(Part 2) Top products from r/wisconsin

1) How would dumping low-skilled labor into the US labor pool not displace or devalue US low-skilled labor?

I think the problem that a lot of people who look at it this way have is that they don't account for entrepreneurial expansion or the fluidity of human capital. I'm going to use farmers as my example for consistency but there are factory jobs, construction jobs, and other jobs in the food service sector that low/wage immigrant workers tend to take.

If a farmer sees a reduced cost of wages due to increased competition between domestic and international laborers on his/her farm, s/he has two possible ways to react: lower costs to the consumer (unlikely) or reinvest the excess money into the operation. This, in turn, increases demand in other areas of the economy in different ways and creates openings in other low-wage/low skill areas like factories, chemical plants, etc. Though these low-wage workers may not be able to work at a farm anymore, there's always the low-wage canning factory, farming supply store, repair shop, or other jobs that will grow as a result of an expansion at the farm.

What if these jobs don't exist in their area? Then the people may have to move to an area where the jobs do exist. The reason why the US economy is able to meet the demands of the world market so well is because most Americans are willing to move to get to the job that gives them the life they want. If immigrants come to Baraboo and push a bunch of farmer laborers out, they can always move to Stevens Point and work for Del Monte.

This reaction also ignores the fact that a person can, at any time, improve their skill-sets or education. Right now, we're having a discussion about people with very low skill-sets: lacking a high school diploma or GED, generally in the agricultural sector. The US has many opportunities for these people to advance to the next level of education or training if/when jobs become scarce. This is why Congress passed a bill that expanded tech colleges immediately after the Great Recession in 2008 to meet the expected demand of new students.

In all reality, though, the data is inconclusive as to whether or not a displacement or devaluation of domestic low-skilled labor occurs. When we talked about this in one of my econ classes, the only group of people affected by more immigration were the immigrants already in the US, legal or otherwise. I would actually like to see some research that demonstrates the sort of effect you're talking about here because I haven't seen any, yet.

2) What explains the flood of high risk-taking by immigrant labor?

This is widely believed but, I think, widely misunderstood. Most people who ILLEGALLY immigrate to the US are not taking excessive risks because only one incident with the police will demonstrate that they don't have legal documentation and send them to jail or to be deported. Here's an article by NPR (I know, biased but I'm doing this on the fly) that talks about it. From personal experience working with Latino immigrants to the US, I can say that the majority's biggest fear is that the police will have any reason to stop them because it would mean that they have to be sent home. A kid I worked with at a restaurant was pulled over for not having his car fully registered and he never showed up to work again.

I agree though, the places where most of these people are coming from are also some of the poorest states in their country. Nowadays, what we're seeing an increase of is immigrants from further south: Honduras, Nicaragua, Guatemala, etc. and an overall decrease of Mexican immigration.

3) Though I'm aware of many border factories, didn't our subsequent deal with China wipe out the full promise of NAFTA?

Short answer: no. Long answer: Our investment in Mexico allowed Mexico to gain a competitive advantage in a lot of the manufacturing jobs that were displaced there. Though many of the factories that we initially relocated to Mexico have subsequently moved to China (and now to Vietnam, Bangladesh, and Indonesia) the Mexican domestic demand for many of these products remained and so the factories did, too. It's also easier to do business with Mexico because of our more similar cultural expectations, free trade agreement, and trust between nations. Mexico is a natural partner for the US and Canada.

4) I see you've referenced the Hamilton Project of the Brookings Institution; do you have non-political-thinktank sources to support your point?

Sorry, no, I looked hard, but the subject hasn't had a truly "independent" look yet. I can say that the book I read that initially discussed all of this was pretty balanced in its approach, but Paul Krugman and the professor teaching the class are both considered "liberal" economists.

4) Stuff on the bottom of your point

Yes, Mexico's inequality does remain very high and will continue to do so until they fix their institutions. The influx of wealth from the North did not fix their problem, it only helped alleviate ours a little. It's sort of like a teacher putting a kid's homework into their backpack every night. The kid still has to do the homework, but at least it's there for him to do.

And it will and should. I'm a free trade guy, so my take on this is that Mexico didn't have the infrastructure to effectively and efficiently produce corn that could fully compete with US corn. I whole-heatedly agree that agricultural subsidies should be reexamined, but I haven't studied it much so this opinion is based solely on the fact that I see it as spending the US government can't afford. I don't know the benefits of the system very well.

(Source Emphasis added)

---
You’ll be shocked, shocked to read this, but it seems the great man of populist integrity is, at his heart, as much of a filthy capitalist whore as anyone.

PORCINE provocateur Michael Moore likes to portray himself as a working-class man of the people, but a new book exposes him as a “corporate criminal, environmental menace and racist union-buster.”

In “Do As I Say, Not As I Do: Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy,” Peter Schweizer reveals that Moore, who has been vociferous in his criticism of defense contractor Halliburton, has bought and sold hundreds of shares of Halliburton stock — and that of other defense contractors — through his private foundation.

Moore, who has claimed he doesn’t own a “single share” of stock, has also invested heavily in HMOs and pharmaceutical giants, the targets of his next movie, “Sickos.”

Moore also likes to rail against what he calls rampant racism in the United States and the fact that supposedly no one hires blacks for good jobs. Schweizer points out that “out of the 134 producers, editors, cinematographers, composers, and production coordinators Moore hired, only three were black.” And not one African-American lives in the ritzy Michigan enclave where Moore has a $1 million mansion.

