for a moment. The majority leader of the Senate is bragging that he knows the president will circumvent Congress to issue executive amnesty to millions, and he is encouraging the president to ensure this amnesty includes as many people as possible. And the White House has acknowledged that 5 to 6 million is the number they are looking at.

    Has one Senate Democrat stepped forward to reject Mr. Reid’s statement? Has one Senate Democrat stepped forward to say: I support the legislation passed by the House of Representatives that would secure the border and block this executive amnesty? Have they ever said they support that? Have they ever said: I will do everything in my power to see that the House legislation gets a vote in the Senate so the American people can know what is going on? No. All we hear is silence.

    This body is not run by one man. We don’t have a dictator in the great Senate. Every member has a vote. And the only way Senator Reid can succeed in blocking this Senate from voting to stop the president’s executive actions is for members to stop supporting him.

    Every senator needs to stand up and represent their constituents — not big business, not the ACLU, not activist groups, not political interests, but the American interests, the workers’ interests. That is what we need to expect from them, and we don’t have but a few weeks, it looks like, to get it done.

    In effect, the entire Senate Democratic conference has surrendered the jobs, wages, and livelihoods of their constituents to a group of special interests meeting in secret at the White House. They are surrendering them to executive actions that will foist on the nation what Congress has refused to pass and the American people have rejected. They are plotting at the White House to move forward with executive action no matter what the people think and no matter what Congress — through the people’s House — has decided.

    Politico reports that “White House officials conducted more than 20 meetings in July and August with legal experts, immigration advocates and business leaders to gather ideas on what should be included in the order.”

    So who are these so-called expert advocates and business leaders? They are not the law-enforcement officers; they are not our ICE officers; they are not our Border Patrol officers; they are not the American working man and woman; they are not unemployed Americans. They weren’t in the room. You can be sure of that. Their opinions weren’t sought.

    No, White House officials are meeting with the world’s most powerful corporate and immigration lobbyists and activists who think border controls are for the little people. The administration is meeting with the elite, the cosmopolitan set, who scorn and mock the concerns of everyday Americans who are concerned about their schools, jobs, wages, communities, and hospitals. These great and powerful citizens of the world don’t care much about old-fashioned things like national boundaries, national sovereignty, and immigration control — let alone the constitutional separation of powers.

    Well, don’t you get it? They believe they are always supposed to get whatever it is they want. They are used to that. They spent hundreds of millions of dollars. In fact, one report says they have spent $1.5 billion since 2007 trying to pass their desired immigration bill — $1.5 billion. They tried and tried and tried to pass the bill through Congress, but the American people said: No, no, no. So they decided to just go to the president. They decide to go to President Obama, and they insist that he implement these measures through executive fiat. And Senate Democrats have apparently said: Well, that is just a wonderful idea. We support that. Just do it. Go big. But, Mr. President, wait a little bit. Wait until after the election. We don’t want the voters to hold us accountable for what you are doing. We want to pretend we in the Senate have nothing to do with it.

    One of the groups that have joined the chorus of special interests demanding executive action on immigration is FWD.us, run by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. He just turned 30, and I understand he is worth about $30 billion.

    Mr. Zuckerberg has been very busy recently. One of his fellow billionaires, Mr. Carlos Slim — maybe the world’s richest man — invited Mr. Zuckerberg down to Mexico City to give a speech. What did Mr. Zuckerberg promote in his speech? Well, this is a report of it.

    I guess I will first note that young Mr. Zuckerberg maybe doesn’t know there is a deep American tradition — a tradition in most developed nations — that you don’t go to a foreign capital to criticize your own government. I suppose he doesn’t know about that. They probably didn’t teach him about that when he was at one of the elite schools he attended.

    This is what he said in Mexico City: “We have a strange immigration policy for a nation of immigrants. And it’s a policy unfit for today’s world.”

    Well, the “masters of the universe” are very fond of open borders as long as these open borders don’t extend to their gated compounds and fenced-off estates.

    I have another article from late last fall that was printed in Business Insider about Mr. Zuckerberg’s actions. The headline is “Mark Zuckerberg Just Spent More than $30 Million Buying 4 Neighboring Houses for Privacy.” The article says:

    Mark Zuckerberg just made an unusual purchase. Well, four purchases. Facebook’s billionaire founder bought four homes surrounding his current home near Palo Alto, Mercury News Reports. The houses cost him more than $30 million, including one 2,600 square-foot home that cost $14 million. (His own home is twice as large at 5,000 square-feet and cost half as much.) Larry Page made a similar move a few years ago so he could build a 6,000-square-foot mansion. But Zuckerberg’s reason is different. He doesn’t want to live in excess, he just wants a little privacy.

    That is a world the average American doesn’t live in.

    So Mr. Zuckerberg — who has become the top spokesman for expanding the admission of foreign workers — championed the Senate immigration bill for which all of our Democratic colleagues voted. One of the things the bill did was double the supply of low-wage foreign workers brought into the United States for companies such as Facebook.

    Many of us have heard for a long time the claim that there is a shortage of STEM and IT workers. This has been the central sales pitch used by those making demands for massive increases in foreign-worker programs across the board — programs that bring in workers for every sector in the U.S. economy. But we know otherwise from the nation’s leading academics, people who studied this issue and are professionals in it. I have a recent op-ed here from USA Today which reports that there is actually not a shortage but a surplus of Americans who have been trained in the STEM and IT fields and that this is why wages for these fields have not increased since 1999.

    If you have a shortage of workers in a field such as information technology or science and mathematics, wages go up, do they not? If wages are not up, we don’t have a shortage.

    So rich high-tech companies are using the H-1B visa program to keep wages down and to hire less expensive workers from abroad. Indeed, the same companies demanding more guest workers are laying off American workers in droves.

    I would like to read some excerpts from that op-ed published in USA Today. The article was co-authored by five of the nation’s experts on labor markets and the guest-worker program. I think it tells a story that has not been refuted. We have partisans and advocates who have been claiming there is a shortage in these fields, but the experts say no. And since they have been speaking out on this issue, we have seen no real data that would dispute what they say in this article dated July 27, 2014.

    Headline: “Bill Gates’ tech worker fantasy.” Sub-headline: “Silicon Valley has created an imaginary staffing shortage.”

    Business executives and politicians endlessly complain that there is a “shortage” of qualified Americans and that the U.S. must admit more high-skilled guest workers to fill jobs in STEM fields: science, technology, engineering and math. This claim is echoed by everyone from President Obama and Rupert Murdoch to Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates.

    Yet within the past month, two odd things occurred: Census reported that only one in four STEM degree holders is in a STEM job, and Microsoft announced plans to downsize its workforce by 18,000 jobs.

    The five writers of this article — referring to themselves — go on to say:

    None of us have been able to find any credible evidence to support the IT industry’s assertions of labor shortages.

    The article was written by Ron Hira, Paula Stephan, Hal Salzman, Michael Teitelbaum, who has recently written a book on this subject, and Norm Matloff. These are labor-economics experts who have studied these issues for years. Many of them have testified before Congress. They say:

    None of us have been able to find any credible evidence to support the IT industry’s assertions of labor shortages.

    What a statement that is.

    They go on to write — they all signed this article together — that:

    If a shortage did exist, wages would be rising as companies try to attract scarce workers. Instead, legislation that expanded visas for IT personnel during the 1990s has kept average wages flat over the past 16 years. Indeed, guest workers have become the predominant source of new hires in these fields.

    The “predominant source of new hires” in information-technology fields is guest-worker programs from abroad.

    They go on to say:

    Those supporting even greater expansion seem to have forgotten about the hundreds and thousands of American high-tech workers who are being shortchanged — by wages stuck at 1998 levels, by diminished career prospects and by repeated rounds of layoffs.

    They go on to say:

    There is an ample supply of American workers who are willing and qualified to fill high-skill jobs in this country. The only real disagreement is whether the supply is two or three times larger than the demand.

    There is no doubt we have a surplus of IT workers. The question is whether the supply is two or three times as big as the number of job openings.

