Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
Thanks Tree8Thanks

Thread: A suggestion to curtail illegal immigration

  1. #1
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    6,328
    Thanks
    4095

    From
    Canada, West Coast

    A suggestion to curtail illegal immigration

    A friend of mine and I came up with what we think is a foolproof three step way of minimizing illegal immigration from Mexico and Central/South America. The illegals who come to the US for the money.

    First, enforce the use of e-verify. Secondly, put long teeth in the sanctions part. The big house ain't no fun.

    Thirdly, enact a "prime contractor" law. I'm not sure the US has ever had this kind of law and maybe you are familiar with it under another name, but essentially it means that the guy (since corporations are people, and that was a gender-neutral "guy") who ultimately pays the tab is responsible for the actions of his sub-contractors.

    So when WalMart is busted for illegal workers on their subcontracted janitorial staff it is Doug McMillon who is perp-walked past the press photographers. And put long teeth in the sanctions there too. No longer can they claim "well, I insisted that the workers be legal, it was the subcontracting company that is to blame".

    The jobs dry up, the illegals go home and new ones don't come.

    I saw this firsthand in the oil industry in Alberta. A company would go out to bid on some service and Joe would bid $X, Fred would bid $1.05X, Steve would bid $0.95X and Luigi would bid $0.75X. So the greedy company chooses Luigi and you don't become the boss of a company without knowing that there has to be something wonky in a bid that low, some corners are being cut.

    In the Alberta oilpatch, it wasn't illegal workers, it was usually not following safety or environmental guidelines, but the same principle applied. Since they passed the prime contractor law, safety and environmental compliance is up, injuries and environmental damage are down.

    And a heartfelt apology to all Italians the world over, but the stereotype was just too tempting.
    Thanks from Thx1138 and MaryAnne

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,564
    Thanks
    281

    From
    under a rock near NC / GA
    This thread is almost funny. A Canadian socialist is going to tell America how to handle its immigration issue. Sad thing is we have a lot of National Socialists and really silly people that buy into that crap.

    I am not a fan of National ID, E Verify, nor all those Hitler inspired "solutions" (if you can call regression a solution.)

  3. #3
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    6,328
    Thanks
    4095

    From
    Canada, West Coast
    Quote Originally Posted by Humorme View Post
    This thread is almost funny. A Canadian socialist is going to tell America how to handle its immigration issue. Sad thing is we have a lot of National Socialists and really silly people that buy into that crap.

    I am not a fan of National ID, E Verify, nor all those Hitler inspired "solutions" (if you can call regression a solution.)
    Do you have a better solution to your supposed immigrant problem? Or are you another delusional believer in the wall?

  4. #4
    Senior Member Eve1's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    11,903
    Thanks
    7753

    From
    My own world
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    A friend of mine and I came up with what we think is a foolproof three step way of minimizing illegal immigration from Mexico and Central/South America. The illegals who come to the US for the money.

    First, enforce the use of e-verify. Secondly, put long teeth in the sanctions part. The big house ain't no fun.

    Thirdly, enact a "prime contractor" law. I'm not sure the US has ever had this kind of law and maybe you are familiar with it under another name, but essentially it means that the guy (since corporations are people, and that was a gender-neutral "guy") who ultimately pays the tab is responsible for the actions of his sub-contractors.

    So when WalMart is busted for illegal workers on their subcontracted janitorial staff it is Doug McMillon who is perp-walked past the press photographers. And put long teeth in the sanctions there too. No longer can they claim "well, I insisted that the workers be legal, it was the subcontracting company that is to blame".

    The jobs dry up, the illegals go home and new ones don't come.

    I saw this firsthand in the oil industry in Alberta. A company would go out to bid on some service and Joe would bid $X, Fred would bid $1.05X, Steve would bid $0.95X and Luigi would bid $0.75X. So the greedy company chooses Luigi and you don't become the boss of a company without knowing that there has to be something wonky in a bid that low, some corners are being cut.

    In the Alberta oilpatch, it wasn't illegal workers, it was usually not following safety or environmental guidelines, but the same principle applied. Since they passed the prime contractor law, safety and environmental compliance is up, injuries and environmental damage are down.