And while publicly championing unions, Moore has been quite anti-union in his own business dealings and had several clashes with the Writers Guild.

We’ve detailed a number of these revelations here over the years, specifically the way Mike treats his staff and won’t allow them to unionize, pays them slave wages, and outsources much of his production work to Canada. It’s good to see it all laid out in print, nicely researched and sourced.

---

Yeah... embrace that "Wisconsin Feeling"... just stay clear of the fat hypocrite.

I would call myself a liberal, but grew up in small town, relatively conservative county. A great start would be understanding where people are coming from, and for that, I would recommend this book : https://www.amazon.com/Politics-Resentment-Consciousness-Wisconsin-American/dp/022634911X

It was written recently by a Madison professor as a series of interviews with rural Wisconsinites after the extreme polarization of the last few years. I learned a lot in my time as a rural journalist, working with town and country officials and getting in invited into people's homes regularly. Even if I didn't agree with what they were saying, I got to know their point of view, and that's what counts.

> You do realize that the second amendment never mentions being able to overthrow our government and that is not at all what its intended purpose was right?

It doesn't have to mention it, just like the other Amendments in the Bill of Rights don't have to enumerate their every use case in detail. You can read the writings of the founders at the time to fill in the context, which are overflowing with references to John Locke, to the point where the founders would casually invoke him to support an argument much like we'd do with the founders today (see: The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution pg 28).

Locke wrote extensively on the right to revolution and was an obvious inspiration when the founders wrote in the Declaration of independence that people have a natural right to "alter or abolish" "any Form of Government [that] becomes destructive."

> It does specifically state the Militia can be called upon by the President to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.
>
> ...
>
> The whole purpose of the 2nd amendment was to allow local branches of government to form militias ...

The prefatory clause of the Second Amendment doesn't limit the operative clause, i.e. it's not restricted to militia use. That was obvious from writings of the time but thanks to Heller that's now been legally clarified too.

> Even with all the automatic weapons being fully legal they would have no impact on tanks and little to no impact on aircraft. Drones would be able to wipe out any real revolution pretty quickly. You would need to legalize missiles on private aircraft to even stand a slight chance. You would need rocket propelled grenades and surface to air missiles to even start to combat to power of our current military. The idea we could take out our government by forceful insurrection is laughable today and only held to by those without a clue on how the real world works.

Weird how we got thrashed in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan then

See also https://i.imgtc.com/D7G0hkG.png

I highly recommend Wisconsin's Past and Present: A Historical Atlas by the Wisconsin Cartographers' Guild and The Making of Milwaukee by historian John Gurda. The antiquities of Wisconsin: As Surveyed and Described by scientist Increase Lapham is also interesting.

There is also a book called "Haunted Heartland" put out back in the late 80s. It was a pretty interesting read if you want to delve into it.

For anyone interested in this house or the man, this book is f’ing insane...the amount of amazing, weird, and crazy shit that went down in this rural part of Wisconsin is mind boggling. This book reads like a script for a six-season HBO show. And then just when things can’t get any weirder, Joseph Stalin‘s daughter shows up and starts hanging out because, of course she does! Pretty much all opinions on this man - that he was a genius architect, that he was a terrible architect, that he was a wonderful man, that he was a garbage human being...are all confirmed. https://www.amazon.com/Fellowship-Untold-Story-Wright-Taliesin/dp/0060988665

I am all for them. Also from various things i have read they are safer also. Since they force the drivers to actually pay attention and not just stop at the red light, shut off brain and wait for the green until they gas it.

As long as they dont implement something like this Magic Roundabout

Heres a couple other links you may find interesting

• Roundabouts: Reducing Traffic Frustration
  
• Why we drive the way we do

Are you looking at our political structure or our political climate? Scott Walker recently published a book, if you are looking more at climate than structure. This one might help more, as it tries to call things more down the middle from what I understand.

Perhaps. Although I hate to generalize a group of people, but that is likely true.

Although I don't really blame them, I blame the environment they grew up in as described here:

How children lost the right to roam in four generations

Helicopter Moms vs. Free-Range Kids

Free-Range Kids, How to Raise Safe, Self-Reliant Children (Without Going Nuts with Worry)

Free-Range Kids - Blog

I see people moving in two directions at once, backward as you describe, not just limited to kids but adults that have desk jobs and work overtime. At the same time we have people pushing the envelop, doing extreme sports or 'silent sports' like biking, kayaking, cross-country skiing, but those people are much fewer in number by comparison.

http://www.amazon.com/Under-Big-Black-Sun-Personal/dp/0306824086/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1462912664&sr=1-1&keywords=john+doe

Edited to add to the reply, but since you won't see that I'll add it here:

• http://www.nami.org/Content/ContentGroups/Policy/WhereWeStand/The_Criminalization_of_People_with_Mental_Illness___WHERE_WE_STAND.htm
  
  
• http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21582535-costly-criminalisation-mentally-ill-locked
  
  
• http://solitarywatch.com/2010/10/20/criminalizing-mental-illness/
  
  
• http://www.amazon.com/Crazy-America-Tragedy-Criminalized-Mentally/dp/0786717459
  
  
• http://jonathanturley.org/2013/05/12/criminalizing-mental-illness-jails-hospitals-or-on-the-street/
  
  After reading the reply, read up a little, its an area that shouldn't be that unfamiliar.

Heres the link https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07G2B8QX8