By Tyler Durden
ZeroHedge.com, December 5, 2015
. . .
We are confident that one can make the case that there are considerations on both the labor demand-side (whether US employers have a natural tendency to hire foreign-born workers is open to debate) as well as on the supply-side: it may be easier to obtain wage-equivalent welfare compensation for native-born Americans than for their foreign-born peers, forcing the latter group to be much more engaged and active in finding a wage-paying job.
However, the underlying economics of this trend are largely irrelevant: as the presidential primary race hits a crescendo all that will matter is the soundbite that over the past 8 years, 2.7 million foreign-born Americans have found a job compared to only 747,000 native-born. The result is a combustible mess that will lead to serious fireworks during each and every subsequent GOP primary debate, especially if Trump remains solidly in the lead.
. . .
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-05/326000-native-born-americans-lost-their-job-november-why-remains-most-important-jobs
Immigration Cronyism Is Alive & Well & Living in the House of Representatives
By Mark Krikorian
The Corner at National Review Online, December 16, 2015
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/428632/omnibus-spending-bill-immigration-cronyism?target=author&tid=982
Tucked into the 2,000-plus pages of Paul Ryan’s monster spending bill to fund the federal government through the rest of this fiscal year are two immigration measures that testify to the strength of employer interests in bending immigration policy to their will.
BLOG: ONE-THIRD OF ALL ILLEGAL FARM WORKERS IN LA RAZA-OCCUPIED MEXIFORNIA END UP ON ANCHOR BABY WELFARE!
One is a change that would effectively quadruple the number of H-2B foreign workers. These are unskilled non-farm workers (a companion program to the H-2A for farmworkers, and the H-1B for tech workers) who work in a variety of industries, including manufacturing, tourism, lifeguards, seafood processing – you know, jobs Americans won’t do.
The measure inserted into the spending bill was originally introduced last month by four Republican members –Chabot, Goodlatte, Harris, and Boustany. It consists of the common trick of nominally preserving the statutory cap (66,000 H-2B visas per year) but exempting from the cap any foreign worker who came in the prior three years. This would potentially quadruple the number of these “seasonal” workers to more than a quarter million. Even under current law the “seasonal” nature of the visa is a lie; they’re good for 10 months out of the year, so that they really are for permanent workers who take two-month unpaid vacations at Christmas time. (And just to highlight what a cronyist cesspool the H-2B visa program is, note that the current rules exempt from the cap all “Fish roe processors, fish roe technicians and/or supervisors of fish roe processing.” Some West Coast lawmaker presumably sold his vote on another matter in exchange for this loophole.)
The other donor-service provision slipped into the omnibus spending bill is a straight renewal of the scandal-plagued EB-5 investor visa program. The program sells permanent residence in the United States for the entire family in exchange for a $500,000 investment (usually in a high-end real estate development) that supposedly produces 10 jobs (though you can pay an economist to concoct a story about “indirect” job creation).
Fortune magazine last year published a deep dive into this sleazy program that’s well-worth the time to read, so long as you’ve taken your blood-pressure meds. And my colleague David North has been following the program closely for years.
The scandalous nature of this visa-selling scam was so apparent that the Republican chairmen and ranking Democrats of both the House and Senate Judiciary Committees got together to introduce a reform bill. The changes are modest, considering that this steaming pile of cronyism should simply be abolished, but they were better than nothing and had broad support.
The reason these changes had a shot was that the program expires this month and would have to be reauthorized; you’d think that with Grassley, Leahy, Goodlatte, and Conyers behind them, the reforms would have been included as a condition of renewal.
But then John Cornyn got together with Chuck Schumer to kill the measure. The program is being renewed for the remainder of the fiscal year with no changes. The chief EB-5 lobbyist crowed on twitter:
Laura Reiff tweet: So proud of our EB-5 Investment Coalition. Extension of the program for 10 months! TY Schumer Cornyn and Flake.
[NOTE: This is a screenshot; the tweet was taken down shortly after this post was published.]
I suppose it should come as no surprise that a body that actually revived the expired Ex-Im Bank would make sure that employers could wet their beaks through these immigration giveaways as well. But it’s disconcerting nonetheless.
(And in case you were wondering, the omnibus spending bill also fully funds Obama’s plans to resettle 10,000 Syrian refugees. All thoroughly vetted, of course.)
So Is Cruz for Immigration Increases or against Them?
