The First 100 days

It didn't look that good. It was a political compromise between business-friendly Republicans who wanted a steady flow of cheap labor and labor-friendly Democrats who wanted illegal immigration stopped, because it was undermining unions. It's remarkable how things have changed. But here's what's different today. In 1986, the technology didn't exist for an employer to verify his employee's work status. He basically had to rely on the employee's word and his paperwork, so IRCA truly was the most we could do to employers. Things are radically different today from a technological standpoint.

That's true with almost every controversial law, and it'll be true with a wall as well. Keep in mind that we'll have to seize property through eminent domain. It'll be tied up in court for years.

To be fair, it's not up to cities to enforce the requirements on local businesses any more than it's the FBI's job to go prosecute purse snatchers. Ultimately it's ICE's job. However, this is also where the private enforcement comes into play. Even if ICE doesn't want to do its job and go after businesses (because we have a Jeb Bush-type in the White House), private citizens can. That's the point of private enforcement.

You do both, but keep in mind that 90 percent of the barbarians are here because of the massive pay raise. Take that away, and most of them won't come.

 

DOW set another new all time record this morning

Up over 21% since the November Election

 

Yes. Yes. and Yes.

I am a little unclear on what you mean by "private enforcement" though. Is that another way of saying a regular joe could sue an employer for failing to utilize EVerify?

And for those that point to its potential false positive/negative rate. They resolve about 98% of the erroneous replies within 48 hours. it is very rare that a legitimate employee has to be turned away from a job due to a bad EVerify result. And even those that do have to work a little harder to get their EVerify record straight have to do it ONCE. After that they record is clean and any future applications sail through.

 

From my perspective, E-verify puts the entire burden of compliance on business. I see it somewhat akin to them putting the tax collection burden on employers (FICA, FUTA, maybe SUTA and so on). I dont know if you have ever started a small business in the US, but the level of government regulations/requirements is already staggering, even without E-Verify. It's a huge disincentive. I sometimes am amazed so many people keep trying.

I always remember part of a summer I spent in Sweden. Somehow I lucked into hanging out with a group of motivated, entrepreneurial young Swedes. Great folks. They were so jealous of the business culture in the US and complained a sh*t ton about the burdens their Govt put on them (and the stuff they dealt with really was ridiculous - all we could do was drink and laugh). I always found their plight so interesting. But I now wonder if we have leveled the field with them or even fallen behind? (#ThanksObama)

Visa overstays are a separate issue, and are not a valid excuse not to build a wall.
(Was that a double negative?)

 

It's just the opposite. E-Verify actually takes the burden (and risk) off the employer. Rather than carry the risk that you've been deceived and could be subject to penalties now you simply need to spend 5 minutes to submit to E-Verify through their website if you are a small business. For larger businesses we have a vendor do manage this for us. They supply the tool, we input the information and it tracks the completion/dispute process. We spend <$10k/yr on this process for ~1000 hires.

 

It looks like everyone left in the White House still advising Trump all support DACA

 

11-year-old Frank Giaccio gets to mow lawn at the White House after sending a letter earlier this year making request.

That's heart warming. I heard (I can't play your video here at work) that he didn't stop even when Trump came out. Later I heard Trump gave him a high five.

 

A Princeton University study estimates that every DACA qualifier will bring an average of 6.38 family members with them through chain migration. That's means 4-6 million new "Americans" depending on how many qualify for DACA. You can bet that if they estimate there are 800,000 that qualify, it'll be substantially more.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...igger-flood-4-6-m-foreign-nationals-not-800k/

 

How much of that 6.8M is part of the 11-13M of illegal immigrants already here?

 

^^^^

 

I think there was a country song about that, some time back. "Dont It Make My Red States Blue." Or something like that

 

Those in favor of the wall are not arguing to substitute it for other crucial illegal combative measures like e-verify, increased border security, anti-sanctuary, etc.

Everything but the wall can be removed by a not-so-distant future Congress or rendered ineffective by a refusal to enforce by the next Dem POTUS and his/her DOJ. As a matter of fact it's almost certain "would be" better fits that statement.

Sure the wall has no permanent guarantee, but the sheer amount of investment will secure its presence and effective deterrence for a MUCH longer time.

Then there's the positive effects the wall would have against combating drug flow into the states.

