Lets solve this illegal alien imbroglio once and for all

[Okla-homey]

I read recently ("Time") that the Tyson chicken workforce over in Hawginsaw is 70% undocumented aliens. I expect that's pretty consistent with the rest of the chicken processors. Ditto beef and swine. We know they also make up the largest percentage of ag workers in many areas (pickers, processors and packers).

Now if that's true, then that means if they vanished we'd necessarily pay more for all our chow. Particularly since payroll is usually among the biggest components of corporate overhead.

So here's the question. Would you be willing to pay, say, 30% more for all your groceries in lieu of whatever portion of your taxes goes to provide public services to illegals?

[Jimminy Crimson]

How 'bout we let them keep their jobs, just don't let them have any gov't services? ;)

[Octavian]

no

[Hamhock]

Why doesn't illegal mean illegal anymore?

I blame Judas.

[bri]

Aw man, I was hoping this thread would be about this chick:

http://www.torstenmaue.net/bilder/natalie-imbruglia.jpg

[colleyvillesooner]

heh

[OUinFLA]

How 'bout we let them keep their jobs, just don't let them have any gov't services? ;)


cutting edge thought processing at it's near finest.
You're on the right track.

[OhU1]

Yes, I would be willing to pay the real price the goods would cost without the illegal labor. Tyson is not passing on those labor savings to you anyway.

I think there is a good argument that turning a blind eye to illegal immigration is a form of corporate welfare. Poor and unskilled labor are pushed out of the job market or forced to work for a wage that is deflated by the illegal aliens. The taxpapers have to pick up the tab on other various costs for the illegals (and the displaced unskilled American workers). Tyson, Hormel, and IBP pays nothing.

To make matters worse they buy the winning $365 million lottery ticket in Nebraska! :)

[Okla-homey]

cutting edge thought processing at it's near finest.
You're on the right track.

So if they get hurt on the job slicing chickens we just let 'em bleed to death? Remember, no workers comp claims -- that's a government-backed insurance program. Can't go to the ER either, that's allegedly making hospitals go broke -- although a cursory review of the leading healthcare providers' profit summaries seem to belie that allegation.

[1stTimeCaller]

So if they get hurt on the job slicing chickens we just let 'em bleed to death? Remember, no workers comp claims -- that's a government-backed insurance program. Can't go to the ER either, that's allegedly making hospitals go broke -- although a cursory review of the leading healthcare providers' profit summaries seem to belie that allegation.

I'd say that worker's comp is splitting hairs. Employers pay for that insurance and their premium is dependent upon how safe the job the employee is doing and the company's overall safety record.

[PrideTrombone]

So if they get hurt on the job slicing chickens we just let 'em bleed to death? Remember, no workers comp claims -- that's a government-backed insurance program. Can't go to the ER either, that's allegedly making hospitals go broke -- although a cursory review of the leading healthcare providers' profit summaries seem to belie that allegation.

They shoulda thought of that before sneaking into a country illegally.

[yermom]

Aw man, I was hoping this thread would be about this chick:

http://www.torstenmaue.net/bilder/natalie-imbruglia.jpg

i'm torn on this issue

[SicEmBaylor]

Does cheap labor justify breaking the law? No.

Does cheap labor justify an open unprotected border? No.

Do the costs associated with illegal immigrants from having to jail them after committing a violent crime, medical costs, and the costs to educate their children outweigh the savings associated with their cheap labor? Yes.

Is not assimilating going to cause the Balkanization of the American Southwest in the coming decades? Yes, it's a very real possibility.

Any immigration policy needs the following provisions passed and enforced in the following manner:

1)Massive increases in the number of border guards including the construction of a southern wall with border security outposts at regular intervals.

2)Massive deportations of existing illegal immigrants (we can't get them all certainly but we should try).

3)Massive penalties for businesses who emply illegal immigrants.

4)A new "temporary worker" program for those seeking legal employment in these United States.

5)A new and seperate tract for citizenship for long term temporary workers with fluency in english as a requirement.

