Lou Dobbs misreported again tonight
- Thread starter ipcomUser
- Start date
GCdreamer2006
Registered Users (C)
Sorry, but where does it say he is against legal immigration ?
I thought that he wanted controlled and reduced legal immigration.
Also, if you don't mind if I ask, where is the distortion about the H1B visas ? That is a controversial issue you know. There are conflicting reports out there on what the numbers of required H1B's should be. It depends on what reports you want to believe. Therefore your e-mails to CNN will be most likely perceived as just an opinion. I don't think you can tell Lou Dobbs is wrong or misleading information as someone stated in letters to CNN.
I thought that he wanted controlled and reduced legal immigration.
Also, if you don't mind if I ask, where is the distortion about the H1B visas ? That is a controversial issue you know. There are conflicting reports out there on what the numbers of required H1B's should be. It depends on what reports you want to believe. Therefore your e-mails to CNN will be most likely perceived as just an opinion. I don't think you can tell Lou Dobbs is wrong or misleading information as someone stated in letters to CNN.
msh626 said:
From wiki:
"Concerning immigration, he favors immigration reduction, is harshly opposed to illegal immigration, and supports stringent enforcement at United States borders, whether by federal or state action, or by private groups like the controversial Minuteman Project."
"he favors immigration reduction" means _legal_ immigration reduction. Correct me if I am wrong here but the US takes in about 1M legal immigrants per year for a population of about 295M. So if not *against* immigration, surely he is in for a *reduction*. So let me put it like this: Lou is against legal immigration at it's current levels and left to frame the law himself would cull the number of legal immigrants entering the country.
In today's interconnected world, no country will completely ban immigration. However, by reducing immigration to record low levels it can frame a policy where it can defend itself in the international community by saying that "We allow immigration". This is not to risk censure, isolation and retaliation against its own citizens. When a country has a very low immigration quota, it essentially means that the lawmakers are against immigration but they have to allow a few to get thru in order to have a consistent policy with other countries of the world. A country's immigration policy is based on both domestic needs and maintaining international relations.
"Concerning immigration, he favors immigration reduction, is harshly opposed to illegal immigration, and supports stringent enforcement at United States borders, whether by federal or state action, or by private groups like the controversial Minuteman Project."
"he favors immigration reduction" means _legal_ immigration reduction. Correct me if I am wrong here but the US takes in about 1M legal immigrants per year for a population of about 295M. So if not *against* immigration, surely he is in for a *reduction*. So let me put it like this: Lou is against legal immigration at it's current levels and left to frame the law himself would cull the number of legal immigrants entering the country.
In today's interconnected world, no country will completely ban immigration. However, by reducing immigration to record low levels it can frame a policy where it can defend itself in the international community by saying that "We allow immigration". This is not to risk censure, isolation and retaliation against its own citizens. When a country has a very low immigration quota, it essentially means that the lawmakers are against immigration but they have to allow a few to get thru in order to have a consistent policy with other countries of the world. A country's immigration policy is based on both domestic needs and maintaining international relations.
GCdreamer2006
Registered Users (C)
It is currently 1 million/year. According to studies performed by the Center for Immigration Studies and some publishers, 300,000/year would be a more sustainable figure. If Lou Dobbs based his insight on that, he is not misleading, against legal immigration or necessarily ignorant. Is 300,000/year considered a low number ? I am not sure. There are smart folks out there researching this for a while and projecting that this country is heading to an explosive population growth, and 2/3 of that would be due to immigration. Unplanned population growth is not good a thing as the middle class, what really makes this country unique and strong can be affected badly by that.
The bottom line is that one should not get frustrated and retort Lou Dobbs that way since the man apparently defending his position professionaly. Again, it is just a matter of which study you want to believe or as many feel tempted to do - which side one wants to pick.
