If I hear one more politician - Republican
or Democrat - blather on about the "jobs that Americas won't do," as if this sound byte were some sort of natural truism that couldn't possibly be disputed, I believe I may become apoplectic.
The working standard here, of course, is that one man's trash is another man's treasure -- that the shit jobs that are "beneath" Americans are absolutely fine for the formerly oppressed, poverty-stricken, opportunity-starved immigrants with lower standards and expectations.
We've heard the "jobs American's won't do" argument from both ends of the political spectrum, from George Bush to Bill Clinton. It is the oft-repeated talking point in the immigration debate and one of the core justifications for amnesty. Our economy, the theory goes, would be on fast(er) track to hell if not for the immigrants - illegal or otherwise - who so graciously perform the most menial, tedious and unrewarding of occupational tasks.
Let's deconstruct this myth in 3 easy truths.
1. The mere presence of the immigrants suppresses compensation for these jobs, which is why Americans can't do them.
Call it the self-fulfilling prophecy of the human labor force. As Mark Krikorian writes at the National Review:
If the supply of foreign workers were to dry up (say, through actually enforcing the immigration law, for starters), employers would respond to this new, tighter, labor market in two ways. One, they would offer higher wages, increased benefits, and improved working conditions, so as to recruit and retain people from the remaining pool of workers. At the same time, the same employers would look for ways to eliminate some of the jobs they now are having trouble filling. The result would be a new equilibrium, with blue-collar workers making somewhat better money, but each one of those workers being more productive.
Or, more simply, the shit jobs are shit because the immigrants allow them to be shit - not because they are just inherently shitty.
John Dougherty at News Max writes:
The big lie in this jobs-for-illegals debate is the contention Congress must approve such a program to ensure all the jobs Americans won't do still get done. As I document in my new book, "Illegals: The Imminent Threat Posed by Our Unsecured U.S.-Mexico Border," such jobs exist, but only because the open borders crowd has created them. If we open the door to more illegal workers, wages will only decrease further.
SAY IT WITH ME: Illegal immigrants are actually BAD for the U.S. economy, not good. Unless by "U.S. Economy," you mean "CEOs," which leads to truth #2...
2. The money that Corporate America saves by suppressing wages goes right into the pockets of the CEOs.
If your response to #1 above is "No, you idiot, there isn't enough money in those jobs to meet American pay standards," think again.
Let's just look at three immigrant-heavy industries: hospitality, construction and agriculture. All of the following info is from the AFL/CIO's Executive Pay Watch database, which is nothing short of fascinating if you have the stomach to browse through it.
Hospitality:
J.W. Marriott, CEO of Marriott International, made over $8,000,000 in 2004.
Stephen Bollenbach, CEO of Hilton Hotels, only made $3,400,000 or so. Thankfully, he had cashed in nearly $26,000,000 in stock options just a year earlier.
Or check this out:
In 2004, Barry S. Sternlicht raked in $32,965,589 in total compensation including stock option grants from Starwood Hotels & Resorts.
From previous years' stock option grants, the Starwood Hotels & Resorts executive cashed out $17,570,934 in stock option exercises.
And Barry S. Sternlicht has another $232,965,790 in unexercised stock options from previous years.
Just for a little perspective, Barry's unexercised stock options alone would be enough to double the hourly pay rate of 22,000 minimum wage workers - from $5.15 to $10.30 and hour - for a fucking year!
If your eyes didn't bulge out of your head just now, you didn't read it right.
Construction:
Robert Mellor, CEO of Building Materials Holding Group, made nearly $4.5 million last year. John Landon, CEO of Meritage Homes, got $6.6 million, and has $38,000,000+ in unexercised stock options in his portfolio. Richard Dugas of Pulte Homes -- $18,000,000.
So clearly, some Americans do very well in the construction business, thank you very much.
Agriculture:
Corporate Farming has put the family farm on the endangered species list, and CEOs everywhere are "reaping" the benefits of immigrant labor.
Bruce Rohde, CEO of ConAgra Foods, pocketed a paltry $11,000,000 in 2004. Same for Hormel CEO Joel Johnson. John Tyson (Tyson Foods) did about a million better.
The list goes on and on, and the point is very clear: if American companies "had to" pay American living wages, they could certainly afford to do so. And if they did pay American living wages, then certainly they would be creating jobs that Americans would do.
Over at LibertyPost.org, Rich Lowry writes:
President George Bush, a strong supporter of the guest-worker program, has long said that "family values don't stop at the Rio Grande." We are supposed to believe, however, that the work ethic does stop there -- it is only south of it that people can be found who are willing to work in construction, landscaping and agricultural jobs. So, without importing those people into our labor market, these jobs would go unfilled, disrupting the economy (and creating an epidemic of unkempt lawns in Southern California).
This is sheer nonsense. According to a new survey by the Pew Hispanic Center, illegals make up 24 percent of workers in agriculture, 17 percent in cleaning, 14 percent in construction, and 12 percent in food production. So 86 percent of construction workers, for instance, are either legal immigrants or Americans, despite the fact that this is one of the alleged categories of untouchable jobs.
3. Supply and demand still rule the American economy.
Selwyn Duke at Renew America says it best:
I have to ask, if I paid you $800 an hour to pick fruit, would you do it? Except for the silk and satin set, I have a feeling most would beat a path to my orchard. And this brings us to what is a true law of economics.
There are no jobs Americans won't do. There are only wages Americans won't work for.
And this relates to a fact of contemporary American life: immigrants, illegal or otherwise, depress wages. Oh, some would dispute this? Well, they're wrong and I intend to prove it.
There's another universal, unchangeable law of economics called "supply and demand," and most of us understand it. Regardless of what product or service is at issue, if demand increases relative to supply, prices increase; if supply increases relative to demand, prices drop. And this phenomenon is relevant here. Why?
Quite simply because, like it or not, within the context of a free market system, workers are commodities whose value is determined by supply and demand. For example, a skilled neurosurgeon doesn't make a half a million dollars a year because what he does is so important. If that were the case, he'd earn more than people who hit, kick and throw balls around and sign autographs. No, his income is a function of his rarity; create 100 million more just like him and his salary will become relatively paltry.
Thus, increase the supply of workers relative to the jobs available and the value of workers decreases. This is not opinion, my friends, but hard, cold fact. Immigrants swell the worker pool, thereby increasing competition for jobs, allowing employers to pay less for the same employees. We've all heard of a "buyer's market" and a "seller's market"; well, high levels of immigration transform us from a worker's market into an employer's market. Big business loves it.
None of which is to say that immigration is bad, or immigrants are bad, or anybody's particular immigration proposal is bad; frankly, I haven't digested the entire debate yet. But this piece of the pro-immigration argument simply doesn't hold up.
So whaddya say we get this right, once for all?
The jobs that "Americans won't do" are actually jobs that America can't do, because the immigrants will do them at a depressed wage, which is exactly the way Corporate America and its fat-cat CEOs like it.
Period. Now shut the fuck up already.
{Um, I hope the strategically-placed profanity doesn't discourage you from recommending.}