Rand Paul's presence-and-jobs amnesty -- WITHOUT E-Verify

[Carson]

Rand Paul's presence-and-jobs amnesty -- WITHOUT E-Verify

By Roy Beck, Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 5:14 PM EDT

Whether or not you admire the bold individualistic leadership of Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on other issues, I know you will be disappointed and maybe even shocked by the immigration platform he outlined this morning before the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.



KEY POINTS OF THE RAND PAUL AMNESTY

* The 11-19 million illegal aliens would get to live permanently in the United States.
* One year after passing the amnesty, illegal aliens can start getting work permits to compete directly in the legal job market with Americans.
* New illegal aliens who are enticed by the amnesty will continue to have a relatively open access to U.S. jobs because Sen. Paul opposes mandatory E-Verify and other means to keep employers from hiring illegal aliens.
* Sen. Paul will force American workers to compete with far more new legal immigrant workers in the future.

Nowhere in his long speech did Sen. Paul indicate any concern for the 20 million Americans who can't find a full-time job or for the taxpayers who have to support them in myriad ways while 26 million legal and illegal foreign-born workers hold U.S. jobs.

Instead, Sen. Paul emphasized the need for even more foreign workers as if there can never be a downside of too much immigration. He called for a:

. . . dialogue that shows that the GOP sees all immigrants as assets. . . . The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.

Nonetheless, Rand Paul outlined his amnesty with enough ambiguity to give some hope that Kentuckians can rescue him -- and the country -- from disastrous leadership on this issue.


Snip...

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/beckr/march-19-2013/rand-pauls-presence-and-jobs-amnesty.html

[BAllen]

I don't understand why Libertarians support endless immigration policies, when other areas of the market are too restrictive to balance the equation of free market labor. The other side of the coin is, that if all were legalized, residents would take up arms and beat and kill immigrants to drive them out of this country. There would be nothing holding them back, since they would be competing for the same jobs as Americans. Right now, they mostly take under the table jobs.

[BAllen]

Another thing to consider. Why would he support unchecked immigration when these people do not vote for freedom candidates? They vote for the freebies offered by the Dems. That's like cutting your own throat. :confused:

[cheapseats]

Another thing to consider. Why would he support unchecked immigration when these people do not vote for freedom candidates? They vote for the freebies offered by the Dems. That's like cutting your own throat. :confused:

1.) To "broaden the tax base", rather than hike taxes on millionaires AND BILLIONAIRES.

2.) Cheap labor. Roll tape from QE1 days, to hear Helicopter Ben Bernanke stress the importance of reducing "PER UNIT LABOR COSTS."

[BAllen]

1.) To "broaden the tax base", rather than hike taxes on millionaires AND BILLIONAIRES.

2.) Cheap labor. Roll tape from QE1 days, to hear Helicopter Ben Bernanke stress the importance of reducing "PER UNIT LABOR COSTS."

Then why not simply eliminate the minimum wage?

[The Gold Standard]

I don't understand why Libertarians support endless immigration policies, when other areas of the market are too restrictive to balance the equation of free market labor. The other side of the coin is, that if all were legalized, residents would take up arms and beat and kill immigrants to drive them out of this country. There would be nothing holding them back, since they would be competing for the same jobs as Americans. Right now, they mostly take under the table jobs.

What Americans are competing with the illegals for their jobs? Do you know any unemployed Americans that would shovel cow shit for 12 hours a day?

[eating_nachos]

What Americans are competing with the illegals for their jobs? Do you know any unemployed Americans that would shovel cow shit for 12 hours a day?

This is such a fucking myth. The majority of illegals do not work in agriculture. Most illegals work in construction, manufacturing and in the service industries. All jobs that were once occupied by Americans. So the idea that Americans are all lazy and don't want to work these jobs and therefore we need illegals here is pure propaganda.

[NCGOPer_for_Paul]

This is not good.

[The Free Hornet]

Another thing to consider. Why would he support unchecked immigration when these people do not vote for freedom candidates?

"unchecked immigration"? That is your statist spin on the speech. People with my lily white skin and British ancestry do not vote for freedom candidates. It would have take a PATHETICALLY small percentage of the vote to get Ron Paul the nomination. That didn't happen because people who look like you and me are just as big of assholes as everyone else.


That's like cutting your own throat. :confused:

Get a clue. The Republicans offer a similar if not equal number of freebies. The recipient names may change, the graft does not.

[The Free Hornet]

This is such a fucking myth. The majority of illegals do not work in agriculture. Most illegals work in construction, manufacturing and in the service industries. All jobs that were once occupied by Americans [seriously? Do you even know what "American" means? Or "all"? Perhaps the Irish were more American than Mexicans in your twisted view.]. So the idea that Americans are all lazy and don't want to work these jobs and therefore we need illegals here is pure propaganda.

What is the evidence that we need you here? What would be the cost of forcing you to leave? Are you not as "illegal" with your 3 felonies a day like everyone else? It is time you cease the social re-engineering of peoples often native to the Americas or brought here against there will. A fence works both ways and it would be my preference if we could come and go freely without passports and begging governments to travel. You'd rather live in a cage.

[eating_nachos]

What is the evidence that we need you here? What would be the cost of forcing you to leave? Are you not as "illegal" with your 3 felonies a day like everyone else? It is time you cease the social re-engineering of peoples often native to the Americas or brought here against there will. A fence works both ways and it would be my preference if we could come and go freely without passports and begging governments to travel. You'd rather live in a cage.

Oh, I see you're a liberal. No point in arguing with you then.

[erowe1]

What do the people who oppose Rand on this really want?

Deporting people isn't an option. Regulating whom employers can and can't hire isn't an option. NumbersUSA wants to do both of those.

What's left?

[eating_nachos]

What do the people who oppose Rand on this really want?

Deporting people isn't an option. Regulating whom employers can and can't hire isn't an option. NumbersUSA wants to do both of those.

What's left?

Who said they're not options? You?

E-Verify is already being used in over a dozen states and is a part of Rubio's plan.

You take away the incentive to be here and they'll leave on their own.

[erowe1]

Who said they're not options? You?

E-Verify is already being used in over a dozen states and is a part of Rubio's plan.

