Farmers worry about worker shortage

[Socio]

Farmers worry about worker shortage

In recent years, growers in America's most bountiful farmland have watched tighter border enforcement and competition from the booming construction industry threaten their labor supply.

The building bubble has burst, but will laborers come back to lower-paying, backbreaking jobs in the fields? Growers are doubtful.

I saw a report on this on Foxnews, the work is too hard and the pay to low for immigrants now, they would rather have your jobs instead. This is no surprise to me, they are going after the easier, higher paying jobs that American?s will do, simultaneously driving down the wages for everyone which has far more reaching implications than just spoiled crops.

This phenomenon is the onset of the erosion of the middle class in America. Middle class America is the backbone of the country, it is what makes this country so great, once enough of this erosion has occurred and that backbone breaks so goes the country.

 

[dmcowen674]

Welcome to P&N

Be prepared to be called a loon by the resident righty pundits in here.

I've been saying this for years now.

 

[Jaskalas]

The farmers should pay more money to their workers, or go out of business. Why should we want people paid so low that they can?t make a living? It?s bulls*** that we even want an underclass that is being paid so little and that is forced to live off government programs for poverty.

 

[dullard]

Raise food prices, pay your workers a living wage. Farmers still earn the same amount. Problem solved.

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
The farmers should pay more money to their workers, or go out of business. Why should we want people paid so low that they can?t make a living? It?s bulls*** that we even want an underclass that is being paid so little and that is forced to live off government programs for poverty.

its not the employers duty to pay people enough to live off of. If your not earning enough where you work then learn skills to go elsewhere.

the lower class is not forced to live off the goverment because of employers not paying them enough, they are living off the government because it pays as much as working with their skillset. In otherwords, the government pays too much

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Shivetya
its not the employers duty to pay people enough to live off of. If your not earning enough where you work then learn skills to go elsewhere.

If you are an employer and you can't get anyone to work for you (Americans or even illegals), then you have a choice: (a) pay more or (b) go out of buisness. With that choice in mind, it IS the employer's duty to pay more.

If they paid more, they'll stay in business, we can eliminate the need for minimum wages, and slash or eliminate government aid. But of course, you must want the minimum wage and goverment aid to continue. 😉

 

[Rustican]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Shivetya
its not the employers duty to pay people enough to live off of. If your not earning enough where you work then learn skills to go elsewhere.

If you are an employer and you can't get anyone to work for you (Americans or even illegals), then you have a choice: (a) pay more or (b) go out of buisness. With that choice in mind, it IS the employer's duty to pay more.

If they paid more, they'll stay in business, we can eliminate the need for minimum wages, and slash or eliminate government aid. But of course, you must want the minimum wage and goverment aid to continue. 😉

American farmers compete against crops imported from else where. One example being it's cheaper to import oranges from Brazil than grow and pick them from Florida and California. This is because Brazil uses cheap unskilled labor. Florida orange juice can only be called Florida orange juice as long as a certain percent of the oranges come from Florida. The rest is from Brazil.

American farmers use cheap labor to keep their prices low. Paying for higher labor will raise their prices making them unable to compete with foreign produce and hence will go out of business. Farms have turned more and more to automation but that requires a large upfront investment. Also Orchards have to be planted and spaced to machinery can get through the trees. This takes a lot of time and effort if you're respaceing or replanting trees that take decades to mature and bear fruit. Smaller farms lack the resources to make such transitions.

You gave employers two choices (a) pay more or (b) go out of business. What if paying more causes you to go out of business? Then what are your options?

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Rustican
You gave employers two choices (a) pay more or (b) go out of business. What if paying more causes you to go out of business? Then what are your options?

If that really was the case (and they can't differentiate themselves in the market to justify the premium) then like Shivetya said, "If your not earning enough where you work then learn skills to go elsewhere." If your only choice was to go out of buisness or to go out of buisness, then you are useless drains on the US and you need to find better jobs (farmers included). Let the foreign farmers make pennies a day and have the former American farmers make $60k/year as a engineer.

 

[ahurtt]

Originally posted by: Socio

I saw a report on this on Foxnews, the work is too hard and the pay to low for immigrants now, they would rather have your jobs instead.

They want my job, huh? That'll be real interesting to see how well an orange picker with no formal education or practical work experience can do my job without first at least getting a college degree of some kind. Without that their resume is going to go straight to the trash bin without a second glance. See the difference is, I can pick oranges for a living if I have to. Somebody who spent most of their working life to date picking oranges simply cannot do my job without at least first getting a basic education in my field. For anybody who comes here an orange picker and has the gumption and talent and determination and drive to work their way up and put themselves through school and learn and acheive what it takes to do my job, more power to them. I welcome that kind of person to the United States. That is the kind of person we need in this country. If you can't do that, or don't want to do that, then stfu and get back to the orchard. Any slack-jawed yokel fresh off a turnip truck can pick oranges. I spent 18 years of my life getting educated and the last 12 years building layers of professional skills and knowledge one on top another to get where I am now. Wanna catch up? Better get started.

