A Challenge for America....

[mede8er]

Don't get me wrong, I'm a business owner, very much pro business, but believe that business must play a leading role where ethics are concerned......

Are we as Americans ready to bite the bullet and make sacrifices in order to see our current labor laws enforced...

Are we prepared to pay the price when cheap illegal labor and those who hire them are prosecuted.....

I, for one, am ready...bring it on.....only good things will ultimately result.....

[Don Ro]

!

[dd74]

Shareholders hold businesses to the fire for profits. In most cases, shareholders either don't know or don't care what, where and how they do business as long as the "if" involves an increase in dividends.

It's harsh but true.

Businesses are also hamstrung. Say you open a house cleaning service that employs men and women who clean peoples' homes. What do you think would happen if you describe yourself as "...hiring Americans only." Or "Hiring legal citizens only."

I'm not certain, but I wouldn't doubt you'd get sued for some type of job and/or hiring discrimination.

[mede8er]

Originally posted by dd74
Shareholders hold businesses to the fire for profits. In most cases, shareholders either don't know or don't care what, where and how they do business as long as the "if" involves an increase in dividends.

It's harsh but true.

Businesses are also hamstrung. Say you open a house cleaning service that employs men and women who clean peoples' homes. What do you think would happen if you describe yourself as "...hiring Americans only." Or "Hiring legal citizens only."

I'm not certain, but I wouldn't doubt you'd get sued for some type of job and/or hiring discrimination.

Hiring legal citizens or those authorized by law to work (green card) is the law...you cannot be sued for obeying it....

[mede8er]

But would it benefit consumers in any way—like a decrease in taxes?
At the federal level, [undocumented immigrants] turn out to be a net-positive benefit because immigrants are young and the federal government is spending money on programs for the elderly, like Medicare and Social Security. At the state and local level they tend to be a tax burden, not because of welfare and not because of health, but because of education. In California, we estimated that the native-born households were paying about $1,200 more in taxes than they received in benefits in order to pay for immigrants.

What’s the biggest misconception about the impact of undocumented workers on the U.S. economy?
I think people overstate their importance. It’s a positive benefit but it’s not the be-all end-all of the economy.

Immigration specialist James P. Smith

[dd74]

Originally posted by mede8er
Hiring legal citizens or those authorized by law to work (green card) is the law...you cannot be sued for obeying it....

Sure it's the law. But there are laws that will challenge that law. And I guarantee you get some hungry ACLU lawyer in on the case, and he'll challenge the first law (yours) as unconstitutional, particularly after yesterday's nationwide march of solidarity/boycott/show of force, or whatever it's been called.

[RoninLB]

There would be a difference in opinion on managing any people import between a wall st banker and a social policy progressive.

The point being that in dealing with social issues there are more unintended consequences than dealing with it as an economic model.

If the imports could be tailored to enhancing US world wide economic competition it would be a home run imo. If consumer spending is low the US could import 100,000 millionaires for a few yrs, etc.

meanwhile.. i don't think anything will happen till after the election and maybe not even till a new President.

I don't know how to take the current illegal's posturing except that Germany encouraged a separate Turkish culture to develop inside over a span of around 20yrs. Many second generation Turks don't even speak German and their families don't want them to. I think they're about 10% of Germany's population, maybe more? It's a huge social and legal problem as they want to keep old school non-sophisticated culture. For example a 50yr old Turkish German citizen can import a 12yr old bride from Turkey right now afaik.

[dd74]

Germany's model that you suggest is based on, to a degree, guilt. Already responsible for genocide in the 30s and 40s, they suffer a hands-off cultural response to immigrants as the country is afraid of slipping back into its dark ages of the early 20th Century. This is not to say there are no economic implications that have evolved from Germany's sense that it should be tolerant of any and all, even as that any and all take advantage of Germany's social system.

Britain might suffer the same plight as they increasingly feel guilty for 19th century Imperialism and other ethnic slaughters that date back to when maps were etched into deer's skin.

The U.S. should not feel guilty as we once did openly admit immigrants into this country. However, the main difference between Germany and Britain and the U.S. is the first two countries are very old and very slow to advance. The U.S., on the other hand, is still young (compared to others), and advances with extreme quickness. What was true in the time of Ellis Island welcoming Europeans in the early 20th Century, does not hold water now; the U.S. and its economy has radically changed since then; and it is disingenuous for today's illegal immigrant to demand amnesty based on that time.

Beyond the fact that illegals make up an enormous portion of the economy; that their importance can't be just ignored or that they should be booted from the U.S., is another argument that has complexities beyond any of the "Damn Mexicans!" arguments that has been going on in OT. It's really not that easy to sort out what to do about them. Amnesty won't work, nor will deportation.

What's clear to me, though, is the immigrant problem in Europe evolves from a much different source than ours. Britain, France and Germany all have cultural/expansionism issues at hand with their immigrant problems. The U.S. has been culturally tolerant on many levels, and aside from our little predicaments in Korea, Vietnam and now Iraq, we have not colonialized other countries or people.

It's the money that drives the illegals here, and the money that keeps them from adapting to our ways of, to an extent, speak English, and adapt other portions of our culture to its fullest, aside from sucking off its resources. Also, about money, one should note that every form of big business known in the U.S. caters to illegals in their own language (mostly Spanish), so why should they feel a need to be true Americans?

In all honesty, we owe them nothing. Unlike Britain who believes it owes something to Pakistan or India, and in return, contends with such a stifling influence of both countries in (for example) London, London is now barely known to be a shadow of itself, we, on the other hand, never colonialized Mexico, or tried to bring Mexico under some kind of imperialistic rule.