You take away the incentive to be here and they'll leave on their own.

They're not options.

Do you have the right to make me tell you whomever I want to hire to work for me and get your permission? If so, where did you get that right. If not, then how can the government have it?

And really, if you're that much of a statist, I don't see why you wouldn't want more statist voters to elect the kind of despots you want ruling us.

[eating_nachos]

They're not options.

Do you have the right to make me tell you whomever I want to hire to work for me and get your permission? If so, where did you get that right. If not, then how can the government have it?

And really, if you're that much of a statist, I don't see why you wouldn't want more statist voters to elect the kind of despots you want ruling us.


If you're goal is to screw over American citizens then yes I do.

Like it or not we live in a nation state and the state has the right to protect it's sovereignty. If that means restricting the unscrupulous than so be it.

[FSP-Rebel]

The plan doesn't offer amnesty. It focuses on border security as a first priority and must be proven so by a federal agency a la DHS or ICE and then must be voted on in Congress every year for up to 5 years. It offers a permanent work visa program iirc yet allows those that do want to become citizens a window of opportunity to indicate such and then must get to the back of the bus behind all those currently undergoing the process. Those that fail to go through either of the aforementioned procedures are still illegal and liable for deportation if found. So, this raises more tax money from millions of under the table workers and demands border security up front instead of the wait and see approach that comes with the amnesty packages from Rubio and Bush. This forces the democrats' hands on security instead of giving them extra voters up front with no security in return. Kinda like allowing them to raise the debt limit with promises for cuts down the line that doesn't ever happen.

[erowe1]

If you're goal is to screw over American citizens then yes I do.


You do have the right to interfere with my hiring of someone to work for me if my "goal is to screw over American citizens"?

How do you go about determining that's my goal? And what other thought crimes do you think you have the right to punish?


Like it or not we live in a nation state and the state has the right to protect it's sovereignty. If that means restricting the unscrupulous than so be it.

The unscrupulous = anybody who supports anything like E-Verify.

[eating_nachos]

You do have the right to interfere with my hiring of someone to work for me if my "goal is to screw over American citizens"?

How do you go about determining that's my goal? And what other thought crimes do you think you have the right to punish?



The unscrupulous = anybody who supports anything like E-Verify.


You're not Socrates. So if you have a point to make, just make it.

[itshappening]

Why do you support a massive Federal database that could be used to deny people jobs?

It's also expensive.

[erowe1]

You're not Socrates. So if you have a point to make, just make it.

Obviously, you don't have that right.

If you really think you do, then you're the one with the explaining to do.

[eating_nachos]

Why do you support a massive Federal database that could be used to deny people jobs?

It's also expensive.


Since when is something that's free expensive?

It would only deny illegals jobs.

[erowe1]

It would only deny illegals jobs.

Suuuuure.

The magical government program that would only do exactly what the people selling it to us in the first place claimed it was going to do.

[eating_nachos]

Obviously, you don't have that right.

If you really think you do, then you're the one with the explaining to do.

The fact that the system exists in several states and has already faced lawsuits and has won those lawsuits, tells me I do have the right.

[erowe1]

The fact that the system exists in several states and has already faced lawsuits and has won those lawsuits, tells me I do have the right.

The fact that someone somewhere does something proves that you have the right to do it?

So basically, there's no limit to the statism that you'll support.

Why are you here?

[erowe1]

Let's put it another way.

One of our goals is to eliminate all government data keeping of who works where. No more SS numbers. No more income tax. No national id. Etc.

How are we supposed to move in that direction if we put something in place that only further entrenches those things?

E-verify is not an option. The whole point of Rand putting for any immigration plan at all is specifically so it can be one that doesn't involve anything like E-Verify.

[Carson]

I have a hard time taking anyone serious about immigration. I think I will until we get some honest people in office that take their oaths of office seriously and enforces the immigration laws we have on the books. Only then could I consider any new laws. Without the rule of law upfront they just appear to be new lies not laws.

The article is written by one of the long time supporters of law and order regarding immigration. His name is Roy Beck. He put out a great video a long time ago called Gumballs. It demonstrates immigration with...you guessed it gum balls.

http://splodetv.com/video/immigration-gumballs

Another one I liked was this one with tubes.

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/resources/video/educational/roys-jay-walking-capitol-mall-reveals-real-immigration-tradition.html

What he has been doing that really seems to get noticed is the way he has his website, NumbersUSA set up to help you send letters to your public officials. And more importantly he keeps an eye out for you and lets you know when it is time to come and send FAX's or phone.

The way it used to work was you checked off the things that interested you.

He'd watch and if something came up he would get a FAX ready for you to send then he'd email you.

You would go to your "Action Board" and click on the FAX's he has ready. You can read them. Edit them. Add anything you want and then click send. It is just that easy.

It has been a while since I've been there. I see I have a few ready.

I don't see where it is you sign up. Maybe on the Action Board itself?

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/my/action/board

[The Free Hornet]

Oh, I see you're a liberal. No point in arguing with you then.

Yes, liberal, without a fucking once of pity for statists and illiberal assholes:



lib·er·al
[lib-er-uhl, lib-ruhl]
adjective
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. ( often initial capital letter ) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3.of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism, especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.

It is not a perfect word and it is often misunderstood by the poorly educated. That you would sling it as an insult speaks more about yourself.

[The Free Hornet]

I have a hard time taking anyone serious about immigration. I think I will until we get some honest people in office that take their oaths of office seriously and enforces the immigration laws we have on the books.

So... never then?

Why not shelve all political discussion? Why start this thread and give that opinion?

Why premise new laws on the enforcement of old laws (http://www.dumblaws.com/). The non-enforcement of those laws might be an indicator that they are worthless.

How about we repeal the dumb and unenforced laws and then focus on smart laws or, possibly, freedom.

[eating_nachos]

Let's put it another way.

One of our goals is to eliminate all government data keeping of who works where. No more SS numbers. No more income tax. No national id. Etc.

How are we supposed to move in that direction if we put something in place that only further entrenches those things?

E-verify is not an option. The whole point of Rand putting for any immigration plan at all is specifically so it can be one that doesn't involve anything like E-Verify.


