The 2016 General Election Thread

[printcraft]

When I say "employer," I mean those persons who knowingly hire illegals. I'm clear there are already penalties, but obviously the penalties aren't persuasive enough. There needs to be some teeth in those laws. Let me put it this way, while there are certainly many (of used to be) many illegals that use identity theft to obtain identification, I run into tons illegals without a state or federal issued ID. As far as Mexicans go, they have Mexican consulate issued identification cards, which are provided to undocumented persons. These persons are working, in a variety of fields. If there are so many these persons, then it's obvious employers aren't doing their jobs.

Matey said the driver, identified as Denis Yasmir Amaya Rodriguez, 37, of Honduras, was an employee of that company."He is in this country illegally from Honduras. He has no driver's license. He had minor injuries," she said.
Rodriguez will be booked in the St. John the Baptist jail and will be charged with two counts of negligent homicide, reckless operation, and no driver's license, Fox 8 reported. Police told the television station that additional charges are forthcoming.

Do we fry the employer in this case? I hope so.


Two killed in Louisiana bus crash, driver in US illegally, cops say | Fox News

 

[dusty88]

When I say "employer," I mean those persons who knowingly hire illegals. I'm clear there are already penalties, but obviously the penalties aren't persuasive enough. There needs to be some teeth in those laws. Let me put it this way, while there are certainly many (of used to be) many illegals that use identity theft to obtain identification, I run into tons illegals without a state or federal issued ID. As far as Mexicans go, they have Mexican consulate issued identification cards, which are provided to undocumented persons. These persons are working, in a variety of fields. If there are so many these persons, then it's obvious employers aren't doing their jobs.

Sometimes when we have trouble enforcing a law it is wise to ask why so many people are breaking it. It appears to me that we are fighting market forces when we try to stop people from hiring illegals. I am going more by indirect statements (people who have hired someone in California) or by what I read than my own experience.

What it appears to me is that you have people who are willing to do really good work at a low cost. To suggest that it is "wrong" to hire them suggests that you deny someone the opportunity to work and feed their family. I assume along with that you want the employer to hire an American and pay higher wages. In some cases, that might be rational. if the billionaire is getting a cheap housekeeper, maybe he needs to pony up and pay more. But why aren't poor Americans taking the jobs? In some cases I'm guessing it's not just the wages but the regulatory burden of hiring them. I considered hiring a summer nanny once. To do so legally, you have to become an employer (a designation I already have for my actual business) but this means either doing your own payroll just for 1 household employee or hiring a payroll service, which just starts to make the expense ridiculous. You then also have to pay workmens compensation unless you incorporate. So I think maybe we have a problem with the law as much as we do with the outlaws.

I understand some immigrants workers are migrant farm workers. I don't know how often this is legal vs illegal. Same with construction. But again we have market forces at work and a lot of regulatory costs on employers, as well as the cost to consumers.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Sometimes when we have trouble enforcing a law it is wise to ask why so many people are breaking it. It appears to me that we are fighting market forces when we try to stop people from hiring illegals. I am going more by indirect statements (people who have hired someone in California) or by what I read than my own experience.

What it appears to me is that you have people who are willing to do really good work at a low cost. To suggest that it is "wrong" to hire them suggests that you deny someone the opportunity to work and feed their family. I assume along with that you want the employer to hire an American and pay higher wages. In some cases, that might be rational. if the billionaire is getting a cheap housekeeper, maybe he needs to pony up and pay more. But why aren't poor Americans taking the jobs? In some cases I'm guessing it's not just the wages but the regulatory burden of hiring them. I considered hiring a summer nanny once. To do so legally, you have to become an employer (a designation I already have for my actual business) but this means either doing your own payroll just for 1 household employee or hiring a payroll service, which just starts to make the expense ridiculous. You then also have to pay workmens compensation unless you incorporate. So I think maybe we have a problem with the law as much as we do with the outlaws.

I understand some immigrants workers are migrant farm workers. I don't know how often this is legal vs illegal. Same with construction. But again we have market forces at work and a lot of regulatory costs on employers, as well as the cost to consumers.

I have repeatedly said that I understand why illegals come here. I have even gone so far as to say that if I was in their situation, I would be dumb to not want to come her. That said, the United States should not be in the charity business, and feel obligated to give employment to illegally immigrated foreign nationals. So yes, I would deny them the chance to feed their families.
I've always held the belief that the greatest risk posed by illegal immigrants, isn't crime, but a lowering of the American standard of living. In a nation of relative affluence, injecting workers from very impoverished areas, who are willing to take greatly reduced wages, is a serious issue for the American worker. It's not that poor Americans won't take the job, they simply won't take a job that has a crappy wage, and would undoubtedly pay more, if it wasn't for persons, who shouldn't be here in the first place, driving wages down.