    And a heartfelt apology to all Italians the world over, but the stereotype was just too tempting.
    Except you declare bankruptcy and move on and the company opens under a new name with a new business number. Forget the fines, CEO's have to go to jail when they put people and environmental safety at risk signing personal guarantees that they are abiding by all laws and regulations and if they don't its' the big house for 3 years or longer.
    Thanks from MaryAnne

  5. #5
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    6,328
    Thanks
    4095

    From
    Canada, West Coast
    Quote Originally Posted by Eve1 View Post
    Except you declare bankruptcy and move on and the company opens under a new name with a new business number. Forget the fines, CEO's have to go to jail when they put people and environmental safety at risk signing personal guarantees that they are abiding by all laws and regulations and if they don't its' the big house for 3 years or longer.
    That is exactly what I meant by "long teeth". In the case of WalMart, they've got so much money that fines wouldn't work. Or Exxon.

    And I should have included @Humorme, what's your position on voter ID laws?

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    9,156
    Thanks
    2445

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    A friend of mine and I came up with what we think is a foolproof three step way of minimizing illegal immigration from Mexico and Central/South America. The illegals who come to the US for the money.

    First, enforce the use of e-verify. Secondly, put long teeth in the sanctions part. The big house ain't no fun.

    Thirdly, enact a "prime contractor" law. I'm not sure the US has ever had this kind of law and maybe you are familiar with it under another name, but essentially it means that the guy (since corporations are people, and that was a gender-neutral "guy") who ultimately pays the tab is responsible for the actions of his sub-contractors.

    So when WalMart is busted for illegal workers on their subcontracted janitorial staff it is Doug McMillon who is perp-walked past the press photographers. And put long teeth in the sanctions there too. No longer can they claim "well, I insisted that the workers be legal, it was the subcontracting company that is to blame".

    The jobs dry up, the illegals go home and new ones don't come.

    I saw this firsthand in the oil industry in Alberta. A company would go out to bid on some service and Joe would bid $X, Fred would bid $1.05X, Steve would bid $0.95X and Luigi would bid $0.75X. So the greedy company chooses Luigi and you don't become the boss of a company without knowing that there has to be something wonky in a bid that low, some corners are being cut.

    In the Alberta oilpatch, it wasn't illegal workers, it was usually not following safety or environmental guidelines, but the same principle applied. Since they passed the prime contractor law, safety and environmental compliance is up, injuries and environmental damage are down.

    And a heartfelt apology to all Italians the world over, but the stereotype was just too tempting.
    Mr. RNG,

    With regard to your first point, I'm glad you agree with me that finally President Trump is doing something about illegal immigration. Unfortunately, you seem to misunderstand what e-verify is. It is a largely volunteer program which only applies to federal contracts. Some states require e-verify for state contacts, but other states like California have severely limited the use of e-verify, whereas other states, like NY do not require it to be used. And there are no teeth in the sanctions part other than the denial of a government contract.

    With regard to your second point, a "prime contractor" law would not and cannot work for subcontractors. Basically, you can't hold someone responsible for someone else's malfeasance. You can require a prime contractor to require that their subs hire only legal workers, but if they don't, you can't penalized the prime for the actions of the subcontractors, unless they were complacent in the actions.

    I know, I know, you say that works for safety and environmental guidelines, but you are talking apples and oranges. The owner of a project is legal obligation to follow environmental law. If environmental damage occurs, they will have to deal with it. They can go back an sue the sub for causing the damage, but the owner is the one who pays the fines. Similarly, the owner is responsible for providing a safe working environment within the bounds of the project. Meaning, everybody who comes into a project area must comply with the owner's code of safe practices.

    On a third point, companies don't pick the low bid because they are greedy, but rather, because they have prudent business models. Point of fact, a smart company owner would likely not take a low bid with that much disparity without looking into why. Another point of fact, government agencies are required to take the low bid. Are you saying government is greedy?

    And finally, no need to apologize....Italians are pretty sketchy characters....
    Thanks from AttusBlack, MaryAnne and Sparta

  7. #7
    RNG
    RNG is offline
    Moderator RNG's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    6,328
    Thanks
    4095

    From
    Canada, West Coast
    Quote Originally Posted by Kallie Knoetze View Post
    Mr. RNG,

    With regard to your first point, I'm glad you agree with me that finally President Trump is doing something about illegal immigration. Unfortunately, you seem to misunderstand what e-verify is. It is a largely volunteer program which only applies to federal contracts. Some states require e-verify for state contacts, but other states like California have severely limited the use of e-verify, whereas other states, like NY do not require it to be used. And there are no teeth in the sanctions part other than the denial of a government contract.

