tracking canucks
Jun 19th 2002, 4:20 am
#166
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> James Donovan wrote:
>
> > >
> > > > Like it or not, it is the same with letting people in our country. You are a
> > > > guest, you come for a certain period of time. If you overstay, and we catch
> > > > you, we send you back, and you will not be allowed to return.
> > >
> > > But they *are* allowed to return.
> >
> > If you overstay more than 180 days I would like to see you return within a short
> > period of time.
> >
>
> But what if they keep spending money (as you noted in your previous paragraph)?
What about when the money runs out? Don't tell me they could work here, because
Americans should have first preference for American jobs. In Canada, Canadians have
first preference for Canadian Jobs.
> > It helps catching them and banning them when they leave.
> >
>
> They then cannot come back and spend the money.... You lose on the money....
So what, a few dollars. Canadian money isn't worth squat anyway.
news:<[email protected]>...
> James Donovan wrote:
>
> > >
> > > > Like it or not, it is the same with letting people in our country. You are a
> > > > guest, you come for a certain period of time. If you overstay, and we catch
> > > > you, we send you back, and you will not be allowed to return.
> > >
> > > But they *are* allowed to return.
> >
> > If you overstay more than 180 days I would like to see you return within a short
> > period of time.
> >
>
> But what if they keep spending money (as you noted in your previous paragraph)?
What about when the money runs out? Don't tell me they could work here, because
Americans should have first preference for American jobs. In Canada, Canadians have
first preference for Canadian Jobs.
> > It helps catching them and banning them when they leave.
> >
>
> They then cannot come back and spend the money.... You lose on the money....
So what, a few dollars. Canadian money isn't worth squat anyway.
Jun 19th 2002, 4:20 am
#167
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
James Donovan wrote:
> Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > James Donovan wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > > Like it or not, it is the same with letting people in our country. You are
> > > > > a guest, you come for a certain period of time. If you overstay, and we
> > > > > catch you, we send you back, and you will not be allowed to return.
> > > >
> > > > But they *are* allowed to return.
> > >
> > > If you overstay more than 180 days I would like to see you return within a
> > > short period of time.
> > >
> >
> > But what if they keep spending money (as you noted in your previous paragraph)?
>
> What about when the money runs out? Don't tell me they could work here, because
> Americans should have first preference for American jobs. In Canada, Canadians have
> first preference for Canadian Jobs.
>
> > > It helps catching them and banning them when they leave.
> > >
> >
> > They then cannot come back and spend the money.... You lose on the money....
>
> So what, a few dollars. Canadian money isn't worth squat anyway.
Just ask the USCs in the "American Sunbelt" how impoverished they would be if the
snow birds did not come next season with their money that "isn't worth squat".
Bettcha they'll be glum faced. Where will the Snow Bird's replacements come from?
Harlem? Russia? Japan?
Where will the replacement money come from?
Ken
> Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > James Donovan wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > > > > Like it or not, it is the same with letting people in our country. You are
> > > > > a guest, you come for a certain period of time. If you overstay, and we
> > > > > catch you, we send you back, and you will not be allowed to return.
> > > >
> > > > But they *are* allowed to return.
> > >
> > > If you overstay more than 180 days I would like to see you return within a
> > > short period of time.
> > >
> >
> > But what if they keep spending money (as you noted in your previous paragraph)?
>
> What about when the money runs out? Don't tell me they could work here, because
> Americans should have first preference for American jobs. In Canada, Canadians have
> first preference for Canadian Jobs.
>
> > > It helps catching them and banning them when they leave.
> > >
> >
> > They then cannot come back and spend the money.... You lose on the money....
>
> So what, a few dollars. Canadian money isn't worth squat anyway.
Just ask the USCs in the "American Sunbelt" how impoverished they would be if the
snow birds did not come next season with their money that "isn't worth squat".
Bettcha they'll be glum faced. Where will the Snow Bird's replacements come from?
Harlem? Russia? Japan?
Where will the replacement money come from?
