^ Still hyperbole, worrying about all these jobs that will apparently devastate our economy somehow if we are to follow the law. And by this I can see what it takes to get you to unburden yourself from the Neo-Liberal Fantasy delusion: "There also is the question of what kind of pay one would have to offer to induce Americans to work many of these jobs and how inflationary the result would be." Right, how much is it to get legal citizens to the job we can pay foreigners sub-living wages to do for us? I really find it difficult to see how you guys fail to see wage slavery for what it is---still treating people as subhuman. This is a prime example.
My father used to own an apartment building. Three-quarters of the residents were Mexicans earning "sub-living wages". But on those wages they managed to feed kids, pay the rent, send dollars to relatives in Mexico, buy powerful stereos to blast out Hispanic hits, drink on the weekends, and own vehicles.
I think a problem here is what Americans consider a "living wage". The figure is plainly higher than what's indicated by reality, because immigrants across Oregon -- legal and illegal -- are managing to live on those "sub-living wages" quite well. My suspicion is that Americans have gotten so accustomed to having things convenient and easy that they've gotten lazy and don't pay attention to what they spend; they are undisciplined and incompetent with regard to finances and budgeting.
As for shipping jobs overseas, the wages paid by corporations such as Nike look degrading to us, but invariably those wages make the employees almost wealthy compared to their peers in those countries. Were U.S.-based corporations to pay U.S.-standard wages overseas, one result would be local inflation, driving the economic bottom-of-the-rung populace farther down into poverty.
Government does not help; it contributes to the problem, making a "living wage" artificially high due to piles and tangles of regulation, from zoning to building codes and beyond. In the Pacific Northwest, the cost of a home is inflated by roughly 20% due to inspections, permits, and other paperwork; second-hand houses are frequently priced out of range of any but the upper middle-class by regulations that require upgrading to existing codes before a sale can be approved (a fact I've made good money from, occasionally). But each upgrade raises the value of a house, not infrequently as much as doubling; ripple effect raises the value of neighboring homes, raising taxes in turn, and for a minority of homeowners that means being unable to get by -- or to upgrade their houses so they can move. They are forced to pull back on their lifestyle, but rarely manage to learn what the Mexicans know; indeed, if they are retirees, they are often cornered into selling their homes below value, with the sale price reduced by the amount needed to upgrade to existing codes.
Of course the Mexicans are often living in "substandard" housing, though to them that housing is a giant step up from what they had in Mexico, both in quality and square footage -- I recall a family with two parents, a grandmother, two uncles (brother of wife, brother of husband), and six kids marveling at the "magnificence" of an apartment with but two bedrooms, a small bathroom, a tiny kitchen, and a living room, that in terms of code was barely up to 1960s standards. They were thrilled at their step up in the world, instead of believing they were owed the latest thing(s).
Maybe if we were willing to settle for things besides the latest and best, and go with better-than-before, this economic tangle would melt away.
