U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 02-19-2012, 10:44 PM
 
44 posts, read 35,175 times
Reputation: 23

Advertisements

Here is your problem...

http://www.city-data.com/forum/polit...ed-states.html

And that is on this ugly unbalanced list...

 
Old 02-19-2012, 10:46 PM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,711,425 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by acetic3 View Post
Silliness. 45% of the illegals work off book already. You tighten down it goes to 75%. The illegals lose and the US loses tax revenue.

As a practical matter there is no way to deport 10 million people.
Your allegation that the US loses tax revenue is pure speculation. Those illegals will have to create a workaround which would require them to obtain false ID in order to work, which would require taxed wages, the US loses nothing, in fact the US would actually gain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gysmo View Post
don't understand how the U.S. loses tax revenue. the place where i work 2 worker were let go because of their status in the U.S. and 2 were hired to take their place they had legal status possibly citizens i don't know. I am sure they used e-verify so they were legal. no tax revenue lost! it works perfactly!
Even gysmo explained it to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by acetic3 View Post
The two guys laid off went home and got a job for Uncle Jose off the books. US lost the tax revenue from their employment. At least FICA.

It adds up to a substantial sum.
They went home? back to their countries? Great, a win/win for the US.

Quote:
Originally Posted by acetic3 View Post
Securing the boarder is unworkable at the existing illegal population levels. 40% of the illegals overstay legal entry. No amount of border security stops that...and given the nature of the Mexico/America border it is never going to be very secure. Mother nature takes care of that.
Non-sense, securing the borders is always good, it prevents more from coming. The 40% can be weeded out with e-verify or simply waiting until they require state help or come into contact with LEO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gysmo View Post
how about the 2 guy who got work at the company they now will pay taxes! why not go after jose with e-verify and make him put his worker on the books! uncle jose is breaking the law a threat of jail time will do!
A fine, too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by acetic3 View Post
The two guys could have been working elsewhere or gain alternate employment.

And laying those two guys off encouraged Uncle Jose to break the law. The chances of actually going to jail is virtually nil in a lot of fields. If caught maybe a fine but even that is unlikely.

We pretty much count on the tax payer being honest.
Why not deportation for all 3?

Quote:
Originally Posted by gysmo View Post
wow if those 2 guys left a job some where else, they had to be replaced by two more guys! fine stiff fines is the way to go!
Stiff fines, jail sentence and then deportation, we all agree.
 
Old 02-19-2012, 10:58 PM
 
44 posts, read 35,175 times
Reputation: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
Your allegation that the US loses tax revenue is pure speculation. Those illegals will have to create a workaround which would require them to obtain false ID in order to work, which would require taxed wages, the US loses nothing, in fact the US would actually gain.

Even gysmo explained it to you.

They went home? back to their countries? Great, a win/win for the US.

Non-sense, securing the borders is always good, it prevents more from coming. The 40% can be weeded out with e-verify or simply waiting until they require state help or come into contact with LEO.

A fine, too.

Why not deportation for all 3?

Stiff fines, jail sentence and then deportation, we all agree.
Statistically 45% work off the books. If it goes to 75% the US loses revenue. The illegal likely gets screwed to as the job quality is likely lower.

And note that the gov loses even if they are replaced with legals. The legals will in time collect their benefits as opposed to the "donation" made by the illegal.

In lots of cases though the work will go undone...and everybody loses.
 
Old 02-19-2012, 11:24 PM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,711,425 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by acetic3 View Post
Statistically 45% work off the books. If it goes to 75% the US loses revenue. The illegal likely gets screwed to as the job quality is likely lower.

And note that the gov loses even if they are replaced with legals. The legals will in time collect their benefits as opposed to the "donation" made by the illegal.

In lots of cases though the work will go undone...and everybody loses.
I see, you are still speculating. If it goes to 75% the 30% difference is made up by legal workers who actually get paid more and increase the tax revenue to include EOY taxes. The illegal should get screwed as he/she shouldn't be working here to begin with. Illegals already over collect on child tax credits, schools, etc. The Congressional Budget Office says that each illegal family takes out of the economy $89,000 more than they contribute (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...00209-517.html). That "donation" sits in an EFT account due to non-matching SS numbers, Congress takes that money and shifts it around of which it is only $7B per year (both the employer and the employee tax contributions) which makes the illegal share merely $3.5B by the estimated 8m illegal workers. Still you claim work will go undone based on speculation, the farmer (example) can bring in H2A workers (legal) and the work is done, the farmer can mechanize, again work done, the farmer can change crops, still work done.
 
Old 02-19-2012, 11:32 PM
 
44 posts, read 35,175 times
Reputation: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
I see, you are still speculating. If it goes to 75% the 30% difference is made up by legal workers who actually get paid more and increase the tax revenue to include EOY taxes. The illegal should get screwed as he/she shouldn't be working here to begin with. Illegals already over collect on child tax credits, schools, etc. The Congressional Budget Office says that each illegal family takes out of the economy $89,000 more than they contribute. That "donation" sits in an EFT account due to non-matching SS numbers, Congress takes that money and shifts it around of which it is only $7B per year (both the employer and the employee tax contributions) which makes the illegal share merely $3.5B by the estimated 8m illegal workers. Still you claim work will go undone based on speculation, the farmer (example) can bring in H2A workers (legal) and the work is done, the farmer can mechanize, again work done, the farmer can change crops, still work done.
Sorry but if legal workers result the taxes are spoken for. Only the illegals donate. And it is 7 Billion. The employer share is not paid back to the employer.

