Re: Las Vegas: Don't Feed the Homeless
Welcome to the dark side of American liberalism. Have you read the Op-Ed by Dukakis and Mitchell
, the one where they advertize the minimum wage as a deliberate policy for pricing Mexicans out of the labor market? You may be surprised that Democrats don't really give a shît about poor people. I'm not.
I did actually read that, and I was ready to post excerpts from that article here somewhere. I think they make a great point. Illegal immigrants working for hunger wages don't "take the jobs Americans dont want" - they take the jobs Americans dont want at a hunger wage
. To point out that obvious elephant in the room is a good and important thing.
You say that their perspective proves that "Democrats don't really give a shît about poor people". Thats two fallacies in one. First off, Dukakis has suddenly morphed into the "Democrats". I didnt know that he spoke for them. Secondly - a disgust at employers dodging the law and legal labour relations in order to pay people hunger wages doesnt sound like "not giving a **** about poor people" to me. It sounds like opposing the attempts by business to trigger or further a downwards cycle in wages and labour conditions, to squeeze those who already earn the least ever more to max their profits.
The West, too, had immense and painful poverty just seventy, ninety, a hundred years ago. That poverty was eradicated or at least reduced by a decades-long struggle to, one step at a time, put in place decent working wages, decent labour conditions, some employer responsibility for health and disability. Those employers, out of logical business interest, will do what they can to erode that progress - and illegal immigration provides them with the perfect tool. But doing away - or letting employers get away with dodging - those long-fought for defences against structural poverty may benefit individual illegal immigrants in the short term - but in the end victimises everyone. Those immigrants will want their children to benefit from reasonable institutional protections against workplace abuse and exploitation too - so its not necessarily in their interest to let businesses get away with destroying them either.
Basically, I dont buy the alternate narrative (the one you are implying?). That allowing business to hire illegal immigrants at illegal, far-below minimum wages is in actuality a social
kind of thing, a redistributive thing - because those illegal immigrants were poorer than the American poor, and the begging wages they work for in the US still make them richer than they were back home. I dont think that allowing business to take away from America's poorest to give to illegal immigrant poor is what it really means to "give a shît about poor people" - that's some sick Robin Hood there. In the old days we would have just called it for what it is - playing the poor off against each other, and the rich smile. Good for Dukakis cs to speak up about it.
Meanwhile, none of that has anything to do with happened in Las Vegas. As you very articulately pointed out in your preceding post, this story is not about whether the state should provide for its people, legal or illegal - its about government actually forbidding individual people to help each other
. As you pointed out, that is a wholly different ballgame, and an unambiguously outrageous one.