Dishwasher and $59,000

[spare_change]

The following is an article, verbatim, from the CNN website.

Comments in two areas, please.

1) The plight of Pedro Zapeta and his money
2) The pro-illegal immigrant slant of the article, as crafted by the "reporters"


From John Zarrella and Patrick Oppmann CNN

MIAMI, Florida (CNN) -- For 11 years, Pedro Zapeta, an illegal immigrant from Guatemala, lived his version of the American dream in Stuart, Florida: washing dishes and living frugally to bring money back to his home country.
Zapeta

Pedro Zapeta, an illegal immigrant, managed to save $59,000 while working as a dishwasher for 11 years.

Two years ago, Zapeta was ready to return to Guatemala, so he carried a duffel bag filled with $59,000 -- all the cash he had scrimped and saved over the years -- to the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport.

But when Zapeta tried to go through airport security, an officer spotted the money in the bag and called U.S. customs officials.

"They asked me how much money I had," Zapeta recalled, speaking to CNN in Spanish.

He told the customs officials $59,000. At that point, U.S. customs seized his money, setting off a two-year struggle for Zapeta to get it back. Video Zapeta describes how he lost his money »

Zapeta, who speaks no English, said he didn't know he was running afoul of U.S. law by failing to declare he was carrying more than $10,000 with him. Anyone entering or leaving the country with more than $10,000 has to fill out a one-page form declaring the money to U.S. customs.

Officials initially accused Zapeta of being a courier for the drug trade, but they dropped the allegation once he produced pay stubs from restaurants where he had worked. Zapeta earned $5.50 an hour at most of the places where he washed dishes. When he learned to do more, he got a 25-cent raise.

After customs officials seized the money, they turned Zapeta over to the Immigration and Naturalization Service. The INS released him but began deportation proceedings. For two years, Zapeta has had two attorneys working pro bono: one on his immigration case, the other trying to get his money back.

"They are treating me like a criminal when all I am is a working man," he said.

Zapeta's story became public last year on CNN and in The Palm Beach Post newspaper, prompting well-wishers to give him nearly $10,000 -- money that now sits in a trust.

Robert Gershman, one of Zapeta's attorneys, said federal prosecutors later offered his client a deal: He could take $10,000 of the original cash seized, plus $9,000 in donations as long as he didn't talk publicly and left the country immediately.

Zapeta said, "No." He wanted all his money. He'd earned it, he said.

Now, according to Gershman, the Internal Revenue Service wants access to the donated cash to cover taxes on the donations and on the money Zapeta made as a dishwasher. Zapeta admits he never paid taxes.

CNN contacted the U.S. Attorneys office in Miami, U.S. Customs and the IRS about Zapeta's case. They all declined to comment.

Marisol Zequeira, an immigration lawyer, said illegal immigrants such as Zapeta have few options when dealing with the U.S. government.

"When you are poor, uneducated and illegal, your avenues are cut," he said.

On Wednesday, Zapeta went to immigration court and got more bad news. The judge gave the dishwasher until the end of January to leave the country on his own. He's unlikely to see a penny of his money.

"I am desperate," Zapeta said. "I no longer feel good about this country."

Zapeta said his goal in coming to the United States was to make enough money to buy land in his mountain village and build a home for his mother and sisters. He sent no money back to Guatemala over the years, he said, and planned to bring it all home at once.
advertisement

At Wednesday's hearing, Zapeta was given official status in the United States -- voluntary departure -- and a signed order from a judge. For the first time, he can work legally in the U.S.

By the end of January, Zapeta may be able to earn enough money to pay for a one-way ticket home so the U.S. government, which seized his $59,000, doesn't have to do so

[spare_change]

Does he deserve his $59,000?

Should he given the money and deported?

Should he be given the money and be allowed to stay in the US?

Is the article slanted toward a particular opinion?

[c50t]

"I am desperate," Zapeta said. "I no longer feel good about this country."

Wow, I think if they made me pay taxes after 11 years I wouldn't feel so good about it either.


By the end of January, Zapeta may be able to earn enough money to pay for a one-way ticket home so the U.S. government, which seized his $59,000, doesn't have to do so

Yeah, it was "his" money - even though he 'earned' it outside the law- and he'd being doing the U.S. a huge favor if he paid for his ticket home.
So - the facts, as I can dig for them in this article are:
1: he worked for 11 years illeagaly
2. he never wanted to be a leagal citizen
3. he never intended to pay taxes
4. he wanted to take 11 years of savings to his home all at once without declaring it (breaking another customs law)
5. he served no jail time
6. he got offered $19,000 and freedom to leave but refused
7. he has two free lawyers
8. he is free to go to his home

Customs took a pocket knife from me before I boarded a flight. I wonder if any lawyers out there could get it back for me?

[Lacey]

Does he deserve his $59,000?

Should he given the money and deported?

Should he be given the money and be allowed to stay in the US?

Is the article slanted toward a particular opinion?




Does he deserve his $59,000?
Yes! He worked for that money it is his.

Should he given the money and deported?
Yes he should be given the money,as far as deported,that's not my call,I think alot of people need to be deported lol

As far as staying here,he says he came here to make money to buy land for his Mom and family,damnit it's hard to say,I usually don't like to say anything about this stuff because it aggravates the tar out me!But I think if it's that important to him ,get the money and go home(his home!)

JMO

[twoblues]

If the IRS taxes him for the 11 years, then they are pretty much saying that it's his money and should give him the remains.

