What should be done about illegal immigration?

Setanta wrote:

If they don't have two pieces of identification, or a work permit (which is all the Form I-9 requires), they get no job. Once again, you offer anecdotal evidence, and seem to think we should all just take your word for it.

Once again, what is your evidence that "virtually no employers are doing this now?"

Where is your evidence that they are? My evidence is 11 or 12 million or more illegals living and working in the United states.

In the Carter administration you had to have proof of citizenship and proof of residency - three pieces required. Just ID was not sufficient. Are you requiring that now? You obviously are not having to hire somebody and put them to work right away either. Many employers do need to do that. You are comparing one set of circumstances that are unrelated to what I have been describing.

Foxfyre wrote:

Setanta wrote:

If they don't have two pieces of identification, or a work permit (which is all the Form I-9 requires), they get no job. Once again, you offer anecdotal evidence, and seem to think we should all just take your word for it.

Once again, what is your evidence that "virtually no employers are doing this now?"

Where is your evidence that they are? My evidence is 11 or 12 million or more illegals living and working in the United states.

In the Carter administration you had to have proof of citizenship and proof of residency - three pieces required. Just ID was not sufficient. Are you requiring that now? You obviously are not having to hire somebody and put them to work right away either. Many employers do need to do that. You are comparing one set of circumstances that are unrelated to what I have been describing.

Utter tommyrot . . . 12 million illegals is rock solid evidence of the extent to which employers are breaking the law. You are the one making the outrageous claim that most employers don't observe the law--but you offer no proof. For several years, and in fact in the era in which the 1986 Act was passed (specifically, from 1984 to 1988), i was employed at an environmental center and outdoor education center, and the staff in winter was 30 people, expanding to 160 or more every spring. We met the requirements of the law. This is a link to a PDF document which is the Department of Justice Immigration Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification. It does not require three pieces of identification, and it does not require proof of residence. You really shouldn't make things up when you post.

Setanta wrote:

If they don't have two pieces of identification, or a work permit (which is all the Form I-9 requires), they get no job. Once again, you offer anecdotal evidence, and seem to think we should all just take your word for it.

Once again, what is your evidence that "virtually no employers are doing this now?"

Where is your evidence that they are? My evidence is 11 or 12 million or more illegals living and working in the United states.

The DoJ Form I-9 is the current requirement, Fox--your stories (and they are only stories until you provide some evidence) about what you were required to complete more than twenty years ago have nothing to do with the requirements of the 1986 Act. You also continue to fail to provide any evidence that most employers do not comply.

And with your immigration policy that is apparently much more liberal than what most Americans want here, your unemployment rate is what? And are you providing free education for the children of the illegals, free health care, workers compensation, other social services?

And with your immigration policy that is apparently much more liberal than what most Americans want here, your unemployment rate is what?

Setanta wrote:

The DoJ Form I-9 is the current requirement, Fox--your stories (and they are only stories until you provide some evidence) about what you were required to complete more than twenty years ago have nothing to do with the requirements of the 1986 Act. You also continue to fail to provide any evidence that most employers do not comply.

Well prove that anything you've said about your experience is anywhere near close to the truth then. If it is invalid to cite experience, then yours is null and void too including your allegations that you actually complete a Form 1-9 for your employees.

Foxfyre wrote:

And with your immigration policy that is apparently much more liberal than what most Americans want here, your unemployment rate is what? And are you providing free education for the children of the illegals, free health care, workers compensation, other social services?

If liberal is used like you always use (left, extreme-left): it was introduced by the conservative govenment.

Of course, we can start a general discussion about our unemployment rate, but that has nothing to due with immigration - at least, I've never heard such here.

As said - but probably not in the words - illegals usually are deported.
Any education, social service, health care etc is only given to people legally here (which includes asylum seekers, people waiting for deportation etc).
Most asylum seekers are not allowed to work, so they get no unemployment benefit. Everyone who works somewhere, normally can only work when legally here. (Problems are sometimes with seasonal workers - like for aspergus, strawberries, wine - but since controls work very efficient, you don't find more than a couple of hundreds per year. And they get nothing from the state, sinc they can't.)

I'm not aware of the number of illegal children, but I don't think there are many.

nimh wrote:

Well, its sure the opposite of what America's always prided itself of..

Which is what?

Foxfyre wrote:

Setanta wrote:

The DoJ Form I-9 is the current requirement, Fox--your stories (and they are only stories until you provide some evidence) about what you were required to complete more than twenty years ago have nothing to do with the requirements of the 1986 Act. You also continue to fail to provide any evidence that most employers do not comply.

Well prove that anything you've said about your experience is anywhere near close to the truth then. If it is invalid to cite experience, then yours is null and void too including your allegations that you actually complete a Form 1-9 for your employees.

Well, it's like pulling teeth, but i see it finally sinks in with you. Your experience is no more valid or invalid than mine. There is a huge difference however, between citing one's experience, and making the blanket claim that most employers do not comply with the law. What is your evidence of that?

If our unemployment rate goes much over 5% here, people are hollering.

The difference being that those who arrived on Ellis Island did so with legal permission to do so and were quite willing to abide by U.S. law and wanted to be Americans. That really isn't all that much to ask.

[I think your primary problem is that you cannot articulate a reasoned response to my position(s) on this and therefore it is much easier to excoriate me. I have elected not to do that to you no matter how wrong headed I think your position is.

It is my opinion that it is possible to care about human beings AND obey the law, and this is what I have been advocating. That may be a concept that is foreign to you

I don't know how many out-of-work Germans resent being out of work, but an unemployment rate like that is completely unacceptable to most Americans. If our unemployment rate goes much over 5% here, people are hollering. If illegals are taking jobs that Germans need, I would think there would be little acceptance of those illegals.

There's no link. Britain has more flexible immigration policies [..] and unemployment there is considerably lower than in Germany. Same for Sweden.