The bottom line is that one should not get frustrated and retort Lou Dobbs that way since the man apparently defending his position professionaly. Again, it is just a matter of which study you want to believe or as many feel tempted to do - which side one wants to pick.
msh626 said:
visa lottery
I am glad i have found some people who agrees with me. i watch lou dobbs and i am amazed at how xenophobic he is. he is very anti immigration and his show is very skewed. he did a show a few days ago and reported on the diversity visa lottery and my cup overflowed. i had to write CNN. he is so biased. basiacally he does not make a clear enough distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. he also makes his case by stating that immigrants are not law abiding. he needs a reality check. i cann't help but watch his sho juat to hear his latest misrepresentation
I am glad i have found some people who agrees with me. i watch lou dobbs and i am amazed at how xenophobic he is. he is very anti immigration and his show is very skewed. he did a show a few days ago and reported on the diversity visa lottery and my cup overflowed. i had to write CNN. he is so biased. basiacally he does not make a clear enough distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. he also makes his case by stating that immigrants are not law abiding. he needs a reality check. i cann't help but watch his sho juat to hear his latest misrepresentation
I can't believe this!
Being an economist, it's unfathomable to think he supports protectionism. All protectionist economies failed miserably and history is the proof. Globalisation and capitalism are basic tenents and form the lifeline of this country. It is beyond any forces, now to stop globalisation and international competetiveness.
I work as a physician in an underserved area and still there is more need for physicians. The firm is trying to recruit another physician from nearly 4 years without success.(Yes, no American physician would move here) It may be my own obligation that I am working here but the community is incredibly grateful that Iam here.
Lou Dobbs is doing grave injustice to lot of needy people if he instigates Americans against legal immigration.
GMC92
Being an economist, it's unfathomable to think he supports protectionism. All protectionist economies failed miserably and history is the proof. Globalisation and capitalism are basic tenents and form the lifeline of this country. It is beyond any forces, now to stop globalisation and international competetiveness.
I work as a physician in an underserved area and still there is more need for physicians. The firm is trying to recruit another physician from nearly 4 years without success.(Yes, no American physician would move here) It may be my own obligation that I am working here but the community is incredibly grateful that Iam here.
Lou Dobbs is doing grave injustice to lot of needy people if he instigates Americans against legal immigration.
GMC92
GCdreamer2006
Registered Users (C)
Humans are not goods and services. I think you should not just apply protectionism theories like that way. I strongly believe that immigration is an important factor for the US or any country that needs to remain competitive. Immigration brings competition and that is a must. Shutting down or reducing immigration levels drastically would make the US downgraded in few years to a country more like another Germany or France, in my opinion. I think the million dollar question is, what is the optimal number of immigrants that should be allowed yearly ? 300K, 500K or 800K ? I am not sure.
Saying that you will just open the gates of India, China and Latin America so that people could come here as freely as cars can be imported from Japan is simply irresponsible. There are factors such as culture, population growth and middle class interests that would simply be in jeopardy if your recommendation is followed. The other day the "CIO" magazine just published an article about China. It is expected that China will become a more attractive offshoring meca for IT services than India very soon. Just imagine you can pay on average $13,000 for a manager with 5-8 year experience in China. Yes, there are some difficulties that needs to be overcome, such as language barriers and other things to make offshoring there more attractive. That can be improved in very few years, especially because the Chinese government is investing in English training there. Now let's be sincere and realistic:do you really think major US software companies will resist the temptation to offshore more and more services ? I agree, saying 'no' to H1B would accelerate the pace of offshoring. I don't think it will put a stop to it or reduce it in the mid to long-term. No, that seems inevitable. Now think about this:if Americans allow an unlimited number of foreigners to come, the foreigners may take over key jobs here that are not vulnerable to offshoring. IT jobs in the public sector, hospitals, US agencies, or consultancy in the private sector will be more and more attractive since those are not easily shipped overseas. Americans dont have H1B's to go to India you know. Therefore the qualified Americans and Lou Dobbs probably could be considering that perspective ? I think so. As VoIP is rolled-out and facilities improved in the third overpopulated countries such as China and India, the private companies will send everything they can to those countries and keep upper management here. That is my opinion. That is said, honestly I think Lou Dobbs is doing his job and defending his point of view. Remember, India, China, some countries in Latin America are overpopulated and in my opinion that is nothing to be proud of. The middle classes in those countries are typically weak and poor. Yes, some of them managed to produce lawyers on every corner, others managed to graduate engineers. Americans or any professional in the world must be prepared to face competition in this globalized world. Facing unfair competition from overpopulated countries is not right, and that is the reason why Americans might want to impose more manageable numbers for immigration. What is "unfair competition" ? It is letting overpopulated countries and its respective vast of supply of labor have *unlimited* ability to take over positions in a foreign country. China, India and many Latin America countries have a history of corruption, mismanagement and exploitation of middle class, what caused wages there to be way below than the standards in the US. It would be very naive from Americans to engage in professional competition against people that doesn't play by the same rules, and that's why quotas are in place.
