Illegal Workers Swept From Jobs in ‘Silent Raids’

Aunt Spiker said:

Rock and a hard place.
On one hand we could let them stay - turn a blind eye (like we've been doing) - and do nothin . . . but that obviously nets a LOT of other undesirable problems.
Yet on the other hand we could send them back over the border - unfortunately we all know they'll just come right back. There's nothing for them over there.

Click to expand...

Stick their asses in jail the first time they are caught for 6 months like the law says they can be. That would change a lot of their minds at looking at deportation as nothing more than a free bus ride home.

None of these seem ideal or favorable but those are our options - that's it. they all have their ups and their downs.

Click to expand...

We have lots of options the most desirable one is enticing illegals to go home. That can simply done by enforcing the laws that are on the book,states could also do what Oklahoma and Arizona have done, and there are a whole bunch of other solutions to entice illegals to go back home such as requiring money wiring services,banks and check cashing places to verify the legal status of their costumers, jail time before being deported, jail/prison time for those who hire illegals, jail time for those who aid and house illegals and many other things would encourage illegals to leave.

lol Look who is running things BREAKING NEWS: Napolitano Said She Didn't Know About The Raid & Orders Investigation! - Citizen Orange

During Congressional Testimony today, Janet Napolitano was asked by Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) about the ICE raid in Washington. Napolitano said she had not heard about the raid in advance and was surprised to find out about it this morning. She asked ICE to send her details about it today so she could review why it was carried out. In her testimony, she said enforcement should target employers and felonious criminals vs targetting workers.

The Associated Press just reported:

Napolitano orders review of raid in Wash. plant

Seattle (AP) - Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has ordered a review of a raid at a Washington manufacturing plant that ended with the arrests of 28 illegal immigrants. Homeland Security spokesman Sean Smith says Napolitano wants to know why Tuesday's raid occurred and what led up to it.

President Barack Obama, who appointed Napolitano, has signaled for a shift in immigration policy that would rely less on work site enforcement, focusing instead on employers who hire illegal immigrants and overall immigration reform.

Smith says the raid at the Yamato Engine Specialists in Bellingham was the first work site action that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has taken since Obama took office.

ICE spokeswoman Lori Dankers in Seattle declined comment.

Click to expand...

MaggieD said:

I think most people would agree that if jobs dry up, home they go. If anyone believes we're going to round up millions of illegals and put them thru our justice system to send them home, they're smokin' peyote in the Arizona desert.

Click to expand...

Jobs won't dry up. They will just steal somebody elses identity and leave that person with thousands of unpaid taxes and maybe worse.

Why does nobody talk about the identity theft problem caused by illegal workers.

Another problem this does not address is the illegals crossing for violent purposes and not to find work.

Sure Obama will identify gardners and maids but he will do nothing about the violent offenders coming across the border.

I think the violent ones are a lot more important to identify than a maid.

ric27 said:

If, the US is going to be a country of laws and Illegals are breaking the law then why not deport them when caught?

Letting illegals roam free under our current circumstances is totally asinine

Click to expand...

Focusing so much on illegals and not those that hire them is just as asinine.

PeteEU said:

Focusing so much on illegals and not those that hire them is just as asinine.

Click to expand...

Many do not just focus on illegals,which is why many suggest stiffer fines, and prison/jail time. However the OP story did state that those businesses were fined while nothing happened to the illegals and many people realize that it takes two to tango. Which is why people are complaining about the illegals not being deported.

Mason66 said:

Jobs won't dry up. They will just steal somebody elses identity and leave that person with thousands of unpaid taxes and maybe worse.

Why does nobody talk about the identity theft problem caused by illegal workers.

Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...ricans-targeted-massive-id-theft-schemes.html

Another problem this does not address is the illegals crossing for violent purposes and not to find work.

Sure Obama will identify gardners and maids but he will do nothing about the violent offenders coming across the border.

Click to expand...

To many proillegals in office the thugs crossing the border for criminal activities other than illegal immigration is just a small price to pay in order to keep the border porous.

I think the violent ones are a lot more important to identify than a maid.

Click to expand...

If illegals who are working low wage jobs are enticed to go home would it make it easier for the border guards to spot drug traffickers and other criminals besides those who come here illegally?

We are a nation of "Yes-but'ers."

"Yes, but it doesn't go far enough."
"Yes, but it doesn't solve THIS or THAT."

It's a step in the right direction. It's more than's been done for a long time.

Anyone who thinks we're going to put 11,000,000 illegals in jail is a fool.

danarhea said:

Good idea. You can't clamp down on illegal immigration unless you attack the main reason they are coming here - Employers who are hiring them.