By Mark Krikorian
The Corner at National Review Online, December 15, 2015
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/428538/cruz-legal-immigration-increased-or-decreased?target=author&tid=982
Ted Cruz’s new immigration platform specifically opposes higher immigration levels:
Halt any increases in legal immigration so long as American unemployment remains unacceptably high. The purpose of legal immigration should be to grow the economy, not to displace American workers. Under no circumstances should legal immigration levels be adjusted upwards so long as work-force participation rates remain below historical averages.But his campaign chairman, Chad Sweet, may have sent a different message to Hispanic Republicans he met with privately yesterday. As reported by NBC, the main focus of the meeting was discontent with Cruz’s insistence on enforcing the law. But then there was this bit:
The group did applaud Cruz’s support for increasing legal immigration. Sweet repeatedly told the group Cruz wants to be the champion of legal immigration, Aguilar said.Now, this is Alfonso Aguilar’s version of what Sweet said, and Aguilar is an active proponent of amnesty and unlimited immigration. (Univision activist Jorge Ramos once tweeted that “Republicans you have to listen to for the immigration debate: Jeb Bush, Carlos Gutierrez and Alfonso Aguilar.”)
“He said there’s no better friend than Ted Cruz to legal immigration,” Aguilar said.
So it could be Sweet just expressed platitudinous support for the idea of legal immigration (as Cruz’s website says, “We must continue to welcome and celebrate legal immigrants”) without calling for increases. But it’s important this be clarified – are Cruz’s surrogates saying the same things in private about immigration levels as the campaign is declaring in public?
Cruz Campaign Clarification on Immigration
By Mark Krikorian
The Corner at National Review Online, December 15, 2015
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/428565/cruz-campaign-legal-immigration-clarification?target=author&tid=982
In response to my earlier post about possible ambiguity in what Cruz campaign chairman Chad Sweet said about legal immigration levels during a private meeting with Alfonso Aguilar and other mass-immigration Hispanic Republicans, the campaign sent me the following statement from spokesman Catherine Frazier:
Cruz’s staff reiterates the same principles that Ted Cruz promotes in both public and private. Anyone who truly cares about fixing illegal immigration understands that we must secure the border and enforce the law, and that includes building a wall that works, strengthening e-verify, and enforcing the law including deportation of those who are here illegally.I’m taking this to mean Sweet did not call for increases in immigration, as the NBC report seemed to imply, and I’m glad to hear it. But that’s only an implication, because this response is about illegal immigration, about which the article was clear in any case. I would have preferred a simple quote from Cruz’s plan: “Halt any increases in legal immigration so long as American unemployment remains unacceptably high.” Even that falls short, since it implies that the floodgates would open as soon as the unemployment rate was no longer “unacceptably high.” But I can live with it for now. So long as that’s actually the candidate’s position and it is indeed reiterated in both public and private.
Conservatives ‘Shocked’ by Change to Immigration Law Tucked Inside Spending Bill
BLOG: THE ENDLESS INVASION BY INVITATION OF AMERICA'S CORRUPT GOVERNMENT.
House conservatives are up in arms over a provision in the omnibus spending bill that could allow more than a quarter-million temporary guest workers into the U.S.
As a significant change to immigration law, the measure stunned conservative lawmakers, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, told The Daily Signal.
“It came out of nowhere, completely out of nowhere,” Jordan, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, said, “[and] everyone was shocked there was a change and no one had talked about it.”
The provision is the most recent aspect of the $1.1-trillion package to rile conservatives. Congress hopes to pass the omnibus by Friday, before heading home for the holidays.
Tucked into the 2,009-page spending bill, the measure would increase the current federal caps on H-2B visas for low-skilled foreign workers seeking blue-collar jobs in the U.S.
The provision would quadruple the number of foreign workers allowed annually from 66,000 to 264,000.
House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., in courting conservatives just weeks ago in the speaker race, promised he wouldn’t push immigration changes while a Democrat is in the White House.
But Jordan described the move as “a significant change, something you shouldn’t throw in at the last minute.” He added:
“Ryan didn’t say the House would not touch programs related to visas, rather that it would not pass comprehensive immigration reform,” the aide told The Daily Signal. “This is not that, and not even close.”
The House Judiciary Committee, not Ryan, crafted the change in line with his promise “to allow the committees [to] take the lead in legislating,” the aide said. It was approved by the House Appropriations Committee on July 21 by a vote of 32-17 as part of a homeland security spending bill (H.R. 3128; page 72).
Asked about it Wednesday, Ryan told reporters:
Although the guest worker provision is “not comprehensive,” Brat told The Daily Signal, the measure didn’t follow regular order; it came “before committee, maybe, but never before the House for a vote.”
Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., said he found out about the provision from media reports. He said the episode hearkens back to experiences under the previous speaker, John Boehner, R-Ohio.
“We were not told by our leadership that it [the guest worker program] was in the bill,” Huelskamp said. “That’s very disappointing and something that we had come to expect under former Speaker Boehner: Things would just appear.”
Brat, an economics professor before being elected to Congress last year, questioned the logic behind what he says is “one of the most abused visa programs there is.”
“Why is it that we go and try to recruit in bulk folks who compete against Americans, [against] our inner-city kids, where the unemployment rate is above 30 percent already?” he asked.
