Yes, I work in this field. Why pay some American $120,000 when you can get the work done for half that from someone who overstayed their visa? They don't hire them directly, just use a service that takes the risk. Happens all the time.

The tech industry is the one pushing as hard as possible for more H-1B visas. You don't think Zuckerberg is passionate about immigration because he cares about their plight? He wants that cheap labor.

Cargill.

I did a google search on "cargill illegal workers" and "cargill undocumented workers". I went about 3 pages deep.

A couple articles about some unauthorized at a Cargill plant etc. Nothing much. If you have links that shows this systemic abuse, please link it.

Del Monte

I did a google search on "del monte illegal workers" and "del monte undocumented workers". I went about 3 pages deep.

Raid in 2007 on Del Monte plant that netted 170 undocumented. 2013 article on Del Monte paying a $1.2M fine for human trafficking of Thais in Hawaii.

If you have links that shows this systemic abuse, please link it.

Tyson

I did a google search on "tyson illegal workers" and "tyson undocumented workers". I went about 3 pages deep.

Tyson had the most articles on violations etc. But they were old, saw this from a 2011 post. And keep in mind that the Tyson has been charged, fined etc. so the government is doing something about it.

Pressing employers won't fix the problem of undocumented workers

Bottom-line, I still don't see it.

Quote:

I am not denying unauthorized work happens (of course they do that's why the unauthorized are here?). I am denying that there is a cabal of big businesses and federal government taking advantage of them and federal government is turning a blind eye. Name me some big businesses that have a bunch of unauthorized that the government is not acting on. I can clearly see smaller businesses and some local/state elected officials.

Here's the answer to your e-verify question from at least one source
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/ma...ion-2016-11-02

I read this as - the democrats in trying to help the unauthorized immigrants (e.g. amnesty) is preventing required, nationwide use of e-verify. I am sure if all the unauthorized people told the democrats to stop opposing it, it would go through.


I think this is a fair question. If you have better research that tells you why, link it.

Here are my thoughts & suspicions as to "why the federal government doesn't go after the source for why people cross the border".

1) But they do in many occasions. Look at the Tyson example above, there's plenty more examples I'm sure
2) Its not just a "demand" thing, its also the "supply". We haven't been able to stop the supply. Do you think the small businesses would actively smuggle in unauthorized if we had a full clamp down? No, they are just using whats available (e.g. supply) to them. Re: All recent presidents want to go after the supply, they all had their ideas on immigration reform. Nothing has passed because of the state of our politics, the ineffectiveness and inefficiencies.
3) Because there are plenty of ACLU and unauthorized advocates that put up alot of resistance
4) Not enough money in the budget

Probably others but this is what comes to mind.

Mueller asks to delay Flynn sentencing for another two months-third time he's asked for a delay:


https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/29/polit..._source=twCNNi

I work in IT also. I have not seen this, please provide a link that details this?

I have seen where high-tech companies use other vendors, no doubt. But I've not seen where these vendors use students that overstayed their visa (or at least not in a systemic way). It will be an interesting read if this really does happen.

Zuckerberg just wants the best labor, he's not going after low cost.

I'm not sure who'd want to do the work to supply links, you're not going to believe them anyway.

("Triangle shirtwaist fire? I fail to see how that had any relevance to workplace safety.")

I provide links to support what I say and help clarify (like the burqa vs hijab link). But they don't believe me anyway so I guess you are right.

No idea about your second paragraph.

Yes I am a technology C-level (CISO) for a global 100 and this is absolutely the case.

I feel like you are being purposely obtuse, for some reason. Many posters have said the same thing, many different ways, all to be met with a stubborn refusal to hear any of it.

I’m not sure what you are looking for, you have your beliefs seemingly based on your own observations and your gut, which is fine, we all do.

Americans like cheap food. Meat and vegetables, we love our dollar menus. Cheap food happens because of cheap labor on the farms, in processing plants, and in the kitchens. Domestic/child care help by undocumented people are everywhere. Gardner’s and construction workers (roofers) are everywhere. So, here we have what we eat, where we live and who looks after our children all done, in some parts, by millions of undocumented people. If Americans were truly against this “invasion” then there are plenty of industries we could focus on. It would mean however, a fundamental shift in our purchasing power and lifestyle. I don’t doubt most people are against immigration, I just think in most cases they are purposely turning a blind eye to their own purchases.