Click to expand...

It doesn't make for compelling television coverage, though. That must mean he isn't doing anything.

Deportation is an expensive and ineffective strategy. It is not even worth doing until the demand for their labor is dealt with. Once the demand for their labor is reduced to virtually nothing, you can get an idea of how large the remaining problem will be, and thereby determine how many resources to direct at it.

Here is what I predict, if Obama does what is necessary to dry up the demand: There will be a lot more poor, desperate Mexicans. Some of these people will become involved in the violent supply of drugs across the border. However, on the plus side, illegal immigration for other purposes will come to a virtual halt. Overall, illegal border crossings will drastically decline. This will give whatever administration that is in place greater political cover to take more aggressive measures to secure the border. That is, we can get more aggressive about security with less damage to our relations with Mexico.

Now, if we would get rid of the demand for illegal drugs, we could avoid a large portion of the negative consequences of having additional poor, desperate people hanging about the border. There is only one way to do that: Legalize the drugs and have the government temporarily take over the manufacture and distribution of them.

Then, maybe we could focus with Mexico on finding a real solution for the fact that Mexico has a lot of poor, desperate people.

You don't even need government to take over manufacture. Hell, I bet the tobacco companies already have a file cabinet full of paperwork ready to begin marijuana production. Private production will step in practically overnight when it comes to a new industry this large. Then tax the crap out of it. Between the tax income and the massive reduction in law enforcement/incarceration costs, we take a decent chunk out of that pesky deficit and rob the cartels of most of their income and power.

Deuce said:

You don't even need government to take over manufacture. Hell, I bet the tobacco companies already have a file cabinet full of paperwork ready to begin marijuana production. Private production will step in practically overnight when it comes to a new industry this large. Then tax the crap out of it. Between the tax income and the massive reduction in law enforcement/incarceration costs, we take a decent chunk out of that pesky deficit and rob the cartels of most of their income and power.

Click to expand...

I don't want to derail the thread - I just wanted to address the demand that we create for workers for the illegal drug trade. But, to your point: Well, there is some probability that the cartels would still try to control the drug trade, through force. Even that aside, they have specialized in drug manufacture and distribution, after all, and would probably be more efficient at it than anyone else at this time. It would probably be them who lead the way to the legal drug trade. Thus, legalization would probably reward them, and I would prefer not to do that.

Deuce said: ...we take a decent chunk out of that pesky deficit...

Click to expand...

Since when has increased revenue not spelled anything but increased spending? I hope you're right.

Dezaad said: Then, maybe we could focus with Mexico on finding a real solution for the fact that Mexico has a lot of poor, desperate people.

Click to expand...

I'll drink to that.

PeteEU said:

Focusing so much on illegals and not those that hire them is just as asinine.

Click to expand...

If you read his posts you would know how weong you are about him. He has attacked employers.

MaggieD said:

We are a nation of "Yes-but'ers."

"Yes, but it doesn't go far enough."
"Yes, but it doesn't solve THIS or THAT."

It's a step in the right direction. It's more than's been done for a long time..

Click to expand...

You want people to be happy with token raids that only give the employer a slap on the wrist with a free bus ticket home for the illegals and a sparsely guarded border? Why does it make sense to say here criminal enjoy your free ticket home,see ya soon? Illegal immigration requires more than just deportation and token raids. It requires the following-
1.seriously cracking down on those who hire illegals
2.jailing illegals who are caught, it takes two to tango and illegals are just as guilty as those that hire them.
3.denying tax payer funded services to illegals. That means no food handlers permits, driver's licenses,permits, business permits, building permits or any other permit, welfare,section 8 housing, foodstamps, car tag renewal and other service.
4.allowing local police to verify the legal status of those they stop for a traffic offense or some other form of lawful contact
5.Jailing those who harbor and or aid illegals and this includes the politicians who have their tongues in so deep when tossing the salad of illegals and pro-illegals.
6.Require financial institutions such as banks, check cashing places and money wiring services to verify the legal status of those they do business with.[If illegals are denied tax payer funded services then mostly these places should only have to check a driver's license/ID and a social security card.]
7.Require property owners to verify the legal status of those they rent,sell,lend or give property to.[If illegals are denied tax payer funded services then mostly these places should only have to check a driver's license/ID and a social security card.]
8.Require those selling a to verify that person buying a car has a valid drivers license.

Anyone who thinks we're going to put 11,000,000 illegals in jail is a fool

Click to expand...

