Bush's immigration policy

[j2k4]

It sucks.

[Rat Faced]

"Send us your Poor" :rolleyes:

[Busyman]

It sucks.
Great thread. :ermm:

What's his policy?

[j2k4]

It sucks.
Great thread. :ermm:

What's his policy?

Utter stealth.

Totally invisible and undiscernable.

[Busyman]

Great thread. :ermm:

What's his policy?

Utter stealth.

Totally undiscernable.
So is this thread. :dry:

[j2k4]

Utter stealth.

Totally undiscernable.
So is this thread. :dry:

Hmm.

I thought it was clear and incisive.

That's what the polls say. :P

[Santa]

are not all usa'ians immigrants?

[Busyman]

are not all usa'ians immigrants?
No I was born here...in the nation's Capitol.

[Everose]

It sucks.


IMO it doesn't. My concern has always been that the immigrants that are here illegally are often exploited. And you don't go to the police for help when you are in a country illegally. All sorts of crimes can be committed against you and you have nowhere to turn. Your employer can take terrible advantage of you and you have nowhere to turn.

After reading this Immigration Policy (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040107-1.html) I have to admit, it makes sense and seems to address a lot of concerns I have had.

:snooty: I still don't like the man, though.

[j2k4]

It sucks.


IMO it doesn't. My concern has always been that the immigrants that are here illegally are often exploited. And you don't go to the police for help when you are in a country illegally. All sorts of crimes can be committed against you and you have nowhere to turn. Your employer can take terrible advantage of you and you have nowhere to turn.

After reading this Immigration Policy (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040107-1.html) I have to admit, it makes sense and seems to address a lot of concerns I have had.

:snooty: I still don't like the man, though.

A lot of help you are! :P

[Busyman]

It sucks.


IMO it doesn't. My concern has always been that the immigrants that are here illegally are often exploited. And you don't go to the police for help when you are in a country illegally. All sorts of crimes can be committed against you and you have nowhere to turn. Your employer can take terrible advantage of you and you have nowhere to turn.

After reading this Immigration Policy (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040107-1.html) I have to admit, it makes sense and seems to address a lot of concerns I have had.

:snooty: I still don't like the man, though.
You know.....my company has mission statements too.

Hey Evey, if you read s'more, you'll find that Bush has tons great policies that work best for many others too. :rolleyes:

:dry:

If You Google, Intelligence Will Come

[Everose]

IMO it doesn't. My concern has always been that the immigrants that are here illegally are often exploited. And you don't go to the police for help when you are in a country illegally. All sorts of crimes can be committed against you and you have nowhere to turn. Your employer can take terrible advantage of you and you have nowhere to turn.

After reading this Immigration Policy (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/01/20040107-1.html) I have to admit, it makes sense and seems to address a lot of concerns I have had.

:snooty: I still don't like the man, though.

You know.....my company has mission statements too.

Have you bothered to read it, or this before passing judgment? If so, in your own words, you must be spending a lot of time 'on the shitter' lately. :D So...a mission statement should be disregarded?

Hey Evey, if you read s'more, you'll find that Bush has tons great policies that work best for many others too. :rolleyes:

Do you mean that this policy actually works best for more than one side, Busy? When has that started to become a bad thing? :D

:dry:

If You Google, Intelligence Will Come

Well, it would be much easier for me to google than for you to take a laxative. :lol:

[Busyman]

You know.....my company has mission statements too.

Have you bothered to read it, or this before passing judgment? If so, in your own words, you must be spending a lot of time 'on the shitter' lately. :D So...a mission statement should be disregarded?
I read some of it and it gets a so what. Mission statement are just that. Application is another story. A porous border shits on mission statements.
Hey Evey, if you read s'more, you'll find that Bush has tons great policies that work best for many others too. :rolleyes:

Do you mean that this policy actually works best for more than one side, Busy? When has that started to become a bad thing? :D
Insert sarcasm, Evey. There are good things written on many websites. Would you believe or and/or vote for someone based on their mission statement? :huh: :dry:

If You Google, Intelligence Will Come

Well, it would be much easier for me to google than for you to take a laxative. :lol:
Uh yeah...mmk. :ermm: So by the Bush website, he has good immigration policies?

Good googling that Evey!!!

[Everose]

I read some of it and it gets a so what. Mission statement are just that.

Would you agree a mission statement states intention? Why would you not want to read all of a President's mission statement on something as important as this? Guess I can't imagine that, Busy. Anyone has a mission statement that effects me, I read it. How else would I know how whether it is being applied or not?

Application is another story. A porous border shits on mission statements. I disagree. The porous border exists and has for decades. His policy acknowledges that and deals with it. I happen to care about the people dying in the Arizona desert, but then.......that is not your problem, right?
Hey Evey, if you read s'more, you'll find that Bush has tons great policies that work best for many others too.

Do you mean that this policy actually works best for more than one side, Busy? When has that started to become a bad thing?
Insert sarcasm, Evey. There are good things written on many websites. Would you believe or and/or vote for someone based on their mission statement?

