tax day and does this bother anyone?

Worrying about other people is a complete waste of time and energy.

mmm fried cookies. They are popular at the C0lumbia C0unty fair.

Even better: cheesecake ... on a stick ... dipped in chocolate ... rolled in chopped nuts!

Chopped nuts in C0lumbia C0unty?

so none of you has the balls to take it up? I'd shrug but I do care.

considering that 1/2 of the staff is illegals, that's a much bigger issue when there are plenty of people in poorer neighborhoods who are more than happy to take those jobs.

"considering that 1/2 of the staff is illegals, that's a much bigger issue when there are plenty of people in poorer neighborhoods who are more than happy to take those jobs."

So why don't they?

because it's easier to drive by and pick up a few illegals than posting jobs and hiring people

I still don't get it. Why can't the people in the poorer neighborhoods go stand in the same place as the illegals to get picked up?

What I love about hiring illegal aliens is that if they get hurt, you can just throw them away and get new ones instead. And tell the client that the old ones decided to move to a farm.

Also, if they object when you stiff them on the agreed subpar wages, you can threaten to deliver them to Homeland Security (an employer-provided benefit).

And more generally, when even the agreed pay rate is half the previously prevailing wage for the area, you can talk up how Americans don't want to do those jobs anymore.

Best of all for me, though, is savoring the thought of denying decent American-standard opportunity to legal Americans (white, black, Asian and especially latino [delightful irony!]) who hope to work their way a little bit up the ladder from poor to working-poor to working class.

What I love about hiring illegal aliens is that if they get hurt, you can just throw them away and get new ones instead. And tell the client that the old ones decided to move to a farm.

Also, if they object when you stiff them on the agreed subpar wages, you can threaten to deliver them to Homeland Security (an employer-provided benefit).

And more generally, when even the agreed pay rate is half the previously prevailing wage for the area, you can talk up how Americans don't want to do those jobs anymore.

Best of all for me, though, is savoring the thought of denying decent American-standard opportunity to legal Americans (white, black, Asian and especially latino [delightful irony!]) who hope to work their way a little bit up the ladder from poor to working-poor to working class.

>What I love about hiring illegal aliens is that if they get hurt, you can just throw them away and get new ones instead. And tell the client that the old ones decided to move to a farm.

Alanhart is doubly right. Laws like the paid sick leave create these incentives.

"I still don't get it. Why can't the people in the poorer neighborhoods go stand in the same place as the illegals to get picked up?"

Because, as Alan pointed out, they're *Americans*.

They cannot "legally" get stiffed by the employer under threat of deportment.

They're not as "flexible" as illegals in many respects such as this.

You guys are saying that if an employer chooses to do illegal stuff, it is cheaper than if they don't.

I'm sure that's true--but you don't have to hire illegal aliens to do various illegal things. You could ignore paid sick leave or workman's comp if you hired Americans as well, so it sounds like it boils down to "illegals are less likely to complain about you breaking the law than Americans". Sounds like the solution is to make it easier to complain about stuff like that without risking getting deported in the process.

"Sounds like the solution is to make it easier to complain about stuff like that without risking getting deported in the process."

Well they SHOULD be deported regardless ...

"Sounds like the solution is to make it easier to complain about stuff like that without risking getting deported in the process."

... this means having de facto open borders with the entire world. People from virtually every nation on the planet would flood in until economic statis is reached with the poorest and most politically harsh parts of the world. Is that a good solution? As it is, many people offer a lalaland approach to dealing with residency-law-breakers that amounts to exactly that, but not thought out beyond "my nanny is nice and makes herself available 24/7 and takes her vacations when we take ours, unless we want her along."

"not thought out beyond "my nanny is nice and makes herself available 24/7 and takes her vacations when we take ours, unless we want her along."

And even more importantly, "... and she's willing to work 15 hours a day at $13/hour with no overtime."

"...and she cooks AND cleans AND runs errands AND knows that if she's caught napping while the kids are napping she'll be fired in a hot New York minute!"

you paying her $13 hr cash is like earning $17-8 hr paying by check.

that's the problem with people in Manhattan and yuppy areas of Bklyn/Queens, they pay too much. $10 hr flat rate... us poor souls in outer boroughs have to deal with morons who overpay.

"Overpay"???

Are you joking?

$13/hour is slave wages.

