GOP Backing Away From Tough Immigration

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

"these people" eh?

 

 

Yeah. Those people.

[mr_genius]

Yeah.  Those people.

racist

[Rex Kickass]

Our military bases are being built with Illegal Immigrant Labor.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/12/...in1494828.shtml

 

It's a little after 7 a.m. and work is already in full swing at this Groton, Conn., construction site, the future home of military housing for officers serving at the nearby Trident Submarine Base.

 

The U.S. military sub-contractor pouring cement at this site — Gargiulo Construction — says its payroll is completely in order. But in reality, some papers are fake. CBS News correspondent Armen Keteyian reports the group is undocumented workers.

 

These men, most in their 20s and all born in Mexico, spoke in shadows because they are here illegally, and fear talking to the press could get them fired. Talking about the long hours and low pay — less than half what a union member makes — about $13 or $14 an hour.

 

Despite dozens of arrests at military bases around the country, government construction sites continue to be fertile ground for undocumented workers, something Centex, the Texas-based conglomerate who has contracts with the federal government, was hesitant to discuss.

 

Hal Parmalee is their man in charge at Groton.

 

"From our perspective they all have documented workers based upon the information they provided us," Parmalee says.

 

That information boils down to a Green card and a Social Security number. Easily obtained for as little as $200 on the streets of New York.

 

"Sometimes, they check your documents," says one man. "Sometimes no. If you show up to work, they need you to work. So it's not always the case."

 

"But, it almost doesn't matter," says another man. "Because they treat you as if you don't have any rights."

 

Mark Erlich is head of the New England Carpenter's Union.

 

"Health and retirement benefits — forget it," he says. "That's not even part of the equation."

 

"The law says it's illegal to hire someone without papers," Erlich says. "The word knowingly is key, hardly anyone is prosecuted, because an employer can simply say, 'Well, I didn't know.'"

 

In the wake of our interview, according to the carpenter's union, eight Hispanic workers were terminated on the spot the next morning, sparking a walkout by two dozen Hispanic workers on Gargiulo job sites

 

Company President Gene Gargiulo flatly denied that he had fired anyone, saying the workers had "voluntarily walked off the job," and the entire episode was orchestrated by the carpenter's union.

 

Nevertheless, this morning, instead of driving into work, 20 illegal immigrants stepped out of the shadows to exercise to very American rights: free speech, and the right to join a union.

[YASNY]

"these people" eh?

 

You know, 'these people' that are here illegally.

Edited April 13, 2006 by YASNY

[Texsox]

Expelling 12 million criminals who are a burden to our social services and contribute FAR less than they take is the only appropriate measure to take.

 

If he use the yardstick of contributing far less, then every poor person in America will have to be expelled. Employers will have to pay everyone a wage that will allow them to contribute in taxes the benefits they receive. These jobs will never pay that kind of wage. We all know that everyone working at minimum wage or even a step of two above it will not pay much in taxes and will qualify for Medicaid, Food Assistance Programs, educational assistance, will drive on the same roads, etc.

 

For the most part these people are working jobs that need to be worked. Expelling them and crippling several industries, including our ag programs, is shortsighted and stupid.

 

I do wish Reagan was still around, the great pillar of conservatism offered amnesty. Bush, who conservatives still believe is this outstanding leader, doesn't have the political capital to invest in amnesty, but is at least pushing for a guest worker program that leads to citizenship. But the rank and file, seem to reject their leadership in this area and I can't understand why.

[BigSqwert]

For the most part these people are working jobs that need to be worked. Expelling them and crippling several industries, including our ag programs, is shortsighted and stupid.

 

Don't you understand? This is a very black and white issue. They must all be expelled a.s.a.p. in order for our country to thrive. There is no grey area.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

If he use the yardstick of contributing far less, then every poor person in America will have to be expelled. Employers will have to pay everyone a wage that will allow them to contribute in taxes the benefits they receive. These jobs will never pay that kind of wage. We all know that everyone working at minimum wage or even a step of two above it will not pay much in taxes and will qualify for Medicaid, Food Assistance Programs, educational assistance, will drive on the same roads, etc.

 

For the most part these people are working jobs that need to be worked. Expelling them and crippling several industries, including our ag programs, is shortsighted and stupid.

 

I do wish Reagan was still around, the great pillar of conservatism offered amnesty. Bush, who conservatives still believe is this outstanding leader, doesn't have the political capital to invest in amnesty, but is at least pushing for a guest worker program that leads to citizenship. But the rank and file, seem to reject their leadership in this area and I can't understand why.

