An employer of immigrants speaks out

[Mulu]

Ah yes, the devil is always in the details.

Comment by Craig J. Regelbrugge, American Nursery & Landscape Association
Social Security No-Match and Law of Unintended Consequences - Aug 9, 2007
The issue of the "social security no-match" rule has certainly hit the news, yet little coverage has gotten to the heart of the matter: why do we have this problem, will the approach the government is taking solve it, and at what cost to the average American?

Most Americans probably assume that "illegal aliens" are knowingly hired by shady employers and paid cash under the table. The facts paint a far different picture:

- Most employers are meeting their obligations under the law, looking at the required forms of identification at time of hire. Yet, particularly in some sectors where Americans aren't really interested in the work -- agriculture and seasonal jobs top the list -- many of the documents are false.

- The immigrant workers in question are having Social Security and applicable federal, state, or local taxes withheld. Literally billions are being paid into Social Security alone by workers who will never have a claim on benefits. In other words, your grandfather's or father's Social Security monthly check is being subsidized by "illegal aliens."

As for whether the rule will work, the answer is probably not. It certainly will cause major disruption for employers, and it may drive immigrant workers off the books so that they are no longer paying into the federal treasury, but it won't likely flush them out of the country.

It may well increase organized criminal identity theft networks, since legitimate names and numbers won't likely be reported as mismatches even when used by a worker to whom they don't belong.

And as for the true costs? Time will tell, but goods and services will be disrupted or become more expensive. In the case of agriculture, enforcement without a broader solution will drive fruit and vegetable production to other countries, with unknown impacts on food reliability and safety.

Some say the industry is to blame. The truth is Congress is to blame. For over ten years agricultural employers have sought reforms to the law that would ensure clarity, integrity, and access to legal workers. For over ten years the industry has heard every excuse, and more than enough partisan bickering. The rule now being anticipated won't solve the problem, and will have unintended consequences. The question is, will it prompt Congress to find the courage to finally act? link

[paazin]

More of your liberal lies.

Away with you, leftist freak!

[ç i p h é r]

And as for the true costs? Time will tell, but goods and services will be disrupted or become more expensive. In the case of agriculture, enforcement without a broader solution will drive fruit and vegetable production to other countries, with unknown impacts on food reliability and safety.

Holy shat, Mulu has become a conservative!

[Mulu]

I thought it was an interesting perspective. Obviously this author is giving a worst case scenario, particularly regarding identity theft and imported dangerous food (we already import an awful lot of fruit, Dole has practically owned Central America for over half a century). Still, it's a good example of the true complexities underlying the immigration debate.

And due to those complexities, conservative agribusiness and liberals are on the same side of an issue for a change.

I particularly noticed his statement that illegals do indeed pay taxes through withholdings that they never benefit from due to providing bogus SS numbers for payroll, the *exact opposite* of political conservative claims that illegals get all these state benefits without ever paying taxes. Somebody is lying...

[ç i p h é r]

Yet at the other end of the spectrum, you have rising health care costs that millions of uninsured illegal workers contribute to. I don't know that anyone is lying but rather that people are all just speaking partial truths. There's not one person with a broad enough perspective to speak definitively about the issue. There are simply too many dimensions.

Illegal immigration is not a purely positive force nor is it a purely negative one either. The question (from a neutral observers point of view) is, what's the net effect of illegal immigration on the economy? For all we know, the benefits may be fully negated by the consequences, though things rarely if ever work out that cleanly.

[mxlm]

Yet at the other end of the spectrum, you have rising health care costs that millions of uninsured illegal workers contribute to.

Contribute to, yes. But they represent less than a third of the uninsured population.

[ç i p h é r]

And that number is only going to keep rising. My premiums went up another ~$200 this year and I'm sure I'm not alone.

Maybe those Spartans were on to something with their "heroic society" concept.

[mxlm]

Yeah, and maybe those Nazis were onto something with the purging the weak stuff.

[Jeppan]

Maybe those Spartans were on to something with their "heroic society" concept.

and here we go again So whats next, only soldiers should be able to vote? (I never understood why we should let people with a fetish for guns and who on average is on a powertrip should decide for the rest of us). Why not have a trained corps of government officials, bred only for this purpose á la Plato?

[fluffmonster]

There's lots of reasons your health insurance premiums are going up, and 'illegal aliens' is one of the more trivial ones. Blaming them for that is like complaining about the rain when you're already drowning in the sea. Could be just simple scapegoating too I suppose.

I like how the administration is cracking down on hiring of illegals. In a sort of perverse way, taking away their labor will make people come to understand a bit better exactly how much they contribute to our quality of life.

[Zakharra]

Why not have a trained corps of government officials, bred only for this purpose á la Plato?

Uuumm.. No. You'd have a group that would take a very narrow view of things and have no reason to keep in touch with the people. After all, if they are to be leaders just because of breeding, why should they? Oh wait.. that sounds like an aristocracy... Guess it can't happen. The Constitution and all.

[ç i p h é r]

Have you lost your sense of humor, Jeppan? That was supposed to be a joke.