4 ms·

>This is just another example of the gross hypocrisy of the GOP I’m not a member of the GOP. Extremely far from it. >We won't fix anything without accountabil

by _iyig 7y ago

>This is just another example of the gross hypocrisy of the GOP I’m not a member of the GOP. Extremely far from it. >We won't fix anything without accountability, and there are two sides to supply and demand. Yes, of course. Punish those who exploit undocumented workers. Of course, it’s much harder to exploit an undocumented workforce when it doesn’t exist or is reduced in size. Many ways to achieve this (paths to citizenship, etc.); Anduril is just one piece of the solution, as I suggest in my original comment.

caconym_ 7y ago
> I’m not a member of the GOP. Extremely far from it. I didn't mean to imply you were or were not a member of the GOP. I included the observation about their hypocrisy simply because they are the largest group making the most noise about border security while clearly not actually giving a shit about Americans' jobs being "taken" by undocumented laborers. > Yes, of course. Punish those who exploit undocumented workers. Of course, it’s much harder to exploit an undocumented workforce when it doesn’t exist or is reduced in size. Many ways to achieve this (paths to citizenship, etc.); Anduril is just one piece of the solution, as I suggest in my original comment. If hiring them gets you thrown in prison, they will suddenly have a much harder time getting hired, and after some time employment will cease to be a reason to cross the border illegally. We don't have to fuck around with "virtual border technology" to accomplish this; all we have to do is recognize that (relatively) wealthy business owners are not above the law, but in America we have an astonishingly hard time with this. It's like the Brock Turner judge's mindset is baked into half the population from birth.
- repolfx 7y ago
  What you're talking about is basically a surveillance based internal border. It can work that way for people if you have massive levels of internal surveillance (otherwise how do you think the government can catch employers of illegals with any efficiency), but it doesn't do much for goods or people who cross the border without wanting to get a job, like gang members, dealers etc.
  - caconym_ 7y ago
    > What you're talking about is basically a surveillance based internal border. It can work that way for people if you have massive levels of internal surveillance (otherwise how do you think the government can catch employers of illegals with any efficiency) What you're talking about is called law enforcement and it has existed in this country for a long time. Until you clarify your point (what are "massive levels of internal surveillance"?) and justify it (why isn't the current investigative toolbox enough?), this is nothing but FUD, and ridiculous FUD at that. > it doesn't do much for goods or people who cross the border without wanting to get a job, like gang members, dealers etc. To the extent that this is actually a real problem, why do you think these people are crossing the border? Are they just coming up here because they feel like it, or are they responding to some kind of demand?
    - repolfx 7y ago
      The current setup of law enforcement doesn't scale to millions of lawbreakers who aren't being reported by any victims of crime. Are they just coming up here because they feel like it, or are they responding to some kind of demand? That's incoherent. They're moving because they can earn more money in America. The fact that there are people who 'demand' lower wage workers is irrelevant: there will always be market demand to get more for less. The issues with immigration aren't on the employer's side.
      - caconym_ 7y ago
        > The current setup of law enforcement doesn't scale to millions of lawbreakers who aren't being reported by any victims of crime. It scales to far more than the handful we go after now (seriously, it's a handful, look it up) and guess what: business owners don't want to lose what they have, and they don't want to go to prison. It's called a "deterrent", and it's the reason e.g. bars and restaurants don't sell liquor to kids despite the fact that the overwhelmingly vast majority of kid-looking people who would try to buy it if these laws weren't enforced are not actually undercover cops. (it's a bit of a chicken and egg thing, but I'm sure you understand) > That's incoherent. They're moving because they can earn more money in America. The fact that there are people who 'demand' lower wage workers is irrelevant: there will always be market demand to get more for less. The issues with immigration aren't on the employer's side. I think you're confused. Are you talking about undocumented workers, or "gang members and dealers"? I addressed the former in the comment you originally replied to; the bit of my last comment that you quoted refers to the latter, and my question stands. Why (do you think) "gang members and dealers" are coming to America?

by _iyig 7y ago

caconym_ 7y ago

> I’m not a member of the GOP. Extremely far from it. I didn't mean to imply you were or were not a member of the GOP. I included the observation about their hypocrisy simply because they are the largest group making the most noise about border security while clearly not actually giving a shit about Americans' jobs being "taken" by undocumented laborers. > Yes, of course. Punish those who exploit undocumented workers. Of course, it’s much harder to exploit an undocumented workforce when it doesn’t exist or is reduced in size. Many ways to achieve this (paths to citizenship, etc.); Anduril is just one piece of the solution, as I suggest in my original comment. If hiring them gets you thrown in prison, they will suddenly have a much harder time getting hired, and after some time employment will cease to be a reason to cross the border illegally. We don't have to fuck around with "virtual border technology" to accomplish this; all we have to do is recognize that (relatively) wealthy business owners are not above the law, but in America we have an astonishingly hard time with this. It's like the Brock Turner judge's mindset is baked into half the population from birth.

repolfx 7y ago
What you're talking about is basically a surveillance based internal border. It can work that way for people if you have massive levels of internal surveillance (otherwise how do you think the government can catch employers of illegals with any efficiency), but it doesn't do much for goods or people who cross the border without wanting to get a job, like gang members, dealers etc.
- caconym_ 7y ago
  > What you're talking about is basically a surveillance based internal border. It can work that way for people if you have massive levels of internal surveillance (otherwise how do you think the government can catch employers of illegals with any efficiency) What you're talking about is called law enforcement and it has existed in this country for a long time. Until you clarify your point (what are "massive levels of internal surveillance"?) and justify it (why isn't the current investigative toolbox enough?), this is nothing but FUD, and ridiculous FUD at that. > it doesn't do much for goods or people who cross the border without wanting to get a job, like gang members, dealers etc. To the extent that this is actually a real problem, why do you think these people are crossing the border? Are they just coming up here because they feel like it, or are they responding to some kind of demand?
  - repolfx 7y ago
    The current setup of law enforcement doesn't scale to millions of lawbreakers who aren't being reported by any victims of crime. Are they just coming up here because they feel like it, or are they responding to some kind of demand? That's incoherent. They're moving because they can earn more money in America. The fact that there are people who 'demand' lower wage workers is irrelevant: there will always be market demand to get more for less. The issues with immigration aren't on the employer's side.
    - caconym_ 7y ago
      > The current setup of law enforcement doesn't scale to millions of lawbreakers who aren't being reported by any victims of crime. It scales to far more than the handful we go after now (seriously, it's a handful, look it up) and guess what: business owners don't want to lose what they have, and they don't want to go to prison. It's called a "deterrent", and it's the reason e.g. bars and restaurants don't sell liquor to kids despite the fact that the overwhelmingly vast majority of kid-looking people who would try to buy it if these laws weren't enforced are not actually undercover cops. (it's a bit of a chicken and egg thing, but I'm sure you understand) > That's incoherent. They're moving because they can earn more money in America. The fact that there are people who 'demand' lower wage workers is irrelevant: there will always be market demand to get more for less. The issues with immigration aren't on the employer's side. I think you're confused. Are you talking about undocumented workers, or "gang members and dealers"? I addressed the former in the comment you originally replied to; the bit of my last comment that you quoted refers to the latter, and my question stands. Why (do you think) "gang members and dealers" are coming to America?