31–36 of 36 posts
Why does anyone find it acceptable for half their workforce to be working here illicitly? Either you’re opposed to them being in the country illegally, or you should be concerned that they are being denied access to basic services due to their status. The status quo is untenable.
The real question: why are we ok with the free movement of capital, but insist on restrictions for the movement of labor?
Why does anyone find it acceptable for half their workforce to be working here illicitly? Either you’re opposed to them being in the country illegally, or you should be concerned that they are being denied access to basic services due to their status. The status quo is untenable.
The real question: why are we ok with the free movement of capital, but insist on restrictions for the movement of labor?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yes it does. [paragraphs of stuff that don't reflect a need to raid factories in order to seize legal workers] No. It does not. Raiding factories of legal workers does not improve my life. Creating a state of persistent fear for legal residents - this also does not improve my life. It does however degrade the lives of legal residents and citizens I know and care about.
> Raiding factories of legal workers does not improve my life. They're illegal workers who broke the law not only by immigrating illegally, but by using stolen identification to get past the federal employment verification system: "In his experience, E-Verify was good at checking numbers, not people. The government maintained that Glenn Valley employees had been using IDs that were stolen. One number belonged to a nu…
This being a misdemeanor, on par with speeding—something I’m sure none of us have ever done today.
Why does anyone find it acceptable for half their workforce to be working here illicitly? Either you’re opposed to them being in the country illegally, or you should be concerned that they are being denied access to basic services due to their status. The status quo is untenable.
Obviously the employer didn't knowingly hire illegal immigrants since the employees were verified through the US government's E-Verify system.
Is that obvious? Is it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Raiding factories of legal workers does not improve my life. They're illegal workers who broke the law not only by immigrating illegally, but by using stolen identification to get past the federal employment verification system: "In his experience, E-Verify was good at checking numbers, not people. The government maintained that Glenn Valley employees had been using IDs that were stolen. One number belonged to a nu…
> They're illegal workers who broke the law not only by immigrating illegally This being a misdemeanor, on par with speeding—something I’m sure none of us have ever done today.
E.g. using false identification to evade eVerify probably can be charged as a felony under 18 USC 1028 or 18 USC 1001. I’d you work with a smuggler or cartel to gain entry, you can be charged with felonies under conspiracy laws. And nobody complies with 8 USC 1302, which requires aliens to register. That’s punishable by up to six months in prison. Ordinary speeding can’t carry jail time at least here in Maryland.
Why does anyone find it acceptable for half their workforce to be working here illicitly? Either you’re opposed to them being in the country illegally, or you should be concerned that they are being denied access to basic services due to their status. The status quo is untenable.
The real question: why are we ok with the free movement of capital, but insist on restrictions for the movement of labor?