I was having a “discussion†with someone about illegal workers. This person didn’t seem to think that illegal workers were much of a big deal. The premise on which she based this was that people violate traffic laws all the time with infractions like speeding. Speeding isn’t a felony and neither is illegal immigration; they’re both misdemeanors and therefore not serious offenses was the premise of the argument.
I tried to point out, but to no avail, of course, that laws like speeding, texting while driving, and driving while intoxicated may be misdemeanors, but when they result in fatalities, they become serious offenses. So someone who is negligent about seemingly minor laws is more likely to be involved in more serious crimes.
Such is the case with the illegal population. You can argue that they’re just here seeking a better life, and I’ve been through that argument with others in the past too. However, the way this country works currently (I think it still does, anyway) is that you need to work to make a living even for the bare necessities and if you don’t have proper identification, you can’t get a job. Now, that might not be the case with all work because some employers do pay their workers without documentation on a cash basis, illegal as that is.
You’ve often heard the chant that illegal workers are actually good for America because they do jobs most Americans don’t want to do. The fact is that illegal workers who have come here for a better life want the same amenities others who are here legally have and more opportunities are available with employers who are not as ready to hire illegal workers. The only thing they need for consideration to be hired by a legitimate employer is documentation to prove they have legal status.
You may have noticed that in the last five years or so, identity theft insurance is advertised almost as much as auto insurance. This is because identity theft is an underground industry that sells your documentation to illegal workers who will pay to own it illegally. So, just as the traffic violator who was negligent obeying traffic laws and later may have killed someone because of that indifference to law, the same indifference to law is true of an illegal worker. Crimes of a more serious nature are more likely to follow when someone has no regard for law in general.
The need for identity theft insurance is almost as important a need as auto insurance now. It angers me that I have to be responsible to keep my own identity and pay to keep it. I think it should be the responsibility of those to whom we have entrusted our most private personal information, but it’s difficult to know from what source your identity has been stolen so the liability of any particular entity is not always as easy to determine. Still, I think that companies and organizations that need your personal information should have to share in the liability. However, that wouldn’t help either because the cost would still be passed onto the private citizen in higher costs to procure the services of the entities that have received your information—a catch 22.
So how much of identity theft is attributable to the illegal worker? It’s hard to tell, but from this 2008 MSNBC article, “there are clear indications that many -- if not most -- of the 9 million mismatches are immigrants using the wrong SSN. One study by Social Security indicates no-match payments come most frequently from agricultural and restaurant industries, for example.â€
The article also attributes blame to the SS Administration, the IRS, and privacy rules that disallow lenders such as banks and auto dealers to alert consumers when they find multiple social security numbers attached to one name.
So, yes, our system is at fault too and there is no doubt about that. Yet, illegal is illegal for reasons far more significant and beyond what the simplest of laws might indicate at face value. Just as disregard for what seems to be a simple traffic violation can result in far worse consequences, illegal immigration also has consequences far beyond the act of residing in a country in which one has no business.
Â
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 68
However, I also place a great blame on the IRS, especially because they know when an SS# no longer belongs to just one person or belongs to even a dead person. There's no excuse for hiding this and, on top of that, expecting us to pay for identity security. I think it's a racket. I wouldn't be surprised if the IRS is getting kickbacks from the companies they help to track down identity thieves. I can't think of any reason the IRS wouldn't make it their business to crack down on the thieves themselves otherwise. I think the IRS should owe anyone who has had his identity stolen a lifetime of "back taxes."
It is nearly possible to have even forgotten this massive problem; there have been quite a few smokescreens thrown up lately. And a massive problem it is. So many overlook the fact that we are in dire Economic straits, and that this is a MAJOR contributor to that problem. This canard that "they do the work Americans won't do" is a lot of rubbish. Americans don't care for low-skilled, low wage labour, but they are also a hearty bunch, and do what is necessary to have some of the amenities, and even the staples and necessities that you've mentioned.
This must stop...and I cannot believe that the American People are so oblivious to the cost and the danger of Illegals. And, our Politicians don't exhibit the "Political Will..." ...it is my dream that we wake up, and clean House in D.C. that we might get something done on this serious Issue.
Leftists make this a "bleeding heart" Issue...but it is, as you have pointed out, quite serious...AND A MATTER OF LAW!
I might have taken another tack on this because there's so much to say about it. The post had a blurb about Senate Bill 1070, the hot issue now, but I went for the low hanging fruit. Since my response seemed to have been misunderstood, I decided to clarify what I meant here.
Have you seen the bill? I haven't read the whole thing yet, but from what I have, it sounds good to me. You can read it here.
Of course, it doesn't address the federal issues like the IRS and SS who can do a great deal to cut out the rampant identity theft and illegal use of SS#s. That's indicative of the whole state of affairs in this country, though. I guess when the President himself has an SS# from a state he never lived in, it's not so easy to prosecute others for the same.
Too much corruption and matters of law that are not important to even the people who make them to break them, our own Congress--another indication of a country that once was.
UGH...
Sue, I've never read a statement that was as ugly as it was True...it's a damned shame.
