• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge lets key parts of Alabama immigration law stand

lpast

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
13,663
Reaction score
4,633
Location
Fla
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
A federal judge refused Wednesday to block key parts of a closely watched Alabama law that is considered the strictest state effort to clamp down on illegal immigration, including a measure that requires immigration status checks of public school students.


This case is going to have a big impact down the road on states immigration laws vs federal




Judge lets key parts of Alabama immigration law stand
 
A federal judge refused Wednesday to block key parts of a closely watched Alabama law that is considered the strictest state effort to clamp down on illegal immigration, including a measure that requires immigration status checks of public school students.


This case is going to have a big impact down the road on states immigration laws vs federal




Judge lets key parts of Alabama immigration law stand

That's good new. Hopefully the SC will uphold all of it and we can see illegals fleeing to every sanctuary state in the country thus forcing those states to crack down on illegals too. Because its one thing when those 12-20 millions are spread across 40 something states (I say 40 something because states like Arizona, Oklahoma, Alabama and few others have enacted laws to discourage illegal immigration),12-20 million illegals in a handful of states can be a major drain on state money and resources.
 

That's good new. Hopefully the SC will uphold all of it and we can see illegals fleeing to every sanctuary state in the country thus forcing those states to crack down on illegals too. Because its one thing when those 12-20 millions are spread across 40 something states (I say 40 something because states like Arizona, Oklahoma, Alabama and few others have enacted laws to discourage illegal immigration),12-20 million illegals in a handful of states can be a major drain on state money and resources.

Your right its no longer just a western US problem...they are in every state of the Union...it MUST be slowed down...we just cant afford it....the employers get all the benefits, dirt cheap wages with no benefits and it enables them to shaft american workers and not have to pay higher salaries...and the rest of us get the privledge to pay for their healthcare and public education and everything else
 
I don't need a Gardner, or a maid so as far as I am concerned, this is great news. Now I'm sure all those millionaires might not think the same way, but who cares...they're not paying my mortgage anyway!
 
Your right its no longer just a western US problem...they are in every state of the Union...it MUST be slowed down...we just cant afford it....the employers get all the benefits, dirt cheap wages with no benefits and it enables them to shaft american workers and not have to pay higher salaries...and the rest of us get the privledge to pay for their healthcare and public education and everything else

Be careful what you wish for. The private sector is not fond of big-government conservatism.

"An Alabama law to tackle illegal immigration is coming under fire from some business leaders in the state, who say the measure is undermining Alabama's economy even before it takes effect.

Representatives of agribusiness, the state's biggest industry, and sectors such as construction, which is charged with rebuilding the tornado-hit city of Tuscaloosa, are reporting worker shortages because of immigrants already fleeing the state. The state agriculture commission says squash, tomatoes and other produce are rotting in the fields.

"We have a big problem on our hands," said Brett Hall, the state's deputy commissioner for agriculture and industry. "Farmers and business people could go under."

Their experiences mirror those of business leaders and farmers in Georgia, who have complained that a similar law signed in May in their state is driving away immigrant workers vital to farming, poultry, restaurants and other businesses in the state."

Alabama Immigrant Law Irks Business - WSJ.com
 
Be careful what you wish for. The private sector is not fond of big-government conservatism.

"An Alabama law to tackle illegal immigration is coming under fire from some business leaders in the state, who say the measure is undermining Alabama's economy even before it takes effect.

Representatives of agribusiness, the state's biggest industry, and sectors such as construction, which is charged with rebuilding the tornado-hit city of Tuscaloosa, are reporting worker shortages because of immigrants already fleeing the state. The state agriculture commission says squash, tomatoes and other produce are rotting in the fields.

"We have a big problem on our hands," said Brett Hall, the state's deputy commissioner for agriculture and industry. "Farmers and business people could go under."

Their experiences mirror those of business leaders and farmers in Georgia, who have complained that a similar law signed in May in their state is driving away immigrant workers vital to farming, poultry, restaurants and other businesses in the state."

Alabama Immigrant Law Irks Business - WSJ.com

Then those people need to get off their butts and either do more work themselves or hire American workers to do it. They do not have a right to hire illegal immigrants to do the work.
 
