Another year, another $4+ billion to illegal immigrants

[Ninjahedge]

BTW, most of the tax fraud is not paid TO the Illegals, but to people that use them as fronts and claim the returns themselves.

If this was examined further we would probably find that the problem is not the illegals themselves, but those that illegally employ and take advantage of them (as sportage pointed out).

 

[WackyDan]

Impractical.

Border securing only works as well as the potential difference between countries. Ironically, what would work better would be working with Mexico to improve their country and help stabilize it.

Billions spent on Mexico already. Billions of taxpayer dollars in foreign aid to pay for their police, military and infrastructure... We are already in the hole on that one.

 

[EagleKeeper]

This all sounds like more faux news bs.
For one thing, illegals want to stay invisible fearing they will be found out.
They do not go to doctors. They do not file taxes <rolled eyes>.
No one is standing out there handing out money as they cross the border.
The one illegal that I do know of, is totally terrified of exposure.
He works construction, and his boss plays little games on him by holding his weekly pay until he is practically forced to beg for it on hands and knees. And what can he do?
If he works, earns, and the boss is a prick, who is this illegal going to run to? The police? LOLOLOLOL
Yeah there are morons that believe anything. They love to believe everything.
Especially bs they hear on Faux news, or from some bs gang bang mass emailing.
Maybe... Just maybe you should look to the greedy banks, the owned US congress, the rightwing owned and paid for US supreme court, or at the greed of healthcare for profit when searching for that misspent tax money.
Or, try looking right under your nose, for once...

The story is about the legals/semi legal that are abusing the tax system by declaring invalid dependents

 

[Ninjahedge]

Billions spent on Mexico already. Billions of taxpayer dollars in foreign aid to pay for their police, military and infrastructure... We are already in the hole on that one.

Billions spent does not mean billions spent WISELY.


Again, a wall along that length of flat terrain is NOT PRACTICAL.


Period.

 

[Ninjahedge]

The story is about the legals/semi legal that are abusing the tax system by declaring invalid dependents

Eagle, the question is, are THEY claiming it, or are their "employers" claiming it.

I do not know of too many illegals filing taxes....

 

[WackyDan]

Billions spent does not mean billions spent WISELY.


Again, a wall along that length of flat terrain is NOT PRACTICAL.


Period.

No it isn't. Partial wall to help focus enforcement? YES.

Personally I would militarize the border, border patrol and DEA does not have enough head count or equipment to properly police the border on their own. 50000 men and women of our armed services conducting exercises in the area should be a sufficient barrier that slows down the successful excursions of illegals into this country.

It is a matter of national security when your neighbor to the south has little control over itself from a security perspective and actually relies on immigration to the US to boost it's own economy.

 

[WackyDan]

Eagle, the question is, are THEY claiming it, or are their "employers" claiming it.

I do not know of too many illegals filing taxes....

Please provide some sort of backing to this claim.

The point is that illegals using fraudulent or stolen SS# submit tax return claims... The irs pays out but by time they figure it out the illegal has moved on to another place. This shell game is catching on and more illegals are doing it.

If you are claiming employers are doing it for them? WTF and what is your point? That the problem isn't with illegals? If illegals weren't the problem how come employers weren't creating ghost returns before illegal immigration became such an issue?

The core problem is the illegal immigration into this country... Treat the core symptom and you correct most of the other issues spawned by it.

 

[Ninjahedge]

No it isn't. Partial wall to help focus enforcement? YES.

I never said it would not help.

What I said is that it was not FEASIBLE.

Personally I would militarize the border, border patrol and DEA does not have enough head count or equipment to properly police the border on their own. 50000 men and women of our armed services conducting exercises in the area should be a sufficient barrier that slows down the successful excursions of illegals into this country.

Again, that is EXPENSIVE. Even 5000 more people along 1000 miles of border does not make much of a dent. Then there are operational costs beyond just the people themselves.

The "slow down" would not be commensurate with the money spent. It is an inefficient solution. Unless, of course, you are recommending shooting the illegals.