Ken
Jun 19th 2002, 1:25 pm
#168
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
Sending work offshore to where labor is cheap is one thing. Bringing cheap laborers
here is another entirely different matter.
Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> 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
here is another entirely different matter.
Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> 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
Jun 19th 2002, 1:26 pm
#169
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
[email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> >You badly want America to become a third world country, don't you?
> America is not going to be a third world country.
If we bring cheap laborers here en masse and give them green cards, it will.
news:<[email protected]>...
> >You badly want America to become a third world country, don't you?
> America is not going to be a third world country.
If we bring cheap laborers here en masse and give them green cards, it will.
Jun 19th 2002, 1:33 pm
#170
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
[email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> >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?
And if Mexicans get visas, why would they work for less than minimum wage? Ticket to
the clue train, those who have gotten amnesty or otherwise legalized their status
DON'T work in the sub minimum wage jobs that they did when they were illegal. They
have options to work in much better jobs that pay alot more. And those who have kids
and who become citizens opt to receive public assistance.
So tell me, in light of all of this, do you think an employer is going to pay X
amount of dollars to the lawyers and INS and wait months just for a few minimum wage
workers? Hell no. He will just illegally smuggle more workers who accept next to
nothing and keep doing so until he is caught.
news:<[email protected]>...
> >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?
And if Mexicans get visas, why would they work for less than minimum wage? Ticket to
the clue train, those who have gotten amnesty or otherwise legalized their status
DON'T work in the sub minimum wage jobs that they did when they were illegal. They
have options to work in much better jobs that pay alot more. And those who have kids
and who become citizens opt to receive public assistance.
So tell me, in light of all of this, do you think an employer is going to pay X
amount of dollars to the lawyers and INS and wait months just for a few minimum wage
workers? Hell no. He will just illegally smuggle more workers who accept next to
nothing and keep doing so until he is caught.
Jun 19th 2002, 3:20 pm
#171
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> James Donovan wrote:
>
> > Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:<[email protected]>...
> > > James Donovan wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Like it or not, it is the same with letting people in our country. You
> > > > > > are a guest, you come for a certain period of time. If you overstay, and
> > > > > > we catch you, we send you back, and you will not be allowed to return.
> > > > >
> > > > > But they *are* allowed to return.
> > > >
> > > > If you overstay more than 180 days I would like to see you return within a
> > > > short period of time.
> > > >
> > >
> > > But what if they keep spending money (as you noted in your previous paragraph)?
> >
> > What about when the money runs out? Don't tell me they could work here, because
> > Americans should have first preference for American jobs. In Canada, Canadians
> > have first preference for Canadian Jobs.
> >
> > > > It helps catching them and banning them when they leave.
> > > >
> > >
> > > They then cannot come back and spend the money.... You lose on the money....
> >
> > So what, a few dollars. Canadian money isn't worth squat anyway.
>
> Just ask the USCs in the "American Sunbelt" how impoverished they would be if the
> snow birds did not come next season with their money that "isn't worth squat".
There are more USC's than Snow Birds in Florida.
news:<[email protected]>...
> James Donovan wrote:
>
> > Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:<[email protected]>...
> > > James Donovan wrote:
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Like it or not, it is the same with letting people in our country. You
> > > > > > are a guest, you come for a certain period of time. If you overstay, and
> > > > > > we catch you, we send you back, and you will not be allowed to return.
> > > > >
> > > > > But they *are* allowed to return.
> > > >
> > > > If you overstay more than 180 days I would like to see you return within a
> > > > short period of time.
> > > >
> > >
> > > But what if they keep spending money (as you noted in your previous paragraph)?
> >
> > What about when the money runs out? Don't tell me they could work here, because
> > Americans should have first preference for American jobs. In Canada, Canadians
> > have first preference for Canadian Jobs.
> >
> > > > It helps catching them and banning them when they leave.
> > > >
> > >
> > > They then cannot come back and spend the money.... You lose on the money....
> >
> > So what, a few dollars. Canadian money isn't worth squat anyway.
