tracking canucks
Jun 18th 2002, 12:13 am
#151
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
>Would you say that the Nazis are morally equivalent to the countries they defeated,
>and to the U.K., and to the U.S.?
No but the UK and the US have spilled far more blood throughout history than has
Germany. Germany's goal was the domination of Europe. The UK and USA's goal is to
dominate the world.
>and to the U.K., and to the U.S.?
No but the UK and the US have spilled far more blood throughout history than has
Germany. Germany's goal was the domination of Europe. The UK and USA's goal is to
dominate the world.
Jun 18th 2002, 1:28 am
#152
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
AftonOkla wrote:
>>Would you say that the Nazis are morally equivalent to the countries they defeated,
>>and to the U.K., and to the U.S.?
> No but the UK and the US have spilled far more blood throughout history than has
> Germany. Germany's goal was the domination of Europe. The UK and USA's goal is to
> dominate the world.
Run that by me again: when did the U.S. spill the blood of 12 million innocents, as
Germany did in a rather short space of time? (Remember, the Jews were not the only
ones; mental ly deficient persons and homosexuals and many others were among the
victims. Are you perhaps a Holocaust-denier?)
The U.S. could have ruled much of the world after WWII, and yet it not only did *not*
insist on ruling, but poured money into rebuilding damaged countries destined to be
fully independent. Your evidence of this purported goal of world domination is what?
And if you are talking about cultural or political or economic influence, puh-lease.
>>Would you say that the Nazis are morally equivalent to the countries they defeated,
>>and to the U.K., and to the U.S.?
> No but the UK and the US have spilled far more blood throughout history than has
> Germany. Germany's goal was the domination of Europe. The UK and USA's goal is to
> dominate the world.
Run that by me again: when did the U.S. spill the blood of 12 million innocents, as
Germany did in a rather short space of time? (Remember, the Jews were not the only
ones; mental ly deficient persons and homosexuals and many others were among the
victims. Are you perhaps a Holocaust-denier?)
The U.S. could have ruled much of the world after WWII, and yet it not only did *not*
insist on ruling, but poured money into rebuilding damaged countries destined to be
fully independent. Your evidence of this purported goal of world domination is what?
And if you are talking about cultural or political or economic influence, puh-lease.
Jun 18th 2002, 5:20 am
#153
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
Sylvia Ottemoeller wrote:
> Ken Pisichko wrote:
>
> > Sadly no nation has a monopoly on being "GOOD" or "EVIL". A major world war (and
> > countless others in the past - and sadly in the future..) or two were fought
> > because of a stupid "we-versus-they" mentality of "superiority/inferiority".
>
> No, no nation or institution or person is perfect; all are flawed. But not all are
> equally flawed; some are so evil that they must be resisted, or their evil will
> increase and their evil will prevail.
>
Quite profound. I believe it is good to resist evil. The difficulty with resisting
evil is that evil is not absolute, and varies according to a nation's perception. I
seem to recall that Iraq was assisted by the USA in terms of weaponry when the
"common" (and does that mean evil) enemy way Iran. My, my, my. What a difference now.
Has Saddam become "evil" all of a sudden? Don't think so. He is what he was. How come
there was such a change in the attitude of USCs toward him?
>
> Would you say that the Nazis are morally equivalent to the countries they defeated,
> and to the U.K., and to the U.S.?
>
I don't understand how the Nazis got into this discussion.
> Should the U.S. simply have let go of that pesky "we-versus-they" mentality, and
> let the Nazis have their way?
Hard for me to say, but the USA did not fight Adolf and his denizens until several
years after 1939. It seems to me that US business made a p***-pot full of money
while the USA was neutral selling war supplies to which ever nation could pay for
the supplies.
Heller's "Catch-22" is an interesting book, that while fiction does have some
basis in fact.
> Would you say that the world which would have resulted from a Nazi victory would
> be a lot like the world today, particularly in Europe?
>
We all know what that answer is. What are you getting at, may I ask?
>
> Would you say that apartheid South Africa was morally equivalent to everyone else?
We all know the answer to that one too. I am frankly ashamed that the RSA government
sent observers to Canada to see how we treated our "Indians" on the reserves. Guess
what the South Africans did? Unfortunately, the "indians" or "aboriginal people" or
"first nations" are still no where near equality of treatment as compared to the rest
of the Canadians. I understand the same is true in the USA. I KNOW it is the same in
Australia.
Moral? Hah! You have to be kidding.
> Were comments by people in other countries about the "superiority/inferiority" of
> the apartheid system out of place?
>
See above.
