The free movement of people over borders can have a negative pressure on low skill native workers. The specific set of policies the US has implemented over the last 100 years has not, even considering undocumented immigration. Both of these things are true, and backed up by decades of research.
Please cite literally any legitimate research on “Biden policies” or “H1B visas everywhere” and their depressive effect on wages. Please also consider in your argument the documented 15% inflation adjusted increase in wages for the lowest earning Americans between 2020 and 2024, the highest of any cohort in America.
They absolutely are. You claim immigration causes wage stagnation, that is not true. Specific programs can cause localized wage pressure, but that’s a marginal effect when you consider the entire country. The other is a pipe dream that nobody is arguing for. “It’s what I said but in more words!” Yes, nuance and context is important and meaningfully changes an argument.
The entire point of creating pathways to legitimate citizenship means immigrants are paid through legitimate and taxable mechanisms, the same way as any other worker in the US.
Sanders argued that specific guest worker programs like the H-1B and H-2B visa programs can suppress local wages, a claim supported by research, and I agree we should get rid of them as part of reform.
He also argues that an open border policy where we let anyone in the country at any time would suppress wages based on a complete race to the bottom, which research supports and which I also agree with.
Neither of these things is at odds with anything that I'm saying. The critical third thing he advocated was the exact kind of reform that I outlined above, which he argued would ultimately raise wages for everyone: creating pathways to citizenship for undocumented immigrants already in this country and reforming our immigration policy.
Sure, I get that, and it's part of my point. It seems to me that most of the complaints about The Odyssey are mostly about casting and some about the direction, which to me would be more analogous as a comparison for the median viewer (who, I would argue, is not someone who has extensively studied or seen Shakespeare so wouldn't recognize 10TIHAY as ToTS). "They took the thing but made it different in ways I don't like", so to speak.
I still don't understand how blind casting relates to the quality of the movie. Why does it have to be either a "fully faithful" adaptation to the written version of a traditionally spoken epic poem OR something completely different yet inspired by it?
This is why it's so hard to have an honest discussion about policy with conservatives. You have decided what position you want to take and created an entire new epistemic structure to support it, rather than being open to learning and understanding what decades of research have to tell us, which we can use to inform smarter policy going forward.
Idk what to tell you, man; stay mad, I guess? The world will move on without you ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I point to Luhrmann's adaptation because it's the most jarring in terms of casting, setting, and direction that still retains the original(ish) name, whereas something like She's the Man or 10 Things I Hate About You is more abstracted.
The circle I can't quite square is why we hold that to a different standard than something like The Odyssey, which has had countless adaptations over the years, centuries, and millennia. I don't quite buy that a movie can't have blind casting because it's less "artificial" than the stage.
Brother man, let me tell you from personal experience that you cannot replace these workers with untrained people overnight. Like, you don't have to want to believe me, but I have worked with these businesses, and it would not work. Picking crab meat is incredibly high skill labor, and there are thousands of job like it in the US.
Americans may well be equipped to LEARN these jobs, or construction or logistics work, and many do! But if we got rid of all the skilled roofers or tilers or forklift drivers overnight, it would cause complete chaos.
I'm sorry the world isn't as simple as you want it to be- yes, wage suppression is a massive issue in the US, but it is not driven by immigration. The primary drivers are a decline in unionization, offshoring, and deregulation. Most studies of the effects of low-skilled immigration show minimal or near-zero effects on wages. See Card's Muriel Boatlift study, Borjas' critical study of nationwide effects, and Peri and Sparbar's work on task specialization.
It’s not that Americans can’t do it, you just couldn’t drop any untrained person into these roles and ramp them up fast enough to avoid complete industry collapse.
I spent the first part of my career designing, building, and installing industrial automation robotics. To speak only from my own personal experience, there are countless roles in agriculture (ex: strawberry harvesting) and aquaculture (ex: crab meat picking) that take months to years to become proficient at and are done entirely by immigrants.
I am less directly experienced in but know from friends in the industries that many of these types of roles exist in construction, logistics, and countless other crucial industries.
It is far more efficient to, if you are intent on punishing them, levy a civil penalty that you collect over 5-10 years of income tax collection than to deport all these people and start again.