In The Bright Of New Administration Rules: Immigrants as Economic Contributors

[ronwagn + 6,290]

21 hours ago, WienerischMitRico said:

Actually I think the need is for unskilled immigrants. The kinds of people who do the jobs that nobody wants to do. The hundreds that work in the meat packing plants, farm labor, landscaping etc....

All the thankless jobs that need to get done, but the reward vs. effort just isnt there.

Who is going to go to the US if they are skilled? By the time you get skilled, you are well into your 30s and the US is just not that great of an option anymore. Maybe for a few who want a change of scenery or from India, but the USA is hardly going to get flooded by tool and die makers from Europe so they can make the same or less.

I live in an eastern european EU country and even here the situation has improved to the point that it is less and less worthwhile to try and emigrate. Several collegues had the green card and even returned after they decided it wasnt worth the hassle. Here there is also a problem with lack of labor (probably due to skewed demographics towards the elderly), so there is a policy that allows 'third country' nationals legal right to work. Of course they are not doing the skilled work, but the cleaning, picking, and labor stuff. Because that is where the demand for workers is.

 That is one side of the story but working twenty years, in the medical field, I worked with mostly doctors from India. They can make very little money there. My cardiologist is African. California and silicon valley is also full of Indians, Chinese, and many other races. Of course Hispanics are the largest group, even beyond Caucasians I think. HIspanics are quite upwardly mobile and are becoming the major political power along with other "minorities". I have no problem with that as Caucasians do not want to produce offspring. I am part Hispanic myself. 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

22 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Reducing demand in the US would achieve the same result as increasing demand in their country of origin. The wages and lifestyle may be less desireable, but that is not for the US to address.

In simplistic terms, yes. But the first is easier to accomplish. Simply punish those employers that use illegal labor. The 2nd (increasing demand in country of origin) is much more of a longterm thing - but essentially key to building functioning countries that can and will enforce law and order, protect their own borders etc. This is strategy that I advocate EU take towards Africa and the US take towards latin America. Just don't expect a quick fix.

 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

2 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Simply punish those employers that use illegal labor.

^ this.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

Just now, Tom Kirkman said:

^ this.

why does Trump not sign an executive order doing this? It would be super effective and tough on illegal immigrants.. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

11 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

why does Trump not sign an executive order doing this? It would be super effective and tough on illegal immigrants.. 

The opposition Democrats and the Never-Trump Republicans oppose measures that would effectively punish employers who knowingly hire illegals.

Recently, I read an article where it laid out that employers could get legally punished for questioning whether a worker was illegal, as it was "discrimination".  Unfortunately, I can't seem to track down that article.  I'll keep trying to find it though.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

38 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

why does Trump not sign an executive order doing this? It would be super effective and tough on illegal immigrants.. 

 

22 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

The opposition Democrats and the Never-Trump Republicans oppose measures that would effectively punish employers who knowingly hire illegals.

Recently, I read an article where it laid out that employers could get legally punished for questioning whether a worker was illegal, as it was "discrimination".  Unfortunately, I can't seem to track down that article.  I'll keep trying to find it though.

Found the article:

Evidence Surfaces of Intentional Employment Violations by Mississippi Companies Raided by ICE

After federal authorities raided seven chicken processing facilities in Mississippi last week evidence is now surfacing (within probable cause affidavits – full pdf below) of willful and intentional illegal hiring practices.  But don’t look for all the employers to be prosecuted.

The Washington Post has an excellent outline of the seven facilities citing dozens of instances where evidence shows each company knew they were hiring people who were not legally eligible for work.

In a surprising number of cases the illegal employees were arrested by Border Patrol in California, Texas, New Mexico and Arizona and released on electronic-monitoring programs, including ankle bracelets, to await court dates.

According to the affidavits federal authorities tracked the GPS locators on some of the employees and found they were illegally working in all of the facilities.  During interviews with the workers they stated how friends and family members in Mexico and Guatemala told them where to go for work in Mississippi.

Apparently the ability to gain illegal employment at the Mississippi facilities, and specifically where to go to get hired, was widely known throughout the home communities of the migrants.  After they were detained at the U.S. border, they were processed, received monitors, allowed to leave, and then immediately went to Mississippi to begin work.

They were not allowed to work legally in the United States while wearing the ankle-bracelets and monitored.  However, they just went to the chicken plants because that was all just part of the anticipated program.

The hiring examples include the customary use of multiple aliases, forged paperwork and ID’s, and using social security numbers of deceased people.

The Washington Post article is really quite remarkable:  SEE HERE.