The H-2B guest worker program has come under increased scrutiny in recent months. In December, the media outlet Buzzfeed reported that its investigation found that “businesses go to extraordinary lengths to deny jobs to U.S. workers” and use the program “so they can hire foreigners instead.”
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., lambasted the legislation Wednesday as proof that the Republican Party’s elites “are openly hostile” and represented “a further disenfranchisement of the American voter.”
Even before the proposed expansion, the H-2B program had galvanized opposition, making allies of some conservatives and labor unions.
An umbrella organization of national unions, the AFL-CIO, called the program “deeply harmful to both the workers, working under the visas, and to U.S. workers.”
NumbersUSA, an organization that opposes increases in immigration, criticized H-2B visas as preying on “vulnerable families during a time when jobs are still hard to find for lower-skilled workers.”
This story was updated to include information about the committee vote and a quote from Ryan.
As a significant change to immigration law, the measure stunned conservative lawmakers, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, told The Daily Signal.
“It came out of nowhere, completely out of nowhere,” Jordan, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, said, “[and] everyone was shocked there was a change and no one had talked about it.”
The provision is the most recent aspect of the $1.1-trillion package to rile conservatives. Congress hopes to pass the omnibus by Friday, before heading home for the holidays.
Tucked into the 2,009-page spending bill, the measure would increase the current federal caps on H-2B visas for low-skilled foreign workers seeking blue-collar jobs in the U.S.
The provision would quadruple the number of foreign workers allowed annually from 66,000 to 264,000.
House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., in courting conservatives just weeks ago in the speaker race, promised he wouldn’t push immigration changes while a Democrat is in the White House.
But Jordan described the move as “a significant change, something you shouldn’t throw in at the last minute.” He added:
I don’t know how much Paul knew about it, but I think it’s the wrong direction, the wrong policy decision, particularly when you don’t have extensive debate or discussion.A Ryan aide downplayed the speaker’s role in the measure and qualified his past promise.
“Ryan didn’t say the House would not touch programs related to visas, rather that it would not pass comprehensive immigration reform,” the aide told The Daily Signal. “This is not that, and not even close.”
The House Judiciary Committee, not Ryan, crafted the change in line with his promise “to allow the committees [to] take the lead in legislating,” the aide said. It was approved by the House Appropriations Committee on July 21 by a vote of 32-17 as part of a homeland security spending bill (H.R. 3128; page 72).
Asked about it Wednesday, Ryan told reporters:
This passed the House Appropriations Committee in July, with the House Judiciary Committee working with that committee. So if you have any questions, I’d refer you to those guys. The whole point of this, I want committees driving the process. I want committees writing the legislation, and that’s what happened here.Rep. Dave Brat, R-Va., said that claim is “a little slippery.”
Although the guest worker provision is “not comprehensive,” Brat told The Daily Signal, the measure didn’t follow regular order; it came “before committee, maybe, but never before the House for a vote.”
Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., said he found out about the provision from media reports. He said the episode hearkens back to experiences under the previous speaker, John Boehner, R-Ohio.
“We were not told by our leadership that it [the guest worker program] was in the bill,” Huelskamp said. “That’s very disappointing and something that we had come to expect under former Speaker Boehner: Things would just appear.”
Brat, an economics professor before being elected to Congress last year, questioned the logic behind what he says is “one of the most abused visa programs there is.”
“Why is it that we go and try to recruit in bulk folks who compete against Americans, [against] our inner-city kids, where the unemployment rate is above 30 percent already?” he asked.
The H-2B guest worker program has come under increased scrutiny in recent months. In December, the media outlet Buzzfeed reported that its investigation found that “businesses go to extraordinary lengths to deny jobs to U.S. workers” and use the program “so they can hire foreigners instead.”
Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., lambasted the legislation Wednesday as proof that the Republican Party’s elites “are openly hostile” and represented “a further disenfranchisement of the American voter.”
Even before the proposed expansion, the H-2B program had galvanized opposition, making allies of some conservatives and labor unions.
An umbrella organization of national unions, the AFL-CIO, called the program “deeply harmful to both the workers, working under the visas, and to U.S. workers.”
NumbersUSA, an organization that opposes increases in immigration, criticized H-2B visas as preying on “vulnerable families during a time when jobs are still hard to find for lower-skilled workers.”
This story was updated to include information about the committee vote and a quote from Ryan.
326,000 Native-Born Americans Lost Their Job in November: Why This Remains the Most Important Jobs Chart
By Tyler Durden
ZeroHedge.com, December 5, 2015
. . .
We are confident that one can make the case that there are considerations on both the labor demand-side (whether US employers have a natural tendency to hire foreign-born workers is open to debate) as well as on the supply-side: it may be easier to obtain wage-equivalent welfare compensation for native-born Americans than for their foreign-born peers, forcing the latter group to be much more engaged and active in finding a wage-paying job.