Though, over that many years, working minimum wage, will he even pay any taxes on that amount? That's just over $5000 a year plus whatever living money he needed as well.

He was an illegal worker, couldn't speak any English...and....not too bright for travelling with that much money! I hardly carry more than $100 at any one time and even then I feel nervous!

Soo...

1) Yes, he deserves his money, but Uncle Sam should get his taxes as well.
2) Pro-illegal slant? Nah, didn't really read much of one into this story. Some pity maybe, but not pro-illegal slant.

[spare_change]

I particularly enjoyed his comment:

"They are treating me like a criminal when all I am is a working man," he said.

[PunkyBob]

The poor man worked his ass off for that money--washing dishes for 11 years is hard work. I've washed dishes for a living. And yes, he is illegal, and should be sent home. Yes, the IRS should take taxes out (if you can tax a man who makes 5K/year. Hell, I didn't even know about the 10k traveling limit.) It would be nice if all the neighboring countries could manage to get their economies together and there was no reason to sneak in here and pick grapes or wash dishes or whatever just to survive...but with our (former) jobs going overseas, mortgage companies going bust one after another, millions of people maxed out on credit cards buying $150 sneakers and every damn gadget the mega-corps produce...should we really talk?

[spare_change]

It's safe to say he earned this money while committing a crime - being in this country illegally. Does that make his wages illegal?

The taxes on $59,000, plus the interest and penalties for not filing for 11 years probably will exceed $59,000. He also used a false social security number - another crime that can be significant fines and even jail time. He had to use false identification in order to rent a place to live, as well as many other every day activities. So, it's safe to say he has a long pattern of crime.

When you apply for your passport, which you now need to get into and out of Mexico, he would have been briefed about the $10k limit -- so, apparently, his exit from the country was going to be just as illegal as his entry.

BTW - he didn't make $5K a year -- he saved $5k a year --- his salary was about $13,000 (assuming they were minimum wage), still not exactly get-rich money.

By the way, what do I think? Be nice guys, give him his $59K, put him on our border watch list, and send him home.

[Pebbles]

At the end of the day, he did wrong, the employer did MORE wrong. Is he being held liable? We all certainly know he knew he was breaking one of his own countrys laws. Goodness, where is compassion? Sure, send him back, but with ALL HIS money except the taxes. Then go after the employer (s), and prosecute them for income tax evation. Let's get this heated over illegals who rape, murder, or just don't work to take care of their basic needs, and steal just to eat because they are plain too lazy to work, but want to stay in USA!

[oldandnaked]

I think we should send him to Washington and put him in charge of the Federal Budget. Anybody who can save $5,000 a year while only earning a measly $13,000 certainly can teach the Yahoos currently running the show a thing or two.

[PunkyBob]

I think we should send him to Washington and put him in charge of the Federal Budget. Anybody who can save $5,000 a year while only earning a measly $13,000 certainly can teach the Yahoos currently running the show a thing or two.

I totally agree. Good point. Why are the people in charge of the money those who don't know what it's like to worry about it???

As far as "crime," yeah it's a crime to be here illegally, work, take money, not pay taxes. It's a shame on us as humans that we created a system that this kind of thing has to exist. Now, on the real, practical side, many foreigners believe the streets here are "paved with gold." If your country at home is so corrupt and difficult to live in that you have to sneak into another just to earn a living or support a family...then this "crime" you commit must be secondary to need.

[spare_change]

At the end of the day, he did wrong, the employer did MORE wrong. Is he being held liable? We all certainly know he knew he was breaking one of his own countrys laws. Goodness, where is compassion? Sure, send him back, but with ALL HIS money except the taxes. Then go after the employer (s), and prosecute them for income tax evation. Let's get this heated over illegals who rape, murder, or just don't work to take care of their basic needs, and steal just to eat because they are plain too lazy to work, but want to stay in USA!

I don't follow the logic --- the employer did MORE wrong? How is that so? The man used falsified documents, willingly committed crimes, misled and duped his employer. How can the employer be more wrong? You are blaming a series of employers because of the crimes of the employee -- it's easier to blame the non-human entity (government, insurance company, employer, etc) than to hold people responsible for their actions.

I agree that there are employers who facilitate the illegal immigrant situation, by knowingly hiring them. But, since this guy used falsified documents, I don't think his employers fall into that category.

The employer didn't avoid taxes --- that's the employee. There's no way, in an income tax system, that the employer can have evaded taxes.

There are only two answers -- give him all his money and send him home, or take all his money and send him home. Since the tax penalties and fees will greatly exceed the money saved, there isn't any way he gets part of his money.

[spare_change]

I totally agree. Good point. Why are the people in charge of the money those who don't know what it's like to worry about it???

As far as "crime," yeah it's a crime to be here illegally, work, take money, not pay taxes. It's a shame on us as humans that we created a system that this kind of thing has to exist. Now, on the real, practical side, many foreigners believe the streets here are "paved with gold." If your country at home is so corrupt and difficult to live in that you have to sneak into another just to earn a living or support a family...then this "crime" you commit must be secondary to need.


Ok, I'm interested.

Are you in favor of open borders -- no immigration control -- because we, as compassionate people, should be willing to allow them to come here for a better life?

I recognize the humanitarianism in your comment -- but I'm curious how you would propose to implement it in today's world.

[PunkyBob]

Ok, I'm interested.

Are you in favor of open borders -- no immigration control -- because we, as compassionate people, should be willing to allow them to come here for a better life?

