Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 62 posts

Re: California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers

#31

Post by scottkduncan »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #5

They're idiots if they thought Trump wouldn't follow through on his pledge to deport illegal workers. However, it should be noted that protectionism will also help American farmers, as produce from Mexico will become more expensive. Should also add, allowing illegal immigrants to work benefits no one. Not American workers, not Mexican workers, no one. By bypassing labour laws and minimum wages, it allows for exploita…

Protectionism would benefit some U.S. farmers, but certainly not all. The U.S. is a net exporter of corn, soybeans, dairy, etc. to Mexico and they are our third largest agricultural export market.

Re: California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers

#32

Post by pfranz »

guitarbill wrote: post #13
Mikeb85 wrote: post #5

They're idiots if they thought Trump wouldn't follow through on his pledge to deport illegal workers. However, it should be noted that protectionism will also help American farmers, as produce from Mexico will become more expensive. Should also add, allowing illegal immigrants to work benefits no one. Not American workers, not Mexican workers, no one. By bypassing labour laws and minimum wages, it allows for exploita…

> Should also add, allowing illegal immigrants to work benefits no one. Not American workers, not Mexican workers, no one. By bypassing labour laws and minimum wages, it allows for exploitation and also drives wages down. That's may or may not be true, and could be a combination of a) there aren't enough people around who would do the job even with minimum wage, e.g. depending on how attractive welfare is and b) it's…

I don't buy that sneaking immigrants into the country to work illegally is the ideal solution. It creates poor incentives (it's too easy to abuse workers. How cheap should we pay them or how many hours to work them? What sort of healthcare or living conditions are acceptable?). There are a few alternatives. I imagine an actual solution would be a mix a) pay a fair wage b) mechanize more of the process (incentivize loans to make it easier) b) increase farm subsidies c) import more food from other countries like Mexico (where they pay lower prices) d) or, if we're hooked on the idea, a special "worker program" visa where we pay below minimum wage. It's not that much different from other industries with a few wrinkles...I believe there are legitimate reasons for partially subsidizing a domestic food supply (in case of trade disputes, natural disasters, or war).

The part I struggle with is how to pursue illegal immigrants who have been quietly living in the country who might have been brought as kids or have established families. What's the cost/benefit and how many resources do you spend on that?

Re: California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers

#33

Post by Mikeb85 »

rhizome wrote: post #26
Mikeb85 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But my question is still who would pay for those wage raises? The people who buy the products? Yes, exactly. > How do you think they'd react if fruit/vegetables were twice the price overnight? If you weren't artificially suppressing wages through illegal immigration, the working class would have more money, the labour market would be at a better equilibrium and everyone would have money to buy food even at the slig…

Slightly higher prices? Care to add some support to that, even if just your imagination and assumptions? My guess is more like "$20 lettuce," at the very least.

Well, the unemployment rate isn't zero. It's hard to say exactly how elastic the labour market is, but my guess is labour costs wouldn't actually double. They'd probably go up by 20-50%, worst case. If the market can't take a 50% price increase, the farmers will either sell for less margin and accept a cut in profits, or they'll find efficiency through automation.

But as I pointed out, nothing happens in a vacuum. Rising 'cost' of labour means rising wages, consumers have more money. What's the better equilibrium?

Keep in mind, in most parts of the world, we pay much, much more for food than Americans. Somehow we survive, and live pretty damn well too.

Edit - I should also add, I buy organic lettuce produced in a greenhouse in Canada. It doesn't cost $20. We're somewhat less tolerant of illegal labour than the US as well.

Re: California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers

#34

Post by BigChiefSmokem »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #9
verroq wrote: post #2

Wait these people that willingly hire illegal workers who are willing to work under minimum wage with little legal protection are worried their workers will be deported and will now have to pay higher wages? The farming subsidies is already ridiculous [1] for little farmers give back. Perhaps they should innovate instead being left behind, clearly the market is moving against them. [1] http://www.economist.com/news/u…

I don't think they work for less than minimum wage, nor do they hire them explicitly as illegal workers (instead, they turn a blind eye when their documentation doesn't line up). How many Americans dream of doing farm work? We have some of the best farmland in the world, but our workforce has mainly moved up the tech chain to more skilled and hence more valuable labor. It is a contradiction.

Please, these people are not stupid. They know exactly what they're doing when they hire undocumented workers.