    They go on to say:

    Unfortunately, companies are exploiting the large existing flow of guest workers to deny American workers access to STEM careers and middle-class security that should come with them. Imagine, then, how many more Americans would be frozen out of the middle class if politicians and tech moguls succeeded in doubling or tripling the flow of guest workers into STEM occupations.

    That is exactly what the bill before this Senate — the bill the House of Representatives rejected — would have done. It would have doubled the number of guest workers coming into America just to take jobs — coming in for the very purpose of taking a job that we need Americans to be taking.

    The article goes on: “Another major, yet often overlooked, provision in the pending legislation” — that is the bill President Obama is pushing for, the Gang of Eight bill — “would grant automatic green cards to any foreign student who earns a graduate degree in a STEM field, based on assertions that foreign graduates of U.S. universities are routinely being forced to leave. Such claims are incompatible with the evidence that such graduates have many paths to stay and work, and indeed the ‘stay rates’ for visiting international students are very high and have shown no sign of decline. The most recent study finds that 92 percent of Chinese Ph.D. students stay in America to work after graduation.”

    So there is this myth that we have thousands and thousands of students graduating from schools and being sent home. That is not accurate, according to the experts who study the data.

    The article continues:

    The tech industry’s promotion of expanded temporary visas (such as the H-1B) and green cards is driven by a desire for cheap, young and immobile labor. It is well documented that loopholes enable firms to legally pay H-1Bs below their market value and to continue the widespread age discrimination acknowledged by many in the tech industry.

    I talked to a gentleman whom I knew a little bit who worked at a computer company. He is well into his 40s, maybe close to 50. I asked him what kind of security there is. He said, well, in the tech industry these companies go and fall. I said, what happens if you were to lose your job? He said, at my age, it would be very difficult.

    The USA Today op-ed concludes by saying:

    IT industry leaders have spent lavishly on lobbying to promote their STEM shortage claims among legislators. The only problem is that the evidence contradicts their self-interested claims.

    So I would pose a question to Mr. Zuckerberg. I read in the news that Facebook is now worth more than $200 billion. Is that not enough money to hire American workers for a change? Your company now employs roughly 7,000 people. Let’s say you want to expand your workforce 10 percent, or hire another 700 workers. Are you claiming you can’t find 700 Americans who would take these jobs if you paid a good wage and decent benefits?

    Let me just say one more thing: Facebook has 7,000 workers. Microsoft just laid off 18,000. Why doesn’t Mr. Zuckerberg call his friend Mr. Gates and say: Look, I have to hire a few hundred people; do you have any résumés you can send over here? Maybe I will not have to take somebody from a foreign country for a job an unemployed U.S. citizen might take.

    There is this myth that we have surging employment in the high-tech industry.

    As Byron York reported, Hewlett-Packard, a high-tech company, “laid off 29,000 employees in 2012” — 29,000. “In August of 2013, Cisco announced plans to lay off 4,000 workers in addition to the 8,000 cut in the last 2 years,” and Cisco was right in the White House this summer with a group of other companies demanding more workers from abroad. Cisco was signing a letter with a bunch of other companies: “United Technologies has announced 3,000 layoffs this year”; “American Express cut 5,400 jobs”; “Procter and Gamble announced 5,700 jobs cut in 2012”; “T-Mobile announced plans to lay off 2,250 employees in 2012.”

    “According to a recent Reuters report,” York writes, overall “U.S. employers announced 50,000 layoffs in August of 2013, up 34 percent from the previous month, then up 57 percent through August 2012.”

    There is no shortage of workers.

    But FWD.us and other immigration lobbyists are working with the White House to extract executive orders from the president that provide them with the same financial benefits that were included in the Senate bill that was rejected by the House of Representatives. One proposal would increase by as much as 800,000 the number of foreign workers admitted for the explicit purpose of taking jobs in the United States.

    A recent Associated Press article, entitled “Obama Weighs Broader Move on Legal Immigration” reports that “President Barack Obama is considering key changes in the nation’s immigration system requested by tech, industry and powerful interest groups.” Not by the American people was he being requested to do this, not by the national interest, but by “powerful interest groups” that are referred to here.

    It goes on to say:

    After recent White House meetings, top officials have compiled specific recommendations from business groups and other advocates.

    “Other advocates.” Who are they? We know the ACLU has been there. We know La Raza has been meeting there on a regular basis. It goes on. The article says:

    One of the more popular requests is a change in the way green cards are counted that would essentially free up some 800,000 additional visas the first year, advocates say. . . . Other requests would extend work permits to the spouses of all temporary H-1B skilled workers who have not been able to work.

    But how about the fact that a single mom might like that job? An unemployed single mom or a single mom who has a job prospect that would pay $3 more than the job she is now working while trying to raise a family? Or an unemployed father? Maybe they would like those jobs first.

    So these actions fall on the heels of previous executive action in which the president already acted unilaterally earlier this year to grant companies an additional 100,000 guest workers. He has already done that. In just the first year of this order, it adds 100,000 guest workers by providing work authorizations to the foreign spouses of temporary guest workers. It would increase the supply of guest workers by approximately 30,000 each year thereafter — this at a time when we have 58 million working-age Americans who are not working. Since 2009 the number of adults has increased by 13 million, while the number of people actually working has decreased by 7 million.

    Median household income has dropped $2,300 since 2009. According to the National Employment Law Project, wages are down across all occupations.

    A CBS report titled “Why American workers feel increasingly poor” writes of the NELP’s study:

    Real median hourly wages have declined across low, middle and high income levels from 2009 to 2013, the study found. No matter if workers were in the lowest bracket ($8.84 to $10.85 an hour) or the highest ($31.40 to $86.34) median hourly wages declined when you take into account the impact of inflation.

    It goes on: “Across all occupations, real median hourly wages slipped 3.4 percent since 2009. While even better-paid workers saw median hourly earnings erode, the worst hit segments were at the bottom” — the people who got hurt the most were at the bottom — “with declines in their wages of more than 4 percent.”

    We have business CEOs, lobbyists, activists, immigration groups, and clever politicians who demand that we have to have even more workers brought into America even when we have a decline in wages and a decline in jobs. But what does the president do? His administration issues an executive order to provide foreign spouses — the citizens of other countries, not American citizens — with 100,000 jobs in the United States, precious jobs that many Americans would love to have. How many American spouses struggling to support their families would benefit from one of those jobs? How many single moms would benefit from a chance to earn a better paycheck?

    Our Senate Democratic friends talk about paycheck fairness repeatedly. Yet they are supporting policies that take jobs and wages directly from American women by the millions.

    Immigration policy is supposed to serve the national interest and the people of the United States, not the interests of a few activist CEOs and the politicians who are catering to them. We have had 40 years of mass immigration combined with falling wages, a shrinking workplace, and exploding welfare rolls. We know that, don’t we, friends and colleagues? It is time for a shift in emphasis. It is time to get our own people back to work, and our communities out of poverty, and our schools back on their feet.

    Harvard professor Dr. George Borjas — who is probably the leading academic in this entire area and has been for many years — estimates that our current immigration rate results in an annual loss of more than $400 billion in wages for Americans competing with immigrant labor. Between 2000 and today the government issued nearly 30 million visas to temporary foreign workers and permanent immigrants, largely lower-skilled and lower-wage.

    A recent Reuters poll showed that Americans wish to see the record rate of immigrant admissions reduced, not increased (as the Gang of Eight bill would have done), by a huge 3-to-1 margin.

    Another poll from pollster Kellyanne Conway recently showed that 80 percent of Americans think companies should hire from among the existing unemployed rather than bringing in new workers from abroad to fill these jobs. Yet Senate Democrats have unanimously supported legislation to double the annual supply of labor brought into the United States. These workers would be brought in to take jobs in every field, occupation, and industry in America.

    So what about the good, decent, and patriotic citizens of our country who fight our wars, who obey our laws, who follow our rules, and want a better future for their children? Should their needs not come first?

    As National Review explained, we are “a nation with an economy, not an economy with a nation.” We cannot put the parochial demands of a few powerful CEOs ahead of an entire nation’s hopes, dreams, and aspirations.