It is a matter of national security when your neighbor to the south has little control over itself from a security perspective and actually relies on immigration to the US to boost it's own economy.

Don't bring up the National Security dodo into this. Too many things have been lumped under that paranoid xenophobic mantra. Most of the guys we have to worry about did not scurry across the border from Mexico. they flew in strait from another country on an American Airline and stayed a few years.

Do not conflate the two issues.

 

[Ninjahedge]

Please provide some sort of backing to this claim.

Can't.

Use your head. How many illegals do you think file income tax returns on their own.

The point is that illegals using fraudulent or stolen SS# submit tax return claims... The irs pays out but by time they figure it out the illegal has moved on to another place. This shell game is catching on and more illegals are doing it.

the point is, this would not be possible without help from their employers and other sin the "inside"

Point, THAT would not be possible without our demand for 99 cent lettuce.

If you are claiming employers are doing it for them? WTF and what is your point? That the problem isn't with illegals? If illegals weren't the problem how come employers weren't creating ghost returns before illegal immigration became such an issue?

Irrelevant. Employers need cheap labor to meet the demand for menial labor. This is a means and they are using it.

The core problem is the illegal immigration into this country... Treat the core symptom and you correct most of the other issues spawned by it.

WTF? You are treating the SYMPTOM, not the disease. What kind of ass-backwards medical analogy is that?

You have cancer and your abdomen hurts, so we are going to give you plenty of pain killers. That should cure the cancer!

 

[werepossum]

Cool story...

Why yes, yes there are.

+1

 

[1prophet]

Completely inaccurate. To whit-

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,236044,00.html

Big business often gets around hiring illegals with a maze of subcontractors, as well, with the benefit to them being just the same, along with plausible deniability. Construction is a great example of that. National builders run on subcontractors. Fast food is another extremely common place to find illegals. When the govt questions their employer about their credentials, they just move down the street, from Taco Bell to McDonalds to where ever- the people who hire 'em know they're illegal, but they work hard & cheap, and there's huge turnover anyway...

It's certain people on the left who prevent mandatory checking of all potential employees BEFORE being employed using the I9 system claiming discrimination possibilities.

If one is required to have a background check BEFORE buying a gun there is no reason the Federal government can't implement the same type of requirement for job applicants,

thereby removing the employer from the decision process as to whether or not the applicant can legally be hired and subsequent discrimination accusations.

Just like the TSA says yeah or nay whether you can board an airline, not the airline itself let the Federal government say yeah or nay whether a job
applicant can be legally hired not the employer.

As for your subcontractors story, here's one for you,
a sub contractor who does renovations for kitchens and bathrooms got in on a contract renovating a sheriffs department,

when he arrived the first thing the deputy in charge of the detail asked him was id for the six guys that were with him, in he goes checks their id then comes out and only allows two out of six employees to go in and work,the rest were rejected due to their criminal records, and the whole process took a few minutes.

Big companies like Walmart can do something similar for legal employment eligibility for contractors and subcontractors, and it should be just as quick if not quicker as the instacheck when buying a gun at walmart.

 

[WackyDan]

I never said it would not help.

What I said is that it was not FEASIBLE.



Again, that is EXPENSIVE. Even 5000 more people along 1000 miles of border does not make much of a dent. Then there are operational costs beyond just the people themselves.

The "slow down" would not be commensurate with the money spent. It is an inefficient solution. Unless, of course, you are recommending shooting the illegals.



Don't bring up the National Security dodo into this. Too many things have been lumped under that paranoid xenophobic mantra. Most of the guys we have to worry about did not scurry across the border from Mexico. they flew in strait from another country on an American Airline and stayed a few years.

Do not conflate the two issues.

Bullshit. It is a national security issue when the costs associated with illegal immigration are a direct threat to the health of our economy and spending of tax dollars. A national security threat isn't simply terrorist or foreign military... Please keep up with the times.

Finally, how many articles do you want me to post about the rapes, murders, and other crimes associated with illegals that have been "deported" multiple times?

 

[WackyDan]

Can't.