[Excerpt] … The records detail how ICE linked undocumented immigrants to the companies. Investigators found some employees via GPS coordinates at plants operated by all five companies. The employees previously had been arrested by Border Patrol agents in California, Texas, New Mexico and Arizona and released on electronic-monitoring programs, including ankle bracelets, to await court dates. In each case cited, the individuals listed addresses in small towns in central Mississippi where they could be located.

An undocumented Mexican woman working in a Peco Foods plant in Bay Springs, Miss., told immigration officials that she had come to the state because people in Mexico had told her that jobs were available at the chicken plants there.

In cases cited in the affidavits, people on ICE’s electronic-monitoring programs were not authorized to work. But according to the affidavits, dozens of employees in such programs were found working at the seven chicken plants in 2018 and 2019. One successful job applicant was told by a supervisor during her interview that she would need to keep her ankle monitor charged while she worked. (read more)

Now, at first review it might sound like the plant employers would be in big trouble; however, buried deep in the article is this statement from one of the employers (Koch Foods), that everyone should pay attention to:

Koch spokesman Jim Gilliland told The Post that Koch Foods risked violating federal law that bans discrimination on the basis of national origin for requesting documents beyond what an applicant provides, if those materials appear authentic.

I can tell you with 100% certainty that what Mr. Gilliland says there is absolutely accurate.  There are two sets of laws in conflict with each-other; and you can be sued, and/or fined, by the United States Department of Labor and/or the U.S. DOJ Civil Rights Division for not hiring illegal aliens.

If you question the authenticity of any applicants identity; and that applicant is one of a legally protected category (think “ethnicity” or “origin”); and the employers authenticity challenge results in a “disparate impact” of non-eligibility for employment – as determined by ethnicity (Latino); then you are in violation of U.S. labor laws.  This happens regardless of it being unlawful to hire illegal aliens.

If you challenge the presented documents, and all the outcomes of those challenges result in non-eligibility of Hispanics as a greater percentage than non-Hispanics, you are violating employment law under the DOJ (Civil Rights Division) definition of “disparate impact.”   In this example, and it is common (believe me), additional employment eligibility checks due to suspicions of false ID’s, is unlawful and legally risky.

It’s also completely stupid.

View this document on Scribd

.

[Danlxyz + 63]

7 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

f you challenge the presented documents, and all the outcomes of those challenges result in non-eligibility of Hispanics as a greater percentage than non-Hispanics, you are violating employment law under the DOJ (Civil Rights Division) definition of “disparate impact.”   In this example, and it is common (believe me), additional employment eligibility checks due to suspicions of false ID’s, is unlawful and legally risky.

It’s also completely stupid.

 

That does sound stupid but it should be easy to fix. After all both are federal agencies and President Trump is the ultimate administrator of both. He has not been shy about issuing executive orders to change existing rules. Just put in a safe harbor provision that if the company always uses e-verify to check all new hires then they would not be subject to any regulatory action.

IMHO, it sounds that the present situation allows a way for employers to evade responsibility.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

1 hour ago, Danlxyz said:

That does sound stupid but it should be easy to fix. After all both are federal agencies and President Trump is the ultimate administrator of both. He has not been shy about issuing executive orders to change existing rules. Just put in a safe harbor provision that if the company always uses e-verify to check all new hires then they would not be subject to any regulatory action.

IMHO, it sounds that the present situation allows a way for employers to evade responsibility.

I don't have a link to an article handy, but I recall a couple years ago when Trump tried to start enforcing e-verify on employers, the Democrats screamed "racism" and everyone backed off.  

 

=========================

/ side note, expect to see more of the "racism" card being hurled at Trump for the forseeable future:

New York Times chief outlines coverage shift: From Trump-Russia to Trump racism

Dean Baquet, the executive editor of the New York Times, said recently that, after the Mueller report, the paper has to shift the focus of its coverage from the Trump-Russia affair to the president's alleged racism.

"We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well," Baquet said. "Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story."

Baquet made the remarks at an employee town hall Monday. A recording was leaked to Slate, which published a transcript Thursday. 

... (much more details in the link)

=============================

 

Anyway, in my opinion, one of the best ways to drastically reduce illegal immigration into the U.S. is to damn the torpedos, full speed ahead, and fine and imprison business owners, directors and boards of directoes that knowingly and repeatedly hire illegal aliens. 

Simply by enforcing the existing e-verify (which is already in place and was already implemented before Trump was elected) the demand by employers for cheap, illegal workers would likely plummet.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

9 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

why does Trump not sign an executive order doing this? It would be super effective and tough on illegal immigrants.. 