I recognize the humanitarianism in your comment -- but I'm curious how you would propose to implement it in today's world.

First, I am not a political expert, and I'm sure that the myriad intricacies of the situation are beyond my abilities and knowledge. But to address your questions, I am not in favor of open borders for the obvious reasons: economic and security issues. That said, I don't see how the US will ever be able to stem the influx of illegals. Do we build a wall, as some people suggest? Would that serve an opposite purpose as the Berlin Wall? Arm everyone with orders to shoot border crossers? I see the furthering of a police state scenario here. No...I believe that the problem rests with those who control governments and economies. But we cannot dictate to others how to run their countries; that's imperialistic and untenable. We cannot control those who operate the financial systems, either, as we haven't yet come close to controlling our own...we have fewer jobs every year, fewer resources for economic relief as it is. As I see it (for whatever that's worth) the problem is a top-down issue. Populations will operate however they can within a structure in order to survive. I suggest that it is the structure itself that requires an overhaul. Why, with all of our food-producing and economic strength, is there so much poverty in our own backyard?

Maybe because of who we are as humans and how we are subject to greed, there isn't a viable solution. As I said, I am not an economic expert, but I do attempt to not remain too ignorant. I'm sure, Spare, that you probably have more knowledge on this subject than I. What do you see as the solution to this? I'm always willing to listen.

[spare_change]

First, I am not a political expert, and I'm sure that the myriad intricacies of the situation are beyond my abilities and knowledge. But to address your questions, I am not in favor of open borders for the obvious reasons: economic and security issues. That said, I don't see how the US will ever be able to stem the influx of illegals. Do we build a wall, as some people suggest? Would that serve an opposite purpose as the Berlin Wall? Arm everyone with orders to shoot border crossers? I see the furthering of a police state scenario here. No...I believe that the problem rests with those who control governments and economies. But we cannot dictate to others how to run their countries; that's imperialistic and untenable. We cannot control those who operate the financial systems, either, as we haven't yet come close to controlling our own...we have fewer jobs every year, fewer resources for economic relief as it is. As I see it (for whatever that's worth) the problem is a top-down issue. Populations will operate however they can within a structure in order to survive. I suggest that it is the structure itself that requires an overhaul. Why, with all of our food-producing and economic strength, is there so much poverty in our own backyard?

Maybe because of who we are as humans and how we are subject to greed, there isn't a viable solution. As I said, I am not an economic expert, but I do attempt to not remain too ignorant. I'm sure, Spare, that you probably have more knowledge on this subject than I. What do you see as the solution to this? I'm always willing to listen.

I don't claim knowledge in this particular area -- only opinions (for which knowledge is not required).

But now -- for my opinion --

First, about poverty -- we, as Americans, don't have any idea what poverty is about. We think of poverty in relative terms -- some people have less than others. Our poverty is measured in STUFF --- nobody in our country has to starve. We have programs to stop that. Nobody is denied health care (despite what you hear). We have programs to stop that. Think about our "poverty level". If we measured the income of all the Americans below the "poverty level", we would have a gross income that far exceeds some 3rd world countries!! Poverty is about not having clean water, or enough to eat, or houses made out of cardboard or sugar cane leaves. Poverty is about open sewage running in the streets, and little kids dying because there is no milk. So, in the US, we have "relative" poverty - in the rest of the world, we have "real" poverty.

Now, having said all that -- and I have no idea why I said all that - the border issue is vexing. It's not a matter of degree -- do we ignore some illegals while focusing on others? -- it's an open/closed decision. I just don't see how there can be degrees of control on the border. I don't think that's possible. The real question becomes "How do we balance our compassion for our fellow man with our need for security?" In order to have security, we need to close, and control, the borders. The methodology is merely a matter of implementation.

But, once we close the borders, how do we help our fellow man? I guess we have to go to them -- bring the fruits of our efforts to them thru charity or giving or assistance. But, we have to do it as people, not as a government -- the answer isn't the "Poor People's Assistance Office" of the government -- the answer is a person-to-person, local charity, involvement. The Peace Corps, for example, is a marvelous way to help people -- if we can figure out how to get the government out of it. Church ministries will work, sometimes.

I don't know -- we need to secure the borders in order to ensure our own safety. We also need to share our blessings, and our bounty, with our fellow man. The trick is to figure out how --- frankly, I ain't got a clue.

[PunkyBob]

I don't claim knowledge in this particular area -- only opinions (for which knowledge is not required).

But now -- for my opinion --

First, about poverty -- we, as Americans, don't have any idea what poverty is about. We think of poverty in relative terms -- some people have less than others. Our poverty is measured in STUFF --- nobody in our country has to starve. We have programs to stop that. Nobody is denied health care (despite what you hear). We have programs to stop that. Think about our "poverty level". If we measured the income of all the Americans below the "poverty level", we would have a gross income that far exceeds some 3rd world countries!! Poverty is about not having clean water, or enough to eat, or houses made out of cardboard or sugar cane leaves. Poverty is about open sewage running in the streets, and little kids dying because there is no milk. So, in the US, we have "relative" poverty - in the rest of the world, we have "real" poverty.

Now, having said all that -- and I have no idea why I said all that - the border issue is vexing. It's not a matter of degree -- do we ignore some illegals while focusing on others? -- it's an open/closed decision. I just don't see how there can be degrees of control on the border. I don't think that's possible. The real question becomes "How do we balance our compassion for our fellow man with our need for security?" In order to have security, we need to close, and control, the borders. The methodology is merely a matter of implementation.

