Replies

I'm going to try to sort this out:

Previous post..

Me: "Let me make sure I understand you...you're saying it should not be illegal to employ illegal aliens? You're saying it would be "abhorrent" to make employing illegals...illegal?"

You..."That is not what I said. Nor is it an accurate statement of what HE said, to which I was responding. See if you can parse out what is the difference in what you are saying from what he originally proposed, and then get back to me. If you can't figure out that there is a significant difference, I will explain it to you."

It appeared you were responding to me, not some unidentified "HE." I'm the guy who suggested the two laws, the first of which you sad was "abhorrent."

Here is what I wrote (that you were responding to):

"If Congress wants to get rid of the illegals they need only pass a law making it a federal offense to employ anyone who is not legally in this country. And, pass a second law, making it illegal for any federal/state/local governmental agency and/or not-for-profit to provide support to anyone who is illegally in this country."

So, the first law...the one you say you find "abhorrent," is the one that suggests that Congress make it a federal crime to employ someone who is in this country illegally.

If I'd have used the phrase "knowingly employ" would that have helped you?

I'm going to try to sort this out:

Please don't bother... I was hopelessly confused and it showed. Just go to the next post and bury this one. Thanks.

The phrase "knowingly employ" is better, but I believe that is already a violation of US tax law. I (literallly) just got up from an appt with an electrical contractor who had a kid working for him a few years ago who, when he sent in his 941s got a letter from the IRS saying that if he continued to employ this person, he was subject to fines of $4,000 a day. "He was the best worker I ever had. I send him contract work whenever I can."