Then those people need to get off their butts and either do more work themselves or hire American workers to do it. They do not have a right to hire illegal immigrants to do the work.

I'm sure they would be more than happy to hire Americans or legal immigrants, but no one is lining up to do back-breaking work for low wages. There is no free lunch. If you want to shut off the supply of cheap labor the cost will be higher food and construction prices and exporting jobs to lower wage countries.

What's needed is a more realistic quota for low-wage immigrant visas. Republicans need to drop their nonsensical opposition to immigration reform unless we first shut off the flow of illegal immigrants. These are two sides of the same coin.
 
Last edited:
It's a step on the right direction but it's not enough solve the problem.

If the laws on the books were enforced and employers were sanctioned as they should be the majority of the problem would solved pronto because if the illegals can't work they have to go back where they came from.

The savings would be in the billions of dollars, and the economy would begin to rebound, but it would take the reduction in the number of weeks one can draw unemployment checks because statistics show that people find a job just as benefits run out.
 
I'm sure they would be more than happy to hire Americans or legal immigrants, but no one is lining up to do back-breaking work for low wages. There is no free lunch. If you want to shut off the supply of cheap labor the cost will be higher food and construction prices and exporting jobs to lower wage countries.

What's needed is a more realistic quota for low-wage immigrant visas.

I'm pretty sure there are people in the US who would be more than happy to do those jobs if they a) knew about them, b) could get to the jobs, and c) were getting paid a livable wage for doing those jobs, especially people with families to support.
 
I'm pretty sure there are people in the US who would be more than happy to do those jobs if they a) knew about them, b) could get to the jobs, and c) were getting paid a livable wage for doing those jobs, especially people with families to support.

You would be mistaken. United Farm Workers invite Americans to 'Take Our Jobs' - Jul. 7, 2010

Again, these are back-breaking jobs that pay minimum wage and offer no benefits. Farmers can't simply double or triple wages without raising prices substantially, and if they do that they will lose out to cheaper imported goods.
 
Last edited:

Yes, because everyone knows about this and everyone can get up and move to those places on a moments notice.

Not everyone has the internet. Not everyone can just move their family to the job in no time at all, especially if they are out of work and have no money or are stuck in a lease. Plus, few who already have a family to support are going to be able to take a minimum wage, no benefits job, especially if that job really doesn't allow for the person to make up for that low pay, no benefits with another job.

Both sides of people, those who are unemployed and those employers looking for workers, need to work harder to understand the meaning of compromise.
 
Yes, because everyone knows about this and everyone can get up and move to those places on a moments notice.

Not everyone has the internet. Not everyone can just move their family to the job in no time at all, especially if they are out of work and have no money or are stuck in a lease. Plus, few who already have a family to support are going to be able to take a minimum wage, no benefits job, especially if that job really doesn't allow for the person to make up for that low pay, no benefits with another job.

Both sides of people, those who are unemployed and those employers looking for workers, need to work harder to understand the meaning of compromise.

The unemployment rates in Alabama and Georgia are around 9.5% and 10.5% respectively. I don't think there's a shortage of nearby candidates.

The bottom line is still that there is no free lunch. If you want to "solve" the illegal immigration problem in this manner then the price will be paid by businesses who rely on that cheap labor and consumers who benfit from lower prices.
 
The unemployment rates in Alabama and Georgia are around 9.5% and 10.5% respectively. I don't think there's a shortage of nearby candidates.

The bottom line is still that there is no free lunch. If you want to "solve" the illegal immigration problem in this manner then the price will be paid by businesses who rely on that cheap labor and consumers who benfit from lower prices.

First of all, giving the unemployment rate for a state does nothing to show how that affects how easy it may or may not be for a person to take those agriculture jobs. If a person's issue with moving is they are in a lease for so much time, then they are really unlikely to take a job, especially a min. wage, no benefits, hard labor job that requires them to drive 50-100 miles out of their way because they live in the city. You have no idea how "nearby" the candidates for those jobs are.

Also, how many of those candidates can actually live off of those wages being offered? That is an issue. A big one, now that we have a healthcare bill coming into effect soon that requires people to have health insurance. Most people can't afford to support a family off of min. wage alone. Even those above min. wage, usually do not have health insurance.

