Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Phaser11 on December 04, 2006, 09:02:43 AM
-
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20061204-122448-1240r.htm
Woops,
I wonder if there will be any lawsuits for the people that followed the rules to get there money back from the government!
-
Did Hillary and her open opposition to a bill Congress put to the Senate leave any doubt that the democrats will give anyone who wants it citizenship in the US? Bill gave our technology to China. Hillary will give everything left away.
-
You can't just post links dude, this is going to get modded unless you write a couple of sentences concerning the subject.
-
Thanks Suave
-
Originally posted by lukster
Did Hillary and her open opposition to a bill Congress put to the Senate leave any doubt that the democrats will give anyone who wants it citizenship in the US? Bill gave our technology to China. Hillary will give everything left away.
They can pass all the bills they wish, but they'll need a 2/3 majority to over-ride a Presidential veto....
Which is why the democrats need the White House.
My regards,
Widewing
-
The Dems are trying to supplement their voting base by this move.
What Widewing said. ;)
-
Bush has always been pretty soft on immigration. I'm not sure we can count on him to veto reformation and amnesty.
-
Bush has always been pretty soft on immigration. I'm not sure we can count on him to veto reformation and amnesty.
Yep.
The problem is that it's only the American people who want to get tough on immigration. Politicians of both parties, for many similar and some different reasons, have no interest in change. We will have to seriously flush Congress to get any change.
Charon
-
And the revolution is one step closer.
-
Politcians are in the hands of the big businesses that payes their way to power. Big business wants cheap labour and so much of it that they can pick and choose while paying less than in a market were there is a labor shortage.
-
Politcians are in the hands of the big businesses that payes their way to power. Big business wants cheap labour and so much of it that they can pick and choose while paying less than in a market were there is a labor shortage.
Yep. But future votes is also an issue. Demographically, potential future Mexican-Americans represent a significant power base. While this will likely benefit the Democrats more, even the Republicans have an eye on this angle since many Mexican immigrants have religious/conservative values that fit well with recent Republican platforms. Neither side wants to totally alienate this group. But yeah, business likes exploiting immigrants and they write the checks.
So as not to be a total hypocrite, I'm sorry to say that even I paid an operation with likely "undocumented" workers to do my final fall clean up this year. I was just too stretched to do it and the price was "right." However, I could live without that if push came to shove.
Charon
-
If you think of it that way imagine this:
If all the current illegal immigrants become naturalized citizens... that means the big bussiness can no longer pay them a cent an hour but the minimal wage.
Its bad for them. The bussiness that depend on the cheap illegal immigrant labor I bet are lobbying to keep the illegals... illegal.
-
The democrats can't lose, short term. They open the US freely to all who want to immigrate here and establsih a minimum wage. Since many businesses won't pay minimum wage unemployment soars putting millions more on welfare. Those on welfare typically vote democrat. Of course when it all comes tumbling down under it's unsustainable weight we all lose.
-
It's not BIG business that uses the majority of the illegals for labor. It's the small mom and pop labor intensive operations that do that.
-
It's not BIG business that uses the majority of the illegals for labor.
I wonder about that. I haven't really seen any numbers either way, but an awful lot of service industry operations -- hotel chains, resturant chains, etc. -- seem to have plenty of illegal labor. Apparently that is the case as well with manufacturing in some industries -- poultry production for example.
Charon
-
Originally posted by Charon
I wonder about that. I haven't really seen any numbers either way, but an awful lot of service industry operations -- hotel chains, resturant chains, etc. -- seem to have plenty of illegal labor. Apparently that is the case as well with manufacturing in some industries -- poultry production for example.
Charon
The legal ramifications if caught would seem to offset the risk that a big business or hotel chain is willing take, and a hotel managers job would be on the line (those guys that DO the hiring)...I'm willing to bet you're sterotyping without seeing whether or not they have a green card.
-
What ARE the penalties to a business if caught? I'm assuming in addition to the Federal case the state may go after the business as well considering it's a tax issue.
Anyone have the info or a link handy?
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
The legal ramifications if caught would seem to offset the risk that a big business or hotel chain is willing take, and a hotel managers job would be on the line (those guys that DO the hiring)...I'm willing to bet you're sterotyping without seeing whether or not they have a green card.