>
> > Some time ago I posted the observation that Japanese school texts indicate (to
> > Japanese school children) that the Japanese were hard done by for WWII, and that
> > they were just defending their national rights (I paraphrase of course) by
> > invading countries surrounding them.
> >
> > Just their opinion of course, but the Japanese are not interested in viewing the
> > aftermath any differently than they are now doing so.
>
> Do you think it's just fine to have distorted textbooks?
>
Revisionism is wrong! Convenient politically, but wrong.
Here in Canada there is some broo-haa occurring between Canwest Global and the rest
of the media not controlled by them. It seems that Canwest wants to have centralized
editorials. In fact Canwest went so far as to fire the publisher of the Ottawa
Citizen on sunday (the supposed day of rest) when he earlier wrote an article stating
that the Prime Minister of canada should be turfed out or fired or??? I did not read
the details of his article. it seems the CEO, a Mr. Asper, with close connections to
the Prime Minister and the Liberal Party of canada took a dim view of this and fired
to man -a day after he received an honourary doctorate (from one of Canada's
top-notch universities) for his work in journalism.
> (Those Japanese textbooks don't have chapters on the Rape of Nanking. Germany has
> been much better than Japan in teaching its new generations about what really went
> on during WWII.)
>
It still is revisionism, even though it is "much better" as you put it.
>
> > Murder is as old as Cain and Able (Spelling??). No nation has been able to stop
> > it - not even with high technology and incredible surveillance. I do not want to
> > open a can of worms, but the events in Israel show two tribes killing each other
> > - one side blowing up themselves and civilians, and the other side
> > blowing/shooting up terrorists in surgical strikes and killing old men, women,
> > and children (often in the arms of these women) with aimed shots at the head
> > etc...
>
> Your evidence for this latter assertion about aimed shots at noncombatants?
Check the media archives!
> Israel is absolutely remarkable for holding back on killing noncombatants. "Suicide
> bombers" who happen to live are treated in Israeli hospitals with the same care as
> those they maimed, just a few rooms away.
>
It is good that they take care of those that they shoot. It is also good that they
take care of those "suicide bombers" who kill and injure the innocent. Are you
suggesting that the Israelis not take care of these crazies who willfully kill the
innocent? What do you suggest they do - shoot them like an injured dog at the side of
the road? I think the Israelis are doing the right thing in taking care of everyone -
that is what being a human being is all about. It seems to me that in war (and the
Israeli situation is not a declared war) the Geneva Conventions establish this as a
requirement of the combatants....
>
> > Like I stated, it would be better if we got off this "we are better and they are
> > worse" philosophy and live in a more understanding way. As far as Canada and the
> > USA are concerned, the border is pretty transparent to the average traveler. God
> > help the border control types in their difficult job. Let the legal travelers
> > spend their money and have the respective bureaucracies work on apprehending the
> > illegal activities (if at all possible).
>
> I more or less agree with you about the visa and immigration part of it ("let the
> legal travelers spend their money. . .), but the sort of anti-war moral equivalency
> arguments have serious problems.
War is UGLY. So is politics. As long as there is humanity I believe we will
have both.
Ken
> Ken Pisichko wrote:
>
> > Sadly no nation has a monopoly on being "GOOD" or "EVIL". A major world war (and
> > countless others in the past - and sadly in the future..) or two were fought
> > because of a stupid "we-versus-they" mentality of "superiority/inferiority".
>
> No, no nation or institution or person is perfect; all are flawed. But not all are
> equally flawed; some are so evil that they must be resisted, or their evil will
> increase and their evil will prevail.
>
Quite profound. I believe it is good to resist evil. The difficulty with resisting
evil is that evil is not absolute, and varies according to a nation's perception. I
seem to recall that Iraq was assisted by the USA in terms of weaponry when the
"common" (and does that mean evil) enemy way Iran. My, my, my. What a difference now.
Has Saddam become "evil" all of a sudden? Don't think so. He is what he was. How come
there was such a change in the attitude of USCs toward him?
>
> Would you say that the Nazis are morally equivalent to the countries they defeated,
> and to the U.K., and to the U.S.?
>
I don't understand how the Nazis got into this discussion.
> Should the U.S. simply have let go of that pesky "we-versus-they" mentality, and
> let the Nazis have their way?
Hard for me to say, but the USA did not fight Adolf and his denizens until several
years after 1939. It seems to me that US business made a p***-pot full of money
while the USA was neutral selling war supplies to which ever nation could pay for
the supplies.
Heller's "Catch-22" is an interesting book, that while fiction does have some
basis in fact.
> Would you say that the world which would have resulted from a Nazi victory would
> be a lot like the world today, particularly in Europe?
>
We all know what that answer is. What are you getting at, may I ask?
