Cat Forum / Health and Behavior / May 2006
A Day Without Immigrants
|
|
Thread rating:  |
youngsopinions@aol.com - 01 May 2006 14:40 GMT May 1st is a day for all illegal immigrants, and the garbage that supports them, to boycott work, school, ect....What if I need a fresh grapefruit? Who's going to dry my car at the car-wash? What happens if I get hungry and want to order Chinese food? Need a blow job from my neighborhood Latina hooker?
These illegals really know how to hurt a guy; I can hardly wait for May 2nd.
Here is what to expect today in the "day without immigrants":
Average wait today in emergency rooms across the country will be about 7 minutes.
Your children will actually learn something today in school
The freshly picked fruit will have less tuberculosis on them
Less gum on the sidewalks
The legitimate workers replacing the illegals today will bring hundreds of millions in additional tax revenue
Crime will drop dramatically
Sales of fuzzy dice will plummet putting most fuzzy dice manufacturers out of business
The 68% of pregnant Latinas under 18 will actually get some exercise today
"Low Rider" magazine will go out of business
Pat Buchanan in 2008!
 Signature ----------
J Young youngopinions@aol.com
youngopinions@aol.com - 01 May 2006 14:51 GMT > May 1st is a day for all illegal immigrants, and the garbage that > supports them, to boycott work, school, ect....What if I need a fresh [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Pat Buchanan in 2008! Path: border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!postnews.google.com!e56g2000 cwe.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: "youngsopinions@aol.com" <youngsopinions@hotmail.com> Newsgroups: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.california,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic,r ec.pets.cats.health+behav,rec.music.beatles Subject: A Day Without Immigrants Date: 1 May 2006 06:40:24 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Lines: 45 Message-ID: <1146490824.264943.284740@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 66.249.37.73 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: posting.google.com 1146490829 18143 127.0.0.1 (1 May 2006 13:40:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 13:40:29 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: G2/0.2 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; SV1),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com; posting-host=66.249.37.73; posting-account=EftglA0AAAAyQikRvq6L0fr4ATOT5Tec Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:3597105 alt.california:734247 alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic:1363445 rec.pets.cats.health+behav:448224 rec.music.beatles:993939
May 1st is a day for all illegal immigrants, and the garbage that supports them, to boycott work, school, ect....What if I need a fresh grapefruit? Who's going to dry my car at the car-wash? What happens if I get hungry and want to order Chinese food? Need a blow job from my neighborhood Latina hooker?
These illegals really know how to hurt a guy; I can hardly wait for May 2nd.
Here is what to expect today in the "day without immigrants":
Average wait today in emergency rooms across the country will be about 7 minutes.
Your children will actually learn something today in school
The freshly picked fruit will have less tuberculosis on them
Less gum on the sidewalks
The legitimate workers replacing the illegals today will bring hundreds of millions in additional tax revenue
Crime will drop dramatically
Sales of fuzzy dice will plummet putting most fuzzy dice manufacturers out of business
The 68% of pregnant Latinas under 18 will actually get some exercise today
"Low Rider" magazine will go out of business
Pat Buchanan in 2008!
 Signature ----------
J Young youngopinions@aol.com
lastcatstanding - 01 May 2006 14:51 GMT >> May 1st is a day for all illegal immigrants, and the garbage that >> supports them, to boycott work, school, ect....What if I need a fresh [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >> >> "Low Rider" magazine will go out of business I agree with this post, and it's funny too.
youngsopinions@aol.com - 01 May 2006 16:42 GMT Take a flying leap, troll.
My name is Jonathan David Young. [Whether that dildo with the AOL address likes it or not.] Look in any phonebook in America and you'll find about a dozen of us.I have never pretended to be, nor do I have any reason to want to pretend to be someone else[Let alone some pretentious loser]If that jack-a.s from AOL doesn't like it:TOO BAD.
Change your name. I'll keep the one my father gave me.I do in the mean time intend to continue to post in NG's in the style I'm most comfortable.