I am sorry. Where did you pull that from? Who is talking about voting for him here? I am talking about a policy that just may work. You, without reading it, have already dismissed it, but then you have already said the people dying in the deserts of our country are not our problem because they shouldn't be here in the first place, but also state it is a porous border. I suspect you haven't bothered to read his policy.

If You Google, Intelligence Will Come



Well, it would be much easier for me to google than for you to take a laxative.


Uh yeah...mmk. So by the Bush website, he has good immigration policies?

Good googling that Evey!!!

If you want a policy written by Bush where do you go, Busy? You see, I find it pretty tedious to get through a lot of propaganda from either side. It is getting pretty damn old and repetitive and bothersome. I go straight for the policy itself. There is no shame in that. The shame is to have prejudices against a policy you haven't even read and won't even bother to read because it is on the website of the man who wrote it. Sheesh.

[Busyman]

I read some of it and it gets a so what. Mission statement are just that.

Would you agree a mission statement states intention? Why would you not want to read all of a President's mission statement on something as important as this? Guess I can't imagine that, Busy. Anyone has a mission statement that effects me, I read it. How else would I know how whether it is being applied or not?

Mission statements are propaganda. They can be true or not. Action speaks louder.

Application is another story. A porous border shits on mission statements. I disagree. The porous border exists and has for decades. His policy acknowledges that and deals with it. I happen to care about the people dying in the Arizona desert, but then.......that is not your problem, right?

Stating a policy is not dealing with it. Investigate how it is put into practice. Stop them from coming over in the first place.

Hey Evey, if you read s'more, you'll find that Bush has tons great policies that work best for many others too.

Do you mean that this policy actually works best for more than one side, Busy? When has that started to become a bad thing?
Insert sarcasm, Evey. There are good things written on many websites. Would you believe or and/or vote for someone based on their mission statement?

I am sorry. Where did you pull that from? Who is talking about voting for him here? I am talking about a policy that just may work. You, without reading it, have already dismissed it, but then you have already said the people dying in the deserts of our country are not our problem because they shouldn't be here in the first place, but also state it is a porous border. I suspect you haven't bothered to read his policy.

Those are people that don't belong here anyway. They take a risk. It is not our job to help them but stop them from putting themselves at risk in the first place.

If You Google, Intelligence Will Come



Well, it would be much easier for me to google than for you to take a laxative.


Uh yeah...mmk. So by the Bush website, he has good immigration policies?

Good googling that Evey!!!

If you want a policy written by Bush where do you go, Busy? You see, I find it pretty tedious to get through a lot of propaganda from either side. It is getting pretty damn old and repetitive and bothersome. I go straight for the policy itself. There is no shame in that. The shame is to have prejudices against a policy you haven't even read and won't even bother to read because it is on the website of the man who wrote it. Sheesh.

Oh I read it.

[Santa]

for those that think us immigration policy is great could you please send me a green card.
thanks in advance.

[Everose]

Well, Busy, I don't hope to change how you feel about this.

I know a lot of people feel like.......so what? they shouldn't be here. It is not our problem. They would rather spend money flying them back into Mexico from Tucson on an almost daily basis, just to watch the same ones come back through the next week. Why did Bush even bother to try to find a better way to deal with this? A compromise. A policy that would involve tightening the borders and allowing work permits?

And it is not like their basic needs are not being met by our government. Basic security, no. Protection from family or outside abuse? No. Continued education for their children that were raised here? No. But at least the children of illegal immigrants are getting free breakfast, lunch and milk through the Federal and State Child Nutrition Programs. You don't have to have a social security number to receive those. And at least they are getting all the free health care they need, since most new arrivals are low income and qualify for free health care, and you don't need a social security number for those, either. Been the case for many years.

According to some people.....we are doing way too much for these illegal aliens.

Other people say the 'Republicans' (must be the Republicans, because from what I read, they are the only ones looking out for business interests. Do democrats own any big businesses? Doesn't seem that way to me. Big business interests are mentioned and Bush is accused of being their buddy....so I don't suppose Democrats own any big businesses) like it the way it is. Good for business....all this cheap labor.

Bush has a plan here Busy. I feel a good one.

Guess you agree with all the 'Republican' Congressman that have tried to stop it?

[Rat Faced]

Rose,

both your political parties are owned by big business, im at a loss as to how you see the Democrats as not being in their pockets.

Didnt see the Democrats sticking up for the little guy that much during their tenure.

There is merely a difference of degree.

I say again; "Send us your poor"..

You asked for 'em, now stop moaning about gettin' 'em... :rolleyes:

:P

[Everose]

Sorry, RF. I am not moaning about getting them. I am concerned about their welfare. Apparently Bush is too. Why are you trying to detract from this?

[Rat Faced]

Sorry, RF. I am not moaning about getting them. I am concerned about their welfare. Apparently Bush is too. Why are you trying to detract from this?

My fault.. the last two lines were aimed at BM, not you ;)

[Busyman]

Sorry, RF. I am not moaning about getting them. I am concerned about their welfare. Apparently Bush is too. Why are you trying to detract from this?