 

[tfcmasta97]

upgrading your skills from doing work americans wont do to doing work better than dumb americans for a huge pay increase is great.

companies get better work done, and you can fill the worst jobs with new poorer immigrants that will still see an improvement in their lives.

 

[halik]

Heh 'shortage'

There's also a Ferrari shortage - i couldn't find a single car for $53 and change. I guess Ferrari *doesn't want to* sell me cars then....

I hope that illustrates the idiocy of that statement. Increase the wages and you'll get more people.

And as for the whole 'increasing costs > go out of business' argument - I'm positive that american ingenuity and technological advantage can make agribuisness profitable and competitive in the global market. Just need some good ol' competition instead of federal subsidies; that's what this country is all about in any case.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: Rustican

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Shivetya
its not the employers duty to pay people enough to live off of. If your not earning enough where you work then learn skills to go elsewhere.

If you are an employer and you can't get anyone to work for you (Americans or even illegals), then you have a choice: (a) pay more or (b) go out of buisness. With that choice in mind, it IS the employer's duty to pay more.

If they paid more, they'll stay in business, we can eliminate the need for minimum wages, and slash or eliminate government aid. But of course, you must want the minimum wage and goverment aid to continue. 😉

American farmers compete against crops imported from else where. One example being it's cheaper to import oranges from Brazil than grow and pick them from Florida and California. This is because Brazil uses cheap unskilled labor. Florida orange juice can only be called Florida orange juice as long as a certain percent of the oranges come from Florida. The rest is from Brazil.

American farmers use cheap labor to keep their prices low. Paying for higher labor will raise their prices making them unable to compete with foreign produce and hence will go out of business. Farms have turned more and more to automation but that requires a large upfront investment. Also Orchards have to be planted and spaced to machinery can get through the trees. This takes a lot of time and effort if you're respaceing or replanting trees that take decades to mature and bear fruit. Smaller farms lack the resources to make such transitions.

You gave employers two choices (a) pay more or (b) go out of business. What if paying more causes you to go out of business? Then what are your options?

Go out of business, unless they figure out a way to use less labor. If you can't compete with foreign competition, you go out of business.
Everyone else in this country has been dealing with this reality for years, it's time for farmers to get with the program.

 

[THUGSROOK]

the farmers can go fack themselves.

(altho i do believe this entire report is BS)

 

[imported_Shivetya]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Shivetya
its not the employers duty to pay people enough to live off of. If your not earning enough where you work then learn skills to go elsewhere.

If you are an employer and you can't get anyone to work for you (Americans or even illegals), then you have a choice: (a) pay more or (b) go out of buisness. With that choice in mind, it IS the employer's duty to pay more.

If they paid more, they'll stay in business, we can eliminate the need for minimum wages, and slash or eliminate government aid. But of course, you must want the minimum wage and goverment aid to continue. 😉

strawman for the win 🙂

its not their duty, its a requirement to pay enough to get someone to do the job. That is FAR FAR different than paying that same person a living wage. What if it takes them 14 hours days to earn a living wage and they still want to work???

the rest of what you posted doesn't make any claim that isn't, like, way so obvious? Of course they have to pay more if no one will work for what they want to pay, what are they supposed to do? Wait for some elves to show up and do it? Hope the stuff picks it self? My dog is this dumb and she eats poo, do you?

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Rustican

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Shivetya
its not the employers duty to pay people enough to live off of. If your not earning enough where you work then learn skills to go elsewhere.

If you are an employer and you can't get anyone to work for you (Americans or even illegals), then you have a choice: (a) pay more or (b) go out of buisness. With that choice in mind, it IS the employer's duty to pay more.

If they paid more, they'll stay in business, we can eliminate the need for minimum wages, and slash or eliminate government aid. But of course, you must want the minimum wage and goverment aid to continue. 😉

American farmers compete against crops imported from else where. One example being it's cheaper to import oranges from Brazil than grow and pick them from Florida and California. This is because Brazil uses cheap unskilled labor. Florida orange juice can only be called Florida orange juice as long as a certain percent of the oranges come from Florida. The rest is from Brazil.

American farmers use cheap labor to keep their prices low. Paying for higher labor will raise their prices making them unable to compete with foreign produce and hence will go out of business. Farms have turned more and more to automation but that requires a large upfront investment. Also Orchards have to be planted and spaced to machinery can get through the trees. This takes a lot of time and effort if you're respaceing or replanting trees that take decades to mature and bear fruit. Smaller farms lack the resources to make such transitions.

You gave employers two choices (a) pay more or (b) go out of business. What if paying more causes you to go out of business? Then what are your options?

If a global economy means our wages have to go down to equalize and be competitive, then to hell with the foreign goods. Enforce trade laws that don't make us lower our wages.

