Rand Paul's presence-and-jobs amnesty -- WITHOUT E-Verify

[erowe1]

erowe1, I got your lovely message, does supporting e-verify exclude me from voting for liberty candidates or do I need your approval before hand? Is their room for non libertarians in your movement?

You believe in a state with unlimited power to engineer society according to your will. You don't have to be a libertarian. I don't call myself one. But when someone's totalitarianism reaches a certain level, it becomes more and more clear that they have no intention of helping us, but are just here to argue.

 

[erowe1]

I have a hard time taking anyone serious about immigration. I think I will until we get some honest people in office that take their oaths of office seriously and enforces the immigration laws we have on the books. Only then could I consider any new laws. Without the rule of law upfront they just appear to be new lies not laws.

If you think that all it takes is some group of people to make up some law and tell the rest of us we have to obey it and then all of a sudden, no matter what it is, it's just the law and every future politician has to accept it, then your understanding of their oath of office is pretty different from that of people like the Pauls.

 

[The Free Hornet]

By "smart laws" do you really mean laws that will allow you to exploit illegals and to push down the wages of working class Americans?

Wait so you call me a "liberal" intending the term to be derogatory and you are concerned about exploitation in voluntary labor relations?

We've exploited someone making over $250,000 annually for years on end. Buy a fucking dictionary already.

ex·ploit
/ikˈsploit/
Verb
Make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource): "500 companies sprang up to exploit this new technology".
Noun
A bold or daring feat: "the most heroic and secretive exploits of the war".
Synonyms
verb. use - utilize - operate - milk
noun. feat - deed - achievement

 

[Brett85]

You're basing this on what, your imagination?

http://news.yahoo.com/census-hispanics-fuel-us-white-population-growth-173449405.html

 

[QueenB4Liberty]

What is the evidence that we need you here? What would be the cost of forcing you to leave? Are you not as "illegal" with your 3 felonies a day like everyone else? It is time you cease the social re-engineering of peoples often native to the Americas or brought here against there will. A fence works both ways and it would be my preference if we could come and go freely without passports and begging governments to travel. You'd rather live in a cage.

This is perfect. If someone is more qualified for a job than you are, you are going to miss out on the job. Your skin color makes little difference. When people talk about pushing wages down for Americans, that's mostly lower class jobs anyhow. Not that it matters much anyhow but still.

 

[eating_nachos]

Wait so you call me a "liberal" intending the term to be derogatory and you are concerned about exploitation in voluntary labor relations?

We've exploited someone making over $250,000 annually for years on end. Buy a fucking dictionary already.

[h=3]Verb[/h] exploit (third-person singular simple present exploits, present participle exploiting, simple past and past participle exploited)

1. (transitive) To use for one’s own advantage.

[h=4]Synonyms[/h]

• (use for one’s own advantage): take advantage of, use

Thanks for playing. Please try again.

 

[eating_nachos]

You believe in a state with unlimited power to engineer society according to your will. You don't have to be a libertarian. I don't call myself one. But when someone's totalitarianism reaches a certain level, it becomes more and more clear that they have no intention of helping us, but are just here to argue.

Nice Strawman.

 

[QueenB4Liberty]

It's kind of just looking at the bigger picture. If a government can create a database to keep illegals from obtaining jobs, who is to say down the road the government wouldn't start stopping other groups of people from obtaining jobs? See once, these government programs are implemented, they don't go away, and their powers keep on expanding over time. It's a bad idea.

 

[Brett85]

I'll be relieved if E-Verify is the worst thing contained in Rubio's immigration bill. It will probably contain something far worse, like a National ID Card.

 

[eating_nachos]

This is perfect. If someone is more qualified for a job than you are, you are going to miss out on the job. Your skin color makes little difference. When people talk about pushing wages down for Americans, that's mostly lower class jobs anyhow. Not that it matters much anyhow but still.

Yeah, I know right, who gives a fuck about poor people, fuck them.

 

[eating_nachos]

It's kind of just looking at the bigger picture. If a government can create a database to keep illegals from obtaining jobs, who is to say down the road the government wouldn't start stopping other groups of people from obtaining jobs? See once, these government programs are implemented, they don't go away, and their powers keep on expanding over time. It's a bad idea.

Right... but Hispanics have a history of voting liberal. Who, if you haven't, noticed like to expand the power of government as well.

See, I can play that game too.

 

[erowe1]

Right... but Hispanics have a history of voting liberal. Who, if you haven't, noticed like to expand the power of government as well.

See, I can play that game too.

But when you play it doesn't make much sense, since you want to expand the power of the government.

 

[eating_nachos]

But when you play it doesn't make much sense, since you want to expand the power of the government.

I want to produce results, you want to sit on your hands and pretend we all live in your fantasy world.

 

[QueenB4Liberty]

Right... but Hispanics have a history of voting liberal. Who, if you haven't, noticed like to expand the power of government as well.

See, I can play that game too.

So do conservatives. And for the record you'd think Hispanics would vote Catholic, since a large majority of Hispanics are Catholic. I thought the party of religion was Conservatives. But like I said, there's little difference between a Liberal and a Conservative.

 

[QueenB4Liberty]

I want to produce results, you want to sit on your hands and pretend we all live in your fantasy world.

What do you want to happen? For all the illegals to be deported?

 

[erowe1]

I want to produce results, you want to sit on your hands and pretend we all live in your fantasy world.