I know the chicken planets around Gainesville, GA are using illegals. My sis-in-law works for one, and she's told us about times immigration would raid the place on payday, loading up illegals to deport, and she'd ask them what to do with thier checks, and most tell her to hold them, they'll be back by Monday or Tuesday. And they show back up to get them, and usually go right back to work according to her.
-
nelson... mav explained it to you, it is not big business that wants or uses illegals but small business.
Does anyone need any more proof of why you should never ever vote for a democrat?
lazs
-
Originally posted by VOR
What ARE the penalties to a business if caught? I'm assuming in addition to the Federal case the state may go after the business as well considering it's a tax issue.
Anyone have the info or a link handy?
It seems to me that Wal~Mart has been busted for this about five times in the last two years. Wal~Mart, like the federal gubment, is big enough that when you get a thousand fingers pointing in a thousand directions there can never be any semblance of accountability. I could be wrong but I think the extent of wally-worlds punishment has been for a patsy store manager's head to roll and a public promise to not allow it to happen again.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/04/national/main581731.shtml
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1027/p08s03-comv.html
http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/insideice/articles/insideice_120505_Web6.htm
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,102928,00.html
-
No comment, on the grounds that skuzzy would have a field day editing my post.
-
Originally posted by sluggish
It seems to me that Wal~Mart has been busted for this about five times in the last two years. Wal~Mart, like the federal gubment, is big enough that when you get a thousand fingers pointing in a thousand directions there can never be any semblance of accountability. I could be wrong but I think the extent of wally-worlds punishment has been for a patsy store manager's head to roll and a public promise to not allow it to happen again.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/04/national/main581731.shtml
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1027/p08s03-comv.html
http://www.ice.gov/pi/news/insideice/articles/insideice_120505_Web6.htm
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,102928,00.html
Not to be picky here but each one of those stories are about subcontractors hired by wally world. They are not directly employed by wallyworld and wally world is not in the position to screen another companies employees prior to hiring.
The suit listed in the last story is rather bogus. Why should an illegal sue a company that hired the company they worked for? Didn't they themselves know they were illegal when the started to work as cleaners.
-
Originally posted by VOR
What ARE the penalties to a business if caught? I'm assuming in addition to the Federal case the state may go after the business as well considering it's a tax issue.
Anyone have the info or a link handy?
In case you really wanted to know, Denver Mayor Hickenlooper owns a restaurant that employed illegal Raul Garcia-Gomez, who ambushed two Denver cops killing one. Oddly enough, the restaurant is still open for business and Hickenlooper still reigns over Denver. Justice? :rolleyes:
The Story (http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/4475243/detail.html)
-
These are all very interesting stories, but I wanted to find out what's actually on the Fed books as min/max punitive actions against an employer. Google gives me a bunch of headlines and editorials.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Not to be picky here but each one of those stories are about subcontractors hired by wally world. They are not directly employed by wallyworld and wally world is not in the position to screen another companies employees prior to hiring.
The suit listed in the last story is rather bogus. Why should an illegal sue a company that hired the company they worked for? Didn't they themselves know they were illegal when the started to work as cleaners.
I don't think you're being picky, you're just saying that you agree with the fact that large corporations are untouchable because they subcontract. The original "sub-debate" was whether large corps engage in the use of illegal labor and whether consequences were great enough to prevent them from doing so.
That last link is kind of funny. Welcome to the brave new world...
-
Originally posted by VOR
These are all very interesting stories, but I wanted to find out what's actually on the Fed books as min/max punitive actions against an employer. Google gives me a bunch of headlines and editorials.
The point is that it doesn't matter what laws are on the books because they aren't being enforced anyway.
-
Originally posted by sluggish
The point is that it doesn't matter what laws are on the books because they aren't being enforced anyway.
I get it, but I'm not looking for points or opinions. I'm looking for some CFR that I can't seem to find.
-
Originally posted by sluggish
I don't think you're being picky, you're just saying that you agree with the fact that large corporations are untouchable because they subcontract. The original "sub-debate" was whether large corps engage in the use of illegal labor and whether consequences were great enough to prevent them from doing so.