[bri]

i'm torn on this issue

This is how you feel?

[Fugue]

I'm lying cold and naked on the floor.

but for no particular reason.

[mdklatt]

So if they get hurt on the job slicing chickens we just let 'em bleed to death? Remember, no workers comp claims -- that's a government-backed insurance program.

Aren't the employers paying into these programs? How the **** does the IRS miss a company not paying into SS for 70% of its employees?!

What about the lazy freeloaders that are citizens? I propose that instead of sending the hard-working illegals back, we let them take the place of shiftless Americans on a one-to-one basis and ship those bastards back to Mexico. New Orleans can be the proof-of-concept.

[Ike]

Aren't the employers paying into these programs? How the **** does the IRS miss a company not paying into SS for 70% of its employees?!




no idea, but just a hunch tells me that they aren't on the books as employees. equipment maybe?

I bet they only have like 50 employees according to their books.

[mdklatt]

5 votes, 4 votes, 5 votes

Yeah, this is working. :D

[Ike]

5 votes, 4 votes, 5 votes

Yeah, this is working. :D

5,5,5


pins and needles.

[jk the sooner fan]

instead of paying 30% more, how bout we kick 30% of the people in this country off welfare.......you know, the fat *** types that dont want to work

let them get hungry enough, and then tell them where some jobs can be found to feed them......

[SoonerWood]

instead of paying 30% more, how bout we kick 30% of the people in this country off welfare.......you know, the fat *** types that dont want to work

let them get hungry enough, and then tell them where some jobs can be found to feed them......

My thoughts exactly.

[jeremy885]

no idea, but just a hunch tells me that they aren't on the books as employees. equipment maybe?

I bet they only have like 50 employees according to their books.


If they do it like my ex-company did, then they're on the books as employees (meaning the company pays FICA, FUTA, and SUTA) but doesn't have anything withheld for income taxes (they claim like 15 dependants on their W-4).

[royalfan5]

Yes, I would be willing to pay the real price the goods would cost without the illegal labor. Tyson is not passing on those labor savings to you anyway.

I think there is a good argument that turning a blind eye to illegal immigration is a form of corporate welfare. Poor and unskilled labor are pushed out of the job market or forced to work for a wage that is deflated by the illegal aliens. The taxpapers have to pick up the tab on other various costs for the illegals (and the displaced unskilled American workers). Tyson, Hormel, and IBP pays nothing.

To make matters worse they buy the winning $365 million lottery ticket in Nebraska! :)
The winning workers in Nebraska were legal immigrants mostly with political aslyum, plus half of them were native white nebraskans. It's a hell of a lot harder to be an illegal from the Congo and SE Asia than it is to be a North/Central American illegal.

[Widescreen]

no idea, but just a hunch tells me that they aren't on the books as employees. equipment maybe?
That's the best idea evar! They'd have to be tagged with asset ID number tags immediately.

Jose, you're now Copier #589283 located in Room 325. :D

[jk the sooner fan]

you know what kills me about the bill that failed today? illegal aliens would have to declare how long they've been in the US .....how would they prove exactly how long they've been here?

"si senor, i have been working under the table for the rich white man in nichols hills since 1998"

[royalfan5]

In hindsight we should have just annexed the whole thing in the 1840's.

[SoonerWood]

In hindsight we should have just annexed the whole thing in the 1840's.

What is stopping us now? :D

[SicEmBaylor]

What is stopping us now? :D

No War for Burritos.

[mdklatt]

No War for Burritos.

Let's not be hasty...some Tex-Mex is worth fighting for.

[royalfan5]

What is stopping us now? :D
If we're in Iraq and Mexico what's going to stop Canada from rolling in with their stronger beer and superflous eh's. I don't know about you but I'm not going to salute no maple leaf. (No offense intended Hosersooner)

[Okla-homey]

Does cheap labor justify breaking the law? No.

Does cheap labor justify an open unprotected border? No.

Do the costs associated with illegal immigrants from having to jail them after committing a violent crime, medical costs, and the costs to educate their children outweigh the savings associated with their cheap labor? Yes.

