Arizona requires you to carry your papers

[southsider2k5]

SCOTUS upholds AZ law that punishes employers

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/05/26/scotus.arizona.law/?hpt=T2

 

A system that ends the incentives for businesses to stop hiring illegal aliens is the quickest way to fix immigration in this country.

[StrangeSox]

A system that ends the incentives for businesses to stop hiring illegal aliens is the quickest way to fix immigration in this country.

Yeah but there's some huge jurisdictional issues here. Mainly, it's not the State's jurisdiction. I haven't read the opinion, but the quote from Roberts in the article doesn't really address the problem. Sure, maybe it's inline with Federal laws right now, but it could be very quickly out of line if they changed the law and it'd take some amount of time before AZ could modify and be back in line.

[Jenksismyhero]

Yeah but there's some huge jurisdictional issues here. Mainly, it's not the State's jurisdiction. I haven't read the opinion, but the quote from Roberts in the article doesn't really address the problem. Sure, maybe it's inline with Federal laws right now, but it could be very quickly out of line if they changed the law and it'd take some amount of time before AZ could modify and be back in line.

 

If you're going to force states to assure an employee's legal status (or at least force them to make a good faith effort), then I don't see why they shouldn't be able to require their businesses to use the E-verify system in furtherance of that obligation.

[StrangeSox]

If you're going to force states to assure an employee's legal status (or at least force them to make a good faith effort), then I don't see why they shouldn't be able to require their businesses to use the E-verify system in furtherance of that obligation.

 

SCOTUS blog coverage on it

 

http://www.scotusblog.com/2011/05/opinion-...on-aliens-jobs/

[Soxbadger]

Southsider,

 

I think you mean the AZ law is the quickest way to cause businesses that employ illegal immigrants to pack up shop and move to New Mexico, Texas or California.

 

Its the price you pay for govt interfering with the supply of labor.

 

Just like SC getting an advantage over Washington because of less union laws, other states will have an advantage over AZ because of illegal immigrants. Seems silly to hurt your own economy.

Edited May 26, 2011 by Soxbadger

[StrangeSox]

Southsider,

 

I think you mean the AZ law is the quickest way to cause businesses that employ illegal immigrants to pack up shop and move to New Mexico, Teas or California.

 

Its the price you pay for govt interfering with the supply of labor.

 

Just like SC getting an advantage over Washington because of less union laws, other states will have an advantage over AZ because of illegal immigrants. Seems silly to hurt your own economy.

 

There's a giant moral problem with that argument, though. Illegal immigrants are often heavily exploited by employers. I'd be in favor of legalizing more immigrants so that they can be legally hired and less likely to be taken advantage of.

[Soxbadger]

Well I believe that all immigrants who want to be legal in the US and are not criminals etc, should be allowed to provided that they get SS#s, pay taxes, etc.

 

But I can tell you that point of view is not accepted by most people (right now), so the only way to change their mind will be when they see just how valuable immigrant labor is to the US economy.

 

Money talks in politics, and eventually big corporate money will start to come on the side of congress who wants to ensure that businesses can hire employees at the cheapest rate.

 

Its not the most moral way of going about it, but sometimes the ends justify the means.

[southsider2k5]

Southsider,

 

I think you mean the AZ law is the quickest way to cause businesses that employ illegal immigrants to pack up shop and move to New Mexico, Texas or California.

 

Its the price you pay for govt interfering with the supply of labor.

 

Just like SC getting an advantage over Washington because of less union laws, other states will have an advantage over AZ because of illegal immigrants. Seems silly to hurt your own economy.

 

Sure, but I want to see this done nationally.

[Balta1701]

Sure, but I want to see this done nationally.

And we want states to be able to tax Amazon.com nationally

[southsider2k5]

And we want states to be able to tax everyone nationally

 

[Soxbadger]

It wont be done nationally because it was a states rights ruling.

 

So all we are going to get is states competing versus states, but finally Illinois gets the advantage being one of the most pro-illegal friendly states. Usually we are on the losing end with EPA guidelines, state taxes etc.

 

 

[Balta1701]

It wont be done nationally because it was a states rights ruling.

 

So all we are going to get is states competing versus states, but finally Illinois gets the advantage being one of the most pro-illegal friendly states. Usually we are on the losing end with EPA guidelines, state taxes etc.

