Colbert Offers Comedy Shtick in Farm Workers Testimony, Fails to Amuse Lawmakers

[hazlnut]

CONGRESSWOMAN JUDY CHU: Mr. Colbert, you could work on so many issues, why are you interested in this issue?

COLBERT: I like talking about people who don't have any power. And this seems like some of the least powerful people in the United States are migrant workers who come and do our work but don't have any rights as a result. And yet we still invite them to come here, and at the same time ask them to leave. And, you know, whatsoever you do for the least of my brothers, these seem like the least of our brothers, right now. And I know that a lot of people are the least of my brothers because the economy is so hard, and I don't want to take anyone's hardship away from them or diminish it or anything like that, but migrant workers suffer, and they have no rights."

Everybody in the media seems to be ignoring this part.

His ironic character was a bit of misfire, IMO, but when he got serious during the questions... he was brilliant.

Like humorists that have come before him, Mark Twain, he made his point on his own terms.

 

[rivrrat]

Colbert, albeit veiled in humor, told it like it is. Do you want to pay what your food would cost if we had no migrant workers?! Really?!

Yes. In fact, I do. I pay local, US farmers for my meat and produce. Oddly, I don't pay that much more for my produce that's not full of pesticide and not picked by illegal, underpaid, abused immigrants.

 

[ScottD]

I watched the video, and there were parts of Colbert's testimony where everyone in the room looked like they were having trouble trying not to laugh. I don't get where this "he wasn't funny" bull**** is coming from, because it looks like everyone in that room found his comments to be funny.

Also this isn't the first time comedians or characters have been in Congressional Hearing in character. I mean even Elmo once gave Testimony to the Republican controlled Congress, why is it such a big deal?

 

[apdst]

For those who can't tell the difference between what "entertainers" like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Stephen Colbert impart, I would suggest it is knowing the difference between SATIRE and CRUELTY. The media elite shrills have hated Colbert since he flayed them alive at the Washington Correspondent's Dinner bearing witness to their power-worshiping souls for the entire world to see. :2bow:

Stephen will never be forgiven by the Georgetown set and perhaps Obama could learn a thing or two.. .. ..rip their masks off and you will be rewarded.eace

Utube Pt. #1
Utube Pt. #2
Utube Pt. #3

Colbert, albeit veiled in humor, told it like it is. Do you want to pay what your food would cost if we had no migrant workers?! Really?!

Do you support farmers evading millions in income taxes every years, because they're hiring illegal aliens?!? Really?!?

I hope you're not one of the, "raise taxes, because it cost money to do business in this country", crowd.

 

[RightinNYC]

Everybody in the media seems to be ignoring this part.

His ironic character was a bit of misfire, IMO, but when he got serious during the questions... he was brilliant.

Great, I can't wait until we have Snooki testifying about how terrible a tax on tanning beds would be.

Like humorists that have come before him, Mark Twain, he made his point on his own terms.

You keep on trying to associate Colbert and Stewart with Mark Twain. It still doesn't make sense.

 

[obvious Child]

Do you support farmers evading millions in income taxes every years, because they're hiring illegal aliens?!? Really?!?

Come again? How are they evading millions in income taxes by hiring illegals? What they are evading is payroll taxes. Seriously. Don't talk about subjects you clearly do not understand.

Furthermore, illegal alien wages in agricultural are effectively an across the board tax cut.

 

[Phoenix]

Colbert upstaged the rest of the clowns in the house and they are pissed!

 

[RightinNYC]

Furthermore, illegal alien wages in agricultural are effectively an across the board tax cut.

Unless the costs associated with those illegal aliens (increased social spending, reduced tax revenue) outweigh the benefits of the cheaper labor.

 

[Phoenix]

Colbert, albeit veiled in humor, told it like it is. Do you want to pay what your food would cost if we had no migrant workers?! Really?!

