Employers of Illegal Immigrants

[Bodi]

i feel it is a little hipocritical to demonize those coming to America illegally just trying for a better life.

and not feel the same way about those American employers waving the cash in the air saying all you have to do is get here and you can have a job.

and a government ready to punish the illegals but make it where Americans if they will follow a few simple rules can hire the illegals with no danger of prosecution.

Everybody feels the same way about these asshole Americans doing that...

 

[Bodi]

Just prosecute the ones that procure counterfeit green cards for their illegal employees.

Just deport them... you mean...

 

[plutonium]

Wow cant believe this pole numbers people saying yes they should be prosecuted .. if trump can do it why cant we????!!!

 

[Moderate Right]

i feel it is a little hipocritical to demonize those coming to America illegally just trying for a better life.

and not feel the same way about those American employers waving the cash in the air saying all you have to do is get here and you can have a job.

and a government ready to punish the illegals but make it where Americans if they will follow a few simple rules can hire the illegals with no danger of prosecution.

How about we do both? We make a wall and increase border security so illegals can't get here and we prosecute employers who knowingly hire illegals, although I wouldn't expect much help from California. ICE has raided many employers in California and California and liberals cried fowl, claiming that California was being unfairly targeted due to retaliation from the feds. The thing you lefties don't realize is that there is a very huge underground where both American citizens and illegals work under the table and there is realistically no way to stop all of this under the table work. It's realistically impossible. On top of that, there is a very huge drug trafficking thing going on where a lot of illegals cross the border for that. So, even if you successfully clamp down on all Employers, illegals will still come here to take part in drug trafficking. It's naive and leftist propaganda to think you can stop all of this by merely going after employers.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

i feel it is a little hipocritical to demonize those coming to America illegally just trying for a better life.

and not feel the same way about those American employers waving the cash in the air saying all you have to do is get here and you can have a job.

and a government ready to punish the illegals but make it where Americans if they will follow a few simple rules can hire the illegals with no danger of prosecution.

It is illegal to hire someone who doesn't have the legal ability to work in the United States of America, therefore anyone who isn't an American citizen should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and then deported.

American citizens, however, should be congratulated for their contribution to the increase in America's GDP.

This, as I understand it (although a paraphrase), is an official part of the official platform of BOTH the Republicans and the Democrats.

 

[Helix]

Should Employers of Illegals be prosecuted?

i support a general amnesty, a migrant worker program, and running every job through Everify. after that major part has been addressed, the fines for non-compliance should be utterly crushing. oh, you use a subcontractor and "didn't know" that he was skirting the rules? tough ****. you get fined, too.

of course, i really doubt that this will happen; maybe not ever. rich people are just fine with using fear of immigrants to manipulate voters politically, but the lobbying money is behind protecting access to cheap labor. my suggestion would make those costs go up, and a lot of people would hire undocumented workers anyway and potentially get caught. they know that, so they will grease politicians, and very little will change. this is why the derp wall is so stupid. if the demand for the labor is still there, you could build that thing all the way to the moon and there would still be cheap immigrant labor.

 

[rickc]

i support a general amnesty, a migrant worker program, and running every job through Everify. after that major part has been addressed, the fines for non-compliance should be utterly crushing. oh, you use a subcontractor and "didn't know" that he was skirting the rules? tough ****. you get fined, too.

of course, i really doubt that this will happen; maybe not ever. rich people are just fine with using fear of immigrants to manipulate voters politically, but the lobbying money is behind protecting access to cheap labor. my suggestion would make those costs go up, and a lot of people would hire undocumented workers anyway and potentially get caught. they know that, so they will grease politicians, and very little will change. this is why the derp wall is so stupid. if the demand for the labor is still there, you could build that thing all the way to the moon and there would still be cheap immigrant labor.

this guy gets it!

it is very difficult to prosecute employers if they have a properly filled out I-9 even if the employee is illegal

mandatory everify would solve the problem. but congress won't do it because the guys who write the checks want that cheap efficient labor

bush tried it and the heat came down and he backed off.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.mc...ics-government/congress/article213791734.html

WASHINGTON
An effort to mandate that every employer use a system to check that their employees are working in the country legally was rejected by House leaders Tuesday — a strong signal that those pushing immigration reform do not believe it has enough support to be passed as part of a comprehensive immigration bill.

The failure of the e-verify plan — which was eagerly sought by conservatives wary of the bill — means the House will instead vote on a plan that still includes a path to citizenship for 1.8 million Dreamers, people brought to the country illegally as children.

That plan, due for a vote as soon as Wednesday, would impose cuts in legal immigration and provide $25 billion for border security, including President Donald Trump's border wall.

Farm groups strongly opposed the defeated employee verification system. Those groups represent huge swaths of the Central Valley districts of House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-California, and Rep. Jeff Denham, R-California, who have been leading immigration efforts in the House.

