PDA

View Full Version : Common Ground?



Marvin S
03-05-2010, 08:01 PM
What did Hoover, Truman & Eisenhower have in common?

During the great Depression, POTUS Herbert Hoover ordered the deportation of all illegal aliens in order to make jobs available to American citizens that desperately needed work.

POTUS Harry Truman deported over 2 million illegals to create jobs for returning veterans.

& then again in 1954, POTUS Dwight Eisenhower deported 13 million Mexican Nationals! The program was code named "Operation Wetback". It was done so WWII & Korean Vets would have a better chance at jobs. It took 2 years, but they were deported.

If they deported the illegals back then, they can do the same today :cool:!

If you doubt the info, enter Operation Wetback into your search engine & confirm for yourself.

Don't forget to remain up to date on your taxes.... 12 million illegals are depending on you ;-).

If the government were to accomplish this - assuming they are costing us $20,000 a head x 12 million = $240,000,000,000 - that would do something to the deficit :o!!

kb27_99
03-05-2010, 08:27 PM
This should be interesting.

ducknwork
03-05-2010, 09:34 PM
The key word in this topic is ILLEGAL. If someone is doing something illegal, then that action should be corrected. Period. End of story.

precisionlabradors
03-05-2010, 10:28 PM
its a good idea. would the deporters be funded privately or by the govt? maybe it would be a good business to privately start a vigilante deportation business. it's constitutional.
________
Kitchen Measures (http://kitchenmeasures.com/)

Franco
03-06-2010, 06:23 AM
The amount of south of the boarder gang members in our jails is staggering. Yet, it is better to lock them up than release them in thier country of origin where they can reenter the USA. One way to discourage gang activity is to use capital punishment on any illegal convicted for a felony. Until we get serious about the problem, they will continue to take advantage of our softness.

road kill
03-06-2010, 07:43 AM
What did Hoover, Truman & Eisenhower have in common?

During the great Depression, POTUS Herbert Hoover ordered the deportation of all illegal aliens in order to make jobs available to American citizens that desperately needed work.

POTUS Harry Truman deported over 2 million illegals to create jobs for returning veterans.

& then again in 1954, POTUS Dwight Eisenhower deported 13 million Mexican Nationals! The program was code named "Operation Wetback". It was done so WWII & Korean Vets would have a better chance at jobs. It took 2 years, but they were deported.

If they deported the illegals back then, they can do the same today :cool:!

If you doubt the info, enter Operation Wetback into your search engine & confirm for yourself.

Don't forget to remain up to date on your taxes.... 12 million illegals are depending on you ;-).

If the government were to accomplish this - assuming they are costing us $20,000 a head x 12 million = $240,000,000,000 - that would do something to the deficit :o!!

I don't think you understand this at all.

Let me help;

First we insure them, then we make them citizens, then they vote for the party that made it all possible.


VOTES=$$$$$-POWER!!!

See what I'm sayin'?????

rk

YardleyLabs
03-06-2010, 07:51 AM
I don't think you understand this at all.

Let me help;

First we insure them, then we make them citizens, then they vote for the party that made it all possible.


VOTES=$$$$$-POWER!!!

See what I'm sayin'?????

rk
And who, exactly, was the last President that provided amnesty to allow illegals to become citizens?

road kill
03-06-2010, 08:24 AM
And who, exactly, was the last President that provided amnesty to allow illegals to become citizens?
What was the temperature yesterday?

SOOOO????

I'm talking about NOW!!

I thought you all voted for "Hope & Change?"
All you do is keep using the lame assed excuse (like some small child) "He sttttaaarrrttteeedddd iiiitttt!!!"

Like that makes it OK!!:rolleyes:

Game, Set & Match.....road kill!:D

YardleyLabs
03-06-2010, 09:50 AM
What was the temperature yesterday?

SOOOO????

I'm talking about NOW!!

I thought you all voted for "Hope & Change?"
All you do is keep using the lame assed excuse (like some small child) "He sttttaaarrrttteeedddd iiiitttt!!!"