Not sure what else to say about the rich and powerful making the rules to stay rich and powerful. I mean, wealth is becoming more concentrated right? Uber rich are getting richer right? So, wouldn’t it make sense that they would want to keep the current political and economic environment? Look who gives the money, none are talking about immigration, rather they all want less government oversight.

The big corporations have learned how to maintain deniability. They contract work and make statements about their serious desire to work within immigration law. When their suppliers are busted they vow never to work with them again and move on to new suppliers doing the same thing.

When there is an extraordinary claim that businesses and federal government are in cahoots to take advantage of unauthorized immigration, that claim needs to be substantiated beyond some general, presumptuous statements. Instead, its likely because the government is as inefficient here as they are in plenty of other areas.

There is plenty of evidence that majority of Americans are against unauthorized immigration (don't think there is a dispute here). Many did something about it by voting for Trump.

Well there’s plenty of scholarly books and articles on the topic if you are interested in learning about it. I would suggest, however, just googling stuff is probably not the best means.

This is what makes me mad. If we can determine where the illegals are, why are we not doing anything about it?

Is it incumbent upon companies to double and triple check identification and employment papers?

If we had a less permeable border, and did not have the cheap labor, these companies would be forced to pay someone domestically more money to do the same job. That would also keep the money here, rather than leaving the country.

There is a quote, if there are two equally valid reasons for the action of government and one of them is incompetence, always assume that is the reason.

Why don't you pick a couple and quote some significant passages from them for everyone here to react to vs. the more general, presumptive statements.

I like it. An Occam's razor variant.

Sigh, ok, 5 days ago. These U.S. industries can't work without illegal immigrants - CBS News

Judging by the pronouncements from the White House, you might think most people don't realize how integral undocumented immigrants are to the U.S. economy. But in fact, polls suggest that Americans do understand this, and also don't believe that immigrants take their jobs.

In a soon-to-be-published poll Cornell conducted in 2017, we asked New Yorkers, "How do you believe undocumented farmworkers impact local communities?"

About 75 percent of those we polled said they have "generally positive impacts," up from 62 percent in 2008. Of those who had a positive impression, most said it was because migrants fill jobs unwanted by citizens or provide essential farm help and keep prices low.

Oh dear, here we ago again with not answering the question.

I read the article. I agree that unauthorized workers are needed (e.g. get them into a guest worker program), please to hear many Americans are happy they do the farm/agriculture bit because they don't want to do it ... but how does that answer the below? I actually didn't see any facts or support details for the cabal?

We just broke the lower barrier of what some economists believed was possible in terms of unemployment. The immigrants aren't taking our jobs, or at least if they are they are creating new jobs that help offset.

And here's a summary of an Emory Law article

Here's from an executive summary on a study about converting ag to a legal workforce.

The first three paragraphs from a Pew study on immigrant job screening

This from a Pro Publica story on Case Farms

From a story on PA fruit and poultry

From a story on AL law

Are these post in response to what I think we are discussing right now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 View Post When there is an extraordinary claim that businesses and federal government are in cahoots to take advantage of unauthorized immigration, that claim needs to be substantiated beyond some general, presumptuous statements. Instead, its likely because the government is as inefficient here as they are in plenty of other areas. There is plenty of evidence that majority of Americans are against unauthorized immigration (don't think there is a dispute here). Many did something about it by voting for Trump.

Cabal is your word you used to a strawman.

I’m done.

This is why I have started adding quote boxes in what I think is the discussion topic. If not we have a lot of room to say what we want without addressing the topic.

Its fair you do not like the word cabal but don't call it a strawman. You should have said much earlier in the day that "I don't agree with that term, let me clarify what I think it is ..."

Come back anytime when you have those scholarly articles.

Eh...kinda feel like you do.

You guys are pretty patient to respond to this fool. You have repeatedly made your point and he's either an idiot or being intentionally obtuse. Maybe jbmagic of politics.

If they graduated and are working off a TIN freelance or through an agency, they're likely past their visa date. There is a reason so many are working through a staffing agency instead of being hired by the company directly. A lot of vendors use those agencies.

As for Silicon Valley just wanting the best, they literally settled a suit for a ton of money for wage fixing.

Affidavit: Cargill Knowingly Hired Illegally Documented Workers
IDs Sold To Illegal Immigrants - CBS News
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-f...35166620070404
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-f...35166620070405
https://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/...2/daily24.html


I'm not sure what your argument. On one hand you talk about how there is a huge problem with illegal immigrants. The next you don't seem to believe any of them are employed.