However, the underlying economics of this trend are largely irrelevant: as the presidential primary race hits a crescendo all that will matter is the soundbite that over the past 8 years, 2.7 million foreign-born Americans have found a job compared to only 747,000 native-born. The result is a combustible mess that will lead to serious fireworks during each and every subsequent GOP primary debate, especially if Trump remains solidly in the lead.
. . .
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-12-05/326000-native-born-americans-lost-their-job-november-why-remains-most-important-jobs
Placating Americans with Fake Immigration Law Enforcement
How our leaders create fantasy 'solutions' for our immigration-related vulnerabilities.
By Michael Cutler
FrontPageMag.com, December 4, 2015
Therefore the Visa Waiver Program should have been terminated after the terror attacks of 9/11 yet it has continually been expanded.
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2015/12/amnesty-hoax-to-keep-wages-depressed.html
It is clear that the overarching goal of a succession of administrations and many members of Congress, irrespective of political party affiliation, is to keep our borders open and take no meaningful action to stop that flow of aliens into the United States.
. . .
The obvious question is why the Visa Waiver Program is considered so sacrosanct that even though it defies the advice and findings of the 9/11 Commission no one has the moral fortitude to call for simply terminating this dangerous program.
The answer can be found in the incestuous relationship between the Chamber of Commerce and its subsidiary, the Corporation for Travel Promotion, now doing business as Brand USA.
The Chamber of Commerce has arguably been the strongest supporter of the Visa Waiver Program, which currently enables aliens from 38 countries to enter the United States without first obtaining a visa.
The U.S. State Department provides a thorough explanation of the Visa Waiver Program on its website.
Incredibly, the official State Department website also provides a link, “Discover America,” on that website which relates to the website of The Corporation for Travel Promotion, which is affiliated with the travel industries that are a part of the “Discover America Partnership.”
. . .
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/261005/placating-americans-fake-immigration-law-michael-cutler
LA RAZA MEX-OCCUPIED LOS ANGELES COUNTY ALONE PAYS OUT MORE THAN A BILLION PER YEAR FOR THE DEM PARTY'S ANCHOR BABY BREEDING FOR GRINGO WELFARE PROGRAM!
"The story that it is somehow difficult to deport 12 million people is a self-serving myth propagated by the political alliance that wants the illegals here. That alliance consists of Democratic politicians who see more Democrat voters and business interests that want cheap labor. There are also the employees of many non-profit operations devoted to aiding illegal immigrants. The losers are American workers, those at the bottom of the economic heap that are displaced and impoverished by 12 million competitors for their jobs. The losers are not nearly as well organized, as are the promoters of illegal immigration."
"The story that it is somehow difficult to deport 12 million people is a self-serving myth propagated by the political alliance that wants the illegals here. That alliance consists of Democratic politicians who see more Democrat voters and business interests that want cheap labor. There are also the employees of many non-profit operations devoted to aiding illegal immigrants. The losers are American workers, those at the bottom of the economic heap that are displaced and impoverished by 12 million competitors for their jobs. The losers are not nearly as well organized, as are the promoters of illegal immigration."
December 17, 2015
Yes, We Can Deport 12 Million
Every year the 89,000 employees of the Internal Revenue Service attempt to enforce the tax laws for well over 200 million taxpayers. Obviously this is impossible and taxpayers could ignore the law with near impunity. Yet, they don’t. Somehow the IRS persuades the vast majority of the taxpayers to pay up.
If the IRS said that it would be inhumane to prosecute tax scofflaws because they have children that need to eat and that most tax scofflaws are good people who have run into hard times, what would happen? What would happen is that the population of tax scofflaws would explode. The tax scofflaws would become shrouded in moral legitimacy. Any attempt by the IRS to step up enforcement would be seen as brutal oppression against good people.
If the IRS said that it would be inhumane to prosecute tax scofflaws because they have children that need to eat and that most tax scofflaws are good people who have run into hard times, what would happen? What would happen is that the population of tax scofflaws would explode. The tax scofflaws would become shrouded in moral legitimacy. Any attempt by the IRS to step up enforcement would be seen as brutal oppression against good people.
The IRS uses a carrot and stick approach. The tax withholding is rigged so that most people will get a refund. That encourages them to file their taxes as soon as possible so as to get the tax refund. People who aren’t toeing the line get threatening notices in the mail generated by a computer.
The IRS has plenty of helpers in the private sector. For example the “Tax Resolution Institute” says this:
To encourage the 12 million illegals to go back from where they came, some carrots and sticks would help. Remember, these people are living in a strange country with strange customs and a language they don’t understand very well. It can’t be that hard to intimidate them. If the IRS feels free to intimidate 200 million taxpayers by outrageous methods why should we be reluctant to use some of the same methods on the illegals?