You guys are confusing me. On the one hand you're saying that the problem is that the whole problem is that illegals are willing to do stuff because their employers use the risk of deporting them to cover up not obeying all sorts of other labor laws. Then you say that the illegals are willing to work under conditions Americans apparently won't (although the original assertion was that people from poorer neighborhoods would gladly take the jobs--I guess not, now). But then when I suggest that they can complain without getting deported, you say that this equals open borders or that they should get deported. So, the vicious cycle continues. I guess it's easier to complain than to think about realistic solutions to problems.

"Then you say that the illegals are willing to work under conditions Americans apparently won't"

That is a common myth perpetrated by nefarious employers who are trying to get away with paying well below the prevailing wage.

The fact of the matter is that Americans "aren't willing" to do those jobs at the slave wages (and long hours with compromised worker safety) that employers can get away with paying illegals.

^^^I have yet to meet ANY unemployed American -- regardless of socio-economic class or education level -- who has ever said s/he is unwilling to do ANY given job.

there is no realistic solution to the problem.

if people want to hire someone for a day or a week, it is easier to go to a corner and pick someone up. if they do a good job that day, you tell them to return the next day and keep them working. if they don't, you have another 20 to choose from.

the people from the poorer neighborhoods don't stand on the corner and have not acquired the skills by the try/buy method. they get screwed once in a while, but once they get enough skills, someone uses them on regular basis. my plumber couldn't walk and had 2 illegals run the pipes as he looked and ran to get more parts when they needed.

if the illegals were removed from the corners, maybe people would post those jobs somewhere and people from poorer neighborhoods could get the skill needed to make a living rather than living on welfare/ssi.

"if the illegals were removed from the corners, maybe people would post those jobs somewhere and people from poorer neighborhoods could get the skill needed to make a living rather than living on welfare/ssi."

Don't kid yourself.

These poor *AMERICANS* aren't not being hired because they lack skills that the illegals have. They're not being hired because they "cost" more than the slave wages these employers want to pay.

"when I suggest that they can complain without getting deported, you say that this equals open borders"

... how is this part of any vicious cycle?

They have no right to work here, employers have no right to hire them, and that is as it should be. The threat of deportation is a lever, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be threatened with deportation. It doesn't mean they should be paid ... they've entered into an illegal contract. It means legal US individuals should be paid, that legal US individuals should do the work, and if there are inconveniences to the employer, tough noogies, they don't have a viable biz, or they don't have a viable family-responsibilities plan, or their house is too big for them to clean (or have cleaned) and they should downsize, or their landscaping is too ambitious/pretentious.

We don't need to cater to the right-wing forces (disguised as lefties with "heart") who want the cheapest possible labor with the most minimal standards (or none) ... we can maintain a certain range of wage/work standards that is higher and still allows for a high level of productivity, but only if we as a nation try seriously to make that happen.

" It means legal US individuals should be paid, that legal US individuals should do the work, and if there are inconveniences to the employer, tough noogies, they don't have a viable biz, or they don't have a viable family-responsibilities plan, or their house is too big for them to clean (or have cleaned) and they should downsize, or their landscaping is too ambitious/pretentious."

I think I'm in love.

Seriously, suggesting that someone doesn't have a viable "family responsibilities plan" here in NYC is touching a live wire to a powder keg. These working women think they have a God-given right to "affordable" child care ("affordable" meaning whatever their budget is, regardless of a living wage for the employee).

ew

What I was trying to get at was that the employers not the illegals working for them are obviously avoiding paying tax by virtue of how they submit their invoices. Meaning no obvious accounting system or invoice number. So they operate out of shoebox and if the records get "lost", well I guess that there's no tax due?

That's the question and for those of you who do pay taxes how do you feel about that?

Why do you do business with these people if you're bothered by their business practices? Presumably you could find someone who pays all their taxes to do the work instead, although I'd guess it would cost more.

That's a good question. Answer is that I got bids from at least from 2 contractors for each job, and what I saw was universally was same. In my opinion this is how most of the contractors operate and I'm looking for comments about that especially from some of the contractors that post here. They all talk about how well they're doing and the second house out on an island and then they present an non-numbered invoice. Primer, what do you say?

I'm in a business that has customers and you can't operate that way, at least not legitimately.

Another thing, jordyn, your statement suggests that you don't have a problem with this?

17% of taxes go uncollected cause of the cash economy. it's not only in real estate...

95% of those you know in NYC who have a baby sitter or cleaning lady ARE TAX CHEATERS. that's right, as many as 95%.

along with rent control, ny needs nanny-pay control.

contractors not paying taxes, asking for cash payments and checks written to them personally? You have got to be kidding.

meh, just report them to the IRS already if it bothers you.