I've often wondered why Fed Agencies like the IRS don't do the "policing," but they wield far too much power for my tastes as it is. I suppose, though, that that would perhaps be the most efficient method, since they have their hand in everything else in this Country...
No, I haven't read the Bill. I'll do that yet tonight before I make sleep.
That was on some TV investigative report.
...Your points are precise and very much to a point, and without any "rhetoric," which is a refreshing chance of pace.
...You did not mention that resources, like schools, hospitals, etc are used.
...Your post does deserve recognition, so I have featured it in my group, Gather Explorers
congratulations.
but the truth is, americans will not do them at the wages offered - if not for illegal workers, companies would have to pay more to get the work done.
ok - i will gladly pay more for fruits, vegatables, ditches dug etc.
because it will be MORE than offset by the lower medical bills, insurance costs, medicaid, welfare, foodstamps, section 8 housing, etc that illegals can not pay for.
was only responding to one of the arguments that some give to say we NEED illegal labor.
there are many as you point out.
If an illegal immigrant can prove they have been here for 3 years, they can stay with a work permit under these conditions:
1) Identify all sources of income for the last three years. (This will allow the Soc Sec Admin to go after those employers for the withholding taxes that should have beeen paid. The employees portion then goes into an annuity cashable only in their country of origin at age 65. The employers portion goes into the Soc Sec general fund- reaping MILLIONS to help offset some of the cost of legitimate workers.)
2.) The illegal for the next 5 years must remain gainfully employed, must file taxes normally, and not be convicted of any felonies.
James, I'm not attempting to make a rip on you, personally; but, I wonder what's happened with your sense of the Law? If we have no intention of enforcing them, then be rid of them, and the charade. If those morons in D.C. are willing to admit that we are a Nation of Laws, then uphold them.
On a serious note, we have existing laws that are a solution to the problem, and we simply need to enforce them. Our government will not do so, mainly because they are afraid of seeming disrespectful to the legal immigrants from Mexico and risking losing the Hispanic vote. As with most issues, our government places politics above the good of the people, and the illegal immigration issue is certainly no exception.
Yes, I think you're right when it comes to Mexico. Politics is the answer and it applies no matter from where the illegal immigrants hail, though when they are from other countries like Asia we tend to need to outsource them so we turn a blind eye so they get trained here and eventually go back and work in their own countries for us. It happens even with those who have legitimate work visas.
I think you've got it kinda backwards, This is about vast wealth, and control . . and the PC is generated to fit the "corporate" model, I'm rather sure.
This explains why most of the PC does not make sense ; )
Yeah, Vic, I think PC plays a role in just about everything. I think it's more sophisticated and subtle when they play the game among each other, but it's there. I had a chuckle with Medvedev's answer to Obama last week because the Russians don't play the PC game, at least not by the PC rules. They let anyone know right up front not to BS a BS-er.
Medvedev said something to the effect with the double-entendre which meant, "Space?-yeah you need space all right, buddy, and we know what that means." So in essence he's saying we know your games; we know what you've got going on with this so-called election over there but that's no excuse because we don't trust you. You might be able to fool the stupid Americans, but we're not the stupid Americans.
Hope you had a happy Easter too, vic.
"I don't see how PC is contradictory to the idea of vast wealth and control as the issue."
I'm not saying they are contradictory, I'm saying that what we deal with that we see as "PC", is essentially manufactured to coincide with the agenda of the people with vast wealth and power. The people with vast wealth and power generate it to fit with their goals and methods for achieving their goals, I'm contending . . not the other way around.
It's not a "collective consciousness" sorta deal, that just bubbles up spontaneously, but a deliberate warping of public perception and reaction, to facilitate an "elitists" agenda that is not even remotely spontaneous, I don't believe. It's coming from the "New World Order" folks, and has been for decades . .
Yes, that is so, and so in essence the elitists dictate what PC is. I don't understand how what Vic said makes a difference to that.
I'm saying I think he's got the "manual they check before they do anything" part right, in a loose way of speaking sense, but it's not really about not offending this or that group of voters. That's just a "cover" I think, to explain away the oddities and contradictions in the propaganda and policies. There's virtually always some group or other of voters that can be used in this way.
Basically, I'm saying I think the commonly accepted notion of PC, and where it comes from, is itself a con, a fable that can be called up anytime to help people rationalize away what they see as peculiar or nonsensical about what the Gov or media says or does. It's a catch-all fig leaf, so to speak, and little more I believe. One of several.
Sure, you can call it a con because anything that is false and used as a pretense to hide an agenda is a con, but it can called a number of other things just as aptly. And yes, it does (I wouldn't say help as you did because I think it's more than that) serve to change perspective so that people see things in ways that are "pre-fabbed" for them. They don't have to think about how they would or should think about something because it's already been done for them.
But you can see how the correctness is sold as a form of political and social etiquette and you begin to see how it affects the mentality of the population that has accepted it as such. That's basically what the other post "Silly Things Married Pople Say," or whatever it was I entitled it, was about.
