Promote to whom? Everyone is located in another city and already has a job you said. I'm confused :(

-Rudey
--Governments have a choice in what contractors they hire, contractors have a choice in what workers they use, and Americans have the liberty to apply to those jobs.

That wasn't the type of conversation I was referring to.

Rudey, you're a smart guy. You're pretending to be dense about this to get a rise out of me. But I'll play along and spell it out for you a bit more...

Most of the legal American workers who work in the fields that are needed most in NO (mostly construction) are happy where they are. Guys up here in Atlanta aren't going to drop what they're doing and head down there for $10, 12 or $15 an hour (which is quoted in the article as being the going rate for the illegal workers) because they're already making that here. There's no incentive for them to make the move.

My point is that the companies in NO could up the pay to attract legal, skilled construction workers. Or they could offer training to unskilled people in the area who are interested in working. They could send a flyer or a recruiter to local colleges and offer training and sign-on bonuses for Christmas and spring break temporary workers. There are alternatives.

ETA: I'm not saying that it's easy to find people to work. Many of the evacuees have decided not to return to the city, which definitely presents a problem for local companies who were counting on them to keep their businesses going. However, I don't buy the argument that illegal workers only take the jobs that Americans won't do. Americans WILL do the jobs. They just tend to expect a bit more in terms of compensation than an illegal person who is excited to get whatever he/she can.

At one point you say the workers aren't American in NO because the Americans already have jobs and live somewhere else.

Later you admit, that the workers can exist outside of a group where they all have jobs and outside of other cities

And your ideas on attracting local talent into the construction biz are great, but I have a couple questions. What city in Mexico has trained their citizens to work in construction and then to leave to be an illegal immigrant? Do the illegal immigrants find their jobs through flyers and recruiters at colleges in Cancun?

-Rudey
--We don't know each other well enough for me to want to get a rise out of you btw.

Would you care to estimate the cost difference with your options? I'm guessing . . . it's massive.

Max's continuation of this point doesn't hold, b/c of the implicit difference between skilled labor, unskilled labor, and skilled white collar work.

You should buy the argument that Americans won't do the jobs, since you made it yourself - they won't leave their jobs in ATL to take those jobs in NO, as you pointed out. Expecting more in the way of compensation is a clever way to burn the candle at both ends - regardless of the reason, they are still not accepting the job as posed. They will, however, accept different circumstances - fantastic, that's not accepting the job.

At some point, you'll have to face the fact that American commerce in certain fields and areas relies upon illegal labor - and the money to rectify that situation with your 'solutions' has to come from somewhere . . . so let me know where, and I'll go along with your ideas.

LOL -- Rudey, you exist on this board to get a rise out of people. It's your whole GC purpose. ;)

I thought it was to flirt with gorgeous girls like you ;)

-Rudey

This isn't a regular, run-of-the-mill job, though. It's the rebuilding of a city after a major catastrophe. Desperate times call for desperate measures, and that includes paying people more money to get things done. I know some folks will argue that "desperate measures" should include illegal immigrants, but I disagree.

The government isn't helping to deter the companies from hiring illegal immigrants in NO, either. After Katrina, President Bush suspended the Davis-Bacon Act (a law that requires construction workers to be paid the prevailing regional wage) in an attempt to speed up reconstruction. Also, the Department of Homeland Security has temporarily stopped going after employers who hire workers with no proof of citizenship. This sends a very clear message that the government is condoning the use of illegals in the rebuilding process. Basically, they don't care how it gets done as long as it does, in fact, get done.

Until we as a country start enforcing our immigration laws, many companies are going to continue hiring illegals because they know that they can pay them less than a legal worker. That does nothing but encourage more illegals to come to the USA. I don't blame them for wanting to come over here -- I can sympathize with the fact that they want better lives for themselves and their families. But it's still illegal, and I don't like it. I'm sorry if that offends someone, but it's how I feel.

That's just your side gig. :D

Meow! Don't get feisty now. :)

-Rudey

Wrong douchbag. I am comparing legal vs illegal not skilled vs unskilled.

Since you brought it up, there is plenty of skilled labor in foreign countries. The Dept of Labor estimates millions of white collar jobs will be offshored in the next decade. We are talking about jobs in banking, law, engineering, accounting, information technology and architecture.

IBM can hire a MIT grads living in China for about a quarter of what they pay employees living in the US.

What do you do for a living? Since you are in favor of a free market, should your customers/employer be able to hire illegal aliens who can do your job for a fraction of what they are paying you? If your answer is "no" then go back to the first sentence.

I'm not chocolate
 

Willy Nagin and the Chocolate Factory what will they think of next?

http://imnotchocolate.com/index.html

Well, like isn' t the history of New Orleans such that back during the War of 1812, the US fought the Spanish for that area?

So maybe, this is just their way of getting New Orleans back...

I'm just saying...

What is Creole anyway?

Wouldn't Manifest Destiny come into play here?

Just asking?

I meant when you cracked on Rudey, killer - chill the fuck out.

What's your point? They can also hire MIT grads living in Montana for less than those living in Boston or Manhattan - these jobs being moved offshore is a reasonable end result of a global market. In the end, consumers will decide with their wallets - would you prefer some other method?

How does this apply to illegal aliens, too? Really - I can see being against using illegal labor, but outsourcing is completely different.

I work in fairly specialized consulting, and that consulting is directly specialized to the US, so I may not be the best example.

What you're asking for is different, though - whether or not they should be allowed is a matter of law.

What I'm saying is that the solutions for hiring illegal labor (pay more!!1) are generally inbred with the reason WHY people are using illegal labor to start. If you want to enforce labor laws, go nuts - but why blame companies for using 'cheap' unskilled/partially skilled labor, when others aren't taking those positions (esp when gov't regs have been temporarily repealed)?

If my company can hire someone cheaper to do my job at an equivalent level, it would be suicide to keep me unless I provide something tangible to justify my extra cost - unless you think charity is a reasonable reason to be in business?

That's not just a post-Katrina thing. In 2004, there were (even more) illegal immigrants in Florida helping out after the hurricanes. You couldn't see a roof-repair job without seeing a ton of Mexican or Guatemalan workers. It's next to impossible to get established workers down to a post-disaster area without giving major incentives. A company will probably just hire a ton of illegals who they don't have to pay for vacation, sick time, insurance, etc.

Illegal immigration is basically how certain industries--construction and hospitality come to mind--are able to make a profit.