But, once we close the borders, how do we help our fellow man? I guess we have to go to them -- bring the fruits of our efforts to them thru charity or giving or assistance. But, we have to do it as people, not as a government -- the answer isn't the "Poor People's Assistance Office" of the government -- the answer is a person-to-person, local charity, involvement. The Peace Corps, for example, is a marvelous way to help people -- if we can figure out how to get the government out of it. Church ministries will work, sometimes.

I don't know -- we need to secure the borders in order to ensure our own safety. We also need to share our blessings, and our bounty, with our fellow man. The trick is to figure out how --- frankly, I ain't got a clue.

I'm not sure why I find myself surprised to be agreeing with you...I think I expected a more hard-line response...so for that I apologize. You're right...the border question is vexing. And I do believe it is up to us as individuals to begin the cure, as the well-equipped mega-corps only look after their own bottom lines and continue to plunder the Earth's resources without regard for humanity...witness the actions of Coca-Cola in South America...slave wages, union-breaking tactics that include murder...and all for a soft drink. The list is mind-bogglingly endless.

You do state hard reality: poverty is indeed--overall--much worse elsewhere, although the sight of individuals and whole families in NYC subway station begging for food money because they couldn't cut it economically (for whatever reasons) just breaks my heart. On the whole I think we could do more as a country for ourselves, and I think increases in public assistance, preventing our jobs from going overseas, and measures designed to control porporate personhood could make a critical difference.

As to the border issue (remember that?) I'm not sure there is a complete solution. Increased security (reports state severe underfunding in this area, despite the trumpet-blowing from the White House--as, indeed, with our troops overseas) might increase effectiveness. Then again, I weaken here when confronted with the reality of some unlucky person forced to sneak in and eke out an existence on the sly. Many foreigners come here believing the streets are paved with gold...only to find they ain't.

There's so much more to this...

[p.a]

Doing the math: $59000/11 years = $5363.63 per year = $446.96 per month = $111.74 per week = $5.58 per hour working 20 hours per week

But if he worked 2 jobs at the same pay 40 hours per week then he made $118000.00 in 11 years, $10726.00 per year, $893.92 per month, 223.48 per week.

What does rent, food, utilities cost in Florida per month? 11 years is a long time without a woman. What does sex cost in Florida?
When you do the numbers, things don't always add up.

"I am desperate," Zapeta said. "I no longer feel good about this country."

He no longer feels good about this country for not allowing him to steal from it?

There are hundreds of thousands who enter this country from very bad places legally. They go through the long process of becoming citizens who work those $5.50 an hour jobs and pay some tax no matter how little. Should we tell them how stupid it is to be an american citizen and pay taxes when you can be illegal and get pretty much the same rights and benefits?


Not gonna get on the soap box here.

[PunkyBob]

Doing the math: $59000/11 years = $5363.63 per year = $446.96 per month = $111.74 per week = $5.58 per hour working 20 hours per week

But if he worked 2 jobs at the same pay 40 hours per week then he made $118000.00 in 11 years, $10726.00 per year, $893.92 per month, 223.48 per week.

What does rent, food, utilities cost in Florida per month? 11 years is a long time without a woman. What does sex cost in Florida?
When you do the numbers, things don't always add up.

"I am desperate," Zapeta said. "I no longer feel good about this country."

He no longer feels good about this country for not allowing him to steal from it?

There are hundreds of thousands who enter this country from very bad places legally. They go through the long process of becoming citizens who work those $5.50 an hour jobs and pay some tax no matter how little. Should we tell them how stupid it is to be an american citizen and pay taxes when you can be illegal and get pretty much the same rights and benefits?


Not gonna get on the soap box here.





Ummm...you just did.

[p.a]

Ummm...you just did.

YOUR RIGHT I DID...MY BAD:thankyou:

[mrdiscreet]

Ummm...you just did.

Stepping up to the soapbox ...

We have major illegal immigration because the US market demands it and condones it, then beats up on those who perform our most menial jobs so we can live less expensive lives.

And its not just small restaurants. The largest food conglomerates in the world are huge employers, as are manufacturing plants; interestingly, not always at rock bottom wages, sometimes $10 an hour range.

If we really want immigration reform, start prosecuting the employers. That is the achieveable control point if we really want to do so. But that would be targeting one of "us" instead of the foreign "them".

But before we do that let's look at the emerging demographics: we are a baby boom bust society, and will increasingly need immigration to wipe our wrinkled asses as we age.

Fine, but do it legally? OK, but lets get real about what levels of immigration, guest workers, etc. are really needed. Now it's the thrid rail for politicians.

[p.a]

Stepping up to the soapbox ...

We have major illegal immigration because the US market demands it and condones it, then beats up on those who perform our most menial jobs so we can live less expensive lives.

And its not just small restaurants. The largest food conglomerates in the world are huge employers, as are manufacturing plants; interestingly, not always at rock bottom wages, sometimes $10 an hour range.

If we really want immigration reform, start prosecuting the employers. That is the achieveable control point if we really want to do so. But that would be targeting one of "us" instead of the foreign "them".

But before we do that let's look at the emerging demographics: we are a baby boom bust society, and will increasingly need immigration to wipe our wrinkled asses as we age.

Fine, but do it legally? OK, but lets get real about what levels of immigration, guest workers, etc. are really needed. Now it's the thrid rail for politicians.