Like that makes it OK!!:rolleyes:

Game, Set & Match.....road kill!:D
Yet you are living in the world of never happened. None of the health proposals provide insurance coverage for illegals. No bill has been submitted to grant amnesty although people from both parties have proposed that such legislation be considered. 90% of the complaints that I hear about the current administration are for things it hasn't done. Why don'y you try focusing on what it has done instead?

luvmylabs23139
03-06-2010, 09:57 AM
We should require proof of legal residence at ER's. We are paying for them whether we want to or not. Illegal, tough luck!!!!! NO SERVICE!!!! Break the law pay the price!!!!

M&K's Retrievers
03-06-2010, 10:42 AM
Why don'y you try focusing on what it has done instead?

This should be good. :)

Franco
03-06-2010, 10:55 AM
This should be good. :)



Yea, that would be interesting to read!

Oh, you mean accomplished?

Let see, he has the American people scared about spending money! The Financial news is doom & gloom. The domestic sale of autos & trucks is slower than it has ever been. People are worried about how much more Health Insurance will cost if the Dems get thier way. Then, there's Cap & Tax, and in general, poor decisions! Lets don't forget all the Czars, bad Cabenit appointments and world apology tour. Lest don't forget about the appointments of Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano.

dback
03-06-2010, 11:43 AM
90% of the complaints that I hear about the current administration are for things it hasn't done.

That right there should give any educated man pause for serious concern as to the circle he runs in.

subroc
03-06-2010, 11:54 AM
Jeff

Why don't we focus on the point of the post. Should we deport illegal aliens?

Does the president still have the power to do it?

Should we give amnesty?

Should we open our borders for all to enter unimpeded?

Every nation has the right to know who is entering their borders, has the right to track them any way they want and deport them at any time with or without cause for whatever reason they want.

YardleyLabs
03-06-2010, 12:53 PM
Jeff

Why don't we focus on the point of the post. Should we deport illegal aliens?

Does the president still have the power to do it?

Should we give amnesty?

Should we open our borders for all to enter unimpeded?

Every nation has the right to know who is entering their borders, has the right to track them any way they want and deport them at any time with or without cause for whatever reason they want.
I believe that the only effective way to prevent illegal immigration is to prevent illegals from being employed. If that happened, illegal immigration would dry up overnight. All other strategies are nothing but political window dressing. The reality is that denial of employment fails because the illegal workers are vital to the businesses they work in and those businesses are vital to our communities. Given that, in my opinion, our options are simple: develop an immigration reform package that meets the needs of our businesses, develop a program of employment based enforcement (e.g., imprisonment of employers/managers that hire illegals in the absence of proof of an effective program to determine status before and uring employment), or learn to live with the consequences of doing nothing.

dback
03-06-2010, 01:26 PM
It is my understanding that Arizona has the strictest laws in the nation in this regard. I was against these laws initially, however with the programs provided by the state to verify each new hire it has worked quite well. Once a new hire has been verified by the state the burden is removed from the employer. Illegals have left the state in droves (mostly California :-)). It does appear to have had a significant impact.

Marvin S
03-06-2010, 01:45 PM
It is my understanding that Arizona has the strictest laws in the nation in this regard. I was against these laws initially, however with the programs provided by the state to verify each new hire it has worked quite well. Once a new hire has been verified by the state the burden is removed from the employer. Illegals have left the state in droves (mostly California :-)). It does appear to have had a significant impact.

That's step 1 - at least those illegals are trying to work -

step 2 - we put people on the dole into those jobs the illegals were doing, reform our L & I regs to make it harder for the able bodied to claim injury & screw off on the job. Having your belly button rubbing your backbone is a great incentive to work ;-).

step 3 - go after those illegals in public housing & on the dole - we could start with Obongo's auntie who could afford to donate to his campaign :cool:.

step 4 - get the illegals out of the schools, they can go to school in their own country

step 5 - clean them out of ER's

Watch the cost savings roll in :D.

ducknwork
03-06-2010, 01:56 PM
But Marvin, that's so inhumane...

YardleyLabs
03-06-2010, 02:13 PM
I have seen very little to suggest that illegals are entering our country in droves hoping for welfare. Employers like illegals because they work hard at work few Americans are willing to do and complain little. Generally speaking, those coming here are coming to earn money to send home. That is why they leave when jobs dry up. I think dback's comment underscores what is already known by those who promise to build border walls instead of going after employers. As a former employer of many non-Americans, we employed aliens because they worked well and were happy to do things that Americans rejected such as moving all over the country with almost no notice.

