America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 4 years ago by victor809. 109 replies replies.
3 Pages<123>
Meanwhile in NY....
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
tailgater Offline
#51 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 10:36 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
frankj1 wrote:
edit: for #43


how about recruiting and hiring them?
why come here without incentives?


Which part of "enforce the laws" did you not understand?
whip

I've said all along that I'd prefer a virtual wall. Crack down on companies hiring the illegals.


victor809 Offline
#52 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 10:48 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
A. people here illegally should be forced to leave.
B. Laws should be enforced.
3. a drivers license is a legal form of ID for most situations. To suggest that people in the country by illegal methods should be allowed to have one is ridiculous.
D. People here illegally should be forced to leave.

It's not rocket surgery folks.

Laws.
Responsibility.

Shirking either takes a loser mentality.


This whole thing is nonsense and really shows the insanity of the situation.

People's presence here illegally is mainly the responsibility of the federal government. They are the ones who have the jurisdiction to "build a wall" (haha like that will do anything) or provide the visas which people come in on.

Yet local governments (cities/states) are the ones who must somehow keep their region operating as well as possible regardless of the federal government's success or failure at managing illegal immigration.

Clearly over the years, local governments have realized that they are better off managing the illegal population rather than demonizing them. ie, you're better off with illegal immigrants passing a driver's test and driving with a driver's license than you are having them drive without any training/license because they're afraid of the state government. You're better off issuing them an ID and knowing who they are under any number of situations, than you are letting them just live under the radar.

You want them to leave, talk to the federal government.
Abrignac Offline
#53 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 10:57 AM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,259
victor809 wrote:
This whole thing is nonsense and really shows the insanity of the situation.

People's presence here illegally is mainly the responsibility of the federal government. They are the ones who have the jurisdiction to "build a wall" (haha like that will do anything) or provide the visas which people come in on.

Yet local governments (cities/states) are the ones who must somehow keep their region operating as well as possible regardless of the federal government's success or failure at managing illegal immigration.

Clearly over the years, local governments have realized that they are better off managing the illegal population rather than demonizing them. ie, you're better off with illegal immigrants passing a driver's test and driving with a driver's license than you are having them drive without any training/license because they're afraid of the state government. You're better off issuing them an ID and knowing who they are under any number of situations, than you are letting them just live under the radar.

You want them to leave, talk to the federal government.


Another fine example of a strawman argument.
frankj1 Offline
#54 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:00 AM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
DrMaddVibe wrote:
I posted the link because I'm sick and tired of hearing that it doesn't cost anything and we're a great nation anyways that can afford it. EVERYTHING HAS A COST. There's no "free lunch". Someone is ALWAYS paying for it.

If you have proof that a corporation is doing this...turn them in to ICE!

https://www.ice.gov/worksite

are there any stats showing how much these illegal workers are paying in federal, state, and local taxes?
we'd need both sides of the tax equation to determine how much (or if) they are costing us...not even factoring what they contribute (spend) to the economy. Though as the laws are currently written, I'd still like to see those doing the hiring paying a price.

But would these jobs get done by our citizens, even for a guaranteed minimum wage? Doubt it. This is not a simple issue.

It wouldn't be possible, but if there was a way to let in x amount for x amount of time from x many countries to do the work Americans refuse to do, we'd get our fruit and veggies at the supermarket and stuff, and our elderly citizens' butts wiped, and all the other unglamorous jobs we are above doing.

It worked reasonably well with visa stuff for restaurant and hotel jobs in seasonal vacation spots, many young adults from Ireland and Bulgaria and other countries that come and go...foreign students and others wanting to see America but needing to work their way across it.
victor809 Offline
#55 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:03 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
Another fine example of a strawman argument.


Not sure you understand the definition of a strawman argument.
Tail claimed that illegals shouldn't be here.
I pointed out it's not the local government's problem and they're just trying to run a city/state. That's not a "strawman" that's literally in response to what he said.
If you believe it's a strawman, then his statement couldn't be relevant to the conversation at hand.
DrafterX Offline
#56 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:28 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,535
House lawmakers on Thursday passed a bill that would allow illegal immigrants to be eligible for damages from their employer if their labor rights are judged to have been violated -- while rejecting a measure that would prevent unions from recruiting those in the country illegally.