Agrees 100%

[spare_change]

I'm not sure why I find myself surprised to be agreeing with you...I think I expected a more hard-line response...so for that I apologize. You're right...the border question is vexing. And I do believe it is up to us as individuals to begin the cure, as the well-equipped mega-corps only look after their own bottom lines and continue to plunder the Earth's resources without regard for humanity...witness the actions of Coca-Cola in South America...slave wages, union-breaking tactics that include murder...and all for a soft drink. The list is mind-bogglingly endless.

You do state hard reality: poverty is indeed--overall--much worse elsewhere, although the sight of individuals and whole families in NYC subway station begging for food money because they couldn't cut it economically (for whatever reasons) just breaks my heart. On the whole I think we could do more as a country for ourselves, and I think increases in public assistance, preventing our jobs from going overseas, and measures designed to control porporate personhood could make a critical difference.

As to the border issue (remember that?) I'm not sure there is a complete solution. Increased security (reports state severe underfunding in this area, despite the trumpet-blowing from the White House--as, indeed, with our troops overseas) might increase effectiveness. Then again, I weaken here when confronted with the reality of some unlucky person forced to sneak in and eke out an existence on the sly. Many foreigners come here believing the streets are paved with gold...only to find they ain't.

There's so much more to this...

Oh-oh! Here comes the hard-line stuff!

I don't think there's more to this--- I think you have to treat the border issue as a security issue, and nothing else. Our security has to be paramount. If we aren't secure - to follow your train of thought - we can't create the wealth necessary to help those on the other side of the fence, and we do need to help them .... on the other side of the fence (that's a rhetorical fence -- lol).

The Cold War was won using economic weapons - essentially, Reagan forced the USSR to spend so much money that they went bankrupt. We can use those same forces for good intentions. We talk about the impact of our jobs going to Mexico or Thailand or wherever. But, think of the positive impact of those jobs in that country.

What if we were to insist that Americans can only buy products made in the US? The Coca Cola plant in the US (must be hundreds) would support our economy. Conversely, the Coca Cola plant in Mexico wouldn't sell in the US -- no more producing for a nickel and selling for a dollar. If they produce for a nickel, then they have to sell it for 15 cents, cuz that's all the Mexican community can support.

I dunno -- never gave it that much thought.

But, back to the illegal immigration -- peter is correct. To allow this guy to keep the money is a direct slap in the face to all the honest immigrants ;out there. The man is a criminal, and his money was illegally gained. The rule of law must apply -- or there is no law at all.

[mrdiscreet]

Criminal? I don't know the answer. I know we don't prosecute and throw in jail (or at least I don't think we do?), but instead use deportation proceedings.

I go with equity here on the guy's $59K: he worked hard to earn it; if the penalty is getting booted form the country, OK, but confiscating the cash is cruel.

And on the taxes: typically illegals give a phony soc sec # and taxes (along with 5.85% soc. sec.) are withheld; as an illegal, they never file for refunds or get soc. sec. benefits; in fact, they are a huge net plus to financing our gov't, as much as most of the bottom 50% of citizens.

So maybe be generous with the tip next time your at the carwash?

[Pebbles]

Criminal? I don't know the answer. I know we don't prosecute and throw in jail (or at least I don't think we do?), but instead use deportation proceedings.

I go with equity here on the guy's $59K: he worked hard to earn it; if the penalty is getting booted form the country, OK, but confiscating the cash is cruel.

And on the taxes: typically illegals give a phony soc sec # and taxes (along with 5.85% soc. sec.) are withheld; as an illegal, they never file for refunds or get soc. sec. benefits; in fact, they are a huge net plus to financing our gov't, as much as most of the bottom 50% of citizens.

So maybe be generous with the tip next time your at the carwash?

If you read the newspapers and see all the cases of illegals being deported that had phony papers...only to see that they return (some times as little as two weeks)with new phony papers and go back to work at the same company they had worked at before.. makes me wonder why the employers aren't blamed more for letting this type thing happen. Don't tell me this kind of thing doesn't happen..because I worked in a packing house for over 20 years and know what they do. They are the ones who have advertised in Mexican newspapers looking for help. The companies are the ones who give these illegals work.
Sure the illegals are at fault to! They just wanted a better job and a better way of life. The US government wouldn't give them a work visa to come and work in the US. So they decided to do it illegally. This has been going on for so many years...that correcting it now..will be all most impossible. Close off the borders to the USA...how can this be done? What freedoms will all American citizens loose to accomplish this illegal problem? Why wasn't this problem handled many years ago...like it should have been? Tell me that.

[spare_change]

I agree you can find individual instances where illegal immigrants are a boon to the system, but statistics clearly indicate that, taken en masse, they are a drain on the system.

As for criminal - income tax evasion is a crime. If the IRS applies all the financial penalties and fees, he will owe more than the $59,000, and will be eligible for about 15 years in federal prison.

[mrdiscreet]

I agree you can find individual instances where illegal immigrants are a boon to the system, but statistics clearly indicate that, taken en masse, they are a drain on the system.

As for criminal - income tax evasion is a crime. If the IRS applies all the financial penalties and fees, he will owe more than the $59,000, and will be eligible for about 15 years in federal prison.

What are the penalties for failure to file if you would have been owed a refund? I don't know if this particular guy's employer withheld, but that employer engaged in tax fraud if he did not. And I am certain the illegal did not try to justify an EXEMPT classification with his employer.

If anyone has the tax expertise, I'd be very interested in what he might truly owe. Can't imagine its a significant number.