My fault.. the last two lines were aimed at BM, not you ;)
Really? If you've seen my posts about immigrants you'd know that I want America look after first.

I am not concerned about their welfare when there are Americans to be looked after.

It irks me when I see folks adopting babies from other countries when they can just look much closer. God forbid someone hop the fence.

[Rat Faced]

My fault.. the last two lines were aimed at BM, not you ;)
Really? If you've seen my posts about immigrants you'd know that I want America look after first.

I am not concerned about their welfare when there are Americans to be looked after.

It irks me when I see folks adopting babies from other countries when they can just look much closer. God forbid someone hop the fence.

I did see your post and understood it... thats why i was reminding you about what your nation requested of the world.. :lol:

To the best of my knowledge, the US havent formally withdrawn the request, so that must be why they're still coming.. :P

[Busyman]

Really? If you've seen my posts about immigrants you'd know that I want America look after first.

I am not concerned about their welfare when there are Americans to be looked after.

It irks me when I see folks adopting babies from other countries when they can just look much closer. God forbid someone hop the fence.

I did see your post and understood it... thats why i was reminding you about what your nation requested of the world.. :lol:

To the best of my knowledge, the US havent formally withdrawn the request, so that must be why they're still coming.. :P
They need to withdraw the request. :snooty:

Shit is getting fucked up ova here. Pretty soon Maine will be Mexico.

[Helghast004]

Eh, I live in south Texas and it still feels like im in the US...~looks again~ Yeah Im still here. :shifty:

In other words, I dont think we have to worry about the US turning into Mexico numero dos anytime soon.

What I dont agree with is making spanish the second official language of the US and just letting in all the Illegal Immigrants walk in as they please.

[Busyman]

Eh, I live in south Texas and it still feels like im in the US...~looks again~ Yeah Im still here. :shifty:

In other words, I dont think we have to worry about the US turning into Mexico numero dos anytime soon.

What I dont agree with is making spanish the second official language of the US and just letting in all the Illegal Immigrants walk in as they please.
Well good fuck that's what's going on.

So when I see a policy on a website that doesn't match what's staring me in the face the "policy" means shit.

In Virginia, some want to use taxpayer money to open a day laborer center.
Fuck that.

[Santa]

Shit is getting fucked up ova here. Pretty soon Maine will be Mexico.

i have never been to mexico
it seems to be more experienced than the rest of the world
would you care to overpopulate your home?
forget it maine is a long way from becoming mexico
it is a pity

[j2k4]

Just to clarify:

What is taking place on our southern border is not immigration; it is something else.

Rat-

"Give us your poor, your hungry, etc.,..." does not mean "ignore the process of naturalization".

The Statue of Liberty is located next to Ellis Island, as I assume you are aware.

A great many emigres were "processed" there...

[Peerzy]

It sucks.

Better than his foreign policy;

Canada - To Close
Chine - To Far
France - No Oil
Iceland - To Cold
Narnia - To Many Lions and Witches
Iraq - Bingo

[j2k4]

Just to clarify:

What is taking place on our southern border is not immigration; it is something else.

Rat-

"Give us your poor, your hungry, etc.,..." does not mean "ignore the process of naturalization".

The Statue of Liberty is located next to Ellis Island, as I assume you are aware.

A great many emigres were "processed" there...

Odd that no one responded to this...

[Rat Faced]

Thats coz there was absolutely nothing to say...

There was no process of naturalization at the time it was said... and it also didn't state that they had to become American Citizens anywhere in the statement i read at school.

If you move the goalposts, thats your problem :snooty:

[j2k4]

Thats coz there was absolutely nothing to say...

There was no process of naturalization at the time it was said... and it also didn't state that they had to become American Citizens anywhere in the statement i read at school.

If you move the goalposts, thats your problem :snooty:

Moved the goalposts?

Our naturalization process predates the Mexican flood, I think you'll find, provided you avoid the text you claim to have read in school.

[Everose]

I have been reading where this policy negates our naturalization process. So is that what you think, j2?

[vidcc]

What I dont agree with is making spanish the second official language of the US
Is there an official language of the United States then?

[j2k4]

I have been reading where this policy negates our naturalization process. So is that what you think, j2?

I don't like the policy in practice, so much so that I cannot claim to have read it.

I have heard, though, that it gives short shrift to what was previously known as naturalization.

This "guest-worker" feature has the effect of summarily ending any need to ever "naturalize" any immigrant, ever again, which (nobody seems to have reached this surmise) also means that "immigrant" is soon to be just another obsolete term.

I heartily recommend the Administration further catagorize the "policy" to accomodate guest-criminals, with a sub-catagory: guest-terrorists.

There will no doubt be additional classifications as the various special interests (here, as well as in Mexico) weigh in on the matter.

[Everose]

Eh, I live in south Texas and it still feels like im in the US...~looks again~ Yeah Im still here. :shifty:

Are you still there, Helghast004, or have you evacuated? :huh:

In other words, I dont think we have to worry about the US turning into Mexico numero dos anytime soon.

