politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, I'm absolutely opposed to this deportation thing, it's cruel and if anything I feel that we should be encouraging more immigrants to come here, but the "it'll be bad because it'll get rid of all the people who do these jobs american citizens don't want to do" line does sorta gloss over the fact that if the job conditions are so bad that if people have literally any other option the role goes unfilled, something probably needs to be done to improve the conditions of that job, especially if it is as vital as food production.
You're not wrong but what's a realistic path to accomplishing such a thing? Capitalists want to extract as much money as possible so raising wages or improving working conditions without being forced is out of the question. The only party with even a pretend interest in forcing that discussion just got beat down all over the country. And no one cares enough about the issue to fix it by paying more for food, which would probably still be true if we doubled wages for all jobs.
Realistically it is difficult, I agree, as capitalism doesnt look to be going anywhere and the current environment doesnt seem like one where increased regulation is likely to get passed. Honestly I think the most realistic path to some improvement at the moment is research into automation tech for the kinds of farm roles that currently rely on cheap labor. Not that capitalists wont just take the cost savings and still pay people less, but its at least possible to pay people more without increasing the cost of staples if the available revenue can be spread across fewer more productive workers, and because operating complex machinery and maintaining it take more time to learn, such workers at least might have a better shot at organizing and thereby forcing that wage increase, because their skills could be harder to replace. And because the technology theoretically allows for increased profits, funding developing it might stand a chance at still getting through even current political conditions.
Honestly, that might be required even in a more equitable economic system anyway though, at some level that kind of work seems like it would have pretty slim margins, so even if the profits were distributed fairly, it still might not be enough to make those jobs not terrible.
Automation of some of the jobs might be possible, but likely still wildly more expensive than paying some immigrant peanuts
Or you need slaves
Guess which option the pigs will pick