Use your head. How many illegals do you think file income tax returns on their own.



the point is, this would not be possible without help from their employers and other sin the "inside"

Point, THAT would not be possible without our demand for 99 cent lettuce.



Irrelevant. Employers need cheap labor to meet the demand for menial labor. This is a means and they are using it.



WTF? You are treating the SYMPTOM, not the disease. What kind of ass-backwards medical analogy is that?

You have cancer and your abdomen hurts, so we are going to give you plenty of pain killers. That should cure the cancer!

Can't? Holy shit man... Read that again. YOU FUCKING CAN'T... Yet there is evidence they do file returns... and any illegal with a fraudulently used SS# can show up at H&R Block or XYZ tax service and file a return... It isn't rocket science and they don't even have to speak english... and it isn't a stretch if they've been here longer than a few years. Where the fuck do you live, because I will give you a tour of where I am and show you how cohesive and organized the illegal sub community is here.

My point was to cut the head off the problem symptom/disease... Severely limit the amount of illegal immigration... combination of employer penalties, border enforcement, and deportations... and the rest will take care of itself... You however choose to ignore the pain... because it just doesn't hurt enough... You twisted what I said... Nicely done.

 

[nehalem256]

Big companies like Walmart can do something similar for legal employment eligibility for contractors and subcontractors, and it should be just as quick if not quicker as the instacheck when buying a gun at walmart.

Why should corporations be expected to act as law enforcement, when actual law enforcement is prohibited from enforcing the same laws?

 

[Jhhnn]

It's certain people on the left who prevent mandatory checking of all potential employees BEFORE being employed using the I9 system claiming discrimination possibilities.

If one is required to have a background check BEFORE buying a gun there is no reason the Federal government can't implement the same type of requirement for job applicants,

thereby removing the employer from the decision process as to whether or not the applicant can legally be hired and subsequent discrimination accusations.

Just like the TSA says yeah or nay whether you can board an airline, not the airline itself let the Federal government say yeah or nay whether a job
applicant can be legally hired not the employer.

As for your subcontractors story, here's one for you,
a sub contractor who does renovations for kitchens and bathrooms got in on a contract renovating a sheriffs department,

when he arrived the first thing the deputy in charge of the detail asked him was id for the six guys that were with him, in he goes checks their id then comes out and only allows two out of six employees to go in and work,the rest were rejected due to their criminal records, and the whole process took a few minutes.

Big companies like Walmart can do something similar for legal employment eligibility for contractors and subcontractors, and it should be just as quick if not quicker as the instacheck when buying a gun at walmart.

It's not people on the left thwarting such an ID check system, at all, but rather business interests and those who refuse to fund it. I think such ID should be free, that the centers providing/checking it should be very well staffed, and that provisions should be in place to assist people in obtaining the proper documentation. We have the bare bones of it in the CDL system.

I do object to the bit about not allowing guys who've done their time to work. If we want ex-offenders to rejoin society, they need to be allowed to work.

 

[Jhhnn]

Why should corporations be expected to act as law enforcement, when actual law enforcement is prohibited from enforcing the same laws?

Righties generally have no problem with mandatory drug tests for certain kinds of employment, which discriminates very strongly against pot smokers. The test doesn't say you're stoned, at all, but rather that you were at some time in the last several days... They also seem to have no problem with on demand drug testing as a condition of employment in general.

 

[werepossum]

It's certain people on the left who prevent mandatory checking of all potential employees BEFORE being employed using the I9 system claiming discrimination possibilities.

If one is required to have a background check BEFORE buying a gun there is no reason the Federal government can't implement the same type of requirement for job applicants,

thereby removing the employer from the decision process as to whether or not the applicant can legally be hired and subsequent discrimination accusations.

Just like the TSA says yeah or nay whether you can board an airline, not the airline itself let the Federal government say yeah or nay whether a job
applicant can be legally hired not the employer.

As for your subcontractors story, here's one for you,
a sub contractor who does renovations for kitchens and bathrooms got in on a contract renovating a sheriffs department,

when he arrived the first thing the deputy in charge of the detail asked him was id for the six guys that were with him, in he goes checks their id then comes out and only allows two out of six employees to go in and work,the rest were rejected due to their criminal records, and the whole process took a few minutes.