I think you see Americans in alert for that reason. Just my humble opinion. I will continue my fight to allow an increase in visa numbers, but I will never be unfair to the point of dreaming unlimited or excessive number of immigrants to come.
For the US to survive in this globalization and information age, perhaps the long-term solution will be by working to increase the standard of living in India, China, etc. Interesting times.
Saying that you will just open the gates of India, China and Latin America so that people could come here as freely as cars can be imported from Japan is simply irresponsible. There are factors such as culture, population growth and middle class interests that would simply be in jeopardy if your recommendation is followed. The other day the "CIO" magazine just published an article about China. It is expected that China will become a more attractive offshoring meca for IT services than India very soon. Just imagine you can pay on average $13,000 for a manager with 5-8 year experience in China. Yes, there are some difficulties that needs to be overcome, such as language barriers and other things to make offshoring there more attractive. That can be improved in very few years, especially because the Chinese government is investing in English training there. Now let's be sincere and realistic:do you really think major US software companies will resist the temptation to offshore more and more services ? I agree, saying 'no' to H1B would accelerate the pace of offshoring. I don't think it will put a stop to it or reduce it in the mid to long-term. No, that seems inevitable. Now think about this:if Americans allow an unlimited number of foreigners to come, the foreigners may take over key jobs here that are not vulnerable to offshoring. IT jobs in the public sector, hospitals, US agencies, or consultancy in the private sector will be more and more attractive since those are not easily shipped overseas. Americans dont have H1B's to go to India you know. Therefore the qualified Americans and Lou Dobbs probably could be considering that perspective ? I think so. As VoIP is rolled-out and facilities improved in the third overpopulated countries such as China and India, the private companies will send everything they can to those countries and keep upper management here. That is my opinion. That is said, honestly I think Lou Dobbs is doing his job and defending his point of view. Remember, India, China, some countries in Latin America are overpopulated and in my opinion that is nothing to be proud of. The middle classes in those countries are typically weak and poor. Yes, some of them managed to produce lawyers on every corner, others managed to graduate engineers. Americans or any professional in the world must be prepared to face competition in this globalized world. Facing unfair competition from overpopulated countries is not right, and that is the reason why Americans might want to impose more manageable numbers for immigration. What is "unfair competition" ? It is letting overpopulated countries and its respective vast of supply of labor have *unlimited* ability to take over positions in a foreign country. China, India and many Latin America countries have a history of corruption, mismanagement and exploitation of middle class, what caused wages there to be way below than the standards in the US. It would be very naive from Americans to engage in professional competition against people that doesn't play by the same rules, and that's why quotas are in place.
I think you see Americans in alert for that reason. Just my humble opinion. I will continue my fight to allow an increase in visa numbers, but I will never be unfair to the point of dreaming unlimited or excessive number of immigrants to come.
For the US to survive in this globalization and information age, perhaps the long-term solution will be by working to increase the standard of living in India, China, etc. Interesting times.
GMC92 said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Illegal Vs Legal
I have watched Lou Dobbs for many years now. He has a loyal following of viewers and plays to their tune. Even the politicians are aware of this and come on when they wish to fan the flames and gain a few such constituents. If you observe closely the mainstream politicians shun his show entirely. It is the outliers like Tom Tancredo that are frequent fliers there.