    The basic social contract is that citizens agree to follow the law, pay their taxes, and devote their love and loyalty to their country, and in exchange the nation commits to preserve and protect and serve their interests, safeguard their freedom, and return to them in kind their first allegiance and loyalty.

    The job of elected officials is to answer to the people who sent them to Washington — not to scorn them, not to demean them, not to mock them, and not to sell their jobs and dreams to the highest bidder.

    I yield the floor.

    Excellent.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  20. @Carlton Meyer
    I knew little of Senator Sessions until I came across his brilliant Senate speech in 2014 that I posted in my blog:

    Sep 15, 2014 - Opposition to Open Borders

    I rarely repost outside things. However, a reader sent one of the most important political speeches this decade, which was ignored by the corporate media. Opening America's borders with another amnesty would devastate the USA since it would encourage another 20 million poor, desperate refugees to flood across within a decade. If the Republicans were not so closely allied with big business, they would run on this issue and easily win the Senate and Presidency. Senator Sessions is very popular in his state due to vocal opposition on this issue so is less afraid of scorn from corporate lobbyists.

    NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE www.nationalreview.com
    September 11, 2014 2:38 PM

    Don't Give the Masters of the Universe Their Amnesty

    The Senate isn’t doing anything to stop Obama’s plans — thank the plutocrats.

    By Jeff Sessions

    Senator Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.), the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, delivered a speech on the Senate floor Wednesday evening about Senate Democrats’ refusal to support legislation to block the president’s proposed executive actions on immigration policy, and the interests supporting amnesty. Following is an adapted version of his remarks.

    ________________________________________

    Earlier this week I spoke about the president’s promise that he would issue an executive amnesty to 5 or 6 million people. The planned amnesty would include work permits, photo IDs, and Social Security numbers for millions of people who illegally entered the U.S., illegally overstayed their visas, or defrauded U.S. immigration authorities.

    The Senate Democratic conference has supported and enabled the president’s unlawful actions and blocked every effort to stop them. Not even one of our Democratic colleagues has backed the House legislation that would stop this planned executive amnesty or demanded that Senator Reid bring it up for a vote. Every Senate Democrat is therefore the president’s partner in his planned lawless acts.

    Tonight I would like to talk about the influence of special interests on our nation’s immigration system. How did we get to the point where elected officials, activist groups, the ACLU, and global CEOs are openly working to deny American workers the immigration protections to which they are legally entitled? How did we get to the point where the Democratic party is prepared to nullify and wipe away the immigration laws of the United States of America?

    Just yesterday Majority Leader Reid wrote in a tweet something that was shocking. He said: “Since House Republicans have failed to act on immigration, I know the President will. When he does, I hope he goes Real Big.”

    Let this sink in for a moment. The majority leader of the Senate is bragging that he knows the president will circumvent Congress to issue executive amnesty to millions, and he is encouraging the president to ensure this amnesty includes as many people as possible. And the White House has acknowledged that 5 to 6 million is the number they are looking at.

    Has one Senate Democrat stepped forward to reject Mr. Reid’s statement? Has one Senate Democrat stepped forward to say: I support the legislation passed by the House of Representatives that would secure the border and block this executive amnesty? Have they ever said they support that? Have they ever said: I will do everything in my power to see that the House legislation gets a vote in the Senate so the American people can know what is going on? No. All we hear is silence.

    This body is not run by one man. We don’t have a dictator in the great Senate. Every member has a vote. And the only way Senator Reid can succeed in blocking this Senate from voting to stop the president’s executive actions is for members to stop supporting him.

    Every senator needs to stand up and represent their constituents — not big business, not the ACLU, not activist groups, not political interests, but the American interests, the workers’ interests. That is what we need to expect from them, and we don’t have but a few weeks, it looks like, to get it done.

    In effect, the entire Senate Democratic conference has surrendered the jobs, wages, and livelihoods of their constituents to a group of special interests meeting in secret at the White House. They are surrendering them to executive actions that will foist on the nation what Congress has refused to pass and the American people have rejected. They are plotting at the White House to move forward with executive action no matter what the people think and no matter what Congress — through the people’s House — has decided.

    Politico reports that “White House officials conducted more than 20 meetings in July and August with legal experts, immigration advocates and business leaders to gather ideas on what should be included in the order.”

    So who are these so-called expert advocates and business leaders? They are not the law-enforcement officers; they are not our ICE officers; they are not our Border Patrol officers; they are not the American working man and woman; they are not unemployed Americans. They weren’t in the room. You can be sure of that. Their opinions weren’t sought.

    No, White House officials are meeting with the world’s most powerful corporate and immigration lobbyists and activists who think border controls are for the little people. The administration is meeting with the elite, the cosmopolitan set, who scorn and mock the concerns of everyday Americans who are concerned about their schools, jobs, wages, communities, and hospitals. These great and powerful citizens of the world don’t care much about old-fashioned things like national boundaries, national sovereignty, and immigration control — let alone the constitutional separation of powers.

    Well, don’t you get it? They believe they are always supposed to get whatever it is they want. They are used to that. They spent hundreds of millions of dollars. In fact, one report says they have spent $1.5 billion since 2007 trying to pass their desired immigration bill — $1.5 billion. They tried and tried and tried to pass the bill through Congress, but the American people said: No, no, no. So they decided to just go to the president. They decide to go to President Obama, and they insist that he implement these measures through executive fiat. And Senate Democrats have apparently said: Well, that is just a wonderful idea. We support that. Just do it. Go big. But, Mr. President, wait a little bit. Wait until after the election. We don’t want the voters to hold us accountable for what you are doing. We want to pretend we in the Senate have nothing to do with it.

    One of the groups that have joined the chorus of special interests demanding executive action on immigration is FWD.us, run by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. He just turned 30, and I understand he is worth about $30 billion.

    Mr. Zuckerberg has been very busy recently. One of his fellow billionaires, Mr. Carlos Slim — maybe the world’s richest man — invited Mr. Zuckerberg down to Mexico City to give a speech. What did Mr. Zuckerberg promote in his speech? Well, this is a report of it.

    I guess I will first note that young Mr. Zuckerberg maybe doesn’t know there is a deep American tradition — a tradition in most developed nations — that you don’t go to a foreign capital to criticize your own government. I suppose he doesn’t know about that. They probably didn’t teach him about that when he was at one of the elite schools he attended.

    This is what he said in Mexico City: “We have a strange immigration policy for a nation of immigrants. And it’s a policy unfit for today’s world.”

    Well, the “masters of the universe” are very fond of open borders as long as these open borders don’t extend to their gated compounds and fenced-off estates.

    I have another article from late last fall that was printed in Business Insider about Mr. Zuckerberg’s actions. The headline is “Mark Zuckerberg Just Spent More than $30 Million Buying 4 Neighboring Houses for Privacy.” The article says:

    Mark Zuckerberg just made an unusual purchase. Well, four purchases. Facebook’s billionaire founder bought four homes surrounding his current home near Palo Alto, Mercury News Reports. The houses cost him more than $30 million, including one 2,600 square-foot home that cost $14 million. (His own home is twice as large at 5,000 square-feet and cost half as much.) Larry Page made a similar move a few years ago so he could build a 6,000-square-foot mansion. But Zuckerberg’s reason is different. He doesn’t want to live in excess, he just wants a little privacy.

    That is a world the average American doesn’t live in.

    So Mr. Zuckerberg — who has become the top spokesman for expanding the admission of foreign workers — championed the Senate immigration bill for which all of our Democratic colleagues voted. One of the things the bill did was double the supply of low-wage foreign workers brought into the United States for companies such as Facebook.

    Many of us have heard for a long time the claim that there is a shortage of STEM and IT workers. This has been the central sales pitch used by those making demands for massive increases in foreign-worker programs across the board — programs that bring in workers for every sector in the U.S. economy. But we know otherwise from the nation’s leading academics, people who studied this issue and are professionals in it. I have a recent op-ed here from USA Today which reports that there is actually not a shortage but a surplus of Americans who have been trained in the STEM and IT fields and that this is why wages for these fields have not increased since 1999.