The Democrat-sponsored "Protecting the Right to Organize" (PRO) Act seeks to expand labor protections and boost unions across the board. Like California's controversial Assembly Bill 5, one of the PRO Act's stated purposes is to end worker misclassification and stop employers from denying workers benefits by doing so. It passed in a 224-194 vote, mostly along party lines.

Film at 11... Think
jjanecka Offline
#57 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:38 AM EST
Joined: 12-08-2015
Posts: 4,334
In a way that makes it harder to want to hire illegals
Abrignac Offline
#58 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:41 AM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,259
victor809 wrote:
Not sure you understand the definition of a strawman argument.
Tail claimed that illegals shouldn't be here.
I pointed out it's not the local government's problem and they're just trying to run a city/state. That's not a "strawman" that's literally in response to what he said.
If you believe it's a strawman, then his statement couldn't be relevant to the conversation at hand.


Exactly. Your solution of looking to the Federal Government to solve this problem isn’t a solution relevant to the problem. Solving this problem REQUIRES a united solution. As long as individual states offer incentives to illegal immigrants a Federal Government solution in IMPOSSIBLE.
teedubbya Offline
#59 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:44 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
We sure pick and choose when supporting States rights.
victor809 Offline
#60 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:44 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
Exactly. Your solution of looking to the Federal Government to solve this problem isn’t a solution relevant to the problem. Solving this problem REQUIRES a united solution. As long as individual states offer incentives to illegal immigrants a Federal Government solution in IMPOSSIBLE.


How does that make my argument a "strawman"?

"A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent"

I addressed tail's actual argument, that "we should get rid of all illegals" by pointing out that wasn't a local government's responsibility really.
Abrignac Offline
#61 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:47 AM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,259
victor809 wrote:
Not sure you understand the definition of a strawman argument.
Tail claimed that illegals shouldn't be here.
I pointed out it's not the local government's problem and they're just trying to run a city/state. That's not a "strawman" that's literally in response to what he said.
If you believe it's a strawman, then his statement couldn't be relevant to the conversation at hand.


You’re correct is not a straw man argument. It’s simply illogical.
Abrignac Offline
#62 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:49 AM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,259
victor809 wrote:
How does that make my argument a "strawman"?

"A straw man is a form of argument and an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent"

I addressed tail's actual argument, that "we should get rid of all illegals" by pointing out that wasn't a local government's responsibility really.


See above. You pounced quicker than I could correct my mistake.
victor809 Offline
#63 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:49 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
teedubbya wrote:
We sure pick and choose when supporting States rights.


What's funny is I would actually be totally fine with this (this being the actual topic of this thread), if this were based on a rational argument and didn't appear to be just petty retribution for not obeying the federal mandate (similar to the drinking ages/highway funding).

But as I said before, by claiming this is because there's such critical information in that DMV database that they simply cannot approve of anyone who's DMV records they cannot see, they are essentially admitting that they barely do anything fr these "background checks"
victor809 Offline
#64 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:57 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
See above. You pounced quicker than I could correct my mistake.

gotcha

Meh... illogical? I think it can be debated as to whether this requires a "united solution". I won't disagree with you, but the same people can make the argument that gun safety requires a "united solution" and use that as a wedge to take away states rights there.

Is a "united solution" likely to be more effective at removing illegals? Sure.
But will that create other problems for regional governments that are not seen at the federal level? Of course. These regional governments need to function in the best interests of their legal population, and sometimes that means making concessions for the illegal population so that government can be run properly. By taking a stance that this "requires" a "united solution" you are prioritizing getting rid of all illegal immigrants over any local needs. That's fine for you to prioritize, but we're a big country and other people may have other priorities.

If the problem becomes a big enough issue at the local level, those local governments will voluntarily work with the federal government. Perhaps they have other priorities right now that you don't realize, and which may be counteracted by a top-down federal mandate?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#65 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 11:59 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,389
frankj1 wrote:
are there any stats showing how much these illegal workers are paying in federal, state, and local taxes?
we'd need both sides of the tax equation to determine how much (or if) they are costing us...not even factoring what they contribute (spend) to the economy. Though as the laws are currently written, I'd still like to see those doing the hiring paying a price.

But would these jobs get done by our citizens, even for a guaranteed minimum wage? Doubt it. This is not a simple issue.