 Signature ----------
J Young youngsopinions@hotmail.com
911 - 01 May 2006 17:32 GMT >> May 1st is a day for all illegal immigrants, and the garbage that >> supports them, to boycott work, school, ect....What if I need a fresh [quoted text clipped - 97 lines] > > Pat Buchanan in 2008! hahahahahaha!!!! What a pussy. Not only do you post a working email address for spam harvesters to add to their list, you admit to being on the short bus A.K.A. - AOL. The short bus to the Internet. And icing on the cake, you're gonna tell..... hahahahahahaha!!!!
LC - 01 May 2006 19:40 GMT > hahahahahaha!!!! What a pussy. Not only do you post a working email > address for spam harvesters to add to their list, you admit to being on > the short bus A.K.A. - AOL. The short bus to the Internet. And icing on > the cake, you're gonna tell..... hahahahahahaha!!!! Now this is funny.
There's a better than good chance this troll is forging himself, given his desperate need for attention.
The loon creates sockpuppets on a regular basis. To wit:
No list would be complete without adding the names "Paul Duca" and "Parsifal" . Here they are together in an undated photo: http://www.ambushmag.com/is1398/images/s10.jpg From: <youngopinions@aol.com> Newsgroups: alt.atheism References: <1146502649.503233.321860@j73g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: The 100 unsexiest men in the world Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 13:39:53 -0400 Message-ID: <I9ednWeKkpko2svZRVn-gA@giganews.com>
"Recently discovered in the archives." http://www.ambushmag.com/is1398/images/s10.jpg From: youngopinions@aol.com (J Young) Newsgroups: houston.general,austin.general,tx.general Subject: Pattie and Donnie: The Prom Date: 25 Oct 2004 15:31:28 -0700 Message-ID: 9c2d0f9a.0410251431.51421c12@posting.google.com
"You have the audacity to lecture anyone about morals? Where were your morals when you posed for this picture at the firehouse? http://www.ambushmag.com/is1398/images/s10.jpg For shame!!!" From: youngopini...@aol.com (J Young) Newsgroups: talk.abortion,houston.general,alt.feminism,alt.abortion,tx.politics Subject: Re: Our Not-So-Free Press Date: 12 Nov 2004 16:29:38 -0800 Message-ID: <9c2d0f9a.0411121629.14fedfc0@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.12.116.132<AOL>
And *all* those sockpuppets:
http://www.ambushmag.com/is1398/images/s10.jpg From: lappcatt@aol.com (IBen Getiner) Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality Date: 25 Oct 2004 09:38:56 GMT Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Subject: More Ugly Homosexuality Message-ID: <20041025053856.00243.00001651@mb-m26.aol.com>
"There is a lowlife scumbag roaming Usenet with the nickname "Loose Cannon". Harrassing and annoying decent people has become his/her M.O. There is only one know photo of this shithead; taken from his/her friend "Nails" profile of the two of them at a party last year. If anyone can identify which "Loose Cannon" this really is, please let us know." http://www.ambushmag.com/is1398/images/s10.jpg From: "Payback's a bitch" <superasswipe@hotmail.com> Message-ID: <1105153601.171474.67170@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 152.163.100.139 <AOL>
http://www.ambushmag.com/is1398/images/s10.jpg "He's the tall one on the left" From: "loose cannon" <looseaint@aol.com> Newsgroups: austin.forsale,austin.general,austin.politics,tx.politics,tx.general Subject: "Donald" at the Christmas party, 2002 [ for those who missed it ] Date: 21 Jun 2005 22:28:11 -0700 Message-ID: <1119418091.441783.129100@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 152.163.101.14<AOL>
LC~ J/IBen just keeps recycling the same old crap with new nyms.
"Iben uses J Young as one of his nicks, but with an AOL address in the headers. Recently, someone using a hotmail address has been spoofing J Young/Iben from google. That could be Iben himself, doing it to draw attention to himself, or it could be someone else." From: Charlie Wilkes <charlie_wil...@users.easynews.com> Newsgroups: rec.pets.cats.health+behav Subject: Re: News group falling apart Reply-To: charlie_wil...@users.easynews.com Message-ID: <7t6t32dumdp3oju5gmddv1alpqinu1a6sd@4ax.com>
IBen Getiner - 02 May 2006 07:37 GMT Patricia wrote...