    If you have a shortage of workers in a field such as information technology or science and mathematics, wages go up, do they not? If wages are not up, we don’t have a shortage.

    So rich high-tech companies are using the H-1B visa program to keep wages down and to hire less expensive workers from abroad. Indeed, the same companies demanding more guest workers are laying off American workers in droves.

    I would like to read some excerpts from that op-ed published in USA Today. The article was co-authored by five of the nation’s experts on labor markets and the guest-worker program. I think it tells a story that has not been refuted. We have partisans and advocates who have been claiming there is a shortage in these fields, but the experts say no. And since they have been speaking out on this issue, we have seen no real data that would dispute what they say in this article dated July 27, 2014.

    Headline: “Bill Gates’ tech worker fantasy.” Sub-headline: “Silicon Valley has created an imaginary staffing shortage.”

    Business executives and politicians endlessly complain that there is a “shortage” of qualified Americans and that the U.S. must admit more high-skilled guest workers to fill jobs in STEM fields: science, technology, engineering and math. This claim is echoed by everyone from President Obama and Rupert Murdoch to Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates.

    Yet within the past month, two odd things occurred: Census reported that only one in four STEM degree holders is in a STEM job, and Microsoft announced plans to downsize its workforce by 18,000 jobs.

    The five writers of this article — referring to themselves — go on to say:

    None of us have been able to find any credible evidence to support the IT industry’s assertions of labor shortages.

    The article was written by Ron Hira, Paula Stephan, Hal Salzman, Michael Teitelbaum, who has recently written a book on this subject, and Norm Matloff. These are labor-economics experts who have studied these issues for years. Many of them have testified before Congress. They say:

    None of us have been able to find any credible evidence to support the IT industry’s assertions of labor shortages.

    What a statement that is.

    They go on to write — they all signed this article together — that:

    If a shortage did exist, wages would be rising as companies try to attract scarce workers. Instead, legislation that expanded visas for IT personnel during the 1990s has kept average wages flat over the past 16 years. Indeed, guest workers have become the predominant source of new hires in these fields.

    The “predominant source of new hires” in information-technology fields is guest-worker programs from abroad.

    They go on to say:

    Those supporting even greater expansion seem to have forgotten about the hundreds and thousands of American high-tech workers who are being shortchanged — by wages stuck at 1998 levels, by diminished career prospects and by repeated rounds of layoffs.

    They go on to say:

    There is an ample supply of American workers who are willing and qualified to fill high-skill jobs in this country. The only real disagreement is whether the supply is two or three times larger than the demand.

    There is no doubt we have a surplus of IT workers. The question is whether the supply is two or three times as big as the number of job openings.

    They go on to say:

    Unfortunately, companies are exploiting the large existing flow of guest workers to deny American workers access to STEM careers and middle-class security that should come with them. Imagine, then, how many more Americans would be frozen out of the middle class if politicians and tech moguls succeeded in doubling or tripling the flow of guest workers into STEM occupations.

    That is exactly what the bill before this Senate — the bill the House of Representatives rejected — would have done. It would have doubled the number of guest workers coming into America just to take jobs — coming in for the very purpose of taking a job that we need Americans to be taking.

    The article goes on: “Another major, yet often overlooked, provision in the pending legislation” — that is the bill President Obama is pushing for, the Gang of Eight bill — “would grant automatic green cards to any foreign student who earns a graduate degree in a STEM field, based on assertions that foreign graduates of U.S. universities are routinely being forced to leave. Such claims are incompatible with the evidence that such graduates have many paths to stay and work, and indeed the ‘stay rates’ for visiting international students are very high and have shown no sign of decline. The most recent study finds that 92 percent of Chinese Ph.D. students stay in America to work after graduation.”

    So there is this myth that we have thousands and thousands of students graduating from schools and being sent home. That is not accurate, according to the experts who study the data.

    The article continues:

    The tech industry’s promotion of expanded temporary visas (such as the H-1B) and green cards is driven by a desire for cheap, young and immobile labor. It is well documented that loopholes enable firms to legally pay H-1Bs below their market value and to continue the widespread age discrimination acknowledged by many in the tech industry.

    I talked to a gentleman whom I knew a little bit who worked at a computer company. He is well into his 40s, maybe close to 50. I asked him what kind of security there is. He said, well, in the tech industry these companies go and fall. I said, what happens if you were to lose your job? He said, at my age, it would be very difficult.

    The USA Today op-ed concludes by saying:

    IT industry leaders have spent lavishly on lobbying to promote their STEM shortage claims among legislators. The only problem is that the evidence contradicts their self-interested claims.

    So I would pose a question to Mr. Zuckerberg. I read in the news that Facebook is now worth more than $200 billion. Is that not enough money to hire American workers for a change? Your company now employs roughly 7,000 people. Let’s say you want to expand your workforce 10 percent, or hire another 700 workers. Are you claiming you can’t find 700 Americans who would take these jobs if you paid a good wage and decent benefits?

    Let me just say one more thing: Facebook has 7,000 workers. Microsoft just laid off 18,000. Why doesn’t Mr. Zuckerberg call his friend Mr. Gates and say: Look, I have to hire a few hundred people; do you have any résumés you can send over here? Maybe I will not have to take somebody from a foreign country for a job an unemployed U.S. citizen might take.

    There is this myth that we have surging employment in the high-tech industry.

    As Byron York reported, Hewlett-Packard, a high-tech company, “laid off 29,000 employees in 2012” — 29,000. “In August of 2013, Cisco announced plans to lay off 4,000 workers in addition to the 8,000 cut in the last 2 years,” and Cisco was right in the White House this summer with a group of other companies demanding more workers from abroad. Cisco was signing a letter with a bunch of other companies: “United Technologies has announced 3,000 layoffs this year”; “American Express cut 5,400 jobs”; “Procter and Gamble announced 5,700 jobs cut in 2012”; “T-Mobile announced plans to lay off 2,250 employees in 2012.”

    “According to a recent Reuters report,” York writes, overall “U.S. employers announced 50,000 layoffs in August of 2013, up 34 percent from the previous month, then up 57 percent through August 2012.”

    There is no shortage of workers.

    But FWD.us and other immigration lobbyists are working with the White House to extract executive orders from the president that provide them with the same financial benefits that were included in the Senate bill that was rejected by the House of Representatives. One proposal would increase by as much as 800,000 the number of foreign workers admitted for the explicit purpose of taking jobs in the United States.

    A recent Associated Press article, entitled “Obama Weighs Broader Move on Legal Immigration” reports that “President Barack Obama is considering key changes in the nation’s immigration system requested by tech, industry and powerful interest groups.” Not by the American people was he being requested to do this, not by the national interest, but by “powerful interest groups” that are referred to here.

    It goes on to say:

    After recent White House meetings, top officials have compiled specific recommendations from business groups and other advocates.

    “Other advocates.” Who are they? We know the ACLU has been there. We know La Raza has been meeting there on a regular basis. It goes on. The article says:

    One of the more popular requests is a change in the way green cards are counted that would essentially free up some 800,000 additional visas the first year, advocates say. . . . Other requests would extend work permits to the spouses of all temporary H-1B skilled workers who have not been able to work.

    But how about the fact that a single mom might like that job? An unemployed single mom or a single mom who has a job prospect that would pay $3 more than the job she is now working while trying to raise a family? Or an unemployed father? Maybe they would like those jobs first.

    So these actions fall on the heels of previous executive action in which the president already acted unilaterally earlier this year to grant companies an additional 100,000 guest workers. He has already done that. In just the first year of this order, it adds 100,000 guest workers by providing work authorizations to the foreign spouses of temporary guest workers. It would increase the supply of guest workers by approximately 30,000 each year thereafter — this at a time when we have 58 million working-age Americans who are not working. Since 2009 the number of adults has increased by 13 million, while the number of people actually working has decreased by 7 million.

    Median household income has dropped $2,300 since 2009. According to the National Employment Law Project, wages are down across all occupations.