What I dont agree with is making spanish the second official language of the US and just letting in all the Illegal Immigrants walk in as they please.

[vidcc]

J2.
Surely there is a background check system supposed to be applied. One would hope a bit more involved than for a tourist even if not as detailed as a permanent or naturalised resident.
If you think the checks are sufficient or not is another matter.

Being realistic it seems to me that we could never eliminate illegal immigration and we do have certain industries that rely on the cheap workers so as a compromise and a means of reducing undocumented residents I can't oppose the idea totally. Plus they will be paying tax.

The idea has merits, time will tell if it works.

[j2k4]

J2.
Surely there is a background check system supposed to be applied. One would hope a bit more involved than for a tourist even if not as detailed as a permanent or naturalised resident.
If you think the checks are sufficient or not is another matter.

Being realistic it seems to me that we could never eliminate illegal immigration and we do have certain industries that rely on the cheap workers so as a compromise and a means of reducing undocumented residents I can't oppose the idea totally. Plus they will be paying tax.

The idea has merits, time will tell if it works.

A "background check"?

That's hilarious.

We can't even begin to manage to naturalize these interlopers, yet we're going to do "background checks"?

By what miracle is this to be accomplished?

We could "eliminate" illegal immigration in a heartbeat by accomodating the laws that have to do with entering the country rather than ignoring them altogether; I would bet we could reduce it to statistically zero merely by cracking down.

Your (and Bush's) entire scenario presupposes a level of cooperation on the part of the transient Mexican (and his/her government) that will never be achieved via any amnesty program, I can assure you.

[Everose]

J2.
Surely there is a background check system supposed to be applied. One would hope a bit more involved than for a tourist even if not as detailed as a permanent or naturalised resident.
If you think the checks are sufficient or not is another matter.

Being realistic it seems to me that we could never eliminate illegal immigration and we do have certain industries that rely on the cheap workers so as a compromise and a means of reducing undocumented residents I can't oppose the idea totally. Plus they will be paying tax.

The idea has merits, time will tell if it works.

A "background check"?

That's hilarious.

We can't even begin to manage to naturalize these interlopers, yet we're going to do "background checks"?

By what miracle is this to be accomplished?

We could "eliminate" illegal immigration in a heartbeat by accomodating the laws that have to do with entering the country rather than ignoring them altogether; I would bet we could reduce it to statistically zero merely by cracking down.

Why do you think we have not 'cracked down' on the borders?

Your (and Bush's) entire scenario presupposes a level of cooperation on the part of the transient Mexican (and his/her government) that will never be achieved via any amnesty program, I can assure you.

I think that has basically already been achieved. Except, of course, for their protection. But then I suppose it isn't that hard for them to get guns, either. ;-)

[j2k4]

A "background check"?

That's hilarious.

We can't even begin to manage to naturalize these interlopers, yet we're going to do "background checks"?

By what miracle is this to be accomplished?

We could "eliminate" illegal immigration in a heartbeat by accomodating the laws that have to do with entering the country rather than ignoring them altogether; I would bet we could reduce it to statistically zero merely by cracking down.

Why do you think we have not 'cracked down' on the borders?

Your (and Bush's) entire scenario presupposes a level of cooperation on the part of the transient Mexican (and his/her government) that will never be achieved via any amnesty program, I can assure you.

I think that has basically already been achieved. Except, of course, for their protection. But then I suppose it isn't that hard for them to get guns, either. ;-)

Just so.

It seems I've started a fire hereabout.

I can never remember to bring the hotdogs... :huh:

[Helghast004]

What I dont agree with is making spanish the second official language of the US
Is there an official language of the United States then?


Ah...touche.

Yes the US doesnt have an official language. But what can be an obvious choice? English is definetly a dominate language here...at anyrate I have no further answers.

As for me evacuating...we'll just use this time to go camping. We leave in the morning for the state park further inland. If not, we'll just go to missouri with my family.

[Everose]

I think that has basically already been achieved. Except, of course, for their protection. But then I suppose it isn't that hard for them to get guns, either. ;-)

Just so.

It seems I've started a fire hereabout.

I can never remember to bring the hotdogs... :huh:

No, no fire, J2. :mellow: Too scattered right now to focus much on anything but family and friends in Houston. Just have a lot of questions that it doesn't seem anyone has the answers for regarding our southern border. Frustrated that I can't find the answers myself, if anything.

[Rat Faced]

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!

ah... missed the small print at the bottom. Sorry.

Please make sure they have money, speak english, are educated and fill in the appropriate forms in triplicate 1st. Being whitish and Christian is an advantage but not necessary as our Utah Branch will be calling soon to discuss the belief issue in the North, and local residents will make sure you conform to local customs in the South. Being allowed to enter does not confire any rights upon attendee's however they can then be entered into the monthly Green Card Lottery. Please be advised that "Free" is used in its fullest sense: Free to Starve or die of easily treatable disease if Health Insurance is not taken out. The Government of the USA cannot be held responsible for anything in any way whatsoever, and neither can their sponsors.