May 1st is the planned "Day Without an Immigrant" boycott by illegal immigrants here in the United States. They plan on boycotting work, thus showing how many menial jobs they provide cheap labor for. They plan on boycotting our stores, thus showing how much money they provide for the economy. I am fine with this tactic.
I have one suggestion: Please boycott our hospitals, schools, jails, and highways.
Let us see what our health care system would be like without an overcrowded emergency room full of illegal immigrants using it as a free clinic to treat non-emergent ailments. Let us see what it would be like to have people who the hospital actually expects to pay for treatment. I wonder if the costs for health insurance would drop.
Let us see what it would be like to reduce the size of our classrooms. Let us see what it would be like to have to spend taxpayer dollars to teach in English only. Let us see if our schools test score averages increase.
Let us see what it would be like to not be victimized by an illegal immigrant and then have to pay for the incarceration of that illegal immigrant. The Los Angeles County Jail system would be alleviated of thousands of inmates. Those incarcerated might actually do 100% of their sentences rather than the 10% that they have been doing.
Let us see what our highways would be like. Let us see if traffic is reduced without their presence. Let us see if the number of unlicensed, uninsured, unqualified motorists drops and the number of traffic collisions also drops proportionally. Maybe our car insurance rates would see a decrease as a result.
Maybe the May 1st "Day Without an Immigrant" boycott should be encouraged so the rest of the citizens can fully appreciate what benefits and burdens illegal immigration creates.
IBen says, Cubans and South Americans=good. Mexicans and Porto Ricans=bad. Start up the nuclear powered crematoriums. Run them bastards 24 hours per day, 365 days per year (with me in charge). Yes in-double-deedee
IBen Getiner
LC - 02 May 2006 16:52 GMT > IBen says, Cubans and South Americans=good. Mexicans and Porto > Ricans=bad. Start up the nuclear powered crematoriums. Run them > bastards 24 hours per day, 365 days per year (with me in charge). Yes > in-double-deedee You're quite the kinky loon, J Young/IBen. No doubt this too is a "forgery"?:
"I was typing some notes to you AZZHOLES when suddenly I noticed something, my KAT was licking *MY BALLZ*. It felt good but that SANDPAPER TONGUE wasn't all that. My question: " WHAT can I do to make IT FEEL BETTER?" IBen From: "IBen Getiner" <lappcatt@hotmail.com> Newsgroups: rec.pets.cats.health+behav,rec.music.beatles Subject: Kitty love Date: 30 Apr 2006 07:27:26 -0700 Message-ID: <1146407246.057683.157250@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 152.163.100.198
Forgery?
Not.
LC~ J/IBen's losing track of all his sockpuppets.
"He's just demonstrating his credentials as a redneck racist. When I saw the subject line, I just *knew* I could count on J.Young/IBen to come up with something of that level of maturity and intellect." Message-ID: <t02eq1ddtm0p6cnoh61vhv3o2um3nj6ds3@4ax.com>
Chimp - 01 May 2006 16:07 GMT Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not.
> May 1st is a day for all illegal immigrants, and the garbage that > supports them, to boycott work, school, ect....What if I need a fresh [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Pat Buchanan in 2008! Shardonay - 01 May 2006 16:13 GMT > Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. That's Labor Day.
>>May 1st is a day for all illegal immigrants, and the garbage that >>supports them, to boycott work, school, ect....What if I need a fresh [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >> >>Pat Buchanan in 2008! Chimp - 01 May 2006 18:47 GMT >> Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. > > That's Labor Day. Its actually spelt "labour".
Happy to help :)
Magic Mood Jeep© - 01 May 2006 18:56 GMT >>> Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. >> >> That's Labor Day. > > Its actually spelt "labour". Only in your area, over here, we drop the "U" and pronounce it lay bore, not lay bowr - we also drop an I and make it aluminum (a loom uh nuhm), not aluminIum (al oo min ee uhm) - drops a syllable and makes it more pronounceable.