Re: California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers

#35

Post by bryanlarsen »

tomjakubowski wrote: post #3

> The prospect has business owners in the valley on edge. Patricia Pantoj runs a travel agency in Madera, north of Fresno, where the city’s approximately 60,000 residents are predominantly Latino and work in the fields. This year, she said, fewer people than ever before traveled back to their hometowns in Mexico. > “They didn’t want to risk it,” she said. “Everyone is scared, even if they have papers.” So policy whic…

That's been obvious from the start. Trump is going to destroy the Mexican economy so they're going to flood the States looking for work. NAFTA kept a lot more Mexicans out of the US than any wall ever will.

Re: California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers

#36

Post by analbeads »

BigChiefSmokem wrote: post #34
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they work for less than minimum wage, nor do they hire them explicitly as illegal workers (instead, they turn a blind eye when their documentation doesn't line up). How many Americans dream of doing farm work? We have some of the best farmland in the world, but our workforce has mainly moved up the tech chain to more skilled and hence more valuable labor. It is a contradiction.

Please, these people are not stupid. They know exactly what they're doing when they hire undocumented workers.

So they're smart enough to hire illegals for cheaper labor, but somehow not smart enough to realize that Trump was completely serious when he said at every speech he gave that he planned to deport illegal immigrants? Does that not sound fishy to you?

Re: California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers

#37

Post by jrowley »

greglindahl wrote: post #29
verroq wrote: post #2

Wait these people that willingly hire illegal workers who are willing to work under minimum wage with little legal protection are worried their workers will be deported and will now have to pay higher wages? The farming subsidies is already ridiculous [1] for little farmers give back. Perhaps they should innovate instead being left behind, clearly the market is moving against them. [1] http://www.economist.com/news/u…

Note that farm subsidies don't go to crops which are labor intensive. They're for "row crops" that are fully mechanized.

Exactly!

>But only 9% of California's 74,000 farms have actually received subsidy payments and nearly two-thirds of the money since 1996--$1.8 billion--has gone to fewer than 3,500 farms. Most of the crops that fuel the state's $29-billion farm machine--grapes, peaches, plums, nectarines, strawberries, almonds, walnuts and vegetables of every hue--don't get a penny of aid. They aren't eligible. Rather, the bulk of the money goes to support giant fields of cotton, rice, wheat and barley--crops that exist in surplus. Of the top 20 recipients in California, seven are big cotton growers and 11 are big rice growers. On average, they take in $596,000 in crop subsidies a year.

http://articles.latimes.com/2002/jun/10/local/me-subsidy10

Re: California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers

#38

Post by bluejekyll »

greglindahl wrote: post #29
verroq wrote: post #2

Wait these people that willingly hire illegal workers who are willing to work under minimum wage with little legal protection are worried their workers will be deported and will now have to pay higher wages? The farming subsidies is already ridiculous [1] for little farmers give back. Perhaps they should innovate instead being left behind, clearly the market is moving against them. [1] http://www.economist.com/news/u…

Note that farm subsidies don't go to crops which are labor intensive. They're for "row crops" that are fully mechanized.

Yes. And the corn subsidy in particular has really thrown off the market, encouraging huge numbers of foods in the US to be made with some sort of corn byproduct. We quite literally are subsidizing the fattening of the US with Coca-Cola getting a cheap sugar.

Re: California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers

#39

Post by thebooktocome »

analbeads wrote: post #36
BigChiefSmokem wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please, these people are not stupid. They know exactly what they're doing when they hire undocumented workers.

So they're smart enough to hire illegals for cheaper labor, but somehow not smart enough to realize that Trump was completely serious when he said at every speech he gave that he planned to deport illegal immigrants? Does that not sound fishy to you?

Uh, no? People vote against their best interests all the time.

Re: California Farmers Backed Trump, but Now Fear Losing Field Workers

#40

Post by pfranz »

rhizome wrote: post #26
Mikeb85 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But my question is still who would pay for those wage raises? The people who buy the products? Yes, exactly. > How do you think they'd react if fruit/vegetables were twice the price overnight? If you weren't artificially suppressing wages through illegal immigration, the working class would have more money, the labour market would be at a better equilibrium and everyone would have money to buy food even at the slig…

Slightly higher prices? Care to add some support to that, even if just your imagination and assumptions? My guess is more like "$20 lettuce," at the very least.

I think, much like when the ACA was implemented in the US, there's no real way to quantify beforehand how significant the changes will be (that's not saying we should do it and wait for the fallout). Yes, lettuce might go up to $20 a head--we'll eat less lettuce and it's no longer assumed to come free on burgers and people move to something else. We can offset that by offering farmer's more subsidies, importing more lettuce from somewhere else, or incentivize loans for better farm equipment/irrigation.

We'd need to decide to stop exploiting workers and work on finding solutions from there (I don't actually see that first part happening).

Post reply on HN