I guess I should have answered Blatham's inquiry by PM.
Foxfyre wrote: McGentrix wrote:It would certainly help to explain the extremist views he has on immigration.
Such extremist views including the dichotomy of his earlier assertion that he had verified legal status of all his restaurant employees--therefore it is not necessary to exploit illegal labor and the employers can enforce the law--and his more recent assertion that restaurants wouldn't stay in business without illegal labor and we ought to accept all that come, yadda yadda.
There you go demonstrating your lack of working knowledge with logical fallacies, again. Both of those are statements of factÂ… Virtually unrelated fact, at that.
A. I said I verified paperwork and performed my legally required due diligence, not verified status.
B. Any line of business that lost a sizable percentage of their trained workforce would suffer. The laws of supply and demand would drive the costs upwards, and I happen to be acutely aware of how tight the profit/loss margin is in the industry.
C. Legalizing the workforce would eliminate the repercussions, so try to be a little more accurate when attempting to paraphrase what I say.
Foxfyre wrote: and we ought to accept all that come, yadda yadda.
This bit had no business being tied to the rest of your sentence either. It is a wholly separate point. Your entire post is either very sloppy, or the work of an inferior mind.