> Happy to help :) Don't see where you've been any help at all, actually.
Shardonay - 01 May 2006 19:39 GMT >>>Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. >> >>That's Labor Day. > > Its actually spelt "labour". Not since we kicked your a.s in 1776.
edrhodes@hotmail.com - 04 May 2006 13:10 GMT > >>>Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. > >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Not since we kicked your a.s in 1776. ...and refreshed the lesson in 1812.
Char - 07 May 2006 16:47 GMT > > > Its actually spelt "labour". > > > > Not since we kicked your a.s in 1776. > > ...and refreshed the lesson in 1812. WRONG........ Here is a refresher on that day the British and Canadian troops kicked YOUR a.s, ( USA) Source: Canadian forums/history http://www.canadaka.net/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=624
Learn it, love it......read>>>
The Battle of Washington D.C.
By 1814 the defenders of Canada had repelled five separate American invasions, but they were running low on reenforcements and supplies to withstand the American assaults. In Quebec City, the British Governor General of Canada Sir George Prevost believed that he could not hold out much longer without more help from Great Britain, he wrote desperate appeals to London to send him men and supplies.
In the summer of 1814 Sir George Prevost got his wish. Napoleon had been defeated in Europe freeing up tens of thousands of British troops to fight in North America, most of the British forces were shipped over to Quebec City and Montreal and put at the disposal of Governor General Prevost.
Prevost had a reputation of being a hesitant commander but now he had enough troops to go on the offensive.
Governor General Prevost devised plans for his first full scale invasion of the United States. He would personally lead the main invasion force south from Montreal down the Richelieu River and into Lake Champlain, if he could destroy the American naval facilities there he would turn his attention to control of the great lakes and the Michigan territory which the British had promised to the Indian people as a future country.
The key to controling the lakes was the American naval base at Sackets Harbour, and that is where President James Madison felt most vulnerable.
While the United States government was concentrating on the defences hundereds of miles away on it's northern border it neglected matters closer to home.
In the late summer of 1814 a British fleet was sent into Chesapeake Bay to make a deversionary attack against Washington and Baltimore.
When the lead British ships appeared in Chesapeake Bay in August 1814 the Americans had no idea where they were headed or what their intentions were. The British sailed up the Patuxent River and moved ashore a force of nearly five thousand crack troops fresh from the battle fields of Europe.
In the American capitol there was a curious lack of alarm when word arrived that the British invasion force had come ashore. At the new Congress building there was no serious worry that the capitol of the United States might be attacked. At the White house or President's Palace there was little concern, the leaders of the United States had been assured by the Secretary of War that there was no danger.
John Armstrong assured the president that the British might attack Baltimore but the young capitol was in no danger.
Mr. Madison rode to the front to watch the up coming battle, he sent a note to his wife:
"My dearest I have passed among the troops who are in high spirits and make a good appearance. The reports as to the enemy has varied from hour to hour, the last and probally best information is that they are not very strong and are without cavarly and artillery and of coarse they are not in a condition to strike at Washington."
Dolly Madison the presidents wife was now hearing differently. Mrs. Madison knew what was a foot better than her husband the British moved relentlessly on Washington knowing the effect it would have on the people of the United States to have their nations capitol attacked.
The British soon got word that the only troops standing between them and Washington were militia units. The main British force moved into a Washington suburb and after a brief battle the militia units broke and ran, in the words of one American observer:
"They ran like sheep being chased by dogs".
Several hunderd U.S. sailors came ashore to fight but they could not stop the British advance for very long.
The military problems of Mr. Madison and his cabinet faced on the Canadian frontier were now being repeated at the door of the nations capitol.
Once the battle had commenced Mr. Madison and the Secretaries of War and State decided it would be better to withdraw to a position in the rear.
