Immigrants

[SEC=UGA]

The Feds have a checking system called eVerify. I don't think it's mandated but I do believe it works.

 

It does and it doesn't work. You have to remember that many of these illegals have working SS# and identification cards, they'll pass through e-verify in many cases. We have had to use it to meet the requirements to do fed gov work, all of our guys cleared.

[Ursa Majoris]

It does and it doesn't work. You have to remember that many of these illegals have working SS# and identification cards, they'll pass through e-verify in many cases. We have had to use it to meet the requirements to do fed gov work, all of our guys cleared.

Regardless, the system (if made compulsory) would catch at least some. Better than nothing. The lack of perfection is being made an excuse.

[SEC=UGA]

Regardless, the system (if made compulsory) would catch at least some. Better than nothing. The lack of perfection is being made an excuse.

 

Much like Arizona's law?

[gbpfan1231]

Regardless, the system (if made compulsory) would catch at least some. Better than nothing. The lack of perfection is being made an excuse.

We caught Nikki Diaz - she is still here. Sorry thought my Schtick fit in perfect here.

[Ursa Majoris]

Much like Arizona's law?

I never had a problem with Arizona's law, to be honest. I don't really have an issue with profiling in general (same with profiling in airports), it seems like efficiency to me. Should there be equal numbers of police patrol cars in third ring suburbia as there are in crime ridden inner cities? When did targeting resources where they are most likely to be successful become a bad thing?

[bpwallace49]

Do you think that if strict laws were passed at the state level that we would see a high rate of unemployment among hispanics due to employers not wanting to take a chance at potentially being fined or losing their business license? I mean think of all of the innocent people, the natural born hispanics, that may get caught up in this.

 

Also, IRCA 1986 does make it illegal to hire illegals and provides for stiff penalties for doing so. You know how employers get around this law. The don't hire people as employees, they hir them as independent contractors or sub-contractors. This would continue to happen even if new state laws were enacted, don't you think?

 

I think your company is horribly corrupt and I am sad you hate America.

[Perchoutofwater]

So you're advocating for broader governmental power to restrict our rights to enter into contracts and other dealings involving private property? Interesting.

 

I'm for enforcing the f'n law something some apparently don't care about. If a person is here illegally, they how can you have a legal contract with them?

[Ursa Majoris]

Also, IRCA 1986 does make it illegal to hire illegals and provides for stiff penalties for doing so. You know how employers get around this law. The don't hire people as employees, they hir them as independent contractors or sub-contractors. This would continue to happen even if new state laws were enacted, don't you think?

Bah. That isn't to get around immigration law, that is to avoid having to pay benefits like health insurance. This I know for a fact, since the company that renovated my kitchen last year used all sub-contractors, every one of whom used to be an employee and was fired and rehired the same day, sans benefits.

[SEC=UGA]

I think your company is horribly corrupt and I am sad you hate America.

 

I understand that you don't want to take the time to answer the questions I posit, it's okay, I'll take your slings and arrows.

 

Can you encapsulate for me why you believe I hate America?

[SEC=UGA]

Bah. That isn't to get around immigration law, that is to avoid having to pay benefits like health insurance. This I know for a fact, since the company that renovated my kitchen last year used all sub-contractors, every one of whom used to be an employee and was fired and rehired the same day, sans benefits.

 

What you say is true, as well. But speaking specifically to getting around a law regarding hiring illegals as employees, this would be the way to do it.

[bpwallace49]

Do you think that if strict laws were passed at the state level that we would see a high rate of unemployment among hispanics due to employers not wanting to take a chance at potentially being fined or losing their business license? I mean think of all of the innocent people, the natural born hispanics, that may get caught up in this.

 

Dont be disingenuous. If all companies had a mechanism that consistently worked (like if everify was more accurate) then your "not taking a chance" hypothetical is proven to be ridiculous. But we cant have businesses forced to do things like check to make sure their employees are illegal . . that would be infringing on theor God given right to make a profit by hiring illegals.

 

if businesses cared about immigration, then they wouldnt hire illegals and give them a reason to come here. And it aint the mom and pop operations like Perch's that would be the problem here, it is the massive companies that dont care to look too closely cause the almighty buck is more important than giving illegals a reason to come here in the first place.

[bpwallace49]

What you say is true, as well. But speaking specifically to getting around a law regarding hiring illegals as employees, this would be the way to do it.

 

I am glad you find ways to skirt the law. Bravo.

[bpwallace49]

Can you encapsulate for me why you believe I hate America?

 

You like the SEC?

[SEC=UGA]

You like the SEC?

 

Oh, come on now, you gotta respect the talent coming outta the SEC. You, of all people here, should be able to intelligently assess the talent and skill that they have. Most of us are simply armchair analysts. You have actually been in the trenches and played the game and know the talent level that these guys have (and I'm being serious about this, as none of us here, or very few, could even have stepped on the field in your division.)

[Perchoutofwater]

Dont be disingenuous. If all companies had a mechanism that consistently worked (like if everify was more accurate) then your "not taking a chance" hypothetical is proven to be ridiculous. But we cant have businesses forced to do things like check to make sure their employees are illegal . . that would be infringing on theor God given right to make a profit by hiring illegals.

 

if businesses cared about immigration, then they wouldnt hire illegals and give them a reason to come here. And it aint the mom and pop operations like Perch's that would be the problem here, it is the massive companies that dont care to look too closely cause the almighty buck is more important than giving illegals a reason to come here in the first place.