It did not cost us less to hire aliens, it cost us more to comply with Labor Department requirements. In addition, we spent 10's of thousands per year in legal fees to try to comply with all legal requirements. However, INS made it hard to comply, not easy. Processing delays were often measured in years so that people would go out of status despite doing everything appropriately. Under the law at the time, we could continue employing them but they could not take a job with another employer. If we laid someone off who was out of status, we had to fly them back to their home country.

Eventually, we hit a point where the incremental cost of hiring an alien was 20-30% more than hiring an American but Americans would not do the work that needed to be done even at higher salaries. Accordingly, we simply stopped pursuing those types of jobs and cut our workforce by 80% Those jobs ended up being outsourced to other countries instead. America lost, India gained. Our average salary at that time was approximately $90,000 per year and we eliminated 80 jobs when we stopped accepting work requiring staff relocation.

M&K's Retrievers
03-06-2010, 04:15 PM
...I have seen very little to suggest that illegals are entering our country in droves hoping for welfare. Employers like illegals because they work hard at work few Americans are willing to do and complain little. Generally speaking, those coming here are coming to earn money to send home....

I couldn't agree more (imagine that). A friend and client of mine has a concrete construction company. Except for his foremen, he hired almost exclusively illegal aliens because they were the only ones who would do the work for reasonable pay. As long as they provided a SS card, they were hired. As soon as the SS office notified him of a duplicate number and he confronted the employee, they were gone. He said it was almost impossible to find legals who would or could do the manual labor the job required even at twice the price. Many prospective employees would rather stay on unemployment than work that hard. Oklahoma has recently passed legislation cracking down on employers who were hiring illegals. This has forced him to use smaller crews at higher wages and higher Workers Comp premiums all of which are passed on to the consumer.
He and I have had many disagreements over cold ones about this problem and he is a die hard DEM. I always tell him he is a convenient liberal.
I'm not sure what exactly Oklahoma is doing but it sure put the fear of God in employers and apparently the law is doing as intended.

Marvin S
03-06-2010, 06:19 PM
I have seen very little to suggest that illegals are entering our country in droves hoping for welfare. Employers like illegals because they work hard at work few Americans are willing to do and complain little. Generally speaking, those coming here are coming to earn money to send home. That is why they leave when jobs dry up. I think dback's comment underscores what is already known by those who promise to build border walls instead of going after employers. As a former employer of many non-Americans, we employed aliens because they worked well and were happy to do things that Americans rejected such as moving all over the country with almost no notice.

We apparently travel in different circles - in E WA the illegals would send their pay home & hit the welfare offices. Mexico would have a huge balance of payments issue without the Mexican citizens that are in this country sending money back to Mexico.

As for people not wanting to move, you must have had an interesting group of employees.

As for people not wanting to work, possibly conditions waiting for a handout have become to lucrative :rolleyes:.


It did not cost us less to hire aliens, it cost us more to comply with Labor Department requirements. In addition, we spent 10's of thousands per year in legal fees to try to comply with all legal requirements. However, INS made it hard to comply, not easy. Processing delays were often measured in years so that people would go out of status despite doing everything appropriately. Under the law at the time, we could continue employing them but they could not take a job with another employer. If we laid someone off who was out of status, we had to fly them back to their home country.

When I contract mined, quite successfully, the other 5 people on our crew were Mexican, 3 legals & 2 with cards so they were legal just not citizens. It worked quite well that way. When I went back to that company in a management position it became obvious to me that unless something changed there would be no way we would attract a sufficiently energized work force to continue operating as we did. Again, I say, it has become to attractive for US citizens not to work.

So I went to the big kite factory, working as an engineer & eventually a lead. Through 3 layoffs I saw Americans RIFFED because they were more expensive than someone who could go through the motions but obviously with less talent. Over time this creates a serious brain drain. When the government shut down military procurement in the late 60"s over a million engineers were without employment. Some were that way because they did not see the HWOTW & had allowed their skills to deteriorate but there were those who had not but were SOL.

So, I saw something different than you & will reiterate, "It is much to easy to be without employment"


Eventually, we hit a point where the incremental cost of hiring an alien was 20-30% more than hiring an American but Americans would not do the work that needed to be done even at higher salaries. Accordingly, we simply stopped pursuing those types of jobs and cut our workforce by 80% Those jobs ended up being outsourced to other countries instead. America lost, India gained. Our average salary at that time was approximately $90,000 per year and we eliminated 80 jobs when we stopped accepting work requiring staff relocation.