His resorts would probably be negatively effected. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

20 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Anyway, in my opinion, one of the best ways to drastically reduce illegal immigration into the U.S. is to damn the torpedos, full speed ahead, and fine and imprison business owners, directors and boards of directoes that knowingly and repeatedly hire illegal aliens. 

Simply by enforcing the existing e-verify (which is already in place and was already implemented before Trump was elected) the demand by employers for cheap, illegal workers would likely plummet.

It does not work that way.  The employer reviews the documents the applicant presents.  If they are legit papers he cannot demand further.  Typically what is presented is a social-security card from someone else.  Or an I-551 visa card from someone else.  The employer is looking at authentic documents.  Except the person presenting the "papers" is Jorge, not Guillermo,  and the employer has no way of knowing.  

You can go run that name through some e-verify data-base, but so what?  Remember, there really is a Guillermo who is a legit migrant with legit papers.  The problem is that Guillermo is simultaneously working at 15 places in 8 States. Who is to know?  Nobody.  And yes, it is a violation of labor law to not accept papers when they are obviously legit, which they always are. What's to prosecute? Nothing.  What's to "Executive Order" about?  Nothing.  And the Great Charade simply continues. 

 

[Danlxyz + 63]

48 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

You can go run that name through some e-verify data-base, but so what?  Remember, there really is a Guillermo who is a legit migrant with legit papers.  The problem is that Guillermo is simultaneously working at 15 places in 8 States. Who is to know?  Nobody.  And yes, it is a violation of labor law to not accept papers when they are obviously legit, which they always are. What's to prosecute? Nothing.  What's to "Executive Order" about?  Nothing.  And the Great Charade simply continues. 

The IRS would know. The employers of all those 15 people claiming to be Guillermo will send in a W2 to the Social Security Admin and the information is sent to the IRS. If no one files a tax return claiming all those W2s then the IRS could notify e-verify that there is a possibility of fraud. When someone else uses that name and number they would be told to go to Social Security to prove they are the real Guillermo.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 hour ago, Danlxyz said:

If no one files a tax return claiming all those W2s then the IRS could notify e-verify that there is a possibility of fraud.

I recall it was Mitt Romney who stated that 47% of Americans filed no Form 1040 and paid not Federal Income Tax.  Remember that for low-wage workers  (the average poultry-plant worker down in Mississippi is paid $12.50/hour) there is no federal income tax withheld.  So there is no accumulation of tax slips and there is nothing for the IRS to report - which they do not have the authority to do in the first place. And that is before you get to the underlying fact that the IRS does not have the people to start sifting through Returns, or W-2, or much of anything else.  The IRS is dramatically short-staffed.  And even if there is this pile of W-2s, so what?  Nobody is obliged to go claim them - especially if there is no withholding on them in the first place. 

[Danlxyz + 63]

1 hour ago, Jan van Eck said:

1 hour ago, Jan van Eck said:

I recall it was Mitt Romney who stated that 47% of Americans filed no Form 1040 and paid not Federal Income Tax.  Remember that for low-wage workers  (the average poultry-plant worker down in Mississippi is paid $12.50/hour) there is no federal income tax withheld.  So there is no accumulation of tax slips and there is nothing for the IRS to report - which they do not have the authority to do in the first place. And that is before you get to the underlying fact that the IRS does not have the people to start sifting through Returns, or W-2, or much of anything else.  The IRS is dramatically short-staffed.  And even if there is this pile of W-2s, so what?  Nobody is obliged to go claim them - especially if there is no withholding on them in the first place. 

I don't recall that he said they don't file 1040s, just that they don't pay any taxes.

But the employers must file a w2 if there are any wages and pay the FICA and Medicare taxes. The record keeping is all done with computers now. A company with over a certain number of employees is required to file their W2s  electronically. If they have less, then they mail them in and SS optically scans the W2s. At least that was how it was done when  I had that job.  After it gets in the system all of the income is sorted into accounts based on name and social security number. You can go to irs.gov and find your own account showing all your reported income for the last few years.

The 2018 filing requirement was $12,000 and $400 for selfemployed. If you had multiple people using the same identity, you probably would have income totaling more than that.The computer would generate a letter reminding you to file. Then if you didn't answer it would follow up with more and more drastic actions. At some point a human being would become involved.

You need the executive order to put some teeth into e-verify. If something is not allowed now, the order can authorize it. It could set new procedures for solving all the problems you point out.