 

Theres one important difference between American poor people and illegal immigrants. American poor people actually belong here.

[Texsox]

Theres one important difference between American poor people and illegal immigrants.  American poor people actually belong here.

 

Well go ahead and expell all of them, I'm certain we will find 12,000,000 people to take their place. Dumb and short sighted, but if that's what the GOP wants. :headshake

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Well go ahead and expell all of them, I'm certain we will find 12,000,000 people to take their place. Dumb and short sighted, but if that's what the GOP wants.  :headshake

 

 

Well since you obviously missed what I said on the last page I'll re-post it for you.

 

Obviously we can't go out tomorrow, round em up and toss em out. The way to get rid of these people is to arrest them when the opportunity presents itself, make the border airtight and as Rex said, start levying massive fines on employers who are found to be hiring these people. You eliminate their reason for being here in the first place and they will start leaving on their own.

 

:rolly

[mr_genius]

Well go ahead and expell all of them, I'm certain we will find 12,000,000 people to take their place. Dumb and short sighted, but if that's what the GOP wants.  :headshake

 

 

you keep insisting that is what the GOP wants, but you're wrong.

 

what does the president want? what do most of the GOP want?

[Texsox]

you keep insisting that is what the GOP wants, but you're wrong.

 

what does the president want?  what do most of the GOP want?

 

Well from here and elsewhere, it is the most conservative that have spouted off ideas like expelling them. The conservative talk show hosts have spoken that Bush is wrong. It certainly isn't the Dems who are talking expulsion.

 

Does anyone have any idea how remote and long our borders are? How are we going to pay for the ultra tight border? To stop undocumented workers? What a waste of money. But of course the usual GOP plan would be to cut taxes and then we'd be able to pay for that.

[mr_genius]

Well from here and elsewhere, it is the most conservative that have spouted off ideas like expelling them. The conservative talk show hosts have spoken that Bush is wrong. It certainly isn't the Dems who are talking expulsion.

 

Does anyone have any idea how remote and long our borders are? How are we going to pay for the ultra tight border? To stop undocumented workers? What a waste of money. But of course the usual GOP plan would be to cut taxes and then we'd be able to pay for that.

 

Well, if you want to claim the far right of the GOP as the GOP standard, I can definately counter with some of the loony toons the Dems have. Na, lets not get into that.

 

You know what, we can't just let everyone in the country that wants to come here. There is NO first world country that has that kind of immigration policy (there is a good reason for that). Even the most liberal European countries have stricter immigration policies than the US. The border can be much more secure, if some of the tax cuts need to be repealed thats fine with me.

 

I don't have that much of a problem with setting up something where people that are here working can pay back taxes, fines and work on becoming citizens. However, this has to be it. Reagan already gave amnesty in the 80's and it encouraged more illegal immigration. After this last "amnesty" deal we have to end this. If you hire illegals you will be fined severly and if you hire them, knowing they are illegal, you should be criminally prosecuted.

Edited April 13, 2006 by mr_genius

[Cerbaho-WG]

Expelling 12 million criminals who are a burden to our social services and contribute FAR less than they take is the only appropriate measure to take.

 

Let's try thinking here:

 

-Illegal immigrants are taking many jobs that people don't want and getting paid ridiculously low wages to do so

-To mobilize the unemployed to take these jobs, you'd probably have to double the wage at least. You'd have to expect an agricultural job to pay 12+ up. Because this isn't a service based job, the higher the wage, the lower the employment level. You'd experience a real high spike of unemployment in the short-run and a lot less quanity supplied. Again, you'd have to raise wages substantially to compensate for this.

 

If you're going to b**** that they're not paying taxes and what not, the amount is amazingly small. Maybe if you wanted to increase tax revenue, you could, I don't know, stop pissing it away to spur short run consumption via tax cuts.

 

I'm failing why to see Republicans are getting all huffy about this. They'll protect corporations at any cost to maximize profit and advocate outsourcing jobs to East Asia where wages are lower, but when they have lower wages sitting right in front of them, they just want to boot them out.

[NorthSideSox72]

Let's try thinking here:

 

-Illegal immigrants are taking many jobs that people don't want and getting paid ridiculously low wages to do so

-To mobilize the unemployed to take these jobs, you'd probably have to double the wage at least. You'd have to expect an agricultural job to pay 12+ up. Because this isn't a service based job, the higher the wage, the lower the employment level. You'd experience a real high spike of unemployment in the short-run and a lot less quanity supplied. Again, you'd have to raise wages substantially to compensate for this.