Ahead of the President word shot back to Washington that all was not well. The British invasion force was now clearly in on the capitol, the presidents wife Dolly Madison dashes of a note to her sister:
"Will you believe it my sister, we have a battle or skirmish near the city. I am still within sounds of the cannons, Mr. Madison comes not. May God protect us. Two messengers come in and asked me to leave the capitol, I must stay here and wait for my husband."
While Mrs. Madison showed great courage at the White House . Mr. madison was tracking down the Secretary of War to find out what steps were in the works to meet the final British assault, he was shocked and disheartened to find out there was no plan.
The 25th of August 1814, the British approached the heart of Washington, march down Constitution Avenue bearing a flag of truce and demand a surrender. Suddenly from a house window the flag of truce is fired apon.
The British troops rushed into the house where the shots had been fired from, and put all who were found in the house to the sword and then reduced the house to ashes. They went onto burn and destroy every building connected to the government.
While Washington burned, the president and his cabinet became fugitives fleeing westward deep into the hills of Virginia. At the White House Mrs. Madison was persuaded to leave also, and soon after the British troops arrived.
When these British soldiers who had been sent to destroy the President's house entered they found a dinner that had been made for about forty people. They ate every bit of food and drank every bottle of wine, then started to destroy the White House.
Washington D.C. the capitol of the United States was a city on fire, what had started two years earlier as the invasion and conquest of Canada (a subject territory) had now turned into a defensive war.
edrhodes@hotmail.com - 09 May 2006 04:44 GMT > > > > Its actually spelt "labour". > > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Source: Canadian forums/history > http://www.canadaka.net/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=624 <history lesson taken to heart and then snipped>
...and yet, you're not still here! Did you simply decide out of the goodness of your heart to leave your former colonies?
Magic Mood Jeep© - 01 May 2006 16:13 GMT > Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. Not in USofA, Deerie. Here's it's like any other Monday. We have to wait until the last Monday in May, which is Memorial day (which also follows the Most Watch Sproting Event of All Time, the Indianapolis 500)
>> May 1st is a day for all illegal immigrants, and the garbage that >> supports them, to boycott work, school, ect....What if I need a fresh [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >> J Young >> youngopinions@aol.com Chimp - 01 May 2006 18:48 GMT >> Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. > > Not in USofA, Deerie. Here's it's like any other Monday. We have to wait > until the last Monday in May, which is Memorial day (which also follows > the Most Watch Sproting Event of All Time, the Indianapolis 500) So if its not the case in America, why are the "immigrants" taking a day off?
Magic Mood Jeep© - 01 May 2006 18:52 GMT >>> Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > So if its not the case in America, why are the "immigrants" taking a > day off? I guess you *have* had your head up your a.s, excuse me, _arse_, after all.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/01/immigrant.day/index.html
Chimp - 01 May 2006 19:21 GMT > I guess you *have* had your head up your a.s, excuse me, _arse_, after > all. > > http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/01/immigrant.day/index.html Ah, I'd not heard of this. I kinda got the impression they were taking the day off cos it was the case in the "old country", didn't know there was a protest on.
By the way, we pronounce it "lay-buh", not "lay-bowr".
h2h
Magic Mood Jeep© - 01 May 2006 20:18 GMT >> I guess you *have* had your head up your a.s, excuse me, _arse_, >> after all. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > h2h So, you're in Massachusetts, not UK?
Chimp - 01 May 2006 22:19 GMT >> h2h > > So, you're in Massachusetts, not UK? Afraid not.
Magic Mood Jeep© - 01 May 2006 23:53 GMT >>> h2h >> >> So, you're in Massachusetts, not UK? > > Afraid not. Just a joke - the way you explained it, I read what would, to me, sound like an Upper East Coast of the US accent - Like Teddy Kennedy or his (deceased) brothers, JFK & RFK, Jr..
