Feds arrest over 300 Illegal Workers at Wal-Mart Stores Across the Country

Fox ^

[sonsofliberty2000]

Federal officials arrested more than 300 illegal workers at 61 Wal-Mart stores across the country early Thursday morning.

WASHINGTON

[PRND21]

Have you ever been right?
I hope your cowardly union buddies lose their cushy jobs.
Let them pick crops.

[Joe Hadenuf]

In fact, link it, coward. You've failed to in the past.

Well, I linked it. Now what Hector?..LOL!

[PRND21]

How many "According to Joe" threads have you posted?

[Joe Hadenuf]

Go away Hector........

[PRND21]

Let's review.

First you bash WalMart while not mentioning you support the current Grocer's strike. That's dishonest.
You then call me a "Racist bigot" after I point out your duplicity. That's dishonest.
Then you post a link to a thread other than the one you were asked about. That's dishonest
Then you call me Hector, trying to imply my opinions are based on me being a Mexican, I'm not. That's dishonest.
And then, you say, Go away Hector... when called out.

Go Joe Go

[budwiesest]

The fact that the illegal laborers are here simply means that they will be exploited (and for some to their own delight-given conditions back home). This follows basic economic sense: that of asset utilization since labor is a component of the production function.

What remains to be seen is whether this illegal 'labor' component is contributing in the expansion of the economy or having a dampening effect on wages throughout the economy by being in surplus.

An economy awash in 'low-wage' greenbacks (interest rates) and a surplus of 'wetbacks' that isn't humming along at impressive growth rates has other problems that need to be addressed (too much government, for instance).

If every illegal worker were sent packing tomorrow, the drain on the labor pool would be so great that it would cause businesses to raise wages significantly in an effort to attract replacements. Over time equilibrium would be restored, however, the shock would be too great for many businesses to absorb and so, any plan to remove illegal labor should probably be gradual (similar to the way interest rates move). If taxes decreased at the same rate that labor costs went up, businesses could then handle the transition fairly well, but we know that that can't happen.

In summary, Americans have allowed government to grow to such an extent that they can no longer afford the burden (along with all the other burdens life allows) without the importation of cheap, illegal labor to produce the bottom line needed to remain solvent. And when you pour enough water into a glass of Jack Daniels, is soon ceases to be JD.

[Fledermaus]

I was shocked to actually hear about the I-9 form. I have NEVER seen the INS use I-9 as a reason to check workers.

The I-9 is the most ridiculous document the goverment has. It says the employer has to "check" ID's and citizenship based on two out three lists. It turned morons into Nazis that would "require" you let your new employer make a copy of your documents which clearly is NOT what the I-9 was for. The I-9 just requires the employer SEE and ATTEST to those documents (driver's license, Soc Sec card, Military ID, Visa, Green cards, etc.).

And I'm suspicious why they went after Wal-Mart when it's clear it's contract work. Why not Target, K-Mart, Kohl's and others?

How about when the stupid idiot Democrats in the Tenn legislature passed a law to allow illegal aliens to get a drivers license (two years before Gray Davis' attempt during the recall)? The INS could have just showed up at the drivers testing station and arrested hundreds a day. GOP legislators and talk show host called them asking that question.

Why not just go into ever restaurant in Los Angeles? I'll bet you can round up thousands of illegal workers.

Will the ones in the Wal-Mart sting get deported? I doubt it. It's a publicity stunt for the government and shows Bush has no f'ing clue what he's doing and Tom Ridge is a moron now running the INS.

When I first read this story I figured the government was rounding them up to offer them free education, healthcare and drivers licenses.

Pitiful.

[PRND21]

And when you pour enough water into a glass of Jack Daniels, is soon ceases to be JD.

It is JD. It's just not isolated.

[Conspiracy Guy]

Thanks. I went to your profile. You are weird ; )

[Conspiracy Guy]

You bring the rope and I'll bring the whiskey. Practice saying "Hangins too good yer him lets duct tape em to Hillary Clinton". ; )

[Conspiracy Guy]

I know that and will not say it isn't so. What I have a problem with is automatically assuming it's so. Let's wait and see. If we want to speculate let's accuse the Democratic National Committee of owning the contracting company.

[CSM]

"BTW, since when does the wholesale violation of our borders constitute a free market situation."

Remember this when you are faced with your next purchase decision. I expect you to chose the most expensive product, therefore subsidizing the least competitive company. Americans are voting with their wallets and they will most likely chose the least expensive product. This causes all companies to do anything they can to lower the costs of offering that product, therefore they move jobs to the least costly market.

The American worker seems to think they are entitled to a lot of benefits that drive the cost of their labor beyond what that same worker is willing to spend for a product or service. The government has supported this worker by forcing a lot of extra costs into labor. If that same worker were willing to spend a 10-25% premium for a product, then they would be more deserving of these costly benefits. They aren't.

The same joker in the UAW that threatens a strike wouldn't buy the product they produce if they weren't able to get it at a huge discount. That is shown in the market share loss by the US manufacturers to the Asian manufacturers.

It isn't the violation of laws that create the free market. It is the availability of lower costs for labor. The customer demands lower prices, the company has to lower costs. The government has set policies that will not allow for an employee to cost less, so we end up with less employees being hired.

Hiring of illegal aliens is against the law and any company doing it should be prosecuted. However, gains in market share makes it worth while for a company to do it, because that company IS REWARDED BY THE COSTUMER!

"These aren't my kids. These are kids already in programs to help them."

Why don't they try to get jobs that reward them with tips only and don't come with a wage? Why not offer a service that is free to a business, but charges a customer? Think, grocery delivery, free to grocery store charge the customer. Why not be creative and create their own market!

"I am a beancounter by trade and I knew every tiny bit of minutiae involved in running the business."

Yep, I am sure that the Walmart accountants know all the activities in every store and of all 1.4M employees.

[OpusatFR]

Those are very nice sentiments.

While you are at it, perhaps you can address exactly how businesses can circumvent the law and use the illegals and not get caught.

Or do have a solution to the problem? You speak, pardon me if you are not, like a typical Democrat. No solutions. Observations, some analysis which I don't agree with in the main, but no solution.

Perhaps you have one.

[CSM]

Solution:

Repeal government intrusion in the market by eliminating minimum wage and regulated benefits. Allow the business to make an offer of compensation and a potential employee to accept or decline that offer.

[CSM]

"You speak, pardon me if you are not, like a typical Democrat."

Yep, acknowledging the free market is very progressive, just like the democrat party. You should go over to DU and look at their threads on this. The hate Walmart posters mirror the posts on this thread. Take a look and you just might actually realize how anti big business these threads become. A more progressive, emotional response can't be made than some of the posts on this board.

Rather than use logic to address any of my points, you pull the "you sound like a democrat" argument out of your holster. I challenge you to go on over and read the posts on DU, then come back and let me know which side of this discussion seems like a democrat to you. I garuntee that a "free market" argument isn't in line with the progressive stance.

[PRND21]

Your loyalty to Mexico is heart-warming.

Your information is wrong. Read better.

[OpusatFR]

Pardon me? That vitriol directed at me for asking is a bit much. DU is indeed the home of some psychological misfits.

I am as much for the free market as anyone, but I am also a realist. There is no going back from the socialist progression. The regulation strangling business competitiveness is not just labor. That's just a small slice. Asking for a repeal of the minimum wage and various benefit packs isn't going to happen, ever. That's a dream.

I want to know what we do about the illegal immigration now that is affecting the infrastructure of this country. Throwing them all in here and letting the market forces determine the cost of labor isn't going happen.

Illegal immigration must be addressed. And frankly, I have stock in Walmart. I have stock in any number of politically incorrect companies.

Fortune falls everywhere.

[CSM]

I have read and reread my post to you and I can't find any "vitroil" directed at you. Reread it yourself and you will see that I was pointing out how the anti Walmart posts on this thread mirror the posts on DU. Have you gone over and read them? If so, you would see what I was saying.