>
> Would you say that apartheid South Africa was morally equivalent to everyone else?
We all know the answer to that one too. I am frankly ashamed that the RSA government
sent observers to Canada to see how we treated our "Indians" on the reserves. Guess
what the South Africans did? Unfortunately, the "indians" or "aboriginal people" or
"first nations" are still no where near equality of treatment as compared to the rest
of the Canadians. I understand the same is true in the USA. I KNOW it is the same in
Australia.
Moral? Hah! You have to be kidding.
> Were comments by people in other countries about the "superiority/inferiority" of
> the apartheid system out of place?
>
See above.
>
> > Some time ago I posted the observation that Japanese school texts indicate (to
> > Japanese school children) that the Japanese were hard done by for WWII, and that
> > they were just defending their national rights (I paraphrase of course) by
> > invading countries surrounding them.
> >
> > Just their opinion of course, but the Japanese are not interested in viewing the
> > aftermath any differently than they are now doing so.
>
> Do you think it's just fine to have distorted textbooks?
>
Revisionism is wrong! Convenient politically, but wrong.
Here in Canada there is some broo-haa occurring between Canwest Global and the rest
of the media not controlled by them. It seems that Canwest wants to have centralized
editorials. In fact Canwest went so far as to fire the publisher of the Ottawa
Citizen on sunday (the supposed day of rest) when he earlier wrote an article stating
that the Prime Minister of canada should be turfed out or fired or??? I did not read
the details of his article. it seems the CEO, a Mr. Asper, with close connections to
the Prime Minister and the Liberal Party of canada took a dim view of this and fired
to man -a day after he received an honourary doctorate (from one of Canada's
top-notch universities) for his work in journalism.
> (Those Japanese textbooks don't have chapters on the Rape of Nanking. Germany has
> been much better than Japan in teaching its new generations about what really went
> on during WWII.)
>
It still is revisionism, even though it is "much better" as you put it.
>
> > Murder is as old as Cain and Able (Spelling??). No nation has been able to stop
> > it - not even with high technology and incredible surveillance. I do not want to
> > open a can of worms, but the events in Israel show two tribes killing each other
> > - one side blowing up themselves and civilians, and the other side
> > blowing/shooting up terrorists in surgical strikes and killing old men, women,
> > and children (often in the arms of these women) with aimed shots at the head
> > etc...
>
> Your evidence for this latter assertion about aimed shots at noncombatants?
Check the media archives!
> Israel is absolutely remarkable for holding back on killing noncombatants. "Suicide
> bombers" who happen to live are treated in Israeli hospitals with the same care as
> those they maimed, just a few rooms away.
>
It is good that they take care of those that they shoot. It is also good that they
take care of those "suicide bombers" who kill and injure the innocent. Are you
suggesting that the Israelis not take care of these crazies who willfully kill the
innocent? What do you suggest they do - shoot them like an injured dog at the side of
the road? I think the Israelis are doing the right thing in taking care of everyone -
that is what being a human being is all about. It seems to me that in war (and the
Israeli situation is not a declared war) the Geneva Conventions establish this as a
requirement of the combatants....
>
> > Like I stated, it would be better if we got off this "we are better and they are
> > worse" philosophy and live in a more understanding way. As far as Canada and the
> > USA are concerned, the border is pretty transparent to the average traveler. God
> > help the border control types in their difficult job. Let the legal travelers
> > spend their money and have the respective bureaucracies work on apprehending the
> > illegal activities (if at all possible).
>
> I more or less agree with you about the visa and immigration part of it ("let the
> legal travelers spend their money. . .), but the sort of anti-war moral equivalency
> arguments have serious problems.
War is UGLY. So is politics. As long as there is humanity I believe we will
have both.
Ken
Jun 18th 2002, 1:24 pm
#154
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
[email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> >Usually when a white guy is on America's most wanted, they dont' even say where he
> >was born.
> Yes but they usually do say "he is from Toronto Canada and has family there. He may
> be there or in the area where the crime was comitted". I rarely hear them say a
> suspect is from Canada but every week they have some from Mexico who "may have
> returned to Mexico". This is why we need to STOP this turning the cheek to illegal
> immigration and START issuing visas for Mexicans to come here and work for up to 10
> months a year. This means we can keep track of them and keep the criminals out.
You badly want America to become a third world country, don't you?
news:<[email protected]>...
> >Usually when a white guy is on America's most wanted, they dont' even say where he
> >was born.