My answer is yes. I'm no minimum wage supporter, nor union goon, however, if we have a law that says people must be paid $X per hour worked it should apply to all people doing that job in this country. Otherwise we create a lower class of people, unequally protected by the law.

 

[obvious Child]

Unless the costs associated with those illegal aliens (increased social spending, reduced tax revenue) outweigh the benefits of the cheaper labor.

Let me state this right up, the total net benefit or cost from illegal aliens is going to be one grand equation with dozens, if not hundreds of variable factors. The positive and negative impact that illegals have is wide and varied. I honestly cannot even begin to start on that equation. I can however, address individual benefits and costs. And agriculture is a clear benefit as low wages effectively act as a tax cut. Of course there are costs, such as schooling for their children and hospital care, but rationally, it is going to be extremely difficult to say with any reasonable level of certainty of they are a net benefit or cost.

However, I will leave you with dirty not so little secret. Illegal aliens who enter the US at the prime of their working lives are likely to be a benefit. We spend nothing to educate, house and feed them during their non-productive youth, and then leverage out their productive years at a low labor cost to ourselves. At the same time, we get at least some of their social security to help fund the deficit.

As for reduced tax revenue, I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Are we not taxing them on income? Probably. But at the same time does their labor allow us to free up resources for more productive, higher revenue generating activities? Possibly. Hard to say if they are in fact a reduced tax revenue cause.

 

[RightinNYC]

Let me state this right up, the total net benefit or cost from illegal aliens is going to be one grand equation with dozens, if not hundreds of variable factors. The positive and negative impact that illegals have is wide and varied. I honestly cannot even begin to start on that equation.

I agree with all this.

I can however, address individual benefits and costs. And agriculture is a clear benefit as low wages effectively act as a tax cut. Of course there are costs, such as schooling for their children and hospital care, but rationally, it is going to be extremely difficult to say with any reasonable level of certainty of they are a net benefit or cost.

However, I will leave you with dirty not so little secret. Illegal aliens who enter the US at the prime of their working lives are likely to be a benefit. We spend nothing to educate, house and feed them during their non-productive youth, and then leverage out their productive years at a low labor cost to ourselves. At the same time, we get at least some of their social security to help fund the deficit.

As for reduced tax revenue, I'm not entirely sure what you mean. Are we not taxing them on income? Probably. But at the same time does their labor allow us to free up resources for more productive, higher revenue generating activities? Possibly. Hard to say if they are in fact a reduced tax revenue cause.

I actually don't think it's that clear. If the alien is working under the table (very common), the government gets absolutely nothing in terms of tax revenue. Even if they're paying taxes with someone else's identity, the total revenue to the government is substantially reduced - not only is the overall money paid to workers less (otherwise there would be no reason to hire them), but the government takes in less from two guys earning $30k than it does from one guy earning $60k.

In addition, it seems likely that the costs are substantial. In most cases, taking care of the children will drastically outweigh any possible benefits from the parents. Even if the average family only has 2 kids, that's $10k/kid/year in public schooling. Add in medicaid or schip and the costs are enormous.

I agree that it's incredibly difficult to consider all these factors and come up with a number one way or the other, I just think it's likely that the costs outweigh the overall downward pressure on prices.

 

[obvious Child]

I actually don't think it's that clear. If the alien is working under the table (very common), the government gets absolutely nothing in terms of tax revenue.

Why nothing? If the employer is paying them wages below legal, they are also taking employee expenses below legal and thereby boosting their taxable income. Therefore, the government is getting revenue based upon the difference between legal and illegal wages. That's hardly nothing. While it is possible that the employer is reporting legal wages, that would technically be tax fraud and the government can get a lot more then just the base amount of evaded taxes. It's a deferral if you will. eace

Even if they're paying taxes with someone else's identity, the total revenue to the government is substantially reduced - not only is the overall money paid to workers less (otherwise there would be no reason to hire them), but the government takes in less from two guys earning $30k than it does from one guy earning $60k.