That's not OUR goal, that's YOUR goal.

[Brett85]

Another thing to consider. Why would he support unchecked immigration when these people do not vote for freedom candidates? They vote for the freebies offered by the Dems. That's like cutting your own throat. :confused:

1) He's not allowing them to vote right away, just obtain a work permit and work here.
2) Eventually hispanics are going to be the majority group in America anyway, even if the illegals who are here never become citizens. The Republican Party has to figure out some way to get their vote or else they will become a permanent minority party.

[eating_nachos]

So... never then?

Why not shelve all political discussion? Why start this thread and give that opinion?

Why premise new laws on the enforcement of old laws (http://www.dumblaws.com/). The non-enforcement of those laws might be an indicator that they are worthless.

How about we repeal the dumb and unenforced laws and then focus on smart laws or, possibly, freedom.


By "smart laws" do you really mean laws that will allow you to exploit illegals and to push down the wages of working class Americans?

[William R]

Rand Paul self destructs.

[eating_nachos]

1) He's not allowing them to vote right away, just obtain a work permit and work here.
2) Eventually hispanics are going to be the majority group in America anyway, even if the illegals who are here never become citizens. The Republican Party has to figure out some way to get their vote or else they will become a permanent minority party.

Hispanics are not going to be the majority, that will still be whites.

[Brett85]

Who said they're not options? You?

E-Verify is already being used in over a dozen states and is a part of Rubio's plan.

You take away the incentive to be here and they'll leave on their own.

Rubio's plan mandates the E-Verify program at the federal level for every single business. It's just an unconstitutional power grab by the federal government.

[Brett85]

Hispanics are not going to be the majority, that will still be whites.

Even a lot of the white population now is part white, part Hispanic. Whites and hispanics are marrying and having kids, so you're ultimately just going to have more of a blended society in the future. You're still going to have tons of people with Hispanic heritage.

[eating_nachos]

Yes, liberal, without a fucking once of pity for statists and illiberal assholes:



It is not a perfect word and it is often misunderstood by the poorly educated. That you would sling it as an insult speaks more about yourself.


You do realize that meaning of the word has evolved to mean something else don't you?

So, in other words , fuck you.

[eating_nachos]

Even a lot of the white population now is part white, part Hispanic. Whites and hispanics are marrying and having kids, so you're ultimately just going to have more of a blended society in the future. You're still going to have tons of people with Hispanic heritage.

You're basing this on what, your imagination?

[erowe1]

You're basing this on what, your imagination?

Those categories are all arbitrary anyway. You can define "white" however you want to make it a majority or minority. It's not like the human race is divided up into these separate races in some physical objective way.

If you count political persuasions are part of the makeup of race, then it's already the case that whatever race wants freedom is a small minority now, and you're not a part of it.

[eating_nachos]

Those categories are all arbitrary anyway. You can define "white" however you want to make it a majority or minority. It's not like the human race is divided up into these separate races in some physical objective way.

If you count political persuasions are part of the makeup of race, then it's already the case that whatever race wants freedom is a small minority now, and you're not a part of it.


I would love to know the fantasy land you live in, does it exist outside your mind?

[eating_nachos]

erowe1, I got your lovely message, does supporting e-verify exclude me from voting for liberty candidates or do I need your approval before hand? Is their room for non libertarians in your movement?

[erowe1]

erowe1, I got your lovely message, does supporting e-verify exclude me from voting for liberty candidates or do I need your approval before hand? Is their room for non libertarians in your movement?

You believe in a state with unlimited power to engineer society according to your will. You don't have to be a libertarian. I don't call myself one. But when someone's totalitarianism reaches a certain level, it becomes more and more clear that they have no intention of helping us, but are just here to argue.

[erowe1]

I have a hard time taking anyone serious about immigration. I think I will until we get some honest people in office that take their oaths of office seriously and enforces the immigration laws we have on the books. Only then could I consider any new laws. Without the rule of law upfront they just appear to be new lies not laws.

If you think that all it takes is some group of people to make up some law and tell the rest of us we have to obey it and then all of a sudden, no matter what it is, it's just the law and every future politician has to accept it, then your understanding of their oath of office is pretty different from that of people like the Pauls.

[The Free Hornet]

By "smart laws" do you really mean laws that will allow you to exploit illegals and to push down the wages of working class Americans?

Wait so you call me a "liberal" intending the term to be derogatory and you are concerned about exploitation in voluntary labor relations?

We've exploited someone making over $250,000 annually for years on end. Buy a fucking dictionary already.



ex·ploit
/ikˈsploit/
Verb
Make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource): "500 companies sprang up to exploit this new technology".
Noun
A bold or daring feat: "the most heroic and secretive exploits of the war".
Synonyms
verb. use - utilize - operate - milk
noun. feat - deed - achievement

[Brett85]

You're basing this on what, your imagination?

http://news.yahoo.com/census-hispanics-fuel-us-white-population-growth-173449405.html

[QueenB4Liberty]

What is the evidence that we need you here? What would be the cost of forcing you to leave? Are you not as "illegal" with your 3 felonies a day like everyone else? It is time you cease the social re-engineering of peoples often native to the Americas or brought here against there will. A fence works both ways and it would be my preference if we could come and go freely without passports and begging governments to travel. You'd rather live in a cage.

This is perfect. If someone is more qualified for a job than you are, you are going to miss out on the job. Your skin color makes little difference. When people talk about pushing wages down for Americans, that's mostly lower class jobs anyhow. Not that it matters much anyhow but still.

[eating_nachos]

Wait so you call me a "liberal" intending the term to be derogatory and you are concerned about exploitation in voluntary labor relations?

We've exploited someone making over $250,000 annually for years on end. Buy a fucking dictionary already.




Verb exploit (third-person singular simple present exploits (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/exploits#English), present participle exploiting (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/exploiting#English), simple past and past participle exploited (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/exploited#English))


(transitive (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/transitive)) To use for one’s own advantage.

Synonyms

(use for one’s own advantage): take advantage of (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/take_advantage_of), use (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/use#Verb)




Thanks for playing. Please try again.