>
> Just ask the USCs in the "American Sunbelt" how impoverished they would be if the
> snow birds did not come next season with their money that "isn't worth squat".
There are more USC's than Snow Birds in Florida.
Jun 19th 2002, 9:43 pm
#172
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
James Donovan wrote:
> Sending work offshore to where labor is cheap is one thing. Bringing cheap
> laborers here is another entirely different matter.
Several points on this: in both cases a job for a USC IS REMOVED! Second point, by
taking the work offshore, the US business conglomerate pays less for labor and
possibly (because the subsidiary is also offshore) pays less tax to Uncle Sam. Third
point, when labor comes into the USA those bodies still need to purchase services,
food etc, from the location they are in. I presume they rent property because they
don't make enough to own, and thus some landlord's buildings are not empty. more
property taxes can be paid... Last point, is that one would suppose there would be
better quality control in a US plant than in some offshore sweat-shop. Perhaps, but
not necessarily ...
Sounds like bringing folks into the country is better for the country than shipping
the work offshore.
What about all that rhetoric regarding "bring us your poor, etc etc etc....".
Remember that unless you are a North American Indian you or your ancestors
came here too.
Ken
> Sending work offshore to where labor is cheap is one thing. Bringing cheap
> laborers here is another entirely different matter.
Several points on this: in both cases a job for a USC IS REMOVED! Second point, by
taking the work offshore, the US business conglomerate pays less for labor and
possibly (because the subsidiary is also offshore) pays less tax to Uncle Sam. Third
point, when labor comes into the USA those bodies still need to purchase services,
food etc, from the location they are in. I presume they rent property because they
don't make enough to own, and thus some landlord's buildings are not empty. more
property taxes can be paid... Last point, is that one would suppose there would be
better quality control in a US plant than in some offshore sweat-shop. Perhaps, but
not necessarily ...
Sounds like bringing folks into the country is better for the country than shipping
the work offshore.
What about all that rhetoric regarding "bring us your poor, etc etc etc....".
Remember that unless you are a North American Indian you or your ancestors
came here too.
Ken
Jun 19th 2002, 10:20 pm
#173
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
James Donovan wrote:
> Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > James Donovan wrote:
> >
> > > Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:<[email protected]>...
> > > > James Donovan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Like it or not, it is the same with letting people in our country. You
> > > > > > > are a guest, you come for a certain period of time. If you overstay,
> > > > > > > and we catch you, we send you back, and you will not be allowed to
> > > > > > > return.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But they *are* allowed to return.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you overstay more than 180 days I would like to see you return within a
> > > > > short period of time.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > But what if they keep spending money (as you noted in your previous
> > > > paragraph)?
> > >
> > > What about when the money runs out? Don't tell me they could work here, because
> > > Americans should have first preference for American jobs. In Canada, Canadians
> > > have first preference for Canadian Jobs.
> > >
> > > > > It helps catching them and banning them when they leave.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > They then cannot come back and spend the money.... You lose on the money....
> > >
> > > So what, a few dollars. Canadian money isn't worth squat anyway.
> >
> > Just ask the USCs in the "American Sunbelt" how impoverished they would be if the
> > snow birds did not come next season with their money that "isn't worth squat".
>
> There are more USC's than Snow Birds in Florida.
Of course there are. Just answer the question: what would happen to the business in
the sunbelt of the Snow Birds did not come ........
Remember what happened to business after 9-11 when people stopped flying for a while.
Just answer my question.
> Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > James Donovan wrote:
> >
> > > Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:<[email protected]>...
> > > > James Donovan wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Like it or not, it is the same with letting people in our country. You
> > > > > > > are a guest, you come for a certain period of time. If you overstay,
> > > > > > > and we catch you, we send you back, and you will not be allowed to
> > > > > > > return.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But they *are* allowed to return.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you overstay more than 180 days I would like to see you return within a
> > > > > short period of time.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > But what if they keep spending money (as you noted in your previous
> > > > paragraph)?