 

If you're going to b**** that they're not paying taxes and what not, the amount is amazingly small. Maybe if you wanted to increase tax revenue, you could, I don't know, stop pissing it away to spur short run consumption via tax cuts.

 

I'm failing why to see Republicans are getting all huffy about this. They'll protect corporations at any cost to maximize profit and advocate outsourcing jobs to East Asia where wages are lower, but when they have lower wages sitting right in front of them, they just want to boot them out.

What some people here are failing to see is that if these immigrants were here legally, they'd still do those jobs. The fact that they have them illegally is not the positive aspect - its the fact that the jobs are filled at all. So, if people have to get into an actual system of some kind, nothing is lost. Therefore, doing what Nuke suggests, and making them essentially stop skipping and get in line, is not going to permanently drain those jobs.

 

But at least in that case, we'd get the tax revenue and the security that goes with knowing they are here, and they'd get the protections that go with being a documented alien.

 

So you see, their presence here illegally isn't justifiable by the jobs they hold. That argument would only fly if some buffoon (Tancredo perhaps) was saying no to a guest worker program and no to any increas in visas, and yes to kicking them out, thus permanently removing these people from the job scene.

 

Enforce where you can, tighten the borders, and get a guest worker program going (along with increased visa volume). That is the best of both worlds.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Let's try thinking here:

 

-Illegal immigrants are taking many jobs that people don't want and getting paid ridiculously low wages to do so

-To mobilize the unemployed to take these jobs, you'd probably have to double the wage at least. You'd have to expect an agricultural job to pay 12+ up. Because this isn't a service based job, the higher the wage, the lower the employment level. You'd experience a real high spike of unemployment in the short-run and a lot less quanity supplied. Again, you'd have to raise wages substantially to compensate for this.

 

If you're going to b**** that they're not paying taxes and what not, the amount is amazingly small. Maybe if you wanted to increase tax revenue, you could, I don't know, stop pissing it away to spur short run consumption via tax cuts.

 

 

 

What is your defenition of "short run"? I believe the last recession ended in 2002 and the economy has been expanding ever since and tax revenue's have also gone up even despite the tax cuts so there goes your stupid argument about "pissing it away".

 

Since you haven't read anything I have had to say on this issue I'll refresh your memory. I understand that there are a lot of jobs that most Americans will not take and as such I favor a guest worker program to fill them. What Im not in favor of is a bunch of people crossing into this country illegally in order to take them. We dont know who they are, we have no clue as to their background and their presence here not only violates the law but is a slap in the face to the thousands of LEGAL immigrants who play by the rules and pursue the American dream the right way.

 

Being the "socially conscious" lefty that you are you should be outraged that evil corporations exploit migrant labor at a fraction of the minimum wage but I guess in your frenzy to stop immigration reform you guys forgot all about that.

 

I'm failing why to see Republicans are getting all huffy about this. They'll protect corporations at any cost to maximize profit and advocate outsourcing jobs to East Asia where wages are lower, but when they have lower wages sitting right in front of them, they just want to boot them out.

 

I dont know what it takes to get it through your thick skull that these people are violating the law by being here. You say try thinking? You should take your own advice. Additionally, I know it really burns your ass but this isin't Soviet Russia and the government has no say so as to where corporations locate their factories or how they run their businesses. Those jobs are outsourced because the cost of labor is becomming prohibitively high, as an economics major you should know this, and to stay competitive and increase shareholder value companies must seek to lower costs.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Does anyone have any idea how remote and long our borders are? How are we going to pay for the ultra tight border? To stop undocumented workers? What a waste of money. But of course the usual GOP plan would be to cut taxes and then we'd be able to pay for that.

 

Oh so making sure our borders are secure is a "waste of money" huh? I guess screening all those containers coming into our ports is a "waste of money" too huh? There's so many and they're all carrying toys. dvd players and televisions, nothing could ever happen there!

 

Sometimes you really amaze me.

 

 

 

:rolly

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

What some people here are failing to see is that if these immigrants were here legally, they'd still do those jobs.  The fact that they have them illegally is not the positive aspect - its the fact that the jobs are filled at all.  So, if people have to get into an actual system of some kind, nothing is lost.  Therefore, doing what Nuke suggests, and making them essentially stop skipping and get in line, is not going to permanently drain those jobs.

 

But at least in that case, we'd get the tax revenue and the security that goes with knowing they are here, and they'd get the protections that go with being a documented alien.