    A CBS report titled “Why American workers feel increasingly poor” writes of the NELP’s study:

    Real median hourly wages have declined across low, middle and high income levels from 2009 to 2013, the study found. No matter if workers were in the lowest bracket ($8.84 to $10.85 an hour) or the highest ($31.40 to $86.34) median hourly wages declined when you take into account the impact of inflation.

    It goes on: “Across all occupations, real median hourly wages slipped 3.4 percent since 2009. While even better-paid workers saw median hourly earnings erode, the worst hit segments were at the bottom” — the people who got hurt the most were at the bottom — “with declines in their wages of more than 4 percent.”

    We have business CEOs, lobbyists, activists, immigration groups, and clever politicians who demand that we have to have even more workers brought into America even when we have a decline in wages and a decline in jobs. But what does the president do? His administration issues an executive order to provide foreign spouses — the citizens of other countries, not American citizens — with 100,000 jobs in the United States, precious jobs that many Americans would love to have. How many American spouses struggling to support their families would benefit from one of those jobs? How many single moms would benefit from a chance to earn a better paycheck?

    Our Senate Democratic friends talk about paycheck fairness repeatedly. Yet they are supporting policies that take jobs and wages directly from American women by the millions.

    Immigration policy is supposed to serve the national interest and the people of the United States, not the interests of a few activist CEOs and the politicians who are catering to them. We have had 40 years of mass immigration combined with falling wages, a shrinking workplace, and exploding welfare rolls. We know that, don’t we, friends and colleagues? It is time for a shift in emphasis. It is time to get our own people back to work, and our communities out of poverty, and our schools back on their feet.

    Harvard professor Dr. George Borjas — who is probably the leading academic in this entire area and has been for many years — estimates that our current immigration rate results in an annual loss of more than $400 billion in wages for Americans competing with immigrant labor. Between 2000 and today the government issued nearly 30 million visas to temporary foreign workers and permanent immigrants, largely lower-skilled and lower-wage.

    A recent Reuters poll showed that Americans wish to see the record rate of immigrant admissions reduced, not increased (as the Gang of Eight bill would have done), by a huge 3-to-1 margin.

    Another poll from pollster Kellyanne Conway recently showed that 80 percent of Americans think companies should hire from among the existing unemployed rather than bringing in new workers from abroad to fill these jobs. Yet Senate Democrats have unanimously supported legislation to double the annual supply of labor brought into the United States. These workers would be brought in to take jobs in every field, occupation, and industry in America.

    So what about the good, decent, and patriotic citizens of our country who fight our wars, who obey our laws, who follow our rules, and want a better future for their children? Should their needs not come first?

    As National Review explained, we are “a nation with an economy, not an economy with a nation.” We cannot put the parochial demands of a few powerful CEOs ahead of an entire nation’s hopes, dreams, and aspirations.

    The basic social contract is that citizens agree to follow the law, pay their taxes, and devote their love and loyalty to their country, and in exchange the nation commits to preserve and protect and serve their interests, safeguard their freedom, and return to them in kind their first allegiance and loyalty.

    The job of elected officials is to answer to the people who sent them to Washington — not to scorn them, not to demean them, not to mock them, and not to sell their jobs and dreams to the highest bidder.

    I yield the floor.

    Thanks for posting that. Cheers

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. Randal says:

    For those of us convinced that continuing mass Third World immigration is the major threat to our republic, with the malicious stoking of anti-white resentment as runner-up in the threat league, President Trump’s cabinet is anyway a tadpole: a huge and very important head attached to a not-very-consequential tail.

    As a foreigner, US foreign policy is my primary concern as far as Trump’s activities are concerned, though as someone who recognises the inherent commonalities between the British and American nations I would naturally want to see the US save itself from demographic suicide almost as much as I’d like my own nation to do so.

    Anyway, the election of Trump and prevention of the Clinton ascendancy has achieved its primary goals simply by happening, so I have no regrets there. It’s likely there will be some curtailment of R2P nonsense, and of the aggression against Russia, perhaps. However, there are two primary areas of groupthink idiocy within the US foreign policy establishment – on Russia and on Iran. While the Pompeo and Flynn appointments suggest that the former may now be less of a problem, they also suggest that the latter might come to replace it again as the main source of US regime blunders.

    Admittedly, it’s probably too much to hope for that sanity and rationality could prevail on both of the major disorders of reason afflicting the US elites at once, unless Trump can really come up trumps for the world and keep a tight lid on his subordinates’ unreason.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  22. You wrote correctly here…

    I wrote in We Are Doomed:

    The whole culture of professional educators is addled with chicanery, corruption, rent-seeking, time-serving, and lies … Reading through the literature of present-day ed biz, every time you think you’ve found an argument, assertion, or proposal than which nothing could possibly be dumber, something dumber soon shows up.

    I have since become much more negative. I have in fact progressed from being an education minimalist to an education nihilist. It’s all just a stupendous waste, to no purpose.

    You done messed up here though!…

    I’ll qualify my nihilism slightly. I’ll allow that up to about fourth or fifth grade, kids need to be sat at desks in rows under firm discipline and have the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic hammered into their silly heads.

    I’ve known kids as young as 3 or 4 who could read and understand English fluently with no formal training at all. The ones I’m aware of learned it from their older subs. As for math, kids as young as 3 can do pretty well at adding and subtracting and even understanding the concept of fractions.

    Institutionalized schooling is a dangerous farce and should never be referred to as “education.”

    A.J. Nock , in his, The Theory of Education in the United States, 1932, elaborates on Ernest Renan’s distinction between instruction and education and the book is well worth reading for that.

    An educated man must be in some sort instructed; but it is a mere non distributio medii to say that an instructed person must be an educated person.

    -A.J. Nock, the Theory of Education in the United States, 1932, pg 7

    Read More
    • LOL: Che Guava
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    Arrrgh! "Sibs," not "subs!"
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. @jacques sheete
    You wrote correctly here...

    I wrote in We Are Doomed:

    The whole culture of professional educators is addled with chicanery, corruption, rent-seeking, time-serving, and lies … Reading through the literature of present-day ed biz, every time you think you’ve found an argument, assertion, or proposal than which nothing could possibly be dumber, something dumber soon shows up.

    I have since become much more negative. I have in fact progressed from being an education minimalist to an education nihilist. It’s all just a stupendous waste, to no purpose.
     

    You done messed up here though!...

    I’ll qualify my nihilism slightly. I’ll allow that up to about fourth or fifth grade, kids need to be sat at desks in rows under firm discipline and have the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic hammered into their silly heads.
     
    I've known kids as young as 3 or 4 who could read and understand English fluently with no formal training at all. The ones I'm aware of learned it from their older subs. As for math, kids as young as 3 can do pretty well at adding and subtracting and even understanding the concept of fractions.

    Institutionalized schooling is a dangerous farce and should never be referred to as "education."

    A.J. Nock , in his, The Theory of Education in the United States, 1932, elaborates on Ernest Renan's distinction between instruction and education and the book is well worth reading for that.


    An educated man must be in some sort instructed; but it is a mere non distributio medii to say that an instructed person must be an educated person.

    -A.J. Nock, the Theory of Education in the United States, 1932, pg 7
     

    Arrrgh! “Sibs,” not “subs!”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  24. Miro23 says:

    Thanks to Carlton Meyer for the transcript of the important Jeff Sessions “Open Borders” Senate speech of September 10th 2014.

    The other side of the question is outsourcing.

    It’s bad form to publish whole articles so this is an extract of Andy Grove’s 2010 article “How America can Create Jobs” from VDare http://www.vdare.com/posts/andy-grove-rip with the whole article really being an essential read: http://www.openvms.org/http%3A//www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2010-07-01/andy-grove-how-america-can-create-jobs

    VDare: Andy Grove RIP

    The underlying problem isn’t simply lower Asian costs. It’s our own misplaced faith in the power of startups to create U.S. jobs. Americans love the idea of the guys in the garage inventing something that changes the world. New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman recently encapsulated this view in a piece called “Start-Ups, Not Bailouts.” His argument: Let tired old companies that do commodity manufacturing die if they have to. If Washington really wants to create jobs, he wrote, it should back startups.