[vidcc]

A "background check"?

That's hilarious.

We can't even begin to manage to naturalize these interlopers, yet we're going to do "background checks"?

By what miracle is this to be accomplished?
I am not talking about naturalizing anyone, I am talking about knowing who is here, for me it is a security issue. If you believe that such security measures don't work as the "bad guys" will step round them please write to the GOP as we are wasting tax dollars on a futile efforts at airports.
My belief is that a Mexican that wants to work here would be likely to sign up as he would be able to work and not worry about deportation. Of course not all would sign up but I believe a significant number would.


We could "eliminate" illegal immigration in a heartbeat by accommodating the laws that have to do with entering the country rather than ignoring them altogether; I would bet we could reduce it to statistically zero merely by cracking down.

Your (and Bush's) entire scenario presupposes a level of cooperation on the part of the transient Mexican (and his/her government) that will never be achieved via any amnesty program, I can assure you.I said I don't oppose the idea entirely, it is a compromise that will reduce undocumented aliens. I also said I don't believe we can eliminate illegals. We could significantly reduce reduce the number with a crack down, and I agree our borders should be secured, but from a fiscal viewpoint I wonder would the conservative taxpayer stand for it.
Our lawmakers spend our tax politically and not in my view wisely.

It is American commerce that is the problem. The company mantra is to make as much profit while paying as little as possible. So low paid Mexicans get jobs. We as a nation want cheap everything. If you wish to punish companies that employ migrant workers put in the leg work and find produce from other companies....you do believe in market forces ?

Of course with such a "guest worker scheme" in place penalties for a company that still employs illegals should be completely over the top.

[j2k4]

I am not talking about naturalizing anyone, I am talking about knowing who is here, for me it is a security issue. If you believe that such security measures don't work as the "bad guys" will step round them please write to the GOP as we are wasting tax dollars on a futile efforts at airports.
My belief is that a Mexican that wants to work here would be likely to sign up as he would be able to work and not worry about deportation. Of course not all would sign up but I believe a significant number would.


We could "eliminate" illegal immigration in a heartbeat by accommodating the laws that have to do with entering the country rather than ignoring them altogether; I would bet we could reduce it to statistically zero merely by cracking down.

Your (and Bush's) entire scenario presupposes a level of cooperation on the part of the transient Mexican (and his/her government) that will never be achieved via any amnesty program, I can assure you.I said I don't oppose the idea entirely, it is a compromise that will reduce undocumented aliens. I also said I don't believe we can eliminate illegals. We could significantly reduce reduce the number with a crack down, and I agree our borders should be secured, but from a fiscal viewpoint I wonder would the conservative taxpayer stand for it.
Our lawmakers spend our tax politically and not in my view wisely.

It is American commerce that is the problem. The company mantra is to make as much profit while paying as little as possible. So low paid Mexicans get jobs. We as a nation want cheap everything. If you wish to punish companies that employ migrant workers put in the leg work and find produce from other companies....you do believe in market forces ?

Of course with such a "guest worker scheme" in place penalties for a company that still employs illegals should be completely over the top.

Who did these jobs before the low-paid Mexicans?

The market forces are inexorable, vid.

In any case, as to the criminal element-why would they accede to an immigration policy which requires them to identify themselves?

The sheer numbers of illegal border-crossers is what makes this easy for them and difficult for us, and this "policy" will not likely change anything; any impetus to collect taxes from these laborers will cause their wages to rise to a level commensurate with what some Democrat will demand on their behalf as "life-sustaining".

There goes the cheap labor...

[vidcc]

Who did these jobs before the low-paid Mexicans?Low paid Americans...you know, the ones the republicans insist are to blame for their own poverty. Now I think you will point to this as evedence that the minimum wage costs jobs and we should abolish it...but then how would you blame poverty on lazyness?

The market forces are inexorable, vid.annoying isn't it


In any case, as to the criminal element-why would they accede to an immigration policy which requires them to identify themselves? show me where I said they would.


The sheer numbers of illegal border-crossers is what makes this easy for them and difficult for us, and this "policy" will not likely change anything Again I stated I am not totally opposed to it. I didn't say I supported it 100%, it is far away from a total solution but it is a compromise to commerce that encourages the cheap Mexican worker and the American consumer that likes to buy things cheap.



any impetus to collect taxes from these laborers will cause their wages to rise to a level commensurate with what some Democrat will demand on their behalf as "life-sustaining".

There goes the cheap labor...
Problem sloved then, who is going to employ a Mexican if they have to pay the same as they would have to pay an American?...no jobs no migrant workers.
Perhaps you feel that the rise will encourage firms to just employ the undocumented workers again but as i said then the punishment should be totally over the top.

[j2k4]

Low paid Americans...you know, the ones the republicans insist are to blame for their own poverty. Now I think you will point to this as evedence that the minimum wage costs jobs and we should abolish it...but then how would you blame poverty on lazyness?