Drain on the system? Open borders should warm the hearts of true free-market conservatives. It's the free market in action, not burdened by pesky gov't regulation.

[roadie4us]

As Clint Eastwood said...deserves got nothing to do with it. Yes he deserves his money (after taxes) just as everyone else would be....but that isnt the main issue.

Deported yes....given his money, no. Wrong precedent to set. Opens the door to examine any benefits he may have received (medical care, food stamps, etc.) and if he should pay that back before leaving.

No, he sould not be allowed to stay in U.S. thus would not be intitled to the money.

The article seemed to present the key or important facts to the case and you can find pro and con argument on both sides. I support issuance of green cards for people to work in this country but I also support the enforcement of the same. It sounds like he came into this country with the intent to return home someday with his tax free moneys. I think it would be fair to have him pay his back taxes (plus interest), pay his attorney/court costs.....then give him the balance and deport.


Does he deserve his $59,000?

Should he given the money and deported?

Should he be given the money and be allowed to stay in the US?

Is the article slanted toward a particular opinion?

[mrdiscreet]

Re-reading the article, the only IRS claim was gift tax (10% or $1K) on the $10k in donations he received when his plight became public. No suggestion the original seized $59K was subject to any unpaid tax.

I would think the fair tax crowd would instead be enraged that the IRS taxes gifting.

Whatever we want to do about immigration, the freeloader argument unfairly tars these people: they do pay income and soc sec. taxes, and are not entitled to benefits. Do they qualify for food stamps? Maybe I'm wrong, but hard to imagine that. Yes, I'm sure they burden healthcare. They are in good company on that front.

The reality is these illegals embody the work ethic this country was founded on. Maybe we've changed, and our economy is more mature, and we no longer believe this:

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

And again, you want to shut this down? Start jailing the employers and seizing their profits. This is your effective control point.

[p.a]

Re-reading the article, the only IRS claim was gift tax (10% or $1K) on the $10k in donations he received when his plight became public. No suggestion the original seized $59K was subject to any unpaid tax.

I would think the fair tax crowd would instead be enraged that the IRS taxes gifting.

Whatever we want to do about immigration, the freeloader argument unfairly tars these people: they do pay income and soc sec. taxes, and are not entitled to benefits. Do they qualify for food stamps? Maybe I'm wrong, but hard to imagine that. Yes, I'm sure they burden healthcare. They are in good company on that front.

The reality is these illegals embody the work ethic this country was founded on. Maybe we've changed, and our economy is more mature, and we no longer believe this:

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

And again, you want to shut this down? Start jailing the employers and seizing their profits. This is your effective control point.


"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Posted on the Statue of Liberty at Ellis Island which is the front door where legal aliens came into the country.

Are we condoning paid slavery now? Are illegals the new indentured servants?

The work ethic you speak of also came with a promise of EQUAL OPPORTUNITY......Washing dishes at $5.50 and hour for elven years just don't sound like opportunity to me. Rather it sounds like it's ok for those who have nothing to strive for nothing. We use the reality of poorer countries as the measuring stick by which we condone the condition of our own less fortunates.

This country also use to have a standard of living that we who live here use to boast about. We called it " The American Dream ". When did the American dream become " I just wanted to earn enough to return to my native country and buy land"? If where this guy is from was so bad, why does he want to go back? When did America become the cash cow for foreigners?

And not all illegal aliens pay taxes and or social security because many get paid in cash. Some employers even use prepaid credit/debit cards that need no paper trail. Only need $9.95 to purchase one and $4.95 to reload any amount.

And here's food for thought. Right now in this country we have the rich, middle class, and the poor. When the middle class disappears, there is no buffer between the very rich and the very poor. When you fall from that lofty position, you fall hard.

[mrdiscreet]

I'm not so sure how much we disagree, or even if we disagree at all.

Perhaps in that I don't fault immigrants for wanting to better their lives, don't want to see them become the focus/scapegoat for anger keyed to larger issues in our society. And I'm not sure how many jobs they are taking away that citizens want.

This such a thorny topic. We must have immigration limits, agreed. Yet how to make it work ... I don't really have a clue.

And I agree we are rapidly becoming a society of rich/poor, with a disappearing middle class. That is the logical result of pure capitalism, which we embrace as a society far more today than even our founding fathers did.

I know this has been a rambling post ... so many different aspects to this I just get confused.

A large part of our immigration history was intended to break labor unions: keep the available labor supply high, and wages low. Henry Ford was a master of this. So in a way, this is nothing new. So maybe illegal immigration does keep wages lower than restaurants or builders or whoever would have to pay otherwise ...

I do fear for the quality of life our kids -- and most definitely our grandkids -- will be able to achieve.

I have seen demographics that show we are going to need boatloads of immigrants to keep our economy moving as the baby boom generation retires; so in that sense, maybe our kids will end up being in demand, and we will need to open the floodgates to get the people we need.

[mrdiscreet]

Firms Brace for Crackdown on Illegal Labor
By MIRIAM JORDAN
October 1, 2007

A U.S. district court in San Francisco could decide as early as today whether the Social Security Administration can send out thousands of "no match" letters to employers whose workers' names don't jibe with their Social Security numbers. The notices would be accompanied by letters from the Department of Homeland Security outlining new penalties for hiring undocumented workers.

The Bush administration prepared the crackdown after Congress failed to pass an immigration bill that would have legalized the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. At least eight million illegal laborers are believed to work in U.S. jobs.