[eating_nachos]

You believe in a state with unlimited power to engineer society according to your will. You don't have to be a libertarian. I don't call myself one. But when someone's totalitarianism reaches a certain level, it becomes more and more clear that they have no intention of helping us, but are just here to argue.


Nice Strawman.

[QueenB4Liberty]

It's kind of just looking at the bigger picture. If a government can create a database to keep illegals from obtaining jobs, who is to say down the road the government wouldn't start stopping other groups of people from obtaining jobs? See once, these government programs are implemented, they don't go away, and their powers keep on expanding over time. It's a bad idea.

[Brett85]

I'll be relieved if E-Verify is the worst thing contained in Rubio's immigration bill. It will probably contain something far worse, like a National ID Card.

[eating_nachos]

This is perfect. If someone is more qualified for a job than you are, you are going to miss out on the job. Your skin color makes little difference. When people talk about pushing wages down for Americans, that's mostly lower class jobs anyhow. Not that it matters much anyhow but still.

Yeah, I know right, who gives a fuck about poor people, fuck them.

[eating_nachos]

It's kind of just looking at the bigger picture. If a government can create a database to keep illegals from obtaining jobs, who is to say down the road the government wouldn't start stopping other groups of people from obtaining jobs? See once, these government programs are implemented, they don't go away, and their powers keep on expanding over time. It's a bad idea.

Right... but Hispanics have a history of voting liberal. Who, if you haven't, noticed like to expand the power of government as well.

See, I can play that game too.

[erowe1]

Right... but Hispanics have a history of voting liberal. Who, if you haven't, noticed like to expand the power of government as well.

See, I can play that game too.

But when you play it doesn't make much sense, since you want to expand the power of the government.

[eating_nachos]

But when you play it doesn't make much sense, since you want to expand the power of the government.

I want to produce results, you want to sit on your hands and pretend we all live in your fantasy world.

[QueenB4Liberty]

Right... but Hispanics have a history of voting liberal. Who, if you haven't, noticed like to expand the power of government as well.

See, I can play that game too.


So do conservatives. And for the record you'd think Hispanics would vote Catholic, since a large majority of Hispanics are Catholic. I thought the party of religion was Conservatives. But like I said, there's little difference between a Liberal and a Conservative.

[QueenB4Liberty]

I want to produce results, you want to sit on your hands and pretend we all live in your fantasy world.

What do you want to happen? For all the illegals to be deported?

[erowe1]

I want to produce results, you want to sit on your hands and pretend we all live in your fantasy world.

Yep. You envision a set of results that you want, and you see the government with all its guns and resources as your tool to bring them about. There are no moral boundaries to what you can do, only practical ones. When it comes to statism, the hispanics you're talking about have nothing on you.

[The Free Hornet]

Verb exploit (third-person singular simple present exploits (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/exploits#English), present participle exploiting (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/exploiting#English), simple past and past participle exploited (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/exploited#English))


(transitive (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/transitive)) To use for one’s own advantage.

Synonyms

(use for one’s own advantage): take advantage of (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/take_advantage_of), use (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/use#Verb)




Thanks for playing. Please try again.


The difference is connotation. Illiberal statists try to browbeat people into supporting further welfare or mandated benefits by tossing "exploitation" as an insult. It is not surprising that you pulled it out of your playbook. You say "liberal" as an insult and bemoan the exploitation of workers in the same thread. You are confused.

I would hope to be exploited to tune of millions and millions of dollars. Yes, I'll be expecting my cut.




erowe1, I got your lovely message, does supporting e-verify exclude me from voting for liberty candidates or do I need your approval before hand? Is their room for non libertarians in your movement?

As a business person, the benefit of e-verify is that we run somebody's numbers and get a 'yay' or 'nay' from Uncle Sam to put on file. AFAIK, you can only run new hires through the system. Small businesses don't have the resources to be colorblind/non-discriminatory AND be border police. So when I hear assholes online complain about businesses hiring people, I have to wonder which laws to said assholes expect us to follow? We are not allowed to discriminate based on country of origin:


Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin;

http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html

This has been the reality for years:


Business beware: Obama's immigration 'catch 22'
Posted by Sherman Frederick
Saturday, Sep. 04, 2010 at 06:31 PM

You're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't. That's the latest message from the Obama administration to businesses and the hiring of illegal immigrants.

On the one hand, if a business mistakenly hires an illegal immigrant, they can be fined by the federal government.

But, if a business asks a prospective worker to produce a "green" card to prove they are in the country legally, they can be sued by the Obama Administration for discrimination.

[This is Google's cache of http://www.lvrj.com/blogs/sherm/Business_beware_Obamas_immigration_catch_22.html.]

So we voluntarily joined e-verify which puts the burden on the people bemoaning the problem. You could say from a business perspective, I am pro-e-verify. In that we ought to have simple paths to legal compliance (we don't need to take sides on the issue itself). Everybody is paid above minimum wage and we have excellent healthcare and 401k. I.e., I don't need your fucking bullshit.

What do I think people blaming business want ("By 'smart laws' do you really mean laws that will allow you to exploit illegals and to push down the wages of working class Americans?")? Like most statists, you want scapegoats. You don't want the problem to be solved by the teachers, police, prison guards, hospital staff, social services, border patrol, and everyone else supported by MY tax dollars to do anything. You expect them to collect paychecks and look the other way. Instead, you want to foist the problem onto employers and to make BS accusations.

You likely also think of a job as something you got and not something you do.

Nothing non-coercive I do can lower your productivity (akin to / in context of : "push down the wages of working class"). I can't make you hammer fewer nails per hour into a roof or force you to flip fewer burgers. Your productivity and making the most of it is your problem.

[erowe1]

Yeah, I know right, who gives a fuck about poor people, fuck them.

This is doubly ironic, because you're saying what you think you don't believe, when it's actually exactly what you do believe, at least when those poor people belong to a group that you consider a different race than yours.

[eating_nachos]

Yep. You envision a set of results that you want, and you see the government with all its guns and resources as your tool to bring them about. There are no moral boundaries to what you can do, only practical ones. When it comes to statism, the hispanics you're talking about have nothing on you.


Oh look, another strawman! Yay! Do I also want to kill babies and stab kittens?