The IRS gives rewards to people who inform on tax evaders. Actually getting the reward money may not be that easy. But it makes tax scofflaws nervous to think that their associates may turn them in for a reward. A program to give rewards to people who turn in employers of illegals would certainly make the employment of illegals less interesting. A lot of these employers are also engaging in income tax fraud, since there is no legal path for employing illegals. A particularly enticing tactic is to prosecute rich people who employ illegals. Of course, people will claim that they didn’t know that their maid was illegal. The trick here is to get the maid to testify against them by means of carrots and sticks. The same tactic can be used against corporations that accept fake documents and claim ignorance. The government does not have to prosecute everyone; just make public examples of a small number of cases. Many measures can be framed as taxes, for example, a $100 a day tax for each day a visitor overstays his visa. Taxes are easier to enforce than criminal sanctions.
A different sort of amnesty program for illegals would be to offer illegals who voluntarily go back to their home country some assistance. For example, time to put their affairs in order and perhaps some financial aid or a free plane ride. Those who accept and then return illegally would be arrested with bail set at $100,000. The detainees would be kept in a low-cost prison camp for at least 3 months, after which they would be offered amnesty if they exit the country. Otherwise they could wait a few more years in the camp for their case to come up. The camp would be humane but unpleasant. Anthropologists would be engaged to engineer a camp that would be particularly unpleasant for people with the cultural background of the illegals, but that would be defensible as humane to American sensibilities. The camp for Mexican illegals could be located near the Mexican border, giving the inmates an opportunity to escape to Mexico. It would be moderately difficult to escape. If an inmate were discovered missing, to add drama, a search team would be sent out with hound dogs and helicopters. The CIA could secretly encourage Mexican journalists to report the sad stories of the escapees who make it back to Mexico. Mexican journalists could also come to the camp to do interviews as well as film the guards with their helicopters and hound dogs. We want the U.S. to seem a dangerous place to prospective illegal immigrants.
The sanctuary city movement can be defanged by directing substantial revenue to cities that enforce immigration laws. For example, fines paid by illegals that are caught by local authorities can be paid to cities that do not welcome illegals.
The story that it is somehow difficult to deport 12 million people is a self-serving myth propagated by the political alliance that wants the illegals here. That alliance consists of Democratic politicians who see more Democrat voters and business interests that want cheap labor. There are also the employees of many non-profit operations devoted to aiding illegal immigrants. The losers are American workers, those at the bottom of the economic heap that are displaced and impoverished by 12 million competitors for their jobs. The losers are not nearly as well organized, as are the promoters of illegal immigration.
About 60% of the illegal immigrants are from Mexico with many more from Central America. Based on Gross National Income per capita, Mexico is an upper middle-income country, ranked slightly higher than China by the World Bank. It’s not as if Mexicans are forced to sneak into the U.S. by extreme poverty. There is no need for us to feel guilty about sending them back to Mexico. The idea that the illegals will suffer extreme hardship if they are sent back is simply a myth. People from these source countries have connections and families that make it perfectly possible for them to resettle in their former home. If they were resourceful enough to sneak into the U.S. and support themselves, surely they are resourceful enough to manage in their home countries where they know the language and customs.
There is nothing to keep us from giving temporary visas for guest workers in instances where that is justified. The idea that the illegals do jobs that Americans won’t is simply another exaggerated claim to justify illegal immigration. I have stayed at hotels in Kansas where all the hotel maids were English-speaking natives. Yes, some things will cost more without cheap illegal labor, but if the illegals are repatriated, more Americans will be able to find good jobs.
The IRS has plenty of helpers in the private sector. For example the “Tax Resolution Institute” says this:
“If you have received a Notice of Intent to Levy by the IRS, you only have 21 days to act. During the course of the 21 days, all of your financial accounts levied will be frozen. You will be unable to access your money. After three weeks, your bank and/or the other organizations in your financial network will be forced to send your money plus interest to the IRS to cover your tax debt. Once the IRS has your money, it is gone, and the chance of getting any of the funds returned is slim to none. If you contact us within this initial 21-day period, there is a good chance we can negotiate a better deal for you and protect your financial security.”Obviously, this sort of talk is designed to terrify the taxpayer. The IRS computer sends a notice; the frightened taxpayer engages an advisor to help him deal with the faceless, threatening government agency. The taxpayer is whipped back into line. The IRS has tyrannical powers that are probably constitutional only because judges depend on the U.S. Treasury to pay their salaries.
To encourage the 12 million illegals to go back from where they came, some carrots and sticks would help. Remember, these people are living in a strange country with strange customs and a language they don’t understand very well. It can’t be that hard to intimidate them. If the IRS feels free to intimidate 200 million taxpayers by outrageous methods why should we be reluctant to use some of the same methods on the illegals?
