What the United States owes first and foremost is a living wage for their own
citizens. With the unemployment rate so high (and much higher than computed
statistics given by the Labor Department), this is a recipe for utter disaster
for our citizens. Try being mid-50's and being thrown out of work in the
recession--no one is going to hire you, and you're too young for Social
Security. Americans needs to take care of their own, and then export their
successful methods to other countries.Brigham Young had it
right--the mark of a moral businessman is that first and foremost he is focused
on creating as many jobs as possible that will pay a living wage. (The wealth
part, said BY, would come of its own, but then would be reinvested in creating
even more living wage jobs.) How much better it would be for Haiti to have such
moral businessmen and make good use of the talents of Haitians, rather than
exporting them to a country that itself does not create enough jobs and has too
few moral businessmen.
“The truth is, rich people in developing countries are much poorer than
the poor in rich countries,” said Pritchett.That certainly
explains Carlos Slim.
He was talking about increasing visas, not guest workers. Guest workers are
subsidized by the taxpayers, visa workers are paid for mostly by the business.
This is how it should be. There are a few visas that allow family to come here,
with nothing to return home for; it's easy to understand why so many stay
here. With 4.3 million visa and green card workers, I think we do
more than our fair share, especially when we have over 23 million Americans
looking for full time work.Experience has shown us that our
government can't run a visa program, and assure the American people that
they do return home. Millions are here right now illegally on overstayed visas.
I served a mission in Brazil. Many people over there looked at me as a rockstar
just because I was American. Many told me how lucky I was to live in such a
great country. Fast forward 10 years, Brazil is on the rise, though
contrary to what many people may think they are way behind the U.S. in many
areas. The north is very poor with mud and straw houses, outhouses, and people
that can barely eat day to day. I have always been very patriotic and had it not
been for wanting to serve an LDS mission, I would have joined the Army or
Marines. I have never, however, been more nervous about my country. The debt
just keeps piling up, Obama Care and other government shenanigans are not
helping either. We always prided ourselves on being a free country with so much
opportunity. Instead the rich get taxed heavily, the lazy get paid
to sit at home at watch tv. As a country, we have a lot of issues to resolve.
Hoping this country can rise back to greatness!
Mr. Pritchett is an ultra liberal, open door spokesman for cheap labor for
business. Instead of helping countries lift themselves up, he wants to drive
down developed countries middle class and poor. A one world order of rich and a
surplus of labor. I have friends in Thailand that drive $70,000
cars, and they are upper middle class. Eastern Europe? Middle class IT workers
get 4 two week paid vacations a year. The idea that America's poor live
like multimillionaires in third world countries is ludicrous. I'm sad to see this tpe of speaker at Sundance. We expect liberal, but
not over the cliff. To far to the left, or to far to the right, you end up in
the same place.
It does strike me as odd that the theme of his thesis is let unskilled workers
come to idustrialized nations to work for short periods of time..but then says
that indusrialized nations have systematicly eliminated unskilled jobs because
of their costs leaveing millions of native citizens unemployed because they have
no skills and there are no, no skills jobs..How does this help?
I thought people were poor because they are all lazy and unmotivated, prefer to
live on welfate to employment and don't know how to shop for groceries.
Tell me it's not true.
So how do we get the rule of law and effective governance into the countries
that don't have them? Anarchy does not allow for an environment of growth,
as Somalia has demonstrated. Those countries with 'more government'
(when fairer) such as the Nordic countries, don't seem to be doing too
badly these days.
Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what THIS country can do for you.
Samhill's comment was the best comment on here.
Let's look at this:1. Productive economy: A culture of people who are
industrious, learned and not idle2. A government that is responsive
to the citizens: A culture where government service is focused on service.3. A capable bureaucracy: A culture where things are done with order and
fairness.4. Rule of law: A culture where they are taught correct
principles and they live by them.Sounds like a rightous nation to
me.Maybe we should be teaching rightousness and not what's in it for
Where would all of our teens work if every job at McDonald's is taken by a
poor immigrant? It's bad enough already...it would only get worse.