What I find very interesting and hypocritical about him is when he is in a debate with pro immigrant(illegal mostly) groups, he takes the moral high ground that he is all for Legal immigration, but at every turn when there is any proposal to support or streamline this proces he is virulently against this. That clearly demonstrates his true beliefs. He claims to support the middle class but seldom airs anything about the benefits to that same middle class that undoubtedly accrues from atleast some of us being present here(though I think all). When one takes such a one sided view of things, it is clear he is no longer a reporter but more of a propaganda machine, but alas he has his viewership, CNN gets its advertising contracts and thrives on it. If you guys noticed even in their latest revision of their schedule they kept his slot exactly the same though they changed other shows. The truth is in a soft economy ordinary people look for all sorts of excuses to explain their difficulties and propoganda like his gets more mileage. If the economy booms next year all this will be eased up and noone will even care how much immigration takes place. His viewership may even decline a bit.This is simple human psychology.
I have watched Lou Dobbs for many years now. He has a loyal following of viewers and plays to their tune. Even the politicians are aware of this and come on when they wish to fan the flames and gain a few such constituents. If you observe closely the mainstream politicians shun his show entirely. It is the outliers like Tom Tancredo that are frequent fliers there.
What I find very interesting and hypocritical about him is when he is in a debate with pro immigrant(illegal mostly) groups, he takes the moral high ground that he is all for Legal immigration, but at every turn when there is any proposal to support or streamline this proces he is virulently against this. That clearly demonstrates his true beliefs. He claims to support the middle class but seldom airs anything about the benefits to that same middle class that undoubtedly accrues from atleast some of us being present here(though I think all). When one takes such a one sided view of things, it is clear he is no longer a reporter but more of a propaganda machine, but alas he has his viewership, CNN gets its advertising contracts and thrives on it. If you guys noticed even in their latest revision of their schedule they kept his slot exactly the same though they changed other shows. The truth is in a soft economy ordinary people look for all sorts of excuses to explain their difficulties and propoganda like his gets more mileage. If the economy booms next year all this will be eased up and noone will even care how much immigration takes place. His viewership may even decline a bit.This is simple human psychology.
hashitoxicosis
Registered Users (C)
Long term effects of open trade
The 'flood' of immigration and jobes going overseas are a result of america's own push for open trade with countries like india and china. In the 90s america wanted to sell their goods including cars,electronics etc without the traditional protectionism shown by those governments. The US has succeded in opening those markets up.
The flip side to that is that the people in those countries now have to have a higher standard of living. Indians for example were used to be satisfied with the ambssadors (car) and the marutis.They can't buy the chevorlets and the toyotas unless they make money in par with the americans. Also, with open policies, US companies are able to tap those people who are hungry for success.
Years of protectionism from these countries were ironically protecting the american standard of living. Now with open trade the standards of living will drop and that of india and china would rise towards the mean. The US cannot stop the juggernaut anymore. Lou better gets used to the immigrant setting up his home across from his.
The 'flood' of immigration and jobes going overseas are a result of america's own push for open trade with countries like india and china. In the 90s america wanted to sell their goods including cars,electronics etc without the traditional protectionism shown by those governments. The US has succeded in opening those markets up.
The flip side to that is that the people in those countries now have to have a higher standard of living. Indians for example were used to be satisfied with the ambssadors (car) and the marutis.They can't buy the chevorlets and the toyotas unless they make money in par with the americans. Also, with open policies, US companies are able to tap those people who are hungry for success.
Years of protectionism from these countries were ironically protecting the american standard of living. Now with open trade the standards of living will drop and that of india and china would rise towards the mean. The US cannot stop the juggernaut anymore. Lou better gets used to the immigrant setting up his home across from his.
mariner555
Registered Users (C)
well if you write to him, his people will just delete the email. I would suggest that everyone should write to CNN (and other anchors on CNN) and tell them that we are boycotting CNN because of Lou. and we will tell everyone back in India too (where CNN is big) to boycott them.
mariner555
Registered Users (C)
well I dont know about you ..but I have often heard Lou trash all immigration (legal and illegal). he seems to think that his ratings are high because of his strong stance against corporations who are sending jobs abroad. the worst point he makes is that all immigrants bring disease to USA. hence everyone should write to CNN and say that we will boycott CNN (or have boycotted it already) because of LOU. BTW I have stopped watching his stupid show and CNN itself.GCdreamer2006 said:
GCdreamer2006
Registered Users (C)
Frankly I don't watch his program every day therefore I cannot comment on that.
mariner555 said:
GCdreamer2006
Registered Users (C)
The issue remains.