Is not assimilating going to cause the Balkanization of the American Southwest in the coming decades? Yes, it's a very real possibility.

Any immigration policy needs the following provisions passed and enforced in the following manner:

1)Massive increases in the number of border guards including the construction of a southern wall with border security outposts at regular intervals. May we mine the approach too? A nice mixed density anti-armor and anti-personnel field. Also, can we use those plastic bouncy ones with ceramic fragments that explode at waist height that gut the victim or behead children that the mine detectors won't register? Cuz, you know, a fence or wall alone hasn't cut it since Roman times. Oh, and it needs to be a "no press" zone because all the images of dead people will tend to turn world opinion against us.

2)Massive deportations of existing illegal immigrants (we can't get them all certainly but we should try). WTF, lets round 'em up! We'll need concentration camps throughout the nation to hold 10-20 million folks though because it will take a while to process them and get them all home. Probably several years. In the meantime, they'll need food, shelter, clothing, medicine and lots of guarding because they're liable to riot. Or maybe we should just have a big march, sort of a "trail of tears." Can we bayonet the stragglers? Also, the ones who have children born here? Do we just take the little American citizen children of illegals and put them in foster homes? Are you willing to take in a few? Or do we just ignore the Constitution and send them south of the border too?

3)Massive penalties for businesses who emply illegal immigrants. Massively anti-business. I guess busting the economy is worth it though to get them danged 'ol illegals back across the Rio Grande.

4)A new "temporary worker" program for those seeking legal employment in these United States. And when they overstay their temp status, do we shoot first or may we ask questions? ID's can be forged. Can we tattoo them at the border with a special number so we can sort out the legals from the illegals? Can we make the "temporary workers" wear a yellow sombrero patch on all their clothing so we can spot them at a distance?

5)A new and seperate tract for citizenship for long term temporary workers with fluency in english as a requirement. Do we set up a timeclock they punch-in on when they arrive on our soil, or do we just take the word of the ones who have already been here 10 or 15 years? Can we revoke the legal resident alien status of the millions of other resident aliens who aren't fluent in English either?

winky-winky, but think about what you're asking. This crap briefs well, but like most government attempts to shut the barn door after all the cows are already out, the practical application of these remedial policies would create more problems than they would solve IMHO.

[SicEmBaylor]

winky-winky, but think about what you're asking. This crap briefs well, but like most government attempts to shut the barn door after all the cows are already out, the practical application of these remedial policies would create more problems than they would solve IMHO.

I'm pretty disappointed in your response. To turn advocating the enforcement of border security into some sort of program to install an American Third Reich is disgusting and beneath you. I'm not even going to dignify any of that crap with a response.

A yellow sombraro patch? Please..

You're removing yourself from reality.

[SicEmBaylor]

Anyone who needs good information on the dangers posed by illegal information should visit this website:
http://yct-unt.org/issues/?page_id=27

It's an excellent collection of information on the issue.

[mdklatt]

Anyone who needs good information on the dangers posed by illegal information should visit this website:
http://yct-unt.org/issues/?page_id=27




A student organization...yeah, I think I'm gonna pass on that.

[Okla-homey]

A student organization...yeah, I think I'm gonna pass on that.

Hitler Youth

[Okla-homey]

I'm pretty disappointed in your response. To turn advocating the enforcement of border security into some sort of program to install an American Third Reich is disgusting and beneath you. I'm not even going to dignify any of that crap with a response.

A yellow sombraro patch? Please..

You're removing yourself from reality.

Someday, when you grow up, you'll understand that politics are constrained by what is logistcally and morally feasible.

[SicEmBaylor]

A student organization...yeah, I think I'm gonna pass on that.

It's one of the most influential conservative organizations in the state of Texas. If you keep up with the workings of Texas politics you'd know that.

[SicEmBaylor]

Someday, when you grow up, you'll understand that politics are constrained by what is logistcally and morally feasible.

Homey,
I do understand that. I've been involved in politics for the better part of my life now. I graduate in a few months with my Poli Sci degree and then I'm entering grad school for my masters in public policy. I've also run for office.

