usmbguest5318
Gold Member
How many illegals did they arrest in the 98 markets in which the raids were conducted? AFAIK, the answer is 21.On Wednesday, January 10, 2018, US Federal (ICE) agents raided 7-11 stores in 17 states, looking for Illegal Aliens and demanding historical hiring documentation of the franchisees (owners).
- ICE raids about 100 7-Eleven stores nationwide to find undocumented workers in latest Trump effort
- Immigration officers raid 7-Eleven stores, arrest 21 people
- ICE raids 7-Eleven stores nationwide in crackdown officials call 'a harbinger of what’s to come'
It's just a drop in the bucket and easily countered,
Um....21 arrests across 98 markets with a resource load of at least 475 ICE agents, assuming the staffing shown in the OP's photo is normal and accurate and only one team is needed per market. I think "waste of money" is a better term for what it was than is "drop in the bucket."
At that paltry rate of return, I sure hope not!Will it last?
The question below does not present a mutually exclusive pair of alternatives and there are other alternatives. They really should just be distinct questions, and I've responded to them as though they are.
I have no idea.Is this just the beginning, or is this an isolated burst of 'showmanship' as stimulus and prelude to negotiations in Congress?
Likely so. Nearly everything Trump-related/-conceived is big on rhetoric and appearances yet thin on substance.Is this just the beginning, or is this an isolated burst of 'showmanship' as stimulus and prelude to negotiations in Congress?Will this (and a few others?) be enough to scare-off many employers from hiring Illegal Aliens, or retaining them on-payroll moving forward?
I can't say. What I can say is that no firms or individuals I'm aware of -- not my own, not my clients' and not my firm's key competitors; my I, not my friends -- hire illegal immigrants and others who are ineligible for employment in the U.S.
AFAIK and in the main, to the extent that illegal immigrants obtain/have sources of incomes, they obtain them by working as self-employed individuals. They may do so as day laborers, odd-jobbers, landscapers/gardeners, housekeepers, etc., pretty much anything where being paid in cash is common and so-called job security is far from certain. Of such workers, their customers are under no obligation to determine whether they are illegal or illegal immigrants provided the nature of the business relationship they have is that of contractor and client, not that of employer and employee.
Have you actually endeavored cogently and soundly to quantify the proposition you just presented? If so, I'd love to see your analysis. If you haven't I suggest you discern what share of employers have illegal immigrants on their payrolls.We just charge a few employers with big fines, and the rest will stop on their own.
I know I've tried to find that information and had no success. I can find lots of information from all manners of sources from grossly partisan to highly rigorous and objective (and everything in between) that discuss, review, opine upon, whatever...every imaginable aspect of the impacts of immigration, illegal immigration, immigrants and illegal immigrants, but I cannot find one thing that quantifies the average quantity or rate of illegal immigrant employment among individual companies.
The closest I've come to finding information I can use to impute the information needed to quantify the proposition you presented is the content found here: Chapter 2: Industries of Unauthorized Immigrant Workers.
Where I suspect one finds illegals is in the "other services" segment of the "professional, business & other services" industry. According to Pew Research:
The "other services" segment includes: landscaping and waste management, to personal services such as dry cleaning, nail salons, car washes and religious organizations. [1] Some 18% are in the leisure and hospitality sector, and 16% are in the construction industry. More than half (55%) of unauthorized immigrant workers are employed in these three sectors, compared with only 31% of U.S.-born workers.
Unauthorized immigrants are particularly concentrated in some subsets of each major industry. In 2012, they represented 24% of workers in the landscaping industry, 23% of those in private household employment, 20% of those in apparel manufacturing, 20% in crop production, 19% in the dry cleaning and laundry industry and 19% of those in building maintenance.
Unauthorized immigrants are particularly concentrated in some subsets of each major industry. In 2012, they represented 24% of workers in the landscaping industry, 23% of those in private household employment, 20% of those in apparel manufacturing, 20% in crop production, 19% in the dry cleaning and laundry industry and 19% of those in building maintenance.
Even using the information in table B3 and making the absurd assumption that illegal immigrants are evenly spread among all employers in the industry, one finds that in many cases very few illegals would be employed by any given employer. Take agriculture for example. Using the assumption just stated, one finds an average of ~20 illegal workers per employer, which amounts to $40K or less for a first offense or $200K for a third 20-person infraction. That's not at all a "big fine" insofar as the average revenue per worker in agriculture is ~$1.2M/year.
Therein is seen the preposterousness of your "big fine" proposition. The fine amounts need to be materially increased so they alter the value proposition, yet you and myriad others here haven't (that I know of) addressed that aspect of the matter. Quite simply, (1) the "penetration rate" of illegals at any given employer isn't going to be great enough and (2) there is no structure for assessing "big fines." Your proposition might be credible were those things in place to make "big fines" a possibility, but they're not in place like that now; thus your proposition is little but an illustration of your having "rushed in where angels fear to tread," or, if you prefer, "putting the cart ahead of the horse." Were you (others) to do some sort of halfway reasonable "back of the napkin" analysis instead of spouting off half-cocked, that wouldn't happen. [2]
Notes:
- Housekeeping falls in there somewhere, except when it is done as part of hospitality, in which case one is often again faced with the same incongruity I noted above regarding firms like mine.
- I don't recognize your ID, so I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by saying that. I realize there are folks here for whom, analysis or no analysis of whatever rigor, it'd still happen.