 

Personally I like E-Verify. We use it on all our employees. I don't know how accurate it is, and frankly don't care. It insulates us to an extent from getting fined if someone has some good faked documentation. I think E-Verify should be required for all businesses with more than 5 employees.

 

I also think that it should be required anytime someone wants to rent or purchase a piece of property.

 

I think that it should be required in order to purchase health insurance and anyone that does not have health insurance that goes to the hospital should be run through it.

 

I also think that anyone that does not pass should be turned into the INS or whatever it is called now, and be deported. I think we should deport any and all illegals regardless of nationality whenever they are found, and I think that any property they might have should be confiscated by the government and sold at public auction to help fund deporting them. I also think we need to build the damn wall.

[redrumjuice]

A joint investigation by ABC News and the Center for Public Integrity found that the Department of Housing and Urban Development has struggled to combat theft, corruption, and mismanagement in the more than 3,000

[SayItAintSoJoe]

Personally I like E-Verify. We use it on all our employees.

I don't know how accurate it is, and frankly don't care.

 

I also think that anyone that does not pass should be turned into the INS or whatever it is called now, and be deported.

 

[Kid Cid]

I know I'm a little late to this party, but since I'm showing up late I'm bring beer. ;-)

 

Here is some actual factual material of how a local county in Virginia was able to positively impact the illegal immigration issue. I've provided three links, one that describes in general terms what the county did, the second gives an overview of the results, and the third is the report from the University of Virginia that details the results.

 

In a nut shell, the County paid for the federal 287(g) training of their law enforcement officers which allows them to access the immigration status of anyone arrested for a crime. They also put in provisions to deny county services (except those mandated by law) to those individuals of illegal immigrant status.

 

The results are seen in a very positive light, especially since the wave of negative things predicted (being sued for racial profiling, strained race relations in the county, rogue cops, etc.) never materialized.

 

Prince William County passes resolution

"Attrition Though Enforcement" Article

Official UVA Report

[Perchoutofwater]

 

When I say I don't know how accurate it is, I don't know how good it is at checking good counterfeits. I'm pretty sure that everyone it does catch is illegal. I'm saying that I think there probably are a few illegals that get through. Still it is better than nothing.

[SayItAintSoJoe]

When I say I don't know how accurate it is, I don't know how good it is at checking good counterfeits. I'm pretty sure that everyone it does catch is illegal. I'm saying that I think there probably are a few illegals that get through. Still it is better than nothing.

 

I have never had to use the system but from what I've read it sounds like it does a pretty good job at making sure those workers that are in fact authorized to work here are accurately identified. Like any system I'm sure that it has on occasion mistakenly flagged someone as not being authorized who was in fact authorized to work in this country. All in all, it sounds like a good system for what it was intended, which is verifying who is legally allowed to work in this country. I'm just not ready to make the leap and say that whomever the system doesn't pass should be on the next plane (train, bus, or boat) out of here.

[Ursa Majoris]

I have never had to use the system but from what I've read it sounds like it does a pretty good job at making sure those workers that are in fact authorized to work here are accurately identified. Like any system I'm sure that it has on occasion mistakenly flagged someone as not being authorized who was in fact authorized to work in this country. All in all, it sounds like a good system for what it was intended, which is verifying who is legally allowed to work in this country. I'm just not ready to make the leap and say that whomever the system doesn't pass should be on the next plane (train, bus, or boat) out of here.

This is common sense. A raised flag should be cause for further investigation. However, I think employment should be predicated on it's use as part of the hiring process. There is no excuse in 2011 for an inability to use a simple web based system. There will be gnashing of teeth from interest groups but their reasoning will be either feeble or worthless, probably relying on some nonsense such as some employers might only profile minorities.

[Perchoutofwater]

This is common sense. A raised flag should be cause for further investigation. However, I think employment should be predicated on it's use as part of the hiring process. There is no excuse in 2011 for an inability to use a simple web based system. There will be gnashing of teeth from interest groups but their reasoning will be either feeble or worthless, probably relying on some nonsense such as some employers might only profile minorities.

 

It is very easy to do. Employers should have no problem doing it on all new hires. I'd also like to see banks, insurance companies, hospitals and landlords use it as well. If you take away the jobs, take away the housing, take away the banking, and make it to where whey they someone goes to the hospital they either have to have insurance or be run through E-Verify then you've pretty much taken away all reason for illegals to be here. If you couple this with a thorough investigation of anyone that fails and swift deportation following that, the problem could be resolved fairly quickly. Get rid of anchor baby laws and confiscate and auction off any property owned by illegals to help offset the governments cost in investigations and deportation, and America will be a lot less hospitable place for illegals to come. As it is there is too much cash work available to illegals, to many services that they are given, and the government often looks the other way unless the illegal has committed a violent crime. We need to attack this issue on all fronts, and we need to have the stones to actually get rid of the illegals when they are found.

[SayItAintSoJoe]

....probably relying on some nonsense such as some employers might only profile minorities.

 

Then do it for everyone, every time. I don't care if we get to a point where you want to run someone through E-Verify in order to buy a carton of eggs (which it sounds like perch would be in favor of), just do it for everybody, every time. Lets not forget that this whole thread was started regarding a British chap.

[Ursa Majoris]

Then do it for everyone, every time. I don't care if we get to a point where you want to run someone through E-Verify in order to buy a carton of eggs (which it sounds like perch would be in favor of), just do it for everybody, every time. Lets not forget that this whole thread was started regarding a British chap.

That's exactly what I'm advocating. I'm just saying that people who don't want illegal immigration stopped will trundle any old excuse out, however pathetic.