[eating_nachos]

The difference is connotation. Illiberal statists try to browbeat people into supporting further welfare or mandated benefits by tossing "exploitation" as an insult. It is not surprising that you pulled it out of your playbook. You say "liberal" as an insult and bemoan the exploitation of workers in the same thread. You are confused.

I would hope to be exploited to tune of millions and millions of dollars. Yes, I'll be expecting my cut.





As a business person, the benefit of e-verify is that we run somebody's numbers and get a 'yay' or 'nay' from Uncle Sam to put on file. AFAIK, you can only run new hires through the system. Small businesses don't have the resources to be colorblind/non-discriminatory AND be border police. So when I hear assholes online complain about businesses hiring people, I have to wonder which laws to said assholes expect us to follow? We are not allowed to discriminate based on country of origin:



This has been the reality for years:



So we voluntarily joined e-verify which puts the burden on the people bemoaning the problem. You could say from a business perspective, I am pro-e-verify. In that we ought to have simple paths to legal compliance (we don't need to take sides on the issue itself). Everybody is paid above minimum wage and we have excellent healthcare and 401k. I.e., I don't need your fucking bullshit.

What do I think people blaming business want ("By 'smart laws' do you really mean laws that will allow you to exploit illegals and to push down the wages of working class Americans?")? Like most statists, you want scapegoats. You don't want the problem to be solved by the teachers, police, prison guards, hospital staff, social services, border patrol, and everyone else supported by MY tax dollars to do anything. You expect them to collect paychecks and look the other way. Instead, you want to foist the problem onto employers and to make BS accusations.

You likely also think of a job as something you got and not something you do.

Nothing non-coercive I do can lower your productivity (akin to / in context of : "push down the wages of working class"). I can't make you hammer fewer nails per hour into a roof or force you to flip fewer burgers. Your productivity and making the most of it is your problem.

Didn't read any of this and just blocked you.

[Brett85]

Didn't read any of this and just blocked you.

That's the best thing to do when dealing with "The Free Hornet."

[BAllen]

Great to have you here, eating_nachos!
Some people just don't have a clue of the dangers of immigration. More crime, more urban sprawl, more schools, more taxes, more diseases, decreasing wages, etc. The list of detriments is massive! We don't have free markets in other areas, so there is no way in hell free market labor and immigration is going to help a damn thing in this country. You have to free up business and housing regulations before any talk of free labor can be discussed. Otherwise, it will simply destroy the middle class.

[UMULAS]

.....

[BAllen]

Don't make me guys want to comment on this, you know I will.

:confused:

[Mach]

I have to say, it's like being over-run by another country, but without the guns.... and a long-term run over.

A different country.

[Carlybee]

What Americans are competing with the illegals for their jobs? Do you know any unemployed Americans that would shovel cow shit for 12 hours a day?


The construction industry is full of illegals and they work as painters, carpenters, etc. Some are very good at their jobs too. A lot of illegals are operating their own businesses...carpet cleaning, maid services, etc. They are not just our there shoveling cow shit.

[The Gold Standard]

I want to produce results, you want to sit on your hands and pretend we all live in your fantasy world.

I have a plan you can get behind and it would definitely get results. Let's have the U.S. army march the streets and gun down every filthy Mexican they lay their eyes on.

[The Gold Standard]

The construction industry is full of illegals and they work as painters, carpenters, etc. Some are very good at their jobs too. A lot of illegals are operating their own businesses...carpet cleaning, maid services, etc. They are not just our there shoveling cow shit.

I know, I was stirring the pot. The problem isn't what the illegals do, it is that the government won't allow Americans to do what the illegals do.

[Philhelm]

What Americans are competing with the illegals for their jobs? Do you know any unemployed Americans that would shovel cow shit for 12 hours a day?

I have worked in an immigration law firm, and most of the immigrants working illegally seem to have more or less normal jobs. Obviously, the higher-end jobs tend to be obtained by legal nonimmigrants with H-1B visas, but I've seen immigrants working illegally as construction workers, restaurant managers, etc. I don't ever recall any claiming to have shoveled shit.

[UpperDecker]

Great to have you here, eating_nachos!
Some people just don't have a clue of the dangers of immigration. More crime, more urban sprawl, more schools, more taxes, more diseases, decreasing wages, etc. The list of detriments is massive! We don't have free markets in other areas, so there is no way in hell free market labor and immigration is going to help a damn thing in this country. You have to free up business and housing regulations before any talk of free labor can be discussed. Otherwise, it will simply destroy the middle class.

I don't know if that is true overall, but I did see it first hand in my home town. I grew up in a decent sized farming town, mostly strawberries so obviously at one point the illegal immigrant population exploded. Santa Maria, CA was once an amazing town, but now there are many parts that people just refuse to go to now because they have been ruined by graffiti, litter, and gangs. The crime rate was once well below the national average, but now remains consistently above. I remember at one point in the early 2000's we had the highest teen pregnancy rate in the nation, probably still do.

[BAllen]

The construction industry is full of illegals and they work as painters, carpenters, etc. Some are very good at their jobs too. A lot of illegals are operating their own businesses...carpet cleaning, maid services, etc. They are not just our there shoveling cow shit.

And therein lies another problem. They have undercut the wages in the construction industry. I've seen ads for experienced carpenters @ $10/hr. Used to be $20/hr. Has the price of housing gone down to compensate? Hell no! So what does that do? It takes more home buyers out of the market. The real estate companies are pushed to sell the homes anyway, so they make bad loans. This of course, leads to foreclosures. Bank of America was selling homes to illegals in California. Cause and effect. It's just that simple.

[erowe1]

And therein lies another problem. They have undercut the wages in the construction industry.

It's difficult for me to understand the idea that the role of government should include the protection of workers in the construction industry from having their wages undercut.

[BAllen]

It's difficult for me to understand the idea that the role of government should include the protection of workers in the construction industry from having their wages undercut.

You failed to read the second part, didn't you? How convenient. You choose what you want to look at. Whether you like it or not, free market labor has a dire consequence, UNLESS YOU FIX THE OTHER RESTRICTIONS IN THE ECONOMY!!! IT'S AMAZING HOW FUKKING STUPID SOME PEOPLE ARE THAT THEY CANNOT UNDERSTAND THIS SIMPLE CONCEPT. MAYBE, JUST MAYBE IF I USE CAPS, ONE OR TWO WORDS MIGHT SINK IN. We'll see.