And, how many people know about those jobs, especially those who could pretty easily take advantage of them? That article has been out since 2010, yet this is the first time I have seen it. How in the hell is someone who is unemployed, likely not to have regular internet access, and/or might not even have a home going to know about this stuff?

The solution is going to take a lot of things. Instilling into young people that they need to be willing to work to earn their way. Making farm owners realize that they have to be willing to offer more than just min. wage for these jobs. It doesn't necessarily have to be common benefits and/or higher wages, although that is likely the easiest. Maybe offering so much food to the families of workers or providing for their housing and/or transportation. Workers, especially those who are on assistance, need to be willing to take what jobs they can find. But there also should be changes in lease agreements and housing costs.
 
>First of all, giving the unemployment rate for a state does nothing to
>show how that affects how easy it may or may not be for a person to
>take those agriculture jobs. If a person's issue with moving is they
>are in a lease for so much time, then they are really unlikely to take
>a job, especially a min. wage, no benefits, hard labor job that
>requires them to drive 50-100 miles out of their way because they live
>in the city. You have no idea how "nearby" the candidates for those
>jobs are.

That's true, but realistically I don't see many people -- other than immigrants -- moving long distances to take a minimum wage job that pays no benefits and requires long hours of back-breaking labor.

>Also, how many of those candidates can actually live off of those wages
>being offered? That is an issue. A big one, now that we have a
>healthcare bill coming into effect soon that requires people to have
>health insurance. Most people can't afford to support a family off of
>min. wage alone. Even those above min. wage, usually do not have
>health insurance.

Yes, that is the problem. That's why shutting off the supply of immigrant workers will put many of these companies out of business, to be replaced by foreign suppliers.

As far as health insurance goes, these workers would not be subject to the individual mandate because they fall below the miniumum income requirement. Employers might be subject to it if they employ more than 50 full-time workers. But I suspect that most of the workers are seasonal and not full time, and even if they were it would just cost the employer $750 per employee to not provide insurance -- or about $2 per day per employee. In effect, employers would end up paying an extra $0.25 an hour.

>And, how many people know about those jobs, especially those who could
>pretty easily take advantage of them? That article has been out since
>2010, yet this is the first time I have seen it. How in the hell is
>someone who is unemployed, likely not to have regular internet access,
>and/or might not even have a home going to know about this stuff?

The story made national headlines when it came out. As the article said, they got 4,000 responses in short order. And out of that, what? Was it two people who actually took them up on their offer?

>The solution is going to take a lot of things. Instilling into young
>people that they need to be willing to work to earn their way. Making
>farm owners realize that they have to be willing to offer more than
>just min. wage for these jobs. It doesn't necessarily have to be
>common benefits and/or higher wages, although that is likely the
>easiest. Maybe offering so much food to the families of workers or
>providing for their housing and/or transportation. Workers, especially
>those who are on assistance, need to be willing to take what jobs they
>can find. But there also should be changes in lease agreements and
>housing costs.

These are not realistic solutions. If the farmers raise pay they will also have to raise prices and they will no longer be competitive. Or if they can raise prices and stay in business then consumers will pay for it in higher food prices. No ... free ... lunch.

The solution is not to kick out illegal immigrants. The solution is to increase immigration quotas to realistic levels to provide for as many legal immigrants as the economy requires.
 
I'm sure they would be more than happy to hire Americans or legal immigrants, but no one is lining up to do back-breaking work for low wages. There is no free lunch. If you want to shut off the supply of cheap labor the cost will be higher food and construction prices and exporting jobs to lower wage countries.

What's needed is a more realistic quota for low-wage immigrant visas. Republicans need to drop their nonsensical opposition to immigration reform unless we first shut off the flow of illegal immigrants. These are two sides of the same coin.

I wonder what the hell we did before illegals, we picked our own fruit. Illegals are taking 20 million good American jobs right here at home. Talk about outsourcing. Then you go on to say "cheap labor" you mean young people will not work for piece work. All I can say is America has become soft with all the entitlements we hand out so you don't have to work. America's work ethic has eroded to the point, where American workers would rather be on the dole than work in a field.
 