It wouldn't be possible, but if there was a way to let in x amount for x amount of time from x many countries to do the work Americans refuse to do, we'd get our fruit and veggies at the supermarket and stuff, and our elderly citizens' butts wiped, and all the other unglamorous jobs we are above doing.

It worked reasonably well with visa stuff for restaurant and hotel jobs in seasonal vacation spots, many young adults from Ireland and Bulgaria and other countries that come and go...foreign students and others wanting to see America but needing to work their way across it.



Short answer...you're talking about undocumented workers. Most with forged, fake and stolen IDs. Most are sending money back home via Western Union and other wire transfer services. That's why I mentioned in another thread about taxing foreign transfers massively to offset this loopbole. Getting an accurate count or dollar amount is impossible. The article I posted states that there people willing to step up and do these jobs.
frankj1 Offline
#66 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 12:45 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Short answer...you're talking about undocumented workers. Most with forged, fake and stolen IDs. Most are sending money back home via Western Union and other wire transfer services. That's why I mentioned in another thread about taxing foreign transfers massively to offset this loopbole. Getting an accurate count or dollar amount is impossible. The article I posted states that there people willing to step up and do these jobs.

not going out of my way to seem ignorant on the topic, but even if presenting fake ID's etc, wouldn't the employers still withhold fed and state taxes?
Abrignac Offline
#67 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 1:02 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,259
frankj1 wrote:
not going out of my way to seem ignorant on the topic, but even if presenting fake ID's etc, wouldn't the employers still withhold fed and state taxes?


Without a SSN, how are these taxes reported to the IRS? If I’m not mistaken state tax withholding documents are tied to one’s SSN as well.

Every employee is required by federal law as dictated by regulations to complete an I-9 form. One cannot legally complete this form without proof of citizenship or appropriate immigration documents. Illegals cannot present either. As a result, absent forged documents witch is a federal crime, illegals are paid in cash and no income taxes are collected. Yet, they can get free medical care by going to a hospital which is required by law to treat and/or stabilize their illness.

https://www.uscis.gov/system/files_force/files/form/i-9-paper-version.pdf?download=1
victor809 Offline
#68 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 1:42 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
Without a SSN, how are these taxes reported to the IRS? If I’m not mistaken state tax withholding documents are tied to one’s SSN as well.

Every employee is required by federal law as dictated by regulations to complete an I-9 form. One cannot legally complete this form without proof of citizenship or appropriate immigration documents. Illegals cannot present either. As a result, absent forged documents witch is a federal crime, illegals are paid in cash and no income taxes are collected. Yet, they can get free medical care by going to a hospital which is required by law to treat and/or stabilize their illness.

https://www.uscis.gov/system/files_force/files/form/i-9-paper-version.pdf?download=1


That's correct. So if the payment is being made "above the table" then the illegal immigrant is using a SSN (for instance a dead person's SSN). Then taxes are being paid.

If it's below the table, then taxes are not being paid.

I don't know the percentage of which is which
opelmanta1900 Offline
#69 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 1:45 PM EST
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
At least in CA, the ssn cannot be that of a dead person... It's almost always an innocent party who finds out when they file their taxes... It changes the way they have to file taxes for the remainder of their life... It's a pretty terrible thing to have happen...
Abrignac Offline
#70 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 2:05 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,259
victor809 wrote:
That's correct. So if the payment is being made "above the table" then the illegal immigrant is using a SSN (for instance a dead person's SSN). Then taxes are being paid.

If it's below the table, then taxes are not being paid.

I don't know the percentage of which is which


Neither do I. But, I’m in the residential remodeling industry. As such, I’ve dealt with many subs. With rare exception, ones that hang around Home Depot are insistent in being paid in cash.
victor809 Offline
#71 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 2:44 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
Neither do I. But, I’m in the residential remodeling industry. As such, I’ve dealt with many subs. With rare exception, ones that hang around Home Depot are insistent in being paid in cash.


I definitely agree that labor is cash.

But I don't know how the large agricultural or food concerns are able to get away with that. I simply don't know because I've not been involved in it, I'd bet someone like Opel would know. But these are large companies with generally "by-the-book" payrolls. I suspect to make their books work, they have to pay to a SSN. If that's the case, then a large number of illegals are getting paid above-the table, and then getting taxed.

