Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (177022)	10/25/2003 10:37:04 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575273

It's not something that would be difficult to change, you simply impose a VERY severe penalty on anyone that hires an illegal, huge fines and maybe jail time for the owner of the business. End of problem, no incentive to cross the border if there is no money to be made. This problem is so much more complex than this. Often, it cannot be easily proven that employers who hired illegals knew they were illegal; these people are illegally documented, as well. I have had clients who caught illegals only because they happen to notice multiple employees with the same SSNs; all papers were in order, they were just fake. Are you going to jail that guy? The recent WalMart incident is a great example. WalMart has been totally villified in the press, but apparently has no culpability whatsoever (and SHOULD have none), since they hired a subcontractor. You can't have WalMart be responsible for the illegals hired by every contractor they deal with. This problem can't be solved on the backs of business, big or small.

To: Road Walker who wrote (177022)	10/25/2003 4:03:05 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1575273

It's not something that would be difficult to change, you simply impose a VERY severe penalty on anyone that hires an illegal, huge fines and maybe jail time for the owner of the business. End of problem, no incentive to cross the border if there is no money to be made. The tradeoff is of course that some goods and services get more expensive. Maybe imported oranges become less expensive than domestic oranges, and some of the groves go out of business. Then again, maybe some of the software guys that are losing their jobs to cheap Indian labor could fill the void? In CA, it seemed that illegal hiring bans were enforced only when the state was in recession. ted

To: Road Walker who wrote (177022)	10/25/2003 6:26:34 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 1575273

JF, The only thing that bugs me is that the folks that rally the hardest against immigration, well sometimes there seems to be a racist undertone to their arguments. It goes the other way, too. Anyone trying to enforce the illegal immigration laws are seen as racist. The tradeoff is of course that some goods and services get more expensive. Maybe imported oranges become less expensive than domestic oranges, and some of the groves go out of business. Then again, maybe some of the software guys that are losing their jobs to cheap Indian labor could fill the void? Either way, the businesses will migrate to areas where labor is cheapest. Net effect, citizens will have to adapt, not to mention the American economy. I'd rather have the laws enforced, then change them wherever necessary. If we need a migrant worker program, let's do it. If the minimum wage is too high, let's fix it. If said migrant workers need driver's licenses, let's create a provisional one for them. We're not going to get anywhere by pandering or selective enforcement. Tenchusatsu