    [MORE]

    Friedman is wrong. Startups are a wonderful thing, but they cannot by themselves increase tech employment. Equally important is what comes after that mythical moment of creation in the garage, as technology goes from prototype to mass production. This is the phase where companies scale up. They work out design details, figure out how to make things affordably, build factories, and hire people by the thousands. Scaling is hard work but necessary to make innovation matter.

    The scaling process is no longer happening in the U.S. And as long as that’s the case, plowing capital into young companies that build their factories elsewhere will continue to yield a bad return in terms of American jobs.

    Scaling used to work well in Silicon Valley. Entrepreneurs came up with an invention. Investors gave them money to build their business. If the founders and their investors were lucky, the company grew and had an initial public offering, which brought in money that financed further growth.

    I am fortunate to have lived through one such example. In 1968 two well-known technologists and their investor friends anted up $3 million to start Intel (INTC), making memory chips for the computer industry. From the beginning we had to figure out how to make our chips in volume. We had to build factories, hire, train, and retain employees, establish relationships with suppliers, and sort out a million other things before Intel could become a billion-dollar company. Three years later the company went public and grew to be one of the biggest technology companies in the world. By 1980, 10 years after our IPO, about 13,000 people worked for Intel in the U.S. …

    Today, manufacturing employment in the U.S. computer industry is about 166,000, lower than it was before the first PC, the MITS Altair 2800, was assembled in 1975 (figure-B). Meanwhile, a very effective computer manufacturing industry has emerged in Asia, employing about 1.5 million workers—factory employees, engineers, and managers. The largest of these companies is Hon Hai Precision Industry, also known as Foxconn. The company has grown at an astounding rate, first in Taiwan and later in China. Its revenues last year were $62 billion, larger than Apple (AAPL), Microsoft (MSFT), Dell (DELL), or Intel. Foxconn employs over 800,000 people, more than the combined worldwide head count of Apple, Dell, Microsoft, Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), Intel, and Sony (SNE) (figure-C).

    Until a recent spate of suicides at Foxconn’s giant factory complex in Shenzhen, China, few Americans had heard of the company. But most know the products it makes: computers for Dell and HP, Nokia (NOK) cell phones, Microsoft Xbox 360 consoles, Intel motherboards, and countless other familiar gadgets. Some 250,000 Foxconn employees in southern China produce Apple’s products. Apple, meanwhile, has about 25,000 employees in the U.S. That means for every Apple worker in the U.S. there are 10 people in China working on iMacs, iPods, and iPhones. The same roughly 10-to-1 relationship holds for Dell, disk-drive maker Seagate Technology (STX), and other U.S. tech companies.

    You could say, as many do, that shipping jobs overseas is no big deal because the high-value work—and much of the profits—remain in the U.S. That may well be so. But what kind of a society are we going to have if it consists of highly paid people doing high-value-added work—and masses of unemployed?

    Andy Grove, September 10th 2014. Full original article published by Bloomberg.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  25. Education is a crock. Federal supervision of education is just another layer of make-work bureaucracy—a fifth or sixth layer—of crock management.

    No, it isn’t.

    However, what yer calling education is really mass schooling and it’s perfectly valid to mock that crock.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. Truth says:

    last year, Governor Haley led the charge to eliminate the flag from public display, thereby ceding public policy to the whims of lunatics.

    I say, Old Boy, why does a Yank on the other side of the pond have any issue with me displaying my Union Jack above my Totty Bar?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  27. pyrrhus says:

    “I’ll qualify my nihilism slightly. I’ll allow that up to about fourth or fifth grade, kids need to be sat at desks in rows under firm discipline and have the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic hammered into their silly heads.”

    Not quite. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, most kids learned to read at home, often from the Bible, and were ready for more advanced work when, and if, they attended grammar schools. Those schools were often private with a modest fee, and they tolerated no discipline problems. This resulted in a far superior level of education, as one can readily see by looking at the exams from the period.
    Since the US got mandatory public education during the 1920s, literacy has been declining steadily, as Army testing has confirmed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bluedog
    Well perhaps but in the 19th century and the early 20th the kids were all in one room with the younger grades with the upper grades, and many if not most learned from being exposed to the upper grades so that their advancement was greater,today if I had children I would homeschool them and remove the indoctrination and propaganda that the school system has become.!!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Bugg says:

    You are being terribly unfair to you children. I’m sure both can ask “Dos cervezas, por favor”, or “Donde esta el cuatro de bano?” . Though 4 years of high school Spanish had little to do with that.

    Simply they do not support Trump, Lindsey Graham and John McCain should have their heads placed on spikes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. Bugg says:
    @Jim Christian
    I suspect Ash is referring to a possible re-ramp of the War On Weed. I'm curious to see if Obama waves The Pen on Schedule One status and gets weed off the Federal enforcement menu. All these weed-grows, labs and shops operate without banking support because they haven't removed weed from the Schedule. It was actually a big fat middle finger to the Feds that States allowed legal weed. You have scads of cash hidden everywhere in weed-legal states because Federal Reserve Banks aren't permitted to do business with "illegal" enterprises, the States-be-damned. Everyone in the industry is cash-and carry right down to the electric bill. Obama has ordered them to look the other way as regards the possession/manufacturing/selling (for now), but the banks aren't permitted to do business with weed enterprises. Being a nut, Sessions might easily turn the entire enterprise on its head in probably 25 States and we're talking tens of billions of dollars a month, maybe more, no one knows because it's all cash..

    As a member of the Choom Gang and a major consumer of Hawaiian buds in his youth (not to mention Obama has a daughter that has taken up the habit), I find it one of his larger hypocrisies not to have cleared this one up. Trump being an abstainer of all intoxicants might loose the Federal dogs on the States that legalized.

    DEA has never said weed was legal to them and Federal Law was never changed and so they'd LOVE for Trump to enforce once again. Hey, I like weed ok, but then, they do testing in my work in case of an accident, so I have to lay off the stuff, most people do. Also, the shit is so strong it paralyzes ya. Think 150-proof, except weed. Still and all, it is mostly a way to hassle the Blacks.

    IF Obama were to do that. Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds will have mass-produced pot cigs to market as soon as legally possible. They have the plans in place already since tobacco consumption drops every day. In a twisted way the quasi-nonenforcement situation right now works to the little guy pot producers’ and marketers’ benefit.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. bluedog says:
    @pyrrhus
    "I’ll qualify my nihilism slightly. I’ll allow that up to about fourth or fifth grade, kids need to be sat at desks in rows under firm discipline and have the basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic hammered into their silly heads."

    Not quite. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, most kids learned to read at home, often from the Bible, and were ready for more advanced work when, and if, they attended grammar schools. Those schools were often private with a modest fee, and they tolerated no discipline problems. This resulted in a far superior level of education, as one can readily see by looking at the exams from the period.
    Since the US got mandatory public education during the 1920s, literacy has been declining steadily, as Army testing has confirmed.

    Well perhaps but in the 19th century and the early 20th the kids were all in one room with the younger grades with the upper grades, and many if not most learned from being exposed to the upper grades so that their advancement was greater,today if I had children I would homeschool them and remove the indoctrination and propaganda that the school system has become.!!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. That pic of Trump at dinner in Palm Beach in suit and tie…. does he ever dress down in public? I mean, apart from taking his tie off.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    Henry's Cat:

    In the same vein, his youngest son Baron usually appears in a suit and tie. Not many times do you see a male of that age civilly dressed.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  32. Dan Hayes says:
    @Henry's Cat
    That pic of Trump at dinner in Palm Beach in suit and tie.... does he ever dress down in public? I mean, apart from taking his tie off.

    Henry’s Cat:

    In the same vein, his youngest son Baron usually appears in a suit and tie. Not many times do you see a male of that age civilly dressed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    If you really want to further our cause, then it’s time for economic voting:

    Stop discretionary spending until President Trump’s first month in office.
    You are taking away from the Obama-Hillary-Stein legacy with one hand and giving to the Trump with the other.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  34. @godfree roberts
    Having driven through SoCal hundreds of times over the past 45 years, I'd say it's in the best shape I've seen it since the 1980s. Whether this is due to the hardworking Latino population there, I cannot say.