It is a great and positive thing that the world in general became more ambitious. Unfortunately, probably Americans and Lou Dobbs think that there are not enough room to bring all ambitious people in the world who want to improve their lives and buy Toyotas, Hondas, etc to America. Therefore the problem remains; more strict quotas on immigration will probably be imposed and the ambitious people who didn't come to the US but stayed in our home countries hopefully should demand changes there. Put pressure on the government back home,combat corruption seriously, give more decent minimum wages, combat violence, enforce environment laws, etc.
It is a great and positive thing that the world in general became more ambitious. Unfortunately, probably Americans and Lou Dobbs think that there are not enough room to bring all ambitious people in the world who want to improve their lives and buy Toyotas, Hondas, etc to America. Therefore the problem remains; more strict quotas on immigration will probably be imposed and the ambitious people who didn't come to the US but stayed in our home countries hopefully should demand changes there. Put pressure on the government back home,combat corruption seriously, give more decent minimum wages, combat violence, enforce environment laws, etc.
hashitoxicosis said:
hashitoxicosis
Registered Users (C)
If they can't come to america to work, these jobs will go to their country. Its as simple as that. That is something america can ill afford
GCdreamer2006
Registered Users (C)
I strongly believe that every single possible job in the house will be offshored. Increasing the H1B numbers may retard that trend, but eventually it will happen regardless. In my graduate program we have discussed how things have changed; 18 months ago the general idea was that project management jobs would remain here. Not anymore. We now see first line management jobs also being gradually sent abroad. It is just a matter of few years now to see more and more of that happening.
hashitoxicosis said:
Last edited by a moderator:
GCdreamer....i have the same belief.......there is still too much scope....for IT jobs to be offshored......since still the average billing is around $60/hr.
i can gaurantee that i can find a similar skill person in india....for $10/hr.....and he can do that job....at double efficiency...
these is just my hypothesis....i have not done any analysis...this is based on my experience in india and usa.....if anyone disagrees....please mention any other points i may be missing...
i can gaurantee that i can find a similar skill person in india....for $10/hr.....and he can do that job....at double efficiency...
these is just my hypothesis....i have not done any analysis...this is based on my experience in india and usa.....if anyone disagrees....please mention any other points i may be missing...
the truth is american is run by conservatives....who are kind of protectionists....they feel insecure....
thats why these politicians make immigration such an issue....even though....fact of life....is that immigration is a necessity...
if they did not allow 400k IT workers by now....guess what, not only 200K more jobs would have been offshored....but another 200k jobs worth business would have been innovated in asia.....american will simply fail to be competitive in global economy.....unless...they force feed every high school students....a ton of science subject...with a six-pack being the incentive....
but the good news is that....industry has a big lobby....and hence things do move in the positive direction.
thats why these politicians make immigration such an issue....even though....fact of life....is that immigration is a necessity...
if they did not allow 400k IT workers by now....guess what, not only 200K more jobs would have been offshored....but another 200k jobs worth business would have been innovated in asia.....american will simply fail to be competitive in global economy.....unless...they force feed every high school students....a ton of science subject...with a six-pack being the incentive....
but the good news is that....industry has a big lobby....and hence things do move in the positive direction.
exploitedMD
Registered Users (C)
Xenophobic retard
Hey this guy even goes after IIT guys,mocking fun at them.
Apparently some IIT guys came 81 st in a competition somewhere and Lou was reporting that with uncontained glee !
I have stopped watching this retard and his network as he is not only racist,but intellectually very shallow.
Hey this guy even goes after IIT guys,mocking fun at them.
Apparently some IIT guys came 81 st in a competition somewhere and Lou was reporting that with uncontained glee !
I have stopped watching this retard and his network as he is not only racist,but intellectually very shallow.