In terms of an isolated system, that would be correct. But if the employer then reports the difference in taxable income, then the government could make it back. And if the employer is generating sufficient income to put them into the 35% tax bracket, they would in theory be making more then taxing two guys making $30k apiece at low rates. But at the same time, if the employer just hides the difference, then you'd be correct. Hard to say either way. I'm just throwing out scenarios here. One thing I do know that is the employer is trying to expand, using saved labor money to buy equipment should generate income on the supplier side and thus taxable revenue. How much either way? Impossible to say right now.

In addition, it seems likely that the costs are substantial. In most cases, taking care of the children will drastically outweigh any possible benefits from the parents. Even if the average family only has 2 kids, that's $10k/kid/year in public schooling. Add in medicaid or schip and the costs are enormous.

But how much do illegal kids actually cost? The 10k seems reasonable as illegals are likely to educate their children. But how often do they use the medical services?

One cost that you didn't talk about is the various costs associated with multiple languages. With millions of spanish only illegals, there's a cost to integration and it's probably large.

I agree that it's incredibly difficult to consider all these factors and come up with a number one way or the other, I just think it's likely that the costs outweigh the overall downward pressure on prices.

I agree with your first sentence, the second I'm not sure about either way. I can see how it could go both ways. But I'm not convinced without that grand equation that is can really be said either way.

 

[Councilman]

Come again? How are they evading millions in income taxes by hiring illegals? What they are evading is payroll taxes. Seriously. Don't talk about subjects you clearly do not understand.

Furthermore, illegal alien wages in agricultural are effectively an across the board tax cut.

Yau can't seriously believe what you are saying, many illegal aliens work under the table and for less the state minumum wages and even at that they send so much money back to Mexico that without it some believe that country would go ahead and collapse.

And this is nonsensical Liberal boulder dash:

Social conservatism is antithetical to limited government.

Why you ask? Because antithetic means sharply contrasted in character or purpose, and that does not compute since conservatism is largely based on smaller Government. And now you are confusing Conservative with all republicans and that too does not fit with reality because the are dumb ass Liberal wackos who are Republicans such as Arnold Schwarzenegger, RINO and Liberal incarnate.

 

[obvious Child]

Yau can't seriously believe what you are saying, many illegal aliens work under the table and for less the state minumum wages and even at that they send so much money back to Mexico that without some believe that country would go ahead and collapse.

Learn to read: Adpt said this:

"Do you support farmers evading millions in income taxes every years, because they're hiring illegal aliens?!? Really?!?"

You can apologize at your leisure. Did I say anything about the actual workers evading income tax? No. Adpst specifically pointed out the people hiring them. So I pointed out how the people hiring them can only hide money via tax fraud, otherwise the difference between legal and illegal pay shows up as an increase to their taxable income and thus gets hit by income tax. Therefore, hiring illegals doesn't cause FARMERS to evade income tax. Payroll taxes are another matter entirely though.

Again, you can apologize at your leisure.

And this is nonsensical Liberal boulder dash

Mullah Iran = You're wrong. Wahhabist Saudi Arabia = You're wrong. Puritan England = You're wrong. Puritan Colonial America = You're wrong. Need I keep going on about how you're wrong?

Why you ask? Because antithetic means sharply contrasted in character or purpose, and that does not compute since conservatism is largely based on smaller Government.

So the 2001 Gop wasn't conservative when they got the Federal Government into the private family matter of the Schiavo's? Let's see just how hypocritical and contradictory you can be today.

Again, Mullah Iran, Wahhabist Saudi Arabia, Puritan England and Puritan Colonial America all show that strong social conservatism eats into limited government and personal freedoms.

And now you are confusing Conservative with all republicans and that too does not fit with reality because the are dumb ass Liberal wackos who are Republicans such as Arnold Schwarzenegger, RINO and Liberal incarnate.

Frankly, there are no Republicans in Congress who are Conservative. The Senate and House Minority Leaders partook in the massive fiscal liberalism and government expansion under Bush

 

[obvious Child]

And yes Councilman, I can see you editing your post right now.