    Dude, get out — meaning actually out of the car and off main drags — and look around more, especially at night. We have lived in LA 5 years and yes, the neighborhoods doing well are doing better than ever, more numerous and diverse restaurants than ever and decent jobs in those establishments, slightly improved train system, etc.

    Downtown LA (including the South Park area to the south) is absolutely booming with largely foreign-owned or foreign-financed hotel, apartment, and condo construction. It also still reeks of urine presents an almost national-high proportion of homeless hitting you up for money, more than occasionally getting intimidating or angry or belligerent or following you, camping on stretches that go block after block right near downtown. More mentally ill people, simply obnoxious pissed-off Africans, and hostile strange white lefties than you’ll see in almost any city in North America.

    Outside downtown, the neighborhoods that would be hostile and ultimately unsafe for you and me and our families, are VERY numerous, widespread, and getting worse if anything.

    The territory you need to stay away from in LA and environs is huge.

    We very much enjoy the rest of LA and the LA area, but please have no illusions about your long-term safety, health, or level of civilization here — pretty much anywhere outside the unaffordable neighborhoods.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    IMHO LA is a racial tinder box.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. OutWest says:
    @Jim Christian
    I suspect Ash is referring to a possible re-ramp of the War On Weed. I'm curious to see if Obama waves The Pen on Schedule One status and gets weed off the Federal enforcement menu. All these weed-grows, labs and shops operate without banking support because they haven't removed weed from the Schedule. It was actually a big fat middle finger to the Feds that States allowed legal weed. You have scads of cash hidden everywhere in weed-legal states because Federal Reserve Banks aren't permitted to do business with "illegal" enterprises, the States-be-damned. Everyone in the industry is cash-and carry right down to the electric bill. Obama has ordered them to look the other way as regards the possession/manufacturing/selling (for now), but the banks aren't permitted to do business with weed enterprises. Being a nut, Sessions might easily turn the entire enterprise on its head in probably 25 States and we're talking tens of billions of dollars a month, maybe more, no one knows because it's all cash..

    As a member of the Choom Gang and a major consumer of Hawaiian buds in his youth (not to mention Obama has a daughter that has taken up the habit), I find it one of his larger hypocrisies not to have cleared this one up. Trump being an abstainer of all intoxicants might loose the Federal dogs on the States that legalized.

    DEA has never said weed was legal to them and Federal Law was never changed and so they'd LOVE for Trump to enforce once again. Hey, I like weed ok, but then, they do testing in my work in case of an accident, so I have to lay off the stuff, most people do. Also, the shit is so strong it paralyzes ya. Think 150-proof, except weed. Still and all, it is mostly a way to hassle the Blacks.

    Since this works so well, I was thinking of starting a local referendum to opt out of the income tax.

    But as to the weed thing, by opting out the FDA is taken out of the picture. Lots of untested food products out there. As a cautionary comment, the FDA got some muscle back in the late 1930s when a drug company marketed tincture of sulfa. Trouble was that sulfa wouldn’t dissolve in ethanol. But ethylene glycol worked just fine. Killed lots of kids.

    How’s your state regarding FDA-style testing of medicines and foodstuffs?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    Massachusetts is Maxi-Mini. That is, maximum statutes, minimum competence/enforcement. They have in Ma. an extensive regimen for testing the Vapes/Nicotine solutions, yet nothing happened until the FDA got in on these nicotine brews. I don't see FDA doing anything about weed until such time as it comes off Schedule 1, they don't recognize weed as in need of analyzing for health/safety/pesticides or quality. Although, the Feds have grows down South, they surely understand varying quality. Massachusetts has had medial pot for years, but as to the actual weed, there have been no published limits or enforced standards. Clinics produce edibles that are so powerful, so THC-laced, that you're paralyzed. The only debate is whether they make them look too much like commercial confections.

    Here's a 30 second spot they ran during the election cycle against legalizing recreational pot: https://youtu.be/oycBIQ_aT78

    Meanwhile if you want to drink the raw, non-homogenized milk from old Bessie back in the barn, Massachusetts will be along to prohibit THAT. As for weed, the growers' pursuit of greater and greater levels of THC in a given amount of weed is likely to backfire. Right now, "better" is stronger. We'll see what FDA, State or Federal has to say about THAT someday. They're at the upper level of "quality" as it is. Weed is almost to strong to smoke absent a level of enormous tolerance.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. Wally says: • Website
    @godfree roberts
    Having driven through SoCal hundreds of times over the past 45 years, I'd say it's in the best shape I've seen it since the 1980s. Whether this is due to the hardworking Latino population there, I cannot say.

    “Driven through”? That’s it?

    Where did you drive through, Bel Air? Malibu?

    I have lived in LA for forty, count ‘em, forty years.
    I have seen nothing but the steady degradation of what was once a nice place to live.

    You like the 3rd world and all of the crime, violence, & rundown graffiti laced neighborhoods? Then SoCal is the place for you.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  37. @RadicalCenter
    Dude, get out -- meaning actually out of the car and off main drags -- and look around more, especially at night. We have lived in LA 5 years and yes, the neighborhoods doing well are doing better than ever, more numerous and diverse restaurants than ever and decent jobs in those establishments, slightly improved train system, etc.

    Downtown LA (including the South Park area to the south) is absolutely booming with largely foreign-owned or foreign-financed hotel, apartment, and condo construction. It also still reeks of urine presents an almost national-high proportion of homeless hitting you up for money, more than occasionally getting intimidating or angry or belligerent or following you, camping on stretches that go block after block right near downtown. More mentally ill people, simply obnoxious pissed-off Africans, and hostile strange white lefties than you'll see in almost any city in North America.

    Outside downtown, the neighborhoods that would be hostile and ultimately unsafe for you and me and our families, are VERY numerous, widespread, and getting worse if anything.

    The territory you need to stay away from in LA and environs is huge.

    We very much enjoy the rest of LA and the LA area, but please have no illusions about your long-term safety, health, or level of civilization here -- pretty much anywhere outside the unaffordable neighborhoods.

    IMHO LA is a racial tinder box.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @OutWest
    Since this works so well, I was thinking of starting a local referendum to opt out of the income tax.

    But as to the weed thing, by opting out the FDA is taken out of the picture. Lots of untested food products out there. As a cautionary comment, the FDA got some muscle back in the late 1930s when a drug company marketed tincture of sulfa. Trouble was that sulfa wouldn’t dissolve in ethanol. But ethylene glycol worked just fine. Killed lots of kids.

    How’s your state regarding FDA-style testing of medicines and foodstuffs?

    Massachusetts is Maxi-Mini. That is, maximum statutes, minimum competence/enforcement. They have in Ma. an extensive regimen for testing the Vapes/Nicotine solutions, yet nothing happened until the FDA got in on these nicotine brews. I don’t see FDA doing anything about weed until such time as it comes off Schedule 1, they don’t recognize weed as in need of analyzing for health/safety/pesticides or quality. Although, the Feds have grows down South, they surely understand varying quality. Massachusetts has had medial pot for years, but as to the actual weed, there have been no published limits or enforced standards. Clinics produce edibles that are so powerful, so THC-laced, that you’re paralyzed. The only debate is whether they make them look too much like commercial confections.

    Here’s a 30 second spot they ran during the election cycle against legalizing recreational pot: https://youtu.be/oycBIQ_aT78

    Meanwhile if you want to drink the raw, non-homogenized milk from old Bessie back in the barn, Massachusetts will be along to prohibit THAT. As for weed, the growers’ pursuit of greater and greater levels of THC in a given amount of weed is likely to backfire. Right now, “better” is stronger. We’ll see what FDA, State or Federal has to say about THAT someday. They’re at the upper level of “quality” as it is. Weed is almost to strong to smoke absent a level of enormous tolerance.

    Read More
    • Replies: @OutWest
    Also, they haven’t figured out just how to test for impaired-by-weed driving. The alcohol standard is arbitrary in that a fair percentile is not seriously impaired at the standard. This is probably the way to go.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. syonredux says:
    @E. A. Costa
    "Tadpole-headed"?