[erowe1]

You failed to read the second part, didn't you? How convenient. You choose what you want to look at. Whether you like it or not, free market labor has a dire consequence, UNLESS YOU FIX THE OTHER RESTRICTIONS IN THE ECONOMY!!! IT'S AMAZING HOW FUKKING STUPID SOME PEOPLE ARE THAT THEY CANNOT UNDERSTAND THIS SIMPLE CONCEPT. MAYBE, JUST MAYBE IF I USE CAPS, ONE OR TWO WORDS MIGHT SINK IN. We'll see.

I didn't fail to read it. It didn't merit a response. It was a made up non sequitur.

Furthermore, if protecting construction workers from having their wages undercut is not the role of government, then the second part would have been moot even if it were true.

[eating_nachos]

You failed to read the second part, didn't you? How convenient. You choose what you want to look at. Whether you like it or not, free market labor has a dire consequence, UNLESS YOU FIX THE OTHER RESTRICTIONS IN THE ECONOMY!!! IT'S AMAZING HOW FUKKING STUPID SOME PEOPLE ARE THAT THEY CANNOT UNDERSTAND THIS SIMPLE CONCEPT. MAYBE, JUST MAYBE IF I USE CAPS, ONE OR TWO WORDS MIGHT SINK IN. We'll see.


You're wasting your time. People like him only care about one thing and that's profit. He would trample over baby if it meant making an extra dollar.

[Lucille]

E-Verify is a burden on businesses (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-bier/why-everyone-should-fear-e-verify_b_1610057.html) and, frankly, I don't think conservatives who push it even understand how it works. You can't not hire someone, nor can you fire them (that would be illegal (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Verification/E-Verify/E-Verify_Native_Documents/manual-employer_comp.pdf)), it is often wrong, and using it does not protect a business from fines. All you can do is report a nonconfirmation to the feds, and then they decide what to do. But whatever. We don't mind doing so many jobs for the USG for free...tax collector, social worker, old age and medical insurance provider. Why not pile immigration agent onto it? It's not like time is money or anything.


Employers participating in E-Verify MUST NOT:

Use E -Verify to prescreen an applicant for employment.

Check the employment eligibility of an employee hired before the company signed the E-Verify MOU.

Take any adverse action against an employee based on a case result unless E-Verify issues a
final nonconfirmation.

Specify or request which Form I-9 documentation a newly hired employee must use.

Use E-Verify to discriminate against ANY job applicant or new hire on the basis of his or her national origin, citizenship or immigration status.

Selectively verify the employment eligibility of a newly hired employee.

I'm with Barry (http://tucsoncitizen.com/morgue/2008/06/05/87274-kimble-immigration-what-would-barry-do/):


Don’t offer amnesty to those already here illegally. Sanctions against employers who hire illegal immigrants are unfair; it is the government’s responsibility to determine who is here legally.

Start a guest worker program to “channel the flow” of illegal immigrants through a legal mechanism.

And establish a clear immigration policy that is actually enforced.

[erowe1]

You're wasting your time. People like him only care about one thing and that's profit. He would trample over baby if it meant making an extra dollar.

So now you're saying that allowing illegal immigrants to work here is good for the economy?

[cheapseats]

You're wasting your time. Some only care about one thing and that's profit.

LIBERTINES.

[kahless]

This whole immigration debate is making me really nervous. Any time anything gets passed having to do with immigration it means I lose more of my freedoms and more government interference in business effecting the bottom line.

The immigration outrage next step is going to end up with all of us forced into having a National ID card. I do not like leeches on the system or having to compete with illegals as much as the next guy but I value my freedoms.

[The Free Hornet]

You failed to read the second part, didn't you? How convenient. You choose what you want to look at. Whether you like it or not, free market labor has a dire consequence, UNLESS YOU FIX THE OTHER RESTRICTIONS IN THE ECONOMY!!! IT'S AMAZING HOW FUKKING STUPID SOME PEOPLE ARE THAT THEY CANNOT UNDERSTAND THIS SIMPLE CONCEPT. MAYBE, JUST MAYBE IF I USE CAPS, ONE OR TWO WORDS MIGHT SINK IN. We'll see.

A list of things we have to do before having freedom is "FUKKING STUPID".

If you oppose freedom because it is not restored in the exact order, manner and time of your choosing, then it becomes clear that you simply oppose freedom.

Even with 100% pure amnesty forever we would not have anything close to "free market labor". We are ludicrously far from "free market labor":

- price controls
- mandates
- state licensing
- business licensing
- government patents/copyrights
- contract restrictions
- the Department of Labor (#8 on the list (http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/cabinet)) - "free market labor" my ass!

You and not everyone here may not be libertarians (or anarcho/voluntarist) - and that is what it is - but please don't distort the language of freedom. Besides, how can you rationally have a fear of freedom (you unambiguously put yourself in the group of 'fraidy cats)?

a) you're unlikely to get it
b) it is unlikely to harm you if you do

[BAllen]

You're wasting your time. People like him only care about one thing and that's profit. He would trample over baby if it meant making an extra dollar.

You're right. They just don't get it. They can't do the math. They want their cheap labor, but would scream like a lil' bitch if someone moved trailers into their brick neighborhoods, driving down the value of their homes and businesses. Same damn thing. You can't fix one without the other or you get what we have now. A suppressed economy with an ever widening gap between rich and poor. It really boggles the mind that there are people that ignorant.

[erowe1]

You're right. They just don't get it. They can't do the math.

Do you have some math that supports your claims? If so, please show it.

[BAllen]

Do you have some math that supports your claims? If so, please show it.

You do see the economic conditions, don't you? What do you think caused the housing crash? I'll tell you. Wage decline due to immigration and bad trade deals. Once again, this would not have wrecked the economy if other regulations were removed allowing other areas of the free market to drive down prices to compensate for the lower wages. That did not happen. Do you understand, now?

[erowe1]

You do see the economic conditions, don't you? What do you think caused the housing crash? I'll tell you. Wage decline due to immigration and bad trade deals.