The guy is right. Having lived in a country where "guest workers" were
a VERY common thing, I can say he is right, in most of his ideas. The one
problem that he didn't address, is what happens when the native people that
used to do those lo end jobs can no longer get those jobs? The answer I saw
was, you get more welfare recipients.And it isn't the guest
workers who are the problem in regards to them not going home...it is the
businesses willing to keep paying them illegally. If they weren't getting
paid, they would be happy to go home to their families and flash a little of the
cash they have built up...assuming they haven't become dumb consumers like
most Americans, and spent all their money already.
The socks were probably an anniversary gift from his wife and the only true
comments made in this speech were pretty obvious. As for the rest
what would an erstwhile "World Bank economist say"? I suspect the
answer is: things favorable to an elite world banking coterie - who, as far as I
know, produce nothing but inflatable paper that ultimately creates problems for
honest working people everywhere.
Right now, someone is feeling really proud and honored to be a poor person in
America rather than a poor person in Haiti. They are also feeling that--if they
moved to Haiti, their own natural talents would make them a rich person and
their 8.50 an hour would translate to them being an upper class snob in Port Au
Prince. They are also, at this moment--penning a letter of appreciation to the
head of the corporation for which they work and offering to clean their boots in
thanks for allowing them to be poor in an 8.50 nation, rather than an eighty
cent an hour nation.
A person making 8.50 and hour pays no federal income tax. Citizen or not.
Don't believe the nay-sayers. Having more guest workers actually increases
wages in the communities that receive them. They and their families actually
use fewer government services than U.S. citizens do.Guest workers
create more jobs than they take. They and their families are consumers who
spend money and pay taxes. Workers need supervisors, payroll secretaries, and
other staff from among the local natives. Check the studies and learn.There are thousands of jobs around here that remain unfilled--and I'm
just talking about the listed jobs. Why list positions you can't fill?The benefits of increased labor mobility go beyond dollars. The bonds
among us and countries that send workers would strengthen. Direct contact with
"foreign" people would overcome prejudice. They and their families
would come to appreciate American values and become less vulnerable to
anti-American propaganda.Sharing the wealth grows the wealth,
especially when done the American way.
It's a great idea but the problem is people wouldn't return after 3
years. And the unemployment rate is currently too high to support it. That was an excellent point about automation taking the unskilled jobs away
"Pritchett insists on the temporary nature of the [guest-worker]
visas."Yeah, well, good luck with that.You're
an ambitious Third World guest worker whose visa just ran out. Do you (a)
meekly go back to your Third World crudhole, or (b) keep living the much better
life that even an illegal alien enjoys in America?Does the
government go out of its way to find and deport you? When doing so is going to
be called cruel, heartless and "extreme," and every Democratic
politician is secretly happy to have you as another reliably-voting client for
his welfare state?
I was expecting him to say, the reason they are poor is because they are content
being poor. then to persuade us we are wrong for wanting something better.
Having lived in poor countries for 7 1/2 years, some of those countries have
actually outsourced a lot of our jobs because they speak English pretty fluently
and understand our laws and order for at least 100 years in their society. As
Mr. Pritchett may have done a study, he needs to have lived in some of the
countries to know first-hand what it is like to be there and experience the
everyday occurrences in the citizen's lives. You cannot have them
wholeheartedly come to our country and to many countries wholesale. The brain
drain from those countries is large enough even without a lot of visas to come
and work here in the United States of America. Many European and other western
type of countries have their own immigration problem. I remember living in
Germany, our apartment building was filled 40 years ago with people from
Mediterranean countries doing jobs as many from Mexico and other Latin American
countries are doing in the USA now.Good article but is only one
point of view and somewhat restrictive.
This resonates with what I have long believed about poverty--which is that the
general level of poverty in a country is more a function of politics than of
@boris"If simple logic brings you to a conclusion that somebody
that has studies something for so long and so carefully is wrong you should
probably consider that maybe you are not grasping the concept...but your simple
logic shows that you simply don't understand."Having worked
in the tech industry for the past 20 years, I have first-hand experience that
guest worker programs indeed can do much damage to the host nation. I have seen
how H-1B visas have decimated tens of thousands of US tech worker careers,
lowered their wages, and ultimately is the main reason that so many US college
students avoid these careers, thus making the US even less self-reliant in
technology. 2/3 of US tech workers are out of the industry in only 10
years!!!I do not support eliminating guest worker programs - I
support the wise use of them, which is rarely done. Lane Pritchett's
opinion is ONE opinion. I am not naive enough to think it is the ONLY valid
opinion.Many "world bank" types support massive open borders
immigration and one-world government sovereignty-destroying agreements such as
NAFTA, FTAA, etc. No thank you.
