Rather, the opposite is generally true, the more people working the more growth and innovation and the more opportunities and capacity for employment.
So if I'm understanding this causal relationship you're suggesting, the problem is too many people are rejecting employment, and if more people wanted to work there would be more jobs?
More people working doesn't just mean more jobs filled. It means more people making money and spending it, so more people needed on the supply side.
The fact that it sounds circular doesn't make it bad logic in this case. It's actually a magnitude increasing spiral. All funded by the Sun.
It is also, obviously, a limited resource that doesn't compound directly. Although its usefulness could compound in terms of density and vertical use increasing housing.
The problem that slows that:
In almost all areas, "property taxes" actually tax both the land (the exclusionary resource that should be taxed since its use reduces land available for others) and the property on it (a wealth tax).
The result of it being a combination tax, is that increasing the value of property on land increases its tax as well. So there is a strong disincentive undercurrent reducing investments in increasing housing on property. It isn't as profitable as it should be.
Even worse, land which is underused, is only taxed as land. Basically getting a tax break relative to the same land nearby which has been developed for maximum use. Meanwhile, the land value goes up parasitically, if while holding but not improving land, neighbors invest in their properties.
The result makes owning land a very good passive parasitical value-growing investment.
Which makes it useful for rich people to store vast sums of money in. Driving prices way above the market value that simple housing should have.
Until the tax issue is fixed, housing can't be fixed. Other changes may be needed to, but just that would make a big difference to everyone's incentives.
(It does happen - but rarely. In 2002, Altoona, Pennsylvania adopted a pure land-value tax, meaning they taxed only the value of the land, not the structures. By 2011, this system fully replaced their traditional property tax, renormalizing so the total tax remained stable. I.e. land was taxed more, improvements none. The effect: owners of productive, developed parcels (homes, businesses) paid less tax, while holders of undeveloped or underused land, such as mansions rarely visited with lots of open acreage, paid more—effectively removing the financial instrument advantage, and turning them into money pits. Land prices declined, development increased, and affordability improved for locals. -- Unfortunately, in 2016 the property tax was reinstated as before.)
But once you do have growth and innovation going one way or another, then that leads to more jobs.
Productivity and growth aren't zero-sum, but money definitely is. All the assets and liabilities in the economy sum to zero, so if you want to add new jobs you need to either deflate the economy or increase someone's debt level.
anyone in corporate america in a hiring position knows the prevailing trend -- you either hire h1b (for maximum leverage) or overseas (for cost savings). we've been told to hire h1b ONLY.
No, it shouldn’t. Treason has a specific meaning.
Most of those things aren't joining up with a foreign adversary with whom we're officially at war.
Even things that are treasonous in a colloquial sense are still pretty narrow, and tend to refer to other specific forms of betraying your country, that just happen to be other crimes -- like espionage, or insurrection.
Adversary to the people, or the state? These are wildly different concepts. Just because my state has beef with China doesn't mean they can't convince me that my life is better with China in it. Sometimes states just misrepresent the people.
Our definition for what constitutes treason is purposely narrow specifically due to the abuse potential.
The focus and the main point remains: It's unethical, it's illegal, and I wish punishment on the companies and the individuals who fraudulently scam American workers out of jobs.
Personally, I think there's lots of treason that pervades our life. Hell you could argue the meaning of "national interest" used by our state department is itself treasonous.
Any definition of the word will come down to what you perceive as in our interests. For easy examples, see Snowden and Manning.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-3/section-3...
If you’re not being hyperbolic, this seems like fraud on the part of whoever is submitting visa applications for your company.
https://www.economicstrategygroup.org/publication/in-brief-u...
When you go to collect benefits, there is a complicated formula based on income records that is used to turn your taxes paid into what is essentially a lifetime annuity. If you keep working, you keep paying social security taxes and you keep buying credits, but your annuity doesn’t change - you are forfeiting 100% of the tax you paid.
That said, the Australian and Danish systems are the best because they're more flexible.
[0] This holds up to about 60% of median wages. You can imagine it'd lower the hours some people get before it entirely makes them unemployed.
[1] One is that it provides price signals to monopsony employers. Another is that it reduces search costs in the labor market by basically acting as a spam filter that gets rid of time-wasting job offers.
That's because of agglomeration effects I think. "In the UK" is the keyword, if they wanted to earn ten times that they could move to Silicon Valley and do that. So you're left with people who don't want to uproot their lives like that.
But wave stickiness is sorta just part of human nature.