That last link is kind of funny. Welcome to the brave new world...
No what I am saying is that wally world is not responsible to screen the employees of the companies they hire. You may want to assess some moral stigma to them, I'm looking at the situation from the part of both companies. The one at fault is the company that hired the illegals, not the one who hired the company. You seem to expect the person / company contracting with a seperate company to screen the employees of the second company. It's not going to happen.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
No what I am saying is that wally world is not responsible to screen the employees of the companies they hire. You may want to assess some moral stigma to them, I'm looking at the situation from the part of both companies. The one at fault is the company that hired the illegals, not the one who hired the company. You seem to expect the person / company contracting with a seperate company to screen the employees of the second company. It's not going to happen.
You're right it's not going to happen. If companies were held responsible for the people who WORKED WITHIN THEIR DOORS they couldn't get away with this. Basically what you're saying is that as long as a company doesn't hire the people that work for them, they aren't responsible for checking if they are legal or not. This is brilliant. A loophole for zero accountability. The government couldn't have done better.
-
Sluggish, based on what you're saying if I hire Bob's Lanscaping service to mow my lawn, I'm personally responsible for checking the immigration status of every dude that shows up with a leaf blower because I employed the company to do a job.
-
Originally posted by VOR
What ARE the penalties to a business if caught? I'm assuming in addition to the Federal case the state may go after the business as well considering it's a tax issue.
Anyone have the info or a link handy?
Dont know about statewide but in NJ a couple of towns have passed local laws that hiring or renting housing to an illegal can result to an up to 10K per person fine per incident.
-
Originally posted by sluggish
You're right it's not going to happen. If companies were held responsible for the people who WORKED WITHIN THEIR DOORS they couldn't get away with this. Basically what you're saying is that as long as a company doesn't hire the people that work for them, they aren't responsible for checking if they are legal or not. This is brilliant. A loophole for zero accountability. The government couldn't have done better.
Nope one last time. I said they are not responsible to screen the employees of the companies they hire. There are privacy issues that wally world is not entitled to know.
Let me try it this way. You work for John's auto detailing. Your company is hired by a local back street renta car company. Back street renta car is not entitled to YOUR personal information that is on the application that YOU filled out when you applied to John's Auto detailing Company. The detailing company is responsible for IT'S employees and their immigration status NOT back street renta car just becasue they hired your comany to do a job on their property. The renta car company might ask your company if they are hiring illegals but if they say no, they can't FORCE them to turn over John's detailing employee records.
-
"With President Bush as an ally in the White House, he worries, Democrats will proceed next year with legislation to ultimately make citizens out of most of the illegals now in the country. And Republicans, still reeling from deep losses in the November elections, will give up the fight."
Give up the fight?
That would be completely stupid.
Being aggainst illegal immigrants is the one issue the majority of the country would still agree with the Reps on.
Its the one area that could make a stand and have the people behind them.
Then again. I never did give the members of governent from either party much credit for their intelectual prowess.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Nope one last time. I said they are not responsible to screen the employees of the companies they hire. There are privacy issues that wally world is not entitled to know.
Let me try it this way. You work for John's auto detailing. Your company is hired by a local back street renta car company. Back street renta car is not entitled to YOUR personal information that is on the application that YOU filled out when you applied to John's Auto detailing Company. The detailing company is responsible for IT'S employees and their immigration status NOT back street renta car just becasue they hired your comany to do a job on their property. The renta car company might ask your company if they are hiring illegals but if they say no, they can't FORCE them to turn over John's detailing employee records.
Nope. you still haven't convinced me. If I hire John's Detailing and they have suspicious employees that don't speak english and I ask John to prove that his employees are legal and he refuses, John's Detailing will have to move on down the road. Although that's not what your original argument was, was it?
You argument was that if you sub out labor you're not responsible for the illegal aliens that work under your roof, not whether or not you have the right to demand documentation. You're telling me that even though wally world probably suspected that their subed out cleaning staff was undocumented, they have neither the right nor the responsibility to even check. To which I say what a wonderful world of zero accountability we live in.