You do not have to put 12-20 million illegals in jail, just the ones that are caught and those caught hiring them in jail. If you adequately crack down on both parties involved you remove the incentive for employers to hire illegals and for illegals to get jobs in the US. Employers will not want to hire illegals and illegals will not want to risk going to jail for six months or longer. When the US has seriously cracked down on illegals and those that harbor them they will deport themselves like with Operation Wetback in 1954 and Mexican Repatriation in the 1928-1939. You do not have to round up all 12-20 million plus illegals nor do you have to jail all of them.

It puzzles me that Obama is taking Arizona to court for a law it passed in 2007, the legal Arizona Workers Act)
(The Legal Arizona Workers Act, passed in 2007, is found in Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) sections 23-211 to 23- 214. The Legal Arizona Workers Act allows a County Attorney to bring a civil suit to suspend or revoke state and local Arizona business licenses if a business intentionally or knowingly employed non-citizens that do not have the right to work in the United States (an “unauthorized alien”). http://www.co.mohave.az.us/ContentPage.aspx?id=112&cid=122

It targets the employer when they knowingly hire illegals. Janet N. was the governor and signed the bill. It would be nice if the Feds would do their jobs and also work with the States. Case will be before the Supreme Court this fall.

Any truly effective measures to deal with illegal workers should probably be ramped up rather than implemented in a grand and sudden push. I don't think we really want a massive business shock to our industries that depend on them. As others have hinted at here, we will be paying more for stuff as a result of more effective measures. We don't want to send shockwaves through these industries which would show up in the produce section of our markets.

Dezaad said:We don't want to send shockwaves through these industries which would show up in the produce section of our markets.

Click to expand...

Get over it. When employers are forced to pay liveable wages, it's going to show up everywhere. We can't be hypocrits. "Solve this problem!!! But don't make ME pay any more."

Dezaad said:

Any truly effective measures to deal with illegal workers should probably be ramped up rather than implemented in a grand and sudden push..

Click to expand...

I disagree. Illegals will just flee to wherever is not being affected by raids.

I don't think we really want a massive business shock to our industries that depend on them. As others have hinted at here, we will be paying more for stuff as a result of more effective measures. We don't want to send shockwaves through these industries which would show up in the produce section of our markets.

Click to expand...

The Seattle Times: Local News: Low-paid illegal work force has little impact on prices



More than 7 million illegal immigrants work in the United States. They build houses, pick crops, slaughter cattle, stitch clothes, mow lawns, clean hotel rooms, cook restaurant meals and wash the dishes that come back.

You might assume that the plentiful supply of low-wage illegal workers would translate into significantly lower prices for the goods and services they produce. In fact, their impact on consumer prices — call it the "illegal-worker discount" — is surprisingly small.

The bag of Washington state apples you bought last weekend? Probably a few cents cheaper than it otherwise would have been, economists estimate. That steak dinner at a downtown restaurant? Maybe a buck off. Your new house in Subdivision Estates? Hard to say, but perhaps a few thousand dollars less expensive.

The underlying reason, economists say, is that for most goods the labor — whether legal or illegal, native- or foreign-born — represents only a sliver of the retail price.

Consider those apples — Washington's signature contribution to the American food basket.

At a local QFC, Red Delicious apples go for about 99 cents a pound. Of that, only about 7 cents represents the cost of labor, said Tom Schotzko, a recently retired extension economist at Washington State University. The rest represents the grower's other expenses, warehousing and shipping fees, and the retailer's markup.

And that's for one of the most labor-intensive crops in the state: It takes 150 to 190 hours of labor to grow and harvest an acre of apples, Schotzko said, compared to four hours for an acre of potatoes and 1 ½ hours for an acre of wheat.

MaggieD said:

Get over it. When employers are forced to pay liveable wages, it's going to show up everywhere. We can't be hypocrits. "Solve this problem!!! But don't make ME pay any more."

Click to expand...

I'm not saying we shouldn't put effective measures in place. I'm just saying take a measured pace in putting them in place. We do need to be smart about this, that is all. Jeez, it's like you can't even talk about some of the possible negative consequences and how to deal with them without people freaking out.

Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t...10enforce.html

Say what you will about the Obama admin's actions in regards to Az, he seems to be doing quite a decent job in this area.[/QUOTE]

The biggest problem in Arizona is the drug trafficers that seem to control the paths into the US. There are thugs from Mexico that have hurt, killed and kidnapped many people in the Phoenix area. This is a major problem that Obama is ignoring. It is why Arizona is requesting troops on the border. The National guard troops that Obama is sending are to sit in offices. Stupidity in action.

