| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Good or Bad Idea?; Home Depot and Immigration | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 12 2006, 06:45 AM (686 Views) | |
| Jolly | Jan 12 2006, 10:44 AM Post #26 |
![]()
Geaux Tigers!
|
Gimme either a flat tax, or a VAT. Either is preferrable to this screwy mess we've got.... |
| The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.- George Soros | |
![]() |
|
| Luke's Dad | Jan 12 2006, 10:51 AM Post #27 |
![]()
Emperor Pengin
|
Google: Herndon Day Labor Site We tried to get a Home Depot or Lowes to sponsor it. |
| The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it. | |
![]() |
|
| Steve Miller | Jan 12 2006, 11:01 AM Post #28 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
Kenny, if the center in Burbank is like the centers in other towns, the operators of the centers check for green cards before the worker is allowed in the queue. The workers you get there are legal, green-card workers- usually off-season farm workers. The centers beat the hell out of 200 guys standing in a parking lot and peeing in the bushes. |
|
Wag more Bark less | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jan 12 2006, 11:12 AM Post #29 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Steve, if so I stand corrected and point the finger at the radio report I heard. Why would anyone protest legal workers. Now this doesn't make sense. Hmmm. |
![]() |
|
| Steve Miller | Jan 12 2006, 11:17 AM Post #30 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
They may still be illegal - green cards are very easy to forge. If you ever need one, PM me and I'll give you directions to the place in LA where you can get one made for $50. They're indistinguishable from the real thing. It's not hard to find, everyone knows where it is. Odd that no one seems compelled to do anything about it. |
|
Wag more Bark less | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jan 12 2006, 11:22 AM Post #31 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
So if I check the guy's green card, even if it turns out to be fake, then I become a Senator I'm safe? What a joke! Oh, and I've been at the same job for 24 years but if they ever DO ask me for a green card I'll give you a call. :lol: |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Jan 12 2006, 02:12 PM Post #32 |
|
I was waiting to see what LD said. He lives even closer than I do to the nationally-heard debate regarding a DLC around here in Northern Virginia. Quite frankly, I say INS just come by and scoop these guys up by the bus (or pick-up ;)) load... It's an odd situation. Do you pay more for cops to control the situation, or do you pay for a site to be set up? Either way, if it's illegal immigrants, they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Around here, the day-labor problem is so bad in the morning, that you honestly can't even pull into a 7-11 where these guys are standing.
|
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jan 13 2006, 01:58 PM Post #33 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
TNCR: 62.5% think it is a bad idea. WTF: 60% think it's a good idea. |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Jan 13 2006, 02:05 PM Post #34 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
If so, then be prepared to pay the full cost of labor with all the "extras" tacked on. Just pointing that out. I'd gladly pay more for legit labor. And both of these proposed ideas really don't fit well, since they don't really address the problem. We've got to either help clean out Mexico, for example, so there's less need to come into the U.S., or work out some legit day labor system with government so that these people aren't breaking the law. I mean, it's not like they're lazy and don't want to work; they clearly do, and at a fraction of what others would work for. Prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law doesn't help anybody, but circumventing the law doesn't, either. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Jan 13 2006, 02:12 PM Post #35 |
|
What are you talking about? Prosecuting them to the full extent of the law is EXACTLY what we should do. That's why it's the LAW. It helps everyone but the criminals who are guilty of breaking the law... (assuming you are talking about illegal immigrants) |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Jan 13 2006, 02:20 PM Post #36 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
If you're so single-minded that you can't see this would in no way deter others from committing the same crime, and would do nothing to eliminate both the supply and demand of this illegal service, then I’m extremely glad you’re not the one to make the decisions. And I have no idea what you meant by your "law" statement. I'm not a lawyer, but I have a feeling the point of the law is not "to prosecute to the fullest extent". Shrugging these people off or throwing them in jail for trying to work is both the wrong moral and rational choice. What they're doing infringes VERY little on the public good, which is what the law was created to preserve (at least I thought). Moreover, it will not deter others from doing the same, nor will it diminish the demand for cheap labor. If you created limitations and set up a legal system for this type of work, there would be no need to throw anyone in jail, the workers could work and we'd still get cheap labor. Everyone wins. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Jan 13 2006, 02:26 PM Post #37 |
|
You're telling me you think that if we started enforcing illegal immigration laws 100%...that it wouldn't affect illegal immigration? You must be out of your mind!!!