At the big kite factory it was within your right to turn down an assignment, these were looked upon as opportunities, which if refused were serious considerations when advancement opportunities arose. One of my sons presently has a small construction company, He generally uses South Americans (Mexicans are not the only people looking for opportunities) as they do not ususally arrive with baggage.


I couldn't agree more (imagine that). A friend and client of mine has a concrete construction company. Except for his foremen, he hired almost exclusively illegal aliens because they were the only ones who would do the work for reasonable pay. As long as they provided a SS card, they were hired. As soon as the SS office notified him of a duplicate number and he confronted the employee, they were gone. He said it was almost impossible to find legals who would or could do the manual labor the job required even at twice the price. Many prospective employees would rather stay on unemployment than work that hard. Oklahoma has recently passed legislation cracking down on employers who were hiring illegals. This has forced him to use smaller crews at higher wages and higher Workers Comp premiums all of which are passed on to the consumer.
He and I have had many disagreements over cold ones about this problem and he is a die hard DEM. I always tell him he is a convenient liberal.
I'm not sure what exactly Oklahoma is doing but it sure put the fear of God in employers and apparently the law is doing as intended.

When the unions, many years ago, got the child labor laws passed, everyone thought that to be a victory. People of my generation still have fond memories of picking various fruits & vegetables, that's why we are a hard working, generally, group of people. It's hard to appreciate hard work when your day has been spent navigating the controls of a Game Boy, an IPOD or twittering away.

But what has happend in some industries is mechanization - the only issue being many of those originally employed do not have the skills to get into that line of work. I believe that to be the individuals fault.

YardleyLabs
03-06-2010, 06:42 PM
...

So, I saw something different than you & will reiterate, "It is much to easy to be without employment"
...

At lower income levels, you may well be right. For example, a person earning $10/hour will still receive the equivalent of almost $7/hour on unemployment if they have worked long enough at their job. However, for someone earning $90,000/year on their job, unemployment is not much of an option since it would provide only about 10-15% of the amount they had been earning.

When it comes to illegal aliens, however, payment of unemployment benefits is illegal. According to the US DoL, "Section 3304(a)(14) of the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA) requires SESAs to take certain actions regarding aliens filing claims for unemployment compensation. The intent of these laws is, in brief, to prohibit paying unemployment compensation to an alien whose wage credits are based on services performed while the alien was not legally entitled to employment within the United States." [http://www.ows.doleta.gov/dmstree/uipl/uipl83/uipl_0683.htm] Many right wing blogs quote a 2006 FBI Statistical Report on Undocumented Immigrants to show that a large percentage of unemployment benefits go to illegals. Unfortunately, the report is fictitious. No such report appears to have ever been issued.

subroc
03-06-2010, 06:49 PM
...When it comes to illegal aliens, however, payment of unemployment benefits is illegal...

?????????????

YardleyLabs
03-06-2010, 06:52 PM
?????????????
??????????????????:confused:

subroc
03-06-2010, 07:19 PM
let me walk you through it Jeff.

I believe that just the fact that someone is an “illegal” alien illustrates that they do not obey our laws anyway. I expect that taking unemployment benefits wouldn’t seem all that illegal to them at all.

YardleyLabs
03-06-2010, 07:58 PM
let me walk you through it Jeff.

I believe that just the fact that someone is an “illegal” alien illustrates that they do not obey our laws anyway. I expect that taking unemployment benefits wouldn’t seem all that illegal to them at all.
DoL rules require verification of the legality of all work done that contributes to the individual's eligibility for UI. Thus, even if an employer paid in premiums for a person that was working illegally, they would not be eligible for benefits until the state agency had verified that they were in the country legally and that the benefits were earned for work done under a valid visa. The problem of illegal aliens is normally that employers make no real effort to verify work status. It is not that workers are presenting forged documents that withstand inspection. If an individual has forged an identity so thoroughly that it withstands investigation, then nothing else that you do for enforcement is going to make a difference.