I wonder what the hell we did before illegals, we picked our own fruit. Illegals are taking 20 million good American jobs right here at home. Talk about outsourcing. Then you go on to say "cheap labor" you mean young people will not work for piece work. All I can say is America has become soft with all the entitlements we hand out so you don't have to work. America's work ethic has eroded to the point, where American workers would rather be on the dole than work in a field.

Do you think this is a recent phenomenon? There have been immigrants working in the fields for decades. Before that there were slaves. The days of the family farm, where the kids and other family would all chip in come harvest time are over.
 
AdamT..

Baloney, dude! Yes tis true farm work isn't for grown ups generally, but never was it intended to be unless you were a slave in the 1800's. I picked fruit and veggies for 3 years when I was much younger. Got pretty good at it as well. Made minimum wage but it was way better than not making any money at all. My parents said if I wanted to buy something, then i had to work for it. Odd how that all works out in the end eh?


Tim-
 
AdamT..

Baloney, dude! Yes tis true farm work isn't for grown ups generally, but never was it intended to be unless you were a slave in the 1800's. I picked fruit and veggies for 3 years when I was much younger. Got pretty good at it as well. Made minimum wage but it was way better than not making any money at all. My parents said if I wanted to buy something, then i had to work for it. Odd how that all works out in the end eh?


Tim-

That's terrific. If the farmers can find enough kids or whoever to fill their needs that's great. But they can't. That's the problem.
 
Then those people need to get off their butts and either do more work themselves or hire American workers to do it. They do not have a right to hire illegal immigrants to do the work.

They hire illegal immigrants because they can pay them under the table less than minimum wage and they dont complain...and still CHARGE US ridiculous prices for fruit and vegetables....its a win...win...win...win for them...and we get to pay for their child births, their trips to the emergency room...we get to pay for law enforcement costs and the horrific cost of their incarceration and all the costs related to endless deportation procedures...and we get to pay for our own kids tuition and theirs when you have MORON POLITICIANS like Perry.....
 
Do you think this is a recent phenomenon? There have been immigrants working in the fields for decades. Before that there were slaves. The days of the family farm, where the kids and other family would all chip in come harvest time are over.

The Amish plow their own fields with horses, and your telling me the rest of America is now to good to pick oranges. Your probably right about it being over, because Americans would rather be on the dole than pick an orange from a tree to make a living. I guess that's what entitlements are for, sit on your ass and collect money.
 
They hire illegal immigrants because they can pay them under the table less than minimum wage and they dont complain...and still CHARGE US ridiculous prices for fruit and vegetables....its a win...win...win...win for them...and we get to pay for their child births, their trips to the emergency room...we get to pay for law enforcement costs and the horrific cost of their incarceration and all the costs related to endless deportation procedures...and we get to pay for our own kids tuition and theirs when you have MORON POLITICIANS like Perry.....

You make a good case to completely close our border.
 
First of all, giving the unemployment rate for a state does nothing to show how that affects how easy it may or may not be for a person to take those agriculture jobs. If a person's issue with moving is they are in a lease for so much time, then they are really unlikely to take a job, especially a min. wage, no benefits, hard labor job that requires them to drive 50-100 miles out of their way because they live in the city. You have no idea how "nearby" the candidates for those jobs are.

Also, how many of those candidates can actually live off of those wages being offered? That is an issue. A big one, now that we have a healthcare bill coming into effect soon that requires people to have health insurance. Most people can't afford to support a family off of min. wage alone. Even those above min. wage, usually do not have health insurance.

And, how many people know about those jobs, especially those who could pretty easily take advantage of them? That article has been out since 2010, yet this is the first time I have seen it. How in the hell is someone who is unemployed, likely not to have regular internet access, and/or might not even have a home going to know about this stuff?

The solution is going to take a lot of things. Instilling into young people that they need to be willing to work to earn their way. Making farm owners realize that they have to be willing to offer more than just min. wage for these jobs. It doesn't necessarily have to be common benefits and/or higher wages, although that is likely the easiest. Maybe offering so much food to the families of workers or providing for their housing and/or transportation. Workers, especially those who are on assistance, need to be willing to take what jobs they can find. But there also should be changes in lease agreements and housing costs.

I would say that most fruit pickers are paid piece work. Meaning the more you pick the more you make, I would also say good pickers make way better than minimum wage.
 