Just like "not charging amazon.com taxes so that local retailers get screwed" is hardly an advantage, being pro-illegal friendly is hardly an advantage.

[StrangeSox]

It wont be done nationally because it was a states rights ruling.

 

So all we are going to get is states competing versus states, but finally Illinois gets the advantage being one of the most pro-illegal friendly states. Usually we business profits are on the losing end with EPA guidelines, state taxes etc. while the majority of citizens benefit from less pollution, more social services, better education, etc.

 

[Soxbadger]

More business in the state generally equals more revenue for the state which means indirectly a win for me as Im in the state.

[StrangeSox]

More business in the state generally equals more revenue for the state which means indirectly a win for me as Im in the state.

 

It means more revenue for the businesses, not necessarily for the state. Especially if those businesses are there due to gutted tax codes, subsidies, gutted environmental and workplace safety, etc.

[Soxbadger]

Still results in employees being in the state who pay income tax, or who live in the state etc. There is a reason they give out subsidies and try and attract large businesses.

 

(edit)

 

Although illegals wont pay income tax, they still will purchase products. (sales tax)

Edited May 26, 2011 by Soxbadger

[StrangeSox]

But selling out your state to attract businesses in a race to the bottom doesn't necessarily mean a net positive for the State or a majority of its citizens.

[StrangeSox]

Also, illegals working under a falsified SSN will still be paying payroll taxes and will likely have withholdings. They just won't be filing a return, but they'd probably end up qualifying for EIC and not pay any income taxes anyway, since it's not exactly high-paying positions they're taking.

[Soxbadger]

I dont think allowing people to compete for jobs is a race to the bottom.

 

Its just the only way around the unfortunate fact that certain people dont want to allow legal immigration out of fear.

[StrangeSox]

I dont think allowing people to compete for jobs is a race to the bottom.

 

Its just the only way around the unfortunate fact that certain people dont want to allow legal immigration out of fear.

 

This started as a reaction to the idea that "we" are on the losing end of e.g. having better EPA regulations because we're not giving into business' demand to pollute more freely.

[Soxbadger]

We are on the losing end when it comes to losing business.

 

I never said whether or not that was an overall "loss", or whether or not those restrictions were with merit, just simply by having restrictions you will lose some business.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

We are on the losing end when it comes to losing business.

 

I never said whether or not that was an overall "loss", or whether or not those restrictions were with merit, just simply by having restrictions you will lose some business.

 

 

Too many people ignore or fail to acknowledge that gutting regulations and rules and taxes/services to attract business could maybe have negative impacts on citizens. You see it in the gloating every time some state passes some rule or regulation by others saying that their state, with lower standards, will gladly keep lower standards to appease business.

 

Of course there's no denying that people do need jobs and that competition really exists, but that doesn't mean we need to always give in to the exploitative power structure and give businesses whatever they want when they threaten to take away jobs.

[Soxbadger]

Im very aware, perhaps you didnt read the thread where there was the discussion of SC and the unions, but I called it a "race to the bottom".

 

I just dont think that allowing illegal immigrants to work in your state because the federal law is a disaster, is a race to the bottom. I think allowing people to work is freedom, and Im a big fan of freedom.

 

The reason there is no race to the bottom, is because the hope for states like Illinois etc, would be that the federal law changes and allows illegal immigrants to become legal and therefore be given all the great things we give to citizens. But if we cant give them that, at least we can give them a chance at a job and a better life.

 

So not sure how its a race to the bottom.

[StrangeSox]

It was a comment directed at that one part of one post and it was pretty much off-topic.

[Jenksismyhero]

I dont think allowing people to compete for jobs is a race to the bottom.

 

Its just the only way around the unfortunate fact that certain people dont want to allow legal immigration out of fear.

 

How does making it easier for illegal immigrants to work and compete for jobs a GOOD thing, considering we're at 9% unemployment, and we have yet to see any actual, stead net job growth over the last 2-3 years? This thinking is so dumb. We should be working HARDER and making it HARDER for illegals to work here so that the people who are actually citizens or registered guests of this country can work.

 

Funny aside, I was at a deposition this week where a guy flat out admitted that he was an illegal alien (and has been for 20 years), that he falsified his tax returns and that he failed to disclose the majority of his income (cash based). I find it sickening that he can still file a suit despite being a criminal.