The work-site program was supposed to roll out in September with the mailing of 140,000 no-match letters to employers. But the AFL-CIO filed a lawsuit alleging the new policy could lead to discrimination against or firing of native-born U.S. workers and legal immigrant workers. The program was delayed when a federal judge in August blocked the new policy until questions about its legality had been addressed. The hearing that opens today is aimed at clarifying this.

In early September, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and several trade groups representing small businesses that employ low-skilled immigrants joined the lawsuit. Among others, the United Fresh Produce Association, the National Roofing Contractors Association and the Association of Nursery and Landscapers allege the Department of Homeland Security failed to perform a financial-impact assessment, as required under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, to measure the impact of the new rule on small businesses.

In the $1.2 trillion construction industry, at least one-third of the work force is undocumented, according to an estimate by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Industry experts believe the actual figure is much higher: Last year alone, nearly half of new construction workers were Hispanics who had arrived in the U.S. since 2000.

In agriculture, about 70% of all workers are illegal immigrants, according to independent estimates, and an existing guest-worker program supplies less than 2% of the work force required each year.

Most illegal immigrants work for bona fide businesses and are hired and paid like other workers on the payroll. To get work, the immigrants normally obtain a fake Social Security card with a made-up nine-digit number. The fake cards are peddled in immigrant neighborhoods.

When the illegal immigrants are hired, their employers don't know whether the documents are authentic. A company thus hires workers, puts them on the payroll and withholds necessary taxes. The unauthorized workers, who receive a paycheck regularly, pay into Social Security but can't draw benefits.

"Employers have to be held accountable if they are given clear notice of the fact that they may be hiring illegal aliens," Mr. Chertoff said in announcing the new crackdown. Mr. Chertoff added that about 4% of the 250 million wage reports received by Social Security each year show no matches.

The new rule is pushing many farmers to consider extreme options. "You've got to comply," says Mrs. Torrey, who runs Torrey Farms in Elba, N.Y. "We move our farm operations to another country or just sell out." Some U.S. farmers have already been investing or subcontracting in other countries such as Mexico.

The owner of a small California manufacturer that has 120 employees and subcontracts for the U.S. government foresees having to fire about 15% of her work force. "Because of the role they play and the tight labor market, it is probable that we would go out of business," said the woman, who spoke on condition that neither her name nor that of her company be cited.

Some observers hope the legal challenge to the administration's latest enforcement efforts will revive congressional action on immigration. In the meantime, the policy could drive more immigrants to seek jobs in the off-the-books economy, where they have fewer legal protections from employment abuses.


(miriam.jordan@wsj.com)

[roadie4us]

Lots of good comments with lots to agree with from both sides. Certainly employers bear a good deal of reponsibility, as does the failure of the governments immigration system. But I most certainly agree that we have to worry about our grandchildren and how this will all play out for them.

[spare_change]

Firms Brace for Crackdown on Illegal Labor
By MIRIAM JORDAN
October 1, 2007

A U.S. district court in San Francisco could decide as early as today whether the Social Security Administration can send out thousands of "no match" letters to employers whose workers' names don't jibe with their Social Security numbers. The notices would be accompanied by letters from the Department of Homeland Security outlining new penalties for hiring undocumented workers.

The Bush administration prepared the crackdown after Congress failed to pass an immigration bill that would have legalized the nation's estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. At least eight million illegal laborers are believed to work in U.S. jobs.

The work-site program was supposed to roll out in September with the mailing of 140,000 no-match letters to employers. But the AFL-CIO filed a lawsuit alleging the new policy could lead to discrimination against or firing of native-born U.S. workers and legal immigrant workers. The program was delayed when a federal judge in August blocked the new policy until questions about its legality had been addressed. The hearing that opens today is aimed at clarifying this.

In early September, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and several trade groups representing small businesses that employ low-skilled immigrants joined the lawsuit. Among others, the United Fresh Produce Association, the National Roofing Contractors Association and the Association of Nursery and Landscapers allege the Department of Homeland Security failed to perform a financial-impact assessment, as required under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, to measure the impact of the new rule on small businesses.

In the $1.2 trillion construction industry, at least one-third of the work force is undocumented, according to an estimate by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Industry experts believe the actual figure is much higher: Last year alone, nearly half of new construction workers were Hispanics who had arrived in the U.S. since 2000.

In agriculture, about 70% of all workers are illegal immigrants, according to independent estimates, and an existing guest-worker program supplies less than 2% of the work force required each year.

Most illegal immigrants work for bona fide businesses and are hired and paid like other workers on the payroll. To get work, the immigrants normally obtain a fake Social Security card with a made-up nine-digit number. The fake cards are peddled in immigrant neighborhoods.

When the illegal immigrants are hired, their employers don't know whether the documents are authentic. A company thus hires workers, puts them on the payroll and withholds necessary taxes. The unauthorized workers, who receive a paycheck regularly, pay into Social Security but can't draw benefits.

"Employers have to be held accountable if they are given clear notice of the fact that they may be hiring illegal aliens," Mr. Chertoff said in announcing the new crackdown. Mr. Chertoff added that about 4% of the 250 million wage reports received by Social Security each year show no matches.

The new rule is pushing many farmers to consider extreme options. "You've got to comply," says Mrs. Torrey, who runs Torrey Farms in Elba, N.Y. "We move our farm operations to another country or just sell out." Some U.S. farmers have already been investing or subcontracting in other countries such as Mexico.