Got any evidence for that?

And what about that math that I don't understand?

[gwax23]

Open Immigration please enough of all this nonsense.

I cant believe libertarians in this day an age are still repeating the age old fallacy that immigrants take jobs away. Implying there is only a limited amount of labor available and that labor must somehow be equally distributed across society in order to protect "Americans'' When in fact each new immigrant adds to the economy by being both a producer and a consumer of goods and services.

The government has no right to restrict a private firms ability to hire the employees who would be most productive at the most competitive wage, even under the pretense to "Protect Americans from unfair competition in the labor market"

Also the only reason Hispanics (Which is a stupid and too general a term to begin with) vote heavily democratic is in part because of the 2 party system and the failure of the republican party to market it values effectively, if not outright discrimination. The vast majority of Hispanic immigrants I have dealt with are hard working individuals with a great work ethic and strongly conservative/catholic moral values (Family, Religion, Church etc) many are even fleeing failed socialist states. They would on paper be great liberty voters but due to the ignorance and xenophobia of many so called conservatives and even libertarians on this board they have been pushed to the left to the benefit of the democrats.

The only just argument I have heard against open immigration is the welfare state and the implications increased population via immigration would have on it. This is a fair argument which I understand. Though it is still flawed in my opinion. The welfare state and other statist socialist institutions are doomed to fail regardless of the demographic conditions of the country. Immigration might only speed up the inevitable but thats hardly a bad thing. Further the notion that certain freedoms need to be withheld or restricted till certain arbitrary subjective benchmarks are reached is very statist and totalitarian logic. We need to be politically and philosophically consistent with our views not bend them and break them at the first site of a controversial topic. Thats now how we gain a reputable reputation.

Countries need growing populations and our country specifically was founded by immigrants from all corners of the world that made this country a diverse melting pot society that it is. This plurality is one factor that made us a great society. If we had the same immigration policies we do today, or stricter ones that people are calling for, since the beginning of our history, we would have ended up little more than an underpopulated backwater.

All of our ancestors where immigrants. They benefited from our open immigration policies. My Ancestors sure did. If the same laws we have today where in effect my ancestors probably never would have made it here.

A growing economy needs a growing population lest we follow in japans xenophobic footsteps. There population is now aging and dying and massive population decline is just getting started, leading to huge negative economic ramifications. The inability of their political leadership to correct this through some sort of immigration reform is a huge problem.

[Carson]

Right... but Hispanics have a history of voting liberal. Who, if you haven't, noticed like to expand the power of government as well.

See, I can play that game too.

I think that people also tend to think that Hispanic people are for illegal immigration.

I've found that about half are for having the immigration laws upheld. Many are more wound up about something needing to be done than others on average. To think just because you speak out in support of the illegal invasion that your working your way in to the hearts, minds and ballots of Hispanic people could be a dangerous path to take.


Kind of funny how people think playing the illegal aliens into the hands of the criminals in business is doing them a favor. If they are truly needed and the criminals were forced to play by the rules the illegal aliens would be here legally and working along side of us for the same wages and benefits like they used to do.

Even Cesar Chavez was against illegal immigration because it broke down all of his union efforts.

. . . when the farm workers strike and their strike is successful, the employers go to Mexico and have unlimited, unrestricted use of illegal alien strikebreakers to break the strike. And, for over 30 years, the Immigration and Naturalization Service has looked the other way and assisted in the strikebreaking. I do not remember one single instance in 30 years where the Immigration Service has removed strikebreakers. . . .The employers use professional smugglers to recruit and transport human contraband across the Mexican border for the specific act of strikebreaking . . .

~ Cesar Chavez

http://www.searchquotes.com/search/Cesar_Chavez_On_Illegal_Immigration/

[presence]

I am so stoked I get amnesty!

[BAllen]

Got any evidence for that?

And what about that math that I don't understand?

I already explained it to you. Go back and re-read my posts.

[BAllen]

I cant believe libertarians in this day an age are still repeating the age old fallacy that immigrants take jobs away. Implying there is only a limited amount of labor available and that labor must somehow be equally distributed across society in order to protect "Americans'' When in fact each new immigrant adds to the economy by being both a producer and a consumer of goods and services.

Not true:
https://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/illegal-immigration/the-fiscal-cost-low-skilled-immigrants.html

[cheapseats]

...I cant believe libertarians in this day an age are still repeating the age old fallacy that immigrants take jobs away. Implying there is only a limited amount of labor available and that labor must somehow be equally distributed across society in order to protect "Americans'' When in fact each new immigrant adds to the economy by being both a producer and a consumer of goods and services...


I can't believe THEORISTS in this day and age are still repeating the age-old theory that "illegal immigrants only take jobs that domestic labor cannot fill" when there are MILLIONS & MILLIONS & MILLIONS & MILLIONS of American Unemployed.

There is definitely NOT a "labor shortage". There is a JOB shortage.

Twelve million unemployed Americans. Twelve million Illegal Immigrants. Head-scratcher.

[tod evans]

Twelve million unemployed Americans. Twelve million Illegal Immigrants. Head-scratcher.

Speaking as a person who has been a professional carpenter for a few decades, it's been my experience that a large portion of "Americans" are too good to do manual labor and would rather live off the state..

[cheapseats]

Speaking as a person who has been a professional carpenter for a few decades, it's been my experience that a large portion of "Americans" are too good to do manual labor and would rather live off the state..


And they have that luxury, when "business is booming" and employers "can't find enough help". (Health Insurance became a perquisite specifically to COURT good labor, back in a different economy.)

Immigration is eased to fill the demand for labor.

That's not our story today.

Congress COERCES enough other behavior. They should COMPEL Americans to fill/TAKE all available jobs, in order to collect/keep collecting such benefits as are necessary to keep their little noses above water, IN VIEW OF SUB-SUBSISTENCE WAGES.

[tod evans]

Personally I'm in the chop off the welfare beasts head group..

De-fund all aid programs from housing and food to free medical and education, work or starve..

Leave charity up to local groups.



And they have that luxury, when "business is booming" and employers "can't find enough help". (Health Insurance became a perquisite specifically to COURT good labor, back in a different economy.)

