The Political & Philosophy Thread

[HamburgerBoy]

I find the tax implications of illegals confounding. If businesses are either reducing the salary expense they are declaring or simply not declaring those wages, wouldn't the government come out marginally ahead?

nvm, missed the context. Illegals can use an ITIN which serves as the equivalent to an SSN, and I believe that businesses are still required by law to collect all owed payroll taxes, no matter the citizenship status of the employee. Simply employing an illegal is not inherently illegal (afaik) so there incentive to not pay any taxes at all is low, when that's what will get your ass in prison.

 

[Dazed and Brutal]

So taxes are hardly an issue to even fuss over when discussing undocumented workers?

 

[HamburgerBoy]

The issue isn't that they pay less taxes than poor citizens. The problem is that poor people in general consume far more than they produce, and importing them by the millions for cheaper produce and maids isn't a good long-term strategy.

 

[Einherjar86]

How many times do I have to point out immigrants aren't a homogeneous suite? Saying "immigration helps the economy" is acting like the legal immigrant cardiologist from India and the illegal construction worker from Guatemala are equivalent. No one is arguing that a highly skilled labor influx hurts the economy. No one. But the US isn't getting whitehat hackers, cardiologists, and oncologists from Yemen. Or jumping the border from Mexico. Etc.

First, they’re being treated as a “homogeneous suite” by virtually all conservative politicians and media pundits. The administration is already saying they want to target legal immigrants. It’s fairly clear that our lawmakers aren’t making a distinction.

Second, the point of info I linked was also that the argument holds generally across documented and undocumented. As for stories about how undocumented immigrants hurt small businesses that prefer to hire legal citizens—I don’t see that as an immigration problem, but as an aspect of capitalism. Hire the workers that save the most money. The arguments against this are entirely inconsistent: “We want free markets! Oh, but actually only for Americans.” Meanwhile, small businesses willing to hire undocumented immigrants are like “well fuck that, I wanna make money.”

See the discontinuity here?

 

[HamburgerBoy]

"If you don't accept anarcho-capitalism, you're being inconsistent in your support for free markets, goyim. Accept illegals you hypocrite."

 

[CiG]

"If you support free love but oppose non-consensual sex acts you're a hypocrite." - Ein2018

 

[Einherjar86]

Christ, you guys really don’t get it.

Americans want free markets, but only for themselves. That’s not a free market.

“Gubment, stay out my business! Oh, but don’t let me hire illegals. K thanx bye.”

 

[CiG]

I cringed IRL.

 

[Einherjar86]

Well so did I. Clearly we’re speaking different languages.

 

[CiG]

No I understand what you're saying, I'm just having trouble believing you're saying it. I've missed this place.

 

[Einherjar86]

I don’t think you do, otherwise you’d understand the contradiction I’m pointing out.

 

[rms]

See the discontinuity here?

isn't this a problem of nation state vs. economic system and not really that controversial?

 

[CiG]

You can support the concept of a free market while also supporting government regulation of borders, immigration and citizenship without contradicting yourself. Free market isn't synonymous with stateless anarchism or whatever kind of autistic meme you're trying to push right now.

 

[Einherjar86]

isn't this a problem of nation state vs. economic system and not really that controversial?

Actually yes, exactly. If by not controversial you mean that people accept this conflict, I would agree. I just happen to think it’s relevant here, is all.

You can support the concept of a free market while also supporting government regulation of borders, immigration and citizenship without contradicting yourself. Free market isn't synonymous with stateless anarchism or whatever kind of autistic meme you're trying to push right now.

The problem is that businesses don’t conform to national borders, nor do they necessarily owe anything to their countries of origin. Markets blow borders apart.

 

[rms]

You can support the concept of a free market while also supporting government regulation of borders, immigration and citizenship without contradicting yourself.

don't agree at all tbh

 

[CiG]

The problem is that businesses don’t conform to national borders, nor do they necessarily owe anything to their countries of origin. Markets blow borders apart.

All the more reason to have the market as free as possible, but there needs to be a balance wherein the poor, uneducated and unskilled citizens aren't fucked over by people who are in the country illegally and will work for crumbs.

don't agree at all tbh

Well, free market has a few different definitions depending on which economic brand you prefer. Why do you think it would be a contradiction?

 

[viewerfromnihil]

Love how some here want a pie in the sky debate on circumstances that could never come about, barring civil war and genocide, yet casually discuss the situation as if migration flows that have occurred since before the United States acquired the West could somehow be stopped in a "regular and reasonable" fashion, when in fact any measure worth its sticks at doing so would reflect measures of ethnic cleansing. Not surprising of course considering that quite a few here are sympathetic to a certain man who's only a few campaign stumps away from proudly enunciating his support for an Orban style illiberal democracy.

Documentation is the only "regular and reasonable" way to come about a solution.

 

[rms]

Well, free market has a few different definitions depending on which economic brand you prefer. Why do you think it would be a contradiction?

we can see how slaves are framed in an economic and political spectrum. slaves are available, so hire them says the economist. and obviously a political framing would say slaves shouldn't exist because of natural law, for instance. or a nation's principle.

or just child labor if we want something still happening

 

[CiG]

How do you hire a slave? "Hire" implies a mutual agreement.

Not really sure I follow.

 

[rms]

Ok it's incorrect word choice but the point should be clear. An economic framing would have slave labor in their employee pool. A political one wouldn't.