What I mean by law, is that it's the law. If you break the law by coming here illegally, you should be deported, sent to jail, or forced to do the temp-work program (which still carries fines and strict rules...not that they'd show up for the court hearing anyway). If you break the law, you should be prosecuted...whatever result that means, according to the law.
Since when did you become an advocate of breaking the law? I'm fine with changing the law as needed, but CURRENTLY what we should do is if someone is here illegally...we should prosecute them accordingly...until the law is changed. |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Jan 13 2006, 02:32 PM Post #38 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
There’s no way to enforce them “100%”, and by that I mean there’s no way to punish everyone who violates this law. Since there are so many day laborers out there, it’d hard for law enforcement to even make a dent in the activity, even if they wanted to. Good luck getting that to work.
So you’re saying lawbreakers should always be prosecuted in the same way, regardless of circumstance? Sounds like you’re not a believer in following the Spirit of the Law. That’s very interesting.
I’m not an “advocate of breaking the law”, I’m an advocate of fixing the problem and enforcing the law when INTENT is on the table. A man shouldn’t have his license revoked for reckless driving if his accident was due to a heart attack on the interstate. The INTENT of the day laborers is not destructive to society, and so therefore by prosecuting the whole lot of them, that creates more problems than it solves. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Jan 13 2006, 02:36 PM Post #39 |
|
You're missing the point. We shouldn't turn a blind eye to illegal immigration, which is what we are doing. We should enforce it at every turn...100%. Don't put words in my mouth, I didn't say that. I said that they should be prosecuted according to the law, whatever that means. If they broke the law and came here illegally, they should be arrested and tried. If that means they are deported, put in jail, or given a temporary visa...that depends. You can read my post again, I said "whatever result that means". Again, you are confusing the situation. I'm not talking about day-laborers...somce of which are here legally. I'm talking about ILLEGAL immigrants who when they came to the USA had full knowledge that they were breaking the law to get in here. To think otherwise would be naive... |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Jan 13 2006, 02:39 PM Post #40 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
That’s funny, I thought we were talking about day laborers. Kenny said:
See, you’re doing it again. You also said:
That seems pretty contradictory to me. Prosecuting to the full extent of the law means going for the maximum penalty, regardless of circumstances. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Jan 13 2006, 02:47 PM Post #41 |
|
Like you've never seen a thread change topics before? Of course we're talking about illegals...how would you prosecute day-laborers? Give them a fine for loitering? If there's a DLC, no fine?
No, it doesn't mean regardless of circumstances, where are you getting your info? It means they go to court, are charged with whatever law they are breaking and are judged by the JUDGE, who will decide their fate...whatever it might be. |
![]() |
|
| Aqua Letifer | Jan 13 2006, 02:53 PM Post #42 |
|
ZOOOOOM!
|
Er, prosecuting to the fullest extent of the law means the prosecutors push for the maximum penalty. It’s the judge’s decision, but your intent is for him/her to use the maximum sentence. |
| I cite irreconcilable differences. | |
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Jan 13 2006, 02:54 PM Post #43 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
If we are going to allow a free market, then there is no reason to deny people the right to stand on the corner and seek work. Indeed, we should encourage it if there is a market for such workers -- which there obviously is. People should work and it seems clear these are people who want to work, are willing to work and presumably do the work they are hired to do. Good for them! In order to make sure that such street corner labor halls do not become a burden on the property ownrs and businesses where they would/do congregate, having a central labor hall makes sense. Burbank's and Home Depot's solution for handling a situation that is going to happen anyway is a good idea. Overall, I guess I take a more classically conservative view of allowing people seeking work to find work than do those who want the strong arm of government to exert massive control and to use laws and regulations to impede such market driven activities. |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| The 89th Key | Jan 13 2006, 02:55 PM Post #44 |
|
Oh ok, see I think of it as enforcing the law. Sorry if it looked like I meant that they should be hung without a trial. (Ok...exaggerating a bit. :P) |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jan 13 2006, 03:04 PM Post #45 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Indeed, they are market driven. The question is how to ensure the various aspects of the common good (security, tax base, hygiene, legal employment, etc). It seems that creating a venue for this activity is actually in the public interest, but that once it is regulated then a whole other level of legislation will kick in to prevent unauthorized ad hoc employment -- vagrancy and loitering and solicitation laws, etc. This is already done in many ways, such as prohibiting liquor stores and adult shops within X distance of schools, etc. Those who for whatever reason want to remain under the radar will find contraband ways of doing so. How does this get enforced? |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| AlbertaCrude | Jan 13 2006, 03:07 PM Post #46 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
I think that's politely called soliciting.
