Hacker News Reader

Comment by skylan_q | Hacker News Reader

They can't. There's tons of cheap labor out there in the developing world and 3rd world. Capital moves quick and labor is everywhere.

The best we can do in the long-run to increase working conditions is to increase demand for labor. In the short-term, all they can do is strike.

View on HN

The best we could do, in theory, would be to allow them to work in the U.S. This helps not only the workers but their families at home, though remittances. Unlikely to happen in this political climate, though.

The whole point of Lexmark operating the plant in Mexico rather than the USA is to save on labor costs. It does not make sense for Lexmark to purchase labor in the USA for over eight times what it would cost if they were to purchase it in Mexico.

Well, yes, but why should the workers care if they can get a better job.

I think that I interpreted your post differently than how you meant for it to be interpreted. I read your post to be a solution for workers at this particular plant, keeping their jobs but with the Lexmark plant located physically in the USA. You are talking about enabling these workers to seek jobs at other businesses within the USA, is that correct?

Yes, I think the goal should be to help people in whatever way you can, not to help Lexmark find workers or to preserve a particular employment relationship.

It's my understanding that immigration often results in large gains for the immigrants, so it may be more effective than other forms of help.

Lexmark should not be allowed to purchase labor in Mexico for any less than it would cost in the United States. That would solve the problem neatly.

Then there would be no jobs in Mexico.

The response from the government was that they shouldn't strike. What does the government think they should do? Are they implying some other viable action?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com