The owner of a small California manufacturer that has 120 employees and subcontracts for the U.S. government foresees having to fire about 15% of her work force. "Because of the role they play and the tight labor market, it is probable that we would go out of business," said the woman, who spoke on condition that neither her name nor that of her company be cited.

Some observers hope the legal challenge to the administration's latest enforcement efforts will revive congressional action on immigration. In the meantime, the policy could drive more immigrants to seek jobs in the off-the-books economy, where they have fewer legal protections from employment abuses.


(miriam.jordan@wsj.com)

I presume the bold emphasis was intended to: 1) highlight the value of illegal immigrants in the economy, and 2) the potential impact on business if illegal immigration is halted.

The story also notes that: 1) the Bush administration is trying to take action against illegal immigration, and 2) the Democratic Congress was unable to come up with a workable, and acceptable, plan to manage illegal immigration. I noticed, though, those weren't marked in bold.

We've heard several opinions here that the employers should be rounded up and punished (well, at least fined) for using illegal immigrants. There exists today no practical way for an employer to determine if an employee is a legal or illegal immigrant.

[spare_change]

A new study from the Center for Immigration Studies is one of the first to estimate the impact of illegal immigration on the federal budget. Based on Census Bureau data, the study estimates that households headed by illegal aliens used $10 billion more in government services than they paid in taxes in 2002. These figures are only for the federal government; costs at the state and local level are also likely to be significant. The study also finds that if illegals were given amnesty, the fiscal deficit at the federal level would grow to nearly $29 billion.

Among the findings:

* Illegal alien households are estimated to use $2,700 a year more in services than they pay in taxes, creating a total fiscal burden of nearly $10.4 billion on the federal budget in 2002.

* Among the largest federal costs: Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).

* If illegal aliens were legalized and began to pay taxes and use services like legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual fiscal deficit at the federal level would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total federal deficit of $29 billion.

* With nearly two-third of illegals lacking a high school diploma, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments — not their legal status or their unwillingness to work.

[p.a]

A new study from the Center for Immigration Studies is one of the first to estimate the impact of illegal immigration on the federal budget. Based on Census Bureau data, the study estimates that households headed by illegal aliens used $10 billion more in government services than they paid in taxes in 2002. These figures are only for the federal government; costs at the state and local level are also likely to be significant. The study also finds that if illegals were given amnesty, the fiscal deficit at the federal level would grow to nearly $29 billion.

Among the findings:

* Illegal alien households are estimated to use $2,700 a year more in services than they pay in taxes, creating a total fiscal burden of nearly $10.4 billion on the federal budget in 2002.

* Among the largest federal costs: Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).

* If illegal aliens were legalized and began to pay taxes and use services like legal immigrants with the same education levels, the estimated annual fiscal deficit at the federal level would increase from $2,700 per household to nearly $7,700, for a total federal deficit of $29 billion.

* With nearly two-third of illegals lacking a high school diploma, the primary reason they create a fiscal deficit is their low education levels and resulting low incomes and tax payments — not their legal status or their unwillingness to work.

Basically the same place African Americans were in pre civil war southern half of America. Slavery is bred by low or no education.

[mrdiscreet]

I don't have the agenda you have opresumed, Spare; just found it fascinating that both Labor and various business interests were siding against cracking down on illegal employment.

I do want to emphasize though that illegals do tend to pay taxes and fund soc. sec., hoping to get off the "freeloader" stereotypes and treating them with respect as human beings however we want to handle immigration as a policy.

In particular, I was surprised by the prevalence of illegal hiring in the construction industry; I would think these are solid jobs citizens would want, and should be screaming about having stolen with low-priced illegal labor as decent jobs become more scarce. You can't offshore construction, unless you bring offshore labor here!

I'd like to find a balance: that we get realistic about what immigration we want (probably guest workers) and in what sectors (ag, restaurants, etc.) and then hold the line in industries that offer jobs citizens want but employers just want cheap labor.

I agree it is hard for employers to know (actually, some re-hire illegals, so not impossible), but that is by heavily lobbied design of our laws. Soc. sec matching is very effective if there is the political will to implement it.

I also agree with the principle that we want permanent/citizen immigration limited to those who can improve the economy rather than being an added burden.

I looked into emigrating to New Zealand at one point, mostly as a pipe dream. I assume typical of most countries, you either have to have a trade skill in demand or be an investor with significant free capital to invest in NZ. I am in favor of the US managing immigration like any other country does.

[dartgirl]

I still can't figure out how anyone managed to save that kind of money, I haven't managed to do it and I don't know of anybody else making that who has done it either.

But he shouldn't get it unless all taxes and penalities are paid just like everybody else who works.

[Pebbles]

I still can't figure out how anyone managed to save that kind of money, I haven't managed to do it and I don't know of anybody else making that who has done it either.

But he shouldn't get it unless all taxes and penalities are paid just like everybody else who works.

I had wondered this myself! I mean rent,utilities,groceries and everything else. I couldn't save that kind of money. I had a decent paying job..as well!
Wonder if he got any welfare benefits? All so wonder if he had a drivers license? So many of the illegals can manage to get a drivers license.

[Lacey]

I still can't figure out how anyone managed to save that kind of money, I haven't managed to do it and I don't know of anybody else making that who has done it either.

But he shouldn't get it unless all taxes and penalities are paid just like everybody else who works.




I think because they live 7 or more to house.I hate the say it,but they do do that.If I had 5 extra people helping pay rent and utilities,I'd have it made!

[roadie4us]

Good point Mrdiscreet.