Dezaad said:

I'm not saying we shouldn't put effective measures in place. I'm just saying take a measured pace in putting them in place. We do need to be smart about this, that is all. Jeez, it's like you can't even talk about some of the possible negative consequences and how to deal with them without people freaking out.

Click to expand...

What the hell does that mean? A measured pace? If you were on a border state you would be thinking rather differently.

We do tend to zero in on stuff, don't we? Mea culpa. I believe the current vernacular is "My bad." I guess that's the nature of public forums. If everyone were reasonable, it wouldn't be any fun.

jamesrage said:

I disagree. Illegals will just flee to wherever is not being affected by raids.

Click to expand...

Temporarily. Until we ramp up to include whatever we leave aside at first.

The Seattle Times: Local News: Low-paid illegal work force has little impact on prices

More than 7 million illegal immigrants work in the United States. They build houses, pick crops, slaughter cattle, stitch clothes, mow lawns, clean hotel rooms, cook restaurant meals and wash the dishes that come back.

You might assume that the plentiful supply of low-wage illegal workers would translate into significantly lower prices for the goods and services they produce. In fact, their impact on consumer prices — call it the "illegal-worker discount" — is surprisingly small.

The bag of Washington state apples you bought last weekend? Probably a few cents cheaper than it otherwise would have been, economists estimate. That steak dinner at a downtown restaurant? Maybe a buck off. Your new house in Subdivision Estates? Hard to say, but perhaps a few thousand dollars less expensive.

The underlying reason, economists say, is that for most goods the labor — whether legal or illegal, native- or foreign-born — represents only a sliver of the retail price.

Consider those apples — Washington's signature contribution to the American food basket.

At a local QFC, Red Delicious apples go for about 99 cents a pound. Of that, only about 7 cents represents the cost of labor, said Tom Schotzko, a recently retired extension economist at Washington State University. The rest represents the grower's other expenses, warehousing and shipping fees, and the retailer's markup.

And that's for one of the most labor-intensive crops in the state: It takes 150 to 190 hours of labor to grow and harvest an acre of apples, Schotzko said, compared to four hours for an acre of potatoes and 1 ½ hours for an acre of wheat.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you are right. But, I am unconvinced, because I am not being presented with a complete picture, here. In all of your quote, nothing is said that measures the effect of inflation on wages that would occur as a result of a decrease in supply of workers. This inflation on wages could greatly increase the legal worker expenditures shown in the information you present.

Nothing you present addresses this effect to either refute its significance or confirm it.

In addition, the effect could also force wages up in other industries as they all compete for the same workers. This is another hidden cost of effective illegal immigration policies. The information you present ignores this effect as well.

Finally, IF wages increase at a fast pace on the low end, then general inflation will also increase. This will force the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates in response. This could start or extend a recession.

Effective illegal immigration policies would represent a major shift in the labor markets. I admit that I don't know what the full effects would be, but your article is entirely simplistic, so you obviously don't either.

None of which is to say that I think we shouldn't have effective policies. Just that we may need to pace them intelligently.

Dezaad said:

Temporarily. Until we ramp up to include whatever we leave aside at first.





Perhaps you are right. But, I am unconvinced, because I am not being presented with a complete picture, here. In all of your quote, nothing is said that measures the effect of inflation on wages that would occur as a result of a decrease in supply of workers. This inflation on wages could greatly increase the legal worker expenditures shown in the information you present.

Nothing you present addresses this effect to either refute its significance or confirm it.

In addition, the effect could also force wages up in other industries as they all compete for the same workers. This is another hidden cost of effective illegal immigration policies. The information you present ignores this effect as well.

Finally, IF wages increase at a fast pace on the low end, then general inflation will also increase. This will force the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates in response. This could start or extend a recession.

Effective illegal immigration policies would represent a major shift in the labor markets. I admit that I don't know what the full effects would be, but your article is entirely simplistic, so you obviously don't either.

None of which is to say that I think we shouldn't have effective policies. Just that we may need to pace them intelligently.

Click to expand...

You don't want to see a reason. You are looking for an excuse not to believe.

texmaster said:

You don't want to see a reason.

Click to expand...

A reason for what?

You are looking for an excuse not to believe.

Click to expand...

Not to believe what?

All I have done, here, is to present factors that any intelligent person already knows is part of the picture, and that are completely ignored by the simplistic information presented. Methinks that it is YOU who is looking for an excuse not to believe. You just readily accept ANYTHING that confirms what you've already decided.