I know damned well what is politically feasible, but this thread and this topic hasn't been about what is politically feasible. We're discussing what should be done with illegal immigration not what is politically feasible in regards to illegal immigration. If that were the topic at hand I'd give a completely different answer. So please don't patronize me and suggest I have no idea what can be done politically.

[leavingthezoo]

i'm all for trading one weak willed, spineless, lyin', cheatin', two tongued, underhanded, not interested in protecting 'Merican interests, "I vacation a few more days a year then I actually work" politician for one illegal alien. But once we run out of politicians, the trading stops!

Mexico would really be up in arms then. win/win situation for us. no win situation for them. :D

[SicEmBaylor]

If you want to know the feasibility of illegal immigration reform as it currently stands right this moment it is this:

The House passed its own security-only version which was DOA in the Senate. There were a number of options in the Senate, but the final bill to come out of the judiciary committee included a rather generous amnesty package.

Now, things are stalled at the moment in the Senate because Republican Senators against the amnesty package are demanding to be allowed votes on any number of amendments to the committee bill which the leadership won't accept because the effect of those amendments would be to kill the bill in its current form.

But whatever eventually comes out of the Senate (and at this point anything at all is in the air)will go back to the House. Now, Rep. Steve King who is a leading opponet to amnesty along with Rep. Tancredo told me this last weekend that the House conference leadership has said that any bill from the Senate that includes an amnesty package will be dead in the House unless mroe than half the caucus supports amnesty.

Now, Tancredo has said that a bill with an amnesty provision is NOT going to pass the House but I'm not at all so sure.

My own guess is that a watered down amnesty provision with stronger security provisions will eventually pass the Senate and then go to the House. The House GOP leadership will then being to whip the purported requirement of half the caucus which they will get and the House leadership will then support a reduced amnesty/increased security bill from the Senate. That legislation will then narrowly pass and be sent to the President who has signaled his support.

That's how I see it playing out.

[OUinFLA]

can we trade horns for cans?

[Okla-homey]

If you want to know the feasibility of illegal immigration reform as it currently stands right this moment it is this:

The House passed its own security-only version which was DOA in the Senate. There were a number of options in the Senate, but the final bill to come out of the judiciary committee included a rather generous amnesty package.

Now, things are stalled at the moment in the Senate because Republican Senators against the amnesty package are demanding to be allowed votes on any number of amendments to the committee bill which the leadership won't accept because the effect of those amendments would be to kill the bill in its current form.

But whatever eventually comes out of the Senate (and at this point anything at all is in the air)will go back to the House. Now, Rep. Steve King who is a leading opponet to amnesty along with Rep. Tancredo told me this last weekend that the House conference leadership has said that any bill from the Senate that includes an amnesty package will be dead in the House unless mroe than half the caucus supports amnesty.

Now, Tancredo has said that a bill with an amnesty provision is NOT going to pass the House but I'm not at all so sure.

My own guess is that a watered down amnesty provision with stronger security provisions will eventually pass the Senate and then go to the House. The House GOP leadership will then being to whip the purported requirement of half the caucus which they will get and the House leadership will then support a reduced amnesty/increased security bill from the Senate. That legislation will then narrowly pass and be sent to the President who has signaled his support.

That's how I see it playing out.

And the courts have the final say. And that's where this foolishness will stop. Book it.

[Okla-homey]

Oh yeah, thanks for the negspek there Sic'Em. Coming from a guy who has stated here that the 14th Amendment should be repealed, I'm staggered. Leave academia, get out in the real world, get shot at a couple times for what you believe in, then we'll talk. I'm out.

[SicEmBaylor]

Oh yeah, thanks for the negspek there Sic'Em. Coming from a guy who has stated here that the 14th Amendment should be repealed, I'm staggered. Leave academia, get out in the real world, get shot at a couple times for what you believe in, then we'll talk. I'm out.

I negged you for the Hitler Youth comment not your opinions.
How does getting out in the real world change my opinion on the repealing of the 14th amendment???