I say help, only because there are an assortment of ways to rationalize most things made available simultaneously, and if one don't work for this or that person very well, the "manuals" have been thoroughly checked, and an appropriate array of cons deployed. Different cloaks for different folks ; )
: )
That barbers remark you made was a cool hyper pun . . it crackled for several seconds in my reactive mind ; )
It's a great idea, that play . . though I suspect it's most likely going to be written in comment boxes ; )
I'd lay ten to one that was not an accidental open mike ; )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5p70YbRiPw&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=GqMVxeZhflI
; )
That was for us, another cloak, I'm pretty sure. The "cue" was the opening of the doors that Mr. Obama was facing . . I suspect it was also for the Russian people's consumption, in a cloaking of some sort they are being conned with . .
It was in Seoul, Korea so it depends on whose mic was open. I'm sure there was more than one mic on him and I can't find any info as to what news source from where had that mic on him that caught that. Do you know, though?
"But despite Barack Obama’s pledge to pursue further nuclear cuts with Russia prior to the meeting, both countries stood their ground on their missile defense policies. Medvedev said that although both countries had their own policies on the thorny issue, he signaled that it was time to push for a solution."
So because there was a stalemate after Obama had already supposedly pledged nuclear cuts and Medvedev was a little exercised about that, it appears to me that this was a deliberate catch by a Russian microphone at the Summit, but who really knows?
" . . I just don't find him that slick."
That's a major part of the game, I think, and another cloak, so to speak . . this idea that a single person is coming up with the cons we witness in whatever instance. No no no, I tell you, think in terms of something like military operations, careful analysis of options, ramifications, and contingencies. The "facemen" are just actors, I am convinced, that play a role in very sophisticated "psyops".
*But despite Barack Obama’s pledge to pursue further nuclear cuts with Russia prior to the meeting, both countries stood their ground on their missile defense policies. Then the big bad wolf said, I'll huff and I'll puff, and I'll blow your house down!!* ; )
No, I just meant it's fairy tales to me, the whole public diplomatic/aristocratic negotiations and posturing pageant, is fiction as far as I'm concerned. Just a show, for PR purposes, and those guys knew the script called for a "stalemate" before they left home, I figure. If I watch that show, it's to get a look at the PR aspects, not the real strategic stuff.
I think Mr. Putin knows he's not dealing with Mr. Obama, on the real strategic decisions level. I think he sees him as an actor.
I saw this interview last night. There's a transcript and a video, whichever you prefer. The only reason in this case that I suggest you listen to him is that he is so well-spoken, so educated and intelligent and I think you need to hear him speak some.
If you read or hear what he says there, he knows the game. If he were running for President, I'd seriously consider him because he understands what liberty is about. He seems to understand what the "race" issue is really about. (I'd put the quotes here, but they're long so read to understand what I mean.)
Socialism and fascism are both anti-liberty and they are not mutually exclusive as people always want to point to out so abruptly and without any thought they are. Obama may appeal to the far-left on what they consider socialist aspects of his programs, but they deny the fascist aspects of his anti-liberty platform. Why?--- well, because fascism and socialism are two separate entities according to them. So even though he plays a role designed to divide the country, if you look at his actions, they don't divide at all if people understood what liberty is about and what socialism and fascism really are. Obama is as much a fascist as he is a socialist and you just can't play both roles effectively.
I had an experience a couple of years ago when I visited Canada for a holiday; we touched down at Calgary and stood as we usually do when we come to Canada behind a white line for our turn to be processed to enter. My wife on the plane coming over as usual wrote out the where we were going and were we were staying and were coming from along with how long we were staying in Canada.
She forgot to fill in the part where it said where we were from as she was disturbed while filling in the form.
When it was our turn to be processed all hell broke loose because of this one mistake on the form, I had to tell them while my wife filled in another form each hotel we were where staying at and how long, each city and town and when were due to fly back out then the young woman checked that it corresponded with what was on the form and then and only then were we let into the county.
What difference when we landed back home at Manchester airport, at least five planes had landed from all over the world with at least 250 on each aircraft and only one person who was checking passports. He did not even look at my wife’s or mine. However as we walked down the corridors, what did we see but customs checking baggage at random, they seemed far more concerned that we were not bringing into the UK items such as clothes, jewellery, booze, cigarettes that are cheaper than in the UK than any person coming in to the UK that shouldn’t.
Don't you feel sometimes that the lunatics are running the asylum both in your country and in mine.
Since I have finished work people have been saying to me that I should run for election in our local elections. I write quite scathing letters to our local paper that get printed at least three times a week most of them are about the conditions of our country and local conditions and I get quite a good response from many people who agree with what I say. The trouble is I would use barrack room language and grab my fellow councillors by the throat to get my message across because I would become so frustrated with them.
Sure, you've got my vote. Come on over!
PS I don't have to stop all wars that we are in do I? Or speak to David Cameron on a regular basis or eat hotdogs with him when he comes over, if I have to I will have no choice but to send back that desk I am sitting behind as I hate the man and can’t stand him although I must say his wife is a bit of alright.
Basically, it is telling legal immigrants: "You fools! You spent years and money to come to the USA when all you needed to do was sneak in."
I came to the USA legally. It puzzles me how so many come here and never seek to become citizens. If you are coming to the US because you want to share in the wonders of this magnificent country, take the full path and become a citizen.