> Yes but they usually do say "he is from Toronto Canada and has family there. He may
> be there or in the area where the crime was comitted". I rarely hear them say a
> suspect is from Canada but every week they have some from Mexico who "may have
> returned to Mexico". This is why we need to STOP this turning the cheek to illegal
> immigration and START issuing visas for Mexicans to come here and work for up to 10
> months a year. This means we can keep track of them and keep the criminals out.
You badly want America to become a third world country, don't you?
Jun 18th 2002, 9:39 pm
#155
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
James Donovan wrote:
> [email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > >Usually when a white guy is on America's most wanted, they dont' even say where
> > >he was born.
> >
> > Yes but they usually do say "he is from Toronto Canada and has family there. He
> > may be there or in the area where the crime was comitted". I rarely hear them say
> > a suspect is from Canada but every week they have some from Mexico who "may have
> > returned to Mexico". This is why we need to STOP this turning the cheek to
> > illegal immigration and START issuing visas for Mexicans to come here and work
> > for up to 10 months a year. This means we can keep track of them and keep the
> > criminals out.
> You badly want America to become a third world country, don't you?
Explain yourself please. How can it even become third world country? I can see it
having a more global outlook without expecting the world to keep doing business with
it. Elaborate on your statement please.
Ken
> [email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > >Usually when a white guy is on America's most wanted, they dont' even say where
> > >he was born.
> >
> > Yes but they usually do say "he is from Toronto Canada and has family there. He
> > may be there or in the area where the crime was comitted". I rarely hear them say
> > a suspect is from Canada but every week they have some from Mexico who "may have
> > returned to Mexico". This is why we need to STOP this turning the cheek to
> > illegal immigration and START issuing visas for Mexicans to come here and work
> > for up to 10 months a year. This means we can keep track of them and keep the
> > criminals out.
> You badly want America to become a third world country, don't you?
Explain yourself please. How can it even become third world country? I can see it
having a more global outlook without expecting the world to keep doing business with
it. Elaborate on your statement please.
Ken
Jun 18th 2002, 11:44 pm
#156
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
"BM" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]. net>...
> I don't have a problem giving some of them visas. I've met a lot and most are
> pretty nice guys. You always get the ones who screw it up for the rest though.
Illegal alien smuggling would still happen. Unscrupulous US companies use illegal
aliens because they work for less than minimum wage, plain and simple. Giving them
visas would mean that they have to work for minimum wage.
Most of the illegal aliens are either farm workers or domestics. We already have a
visa category for seasonal agricultural workers and also for domestics and they are
not being very much used at all. Why? Being in legal status means being entitled to
at least minimum wage, which is EXACTLY why US citizens are not filling those menial
jobs. It is far easier and cheaper to smuggle some aliens across the border and pay
them a few bucks off the books.
Another thing is that the immigration problem in the southwest is often thought of by
many as a "silent invasion" to reclaim what was formerly Mexican land. Think of it.
Millions of illegal aliens crossing the border. They come over and have children
here. They are US citizens by birth. Their children's children are also US
citizens. US citizens can vote and change laws. Can you see where this is headed?
Just look and you will see what what will happen in the south west in 21 years or so.
news:<[email protected]. net>...
> I don't have a problem giving some of them visas. I've met a lot and most are
> pretty nice guys. You always get the ones who screw it up for the rest though.
Illegal alien smuggling would still happen. Unscrupulous US companies use illegal
aliens because they work for less than minimum wage, plain and simple. Giving them
visas would mean that they have to work for minimum wage.
Most of the illegal aliens are either farm workers or domestics. We already have a
visa category for seasonal agricultural workers and also for domestics and they are
not being very much used at all. Why? Being in legal status means being entitled to
at least minimum wage, which is EXACTLY why US citizens are not filling those menial
jobs. It is far easier and cheaper to smuggle some aliens across the border and pay
them a few bucks off the books.
Another thing is that the immigration problem in the southwest is often thought of by
many as a "silent invasion" to reclaim what was formerly Mexican land. Think of it.
Millions of illegal aliens crossing the border. They come over and have children
here. They are US citizens by birth. Their children's children are also US
citizens. US citizens can vote and change laws. Can you see where this is headed?
Just look and you will see what what will happen in the south west in 21 years or so.
Jun 19th 2002, 12:29 am
#157
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
>Most of the illegal aliens are either farm workers or domestics. We already have a
>visa category for seasonal agricultural workers and also for domestics and they are
>not being very much used at all. Why?
Because employers know that the law never fines them and is never even enforced. Why
would they go to the trouble? If the law were enforced and these employers were
fined, jailed and had their assets forfeited, then they would get the visas.
>visa category for seasonal agricultural workers and also for domestics and they are
>not being very much used at all. Why?
Because employers know that the law never fines them and is never even enforced. Why
would they go to the trouble? If the law were enforced and these employers were
fined, jailed and had their assets forfeited, then they would get the visas.