 

[Councilman]

My answer is yes. I'm no minimum wage supporter, nor union goon, however, if we have a law that says people must be paid $X per hour worked it should apply to all people doing that job in this country. Otherwise we create a lower class of people, unequally protected by the law.

It is against the Federal law to hire illegals so the question of them being under paid should never come up. If WEveryone followed the lsw the problems would all go away and the economy as a whole would spring back so fast it's not funny.

The "Trifecta of Doom Obama. Pelosi Reid," along every person on the City Councils and Boards of Supervisors of every Sanctuary Citie are in violation of their oaths of office, and should be removed from all those offices and the sooner the better.

Colbert made a major fool out of himself and there is no excuse for it ever. I have little respect for most on both sides of the isle but I repect the laws and the insitution enough to know right from wrong and funny from really stupid.

 

[obvious Child]

You know Councilman, leisure doesn't mean never.

 

[Councilman]

You know Councilman, leisure doesn't mean never.

This post is the epitome of Non sequitur and I see you have a follower perfect.

And now so as not to confuse or confound anyone.

For your edification: Edification, as used in this context means moral improvement or guidance. Epitome, means: a person or thing that is typical of or possesses to a high degree the features of a whole class: as in: He is the epitome of a dumb ass. And finally, non sequitur is:Latin for "it does not follow"

 

[pbrauer]

It was a farce. I would have gone after him with both barrels spitting in the faces of illegal alien criminal victims and human trafficking disgraces while he makes fun of the problem.

He wasn't making fun of the problem and he wasn't being racist, he was dead serious.

Wonk Room » Stephen Colbert: Let’s ‘Give More Visas’ To Undocumented Farmworkers

Back in June, the United Farm Workers (UFW) launched their “Take Our Jobs” campaign which invites American citizens and legal residents to fill the farm jobs that are mostly occupied by undocumented labor. Comedian Stephen Colbert of Comedy Central’s “The Colbert Report” traveled to a farm in upstate New York and spent ten hours “picking beans, packing corn and learning about the stark reality facing Americans farms and farmers.”
Today, Colbert testified before the House Judiciary subcommittee on his experience as an entertainer-turned-migrant worker. As part of his testimony, Colbert called for more visas for farmworkers

This brief experience gave me some small understanding of why so few Americans are clamoring to begin an exciting career as seasonal migrant field worker. So what’s the answer? I’m a free market guy. Normally I would leave this to the invisible hand of the market, but the invisible hand of the market has already moved over 84,000 acres of production and over 22,000 farm jobs over to Mexico and shut down over a million acres of U.S. farm land due to lack of available labor because apparently even the invisible hand doesn’t want to pick beans. [...]
Maybe we could give more visas to the immigrants, who — let’s face it — will probably be doing these jobs anyway. And this improved legal status might allow legal immigrants recourse if they’re abused. And it justs stands to reason to me if your coworker can’t be exploited, then you’re less likely to be exploited yourself. And that itself might improve pay and working conditions on these farms and eventually Americans may consider taking these jobs again.
Or maybe that’s crazy. Maybe the easier answer is just to have scientists develop vegetables that pick themselves.
​

Watch it:

 

[Fiddytree]

I think he was an opportunist, and the problem was that there was not the sense that maybe they should heed his normal intentions. Stewart, the more serious of the two friends, admits that seeking political capital or clout is antithetical to the entire mission. A long time ago, Stewart said he fell in love with George Carlin's Class Clowns and it was one of the sources of inspiration for what he would later do. Much like Carlin's outlook, the goal is not to really influence the way political dialog is to take place or what they think should be the proper course, but rather, it is merely to admire the silliness of the entire failed venture and create humorous observations of such. They have no real belief that somehow they can contribute to the process, thus almost any attempt of them to do so should naturally be seen as suspect.

This was a simple observation that most of them did not realize. They essentially fell into his comedic trap and made a mockery of our governmental system.