Immigration is eased to fill the demand for labor.

That's not our story today.

Congress COERCES enough other behavior. They should COMPEL Americans to fill/TAKE all available jobs, in order to collect/keep collecting such benefits as are necessary to keep their little noses above water, IN VIEW OF SUB-SUBSISTENCE WAGES.

[cheapseats]

Personally I'm in the chop off the welfare beasts head group..

De-fund all aid programs from housing and food to free medical and education, work or starve.


Believe me, I empathize with that position. Hard-hearted as it seems, it WOULD be better for posterity to PLAY to posterity...rather that flailing around HALF-heartedly trying to prevent every Unfortunate from falling thru the cracks. THEY fucked up (schemed) on too grand a scale, and we LET THEM get away with it. Some people's ENTIRE LIVES will suck because of it. It is nothing less than CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.

But the WELFARE component of "our" government will NOT end, absent wholesale collapse. And "The Powers That Be" ARE the powers that be and be and be and be because ZEY HAFF ZEIR WAYZ to kick and kick and kick the can down the road. They have kids and grandkids, too.



Leave charity up to local groups.

In a perfect world. But in OUR world, charities are one of the SCAM CENTERS. Audit ALL the 501(c)3's, sayeth I, including luminaries like the Red Cross. WHO, I ask, would be unwilling to forego profits, if administrative and operating costs provide THE LIFE OF RILEY?

And since tax-exempt churches clearly do NOT fulfill the role of caring for the Needy, TAX THE CHURCHES. They utilize the same infrastructure & services as Taxpayers. They "benefit" from all the extra and extra-expensive "homeland security", same as Taxpayers.

[erowe1]

I already explained it to you. Go back and re-read my posts.

You asserted it.

Got any evidence?

[jmdrake]

Hmmmmm....e-verify. You have to have permission from the beast (excuse me "the wonderful U.S. government") to buy labor or sell labor. And conservatives support this?

Revelation 13:16,17
It also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads, so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.


Rand Paul's presence-and-jobs amnesty -- WITHOUT E-Verify

By Roy Beck, Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 5:14 PM EDT

Whether or not you admire the bold individualistic leadership of Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on other issues, I know you will be disappointed and maybe even shocked by the immigration platform he outlined this morning before the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.



KEY POINTS OF THE RAND PAUL AMNESTY

* The 11-19 million illegal aliens would get to live permanently in the United States.
* One year after passing the amnesty, illegal aliens can start getting work permits to compete directly in the legal job market with Americans.
* New illegal aliens who are enticed by the amnesty will continue to have a relatively open access to U.S. jobs because Sen. Paul opposes mandatory E-Verify and other means to keep employers from hiring illegal aliens.
* Sen. Paul will force American workers to compete with far more new legal immigrant workers in the future.

Nowhere in his long speech did Sen. Paul indicate any concern for the 20 million Americans who can't find a full-time job or for the taxpayers who have to support them in myriad ways while 26 million legal and illegal foreign-born workers hold U.S. jobs.

Instead, Sen. Paul emphasized the need for even more foreign workers as if there can never be a downside of too much immigration. He called for a:

. . . dialogue that shows that the GOP sees all immigrants as assets. . . . The Republican Party must embrace more legal immigration.

Nonetheless, Rand Paul outlined his amnesty with enough ambiguity to give some hope that Kentuckians can rescue him -- and the country -- from disastrous leadership on this issue.


Snip...

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/nusablog/beckr/march-19-2013/rand-pauls-presence-and-jobs-amnesty.html

[Lucille]

Open Immigration please enough of all this nonsense.

I cant believe libertarians in this day an age are still repeating the age old fallacy that immigrants take jobs away.

It's about more than jobs. We have a right to emigrate, not immigrate.


"I began to rethink my views on immigration when, as the Soviet Union collapsed, it became clear that ethnic Russians had been encouraged to flood into Estonia and Latvia in order to destroy the cultures and languages of these peoples. Previously, it had been easy to dismiss as unrealistic Jean Raspail's anti-immigration novel The Camp of the Saints, in which virtually the entire population of India decides to move, in small boats, into France, and the French, infected by liberal ideology, cannot summon the will to prevent economic and cultural national destruction. As cultural and welfare-state problems have intensified, it became impossible to dismiss Raspail's concerns any longer (http://mises.org/journals/jls/11_1/11_1_1.pdf)."


Upon further reflection, however, it is puzzling why so many libertarians have so enthusiastically and uncritically accepted the “open borders” position. It leads, in fact, to an infringement on the property rights of millions of homeowners, and a tremendous increase in state power.

In a 1993 address before the Mont Pelerin Society, the late Murray N. Rothbard suggested an alternative libertarian approach to immigration. Imagine the pure private-property, or “anarcho-capitalist” model, in which all property, from streets to parks, is privately owned. There is no such thing as a “public space” under such an arrangement, and therefore no “immigration problem.” Individual property owners or contractual communities would be able to set their own immigration policy, and determine for themselves who would or would not be allowed to enter their private property.[1]

The situation becomes muddied when we insert public property into the equation. Cultural cohesion is a value cherished by many, but it is gravely compromised by distant levels of government which force localities to allow “universal access” to local public property. It is hopelessly misleading to describe this state-enforced policy as “free immigration”; rather, as the libertarian philosopher Hans-Hermann Hoppe points out, it is a flagrant case of “forced integration.”[2]

Read more: http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/liberty-and-immigration#ixzz2ONU63iA8

[cheapseats]

CAPITAL is globalized, but labor is not.

SALES are globalized, but selling yourself as an employee is not.

So long as CAPITAL & COMPETITION are globalized but DWELLING & WORKING is restricted, first, you can leave FREE MARKETS outta the debate and, second, unrestricted immigration (including amnesty for Illegal Immigrants) is a WAGE SUPPRESSOR.

It DOES broaden the tax base, tho . . . with more WORKING POOR.

[BAllen]

You asserted it.

Got any evidence?

That's right. It's up to you to prove it wrong. The evidence is the economy. ;)

[Michelangelo]

Importing sugar from abroad would supress sugar prices. Should we keep the sugar tariffs then?