Jun 19th 2002, 12:33 am
#158
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
HA HA. "Sylvia Ottemoeller" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> AftonOkla wrote:
> >>Would you say that the Nazis are morally equivalent to the countries they
> >>defeated, and to the U.K., and to the U.S.?
> > No but the UK and the US have spilled far more blood throughout history
than
> > has Germany. Germany's goal was the domination of Europe. The UK and
USA's goal
> > is to dominate the world.
> Run that by me again: when did the U.S. spill the blood of 12 million innocents,
> as Germany did in a rather short space of time? (Remember, the Jews were not the
> only ones; mental ly deficient persons and homosexuals and many others were among
> the victims. Are you perhaps a Holocaust-denier?)
> The U.S. could have ruled much of the world after WWII, and yet it not only did
> *not* insist on ruling, but poured money into rebuilding damaged countries destined
> to be fully independent. Your evidence of this purported goal of world domination
> is what?
> And if you are talking about cultural or political or economic influence,
> puh-lease.
> AftonOkla wrote:
> >>Would you say that the Nazis are morally equivalent to the countries they
> >>defeated, and to the U.K., and to the U.S.?
> > No but the UK and the US have spilled far more blood throughout history
than
> > has Germany. Germany's goal was the domination of Europe. The UK and
USA's goal
> > is to dominate the world.
> Run that by me again: when did the U.S. spill the blood of 12 million innocents,
> as Germany did in a rather short space of time? (Remember, the Jews were not the
> only ones; mental ly deficient persons and homosexuals and many others were among
> the victims. Are you perhaps a Holocaust-denier?)
> The U.S. could have ruled much of the world after WWII, and yet it not only did
> *not* insist on ruling, but poured money into rebuilding damaged countries destined
> to be fully independent. Your evidence of this purported goal of world domination
> is what?
> And if you are talking about cultural or political or economic influence,
> puh-lease.
Jun 19th 2002, 12:35 am
#159
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
"AftonOkla" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >Would you say that the Nazis are morally equivalent to the countries they
> >defeated, and to the U.K., and to the U.S.?
> No but the UK and the US have spilled far more blood throughout history
than
> has Germany. Germany's goal was the domination of Europe. The UK and USA's
goal
> is to dominate the world.
See part of the United States problem is it's meddling in the rest of the world. We
have to. We have no choice. If we do meddle, we're screwed because the whole world
says "America" they get all involved in other peoples business, but then when the
CHRISTIANS are SLAUGHTERING Muslims in the former Yugoslavia and the MUSLIMS are
doing the same to the CHRISTIANS, we HAVE to get involved because EUROPE won't do it
without us. That way, when everything goes to hell, they can blame us for it.
Yeah, I say we stay out of all of it.
> >Would you say that the Nazis are morally equivalent to the countries they
> >defeated, and to the U.K., and to the U.S.?
> No but the UK and the US have spilled far more blood throughout history
than
> has Germany. Germany's goal was the domination of Europe. The UK and USA's
goal
> is to dominate the world.
See part of the United States problem is it's meddling in the rest of the world. We
have to. We have no choice. If we do meddle, we're screwed because the whole world
says "America" they get all involved in other peoples business, but then when the
CHRISTIANS are SLAUGHTERING Muslims in the former Yugoslavia and the MUSLIMS are
doing the same to the CHRISTIANS, we HAVE to get involved because EUROPE won't do it
without us. That way, when everything goes to hell, they can blame us for it.
Yeah, I say we stay out of all of it.
Jun 19th 2002, 12:45 am
#160
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
>Run that by me again: when did the U.S. spill the blood of 12 million innocents, as
>Germany did in a rather short space of time? (Remember, the Jews were not the only
>ones; mental ly deficient persons and homosexuals and many others were
The USA did not ever do this in the short time period Hitler did but if you look over
time at perhaps 17 million dead Injuns, millions of dead slaves and millions of dead
Mexicans, you see that the USA has not exactly been a hotbed of compassion either.
>among the victims. Are you perhaps a Holocaust-denier?)
No. The Holocaust happened and is a fact. But so did the Injun Holocaust and the
Negro Halocaust and many others forever wiped from the history textbooks of
American schools.
>The U.S. could have ruled much of the world after WWII, and yet it not only did
>*not* insist on ruling, but poured money into rebuilding damaged countries
>destined to be fully independent. Your evidence of this purported goal of world
>domination is what?
Yes, and to this day we are still there in military form pushing those countries
around (or at least the people in them). We do shit like "accidently" roll tanks
over houses and cars, blow up farmers and run jets into sky car cables and then we
always say "oh well, sorry" to the survivors. This is shit we would not dare do in
the country.