But someone with more access to data would have to get that information
Abrignac Offline
#72 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 2:51 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,259
victor809 wrote:
I definitely agree that labor is cash.

But I don't know how the large agricultural or food concerns are able to get away with that. I simply don't know because I've not been involved in it, I'd bet someone like Opel would know. But these are large companies with generally "by-the-book" payrolls. I suspect to make their books work, they have to pay to a SSN. If that's the case, then a large number of illegals are getting paid above-the table, and then getting taxed.

But someone with more access to data would have to get that information


Not sure but, I’d suspect those workers use falsified documents to obtain an SSN.
frankj1 Offline
#73 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 2:55 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
victor809 wrote:
I definitely agree that labor is cash.

But I don't know how the large agricultural or food concerns are able to get away with that. I simply don't know because I've not been involved in it, I'd bet someone like Opel would know. But these are large companies with generally "by-the-book" payrolls. I suspect to make their books work, they have to pay to a SSN. If that's the case, then a large number of illegals are getting paid above-the table, and then getting taxed.

But someone with more access to data would have to get that information

I was referencing the large corporations...I suspect somehow the illegals are paying taxes
frankj1 Offline
#74 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 2:59 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/how-do-undocumented-immigrants-pay-federal-taxes-an-explainer/

evidently in many cases taxes can be paid by undocumented workers without ss numbers...
victor809 Offline
#75 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 2:59 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Abrignac wrote:
Not sure but, I’d suspect those workers use falsified documents to obtain an SSN.


Yeah. SSNs that get snagged through identity theft.... that sort of thing.
But, those would likely be paying taxes... and I suspect that's a large percentage of the workers. They're just not visible to us.
victor809 Offline
#76 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 3:02 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
frankj1 wrote:
https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/how-do-undocumented-immigrants-pay-federal-taxes-an-explainer/

evidently in many cases taxes can be paid by undocumented workers without ss numbers...

Interesting. I learned about ITINs now.
frankj1 Offline
#77 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 3:15 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
victor809 wrote:
Interesting. I learned about ITINs now.

yeah, me too.
so many pay to create a record of paying taxes in hopes of establishing "good character" as they may one day apply for citizenship.

I'm assuming (don't feel like researching right now) that they are also paying into Social Security that they may never be eligible to collect.
victor809 Offline
#78 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 3:50 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
frankj1 wrote:
yeah, me too.
so many pay to create a record of paying taxes in hopes of establishing "good character" as they may one day apply for citizenship.

I'm assuming (don't feel like researching right now) that they are also paying into Social Security that they may never be eligible to collect.


Yes, that would be accurate. Once you're tying into the system you'd pay all of it.

But I would honestly seriously doubt the percentage of illegal immigrants that would do this. TW's mentioned it before, but I think there's a pretty deep fear of the government in that community. Seems unlikely that many would voluntarily identify themselves in that manner. A fake SSN to meet the paperwork requirements and no more seems more likely. Uncle sam get's it's cut and they get to work.
frankj1 Offline
#79 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 4:20 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
victor809 wrote:
Yes, that would be accurate. Once you're tying into the system you'd pay all of it.

But I would honestly seriously doubt the percentage of illegal immigrants that would do this. TW's mentioned it before, but I think there's a pretty deep fear of the government in that community. Seems unlikely that many would voluntarily identify themselves in that manner. A fake SSN to meet the paperwork requirements and no more seems more likely. Uncle sam get's it's cut and they get to work.

makes sense.

I feel like I exercised my fat brain a little today.
delta1 Offline
#80 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 4:47 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,772
here's a source of info about how illegal immigrants contribute taxes and other benefits to the US economy...

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/4-myths-about-how-immigrants-affect-the-u-s-economy


another myth is that illegal immigrants are taking jobs from Americans: large agricultural conglomerates in California have repeatedly said that American citizens didn't want to do back-breaking farm work, even for wages at $15-$17/hr...Many walked away in the middle of the first day, most didn't return after 1 day...
delta1 Offline
#81 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 5:07 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,772
we should and could do a better job of securing our borders and controlling who gains entry...we also should and could do a better job of tracking those who have gained temporary visas and stay after the visa expires. That second group now exceeds border crossers in the total number of illegals....