Chenoa its no secret that Corporate farms let fruit and vegetables rot in fields because the price is too low for thier liking...what makes you think they wont let fruit and vegetables rot in a field because they want to pressure others not to pass a law they dont like.
Your paying sometimes 4.00 a lb now with illegals picking vegetables...how much higher do you think they can charge before they have alot more rotting in the field because people dont buy them...I love brussel sprouts when they get stupid priced I pass them buy...along with all other fruits and vegetables that they stuck horrifically inflated prices on....they are robbing us all around....Ill await the corporate cheerleaders to tell me somehow its the unions fault..:roll::roll::roll:
 
Chenoa its no secret that Corporate farms let fruit and vegetables rot in fields because the price is too low for thier liking...what makes you think they wont let fruit and vegetables rot in a field because they want to pressure others not to pass a law they dont like.
Your paying sometimes 4.00 a lb now with illegals picking vegetables...how much higher do you think they can charge before they have alot more rotting in the field because people dont buy them...I love brussel sprouts when they get stupid priced I pass them buy...along with all other fruits and vegetables that they stuck horrifically inflated prices on....they are robbing us all around....Ill await the corporate cheerleaders to tell me somehow its the unions fault..:roll::roll::roll:

Really. Where are you getting your infomation? It's not the corporate farms, it's the middlemen agribusiness corporations who farm nothing, but buy and sell goods. Farmers have no choice but to sell to them.

In fact, according to agriculture expert Raj Patel, although the average basket of food has increased by 2.0 percent in real terms over the past 20 years, farmers are receiving 40 percent less. And the National Farmers Union estimates that for every dollar that U.S. consumers spend on food, only 20 cents actually goes to farmers or ranchers. The rest is found in "marketing, processing, wholesaling, distribution and retailing".

This increasing concentration means a fewer number of agribusinesses are exerting a larger amount of influence over the food supply chain, from inputs to sale. Critics of this situation compare it to the shape of an hourglass. A vast amount of producers must funnel their goods through a handful of large corporations before they can make their way to consumers.

Research by Mary Hendrickson, a rural sociologist at the University of Missouri, shows the level of influence by agribusiness in the United States has increased significantly. In soybean crushing, for example, the largest four firms now make up 80 percent of the market, whereas in 1977 they comprised 54 percent. In flour milling, the top four have increased their concentration from 42 percent of the market in 1982 to over 60 percent today.

Farming is also concentrated at the extreme beginning and endpoints of U.S. agriculture. The top two seed providers comprise 58 percent of the marketplace and nearly half of purchased food comes from just five retailers: Wal-Mart, Kroger, Albertson's, Safeway, and Ahold. Link

We have a large farm in Georgia and a larger ranch in Texas. We (and our farming neighbors) don't let anything rot in the fields. We can rarely find enough workers to pick by hand when it is needed. Quite a bit of what we grow is machine harvested, but you still have to have "hands", and believe me they're hard to find and keep. I'm going to address your "horrifically inflated prices" that you're blaming on corporate farms. (Did I mention our farm/ranch is a corporation? Probably because it's irrelevant, incorporating helps us handle the business more efficiently.

Farming is a complex business and expensive. You can only do so much direct marketing when you have large yields (direct marketing = farmers markets, roadside markets, etc.) - you just can't sell the volume needed and it once again takes "hands" to pick, transport, and do the selling to customers. So, what does that leave? Well you can do some wholesale marketing (selling directly to retailers, cutting out the middleman) - so add in transportation costs, grading standards, and, some special handling requirements. Often special packaging is necessary. To please retailers, the product must look uniformly good - also difficult. This adds up to $'s that must be passed on to the consumer; and you once again run into volume issues. So, onto option #3. Non-direct marketing. You sell through a middleman, who then markets your crop. And you wait and sell until you get the absolute highest price for your product that you can. Sometimes, you take a massive loss.

So, please get your facts straight before blaming farmers and ranchers. And, I'll add this... for those farmers who let crops rot because of pricing. Their business and their crops to do with as they please if they're getting screwed. Often they cannot afford to harvest for the price they're going to get (the smaller the farm, the more likely that is).
 
Back
Top Bottom