That the "minimum wage costs jobs and we should abolish it" allows us to "blame poverty on laziness"?

I don't follow you on that one.


The market forces are inexorable, vid.annoying isn't it


In any case, as to the criminal element-why would they accede to an immigration policy which requires them to identify themselves? show me where I said they would.

How does one acquire "background information" or "documentation" on unidentified individuals, vid? :huh:


The sheer numbers of illegal border-crossers is what makes this easy for them and difficult for us, and this "policy" will not likely change anything Again I stated I am not totally opposed to it. I didn't say I supported it 100%, it is far away from a total solution but it is a compromise to commerce that encourages the cheap Mexican worker and the American consumer that likes to buy things cheap.



any impetus to collect taxes from these laborers will cause their wages to rise to a level commensurate with what some Democrat will demand on their behalf as "life-sustaining".

There goes the cheap labor...
Problem sloved then, who is going to employ a Mexican if they have to pay the same as they would have to pay an American?...no jobs no migrant workers.
Perhaps you feel that the rise will encourage firms to just employ the undocumented workers again but as i said then the punishment should be totally over the top.

I can't go any further with this silliness, vid.

Please post something that makes sense, any sense at all...

[vidcc]

I can't go any further with this silliness, vid.

Please post something that makes sense, any sense at all...
Well if you are going to be pointless yourself then there is no point continuing with you.

[j2k4]

I can't go any further with this silliness, vid.

Please post something that makes sense, any sense at all...
Well if you are going to be pointless yourself then there is no point continuing with you.

Correct-there is no point in your continuing with me.

Unless, of course, you begin to make some sort of sense. :)

[Rat Faced]

Since when has the American minimum wage been "Life Sustaining"? :huh:

There is so much evidence that shows long hours are life threatening that they had to bring in a maximum number of hours you can work in most occupations in Europe, and although this is 48 hours, its recommended at less than 37.

So, 40 * 5 = $200 per week to feed and house a family, plus pay for medical insurance...

Due to your tax system, i think they pay the tax and claim it back? Therefore they have, de facto, a lot LESS than this..

Life sustaining??

No wonder Trailer Parks are so popular over there, and various crime is so popular a pastime.. I'd probably end up selling drugs to feed my family too if paid that :snooty:

[j2k4]

Since when has the American minimum wage been "Life Sustaining"? :huh:

There is so much evidence that shows long hours are life threatening that they had to bring in a maximum number of hours you can work in most occupations in Europe, and although this is 48 hours, its recommended at less than 37.

So, 40 * 5 = $200 per week to feed and house a family, plus pay for medical insurance...

Due to your tax system, i think they pay the tax and claim it back? Therefore they have, de facto, a lot LESS than this..

Life sustaining??

No wonder Trailer Parks are so popular over there, and various crime is so popular a pastime.. I'd probably end up selling drugs to feed my family too if paid that :snooty:

Oh, for fuck's sake, Rat-you believe the canard that every minimum-wage employee in the U.S. is supporting a family?

Those who wish it raised are more than happy to entertain such ignorance, as it plays to their strength.

Any "family" living on minimum wage is heavily supplemented by an incredibly comprehensive federal entitlement menu; people who live in such circumstances do not accrue medical bills such as those of mine that I have occasionally referred to.

Much of my tax burden goes to assuring that this remains so.

[Rat Faced]

I dont claim to know your system..

I do know some people that are single on minimum wage there though..

I also know they are brassic.

I know a couple that do a job and minor crime, to make ends meet.

That suggests they havent enough that its "life Sustaining"

[manker]

I dont claim to know your system..

I do know some people that are single on minimum wage there though..

I also know they are brassic.

I know a couple that do a job and minor crime, to make ends meet.

That suggests they havent enough that its "life Sustaining"Well, I have a couple of friends who work full-time in a factory and live either alone or with a friend.

They are always skint. One of them deals pot now and again for some cash.

The reason they've not much money is because the rent and council tax around here is pretty high and they don't qualify for benefits.

However, this doesn't mean that our minimum wage system sucks. It's just an isolated case, an example of annecdotal evidence.

Just like what you wrote about America.

[j2k4]

I dont claim to know your system..

Yet you continue to google it with full faith... :huh:

Manker-

You used the term anecdotal?

Yes, much more often than not.

Those inclined to break the law (to supplement their income) will continue to do so no matter the ostensible reason.

This holds true on both sides of the pond.

[JPaul]

Just like what you wrote about America.
I am tempted to ask "how much does Ern earn", in the knowledge that practically no-one will know what I am talking about.

[manker]

I dont claim to know your system..

Yet you continue to google it with full faith... :huh:

Manker-

You used the term anecdotal?

Yes, much more often than not.

Those inclined to break the law (to supplement their income) will continue to do so no matter the ostensible reason.

This holds true on both sides of the pond.People are people, wherever they're from.

I think maybe you're guilty of using a couple of unwarranted absolutes in this thread. Sure, lots of people who are inclined to break the law will do so in any circumstance, but some feel they have no choice in the matter and will resort to lawlessness in only the most dire circumstance.

