Governments should compete for residents, not businesses • Hacker News Board

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#61

Post by Kon-Peki » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:13 PM UTC

wishysgb wrote: post #49

vorpalhex wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is literally easier to move a person than an entire company across national borders. The process for both is at it's core the same - identify, verify and pay your taxes. Yes people can and do move from Mexico to the Midwest all the time. Why do you think Mexican laborers should get paid less for building your car then someone in Detroit? Part of the goal of NAFTA is to help stabilize the economy of Mexico and help…

Legally it is very hard for a Mexican to move to the Midwest. As in almost impossible requiring almost 20years. I am not Mexican but it toke my family 14 years to be able to move to the US from Palestine, although my grandparents and uncles have been here since the 80s. It really isn't hard. A company doesn't need to move everything, they can just literally build a new factory or rent one else where, not only that th…

For professional jobs, it is very easy for a Mexican or Canadian to move to the US and work.

> The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) created special economic and trade relationships for the United States, Canada and Mexico. The TN nonimmigrant classification permits qualified Canadian and Mexican citizens to seek temporary entry into the United States to engage in business activities at a professional level.

> Among the types of professionals who are eligible to seek admission as TN nonimmigrants are accountants, engineers, lawyers, pharmacists, scientists, and teachers.

https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary...

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#62

Post by pessimizer » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:14 PM UTC

mtoner23 wrote: post #45

cyclecount wrote: post #6

This line of thinking comes up often on HN but it ignores the central reason for governments to enact borders, a rather modern invention. Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. A border exists often for workers only, but is mostly a legal fiction that corporations can easily navigate. The most common example for the Americans reading this is NAFTA, which m…

Idk, i think borders exist to exclude other groups of peoples. this is why european countries kept splitting up on various racial groups (check and slovaks, all of yugoslavia) Businesses on the other hand would prefer to have access to all peoples. and to have access to cheaper or better labor wherever it is, giving us the success of the european union.

> Idk, i think borders exist to exclude other groups of peoples.

To exclude them from what? That's the question. You give one of the answers here: sometimes people would want to exclude them because they lower wages. But in reality, people who are alarmed by lower wages are rarely in the position to say anything about what happens at the border. The people who get a say about that are the people who are alarmed by higher wages.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#63

Post by onlyrealcuzzo » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:15 PM UTC

remarkEon wrote: post #34

cyclecount wrote: post #6

This line of thinking comes up often on HN but it ignores the central reason for governments to enact borders, a rather modern invention. Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. A border exists often for workers only, but is mostly a legal fiction that corporations can easily navigate. The most common example for the Americans reading this is NAFTA, which m…

> Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. I have never heard this explanation. Where is it coming from? It sounds not only wrong but inverted to me. Governments enforce borders to effectively secure their territory and people, and thus its own power. Is the idea that, without the “legal fiction” of borders, we’d have some kind of global autoworkers Union or…

Lately - it seems people inside countries enforce their boarders to make sure other people from less fortunate countries can't come in and drive down their wages...

We live in a democracy.

The idea that we vote to screw ourselves over completely is strange.

Some people forget that everything isn't a zero sum game. Something can be good for companies and not bad for you. And something can be good for you and not bad for companies.

Some people DO NOT care about the economy and only care about social issues - or at least the economy's importance is far inferior to social issues (usually because they don't make much money in the first place).

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#64

Post by ErikVandeWater » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:16 PM UTC

nhchris wrote: post #15

The article is valid in speaking specifically about US states competing, but otherwise I find the idea of treating governments, and countries, as mere economic platforms, that compete like a business would, disturbing. They are representatives of their nations, and their duty is to their people, to whom they are guardians, of said people and their homelands. They should not be 'competing' for more residents just as f…

Whether something is disturbing or not doesn't say much about whether it's a good idea, just that it is different from the conventional.