This isn't a perfect solution and maybe slow but it could work for most cases.

 

[Zhong Lu + 845]

If the US government was actually interested in upholding the law on immigration, they should arrest Trump for hiring illegal immigrants.  

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

1 hour ago, Zhong Lu said:

If the US government was actually interested in upholding the law on immigration, they should arrest Trump for hiring illegal immigrants.  

Do you honestly believe that Trump actually has any involvement with who his various business endeavors hire? Does the CEO of ANY large company get involved with hiring? This is what the Human Resource Department is responsible for.

If you dislike Trump, fair enough, but try not to bring in childish arguments.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

When the US gets serious about illegal immigration they will find a way to identify companies hiring illegals.

Keep in mind that identity theft is a crime on top of entering the country illegally.

[Boat + 1,323]

On 8/13/2019 at 10:32 AM, rainman said:

During history the USA is a nation of immigrants - legal immigrants account for most of the successful businesses in the US, and we have some of the lowest population densities in the developed world.

Population density is the in the eye of the beholder. Since WWII the population has jumped to around 320, million. That’s around a 120 million gain. I suggest we create policy that takes us back to 200 million over say 150 years. 

[Zhong Lu + 845]

Then by the same logic, Douglas Buckland, the owners of the Mississippi chicken plant didn't know they were hiring illegals, either.  [Do you have any evidence to claim elsewise?]

Which means that NO BUSINESS in the US can be prosecuted for hiring illegals as long as they can claim plausible deniability (oh I didn't know they were illegal. Do you have any proof otherwise? Oh ho ho ho ho).  

Which also means that illegal immigration will continue, unabated.  

Edited August 18, 2019 by Zhong Lu

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

13 hours ago, Zhong Lu said:

Then by the same logic, Douglas Buckland, the owners of the Mississippi chicken plant didn't know they were hiring illegals, either.  [Do you have any evidence to claim elsewise?]

Which means that NO BUSINESS in the US can be prosecuted for hiring illegals as long as they can claim plausible deniability (oh I didn't know they were illegal. Do you have any proof otherwise? Oh ho ho ho ho).  

Which also means that illegal immigration will continue, unabated.  

With e-verify and IRS requirements for the W-2 filing, if the business owner performs his due diligence then the illegal workers should eventually be identified.

These workers are using either someone else's   Social Security Number or fake ones on their W-2 form. The IRS will be able to tell if the SSN is valid OR if that SSN is also being used by someone else.

Much of identifying illegal workers depends on the employers performing due diligence and using common sense.

You will now say that many employers will not perform their due diligence as they want the cheap labor and will take the risk as the fines for hiring lacks any real sting. This is easy to fix. Instead of fining the employer a couple of hundred bucks for each illegal he hires, increase the fine to say $50,000. After a few companies are put out of business after an ICE raid, other business owners will wake up and play by the rules.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

On 8/16/2019 at 1:23 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

 

Found the article:

Evidence Surfaces of Intentional Employment Violations by Mississippi Companies Raided by ICE

After federal authorities raided seven chicken processing facilities in Mississippi last week evidence is now surfacing (within probable cause affidavits – full pdf below) of willful and intentional illegal hiring practices.  But don’t look for all the employers to be prosecuted.

The Washington Post has an excellent outline of the seven facilities citing dozens of instances where evidence shows each company knew they were hiring people who were not legally eligible for work.

In a surprising number of cases the illegal employees were arrested by Border Patrol in California, Texas, New Mexico and Arizona and released on electronic-monitoring programs, including ankle bracelets, to await court dates.

According to the affidavits federal authorities tracked the GPS locators on some of the employees and found they were illegally working in all of the facilities.  During interviews with the workers they stated how friends and family members in Mexico and Guatemala told them where to go for work in Mississippi.

Apparently the ability to gain illegal employment at the Mississippi facilities, and specifically where to go to get hired, was widely known throughout the home communities of the migrants.  After they were detained at the U.S. border, they were processed, received monitors, allowed to leave, and then immediately went to Mississippi to begin work.

They were not allowed to work legally in the United States while wearing the ankle-bracelets and monitored.  However, they just went to the chicken plants because that was all just part of the anticipated program.

The hiring examples include the customary use of multiple aliases, forged paperwork and ID’s, and using social security numbers of deceased people.

The Washington Post article is really quite remarkable:  SEE HERE.

