This is the money phrase. It's OUR country - by THE people, FOR the people.
Employers are knowingly hiring and attracting illegals. They are more interested in the bottom line than the long term future of our country.
Businesses cannot be expected to objectively operate in any manner other than to maximize profits. It is neither their orientation nor obligation to be "interested" in the welfare of our country.
That's what laws are for; we merely need to incentivize legal enforcement rather than reward violations of the law. It's that simple.
People & sharks are attracted to blood. If enforcement became the next "big" business opportunity, our economy would quickly become dependent on rooting out illegals. In fact, we'd need to import more illegals just to ship them back out to keep the game going. LOL
Pray for bray and his coyotes!
That is part of the problem with the multinational corporations. They have no alliegence to any country. Some even ban the playing of national anthems at stockholder meetings. They will advocate policies that can be detrimental to this country, including immigration and they have the money to wield influence.
"Human Events Magazine has reported that the top 100 American corporations were nearly unanimous in rejecting the suggestion, made by Ralph Nader, that they "establish a regular practice, at every annual shareholders meeting, of reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the American Flag." Only one of the 100 corporations actually accepted the suggestion — Ohio-based Federated Department Stores Incorporated."
That's what laws are for; we merely need to incentivize legal enforcement rather than reward violations of the law. It's that simple....
I know I'm dragging you back to a discussion from last week, but I have to say I disagree with this position, though it is the common and accepted view today. I hold to the Adam Smith, Puritan and other early Christian business doctrines of "enlightened self interest" that drove many of the early business leaders, up until the early part of the last century. History only tells of the abuses by business as part of justifying the labor movement (never questioning it's excesses), but it doesn't tell of the benevolent and positive actions of business designed to give back to the community. The fact that many of those acts were paternalistic and ignored some basic realities, such as living wage, health care, etc., is attributable to ignorance in most cases, not malice.
It is in a businesses best interests when they are concerned about their community and the effects of their actions on their neighbors and the nation as a whole. Depending on laws to do it, meaning government, is the same as depending on government for taking care of the poor amongst us. You'll find out that, as in the case of border security, they aren't competent to achieve the goal. In the case of the poor, they are immesurably poorer since the advent of the welfare state.
Brought to you by the same people that run the post office and the DMV.
Shudder.