> > >
> > > What about when the money runs out? Don't tell me they could work here, because
> > > Americans should have first preference for American jobs. In Canada, Canadians
> > > have first preference for Canadian Jobs.
> > >
> > > > > It helps catching them and banning them when they leave.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > They then cannot come back and spend the money.... You lose on the money....
> > >
> > > So what, a few dollars. Canadian money isn't worth squat anyway.
> >
> > Just ask the USCs in the "American Sunbelt" how impoverished they would be if the
> > snow birds did not come next season with their money that "isn't worth squat".
>
> There are more USC's than Snow Birds in Florida.
Of course there are. Just answer the question: what would happen to the business in
the sunbelt of the Snow Birds did not come ........
Remember what happened to business after 9-11 when people stopped flying for a while.
Just answer my question.
Jun 20th 2002, 12:39 am
#174
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
[email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> >Canada as a stepping stone to get to the US - which will now with Canada's new
> >immigration law, get a little harder. Eliminate those, and the number of "natural
> >born Canadians" going south is a lot smaller.
> It was a "stepping stone" I guess for my wife and my sister-in- law.
This is EXACTLY why we can't have (and why you want) open borders between the US and
Canada. For some classes of immigrants, especially refugees, Canada is much easier
to enter, and is viewed as a "resting point" for their ultimate destination, the US
of A. I remember some Indian people fraudulently immigrating from some caribbean
countries (Guyana and Trinidad I think) to Canada and claiming "refugee" status,
claiming that black people were being violent towards them and making their lives
miserable. Quite a few got across to Canada that way, and quite a large number
ultimately ended up in the USA, either legally, fraudulently or outright illegally.
news:<[email protected]>...
> >Canada as a stepping stone to get to the US - which will now with Canada's new
> >immigration law, get a little harder. Eliminate those, and the number of "natural
> >born Canadians" going south is a lot smaller.
> It was a "stepping stone" I guess for my wife and my sister-in- law.
This is EXACTLY why we can't have (and why you want) open borders between the US and
Canada. For some classes of immigrants, especially refugees, Canada is much easier
to enter, and is viewed as a "resting point" for their ultimate destination, the US
of A. I remember some Indian people fraudulently immigrating from some caribbean
countries (Guyana and Trinidad I think) to Canada and claiming "refugee" status,
claiming that black people were being violent towards them and making their lives
miserable. Quite a few got across to Canada that way, and quite a large number
ultimately ended up in the USA, either legally, fraudulently or outright illegally.
Jun 20th 2002, 1:20 am
#175
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
James Donovan wrote:
> [email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > >Canada as a stepping stone to get to the US - which will now with Canada's new
> > >immigration law, get a little harder. Eliminate those, and the number of
> > >"natural born Canadians" going south is a lot smaller.
> >
> > It was a "stepping stone" I guess for my wife and my sister-in- law.
>
> This is EXACTLY why we can't have (and why you want) open borders between the US
> and Canada. For some classes of immigrants, especially refugees, Canada is much
> easier to enter, and is viewed as a "resting point" for their ultimate destination,
> the US of A. I remember some Indian people fraudulently immigrating from some
> caribbean countries (Guyana and Trinidad I think) to Canada and claiming "refugee"
> status, claiming that black people were being violent towards them and making their
> lives miserable. Quite a few got across to Canada that way, and quite a large
> number ultimately ended up in the USA, either legally, fraudulently or outright
> illegally.
I wonder how the US INS would allow them into the USA illegally. It boggles the
mind quite frankly! Fraudulently? Hummmm! who is in control of immigration into the
USA - you? me?
Ken
> [email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > >Canada as a stepping stone to get to the US - which will now with Canada's new
> > >immigration law, get a little harder. Eliminate those, and the number of
> > >"natural born Canadians" going south is a lot smaller.
> >
> > It was a "stepping stone" I guess for my wife and my sister-in- law.