    With regard to your second point, a "prime contractor" law would not and cannot work for subcontractors. Basically, you can't hold someone responsible for someone else's malfeasance. You can require a prime contractor to require that their subs hire only legal workers, but if they don't, you can't penalized the prime for the actions of the subcontractors, unless they were complacent in the actions.

    I know, I know, you say that works for safety and environmental guidelines, but you are talking apples and oranges. The owner of a project is legal obligation to follow environmental law. If environmental damage occurs, they will have to deal with it. They can go back an sue the sub for causing the damage, but the owner is the one who pays the fines. Similarly, the owner is responsible for providing a safe working environment within the bounds of the project. Meaning, everybody who comes into a project area must comply with the owner's code of safe practices.

    On a third point, companies don't pick the low bid because they are greedy, but rather, because they have prudent business models. Point of fact, a smart company owner would likely not take a low bid with that much disparity without looking into why. Another point of fact, government agencies are required to take the low bid. Are you saying government is greedy?

    And finally, no need to apologize....Italians are pretty sketchy characters....
    On each point, those factors could be achieved by simple legislation being passed. And yes, it would work on illegal workers too.
    Thanks from MaryAnne

  8. #8
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,564
    Thanks
    281

    From
    under a rock near NC / GA
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    Do you have a better solution to your supposed immigrant problem? Or are you another delusional believer in the wall?
    In no way, shape, fashion, or form do I support the nutty wall idea.

    America's immigration debacle is based upon lies, misinterpretations and a general ignorance by our electorate. The anti-immigrants claim that the undocumented foreigners don't pay taxes. But they do. Anti-immigrants claim the undocumented foreigners steal jobs, but the jobs belong to the employer that creates them. Anti-immigrants claim that the undocumented people drive wages down, but that is not true at all. The anti-immigrants don't understand the economics of their own country.

    Do I have a solution? Yep.

    1) Allow employers to hire whomever they want

    2) Create a Guest Worker status with no automatic path to citizenship

    3) Children born in the U.S. of Guest Workers would not automatically become citizens

    4) Employers in a business currently pay about 39 percent in corporate taxes. I'd leave that in place and give employers some options. If they:

    * Hire an all American workforce, they get a tax incentive

    * Take people off the welfare line, unemployment line or off of disability, get tax incentives

    * Bring jobs back to the U.S. and get a tax incentive

    Employers helping Americans could lower their taxes from 39 percent to 15 percent

    5) Guest workers would not be eligible for the privileges of citizenship (unemployment insurance, welfare, food stamps, Medicare, Medicaid, etc.)

    Problem solved.

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,564
    Thanks
    281

    From
    under a rock near NC / GA
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    That is exactly what I meant by "long teeth". In the case of WalMart, they've got so much money that fines wouldn't work. Or Exxon.

    And I should have included @Humorme, what's your position on voter ID laws?
    There is no Right to vote in a federal election. Personally, I think voting is a privilege. I'm not going to make a decision though unless and until Trump supporters can substantiate the claim that millions of undocumented people cast votes in the last election. I want to see the proof if it exists.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    9,156
    Thanks
    2445

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    On each point, those factors could be achieved by simple legislation being passed. And yes, it would work on illegal workers too.
    Mr. RNG,

    There is already legislation in place. Employers are required to fill out and keep on file an employee's I-9 form. There are penalties for lying on the form, improper records keeping, and for hiring someone who is not legally eligible to work. E-verify is simply a voluntary electronic I-9 form. It all works well and good, except when liberal states like California makes it illegal to use e-verify.

    With regard to your "prime contractor" rule, a law would last about 10 minutes into a legal challenge. A sub contractor cannot be force to give out an employee's private information and cannot be forced to give out what is considered proprietary information about the running of their company.

    But finally, we do agree on one point. There should be a law outlawing Italians....
    Thanks from AttusBlack

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Illegal immigration
    By metheron in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 3rd March 2016, 08:23 PM
  2. Why is Nothing Done About Illegal Immigration?
    By the-other-lib in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 132
    Last Post: 8th July 2011, 03:56 PM
  3. Illegal immigration
    By Conservative15 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 23rd September 2009, 01:15 PM
  4. The EU & Illegal Immigration
    By Migi e! in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 20th June 2008, 05:53 PM
  5. Illegal Immigration
    By ty58527 in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 6th May 2006, 09:13 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed