I apologize for his consistent reading incomprehension. It's a persistent malady in his case.
Society The Donald J. Trump Show - 4 more years editions
- Thread starter IschKabibble
- Start date
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
Why do you do this?
The thread is back on track and yet you can't let it go there.
Stop. Please.
I'm suggesting that someone could take a job being paid less than minimum wage because they're an illegal immigrant and then demand full wages. In that case what recourse would an employer have?
Well, and this sounds crazy I know, but they'd to pay them the legally mandated minimum wage.
He could not employ illegal immigrants to start with.
So what would the incentive be to employ an illegal immigrant?
But here we are.
That's really strange.
I mean I thought snorting adderal was supposed to give you high energy.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
I swear, I'm shutting the site down if the left gets "Trump thrown in a van like a side of beef" memes in 2020
Whataboutism at its finest.
Ideally, the rule of law should provide no incentive to be broken.
Let’s deal with reality?
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
I will survive with you blanket
But it clearly does. If you're going to break the law by hiring an illegal more often than not there has to be an incentive for some onto do that. By giving them worker protections, but taking away the employers leverage all that you're doing is creating a situation where illegal immigrants will also be unemployable.
D
Deleted member 1
Guest
I think Mr Kinzinger needs to work on his reading comprehension.
My general answer is so bit it, but I think you're reading a little past the legal clarification here. What it does is disallows as workplace or residential discrimination using immigration status to coerce a resident or worker into compliance. An economistic analysis of the situation imagines that suddenly workers will suddenly accept a low wage and then threaten to make their employer catch a case if they don't give them a raise, maybe not just to the minimum, but all the way to double the minimum. After all, why stop at $15 when you can go to $30/hr? But that's like saying suddenly every woman who goes on a few dates with a man is going to threaten a domestic violence case if he leaves her. It's generally not supported by reality on the ground. Simply by traveling from home to work or even being at work, migrants expose themselves to prosecution and deportation, just as the employer exposes themselves to some legal liability by employing workers under illegal working conditions that could include a distortion of wage levels, workplace safety, governmental authorization, or discrimination. In this case, the workers and owners are in a kind of prisoner's dilemma where reporting the management means many people would lose their jobs, which means it would likely only emerge in a workplace based complaint after the fact. Housing is a completely different story as there are no laws preventing renting to people regardless of status. Adding in protections for people who might lose their homes due to being forced out prior to a lease being up or having repairs withheld due to threats to disclose immigration status violates the spirit and letter of contracts. This is a fairly miniscule vehicle that should discourage that practice, which i can personally attest is widespread in New York.