Sure work will go undone. The H2A visa thing is considered unworkable by virtually all agricultural areas. See GA. And the availability at the right time and place for many things does not work out well. How much goes undone would be speculation. As would how much gets done.
 
Old 02-19-2012, 11:46 PM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,711,425 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by acetic3 View Post
Sorry but if legal workers result the taxes are spoken for. Only the illegals donate. And it is 7 Billion. The employer share is not paid back to the employer.

Sure work will go undone. The H2A visa thing is considered unworkable by virtually all agricultural areas. See GA. And the availability at the right time and place for many things does not work out well. How much goes undone would be speculation. As would how much gets done.
And if the illegal worker is replaced by a legal worker there is no change. SS (FICA) isn't a tax (even-though t is withheld from your earnings), it's an insurance policy in which there is no right to benefits (Flemming v. Nestor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). H2A will always be considered unworkable by those that choose to not use it, why lose profits? Farmers are well aware of the time frames they need workers, their issue is the requirements to pay for trip here and back, provide adequate housing, medical, transportation to and from job site, etc. GA, there really has been very little "crops rotting on the vines" there, or for that matter anywhere like AZ, AL, etc. Through "Totalization Agreements" yes, illegals can obtain SS payments due to work done here unauthorized as long as they are back in their originating country.
 
Old 02-19-2012, 11:52 PM
 
44 posts, read 35,175 times
Reputation: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
And if the illegal worker is replaced by a legal worker there is no change. SS (FICA) isn't a tax (even-though t is withheld from your earnings), it's an insurance policy in which there is no right to benefits (Flemming v. Nestor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). H2A will always be considered unworkable by those that choose to not use it, why lose profits? Farmers are well aware of the time frames they need workers, their issue is the requirements to pay for trip here and back, provide adequate housing, medical, transportation to and from job site, etc. GA, there really has been very little "crops rotting on the vines" there, or for that matter anywhere like AZ, AL, etc.
Effectively becomes a tax when the recipient cannot receive it.

H2A has never been generally popular because of difficulties with resources and schedule. Quite lacking in flexibility. Requires long lead time. That is equivalent to impractical in most agricultural domains.
 
Old 02-19-2012, 11:59 PM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,711,425 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by acetic3 View Post
Effectively becomes a tax when the recipient cannot receive it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by acetic3 View Post
H2A has never been generally popular because of difficulties with resources and schedule. Quite lacking in flexibility. Requires long lead time. That is equivalent to impractical in most agricultural domains.
And yet is increasing in usage year after year. http://www.11alive.com/news/article/214312/40/Planting-for-spring-in-Ga-Fewer-crops-more-guest-workers
Quote:
The state's largest onion farmer, Bland Farms of Glennville, has been using H2A for years, according to a spokeswoman for the grower.
The state's largest peach growers have also used H2A to provide guest workers for the better part of the last decade, Hall said.

Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 02-20-2012 at 12:07 AM..
 
Old 02-20-2012, 12:08 AM
 
44 posts, read 35,175 times
Reputation: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post



And yet is increasing in usage year after year. Farmers To Plant Less, Try To Use H-2A Visa Next Year ? Peach Pundit
Nope Goes down some years at least. Can't use HS numbers. Multiple entries.

And way under a 100,000 total. Drop in a much larger bucket.
 
Old 02-20-2012, 12:12 AM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,711,425 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by acetic3 View Post
Nope Goes down some years at least. Can't use HS numbers. Multiple entries.

And way under a 100,000 total. Drop in a much larger bucket.
It has declined in usage starting in 2009. There is no limit or cap as to how many can be brought in. Doesn't matter if its under 100K . It will increase in usage more come next year, it's inevitable. If we get rid of Obama then it wil once again increase further:
Quote:
In 2008, the Department of Labor concluded that the vast majority of growers “find the H-2A program so plagued with problems that they avoid using it altogether.” In response, the Labor Department issued new regulations to address the concerns of growers.

The new Bush Administration regulations attempted to streamline the application process for growers by moving to an attestation-based system in which growers made commitments backed up by Department of Labor audits.

The regulations sunset the 50% rule and restricted grower responsibility for transportation expenses only to guestworkers who fulfilled at least half of their work contract. That makes common sense.

The regulations did not do away with the adverse effect wage rate but altered its calculation to more reliably mirror local labor costs.

When the new Administration took office in 2009, it almost immediately sought to suspend the Bush Administration’s regulations. And that is regrettable because the Administration’s actions made the situation worse. When told by a federal court that it had to adhere to the processes of the Administrative Procedures Act, the Labor Department proposed and then implemented yet more regulations.

These Obama administration regulations, as noted by the Farm Bureau, roll back commonsense improvements and bring us back to the old, problematic system.
http://judiciary.house.gov/news/04132011.html

Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 02-20-2012 at 12:21 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top