 

So you see, their presence here illegally isn't justifiable by the jobs they hold.  That argument would only fly if some buffoon (Tancredo perhaps) was saying no to a guest worker program and no to any increas in visas, and yes to kicking them out, thus permanently removing these people from the job scene.

 

Enforce where you can, tighten the borders, and get a guest worker program going (along with increased visa volume).  That is the best of both worlds.

 

^^^^^^^

 

Agreed.

Edited April 13, 2006 by NUKE_CLEVELAND

[Texsox]

A've been assuming that everyone has a working knowledge of how illegals get employed. I am thinking now that most people here are thinking the majority of illegals are working off the books, for cash. At least here in Texas, and I suspect most places, that isn't accurate.

 

Many illegals are paying taxes, just not to "accurate" social security numbers. If we are discussing workers who are being paid cash by employers who knowingly have hired undocumented workers, then I agree, both parties should be in serious trouble.

 

What happens more often, is the worker will borrow the proper documentation either from a relative, or pay for a fake identity. The employer is sending in the withholdings, but the account that is being credited, isn't the one doing the working. The obvious downside is someone gets credited for benefits they did not earn and the person working receives no benefits. But taxes are being paid.

 

I am certain we all have been employed here. When you are employed you furnish a copy of your driver's license and social security cards. There is an undergroud market for these items. Identity theft doesn't just mean someone racking up credit card bills, it also means working and using someone elses SS#.

[Balta1701]

Oh so making sure our borders are secure is a "waste of money" huh?  I guess screening all those containers coming into our ports is a "waste of money" too huh?  There's so many and they're all carrying toys. dvd players and televisions, nothing could ever happen there!

 

Sometimes you really amaze me.

:rolly

Which is why the Republicans blocked the Democratic efforts to actually screen those containers.

 

I apologize for the interruption, you may now return to the immigration-related sniping.

Edited April 13, 2006 by Balta1701

[Texsox]

Oh so making sure our borders are secure is a "waste of money" huh?  I guess screening all those containers coming into our ports is a "waste of money" too huh?  There's so many and they're all carrying toys. dvd players and televisions, nothing could ever happen there!

 

Sometimes you really amaze me.

:rolly

 

Fences and patrols away from are ports is what I'm objecting to. Proposals like 1,400 mile long fences. Measures to stop illegals crossing, looking for jobs, while Canada and the US flush shipping lanes during heavy traffic periods by not checking at all. (see the It Would be Different if it was Mexico) I am all for securing the ports, but not for spending billions to patrol thousands of square miles of desert.

[NorthSideSox72]

Fences and patrols away from are ports is what I'm objecting to. Proposals like 1,400 mile long fences. Measures to stop illegals crossing, looking for jobs, while Canada and the US flush shipping lanes during heavy traffic periods by not checking at all. (see the It Would be Different if it was Mexico) I am all for securing the ports, but not for spending billions to patrol thousands of square miles of desert.

As I pointed out earlier in this thread, we don't need to spend billions or put up a 1400 mile wall to protect our borders. There are more efficient technological methods, just as there are at our ports.

[Balta1701]

As I pointed out earlier in this thread, we don't need to spend billions or put up a 1400 mile wall to protect our borders.  There are more efficient technological methods, just as there are at our ports.

If we find a way to remove the reason for people to cross that border illegally...there will be no reason to spend all that money to prevent people from crossing illegally.

[Texsox]

As I pointed out earlier in this thread, we don't need to spend billions or put up a 1400 mile wall to protect our borders.  There are more efficient technological methods, just as there are at our ports.

 

We are already using many of thosr technologies, and by most acounts they have not achieved the desired success. Ut will take much more, which will be very expensive. I fear materials being imported more than people walking across the desert or north woods.

[NorthSideSox72]

We are already using many of thosr technologies, and by most acounts they have not achieved the desired success. Ut will take much more, which will be very expensive. I fear materials being imported more than people walking across the desert or north woods.

Materials still require vehicles and/or people.

 

I wish I could find that darn article now, but the amount of money Border Patrol has spent on detection technologies is staggeringly small.

 

And you are right about the North Woods. I pointed that out too, a while ago, that one can boat across the very long border into MN without anyone ever knowing. But I sure as heck don't want to see a giant battlement of a wall put up across this county's largest roadless wilderness area (BWCAW and Quetico combine to be over 6 million acres).

[NorthSideSox72]

If we find a way to remove the reason for people to cross that border illegally...there will be no reason to spend all that money to prevent people from crossing illegally.

I agree, to an extent. The demand side needs to be addressed as well. But not exclusively.