It doesn't matter though anyway because within two years all these illegals will be granted citizenship anyways. Then Wal~Mart won't have to sneak them in the back door after all the regular "associates" have gone home.
-
VOR, I think a few people here might know of the specific laws. Off the top of my head, Lazs admitted the laws were not being enforced, as a matter of fact, so I think he would know the specifics.
-
Nelson:
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/1054_1165306886_nelson111.jpg)
for content host change per good advice of the duck with a cigarette that thinks im a chick.
Thanks duck with a cigarette that thinks im a chick!!:D :D :D
-
the immigration issue is essentially boiling down to a gated community issue.
are you for or against them?
-
Originally posted by Debonair
Nelson:
(http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/784e171cb7.jpg)
lmao :rofl
-
image hosting sites:mad: :mad: :mad: :furious :furious :furious :cry :cry :furious :noid
-
Debbie: http://onpoi.net/ah
-
danke
-
Originally posted by moot
Debbie: http://onpoi.net/ah
Debbie?
:rofl
-
We're fraked. How hard is it for a U.S. citizen to immigrate to Canada?
-
I've awoken the raging Hermann hormones in him.
-
Originally posted by jigsaw
We're fraked. How hard is it for a U.S. citizen to immigrate to Canada?
dunno. how hard is it for a u.s. citizen to immigrate to canada?
(waits for punchline...)
-
maverick is of course correct... you have no right to screen the employees of a subcontractor.
and you shouldn't. if the subcontractor got busted then he should go to jail... Walmart would be responsible if they somehow conspired to hire the illegals.
The democrats realize that more than 70% of ignorant and poor mexican "immigrants" will vote for democrats (name a hispanic country that votes for prosperity)..
It is also true that probly 100% of illegals will vote for democrats.
Even if it destroyed the republican party they need to do what is right and fight this to the end.
Will one of the parties ever fight for the people of the country even if it means they lose? Nope..... never happen. they will continue to do what is best for themselves and their party and try to put a good face on it for the rest of us.
How many democrats here think that this is a great idea? to simply make is so that anyone who manages to get across is granted legal status?
If you do... should it work the same for any other peoples? Dutch? African? arab? even... brits or scandanavians?
lazs
-
This will pass and Bush will not veto it. Much to his base's dislike, him and a handfull of other republicans have been trying to get an amnesty bill passed since the topid first came up.
The dems will come out of this looking like political heros to many. To me this is a shame, republicans not listening to their base. This is just like the dems when they lost in 04 wanting to go more left and not realizing why.
-
Does anyone believe that when the democrats open even wider our borders there won't be a flood of destitutes doubling or tripling the number of immigrants inside a year? The burden this will put on our social system will be staggering.
-
Ugh..
I see both sides to this argument..
I hate it, I can't choose a side!!!
:furious :noid
-
Millions of illegal immigrants now living in the US do so at below poverty level. Many of those who fear to apply for welfare will naturally lose that fear when they are granted amnesty. Of course millions of others not currently living in the US will take notice. Do the math.
-
Originally posted by lukster
Does anyone believe that when the democrats open even wider our borders there won't be a flood of destitutes doubling or tripling the number of immigrants inside a year? The burden this will put on our social system will be staggering.
Yes but think of all the new voters that will be dependent on the party that provides them. Think of all the cheap labor big business can now legally employ.
It's a win win situation for both bastard parties.
Hell maybe India will now have to re-outsource some telemarketing jobs back our way.
-
I hate sounding uncaring for the poor but letting them all move in with us en masse isn't the answer.
-
I hate sounding uncaring for the poor
I don't.
-
Originally posted by JB88
dunno. how hard is it for a u.s. citizen to immigrate to canada?
(waits for punchline...)
The punchline is when the U.S. is declared a 3rd world country because of the government stuffing it's own pockets.
-
I've always loved a good laugh, so I hereby declare the US a third-world country because of the government stuffing it's own pockets.
-
Originally posted by jigsaw
The punchline is when the U.S. is declared a 3rd world country because of the government stuffing it's own pockets.
oh, so like detroit.
:confused:
-
Originally posted by JB88
oh, so like detroit.
:confused:
Dunno. Never been to Detroit. :D