Yep. You envision a set of results that you want, and you see the government with all its guns and resources as your tool to bring them about. There are no moral boundaries to what you can do, only practical ones. When it comes to statism, the hispanics you're talking about have nothing on you.

 

[The Free Hornet]

[h=3]Verb[/h] exploit (third-person singular simple present exploits, present participle exploiting, simple past and past participle exploited)

1. (transitive) To use for one’s own advantage.

[h=4]Synonyms[/h]

• (use for one’s own advantage): take advantage of, use

Thanks for playing. Please try again.

The difference is connotation. Illiberal statists try to browbeat people into supporting further welfare or mandated benefits by tossing "exploitation" as an insult. It is not surprising that you pulled it out of your playbook. You say "liberal" as an insult and bemoan the exploitation of workers in the same thread. You are confused.

I would hope to be exploited to tune of millions and millions of dollars. Yes, I'll be expecting my cut.

erowe1, I got your lovely message, does supporting e-verify exclude me from voting for liberty candidates or do I need your approval before hand? Is their room for non libertarians in your movement?

As a business person, the benefit of e-verify is that we run somebody's numbers and get a 'yay' or 'nay' from Uncle Sam to put on file. AFAIK, you can only run new hires through the system. Small businesses don't have the resources to be colorblind/non-discriminatory AND be border police. So when I hear assholes online complain about businesses hiring people, I have to wonder which laws to said assholes expect us to follow? We are not allowed to discriminate based on country of origin:

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin;

http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html

This has been the reality for years:

Business beware: Obama's immigration 'catch 22'
Posted by Sherman Frederick
Saturday, Sep. 04, 2010 at 06:31 PM

You're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't. That's the latest message from the Obama administration to businesses and the hiring of illegal immigrants.

On the one hand, if a business mistakenly hires an illegal immigrant, they can be fined by the federal government.

But, if a business asks a prospective worker to produce a "green" card to prove they are in the country legally, they can be sued by the Obama Administration for discrimination.

[This is Google's cache of http://www.lvrj.com/blogs/sherm/Business_beware_Obamas_immigration_catch_22.html.]

So we voluntarily joined e-verify which puts the burden on the people bemoaning the problem. You could say from a business perspective, I am pro-e-verify. In that we ought to have simple paths to legal compliance (we don't need to take sides on the issue itself). Everybody is paid above minimum wage and we have excellent healthcare and 401k. I.e., I don't need your fucking bullshit.

What do I think people blaming business want ("By 'smart laws' do you really mean laws that will allow you to exploit illegals and to push down the wages of working class Americans?")? Like most statists, you want scapegoats. You don't want the problem to be solved by the teachers, police, prison guards, hospital staff, social services, border patrol, and everyone else supported by MY tax dollars to do anything. You expect them to collect paychecks and look the other way. Instead, you want to foist the problem onto employers and to make BS accusations.

You likely also think of a job as something you got and not something you do.

Nothing non-coercive I do can lower your productivity (akin to / in context of : "push down the wages of working class"). I can't make you hammer fewer nails per hour into a roof or force you to flip fewer burgers. Your productivity and making the most of it is your problem.

 

[erowe1]

Yeah, I know right, who gives a fuck about poor people, fuck them.

This is doubly ironic, because you're saying what you think you don't believe, when it's actually exactly what you do believe, at least when those poor people belong to a group that you consider a different race than yours.

 

[eating_nachos]

Yep. You envision a set of results that you want, and you see the government with all its guns and resources as your tool to bring them about. There are no moral boundaries to what you can do, only practical ones. When it comes to statism, the hispanics you're talking about have nothing on you.

Oh look, another strawman! Yay! Do I also want to kill babies and stab kittens?

 

[eating_nachos]

The difference is connotation. Illiberal statists try to browbeat people into supporting further welfare or mandated benefits by tossing "exploitation" as an insult. It is not surprising that you pulled it out of your playbook. You say "liberal" as an insult and bemoan the exploitation of workers in the same thread. You are confused.

I would hope to be exploited to tune of millions and millions of dollars. Yes, I'll be expecting my cut.





As a business person, the benefit of e-verify is that we run somebody's numbers and get a 'yay' or 'nay' from Uncle Sam to put on file. AFAIK, you can only run new hires through the system. Small businesses don't have the resources to be colorblind/non-discriminatory AND be border police. So when I hear assholes online complain about businesses hiring people, I have to wonder which laws to said assholes expect us to follow? We are not allowed to discriminate based on country of origin:



This has been the reality for years:



So we voluntarily joined e-verify which puts the burden on the people bemoaning the problem. You could say from a business perspective, I am pro-e-verify. In that we ought to have simple paths to legal compliance (we don't need to take sides on the issue itself). Everybody is paid above minimum wage and we have excellent healthcare and 401k. I.e., I don't need your fucking bullshit.

What do I think people blaming business want ("By 'smart laws' do you really mean laws that will allow you to exploit illegals and to push down the wages of working class Americans?")? Like most statists, you want scapegoats. You don't want the problem to be solved by the teachers, police, prison guards, hospital staff, social services, border patrol, and everyone else supported by MY tax dollars to do anything. You expect them to collect paychecks and look the other way. Instead, you want to foist the problem onto employers and to make BS accusations.

You likely also think of a job as something you got and not something you do.

Nothing non-coercive I do can lower your productivity (akin to / in context of : "push down the wages of working class"). I can't make you hammer fewer nails per hour into a roof or force you to flip fewer burgers. Your productivity and making the most of it is your problem.

Didn't read any of this and just blocked you.