Hew
03-07-2010, 06:17 AM
I believe that the only effective way to prevent illegal immigration is to prevent illegals from being employed. If that happened, illegal immigration would dry up overnight. All other strategies are nothing but political window dressing. The reality is that denial of employment fails because the illegal workers are vital to the businesses they work in and those businesses are vital to our communities. Given that, in my opinion, our options are simple: develop an immigration reform package that meets the needs of our businesses, develop a program of employment based enforcement (e.g., imprisonment of employers/managers that hire illegals in the absence of proof of an effective program to determine status before and uring employment), or learn to live with the consequences of doing nothing.
Dead solid perfect. Building fences is a monument to stupidity (but quite an economic boost for Mexican ladder makers). Deporting 12 million + illegals is a pipe dream...a logistical and expensive cluster**** that is a political impossibility (btw, Operation Wetback deported only 1 million). Hell, as a country we can't even stomach holding a few hundred murdering scum in Gitmo...what do you think will happen when people start seeing honest and hard working families hauled out of their jobs and schools in plastic cuffs by the Border Patrol?!? The ONLY way to get them home and stop them from coming in the first place is to make it so they can't work.

I've know many Hispanic immigrants, legal and otherwise, and nearly every last one of them was a hard working, honest, salt-of-the-earth person.

precisionlabradors
03-07-2010, 10:32 AM
in order for a person to receive medicaid funded mental health services in ID they have to receive a couple of health referrals and stuff from the doc, but the best part is all that stuff is entered into a database and can be checked for legitamacy by the provider. it would be great if there were a database for employers with legal citizens tied to ssn that employers had to access in order to employ. it would have to be extremely secure and not give ssn's but somehow be able to validate somebody's citizenship. that way, if someone is found to be working illegally, the employer has no leg to stand on and is easily held accountable.
________
SICK FROM NEXIUM (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/nexium/)

YardleyLabs
03-07-2010, 11:04 AM
in order for a person to receive medicaid funded mental health services in ID they have to receive a couple of health referrals and stuff from the doc, but the best part is all that stuff is entered into a database and can be checked for legitamacy by the provider. it would be great if there were a database for employers with legal citizens tied to ssn that employers had to access in order to employ. it would have to be extremely secure and not give ssn's but somehow be able to validate somebody's citizenship. that way, if someone is found to be working illegally, the employer has no leg to stand on and is easily held accountable.
The E-Verify system provides an on-line system for employers to verify consistency of names and social security numbers. The I-9 process requires employers to physically verify ID, citizenship, SSN and visa documentation. However, this process is not supported by any on-line tools and it is very costly to verify how well employers have met their responsibilities. It seems to me that visa verification should be possible on-line. The difficulty is with citizenship verification since there is no equivalent to a national ID in the US. That is, as a citizen, there is no uniform standard that defines or documents citizenship for all citizens. The Real ID act attempts to define national standards for driver licenses that makes these the equivalent of National ID's. However, not all states are in compliance and no one is required to obtain a license. Both conservative and liberal groups have resisted the creation of national ID's as government over-reaching. What do people on this forum think about mandatory national ID's?

precisionlabradors
03-07-2010, 11:18 AM
The E-Verify system provides an on-line system for employers to verify consistency of names and social security numbers. The I-9 process requires employers to physically verify ID, citizenship, SSN and visa documentation. However, this process is not supported by any on-line tools and it is very costly to verify how well employers have met their responsibilities. It seems to me that visa verification should be possible on-line. The difficulty is with citizenship verification since there is no equivalent to a national ID in the US. That is, as a citizen, there is no uniform standard that defines or documents citizenship for all citizens. The Real ID act attempts to define national standards for driver licenses that makes these the equivalent of National ID's. However, not all states are in compliance and no one is required to obtain a license. Both conservative and liberal groups have resisted the creation of national ID's as government over-reaching. What do people on this forum think about mandatory national ID's?