There are links provided showing industries that are made up of large percentages of undocumented workers. I don't have access to the company records of all the agricultural businesses. I'm simply going off studies done by reputable sources that show illegal immigrants are acquiring jobs with relative ease.

If you don't believe this is taking place, I'm not sure where to go with this.


That article is from 2016. The 2018 legislature and Presidency is controlled by the Republicans. They can pass an immigration bill at any time that mandates e-verify.

There are plenty of bright red states with huge Republican majorities that don't touch it. Heck, I posted the article about Florida dropping the e-verify stuff when huge industries in their state fought back. Republican Governor, Republican Senate, Republican House over there. Huge margins too.

The reason it's not mandatory is because a lot of big industries spend a ton of money to make sure that doesn't happen.

The below are my quotes in response to you and to AENeuman. This is what I thought we were discussing. Is this what you thought we were discussing?

I never knew it was a systemic problem. Okay.


The Zuckerberg comment you made (which I get is in the larger context of SV) was based on H1-B, immigration and cheap labor.

This lawsuit was about collusion on wages between some of the biggest high-tech companies (e.g. don't hire my person if I don't hire yours) which did suppress wages as a by product. I have actually seen this in some companies early in a new "industry" e.g. (cloud applications) where there was this informal agreement. Maybe my use of "best" is not accurate, let me scale it down to say "top talent".

Nope, still don't see how it ties. But RM has a good point, maybe we are talking about different things now as the discussion has evolved into the inevitable tangents?

He didn’t even bother to delete the old one pic.twitter.com/A47TuOFfNS

— Ryan Lizza (@RyanLizza) June 30, 2018

.

I actually don't think he's lying, because I think the first tweet was written by someone else. It's a national security issue that we don't know who is allowed to pretend to be the President.

All caps is something his mini me Stephen Miller would do, crazy how many Presidents we would have.

We know who we're allowing to pretend to be president - his name is Donald Trump and hopefully he'll only be there for a few more years :)

Maybe the first tweet was from Miller. But there are other examples.

The books analyzing his presidency and his character will be fascinating.

You'll have the historians, news journalists, but also psychiatrists/psychologists writing about him and his pathological lying.

Bolton is now saying that Putin said Russia didn't interfere in the 2016 election. It simply amazes me how quickly and freely people give up their dignity the moment they step into Trump's orbit.

And now Trump says the EU is just as bad as China, just smaller.

It will be a fucking miracle if we get out of this with the post WW2 order still intact.

Somewhat light but interesting read on the US-China trade war.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...a-tariffs-loom

This is the new definition of employment security, if there is such a thing in this admin.

As a caveat I am not super well-versed in economic theory. That being said...

Doesn't it seem like really shoddy analysis to base the impact of something that kicked off in March off of year-to-date data?

Everyone loses in a trade war but China definitely has more to lose. It does seem like these countries are targeting industries where his base lives though.

So Michael Cohen has done an interview on ABC, not Fox that aired this morning. Affirmed he put his family and country above Trump, believes in the FBI, the Mueller investigation not a witch hunt, and he's been wrongly depicted by the media as a villain. I hope Mueller was listening and called his lawyer right after the interview:


https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/mich...ry?id=56304585

FBI announces they foiled a July 4 attack in Cleveland by an American who had been radicalized:


Man arrested in alleged July 4 terror attack plot to hit downtown Cleveland | Daily Mail Online

From a consumer perspective it'll hit Chinese businesses more as they export more HOWEVER ... China isn't a capitalist setup and as such is less affected by profit/loss as the US.

Finally trade wars are a lose/lose scenario really - if the the US wins it'll be by having less of a decline than other countries, that is prices rising 'less' than elsewhere and the country losing fewer jobs than other countries ... not really a great victory really ..

Finally manufacturing jobs will only return to the US if wages decline sufficiently to make it competitive - Republicans have already started action to try to encourage this by weakening unions etc.

But it won't be wages declining that brings manufacturing back, because with nascent automation, even declining wages will be "too much" to keep American manufacturing competitive.

The net result is going to be an undermining of the American standard of living in exchange for 5-10 years of those jobs coming back, and then not only will they be gone again, but the folks losing them will find themselves with a worse standard of living than they had before.

This seems more like a plea to Trump for a pardon.