But significant segments of our economy, actual profit-making businesses: agriculture, construction, hotels/restaurants, rely on undocumented workers doing work that Americans don't want to do. Compounding this problem is that Americans demand low cost produce, lower housing costs and lower hotel and restaurant bills...

we are all complicit in the problem and must all contribute to the solution...too easy to point fingers...

do we (can we?) want to do something as drastic as compulsory farm/housekeeping/dishwashing work for those on welfare?
frankj1 Offline
#82 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 5:29 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
should we ask ourselves if we actually want to leave it like this and just put the onus on employers to withhold taxes?
Look at how much crap we import and buy from countries, mainly China, that keep costs down in much harsher ways.

Just tossing that out there.
Speyside Offline
#83 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 6:23 PM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Frank, there are many illegal aliens that do pay all taxes. There is a percentage of jobs that are not cash jobs. It is not uncommon for one legal immigrant to let many illegal aliens to use his/her social security number for tax purposes. Based off of federal IRS information many illegal aliens could be rounded up and deported. John Doe has 32 full time jobs, hmmmmm could be 31 illegal aliens? This in no way would improve border security, but it is certainly information that should be made available to ICE. Plus, where does the constitution even remotely lend creedence to the dry feet concept? I see absolutly no constitutional support to deportation trials for illegal aliens.
Speyside Offline
#84 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 6:32 PM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Now lets follow the money. Make the penalty for hiring illegal aliens so onerous that every employer will demand enough multiple forms of documentation that they have made a serious attempt to verify citizenship or legal immigrant status. As long as we are at it let's do something similar for expired work visas. Again, this is not a substitute for border security.

Also, there is no linkage between outdated immigration policy and illegal aliens. A criminal act is a criminal act. Illegal aliens are criminals.
Speyside Offline
#85 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 6:37 PM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Now let's improve border security as much as needed. Experts can determine how to do this. I am open to all ideas on how to do this.

Now, and only now would I be ready for immigration reform. And here I do not want more unskilled laborers than we need. But I do want skilled people that will help our country as well as being assets to our country.
frankj1 Offline
#86 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 6:52 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
how easy or difficult is it to hire unskilled laborers in recent years?
delta1 Offline
#87 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 6:56 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,772
in CA, quite tough, according to owners of the big farms here...sorta explains the uneasy truce between libs and cons over the illegal immigrant issue and the common practice of sanctuary cities up and down the state
RMAN4443 Offline
#88 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 8:20 PM EST
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
frankj1 wrote:
yeah, me too.
so many pay to create a record of paying taxes in hopes of establishing "good character" as they may one day apply for citizenship.

I'm assuming (don't feel like researching right now) that they are also paying into Social Security that they may never be eligible to collect.

I work with dozens of LEGAL citizens, not to mention my kids and their families(or possibly myself), who will never be eligible to collect SS...which is deemed to be an "entitlement", and not something that you've paid into your whole life, and was supposed to be there when you retired.

The list of "entitlements" is at the link below...note that SS and Medicare(contributory programs), are right there alongside Medicaid and Welfare(NON contributory programs)



http://federalsafetynet.com/entitlement-programs.html





Whew!!!! Where did that come from??Blink
frankj1 Offline
#89 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 8:51 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
RMAN4443 wrote:
I work with dozens of LEGAL citizens, not to mention my kids and their families(or possibly myself), who will never be eligible to collect SS...which is deemed to be an "entitlement", and not something that you've paid into your whole life, and was supposed to be there when you retired.

The list of "entitlements" is at the link below...note that SS and Medicare(contributory programs), are right there alongside Medicaid and Welfare(NON contributory programs)



http://federalsafetynet.com/entitlement-programs.html





Whew!!!! Where did that come from??Blink

I do know it isn't an investment program but rather current workers paying for today's retirees...but why won't you get it?
asking before clicking the link...
RMAN4443 Offline
#90 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 9:12 PM EST
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
frankj1 wrote:
I do know it isn't an investment program but rather current workers paying for today's retirees...but why won't you get it?
asking before clicking the link...