 

[THUGSROOK]

point well made...

we dont want imported food!
and to some extent i feel we are tired of low grade imported goods too 😉

global economy is a very bad idea that has been and still is being proven over and over again.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
If a global economy means our wages have to go down to equalize and be competitive, then to hell with the foreign goods. Enforce trade laws that don't make us lower our wages.

That is just a simplistic and nonsensical standpoint if you take in the whole picture.

Hypothetical Protectionist Case: $40k/year average salary. $40k/year average cost for a bundle of goods the worker wants. $0 left for other stuff or savings.

Hypothetical Free Trade Case: $30k/year average salary. $25k/year average cost for the EXACT same bundle of goods. $5k/year left for other stuff or savings.

Sure, the salary goes down. But who fricking cares? The stuff you want to buy goes down further. In the end, you are better off. Your line of argument ONLY works if you forget that the things you buy become cheaper and that MORE than offsets your lost wages.

True, some people will have to change their line of work. That is bad for them. But hey, it is a small price to pay for the overall good.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Shivetya
strawman for the win 🙂

its not their duty, its a requirement to pay enough to get someone to do the job. That is FAR FAR different than paying that same person a living wage.

the rest of what you posted doesn't make any claim that isn't, like, way so obvious?

I see you failed to see the wink. It was a joke, not a strawman argument.

As an employer, it is a duty to get the employees to work. But I won't argue the grammer difference between "duty" and "requirement". I'll let you win that meaningless battle without any further contest and I'll use "requirement" in this thread.

You can pay someone a living wage, and have low tax. Or you can pay someone a low wage, have high tax to get the goverment to bail them out. In the end, you are basically the same. I'd perfer to end the government programs, but that requires a living wage. Businesses won't do it, so we get the government programs instead. Ideally, we'd need neither. But that isn't a choice we have.

 

[Jaskalas]

We don?t have to stop imports, but apply tariffs that don?t make us work at a lower wage to stay in business.

 

[Kntx]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
If a global economy means our wages have to go down to equalize and be competitive, then to hell with the foreign goods. Enforce trade laws that don't make us lower our wages.

That is just a simplistic and nonsensical standpoint if you take in the whole picture.

Hypothetical Protectionist Case: $40k/year average salary. $40k/year average cost for a bundle of goods the worker wants. $0 left for other stuff or savings.

Hypothetical Free Trade Case: $30k/year average salary. $25k/year average cost for the EXACT same bundle of goods. $5k/year left for other stuff or savings.

Sure, the salary goes down. But who fricking cares? The stuff you want to buy goes down further. In the end, you are better off. Your line of argument ONLY works if you forget that the things you buy become cheaper and that MORE than offsets your lost wages.

True, some people will have to change their line of work. That is bad for them. But hey, it is a small price to pay for the overall good.

What has gotten cheaper? Not food. Not gas. Not housing. That is probably three quarters of a working families expenses.

 

[nonameo]

Originally posted by: Kntx

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
If a global economy means our wages have to go down to equalize and be competitive, then to hell with the foreign goods. Enforce trade laws that don't make us lower our wages.

That is just a simplistic and nonsensical standpoint if you take in the whole picture.

Hypothetical Protectionist Case: $40k/year average salary. $40k/year average cost for a bundle of goods the worker wants. $0 left for other stuff or savings.

Hypothetical Free Trade Case: $30k/year average salary. $25k/year average cost for the EXACT same bundle of goods. $5k/year left for other stuff or savings.

Sure, the salary goes down. But who fricking cares? The stuff you want to buy goes down further. In the end, you are better off. Your line of argument ONLY works if you forget that the things you buy become cheaper and that MORE than offsets your lost wages.

True, some people will have to change their line of work. That is bad for them. But hey, it is a small price to pay for the overall good.

What has gotten cheaper? Not food. Not gas. Not housing. That is probably three quarters of a working families expenses.

You forgot healthcare... another major expense.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Jaskalas
We don?t have to stop imports, but apply tariffs that don?t make us work at a lower wage to stay in business.

Tariffs work both ways.

Increase the cost of goods that the consumer pays.

also, if used in retaliation, can reduce what we can export.

 

[Vic]

Why is it that no other group of employers is allowed to screw over their workers, but then the subject turns to farmers and all of sudden it's "screw away"?

If Wal-Mart (or one of its contractors/suppliers) hired illegal workers, paid them substandard wages, and housed them in unsanitary conditions, everyone would be screaming bloody murder (and rightfully so). But ADM or ConAgra does the same and it's all a-okay?
Pardon me, but that's bullsh!t.

 

[dmcowen674]

What do we need farmers for anyway with cheaper goods coming in from other countries?

Just like Manufacturing, who needs factoris here anymore?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
point well made...

we dont want imported food!

and to some extent i feel we are tired of low grade imported goods too 😉

global economy is a very bad idea that has been and still is being proven over and over again.

Hey, that Chinese Gluten was awesome.