it would have its pros and cons. i don't think a lot of americans are into being "tracked" per se, even though we already have ssn's and have to use them to sign up for practically anything.
________
Iolite (http://www.vaporshop.com)

dback
03-07-2010, 11:30 AM
The E-Verify system provides an on-line system for employers to verify consistency of names and social security numbers. I can garooon-damn-Tee you that system is not 100% foolproof The I-9 process requires employers to physically verify ID, citizenship, SSN and visa documentation. High quality fakes for sale on any corner in Phoenix at bargain basement prices any day of the week However, this process is not supported by any on-line tools and it is very costly to verify how well employers have met their responsibilities. It seems to me that visa verification should be possible on-line. The difficulty is with citizenship verification since there is no equivalent to a national ID in the US. That is, as a citizen, there is no uniform standard that defines or documents citizenship for all citizens. The Real ID act attempts to define national standards for driver licenses that makes these the equivalent of National ID's. However, not all states are in compliance and no one is required to obtain a license. Both conservative and liberal groups have resisted the creation of national ID's as government over-reaching. What do people on this forum think about mandatory national ID's? Would certainly be a positive step forward towards fulfilling Biblical Prophecy would't it.....but that's all 'hogwash' anyway, so know worries mate

Just my two cents

precisionlabradors
03-07-2010, 11:32 AM
i missed the part in the bible about the mandatory ID's. since it's the sabbath i guess i need to do a bit o reading
________
Mflb warranty (http://vaporizer.org/reviews)

dback
03-07-2010, 11:44 AM
i missed the part in the bible about the mandatory ID's. since it's the sabbath i guess i need to do a bit o reading

Steven D Miller or Terry Watkins....but let's not go there. It was meant solely as a semi-humorous 'gig' at Yardley....nothing more.

Marvin S
03-07-2010, 02:10 PM
Deporting 12 million + illegals is a pipe dream...a logistical and expensive cluster**** that is a political impossibility (btw, Operation Wetback deported only 1 million). Hell, as a country we can't even stomach holding a few hundred murdering scum in Gitmo...what do you think will happen when people start seeing honest and hard working families hauled out of their jobs and schools in plastic cuffs by the Border Patrol?!? The ONLY way to get them home and stop them from coming in the first place is to make it so they can't work.

I've know many Hispanic immigrants, legal and otherwise, and nearly every last one of them was a hard working, honest, salt-of-the-earth person.

I don't agree with you - Given the right laws with the right person is in charge it could happen, quickly. I believe only the lefty's & their ilk are having an issue with Gitmo & they are just looking for something to bitch about & they are not the majority :cool:. By my definition someone is not honest if they are doing something illegally. Those who don't want to see the law enforced are only concerned for themselves. They just cleaned up a facility in Brewster, WA, 550 illegals, only complainant was the outfit running the facility. I personally believe we should give those who want to work a card & let them work but they must leave their family at home. Send those who don't work home.

Your last statement is correct by what I see, but what %age of the illegal population are those workers?

YardleyLabs
03-07-2010, 03:36 PM
I don't agree with you - Given the right laws with the right person is in charge it could happen, quickly. I believe only the lefty's & their ilk are having an issue with Gitmo & they are just looking for something to bitch about & they are not the majority :cool:. By my definition someone is not honest if they are doing something illegally. Those who don't want to see the law enforced are only concerned for themselves. They just cleaned up a facility in Brewster, WA, 550 illegals, only complainant was the outfit running the facility. I personally believe we should give those who want to work a card & let them work but they must leave their family at home. Send those who don't work home.

Your last statement is correct by what I see, butwhat %age of the illegalpopulation are those workers?

1, If you check, I suspect that you can find an Eichmann descendant who would be happy to come up with some form of "final solution" for 12 million people.

2. I'm not sure that there is any way to measure the percentage of illegals working, however I believe the answer is almost all of them. Also, it is more common to find families with working parents who are illegal and children who are citizens by birth than it is to find parents who are working and children that are illegal.

Hew
03-07-2010, 04:38 PM
The Real ID act attempts to define national standards for driver licenses that makes these the equivalent of National ID's. However, not all states are in compliance and no one is required to obtain a license. Both conservative and liberal groups have resisted the creation of national ID's as government over-reaching. What do people on this forum think about mandatory national ID's?
As I understand it, the Real ID proposal was not a national indentification card, per se, but the standardization of each states' IDs so that they all had the minimum required components (watermarks over pics, etc.). Some states have laughably easy-to-forge IDs (and know it, but don't care). Also, the info required on Real ID wasn't any more than what's required on a normal drivers license. I don't think that there's any chance of an effective illegal policy without forgery-proof ID and an easy means for an employer to verify it.

