No. of Recommendations: 9
Anyone disagree?

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Do you know how e-verify works?

Can you run e-verify before a person is hired?

Can you fire someone for flunking e-verify?

What does the employer have to do if someone flunks.

What does the employee have to do if they flunk.

How long is the process?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Anyone disagree?
Papers, please.

The interactive nature of Papers, Please gives players a window into how fascism manifests itself in bureaucracy.
...Each piece of paper that the player checks represents a tacit agreement with state policy. The flip side is that each layer of bureaucracy is an opportunity to resist.

https://www.theringer.com/2017/2/9/16045604/papers-please-is...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
January 22, 2019 at 9:47AM. Mark that down.

WuLong and I agree on something.

:)

AW
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
WuLong and I agree on something.
That's what happens when you take the red pill.
Stay in Wonderland, and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Have a rec for the Morpheus quote.

AW
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
>Do you know how e-verify works?

Apparently not.

https://www.e-verify.gov/employers/verification-process

Please enlighten me.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Have a rec for the Morpheus quote.
But not one for the post you agree with? Sigh.

Btw, I'm actually serious with that quote. There are important skills that so many appear to be sorely lacking, including critical thought and broad perspective.
Persuasion generally requires one be capable of making the opposing argument. The alternative is merely some form of cheerleading.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
E-Verify and E-Verify services are currently unavailable due to a lapse in government appropriations.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Please enlighten me.

I don't really think you are serious, but...

1. The individual must be hired before the employer can do e-verify

2. If it comes back with a TNC Employers may not terminate, suspend, delay training, withhold or lower pay, or take any other adverse action against an employee because of the TNC, until the TNC becomes a Final Nonconfirmation.

Many times the employee is working at a very short term job (less than a month or two), especially if in agriculture. Often that is not enough time for the TNC to be resolved.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Thank you, Jean.

So there is no way to simply verify that a presented Social Security number appears in the US database and returns a name and age which matches the person applying for a job.

There should be.

It's crazy that the US creates this huge demand for low-paid workers but then tries desperately to turn away the people who respond.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
WuLong, do you refuse to verify your identity when you pass security at an airport?

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I always ask for explanations as to why.
While always being excessively polite (I say please, thank you, sir, madam), I make life as difficult as possible for the kabuki theater players.

Every time I look at TSA I wonder if the USSR really won.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I am of two minds.

As a law and order type, I fully support some form if instant (or near instant) E-verify program PRIOR to beginning of employment. It should be part of every job application. If we had mandatory E-verify, we would SIGNIFICANTLY reduce our need to track illegal entry. We would save a ton of money too on border enforcement.

As a freedom-loving libertarian at heart, I have to ask what business is it of the federal government who I employ? Where in the constitution does it state that I LACK the ability to enter into an employment contract with another person based on their status? This is especially true for 1099 employees where I am not required to collect SS and other taxes for them.

It is easy for me to give up my freedom in this regard but I wonder if I should. I feel the same way about a national ID card.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It is easy for me to give up my freedom in this regard but I wonder if I should. I feel the same way about a national ID card.
You already have a national ID card.

The Real ID Act of 2005 requires states to standardize driver’s licenses across the nation into a single national identity card and database.
https://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy-technology/national-id/r...

Did you even whimper?
Papers, please.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
As a law and order type, I fully support some form if instant (or near instant) E-verify program PRIOR to beginning of employment. It should be part of every job application. If we had mandatory E-verify, we would SIGNIFICANTLY reduce our need to track illegal entry. We would save a ton of money too on border enforcement.

Yes.

As a freedom-loving libertarian at heart, I have to ask what business is it of the federal government who I employ? Where in the constitution does it state that I LACK the ability to enter into an employment contract with another person based on their status? This is especially true for 1099 employees where I am not required to collect SS and other taxes for them.

The database doesn't have to be set up that way - all you would need to do is query the database to see if somebody had a legit tax ID and/or social security number. That's it. An independent contractor would have their own tax records, btw.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
You already have a national ID card.

Only for drivers. I know it is a technicality but in remains that I a person is not necessarily forced to get one. There are many seniors and urban dwellers that don't drive.

Will still need Real ID to fly though.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
There are many seniors and urban dwellers that don't drive.
My 92-year-old mother-in-law had to get a state ID in order to open an IRA and inherit her husband's account.
And those state IDs go into the same database.

Papers, please.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
all you would need to do is query the database to see if somebody had a legit tax ID and/or social security number

Doesn't matter. Same problem.

Nothing in the constitution requires that I demand your SS if I wanted to pay you to mow my lawn. Nothing requires you to provide me such documentation either. I don't even have to verify your identity in order to establish a contract with you under contract law.

Offer, acceptance, consideration.

While my example might be a bit facetious, the principle remains that I have no mandatory responsibility to the fed to help them ferret out our otherwise determine undocumented individuals and to keep them from working. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is for all humans, not just citizens. The Bill of Rights mentions rights of "people" or "persons" it never once states "citizens."

I remain of two minds on this issue. I feel strongly about both.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
While my example might be a bit facetious, the principle remains that I have no mandatory responsibility to the fed to help them ferret out our otherwise determine undocumented individuals and to keep them from working. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is for all humans, not just citizens. The Bill of Rights mentions rights of "people" or "persons" it never once states "citizens."

All true - and here comes my very weak rebuttal - don't you have an obligation as a citizen to look after the best interests of the nation, including doing what you can to protect it from fraud?