 

[zimmer]

There was a time i thought Cobert was kind of funny but he's become a total and complete fool. If you just read the following transcript from his sorry embarrassing appearance on Capital Hill, will agree that he is in need of serious attitude adjustment of a good B***h slapping to get it through his dense or empty head that some things in certain palces are just not funny worth a damn.



Why didn't they just have Bill Maher come and call John Conyers the N word when he ask Colbert to leave.

This is a sick puppy to think being a racist is funny ever.

This is why I rejoiced when I heard Colbert and Stewart were going to have a rally in DC. They only serve to steel those pissed at Pelosi, Reid, and Obama... and the remainder of the Democrat drones serving the Three Stooges... it only serves to steel those who have had enough to get out and vote, and to get others to go too.

This is a great prelude to the idiocy in store... have to say... I love it when the Left brings in twits to testify before Congress.

Thank you... thank you... thank you.

Keep the leftist morons coming all the way up to election day.



This is a great prelude

 

[PeteEU]

It was a farce. I would have gone after him with both barrels spitting in the faces of illegal alien criminal victims and human trafficking disgraces while he makes fun of the problem.

LOL his who show is making fun of the US right, and you expect him to be serious in front of a right wing witch hunting party? HAHAHAHA

 

[obvious Child]

This post is the epitome of Non sequitur and I see you have a follower perfect.

I see you are completely incapable of admitting you were wrong.

The rest of your post is utter drivel.

Let's just pretend post #39 doesn't exist eh because it's too much of a challenge to reply to eh? :2wave:

I take by your failure to respond, you agree that Social conservatism is indeed antithetical to limited government.

 

[Phoenix]

I take by your failure to respond, you agree that Social conservatism is indeed antithetical to limited government.

Not necessarily. Social conservatism is an ideology that may or may not include government. I personally believe that traditional values should be taught but not mandated by the government.

 

[texmaster]

He wasn't making fun of the problem and he wasn't being racist, he was dead serious.

I never once said he was being racist. Do not lie. And no he wasn't being dead serious. Spare us that please.

Wonk Room » Stephen Colbert: Let’s ‘Give More Visas’ To Undocumented Farmworkers

Back in June, the United Farm Workers (UFW) launched their “Take Our Jobs” campaign which invites American citizens and legal residents to fill the farm jobs that are mostly occupied by undocumented labor. Comedian Stephen Colbert of Comedy Central’s “The Colbert Report” traveled to a farm in upstate New York and spent ten hours “picking beans, packing corn and learning about the stark reality facing Americans farms and farmers.”
Today, Colbert testified before the House Judiciary subcommittee on his experience as an entertainer-turned-migrant worker. As part of his testimony, Colbert called for more visas for farmworkers

This brief experience gave me some small understanding of why so few Americans are clamoring to begin an exciting career as seasonal migrant field worker. So what’s the answer? I’m a free market guy. Normally I would leave this to the invisible hand of the market, but the invisible hand of the market has already moved over 84,000 acres of production and over 22,000 farm jobs over to Mexico and shut down over a million acres of U.S. farm land due to lack of available labor because apparently even the invisible hand doesn’t want to pick beans. [...]
Maybe we could give more visas to the immigrants, who — let’s face it — will probably be doing these jobs anyway. And this improved legal status might allow legal immigrants recourse if they’re abused. And it justs stands to reason to me if your coworker can’t be exploited, then you’re less likely to be exploited yourself. And that itself might improve pay and working conditions on these farms and eventually Americans may consider taking these jobs again.
Or maybe that’s crazy. Maybe the easier answer is just to have scientists develop vegetables that pick themselves.
​

Watch it:

Absolutely none of that garbage changes the farce of his testimony.

He ignored the crime illegals bring with them. The human trafficking abuses, murder, rape, child molestation, theft, fraud and countless other crimes that go along with illegal immigration.

He was an embarrassment and you should have been able to pick up on that.