When these circumstances are alleviated, they revert to law abiding type.


Of course, this happens in both the US and UK.

[manker]

Just like what you wrote about America.
I am tempted to ask "how much does Ern earn", in the knowledge that practically no-one will know what I am talking about.I have no idea either. Is it an acronym, if so I shall seek council from Busyman (bka Señor 1337 5p34k).

He is peerless in these matters.

[Rat Faced]

I dont claim to know your system..

Yet you continue to google it with full faith... :huh:



I didnt Google it...

I asked why they were doing something they didnt want to do even though it was illegal and they had a job.

They told me.

Their income was less than their necessary outgoings...

[j2k4]

Yet you continue to google it with full faith... :huh:



I didnt Google it...

I asked why they were doing something they didnt want to do even though it was illegal and they had a job.

They told me.

Their income was less than their necessary outgoings...

You asked our system why "they" were doing...what?

Methinks there has been a misunderstanding of some sort. :huh:

[j2k4]

Yet you continue to google it with full faith... :huh:

Manker-

You used the term anecdotal?

Yes, much more often than not.

Those inclined to break the law (to supplement their income) will continue to do so no matter the ostensible reason.

This holds true on both sides of the pond.People are people, wherever they're from.

I think maybe you're guilty of using a couple of unwarranted absolutes in this thread. Sure, lots of people who are inclined to break the law will do so in any circumstance, but some feel they have no choice in the matter and will resort to lawlessness in only the most dire circumstance.

When these circumstances are alleviated, they revert to law abiding type.


Of course, this happens in both the US and UK.


Which is my point, and also a well-warranted usage of an absolute...

[Busyman]

If someone works a minimum wage job to support a family, it is in many cases, the fault of that person.

Many people resort to crime to make ends meet but there are those that commit crime just to keep up their lifestyle.

Cue Weeds example......

[manker]

Well, I don't think there was much point in saying that RF believes that every minimum wage earner supports a family nor implying that if a person breaks the law when (s)he is penniless, (s)he is just as likely to continue in the same vein when comfortable.

I wouldn't say that those absolutes are well-warranted. I would go so far as to say that they are quite ridiculous.

[j2k4]

I wouldn't say that those absolutes are well-warranted. I would go so far as to say that they are quite ridiculous.

Alright; just which absolutes are you referring to?

[manker]

I wouldn't say that those absolutes are well-warranted. I would go so far as to say that they are quite ridiculous.

Alright; just which absolutes are you referring to?The ones in the same post as the one you took that quote from :lookaroun

[j2k4]

Alright; just which absolutes are you referring to?The ones in the same post as the one you took that quote from :lookaroun

I do hope you will forgive my apparent intransigence, manker; I find it more than a bit difficult to believe you think my construct an absolute but somehow (willfully?) overlooked Rat's in order to attempt to tag me...

Have I reduced you to picking nits?

[manker]

The ones in the same post as the one you took that quote from :lookaroun

I do hope you will forgive my apparent intransigence, manker; I find it more than a bit difficult to believe you think my construct an absolute but somehow (willfully?) overlooked Rat's in order to attempt to tag me...

Have I reduced you to picking nits?How did I overlook what RF said. I replied to him too (http://www.filesharingtalk.com/vb3/showpost.php?p=1135240&postcount=52).

I thought you were both talking a load of rubbish.

I only commented on your second sweeping generalisation because you adressed me.

Honestly, sometimes I really do think that you have a persecution complex.

[j2k4]

I do hope you will forgive my apparent intransigence, manker; I find it more than a bit difficult to believe you think my construct an absolute but somehow (willfully?) overlooked Rat's in order to attempt to tag me...

Have I reduced you to picking nits?How did I overlook what RF said. I replied to him too (http://www.filesharingtalk.com/vb3/showpost.php?p=1135240&postcount=52).

I thought you were both talking a load of rubbish.

I only commented on your second sweeping generalisation because you adressed me.

Honestly, sometimes I really do think that you have a persecution complex.

Well, damn, man-of course we were talking rubbish-what did you think we were doing?

Honestly, you are such a manker-come-lately...

And a persecution complex?

Me?

With my history here?

Why would I, of all people, have a persecution complex?

Silly boy.

[manker]

How did I overlook what RF said. I replied to him too (http://www.filesharingtalk.com/vb3/showpost.php?p=1135240&postcount=52).

I thought you were both talking a load of rubbish.

I only commented on your second sweeping generalisation because you adressed me.

Honestly, sometimes I really do think that you have a persecution complex.

Well, damn, man-of course we were talking rubbish-what did you think we were doing?

Honestly, you are such a manker-come-lately...

And a persecution complex?

Me?

With my history here?

Why would I, of all people, have a persecution complex?

Silly boy.I thought you were both talking rubbish, which you've just confirmed. I think I said that. I made my point about your pointless absolutes when you adressed me with one of them, you said they were well-warranted so I enlightened you to their folly.

It seems you agree.