[Excerpt] … The records detail how ICE linked undocumented immigrants to the companies. Investigators found some employees via GPS coordinates at plants operated by all five companies. The employees previously had been arrested by Border Patrol agents in California, Texas, New Mexico and Arizona and released on electronic-monitoring programs, including ankle bracelets, to await court dates. In each case cited, the individuals listed addresses in small towns in central Mississippi where they could be located.

An undocumented Mexican woman working in a Peco Foods plant in Bay Springs, Miss., told immigration officials that she had come to the state because people in Mexico had told her that jobs were available at the chicken plants there.

In cases cited in the affidavits, people on ICE’s electronic-monitoring programs were not authorized to work. But according to the affidavits, dozens of employees in such programs were found working at the seven chicken plants in 2018 and 2019. One successful job applicant was told by a supervisor during her interview that she would need to keep her ankle monitor charged while she worked. (read more)

Now, at first review it might sound like the plant employers would be in big trouble; however, buried deep in the article is this statement from one of the employers (Koch Foods), that everyone should pay attention to:

Koch spokesman Jim Gilliland told The Post that Koch Foods risked violating federal law that bans discrimination on the basis of national origin for requesting documents beyond what an applicant provides, if those materials appear authentic.

I can tell you with 100% certainty that what Mr. Gilliland says there is absolutely accurate.  There are two sets of laws in conflict with each-other; and you can be sued, and/or fined, by the United States Department of Labor and/or the U.S. DOJ Civil Rights Division for not hiring illegal aliens.

If you question the authenticity of any applicants identity; and that applicant is one of a legally protected category (think “ethnicity” or “origin”); and the employers authenticity challenge results in a “disparate impact” of non-eligibility for employment – as determined by ethnicity (Latino); then you are in violation of U.S. labor laws.  This happens regardless of it being unlawful to hire illegal aliens.

If you challenge the presented documents, and all the outcomes of those challenges result in non-eligibility of Hispanics as a greater percentage than non-Hispanics, you are violating employment law under the DOJ (Civil Rights Division) definition of “disparate impact.”   In this example, and it is common (believe me), additional employment eligibility checks due to suspicions of false ID’s, is unlawful and legally risky.

It’s also completely stupid.

View this document on Scribd

.

Here's what I don't get : I think this would be a slam-dunk winner with Trumps base to go after big biz and illegal immigrants in the same move... Why are we not seeing a twitter storm from Trump? 

To be clear : I am not saying that Trumps is worse the alternative; in fact he may be the best of bad bunch, but what I don't understand is all this praise he gets??? 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

On 8/18/2019 at 10:09 AM, Boat said:

Population density is the in the eye of the beholder. Since WWII the population has jumped to around 320, million. That’s around a 120 million gain. I suggest we create policy that takes us back to 200 million over say 150 years. 

How?

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

On 8/18/2019 at 7:12 AM, Douglas Buckland said:

Do you honestly believe that Trump actually has any involvement with who his various business endeavors hire? Does the CEO of ANY large company get involved with hiring? This is what the Human Resource Department is responsible for.

Senior management sets the direction and values of the company. It would be easy for ANY CEO (and senior management) to create a specific culture. 

Be fair, Doug, don't defend trump blindly. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

28 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Senior management sets the direction and values of the company. It would be easy for ANY CEO (and senior management) to create a specific culture. 

Be fair, Doug, don't defend trump blindly. 

So you are telling me that the CEO of Exxon, Lockheed or NOV (for example) has ANYTHING to do with who gets hired on the shop floor? Get serious!

I am not defending Trump, I am pointing out absolutely inane comments and scenarios.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

Just now, Douglas Buckland said:

So you are telling me that the CEO of Exxon, Lockheed or NOV (for example) has ANYTHING to do with who gets hired on the shop floor? 

YES! 

Of course not directly, but in-directly. Senior management creates culture. Sadly, often they create a bad culture by rewarding results and turning a blind eye to hwo they were achieved. 

 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

11 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

YES! 

Of course not directly, but in-directly. Senior management creates culture. Sadly, often they create a bad culture by rewarding results and turning a blind eye to hwo they were achieved. 

 

So you now say that the CEO is not directly associated with who gets hired or not and it is senior management that creates the culture.

Guess that gets Trump off the hook!😆

Do you actually believe that the CEO of ANY major corporation, or conglomeration of smaller concerns, has the time, or inclination, to get involved in the hiring or firing process? That is why they have Human Resource departments, Line Managers and Legal Departments.

If a CEO is getting involved with this they are seriously micro-managing.

If you dislike Trump and his policies, that is definitely your right, but at least try to be realistic when you are slagging the man!