>Germany did in a rather short space of time? (Remember, the Jews were not the only
>ones; mental ly deficient persons and homosexuals and many others were
The USA did not ever do this in the short time period Hitler did but if you look over
time at perhaps 17 million dead Injuns, millions of dead slaves and millions of dead
Mexicans, you see that the USA has not exactly been a hotbed of compassion either.
>among the victims. Are you perhaps a Holocaust-denier?)
No. The Holocaust happened and is a fact. But so did the Injun Holocaust and the
Negro Halocaust and many others forever wiped from the history textbooks of
American schools.
>The U.S. could have ruled much of the world after WWII, and yet it not only did
>*not* insist on ruling, but poured money into rebuilding damaged countries
>destined to be fully independent. Your evidence of this purported goal of world
>domination is what?
Yes, and to this day we are still there in military form pushing those countries
around (or at least the people in them). We do shit like "accidently" roll tanks
over houses and cars, blow up farmers and run jets into sky car cables and then we
always say "oh well, sorry" to the survivors. This is shit we would not dare do in
the country.
Jun 19th 2002, 12:46 am
#161
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
>You badly want America to become a third world country, don't you?
America is not going to be a third world country.
America is not going to be a third world country.
Jun 19th 2002, 3:21 am
#162
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > You badly want America to become a third world country, don't you?
> Explain yourself please. How can it even become third world country?
When we reduce the cost of labor, we reduce wages and then the standard of living
will follow. I can see massive protests, riots and dare I say civil war if illegal
aliens are to be in legal status and getting less than minimum wage.
Illegal aliens are hired because they work almost for free, not because Americans
won't do the job. Americans will do their jobs for good wages, not for less than
minimum wage, as illegals are being paid. They work for less than minimum wage
because they have no choice. It is either that or you starve.
Besides, mexican illegal immigration isn't all about better economic opportunity.
Part of it is a slow invasion of the SouthWest USA, to "reclaim" territory that was
once theirs.
Why should we reward those who break our laws anyway?
news:<[email protected]>...
> > You badly want America to become a third world country, don't you?
> Explain yourself please. How can it even become third world country?
When we reduce the cost of labor, we reduce wages and then the standard of living
will follow. I can see massive protests, riots and dare I say civil war if illegal
aliens are to be in legal status and getting less than minimum wage.
Illegal aliens are hired because they work almost for free, not because Americans
won't do the job. Americans will do their jobs for good wages, not for less than
minimum wage, as illegals are being paid. They work for less than minimum wage
because they have no choice. It is either that or you starve.
Besides, mexican illegal immigration isn't all about better economic opportunity.
Part of it is a slow invasion of the SouthWest USA, to "reclaim" territory that was
once theirs.
Why should we reward those who break our laws anyway?
Jun 19th 2002, 4:12 am
#163
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
James Donovan wrote:
> Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > > You badly want America to become a third world country, don't you?
> >
> > Explain yourself please. How can it even become third world country?
> When we reduce the cost of labor, we reduce wages and then the standard of living
> will follow. I can see massive protests, riots and dare I say civil war if illegal
> aliens are to be in legal status and getting less than minimum wage.
What about all those USCs and business types who habitually send work offshore: Texas
Instruments, Tonka Toys, Wrangler Jeans, etc etc... They do so for cheap labor. Why,
if I were you, I would not buy their products! Farmers Stores in ND and in MN stopped
carrying a line of clothing because it started to be made offshore. This firm has
patriotism and conviction. They let go of a profitable line because it was not made
in the USA. How many high fliers do that? WalMart? GM? Ford? RCA? Many USCs do
continue to purchase goods from offshore- because they want it both ways: good wages
and cheap goods and foods. Something has to give. It also provides food and some
degree of comfort for those in the third world who would otherwise starve to death.
See, there is good that comes out of sending work offshore!
The illegal aliens at the bottom of our employment chain (and I am talking of Canada
and the USA here) attest to this "need for cheap labor". If there was no demand for
this cheap labor the illegals would be doing something else besides "stealing jobs
from USCs or from Canadians".
> Illegal aliens are hired because they work almost for free, not because Americans
> won't do the job.
There are jobs that Americans won't do because of the perception of the job and the
low wages. Case in point is the teaching situation. IF teaching was so good there
would be no available jobs. However, the wages and to some extent the working
conditions have resulted in many openings. I will gladly come next year and take one
of those openings for which I am qualified if there is no qualified USC willing to
take it. Mind you, I'll need a HB-1 or EB-2 visa first.