    At least 1066 & All That was funny.

    “Tadpole-headed”?

    At least 1066 & All That was funny.

    We live in a fallen world, dear boy. We must take our jests where we can find them….

    Sadly, I’m not at all sure that importing Mexican Mestizos will improve the comedy situation ( wit not being a Mexican virtue). On the other hand, they do make excellent butts of satire….

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jefferson
    "We live in a fallen world, dear boy. We must take our jests where we can find them….

    Sadly, I’m not at all sure that importing Mexican Mestizos will improve the comedy situation ( wit not being a Mexican virtue). On the other hand, they do make excellent butts of satire…."

    And the few Mexican stand up comedians in The U.S only talk about being Mexicany Mex Mex Mexican. Their entire stand up routine is about Mexican identity politics. That's all they got going for them. Mexican stand up comedians are 1 dimensional 1 trick ponies.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. OutWest says:
    @Jim Christian
    Massachusetts is Maxi-Mini. That is, maximum statutes, minimum competence/enforcement. They have in Ma. an extensive regimen for testing the Vapes/Nicotine solutions, yet nothing happened until the FDA got in on these nicotine brews. I don't see FDA doing anything about weed until such time as it comes off Schedule 1, they don't recognize weed as in need of analyzing for health/safety/pesticides or quality. Although, the Feds have grows down South, they surely understand varying quality. Massachusetts has had medial pot for years, but as to the actual weed, there have been no published limits or enforced standards. Clinics produce edibles that are so powerful, so THC-laced, that you're paralyzed. The only debate is whether they make them look too much like commercial confections.

    Here's a 30 second spot they ran during the election cycle against legalizing recreational pot: https://youtu.be/oycBIQ_aT78

    Meanwhile if you want to drink the raw, non-homogenized milk from old Bessie back in the barn, Massachusetts will be along to prohibit THAT. As for weed, the growers' pursuit of greater and greater levels of THC in a given amount of weed is likely to backfire. Right now, "better" is stronger. We'll see what FDA, State or Federal has to say about THAT someday. They're at the upper level of "quality" as it is. Weed is almost to strong to smoke absent a level of enormous tolerance.

    Also, they haven’t figured out just how to test for impaired-by-weed driving. The alcohol standard is arbitrary in that a fair percentile is not seriously impaired at the standard. This is probably the way to go.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    http://www.cannabixtechnologies.com/

    Cannabix is a breath tester they're going to initially settle on here in Ma, at least in my town. The Staties in Ma. are studying it. There are several devices, I suspect more will follow.
    , @dahoit
    I've been driving stoned for 50 years,all my buddies and acquaintances,and I know of not one accident caused by marijuana.
    Alcohol and drug use in combination yes,but alone marijuana does not affect driving skills,although if one is a public service driver,or engineer,caution of course should take precedent.
    Weed from the night before,when you no longer feel it,is in the bloodstream,and there for a month,hence the problem of control,but which is a tempest in a teapot,as again it doesn't effect driving,if it did,America would be one big pileup,coast to coast.
    I did pause at a stop sign for a minute once though,the shite was good.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. No_0ne says:
    @godfree roberts
    Having driven through SoCal hundreds of times over the past 45 years, I'd say it's in the best shape I've seen it since the 1980s. Whether this is due to the hardworking Latino population there, I cannot say.

    Great parody of an oblivious leftist, unable to see the real world, only the narrative. Kudos.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. Jefferson says:
    @syonredux

    “Tadpole-headed”?

    At least 1066 & All That was funny.
     

    We live in a fallen world, dear boy. We must take our jests where we can find them....

    Sadly, I'm not at all sure that importing Mexican Mestizos will improve the comedy situation ( wit not being a Mexican virtue). On the other hand, they do make excellent butts of satire....

    “We live in a fallen world, dear boy. We must take our jests where we can find them….

    Sadly, I’m not at all sure that importing Mexican Mestizos will improve the comedy situation ( wit not being a Mexican virtue). On the other hand, they do make excellent butts of satire….”

    And the few Mexican stand up comedians in The U.S only talk about being Mexicany Mex Mex Mexican. Their entire stand up routine is about Mexican identity politics. That’s all they got going for them. Mexican stand up comedians are 1 dimensional 1 trick ponies.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. @OutWest
    Also, they haven’t figured out just how to test for impaired-by-weed driving. The alcohol standard is arbitrary in that a fair percentile is not seriously impaired at the standard. This is probably the way to go.

    http://www.cannabixtechnologies.com/

    Cannabix is a breath tester they’re going to initially settle on here in Ma, at least in my town. The Staties in Ma. are studying it. There are several devices, I suspect more will follow.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. dahoit says:
    @Jim Christian
    I suspect Ash is referring to a possible re-ramp of the War On Weed. I'm curious to see if Obama waves The Pen on Schedule One status and gets weed off the Federal enforcement menu. All these weed-grows, labs and shops operate without banking support because they haven't removed weed from the Schedule. It was actually a big fat middle finger to the Feds that States allowed legal weed. You have scads of cash hidden everywhere in weed-legal states because Federal Reserve Banks aren't permitted to do business with "illegal" enterprises, the States-be-damned. Everyone in the industry is cash-and carry right down to the electric bill. Obama has ordered them to look the other way as regards the possession/manufacturing/selling (for now), but the banks aren't permitted to do business with weed enterprises. Being a nut, Sessions might easily turn the entire enterprise on its head in probably 25 States and we're talking tens of billions of dollars a month, maybe more, no one knows because it's all cash..

    As a member of the Choom Gang and a major consumer of Hawaiian buds in his youth (not to mention Obama has a daughter that has taken up the habit), I find it one of his larger hypocrisies not to have cleared this one up. Trump being an abstainer of all intoxicants might loose the Federal dogs on the States that legalized.

    DEA has never said weed was legal to them and Federal Law was never changed and so they'd LOVE for Trump to enforce once again. Hey, I like weed ok, but then, they do testing in my work in case of an accident, so I have to lay off the stuff, most people do. Also, the shit is so strong it paralyzes ya. Think 150-proof, except weed. Still and all, it is mostly a way to hassle the Blacks.

    Marijuana is a wonder drug,which should be legalized immediately.
    And no,there is no weed that paralyzes one,as I’ve been searching wo success for it for 50 years.:)It’s possible a non regular imbiber might get a little numb from some good shite though.
    As far as work debilitation,it depends on the job,don’t try to do your bills post toke,but motor skills are sometimes heightened,as you dig your work.
    Alcohol sucks,comparatively,but each to their own.
    And yes,there are billions floating underground from weed,its Americas largest cash crop,24-7-365.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. dahoit says:
    @OutWest
    Also, they haven’t figured out just how to test for impaired-by-weed driving. The alcohol standard is arbitrary in that a fair percentile is not seriously impaired at the standard. This is probably the way to go.

    I’ve been driving stoned for 50 years,all my buddies and acquaintances,and I know of not one accident caused by marijuana.
    Alcohol and drug use in combination yes,but alone marijuana does not affect driving skills,although if one is a public service driver,or engineer,caution of course should take precedent.
    Weed from the night before,when you no longer feel it,is in the bloodstream,and there for a month,hence the problem of control,but which is a tempest in a teapot,as again it doesn’t effect driving,if it did,America would be one big pileup,coast to coast.
    I did pause at a stop sign for a minute once though,the shite was good.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  46. […] looking for a piece I seemed to remember  in which John, a prolific internet presence,  advocates abolishing public education, I came across his overall diagnosis of schooling in America, well worth reading and a marvel of […]

    Read More
  47. […] looking for a piece I seemed to remember  in which John, a prolific internet presence,  advocates abolishing public education, I came across his overall diagnosis of schooling in America, well worth reading and a marvel of […]

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All John Derbyshire Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Limbaugh and company certainly entertain. But a steady diet of ideological comfort food is no substitute for hearty intellectual fare.
Once as a colonial project, now as a moral playground, the ancient continent remains the object of Great Power maneuvering