In a perfect world, there would be no borders, and per the free market, people could freely travel to sell their labor. Unfortunately, this isn't a perfect world. We have borders to protect our ideology, our values, and our wealth. This is the great flaw of a true free market... a person who sells their labor, doesn't just bring their ability to work, but their own ideology, values, and hurt another's ability to gain profit.

 

[dusty88]

I have repeatedly said that I understand why illegals come here. I have even gone so far as to say that if I was in their situation, I would be dumb to not want to come her. That said, the United States should not be in the charity business, and feel obligated to give employment to illegally immigrated foreign nationals. So yes, I would deny them the chance to feed their families.
I've always held the belief that the greatest risk posed by illegal immigrants, isn't crime, but a lowering of the American standard of living. In a nation of relative affluence, injecting workers from very impoverished areas, who are willing to take greatly reduced wages, is a serious issue for the American worker. It's not that poor Americans won't take the job, they simply won't take a job that has a crappy wage, and would undoubtedly pay more, if it wasn't for persons, who shouldn't be here in the first place, driving wages down.

In a perfect world, there would be no borders, and per the free market, people could freely travel to sell their labor. Unfortunately, this isn't a perfect world. We have borders to protect our ideology, our values, and our wealth. This is the great flaw of a true free market... a person who sells their labor, doesn't just bring their ability to work, but their own ideology, values, and hurt another's ability to gain profit.

Bear in mind this is not a flawed free market creating this condition. A low-skilled or young worker cannot legally accept a job (for example) below minimum wage or without certain benefits. We have also made it artificially high to live here through regulations that apply to everything consumers purchase.

We really won't be successful as long as we engage in trying to fight the forces of nature. I think we should focus our efforts on the people that want to harm others.

In any case, if you want to enforce the law more harshly against employers, do it with those who actively recruit or assist illegals. Otherwise it's just a useless burden on every business to prove "compliance" with one more thing.

 

[T.Lex]

New polling from Emerson College has an arguable tie between HRC and Trump in OH and PA. But, this is where any individual poll needs to be taken with a grain of salt. From the methodology:

Data was weighted by 2012 election results .... Data was collected using an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system of landlines only.

So, it was a robocall, which can be good or bad. People don't usually like talking to robots, but the ones that feel strongly will. So, it is no surprise that their sampling was very high in loyalty. But, something I always look a bit askance at is the "weighting." It may be accurate, but also seems much like "fudge factor."

Again, it is a data point in the context of other polls.

 

[MisterChester]

Bear in mind this is not a flawed free market creating this condition. A low-skilled or young worker cannot legally accept a job (for example) below minimum wage or without certain benefits. We have also made it artificially high to live here through regulations that apply to everything consumers purchase.

We really won't be successful as long as we engage in trying to fight the forces of nature. I think we should focus our efforts on the people that want to harm others.

In any case, if you want to enforce the law more harshly against employers, do it with those who actively recruit or assist illegals. Otherwise it's just a useless burden on every business to prove "compliance" with one more thing.

It's not that hard to ask for valid government ID and a Social Security card or passport. If they're not asking for it, they need to be punished.

 

[dusty88]

It's not that hard to ask for valid government ID and a Social Security card or passport. If they're not asking for it, they need to be punished.

It's not the employers job to know when they are fake. In fact, the way the system is set up there really isn't even a channel to report when you think it's fake.

As for those paying under the table, I suppose you are right. Though personally I think someone should be able to "employ" you without a special license from the government, without becoming an unpaid tax collector for the government etc.

That's my opinion. It's also an example of why it's not the "free market" that attracts people over the border. There might be some of that even in a free market. But it's not the case at this time.

 

[BugI02]

Sometimes when we have trouble enforcing a law it is wise to ask why so many people are breaking it. It appears to me that we are fighting market forces when we try to stop people from hiring illegals. I am going more by indirect statements (people who have hired someone in California) or by what I read than my own experience.