^---One of the worst counters I've ever made on the Fool.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
^---One of the worst counters I've ever made on the Fool. -dope

Nah. You've done far worse.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'm with TheDope1 on the subject of national ID. I agree with Hawkwin that a uniform, simple, and foolproof ID check is far better than tens of thousands of ICE agents roaming the nation and harassing persons.

I have a bunch of rights as a US cutizen; I have fewer rights as a guest in the US. These rights are incredibly important and should be defended with vigilance. Identifying ourselves in order to claim those rights is a minor and logically necessary tradeoff.

The travesty is how quickly we surrendered our rights to privacy and convenience in the wake of 9/11 out of fear of an infinitesimal danger of attack by terrorists.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
>Nothing in the constitution requires that I demand your SS if I wanted to pay you to mow my lawn.

Criminy.

Where in the Constitution does it say you must have a license to drive?

Where in the Constitution does it say you can't spread poison on your own property?

Where in the Constitution does it say we can make laws and enforce them? Oh, yeah... It does say that.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Wow.
That may be the most internally inconsistent post I've read in the past year.

...is a minor and logically necessary tradeoff.
The travesty is how quickly we surrendered our rights to privacy and convenience in the wake of 9/11 out of fear of an infinitesimal danger of attack by terrorists.


Two sentences back to back that are diametrically opposed. Stunning.

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
WuLong, you want to board a plane anonymously. I want to stop wholesale data mining of private phone calls.

I guess we all make choices...

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
”>Nothing in the constitution requires that I demand your SS if I wanted to pay you to mow my lawn.

Criminy.

Where in the Constitution does it say you must have a license to drive?

Where in the Constitution does it say you can't spread poison on your own property?

Where in the Constitution does it say we can make laws and enforce them? Oh, yeah... It does say that.”


It doesn’t say in the constitution you must have a license to drive. Those are things states impose and the federal government does not have the power to do it. The constitution doesn’t say you can’t spread poison on your property. Those would fall under state or local law. Finally, you got the last one right. Well, half right. The feds can’t just make up any law they want.

Cheers,

Vile
NEVER SAY DIE!!!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Where in the Constitution does it say you must have a license to drive?

Since I don't own the road, I have no objection to the owner of the road requiring action on my part to enjoy their property.

Where in the Constitution does it say you can't spread poison on your own property?

Assuming it is not a banned substance, I can spread poison on my own property up until the point I endanger my neighbors.

Where in the Constitution does it say we can make laws and enforce them? Oh, yeah... It does say that.

Really? Read the Bill of Rights lately?

What else you got?

Here is a hint, neither the state nor the federal government can compel me to have a state ID or a driver license. If I owned a large piece of property, I could freely drive my vehicle on it without breaking any laws.

If I want to engage in a contract with another person, in intrastate commerce, and have them mow my lawn, what interest is it of the federal government? And, how is that interest more important that my right to be secure in my "persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures?"
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
WuLong, you want to board a plane anonymously.
Technically, I want to live my life with minimal government intrusion. I don't see why a government should track a citizen's free exercise of rights.
But apparently, you and I have different definitions for both "minimal" and "right".

I want to stop wholesale data mining of private phone calls.
Implying I don't? Puh-lease.

I guess we all make choices...
Yeah.
It fascinates me that for all their fist shaking, progressives never seem to actually do anything.
As a conservative, I'm actually the more revolutionary. Go figure.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Don't make it mandatory - increase the penalties for hiring illegals, but mitigate the punishment if the employer can make a showing that he made a good faith effort to avoid committing that crime by using e-verify.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I would let the employer off the hook completely if they used E-verify. But jeanwa opened my eyes to the fact that you have to hire someone before you can use E-verify. And then it takes months to unhire thrm if they fail.

That's crazy.

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
WuLong, how many jobs have you held in your life? I counted mine and it's seven before I became self-employed. That includes my summer job working in a TV repair shop.

Seven times in a lifetime that I would have to produce ID for employment according to my plan.

That's what I call "minimal government intrusion".

And in return we can pretty much eliminate ICE raids, highway blockades, border walls, etc.

Which do you prefer?

Peter
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
You offer a false choice.
Sad.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
I would let the employer off the hook completely if they used E-verify. But jeanwa opened my eyes to the fact that you have to hire someone before you can use E-verify. And then it takes months to unhire thrm if they fail.

That's crazy.

Peter

===================

The events of today reminded me of this post. We live 30 miles from the nearest DMV and SS office.

DH went to get his drivers license renewed today. It expired on the 21st of Feb, but snow and stuff delayed him.

Anyway the DMV did an e-verify on him.

When he got his SS card he told them his name was Bob (he was 15) and they put Bob on the card. His name is Robert. (I thought we had cleared this up since we've been filing w-2 electronically for years and after the first year there was no ss mismatch) He's been on Medicare and SS for awhile. (He's 76)

However, e-verify mismatched at the DMV. Since the e-verify flunked him he had to go to SS to get it cleared up. He went to SS office... they couldn't verify his ID because his driver's license was expired. He had to get a doctor to sign a statement to say he was who he said he was.

Nothing is simple.

Jean
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Nothing is simple.
How do you know that you know what you know?

This is actually a serious problem for computer systems. How do you ensure data integrity? What is the "golden source of truth"?


Papers, please.
Print the post Back To Top