>
> This is EXACTLY why we can't have (and why you want) open borders between the US
> and Canada. For some classes of immigrants, especially refugees, Canada is much
> easier to enter, and is viewed as a "resting point" for their ultimate destination,
> the US of A. I remember some Indian people fraudulently immigrating from some
> caribbean countries (Guyana and Trinidad I think) to Canada and claiming "refugee"
> status, claiming that black people were being violent towards them and making their
> lives miserable. Quite a few got across to Canada that way, and quite a large
> number ultimately ended up in the USA, either legally, fraudulently or outright
> illegally.
I wonder how the US INS would allow them into the USA illegally. It boggles the
mind quite frankly! Fraudulently? Hummmm! who is in control of immigration into the
USA - you? me?
Ken
Jun 21st 2002, 9:32 pm
#176
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
>This is EXACTLY why we can't have (and why you want) open borders between the US and
>Canada. For some classes of immigrants, especially refugees, Canada is much easier
>to enter, and is viewed as a "resting point" for their ultimate destination,
You make a valid point but my desire for open borders is for US and Canadian citizens
only. Not PRs or other immigrants that would still have to be processed by
immigration. But I know what you are saying- and it works in reverse- people that are
rejected by the USA often go to try in Canada as sort of a second choice.
>Canada. For some classes of immigrants, especially refugees, Canada is much easier
>to enter, and is viewed as a "resting point" for their ultimate destination,
You make a valid point but my desire for open borders is for US and Canadian citizens
only. Not PRs or other immigrants that would still have to be processed by
immigration. But I know what you are saying- and it works in reverse- people that are
rejected by the USA often go to try in Canada as sort of a second choice.
Jun 21st 2002, 11:47 pm
#177
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
Yeah, and we do the dirty work they don't want to do on their own, ie. Somalia,
Bosnia Etc. "AftonOkla" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
m...
> >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.
Bosnia Etc. "AftonOkla" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
m...
> >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.
Jun 21st 2002, 11:48 pm
#178
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
Political pressure on the INS NOT to enforce these laws is the reason that these laws
are not enforced.
"AftonOkla" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >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.
are not enforced.
"AftonOkla" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >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.
Jun 21st 2002, 11:48 pm
#179
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
They should be willing to if they don't have a legal work force to pull from. Or
they should just move their company somewhere else.
"James Donovan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
com...
> [email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > >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?
> And if Mexicans get visas, why would they work for less than minimum wage? Ticket
> to the clue train, those who have gotten amnesty or otherwise legalized their
> status DON'T work in the sub minimum wage jobs that they did when they were
> illegal. They have options to work in much better jobs that pay alot more. And
> those who have kids and who become citizens opt to receive public assistance.
> So tell me, in light of all of this, do you think an employer is going to pay X
> amount of dollars to the lawyers and INS and wait months just for a few minimum
> wage workers? Hell no. He will just illegally smuggle more workers who accept
> next to nothing and keep doing so until he is caught.
they should just move their company somewhere else.
"James Donovan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
com...
> [email protected] (AftonOkla) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > >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?
> And if Mexicans get visas, why would they work for less than minimum wage? Ticket
> to the clue train, those who have gotten amnesty or otherwise legalized their
> status DON'T work in the sub minimum wage jobs that they did when they were
> illegal. They have options to work in much better jobs that pay alot more. And
> those who have kids and who become citizens opt to receive public assistance.
> So tell me, in light of all of this, do you think an employer is going to pay X
> amount of dollars to the lawyers and INS and wait months just for a few minimum
> wage workers? Hell no. He will just illegally smuggle more workers who accept
> next to nothing and keep doing so until he is caught.
Jun 21st 2002, 11:51 pm
#180
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: tracking canucks
If anyone here took economics, which I'm sure they did, the best thing to do would be
to get rid of the minimum wage. Then they'd pay these guys so low, that it would
stop the flow, IN THEORY.
"James Donovan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
com...
> 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?
to get rid of the minimum wage. Then they'd pay these guys so low, that it would
stop the flow, IN THEORY.
"James Donovan" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
com...
> 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?