The IRS gives rewards to people who inform on tax evaders. Actually getting the reward money may not be that easy. But it makes tax scofflaws nervous to think that their associates may turn them in for a reward. A program to give rewards to people who turn in employers of illegals would certainly make the employment of illegals less interesting. A lot of these employers are also engaging in income tax fraud, since there is no legal path for employing illegals. A particularly enticing tactic is to prosecute rich people who employ illegals. Of course, people will claim that they didn’t know that their maid was illegal. The trick here is to get the maid to testify against them by means of carrots and sticks. The same tactic can be used against corporations that accept fake documents and claim ignorance. The government does not have to prosecute everyone; just make public examples of a small number of cases. Many measures can be framed as taxes, for example, a $100 a day tax for each day a visitor overstays his visa. Taxes are easier to enforce than criminal sanctions.
A different sort of amnesty program for illegals would be to offer illegals who voluntarily go back to their home country some assistance. For example, time to put their affairs in order and perhaps some financial aid or a free plane ride. Those who accept and then return illegally would be arrested with bail set at $100,000. The detainees would be kept in a low-cost prison camp for at least 3 months, after which they would be offered amnesty if they exit the country. Otherwise they could wait a few more years in the camp for their case to come up. The camp would be humane but unpleasant. Anthropologists would be engaged to engineer a camp that would be particularly unpleasant for people with the cultural background of the illegals, but that would be defensible as humane to American sensibilities. The camp for Mexican illegals could be located near the Mexican border, giving the inmates an opportunity to escape to Mexico. It would be moderately difficult to escape. If an inmate were discovered missing, to add drama, a search team would be sent out with hound dogs and helicopters. The CIA could secretly encourage Mexican journalists to report the sad stories of the escapees who make it back to Mexico. Mexican journalists could also come to the camp to do interviews as well as film the guards with their helicopters and hound dogs. We want the U.S. to seem a dangerous place to prospective illegal immigrants.
The sanctuary city movement can be defanged by directing substantial revenue to cities that enforce immigration laws. For example, fines paid by illegals that are caught by local authorities can be paid to cities that do not welcome illegals.
The story that it is somehow difficult to deport 12 million people is a self-serving myth propagated by the political alliance that wants the illegals here. That alliance consists of Democratic politicians who see more Democrat voters and business interests that want cheap labor. There are also the employees of many non-profit operations devoted to aiding illegal immigrants. The losers are American workers, those at the bottom of the economic heap that are displaced and impoverished by 12 million competitors for their jobs. The losers are not nearly as well organized, as are the promoters of illegal immigration.
About 60% of the illegal immigrants are from Mexico with many more from Central America. Based on Gross National Income per capita, Mexico is an upper middle-income country, ranked slightly higher than China by the World Bank. It’s not as if Mexicans are forced to sneak into the U.S. by extreme poverty. There is no need for us to feel guilty about sending them back to Mexico. The idea that the illegals will suffer extreme hardship if they are sent back is simply a myth. People from these source countries have connections and families that make it perfectly possible for them to resettle in their former home. If they were resourceful enough to sneak into the U.S. and support themselves, surely they are resourceful enough to manage in their home countries where they know the language and customs.
There is nothing to keep us from giving temporary visas for guest workers in instances where that is justified. The idea that the illegals do jobs that Americans won’t is simply another exaggerated claim to justify illegal immigration. I have stayed at hotels in Kansas where all the hotel maids were English-speaking natives. Yes, some things will cost more without cheap illegal labor, but if the illegals are repatriated, more Americans will be able to find good jobs.
Every year the 89,000 employees of the Internal Revenue Service attempt to enforce the tax laws for well over 200 million taxpayers. Obviously this is impossible and taxpayers could ignore the law with near impunity. Yet, they don’t. Somehow the IRS persuades the vast majority of the taxpayers to pay up.
If the IRS said that it would be inhumane to prosecute tax scofflaws because they have children that need to eat and that most tax scofflaws are good people who have run into hard times, what would happen? What would happen is that the population of tax scofflaws would explode. The tax scofflaws would become shrouded in moral legitimacy. Any attempt by the IRS to step up enforcement would be seen as brutal oppression against good people.
The IRS uses a carrot and stick approach. The tax withholding is rigged so that most people will get a refund. That encourages them to file their taxes as soon as possible so as to get the tax refund. People who aren’t toeing the line get threatening notices in the mail generated by a computer.
The IRS has plenty of helpers in the private sector. For example the “Tax Resolution Institute” says this:
To encourage the 12 million illegals to go back from where they came, some carrots and sticks would help. Remember, these people are living in a strange country with strange customs and a language they don’t understand very well. It can’t be that hard to intimidate them. If the IRS feels free to intimidate 200 million taxpayers by outrageous methods why should we be reluctant to use some of the same methods on the illegals?