 

[Masterhawk]

If an employer KNOWINGLY employed an ILLEGAL immigrant, then yes.

 

[Xelor]

Identity Loans and Identity Theft: Illegal Immigrants in a Restricted Labor Market

Readers of the above noted essay will observe that the ability to work under a false identity is a function of key data disconnects. Integrate the data so that one person has one identity everywhere s/he "appears," and changes in their work status propagate throughout the system and, the incidence of immigration-worker-related identity thefts/borrowings declines dramatically.

Why? Because unless one is very well off and indifferent to the sum of the benefits one receives from the government, one is not going to be keen to allow someone else to compromise them. For example:

• One receiving some sort of welfare benefit. That benefit is reduced in proportion to the wages one earns. Nobody receiving a welfare benefit is going to be keen to see them reduced (or eliminated) because an immigrant to whom they've lent their identity earns wages that become known to the welfare system's databases.
• In a fully integrated system, one who's lent their identity to an immigrant, should that immigrant commit a crime, other than borrowing an identity, runs the risk of losing a host of opportunities and rights (for example, the right to vote in states that don't allow convicted felons to vote) should the identity borrower "get out of line." Background checks will reveal the behavior of both the true owner and the person who is using the owner's identity.

Of course, the instant the government moves to aggregate one's data across all the various sources of official data -- SSA, CMS, IRS, state tax agencies, DMVs, DHS, bureaus of vital statistics, various licensing organizations, etc. -- citizens bitch and moan about their privacy being violated. The software systems that interface with one another need not be designed and implemented to reveal the details of "this or that" to third parties who haven't a "need to know." They need only update a record in a system somewhere, say welfare organizations, to adjust the person's benefit due to the borrower's earning amounts and notification of that update's having happened to the identity owner of record.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Identity Loans and Identity Theft: Illegal Immigrants in a Restricted Labor Market

Readers of the above noted essay will observe that the ability to work under a false identity is a function of key data disconnects. Integrate the data so that one person has one identity everywhere s/he "appears," and changes in their work status propagate throughout the system and, the incidence of immigration-worker-related identity thefts/borrowings declines dramatically.

Why? Because unless one is very well off and indifferent to the sum of the benefits one receives from the government, one is not going to be keen to allow someone else to compromise them. For example:

• One receiving some sort of welfare benefit. That benefit is reduced in proportion to the wages one earns. Nobody receiving a welfare benefit is going to be keen to see them reduced (or eliminated) because an immigrant to whom they've lent their identity earns wages that become known to the welfare system's databases.
• In a fully integrated system, one who's lent their identity to an immigrant, should that immigrant commit a crime, other than borrowing an identity, runs the risk of losing a host of opportunities and rights (for example, the right to vote in states that don't allow convicted felons to vote) should the identity borrower "get out of line." Background checks will reveal the behavior of both the true owner and the person who is using the owner's identity.

Of course, the instant the government moves to aggregate one's data across all the various sources of official data -- SSA, CMS, IRS, state tax agencies, DMVs, DHS, bureaus of vital statistics, various licensing organizations, etc. -- citizens bitch and moan about their privacy being violated. The software systems that interface with one another need not be designed and implemented to reveal the details of "this or that" to third parties who haven't a "need to know." They need only update a record in a system somewhere, say welfare organizations, to adjust the person's benefit due to the borrower's earning amounts and notification of that update's having happened to the identity owner of record.

To the "Conservatives" what you are talking about is the introduction of a "National Identity Card" and, as everyone knows that is the first step towards the introduction of a "Socialist Police State".

You will have to come up with something that doesn't strip all Americans of their right to privacy and thereby destroy "Democracy In America".

The fact that your proposal is the only one that would work (aside from instituting "Free Fire Zones" along all of America's borders) and totally prohibiting anyone entering the United States of America is completely irrelevant to all "Right Thinking People".

 

[Evilroddy]

Employers who demonstrate a pattern of behaviour in employing undocumented and illegal aliens should be prosecuted as a felony. Employers who just made a mistake or have no clear pattern of hiring illegals as such, should face minor misdemeanors charges and the employer should be lightly fined but the infraction should be recorded in a national data-base and permanently linked to the name(s) of the decision making officer(s) and director(s) in the offending employer's business. Fines should increase markedly for each subsequent infraction until a pattern is established in which case jail time should result.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[Cephus]

Absolutely they should be prosecuted and heavily fined. $10,000 per offense, three strikes and they permanently lose their business license.

 

[What if...?]

So far only four States; Arizona, Alabama, Mississippi, and S. Carolina have laws requiring use of E-Verify for both government and private hiring.

Moreover, both California and Illinois have statutes preventing localities from passing laws requiring use of E-Verify, and 25 States have no E-Verify requirements at all.