Then you said that I picked on you and not RF, like the big meany that I am - so I thought I'd better set you straight there too.

As for the persecution complex ... yeah, I was kidding. Of course you don't think everyone on the board is out to get you :ermm:

[j2k4]

Well, damn, man-of course we were talking rubbish-what did you think we were doing?

Honestly, you are such a manker-come-lately...

And a persecution complex?

Me?

With my history here?

Why would I, of all people, have a persecution complex?

Silly boy.I thought you were both talking rubbish, which you've just confirmed. I think I said that. I made my point about your pointless absolutes when you adressed me with one of them, you said they were well-warranted so I enlightened you to their folly.

It seems you agree.

Then you said that I picked on you and not RF, like the big meany that I am - so I thought I'd better set you straight there too.

As for the persecution complex ... yeah, I was kidding. Of course you don't think everyone on the board is out to get you :ermm:


Just so we're clear, I advised that Rat seemed to buy a common liberal generalization about minimum-wage earners over here.

This nonsense about abuse of absolutes is tish and pish.

I think the Prince Regent said that alot, doesn't he? ;)

[Rat Faced]

No such thing as absolutes...

However..

$200 per week wages

$650 per month rent...

Doesnt leave a lot for the unimportant things like food and heating.. :P

[j2k4]

No such thing as absolutes...

However..

$200 per week wages

$650 per month rent...

Doesnt leave a lot for the unimportant things like food and heating.. :P

And where did those figures come from?

[Rat Faced]

As I said..

a friends income on min wage in the USA working 40hrs... the same friends rent for a Studio Appt which, frankly, would fit into my Garage with space left over and appears to have been built by an apprentice with lots to learn :snooty:


I dont blame the person for having to do things they'd much rather not... so that they can eat.

If they wanted to have loads of money, they could easily do the non-legit and make a fortune.. the system however ensures they have to do this a little just to survive.

[j2k4]

As I said..

a friends income on min wage in the USA working 40hrs... the same friends rent for a Studio Appt which, frankly, would fit into my Garage with space left over and appears to have been built by an apprentice with lots to learn :snooty:


I dont blame the person for having to do things they'd much rather not... so that they can eat.

If they wanted to have loads of money, they could easily do the non-legit and make a fortune.. the system however ensures they have to do this a little just to survive.


$650 a month?

In Manhattan?

Must be a real shithole; I think the bums charge more than that to live in the sewers.

Maybe they should move to Queens...

Tell me, Rat-

Do you have enough money to live absolutely anywhere you'd like to?

Perhaps your friends have set their sights a bit too high.

[Rat Faced]

The person in question isnt even in a major city, never mind Manhatton, i at no time inferred that they were... :snooty:

[j2k4]

The person in question isnt even in a major city, never mind Manhatton, i at no time inferred that they were... :snooty:

Your allusions previously have been of the "When I came to New York..." variety; I remember when you visited, way back when.

What else am I to conclude?

Reminiscent of an incomplete media treatment, that-I apologize.

Maybe I could catch on with Reuters...

Pray tell, what are the relevent particulars, then?

Were you visiting Ruthie in Woodstock?

[Rat Faced]

Yes, i've been to New York.

I've never been to the city of New York.

I have been to Kingston and Woodstock, both within the State, and visited numerous people there :snooty:

[j2k4]

Yes, i've been to New York.

I've never been to the city of New York.

I have been to Kingston and Woodstock, both within the State, and visited numerous people there :snooty:

Thank you for clearing up that wee, tiny misapprehension, for which you may assume fault and blame, but never mind-I'm not at all vindictive. :)

So-the particulars? :huh:

[Rat Faced]

If your asking what US citizens i have met, I didnt realise that the country was so small you'd know them all?

The US citizens that frequent this board, or have in the past, and so you may have come across here that i've met are:

Mathea, Scroff, Ruthie, SuperJude (I apologise if i missed anyone)

This is a range of Political and Moral views... but they do not constitute the population of Kingston, Woodstock or Blackwood, New Jersey.... the only other place in the States that i have stayed for more than 3 or 4 days.

[Busyman]

If your asking what US citizens i have met, I didnt realise that the country was so small you'd know them all?

The US citizens that frequent this board, or have in the past, and so you may have come across here that i've met are:

Mathea, Scroff, Ruthie, SuperJude (I apologise if i missed anyone)
:angry:

[j2k4]

If your asking what US citizens i have met, I didnt realise that the country was so small you'd know them all?

The US citizens that frequent this board, or have in the past, and so you may have come across here that i've met are:

Mathea, Scroff, Ruthie, SuperJude (I apologise if i missed anyone)
:angry:

No, B., he's actually met them.

Interesting, though; I had forgotten it myself. ;)

[Busyman]

:angry:

No, B., he's actually met them.

Interesting, though; I had forgotten it myself. ;)
Oh he's met me...but doesn't remember. :shifty:

[j2k4]

B.-Clear your PM inbox, huh?

[Busyman]

B.-Clear your PM inbox, huh?
It's clear enough....now.