> Americans will do their jobs for good wages, not for less than minimum wage, as
> illegals are being paid.
Immigrant teachers get paid what the "unavailable" USC teachers would get paid - if
there were any willing to take to job. Collective agreement stuff....
Ken
> Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > > You badly want America to become a third world country, don't you?
> >
> > Explain yourself please. How can it even become third world country?
> When we reduce the cost of labor, we reduce wages and then the standard of living
> will follow. I can see massive protests, riots and dare I say civil war if illegal
> aliens are to be in legal status and getting less than minimum wage.
What about all those USCs and business types who habitually send work offshore: Texas
Instruments, Tonka Toys, Wrangler Jeans, etc etc... They do so for cheap labor. Why,
if I were you, I would not buy their products! Farmers Stores in ND and in MN stopped
carrying a line of clothing because it started to be made offshore. This firm has
patriotism and conviction. They let go of a profitable line because it was not made
in the USA. How many high fliers do that? WalMart? GM? Ford? RCA? Many USCs do
continue to purchase goods from offshore- because they want it both ways: good wages
and cheap goods and foods. Something has to give. It also provides food and some
degree of comfort for those in the third world who would otherwise starve to death.
See, there is good that comes out of sending work offshore!
The illegal aliens at the bottom of our employment chain (and I am talking of Canada
and the USA here) attest to this "need for cheap labor". If there was no demand for
this cheap labor the illegals would be doing something else besides "stealing jobs
from USCs or from Canadians".
> Illegal aliens are hired because they work almost for free, not because Americans
> won't do the job.
There are jobs that Americans won't do because of the perception of the job and the
low wages. Case in point is the teaching situation. IF teaching was so good there
would be no available jobs. However, the wages and to some extent the working
conditions have resulted in many openings. I will gladly come next year and take one
of those openings for which I am qualified if there is no qualified USC willing to
take it. Mind you, I'll need a HB-1 or EB-2 visa first.
> Americans will do their jobs for good wages, not for less than minimum wage, as
> illegals are being paid.
Immigrant teachers get paid what the "unavailable" USC teachers would get paid - if
there were any willing to take to job. Collective agreement stuff....
Ken
Jun 19th 2002, 4:20 am
#164
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
I don't mind paying a little extra for goods and services if it means helping my
fellow citizens.
Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> James Donovan wrote:
>
> > [email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
> > news:<[email protected]>...
> > > >But you are missing my point. It is so easy to cross the border from Canada,
> > > >citizen or not. We NEED to check people coming into our country so that at
> > > >least we reduce the possibility of a terrorist sneaking in via Canada.
> > >
> > > If a terrorist wants in he will get in. He can just as easily sneak in from
> > > Mexico. Hell, about 6 million Mexicans have managed to sneak in so what are his
> > > chances of getting caught? Also there are many crossings from Canada to the USA
> > > that are completely open and people in those rural areas cross back and forth
> > > all the time.
> >
> > Then we need to restrict ALL borders. I am not in favour of mexicans or people of
> > ANY country coming here and staying beyond their allowed invitation. If you are
> > coming here, for whatever purpose, you need to be inspected and we need to ensure
> > that you are not coming here to kill us or stay illegally and become a burden on
> > our society. As much as people say that illegals are benefitting the economy that
> > is totally wrong. They are lowering the cost of labor so that many Americans who
> > need jobs are forced to compete with these illegals, to which there are NO
> > regulations governing which wages they are paid.
>
> I have noticed that immigrants will take whatever job they can get. I saw new
> arrivals from the Indian sub-continent taking the garbage collection and rubbish
> jobs that "UK citizens" turned their nose at. I see the same thing here in Canada.
> New arrivals here in Canada coming as refugees from some God-awful place take
> whatever they can get. I understand from your comment that illegal immigrants do
> the same thing in the USA.
>
> What pray tell, is wrong with the US citizens and business types who hire these
> illegal types? Are they not patriotic? Cannot they see that by hiring these poor
> (and illegal) types that they are depriving US citizens of a job? Cannot they see
> that they might be harboring and employing a terrorist, or a potential killer or
> ......., or just another human being who wants peace and quiet and a place to raise
> children in a peaceful and healthy environment?
>
> I wonder if the folks who hire these poor (and illegal) immigrants are just doing
> it to enhance their bottom line? Remember that while the highly paid executives of
> TONKA Toys live in posh Minnetonka, the denizens who toil in Mexico (at quite
> frankly pi**-poor wages) do so gratefully. These denizens are just happy to have
> work - but they know that the results of their toil results in over-priced products
> to be used and abused by kids in Canada and the USA.