Hew
03-07-2010, 04:41 PM
1, If you check, I suspect that you can find an Eichmann descendant who would be happy to come up with some form of "final solution" for 12 million people. When the going gets tough, the tough break out the Nazi comparisons, eh? :rolleyes:

2. I'm not sure that there is any way to measure the percentage of illegals working, however I believe the answer is almost all of them. I would guess the same. That's the main reason they come here; to work. Also, it is more common to find families with working parents who are illegal and children who are citizens by birth than it is to find parents who are working and children that are illegal.

.............

Marvin S
03-07-2010, 07:10 PM
1, If you check, I suspect that you can find an Eichmann descendant who would be happy to come up with some form of "final solution" for 12 million people.

Just a little something to obfuscate the issue? For a person who attempts to pass yourself off as a "brainiac", that's really sick :mad:.


2. I'm not sure that there is any way to measure the percentage of illegals working, however I believe the answer is almost all of them. Also, it is more common to find families with working parents who are illegal and children who are citizens by birth than it is to find parents who are working and children that are illegal.

I'm not interested in a guess - I am sure that number is somewhere - I'm of the opinion that these agencies, including the INS, have a vested interest in the issue not disappearing.

YardleyLabs
03-07-2010, 07:25 PM
Just a little something to obfuscate the issue? For a person who attempts to pass yourself off as a "brainiac", that's really sick :mad:.

Then you tell me how you are going to drive 12 million people out of this country without Eichmannesque tactics. Are you going to go knocking down doors to locate people? Paying bounties to informers to turn in families? Getting kids to inform on their parents? How will you transport everyone/ Stashed into railroad cars or trucks? How will you prevent them from coming back? Maybe a little brand is in order. What will be your legal process for verifying status? If you think there is any way that you could drive 12 million people out of this country so that with "the right person in charge it could happen quickly", I would love to hear the details of how it would be done and what type of person you have in mind. Because to me, the entire concept does strike as a Nazi like solution, and completely and totally sick.

Marvin S
03-08-2010, 12:02 PM
Before we start - I have addressed that those in charge have a vested interest in the issue not going away - why won't you address that?


Then you tell me how you are going to drive 12 million people out of this country without Eichmannesque tactics.

The INS is responsible for that - they just need to do their job, for which they are being adequately compensated :confused:. Set a timeline, after which they will be unemployed unless the issue is resolved, the issue will disappear.


How will you transport everyone/ Stashed into railroad cars or trucks? How will you prevent them from coming back?

They can return to their place of origin in the same manner that they got to where they do not belong. As for coming back, chip them & we'll know where they are :cool:.


What will be your legal process for verifying status? If you think there is any way that you could drive 12 million people out of this country so that with "the right person in charge it could happen quickly", I would love to hear the details of how it would be done and what type of person you have in mind.

A color coded ID card would do the job, severe penalties for those who aid & abet. (I have to show ID every time I enter a liquor serving area, though it is obvious I am of legal age).


Because to me, the entire concept does strike as a Nazi like solution, and completely and totally sick.

Your unwillingness to drop this is indicative of some level of irrationality ;-). What part of ILLEGAL do you not understand, they have no rights!!!!!!!

Gerry Clinchy
03-08-2010, 03:39 PM
At lower income levels, you may well be right. For example, a person earning $10/hour will still receive the equivalent of almost $7/hour on unemployment if they have worked long enough at their job. However, for someone earning $90,000/year on their job, unemployment is not much of an option since it would provide only about 10-15% of the amount they had been earning.

So Marvin's statement would tend to be an accurate assessment ... while the $7/hr American citizen can sit home on unemployment, the illegal will be happy to work for the $7 since in Mexico he couldn't earn anything. Don't think we have to worry too much about the $90,000/yr people in the scenario.

So, if unemployment benefits for $7/hr workers were limited, they would have the jobs that the illegals are doing?

I don't think amnesty works very well. Reagan did it, and it solved nothing. More illegals came; in even greater numbers. Makes sense to me that eventually they figure another amnesty will occur & they want to be ready to take advantage of it.

And work is definitely the key. I recall one report that illegals in the US shrank as the recession hit. With no work, there was no point in staying.

Illegals may not get unemployment compensation, but I'm sure that those anchor babies are getting Medicaid & other social welfare programs that also extend to their illegally residing mother?