The IRS gives rewards to people who inform on tax evaders. Actually getting the reward money may not be that easy. But it makes tax scofflaws nervous to think that their associates may turn them in for a reward. A program to give rewards to people who turn in employers of illegals would certainly make the employment of illegals less interesting. A lot of these employers are also engaging in income tax fraud, since there is no legal path for employing illegals. A particularly enticing tactic is to prosecute rich people who employ illegals. Of course, people will claim that they didn’t know that their maid was illegal. The trick here is to get the maid to testify against them by means of carrots and sticks. The same tactic can be used against corporations that accept fake documents and claim ignorance. The government does not have to prosecute everyone; just make public examples of a small number of cases. Many measures can be framed as taxes, for example, a $100 a day tax for each day a visitor overstays his visa. Taxes are easier to enforce than criminal sanctions.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/_yes_we_can_deport_12_million.html#ixzz3ubeJjaA1
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
JUDICIAL WATCH
In fiscal year 2015 only two of the 176,397 removal orders requested by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) were based on terrorism concerns, according the government figures released this month by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), a nonprofit university group dedicated to researching the U.S. government. That amounts to about one thousandth of one percent, TRAC points out, disclosing that in fiscal year 2014 DHS sought only three such orders based on terrorism concerns. During the first two months of fiscal year 2016, no removals have been sought by the administration on the bases of terrorism-related activities, TRAC states citing the government figures.
This unsettling information comes amid a recent wave of Somalis charged with terrorism in Minnesota, not to mention the savage attacks in San Bernardino, California by Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) sympathizers, one of them a Pakistani who entered the U.S. with a “fiancé visa.” It’s difficult to believe that the tally of noncitizens that could or should be removed by the feds for terrorism related activities isn’t much higher than the government figures show. Earlier this year Muhammad Abdulaziz , a Kuwaiti born man of Jordanian descent, shot and killed four Marines and a Navy sailor in Chattanooga, Tennessee after spending time in the Middle East. Remember that the Boston Marathon bombers were Chechen terrorists who could have been deported years before they attacked, especially the older brother (Tamerlan Tsarnaev) who had been arrested and/or convicted of domestic violence.
This week a 10th Minnesotan, yet another young Muslim Somali man, was charged with conspiracy to help ISIS. His name is Abdirizak Mohamed Warsame, he’s 20 years old and lives in Eagan, which is located south of St. Paul with a population of around 65,000. Warsame was among a group of 10 men from the Twin Cities’ large Somali community who planned to travel to Syria to fight with ISIS, according to the federal complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. Warsame and his fellow Somali terrorist pals gathered at a local mosque to watch videos glorifying religious violence and Warsame paid $200 to have a third party get him an expedited passport to travel abroad to join fellow jihadists, the feds state in their complaint. Three of the accused have already pleaded guilty to terrorism charges, one is in Syria and five are scheduled to be tried next year.
In a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) affidavit included in the court documents, the agency reveals that Warsame and his buddies planned to travel to Syria by driving to Mexico and flying from there. Here’s another lovely tidbit from a local newspaper report; Minnesota is believed to have produced more would-be foreign fighters than any other state. There’s an upside, though. The area has a Muslim community that’s “exceptionally engaged with efforts to counter extremism.”
For those wondering why ISIS and ISIL are sometimes used interchangeably in the media and elsewhere, here’s an explanation straight out of Warsame’s complaint: “In an audio recording publicly released on June 29, 2014 ISIL announced a formal change of ISIL’s name to Islamic State. This terrorist organization will be referred to as ‘ISIL’ for the balance of this affidavit.” The U.S. government also uses the following aliases when referring to ISIS or ISIL, the complaint states: Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, ad-Dawla al-Islamiyya fi al-‘Iraq wa ash-Sham, Daesh, Dawla al Islamiya and Al-Furqan Establishment for Media Production.
JUDICIAL WATCH
If the IRS said that it would be inhumane to prosecute tax scofflaws because they have children that need to eat and that most tax scofflaws are good people who have run into hard times, what would happen? What would happen is that the population of tax scofflaws would explode. The tax scofflaws would become shrouded in moral legitimacy. Any attempt by the IRS to step up enforcement would be seen as brutal oppression against good people.
The IRS uses a carrot and stick approach. The tax withholding is rigged so that most people will get a refund. That encourages them to file their taxes as soon as possible so as to get the tax refund. People who aren’t toeing the line get threatening notices in the mail generated by a computer.