Big companies like Walmart can do something similar for legal employment eligibility for contractors and subcontractors, and it should be just as quick if not quicker as the instacheck when buying a gun at walmart.

That's an excellent point.

Righties generally have no problem with mandatory drug tests for certain kinds of employment, which discriminates very strongly against pot smokers. The test doesn't say you're stoned, at all, but rather that you were at some time in the last several days... They also seem to have no problem with on demand drug testing as a condition of employment in general.

Expected /= allowed.

 

[Pneumothorax]

I am not calling for a 3rd world rescue effort, but "fixing" Mexico might, ironically, cost LESS than letting it fall under its own weight and building the great (and ineffective) wall of china along our border.

I thought Iraq/Afghanistan taught us that this shit doesn't work. No country can be fixed unless the majority of it's citizens want it to be fixed and willing to work for it. You can pour $800 billion of 'stimulus' into that toilet and the result will be the same after the money is gone. Mexico is a hopeless situation and forever will be. Their whole country is fucked up from top to bottom. (and yes it's worse than ours)

 

[Zebo]

First of all 4 billion is chump change with US budget. Second this is not policy but ppl breaking laws and committing fraud to get money. We give bankers 3 trillion dollar bailouts and let them keep crazy bonuses when they do it - so they maybe they are holding out for a reward - learned by example.

More seriously this is in noise level and I don't really like going after weakest ppl when bigger fish to fry.

 

[Jhhnn]

Expected /= allowed.

It is in the transportation industry, where mandatory pre-employment, "random" & "for cause" drug testing is part of maintaining a CDL, also operating or maintaining heavy truck & rail equipment. Probably airlines, as well.

 

[feralkid]

No it isn't. Partial wall to help focus enforcement? YES.

Personally I would militarize the border, border patrol and DEA does not have enough head count or equipment to properly police the border on their own. 50000 men and women of our armed services conducting exercises in the area should be a sufficient barrier that slows down the successful excursions of illegals into this country.

It is a matter of national security when your neighbor to the south has little control over itself from a security perspective and actually relies on immigration to the US to boost it's own economy.

Easier solution: stop hiring illegal aliens.

 

[nehalem256]

It is in the transportation industry, where mandatory pre-employment, "random" & "for cause" drug testing is part of maintaining a CDL, also operating or maintaining heavy truck & rail equipment. Probably airlines, as well.

Are there actual laws requiring this, or are the companies doing this because they dont want to employ drug users, or face the liability issue of an employee smoking some pot and then crashing their truck/plane?

 

[nehalem256]

Righties generally have no problem with mandatory drug tests for certain kinds of employment, which discriminates very strongly against pot smokers. The test doesn't say you're stoned, at all, but rather that you were at some time in the last several days... They also seem to have no problem with on demand drug testing as a condition of employment in general.

The difference is if a cop pulled someone over and found pot in the car they would have no problems with them being arrested for it. They dont think law enforcement should be prohibited from enforcing drug laws.

 

[shortylickens]

Easier solution: stop hiring illegal aliens.

Not that easy.
WAY too many business rely on cheap labor. The economy might take a hit when small, medium, and large companies collapse. And sadly because they've been integrated into our society so deeply, the average American isnt fit to take over their jobs right away.
I would love a career in construction, but I dont know dick about it.

White Americans are pretty fucking sad. At no point in our history have we ever gotten by without some sort of slavery.
First it was indentured servants in the form of poor europeans. Then actual slaves from Africa, then oppressed blacks after the war, then oppressed workers during the industrial revolution, now illegal aliens from south of the border.

Are we really so fucking lazy and cheap?

 

[Jhhnn]

Are there actual laws requiring this, or are the companies doing this because they dont want to employ drug users, or face the liability issue of an employee smoking some pot and then crashing their truck/plane?

http://www.dot.gov/odapc/

You're remarkably uninformed for a person with such strong opinions.