[leavingthezoo]

can we trade horns for cans?

no. that's an insult to the cans.

[Octavian]

Oh yeah, thanks for the negspek there Sic'Em. Coming from a guy who has stated here that the 14th Amendment should be repealed, I'm staggered. Leave academia, get out in the real world, get shot at a couple times for what you believe in, then we'll talk. I'm out.

He wants the 17th Amendment revoked....doesn't think Senators shoud be directly chosen by the people of their state.

[Octavian]

...my opinion on the repealing of the 14th amendment???

whats wrong in your oppinion w/ the 14th?

[Octavian]

Leave academia, get out in the real world, get shot at a couple times for what you believe in...

really???

very disappointed.....you should change your avatar.

[SicEmBaylor]

really???

very disappointed.....you should change your avatar.

I mean for the record I have shots taken at my opinions on a daily basis. Hell, I debated for 5 years and while that has little to do with what we're talking about it isn't like I'm not used to having my position questioned.

At any rate, I have a couple of problems with the 14th amendment.

First, it was basically ramroded through without proper representation of the southern states in Congress at the time. In fact its passage was coerced by, in a couple of cases, forcing southern states to ratify the amendment before being admitted back into the union.

Second, it has been used by Federal courts to apply Federal constitutional protections to the states. Prior to that Federal constitutional protections provided constraints on Federal power only and not state power. State power was thus reduced by having state constitutions and their own state constitutional protection of individual rights superceded by the Federal government.

Again, I'm not sure what "real world" experiance is going to change my opinion on the 14th amendment. That seems somewhat absurd to me. But whatever.

[Octavian]

You're fighting an uphill libertine battle my brotha...for someone who belives in "makes might right"...you sure have an unfavorable view about Reconstruction America....

The assertion that professional academics can't realize the "real world" and dont do anything about what they "believe in" is beneath Homey...which is why I'm disappointed in his statement...no neg b/c I love his early morning threads but I'm surprised

[Octavian]

and my statement you quoted was intended for Homey....not you

[SicEmBaylor]

and my statement you quoted was intended for Homey....not you

Oh I know but that post had the closest reply button to the other stuff you wrote. :D

And as for the uphill battle, the 14th Amendment will never ever be repealed and I'm not even trying to advocate doing so (though I am for the 17th); I'm just stating my problems with it.

Really you know I think we'd agree on more than you'd think. If states were given their proper authority under the Constitution I would actually be pretty moderate. I support a lot of programs on the state level that would otherwise make me a liberal if applied on the Federal level (which I'm against). But I could easily come to agreement on moderate policies and programs on the state level. I bring this up to illustrate that I'm not some raving right-wing lunatic who hates any and all government. I simply believe government should limit itself to those areas it has been empowered to act on.

[Octavian]

If states were given their proper authority under the Constitution I would actually be pretty moderate.

again....in theory I agree but you missed the boat by a century and a half.


...I bring this up to illustrate that I'm not some raving right-wing lunatic who hates any and all government. I simply believe government should limit itself to those areas it has been empowered to act on.

before you go get your masters you should check out an internship w/ the Cato Institute in DC....you're exactly what they're looking for and you'd make connections I cant even begin to explain

http://www.cato.org/about/about.html their mission statement says it all....IMO they're the good guys.

edit: not their mission statement...the "How To Label Cato" section

[SicEmBaylor]

again....in theory I agree but you missed the boat by a century and a half.



before you go get your masters you should check out an internship w/ the Cato Institute in DC....you're exactly what they're looking for and you'd make connections I cant even begin to explain

http://www.cato.org/about/about.html their mission statement says it all....IMO they're the good guys.

edit: not their mission statement...the "How To Label Cato" section

I've considered CATO actually, and also Heritage. Heritage has a pretty good employment program for up and coming conservatives in the D.C. area but I figured getting my MA first would give me a leg up on the competition. I shudder to think of the number of fresh graduates running around D.C. armed with just a B.A. in Poli Sci.