>
> The consumer wants it both ways - a well paid job and cheap (I mean CHEAP) food and
> consumer goods. Such food and consumer goods CANNOT be produced entirely in Canada
> nor in the USA. If it could happen then US and Canadian corporations (like TONKA,
> TI and IBM) would not be producing offshore. Cannot happen in the current economic
> structure. Something has to give. I no longer wonder why there is such resentment
> in the developing world toward the "developed world" and especially toward North
> America.
>
> Ken
fellow citizens.
Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> James Donovan wrote:
>
> > [email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
> > news:<[email protected]>...
> > > >But you are missing my point. It is so easy to cross the border from Canada,
> > > >citizen or not. We NEED to check people coming into our country so that at
> > > >least we reduce the possibility of a terrorist sneaking in via Canada.
> > >
> > > If a terrorist wants in he will get in. He can just as easily sneak in from
> > > Mexico. Hell, about 6 million Mexicans have managed to sneak in so what are his
> > > chances of getting caught? Also there are many crossings from Canada to the USA
> > > that are completely open and people in those rural areas cross back and forth
> > > all the time.
> >
> > Then we need to restrict ALL borders. I am not in favour of mexicans or people of
> > ANY country coming here and staying beyond their allowed invitation. If you are
> > coming here, for whatever purpose, you need to be inspected and we need to ensure
> > that you are not coming here to kill us or stay illegally and become a burden on
> > our society. As much as people say that illegals are benefitting the economy that
> > is totally wrong. They are lowering the cost of labor so that many Americans who
> > need jobs are forced to compete with these illegals, to which there are NO
> > regulations governing which wages they are paid.
>
> I have noticed that immigrants will take whatever job they can get. I saw new
> arrivals from the Indian sub-continent taking the garbage collection and rubbish
> jobs that "UK citizens" turned their nose at. I see the same thing here in Canada.
> New arrivals here in Canada coming as refugees from some God-awful place take
> whatever they can get. I understand from your comment that illegal immigrants do
> the same thing in the USA.
>
> What pray tell, is wrong with the US citizens and business types who hire these
> illegal types? Are they not patriotic? Cannot they see that by hiring these poor
> (and illegal) types that they are depriving US citizens of a job? Cannot they see
> that they might be harboring and employing a terrorist, or a potential killer or
> ......., or just another human being who wants peace and quiet and a place to raise
> children in a peaceful and healthy environment?
>
> I wonder if the folks who hire these poor (and illegal) immigrants are just doing
> it to enhance their bottom line? Remember that while the highly paid executives of
> TONKA Toys live in posh Minnetonka, the denizens who toil in Mexico (at quite
> frankly pi**-poor wages) do so gratefully. These denizens are just happy to have
> work - but they know that the results of their toil results in over-priced products
> to be used and abused by kids in Canada and the USA.
>
> The consumer wants it both ways - a well paid job and cheap (I mean CHEAP) food and
> consumer goods. Such food and consumer goods CANNOT be produced entirely in Canada
> nor in the USA. If it could happen then US and Canadian corporations (like TONKA,
> TI and IBM) would not be producing offshore. Cannot happen in the current economic
> structure. Something has to give. I no longer wonder why there is such resentment
> in the developing world toward the "developed world" and especially toward North
> America.
>
> Ken
Jun 19th 2002, 4:20 am
#165
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
Stuart Brook <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:<[email protected] da.ca>...
> James Donovan wrote:
> >
> > Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message Listen, All I am saying is
> > that you canucks are guests here, and should not demand to be treated other than
> > that. That being said, guests are treated very well, but not the same as
> > citizens, who own the place.
>
> Who asked to be treated as a citizen ? And sadly, you don't really "own" the place
> ... you're only borrowing it for about 4 score years!
I, as a citizen am entitled to everything here. It is my RIGHT. You, are a guest, you
coming here is a PRIVILEGE. We LET you come here, you don't DEMAND to come here. If
you don't like OUR rules in OUR country then you are free to stay in YOUR country or
go to someone else's who would tolerate you.
news:<[email protected] da.ca>...
> James Donovan wrote:
> >
> > Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message Listen, All I am saying is
> > that you canucks are guests here, and should not demand to be treated other than
> > that. That being said, guests are treated very well, but not the same as
> > citizens, who own the place.
>
> Who asked to be treated as a citizen ? And sadly, you don't really "own" the place
> ... you're only borrowing it for about 4 score years!
I, as a citizen am entitled to everything here. It is my RIGHT. You, are a guest, you
coming here is a PRIVILEGE. We LET you come here, you don't DEMAND to come here. If
you don't like OUR rules in OUR country then you are free to stay in YOUR country or
go to someone else's who would tolerate you.