The remaining 21 have various levels and restrictions.

https://www.numbersusa.com/resource-article/everify-state-map

So, everybody pays federal taxes on legal employees.

So why not a federal mandate? Its a federal system. Make it a federal rule.

Or make it part of the tax code as ttwit advocates.

 

[What if...?]

To the "Conservatives" what you are talking about is the introduction of a "National Identity Card" and, as everyone knows that is the first step towards the introduction of a "Socialist Police State".

You will have to come up with something that doesn't strip all Americans of their right to privacy and thereby destroy "Democracy In America".

The fact that your proposal is the only one that would work (aside from instituting "Free Fire Zones" along all of America's borders) and totally prohibiting anyone entering the United States of America is completely irrelevant to all "Right Thinking People".

Conservatives approved of the patriot act. Which created the surveillance state we live in now.

A "national ID" is a moot point at this point.

They know where you are, what you're doing, what you buy, who you talk to.

Google probably already knows who's legal and who isn't, even if they wouldn't admit it.

 

[benlow68]

I do think employers are responsible for the people they hire.
I dont have a problem with hiring immigrants to do jobs that you couldn't pay an american to do because as a general rule, americans feel entitled. There are jobs here in america that need to be done that most americans wont do unless they get paid a ridiculous amount that will raise the cost of living for all of us.
So how about this, and employer that needs workers for whatever crappy job he has offers a job to an individual while they are in their home country via job posting. The employer is responsible for vetting and helping the individual get a work visa for the required amount of time. While the employee is working he is responsible for paying income tax but is not allowed to get a tax refund. The worker dose not pay social security because they won't get government retirement. Health care is the +-----employers responsibility for all medical expenses. If the employer gets into any legal trouble it is the employers responsibility to send the employer back to their home country. The more requirements put on employers the less likely they will hire illegals.

 

[Myview]

They should not be prosecuted. Just shot.

Lol...that's harsh. Some of those business owners vote Republican. If they were all Democrat Trump would make E-Verify mandatory.

 

[Moon]

They should not be prosecuted. Just shot.

Well, no. That’s pretty ****ed up thinking if you’re serious.

 

[Tom Horn]

Well, no. That’s pretty ****ed up thinking if you’re serious.

It’s treason what they’ve done.

 

[Moon]

It’s treason what they’ve done.

No, not even close.

 

[Tom Horn]

No, not even close.

You’ll be shocked then to find out what’s in store for them.
If history repeats itself, the right will fracture while cleaning up their own camp, the left will arise to power from the vacuum, then seize complete power, finish off the right, then fall when they purge their own numbers.

 

[Irwin Corey]

i feel it is a little hipocritical to demonize those coming to America illegally just trying for a better life.

and not feel the same way about those American employers waving the cash in the air saying all you have to do is get here and you can have a job.

and a government ready to punish the illegals but make it where Americans if they will follow a few simple rules can hire the illegals with no danger of prosecution.

Fined, for sure.

 

[Lord of Planar]

i feel it is a little hipocritical to demonize those coming to America illegally just trying for a better life.

and not feel the same way about those American employers waving the cash in the air saying all you have to do is get here and you can have a job.

and a government ready to punish the illegals but make it where Americans if they will follow a few simple rules can hire the illegals with no danger of prosecution.

I do understand their desire for a better life, and I have few hard feelings aimed at them. They wouldn't come here if people didn't enable them to. I want those enabling them with jobs prosecuted till they are as poor as those they want to exploit.

That includes the politicians who make their cities and states sanctuary places.

 

[Phys251]

Well, no. That’s pretty ****ed up thinking if you’re serious.

What's so offensive about it? He's just accelerating the process that ultraconservatives have already started.

Once you call another human being "illegal," the dehumanization has already begun.

And BTW if you are triggered by this comment, you should know that I voted Yes to the poll.

 

[Lord of Planar]

They should not be prosecuted. Just shot.

I hope you aren't serious.

The farthest I go in jest, is to put hard machine guns at the border with limited fields of strike, with a credit card slot and a sign that says "BYOB." Bring your own bullets. There would be plenty of people manning those guns to keep the illegals out. I'll bet it would generate some good revenue for our government.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Of course, if an employer knowingly and willingly employs an illegal immigrant, they should face prosescution.

One major problem? Identity theft.

Many illegals obtain fake documentation. The most successful method of which is using an existing social security number that belongs to a citizen, supplemented by obtaining driver's license/State ID under the citizen's name, usually from a State the actual citizen does not live in.

A SSAN can be used several times and the citizen may not become aware of the situation until some other red flag appears; i.e. the citizen files for unemployment and "unreported" wages/employment shows up, or an IRS audit due to "under-reporting" income.

This most certainly is a problem. And to correct it would be to make legal citizens life harder having to prove they are citizens as well.