Liberal Ted..... what 3rd world nation did you go to where most people were
college educated? I do business globally a lot, and I haven't run into
such a place yet..... where were you?SME - by definition, the
speaker was talking about work permits, not green cards per se. With a work
permit, if you don't have a employer sponsor, you must go home. There is
no taking advantage of the system without working in a work permit program....and what in the heck does the IRS have to do with any of this? If
you pay your taxes, the IRS isn't a problem.... so this has what to do with
3rd wold nation poverty?THere is a good deal of truth in this. I
do disagree with the education claims though. An educated citizenry will not
accept corruption to the level an uneducated population will. You see
restricting education as a main tool to control a population in places such as
the middle east. You don't want people expecting more than thay already
have. But overall, I agree with most of what was said.
@Midway He never suggests all 3 billion poor people come and work. In fact,
its important that they don't. I family member can come as a guest worker
and provide for his/her family at home and make significant savings at the same
time which will change the future of many people upon return. On that same
point, the increased income that returns to the nation will increase its
standard of leaving not decrease it.If simple logic brings you to a
conclusion that somebody that has studies something for so long and so carefully
is wrong you should probably consider that maybe you are not grasping the
concept. I'm not saying that there may not be some reasonable arguments
against what is being proposed but your simple logic shows that you simply
I suppose the assumption is when people have money, they will invest and use it
wisely and know how to grow their money.I suppose not only will we
need to bring in unskilled labor and pay higher minimum wage to them. Then
we'll need to send them to finance classes. But when that fails, then the
government will need to take their wages and re-distribute it to them. Since
people are incapable of handling their own personal finances.I get
what he is saying, but, money management is a big problem at any income level.
You could win the lottery and have $150 million in your pocket. And find in a
year time that your broke and more destitute.Having lived in a third
world country. Most people I talked with were college graduates with engineering
degrees. High skilled, no job. People complained about how small their homes
were. The only thing to increase the size of the home was for them to spend a
few hours and weave nipa together. Which they were unwilling. Corruptness was
also a big problem in the government and the main church. You were wealthy if
you got into bed with oneofthem
The following four slightly edited sentences seem to sum up this article: - "Haitians [people] are poor because they live in a society
that..." - "... [does NOT have] a productive economy, a
government that is responsive to the citizens, a capable bureaucracy, and the
rule of law." - "Until a country develops institutions that
make productive work possible, its people will remain poor..." -
"The best way to help the poor is to let them work in industrialized
nations."I happen to agree with all of the above...with the
caveat that helping the poor by letting "them work in industrialized
nations" **must** conform to the four conditions of the 2nd sentence within
the "industrialized nation".Allowing people into our or any
other developed country without regard to those conditions simply ensures that
the developed country eventually reverts to being similar to the place the poor
are trying to escape.No solution there.
"The best way to help the poor is to let them work in industrialized
nations."Given that the poor in poor nations are around 3
billion in number, and increases by a whopping 80 million or so every year, this
is hardly a logistical possibility. Not to mention that it will lower the
standard of living in the industrial nations. The only thing keeping the USA
from becoming a third-world nation of poverty itself is its limits to
immigration and guest workers.I know, my thoughts are not popular,
especially for the left-wingers. But think about it. There are 3 billion or more
poor people in the world. Allowing unlimited guest workers into the USA to
reduce poverty will only do a drop in the bucket to alleviate the 3 billion
poor, and will obviously send the US middle class into poverty. It is simple
So the four things every developed country needs is "productive economy, a
government that is responsive to the citizens, a capable bureaucracy, and the
rule of law."Boy is the US in trouble, or what????
The IRS has created more poverty in America than health problems. We need a
government program to control the IRS, instead we get Obamacare which gives the
IRS more power over our lives and will generate even more poverty!
Lant Pritchett has some interesting ideas, it is rare that an academic actually
looks at teh results of "international communities" actions to see if
their policies have the results desired/predicted. I'm not sure that
allowing large numbers of unskilled laborers into a welfare state is a good idea
though. Our welfare systems will provide them with a living far beyond what they
have in their native countries, so why work? It will be much easier to live on
our welfare after they arrive.