What it appears to me is that you have people who are willing to do really good work at a low cost. To suggest that it is "wrong" to hire them suggests that you deny someone the opportunity to work and feed their family. I assume along with that you want the employer to hire an American and pay higher wages. In some cases, that might be rational. if the billionaire is getting a cheap housekeeper, maybe he needs to pony up and pay more. But why aren't poor Americans taking the jobs? In some cases I'm guessing it's not just the wages but the regulatory burden of hiring them. I considered hiring a summer nanny once. To do so legally, you have to become an employer (a designation I already have for my actual business) but this means either doing your own payroll just for 1 household employee or hiring a payroll service, which just starts to make the expense ridiculous. You then also have to pay workmens compensation unless you incorporate. So I think maybe we have a problem with the law as much as we do with the outlaws.

I understand some immigrants workers are migrant farm workers. I don't know how often this is legal vs illegal. Same with construction. But again we have market forces at work and a lot of regulatory costs on employers, as well as the cost to consumers.

Meatpackers' Profits Hinge On Pool of Immigrant Labor - NYTimes.com


"Companies like Tyson, Smithfield Foods and Conagra have profited from paying low wages, pushing production lines faster and hiring workers who are much more willing to endure the hazardous conditions of a meat-processing plant, industry experts say. ''This is certainly not unique to Tyson,'' Professor Heffernan said. ''This has been around for a long time in the meat-processing industry. And employers can take advantage of these people because they can threaten to send them back.''

"The government charged the company and six of its employees with conspiring to transport illegal immigrants across the Mexican border and help them get counterfeit work papers for jobs at more than a dozen Tyson poultry plants. The indictment said that, to meet production and profit goals, Tyson officials would contact local smugglers near its plants to get more workers."

"Industry experts said it has long been believed that American food companies recruit in Mexico and knowingly hire illegal workers. Some said the companies advertise on the radio in Mexico, distribute leaflets, show videos and hire immigrant smugglers, or ''coyotes.''


This is from 2001, but if you think it's any different now I have some land in Florida you should look at ... but only at low tide

 

[dusty88]

This is from 2001, but if you think it's any different now I have some land in Florida you should look at ... but only at low tide

I'm not seeing how that contradicts anything I said. I said we have a lot of non-market forces at work that distort the business and labor market. We could write a book about how regulations and subsidies and the monetary system lead to support of companies like Tyson and a situation where the typical low-wage American worker can only afford $5 chickens and how the Americans who would be willing to work for lowest wages and gain experience are instead subsisted on welfare.

But let's pretend for a moment that Tyson chicken operates within the free market, just to simplify the discussion.

There are several acts there that are already illegal without even prosecuting them for "hiring" illegals. And when you put an employer mandate on, you punish all employers. Let me show you a few things bad guys have done with guns then let's get your guns registered and tracked so we can prove you aren't out doing illegal things with your guns.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

# of state offices:

PA: Clinton 36, Trump 2
NC: Clinton 30, Trump 0
NH: Clinton 17, Trump 1
FL: Clinton 34, Trump 1


Also

Department of Homeland Security eyes special declaration to take charge of elections

 

[miguel]

So, election fraud is not a big deal until this year when the PTB could lose, eh?

Convenient.

edit: This would be juicy...a vote by the Electoral College, but without a popular vote: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles...ould-delay-or-eliminate-presidential-election

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Clinton and Trump have the same unfavorable rating: 60%

Hillary's Poll Bounce Fades | National Review

 

[T.Lex]

Really good article on polling, which has been a topic here.
Polling Benchmarks Trump Needs to Overtake Clinton | RealClearPolitics

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Nancy Pelosi Memo: Obama's Iraq Withdrawal Created Islamic State - Breitbart

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Spy found dead in a bag, Gareth Williams, 'had infuriated his MI6 bosses' | Daily Mail Online

 

[jamil]

Nancy Pelosi Memo: Obama's Iraq Withdrawal Created Islamic State - Breitbart

Wow. She's trying to be captain obvious.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Pay attention that it is The Whitehouse and HRC that will be pushing for a rumor of a election hack.Josh E. Was pushing the narrative all day.

 

[jamil]

Pay attention that it is The Whitehouse and HRC that will be pushing for a rumor of a election hack.Josh E. Was pushing the narrative all day.

But we *need* Homeland security to take over elections.

 

[nate77]

Also

Department of Homeland Security eyes special declaration to take charge of elections

But just weeks ago Obama said the Federal Government has nothing to do with elections, and that election tampering is just a conspiracy theory.

 

[T.Lex]

INGO ever confuses me.

There were reports that certain groups might try to hack the electronic parts of our election system. Cybersecurity is a DHS function. Now DHS cybersecurity for the election is an overreach.

So INGO would prefer paper ballots? Because that worked so well in Florida in 2000...