Discounting the importance of the wall is ignoring the glaring history on the subject over the last three decades. Not to mention the left's newfound desire to escort foreigners in and protect them as first class citizens above our own.

 

Pretty easy to see what DACA + chain migration would mean. Leaving only a question of timing.

 

I see a federal judge in Chicago has just stayed Trump's order to with hold funds to sanctuary cities.

Any new laws that Congress passes will probably be circumvented easier than critics say illegals will go around the wall. There are plenty of dusty, unenforced laws on the books already to stop illegal immigration.

In 1954 Eisenhower launched "Operation Wetback" at the request of the Mexican government. They rounded up ship loads (literally) of illegal Mexicans and shipped, flew, and drove them into Mexico, hundereds of miles from the border, and released them. Problem solved.

Back then, there was a will to stop illegal immigration. Now I'm not so sure that will exists.

 

The rest of that story is only a percentage had to be deported. Once it became clear, through the media at that time, what was happening, the bulk of the persons in the US illegally then self-deported.

 

My sense is that the great bulk of Trump voters have stuck with him up to this point in recognition that the main problem is not so much Trump as it is his own Republican Congress. The people see that those areas of the Government Trump has direct control over (border enforcement, deportations, judges to the federal bench (mostly), undoing Obama EO's, visas) he has followed through with on his promises. Likewise, the people see that those areas Trump has not followed through on are almost exclusively those areas where he must have Congressional cooperation (Obamacare, tax reform, wall funding).

IMO, this all changes with amnesty. This is where the people draw the line. The people correctly sensed that all that all of that Russian stuff was nonsense and propaganda. But amnesty is different. Now Trump really is at risk. While he has taken a firm public stand against chain migration within the last 24 hours (a good thing), he is still waffling on amnesty. It is not over yet but, as of this moment, he seems to be falling into the trap that has caught almost every other Republican who has tried to take action on immigration -- as if calling amnesty something else ("a path to citizenship") will somehow make it alright. But the people were not fooled by amnesty gimmicks and double-speak in the past, and they will not be fooled now. If Trump burns them on this, that will be it for him. So, we have to hope that what is going on now is just negotiations.

 

He is living rent free in their heads ...

 

I'm sure The_Donald is worth a similar amount to Reddit. This is why the platforms are unwilling to enforce their terms of service rules on these communities and their followers. I suspect they'll ultimately fail because they've let them grow to big and powerful on their platform.

 

President Trump at the UN today

He bashed "uncontrolled migration" --

"For the cost of settling one refugee in the US, we could support 10 in their home country" ​

He is also calling on Iran to stop supporting terrorists. Calling it a murderous regime

On NoKo, he says --

"Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself"

If forced to defend ourselves, would "have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea"​

.

 

More ....

"We will stop radical Islamic terrorism .....
because we cannot allow it to tear up our nation & indeed to tear up the entire world."

US and her allies are crushing "loser terrorists"​

Said Iran is squandering wealth of the Iranian people on terrorism

"Frankly, that deal (Iran nuclear) is an embarrassment to the United States."

"The Iranian government masks a corrupt dictatorship behind the false guise of a democracy,"​

Trump also attacked the fact that countries with "egregious" human rights record sit on Human Rights Council

Trump on VZ sounds like he has been reading our "What is Socialism" thread --

"The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented. It's that socialism has been faithfully implemented."​

 

Trump to UNGA

US middle class, once the bedrock of society, has been left behind. They have been forgotten and they will never be forgotten again.

"The costs of uncontrolled migration are borne by low-income citizens whose concerns are often ignored by media and govt."

"strong sovereign nations" are the "foundations for cooperation and success", letting diverse states live together

the "beautiful vision" of UN rests on sovereignty, two key duties: protecting its own people, respecting other states'

the United States does not seek to impose its system on others, but to hold its system up as an inspiration.

Round of applause when Trump said he will always put US first, just as all other leaders will and should put their interests first.​

This stuff is driving liberals nuts. They hate the white middle class. They hate patriotism. They hate the idea of nations, borders, cultures

 

heh

 

Bit of a gasp here
Kind of funny

 

Meanwhile I have been reading about the current version of The Dream Act.
If it passes in this form, then a wall, strict deportation and blocking chain migration will not matter. It will be over. I dont know who these people are.

 

The mischaracterization is depressing. Expected, but depressing.