Around the world, governments act like abusive parents. If people could migrate freely (creating a competition for residents), much more people would live without the abuse of authoritarian governments.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#65

Post by alexfromapex » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:18 PM UTC

The only way to make it happen is to incentivize it monetarily. That means the government’s budget would have to be heavily controlled by how many residents there are. But just residency is too narrow of a lens to make any conclusions from, in my opinion.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#66

Post by draw_down » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:18 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #58

abvdasker wrote: post #56

It's worth remembering that New York-based opposition to subsidies for Amazon's construction of "HQ2" in Long Island City was widely vilified and disparaged in mainstream media outlets across the political spectrum. This latest development looks like a pretty strong vindication of those who were outspoken against these tax handouts to Amazon.

> latest development looks like a pretty strong vindication of those who were outspoken against these tax handouts to Amazon How so? I was in west Manhattan when that happened. We got the jobs and capital, not Queens.

[dead]

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#67

Post by pessimizer » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:20 PM UTC

nhchris wrote: post #11

cyclecount wrote: post #6

This line of thinking comes up often on HN but it ignores the central reason for governments to enact borders, a rather modern invention. Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. A border exists often for workers only, but is mostly a legal fiction that corporations can easily navigate. The most common example for the Americans reading this is NAFTA, which m…

> Governments (at the behest of businesses) enforce borders so that labor cannot effectively organise. This is backwards, and I'm having trouble understanding how a more diverse, more transient population would find it easier to find common interests and unite. Suppose a factory unionizes - without borders, the owner will find it easier to import non-union workers. While moving a factory is challenging regardless of…

> I'm having trouble understanding how a more diverse, more transient population would find it easier to find common interests and unite.

I think it would make it far easier. The problem is every jurisdiction attacking unions and workers in their own unique legal frameworks, and the forcing of unions/workforces to compete with each other across the borders between these jurisdictions. Capital gets to play Mexican against Indonesian workers, even down to workers in Cook County against workers in DuPage county.

If an Indonesian can easily work in Mexico and a Mexican can easily work in Indonesia, their interests aren't just theoretically similar, they're almost the same.

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#68

Post by NovemberWhiskey » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:20 PM UTC

abvdasker wrote: post #56

It's worth remembering that New York-based opposition to subsidies for Amazon's construction of "HQ2" in Long Island City was widely vilified and disparaged in mainstream media outlets across the political spectrum. This latest development looks like a pretty strong vindication of those who were outspoken against these tax handouts to Amazon.

The specific tax incentives offered to Amazon (above and beyond the programs that the city offers broadly) were all linked to job creation. Create no jobs; get no tax breaks.

With that in mind, to what extent do you consider this a "vindication"?

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#69

Post by abvdasker » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:21 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #58

abvdasker wrote: post #56

It's worth remembering that New York-based opposition to subsidies for Amazon's construction of "HQ2" in Long Island City was widely vilified and disparaged in mainstream media outlets across the political spectrum. This latest development looks like a pretty strong vindication of those who were outspoken against these tax handouts to Amazon.

> latest development looks like a pretty strong vindication of those who were outspoken against these tax handouts to Amazon How so? I was in west Manhattan when that happened. We got the jobs and capital, not Queens.

Amazon very publicly decided not to build "HQ2" in Long Island City as a result of the local opposition. Amazon's significant Manhattan presence predates any of this discussion and is largely unsubsidized. It's also a little goofy to assume that the people working for Amazon in Manhattan don't live in Queens but otherwise would if the office was physically located there (especially given their proximity to the 7 train lol).

Re: Governments should compete for residents, not businesses

#70

Post by nradov » Wed, Mar 08, 2023, 5:22 PM UTC

pyuser583 wrote: post #48

nradov wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed there is nothing stopping workers from organizing across borders, even if individual workers are only legally authorized to work in one country. Many labor unions have local chapters in multiple countries and can coordinate labor actions. For example, see the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers which operates in the USA and Canada.

It’s tricky. American unions avoid coordinating with their American counterparts because of corruption. Unions have a very specific set of rules to play by, and these rules are different for each country.

Huh? There is certainly corruption in some labor unions but that doesn't prevent them from coordinating with their counterparts in other unions. Even the most corrupt unions frequently back each other up in order to maximize negotiating power versus management.