|
![]() |
|
| Rick Zimmer | Jan 13 2006, 06:28 PM Post #47 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
Many years ago I was representing a city as a client in a hearing before the California State Treasurer in order to obtain some bond financing to upgrade a section of their downtown that was rife with drug dealers, prostitutes, etc. The Treasurer finished his more serious questions and then, with a bit of a twinkle in his eye, said he was concerned that certain self employed women might lose their "jobs." I answered back that they were in violation of the zoning laws of that community which did not allow business people to display their wares on the public sidewalk.
|
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| Steve Miller | Jan 13 2006, 07:08 PM Post #48 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
I hire those guys who stand out in front of Home Depot from time to time. The going rate is $10/hr + lunch - $12 if I put 'em on the payroll and pay their taxes. I go the payroll route - the insurance coverage makes it worthwhile for me to do it that way. All those guys watch daytime TV and know how to milk the system - including an entire industry based on phony workers comp claims. A few observations: 1. We also have temporary labor agencies like Apple mentions. Around here they cost $18/hr and the employees buy their own lunch. Problem is you can't get Hispanic day laborers from those agencies. What you get are losers, boozers and users - when they show up at all. If they do show up they won't dig, or they'll dig for a few hours and disappear. The Home Depot guys know full well that if I don't like the work they are doing there are 50 other guys at that Home Depot who would jump at the opportunity to work. I always buy a good lunch and we get along fine. 2. Because I put 'em on payroll and pay their taxes, they have to have the paperwork showing they are here legally. They invariably have Social Security cards and most of the time the name even matches the name on their drivers license/ID card. If the names don't match they can usually produce a set that do match or I can go to the next guy. The W2's for HD laborers nearly always come back as undeliverable when I send them out. What this means is that no one is filing a tax return against this money and the gov't is keeping all of it. Not a bad little racket, eh? 3. Putting HD laborers on payroll and reporting their income has an odd side effect. Once the powers-that-be get notification that a Social Security number is receiving wages, the wheels of government start to turn and I start getting the notices to garnish wages. Back taxes. Child support. Judgements. Unpaid tickets. Car registration violations - you name it, those guys have it. A guy can work for me for one day and I'll get notices to garnish for years after that. Sending letters to the various agencies stating that the employee no longer works for me does no good - the notices just keep on coming. Also a nice little racket - keep the caseloads high so the various agencies can cry "poverty" at budget time. 4. A lot of those guys are organized in to little businesses. They hire out as teams, usually with one English speaker as boss and negotiator. Rather than an hourly wage they'll offer a quote for the work, then do it in half the time I thought it would take and want to be taken back to HD so they can land a second job for the day. 5. If you want the best workers, hire the ones wearing work boots. Also, the best workers are not standing in front of HD - they're standing in front of brickyards and such. Any work involving bricks and blocks is hard work, and if you put one of those guys to trimming bushes he'll think he's on vacation. $12/hr. and lunch. Why does anyone work at WalMart at all? |
|
Wag more Bark less | |
![]() |
|
| gryphon | Jan 13 2006, 07:15 PM Post #49 |
|
Middle Aged Carp
|
I thought you did licensed electrical work. |
![]() |
|
| Steve Miller | Jan 13 2006, 07:43 PM Post #50 |
|
Bull-Carp
|
I have a couple of licenses - one of which is as a General Contractor which means I can build just about anything I want to, short of refineries and bridges. On those jobs I'll use laborers for clearing ground, demolition, loading trucks, cleaning up, etc. when we do remodels and such. When we do EC work (I have that license too) I'll use day laborers for trenching and things like unpacking light fixtures. The requirement that electricians dig electrical trenches is a typical union requirement, not a license requirement. This is a good thing - my electricians hate to dig, and they're really terrible at it Other than that I mainly use day laborers for work on my own properties. |
|
Wag more Bark less | |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |









I think that's politely called soliciting.

10:57 AM Jul 11