The IRS has plenty of helpers in the private sector. For example the “Tax Resolution Institute” says this:
“If you have received a Notice of Intent to Levy by the IRS, you only have 21 days to act. During the course of the 21 days, all of your financial accounts levied will be frozen. You will be unable to access your money. After three weeks, your bank and/or the other organizations in your financial network will be forced to send your money plus interest to the IRS to cover your tax debt. Once the IRS has your money, it is gone, and the chance of getting any of the funds returned is slim to none. If you contact us within this initial 21-day period, there is a good chance we can negotiate a better deal for you and protect your financial security.”Obviously, this sort of talk is designed to terrify the taxpayer. The IRS computer sends a notice; the frightened taxpayer engages an advisor to help him deal with the faceless, threatening government agency. The taxpayer is whipped back into line. The IRS has tyrannical powers that are probably constitutional only because judges depend on the U.S. Treasury to pay their salaries.
The IRS gives rewards to people who inform on tax evaders. Actually getting the reward money may not be that easy. But it makes tax scofflaws nervous to think that their associates may turn them in for a reward. A program to give rewards to people who turn in employers of illegals would certainly make the employment of illegals less interesting. A lot of these employers are also engaging in income tax fraud, since there is no legal path for employing illegals. A particularly enticing tactic is to prosecute rich people who employ illegals. Of course, people will claim that they didn’t know that their maid was illegal. The trick here is to get the maid to testify against them by means of carrots and sticks. The same tactic can be used against corporations that accept fake documents and claim ignorance. The government does not have to prosecute everyone; just make public examples of a small number of cases. Many measures can be framed as taxes, for example, a $100 a day tax for each day a visitor overstays his visa. Taxes are easier to enforce than criminal sanctions.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/_yes_we_can_deport_12_million.html#ixzz3ubeJjaA1
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
JUDICIAL WATCH
AMERICA'S OPEN AND UNDEFENDED BORDERS
DHS Rarely Deports for Terrorism: 1,000th of 1 % of Cases
DECEMBER 11, 2015
In fiscal year 2015 only two of the 176,397 removal orders requested by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) were based on terrorism concerns, according the government figures released this month by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), a nonprofit university group dedicated to researching the U.S. government. That amounts to about one thousandth of one percent, TRAC points out, disclosing that in fiscal year 2014 DHS sought only three such orders based on terrorism concerns. During the first two months of fiscal year 2016, no removals have been sought by the administration on the bases of terrorism-related activities, TRAC states citing the government figures.
This unsettling information comes amid a recent wave of Somalis charged with terrorism in Minnesota, not to mention the savage attacks in San Bernardino, California by Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) sympathizers, one of them a Pakistani who entered the U.S. with a “fiancé visa.” It’s difficult to believe that the tally of noncitizens that could or should be removed by the feds for terrorism related activities isn’t much higher than the government figures show. Earlier this year Muhammad Abdulaziz , a Kuwaiti born man of Jordanian descent, shot and killed four Marines and a Navy sailor in Chattanooga, Tennessee after spending time in the Middle East. Remember that the Boston Marathon bombers were Chechen terrorists who could have been deported years before they attacked, especially the older brother (Tamerlan Tsarnaev) who had been arrested and/or convicted of domestic violence.
This week a 10th Minnesotan, yet another young Muslim Somali man, was charged with conspiracy to help ISIS. His name is Abdirizak Mohamed Warsame, he’s 20 years old and lives in Eagan, which is located south of St. Paul with a population of around 65,000. Warsame was among a group of 10 men from the Twin Cities’ large Somali community who planned to travel to Syria to fight with ISIS, according to the federal complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. Warsame and his fellow Somali terrorist pals gathered at a local mosque to watch videos glorifying religious violence and Warsame paid $200 to have a third party get him an expedited passport to travel abroad to join fellow jihadists, the feds state in their complaint. Three of the accused have already pleaded guilty to terrorism charges, one is in Syria and five are scheduled to be tried next year.
In a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) affidavit included in the court documents, the agency reveals that Warsame and his buddies planned to travel to Syria by driving to Mexico and flying from there. Here’s another lovely tidbit from a local newspaper report; Minnesota is believed to have produced more would-be foreign fighters than any other state. There’s an upside, though. The area has a Muslim community that’s “exceptionally engaged with efforts to counter extremism.”
For those wondering why ISIS and ISIL are sometimes used interchangeably in the media and elsewhere, here’s an explanation straight out of Warsame’s complaint: “In an audio recording publicly released on June 29, 2014 ISIL announced a formal change of ISIL’s name to Islamic State. This terrorist organization will be referred to as ‘ISIL’ for the balance of this affidavit.” The U.S. government also uses the following aliases when referring to ISIS or ISIL, the complaint states: Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, ad-Dawla al-Islamiyya fi al-‘Iraq wa ash-Sham, Daesh, Dawla al Islamiya and Al-Furqan Establishment for Media Production.
JUDICIAL WATCH
Sign Up for Updates!
No comments:
Post a Comment