Joe Legal vs. Joe Illegal

Discussion in 'Politics' started by jficquette, Jul 7, 2009.

  1. sjfan

    sjfan

    Do you live in some alternate reality? Federal law requires every employer verify its employee's eligibility for work. That's why they as you to show your social securities card. The ones for [legal] aliens who aren't authorized to work (spouses of H1s, for example) will be a stamp on their social security card to that effect and will typically require additional proof (like a greencard, or whatever, if they got one since they got their social security).

    Every company I've ever worked for has done this a part of the initial HR package. I can't see how California, as much as I detest that state, is different.

    Or... maybe you are just talking out of your ass.

     
    #21     Jul 8, 2009
  2. Not a lot of withholding when you claim 12 dependents.
     
    #22     Jul 8, 2009
  3. I highly doubt the Illegal will get all these benefits you are attributing to them. The biggest problem, is that legitimate construction company owners cannot compete with the illegals. In roofing, with high W.C, for legal workers, it is impossible. Jacklegs (illegal companies) can quote a prcie for a roof, siding or other things, that is often less than a legal construction owner's COST. And the local governments/code enforcement do little to enforce the rules in many places.

    I have a new suggested rule. ANYONE KNOWINGLY HIRING ILLEGAL ALIENS WILL LOSE THEIR US CITIZENSHIP/PERM RESIDENCE!!!!!
     
    #23     Jul 8, 2009
  4. sjfan

    sjfan

    No go, big guy - revoking citizenship requires an act of congress;

     
    #24     Jul 8, 2009
  5. Then get it in the law. It has been long enough that people who pay their taxes and follow the law get stabbed in the back.

    We wouldn't have the problem of illegal immigrants and the attraction to them, if companies stopped looking the other way to get a competitive edge.

    But if they could lose their citizenship, it would make a lot of people think twice. Maybe they can go to North Korea and get citizenship.
     
    #25     Jul 8, 2009
  6. When Reagan was President there wasn't 13 million illegals in the U.S., now was there? At the time, his plan of amnesty and border protection would have nipped the problem in the bud.

    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=18399

    Illegal immigration peaked in 1996-under Clinton.

    You can spin the bullshit anyways you want but it's a preponderance of Democrat's who're soft on illegal immigration for political gain. The only reason the Southwest and Mountain West are even hinted in play for the Dems is because of the Mexican vote.

     
    #26     Jul 9, 2009
  7. sjfan

    sjfan

    You still don't understand - revoking a person's citizenship requires an unique private act of congress; you can't make a law that makes the punishment (effectively) exile. Quit talking out of your ass.

     
    #27     Jul 9, 2009
  8. Eight

    Eight

    Stiff fines would do it.

    It amazes me that we can't get the political will together to man our own borders. One researcher investigated the situation and concluded that MS13 was in charge... the US turns control of it's borders over to a drug dealing gang, way to go liberals, I'll be applauding your efforts here some day.. just wait and see... oh yeah...
     
    #28     Jul 9, 2009
  9. I think the illegals coming here is a result of a demand for workers that wasn't filled by our work force and of poor economic conditions in Mexico, not to boost the democrats voting base.
    The Mexicans I've known didn't come here to vote democrat, hell I've never heard any of them talk politics. The subs I use are from Mexico, they pay taxes, buy property etc. I've been around these guys for a couple of decades and not once have I heard any of them speak of politics, not once.
     
    #29     Jul 9, 2009
  10. Its because they want the votes of the illegals plus the kids of theirs that are old enough to vote.

    Anchor voters.

    John
     
    #30     Jul 9, 2009