YardleyLabs
03-08-2010, 06:17 PM
Before we start - I have addressed that those in charge have a vested interest in the issue not going away - why won't you address that?



The INS is responsible for that - they just need to do their job, for which they are being adequately compensated :confused:. Set a timeline, after which they will be unemployed unless the issue is resolved, the issue will disappear.



They can return to their place of origin in the same manner that they got to where they do not belong. As for coming back, chip them & we'll know where they are :cool:.



A color coded ID card would do the job, severe penalties for those who aid & abet. (I have to show ID every time I enter a liquor serving area, though it is obvious I am of legal age).



Your unwillingness to drop this is indicative of some level of irrationality ;-). What part of ILLEGAL do you not understand, they have no rights!!!!!!!
Your answers are all non-answers. You said it would be easy for the right person to do rid the country of illegal immigrants. I don't believe that anyone can do it easily without creating a reign of terror because there is no clean or easy way to track down, arrest and deport 12 million men, women and children (not to mention the children that are here illegally and cannot be deported even though their parents are here illegally). The illegal population now represents about 4-5% of our total population with much higher percentages in many parts of the country. That 4-5% may be related to an almost equal number of people who are here legally, including the young children of illegals who are US citizens.

You have not offered a single useful suggestion that would suggest otherwise. You also, by the way, did not "address" people having a conflict of interest, you simply asserted it. An assertion is not an argument. My experience is that most bureucrats are tied up in process and have no idea where the forest lies. That is not a matter of people conspiring to protect their jobs, it is a matter of people fulfilling the assignments they are given.

I did provide an indication of how I believed we could be effective in limiting illegal immigration. It hinges on focusing the overwhelming bulk of our efforts on employers. The fact is that I agree that we do not try very hard. The difference is that I don't think that is a problem of bureaucrats. It is a problem of leadership from the top that does not want businesses to suffer from the loss of that illegal labor.

Your statement that "Your [my] unwillingness to drop this is indicative of some level of irrationality ;-). What part of ILLEGAL do you not understand, they have no rights!!!!!!!" is itself somewhat irrational. You are basically saying that if I disagree with you, I am irrational. Your original statements show no sign of reason. How could I do anything but disagree?

Marvin S
03-08-2010, 07:06 PM
Your answers are all non-answers.

I'm not a person who wastes a lot of time on verbiage, I know how to make things happen, so will not waste a lot of time exchanging meaningless drivel with a pencil pusher.

As a student, my professors had issues with my brevity & needless to say my grades suffered, but when in the Real World a lot of those high verbiage people were taking direction from me. That would probably not be consistent with your process ;-).


You have not offered a single useful suggestion that would suggest otherwise. You also, by the way, did not "address" people having a conflict of interest, you simply asserted it. An assertion is not an argument. My experience is that most bureucrats are tied up in process and have no idea where the forest lies. That is not a matter of people conspiring to protect their jobs, it is a matter of people fulfilling the assignments they are given.

U R Joking - I've been involved with these turkeys - In fact, one of my main complaints with both Bushes was their unwillingness to hold their appointed people to their responsibilities.


I did provide an indication of how I believed we could be effective in limiting illegal immigration. It hinges on focusing the overwhelming bulk of our efforts on employers.

You apparently missed my statement - "severe penalties for those who aid & abet" - which would apply to employers, education systems, welfare offices, state governments - all of which do.


Your statement that "Your [my] unwillingness to drop this is indicative of some level of irrationality ;-). What part of ILLEGAL do you not understand, they have no rights!!!!!!!" is itself somewhat irrational. You are basically saying that if I disagree with you, I am irrational. Your original statements show no sign of reason. How could I do anything but disagree?

Your inference that to call these people to task was nazi like is what I was addressing. You made that inference multiple times.

I happen to believe in "Tough Love", leaving a person no doubt as to where they stand, which I believe to be the most humane :confused:.

We are thinking of taking a trip in the next couple of years, I'll get a GPS as to where you abide & will plan to park our trailer on your property without asking permission, turn my dogs loose to roam & leave the place a mess when I depart. As your line of reasoning follows that pattern I'm sure you will be OK by that :). We hope you have a convenient access to free Electricity & Potable water, we do like our conveniences :).