I still have about 7 or so years before I can retire, I just look "mature" for my age Anxious
and I keep hearing how SS is unsustainable, and they're going to have to cut back on SS and the "entitlement programs" and I just figure when I get to the window they're gonna put up the SOLD OUT sign.....
frankj1 Offline
#91 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 9:29 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
RMAN4443 wrote:
I still have about 7 or so years before I can retire, I just look "mature" for my age Anxious
and I keep hearing how SS is unsustainable, and they're going to have to cut back on SS and the "entitlement programs" and I just figure when I get to the window they're gonna put up the SOLD OUT sign.....

I'm dubious. Jump in at 66.5. You'll still be able to work and earn all you want.
It was always supposed to be a supplement, after all.
tailgater Offline
#92 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 9:36 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
frankj1 wrote:
I was referencing the large corporations...I suspect somehow the illegals are paying taxes


Which large corporations are hiring illegals?
delta1 Offline
#93 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 9:46 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,772
here's an article about the prospect of Social Security's demise.

https://www.aarp.org/retirement/social-security/questions-answers/how-much-longer-will-social-security-be-around/


It is worrisome, but not an imminent catastrophe...I remember in its healthier days, plenty of greedy Wall Street types were pushing for privatizing it, presumably to raid the trust...not so much anymore...but we have time to fix it...

nowadays, we're taking out more to pay benefits than we're putting in, exhausting the trust fund...AARP analysts (trust these folks for looking out for foggies) say it'll last til 2035, paying out from the trust fund...then payments will be paid from taxes collected, but that isn't sustainable unless some adjustments are made...some adjustments are built-in, with the most obvious increasing full retirement age

I'm thinking that the system's investment goal of 8% is too conservative...should aim higher to generate more income...
increase income level caps so higher income amounts can be taxed...
reduce benefits over a five-10 years years by freezing annual COLA...
adjust benefits by considering income levels of recipients...with wealthiest folks having benefits cut by up to 40%
tailgater Offline
#94 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 9:48 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
delta1 wrote:


But significant segments of our economy, actual profit-making businesses: agriculture, construction, hotels/restaurants, rely on undocumented workers doing work that Americans don't want to do.


That is a reason for better management of work visas and immigration quotas.
It's not an excuse to allow illegal immigration.
frankj1 Offline
#95 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 9:48 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
tailgater wrote:
Which large corporations are hiring illegals?

will you feel better if I say big industries instead?

Though I have first hand (well, second hand really from the site manager who assigned the workers) knowledge about Trump companies in NYC...but this isn't really about him.
delta1 Offline
#96 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 9:50 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,772
tailgater wrote:
That is a reason for better management of work visas and immigration quotas.
It's not an excuse to allow illegal immigration.






agree 100%
tailgater Offline
#97 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 9:56 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
delta1 wrote:
agree 100%


You just want me to buy you a beer this coming week.
tailgater Offline
#98 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 9:59 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
frankj1 wrote:
will you feel better if I say big industries instead?

Though I have first hand (well, second hand really from the site manager who assigned the workers) knowledge about Trump companies in NYC...but this isn't really about him.


Certain industries absolutely hire illegals.

I called you out on "large corporations" because it's inaccurate.
So it's not that I'd "feel better". But that your comment would be accurate.
And what good is a tripod if he's not a straight shooter?
frankj1 Offline
#99 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 10:00 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
tailgater wrote:
That is a reason for better management of work visas and immigration quotas.
It's not an excuse to allow illegal immigration.





agree, not a reason to allow law breaking activity...which is why I asked if maybe current laws are not designed to give us what we really want.

You list a couple of good starting points if we do want it the way the laws are written, in the meantime how can we catch, fine heavily, and force those employers (who are pretty much recruiting them) to pay the taxes until something changes?

take away the bait and the rest might fix itself...unless we discover our economy might actually be built on the backs of cheap labor. I've never been in a position to know for sure. But obviously I suspect it must be the reason it happens.

do most of us at least agree most illegals risk life because they want to work here, not for free hot breakfast? Can we get a win/win from it?

I've been self employed but was never a business man.
delta1 Offline
#100 Posted: Fri, Feb 7 2020, 10:01 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,772
tailgater wrote:
You just want me to buy you a beer this coming week.



nope...I very rarely drink anymore...so I'll buy you the beer and a cigar...you can buy me an iced tea...

where you gonna be and how much time do you have?
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages<123>
Back to Top