Jim Higgins - 02 May 2006 00:53 GMT >>>> h2h >>> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > like an Upper East Coast of the US accent - Like Teddy Kennedy or his > (deceased) brothers, JFK & RFK, Jr.. A Day Without an Illegal Immigrant - Rep. Tom Tancredo http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTBlOTVlNDFkNTYwOTg4YWYxMThkZmE2MWZhMmVjMWM=
edrhodes@hotmail.com - 04 May 2006 13:13 GMT > >>>> h2h > >>> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > A Day Without an Illegal Immigrant - Rep. Tom Tancredo Actually, it was supposed to be a day without any of the Latino workforce since the "legals" also stayed out in support of the "illegals."
(Here's a news flash, not every Latino in the country is an "illegal!" Just thought you'd like to know!)
Me? I just didn't go to the convenience stores in my area that day.
Runnnerr - 04 May 2006 22:52 GMT > > >>>> h2h > > >>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Me? I just didn't go to the convenience stores in my area that day. Are there any so-called Latinos that can actually speak Latin? Or is it just some kind of mass affectation that these people have?
Magic Mood Jeep© - 04 May 2006 23:44 GMT >>>>>>> h2h >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > it > just some kind of mass affectation that these people have? There's an interview somewhere with Gene Simmons (he of long-tongued KISS fame), where he stated that he grew up with a lot of beautiful dark-haired 'Spanish girls' in the neighborhood - and he explained back in his day they didn't call them Latinos - they aren't Latin, are they? They were Spanish - so that's what they were called.
Somehow they went from being called Spanish, to Hispanic, to Latino....
Runnnerr - 04 May 2006 23:59 GMT > >>>>>>> h2h > >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Somehow they went from being called Spanish, to Hispanic, to Latino.... Most of them aren't even Spanish. Spanish people come only from Spain. It's analogous to calling myself English or British because English is my language.
It must be some sort of massive self-esteem thing with them.
Runnnerr - 05 May 2006 00:00 GMT > >>>>>>> h2h > >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Somehow they went from being called Spanish, to Hispanic, to Latino.... Most of them aren't even Spanish. Spanish people come only from Spain. It's analogous to calling myself English or British because English is my language.
It must be some sort of massive self-esteem thing with them.
Juice - 05 May 2006 00:02 GMT > There's an interview somewhere with Gene Simmons (he of long-tongued KISS > fame), where he stated that he grew up with a lot of beautiful dark-haired > 'Spanish girls' in the neighborhood - and he explained back in his day they > didn't call them Latinos - they aren't Latin, are they? They were Spanish - > so that's what they were called. uh, just wanted to letchew you know ya'll sound like a couple of nerds
Jerry Okamura - 05 May 2006 00:45 GMT edrhodes@hotmail.com wrote:
> Jim Higgins wrote: > > > Chimp wrote: [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Me? I just didn't go to the convenience stores in my area that day. Are there any so-called Latinos that can actually speak Latin? Or is it just some kind of mass affectation that these people have?
Very few people actually speak Latin.
edrhodes@hotmail.com - 04 May 2006 13:11 GMT > >> I guess you *have* had your head up your a.s, excuse me, _arse_, > >> after all. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > So, you're in Massachusetts, not UK? "Chow-duh, CHOW-DUH! Say it right!"
hamandcheese@betweentheknees.com - 02 May 2006 04:44 GMT >So if its not the case in America, why are the "immigrants" taking a day >off? It's not a holiday but rather a strike or protest by mainly illegal aliens.
-m
The EIB Factor - 01 May 2006 16:44 GMT >Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. Where the hell do you get your information? May Day is a Socialist, Communist and Anarchist holiday. In other words it is a Liberal holiday.
- "In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
Theodore Roosevelt 1907
Runnnerr - 01 May 2006 16:51 GMT > >Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Theodore Roosevelt 1907 Oh my goodness!! Could Teddy have been saying that the attitude of "we're coming to your country, now learn our language" is wrong, backwards and un-American?? Imagine that!!
It's so.... racist, isn't it?
Maxwell Edison - 01 May 2006 16:53 GMT > >Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. > > > Where the hell do you get your information? May Day is a Socialist, > Communist and Anarchist holiday. In other words it is a Liberal > holiday. As celebrated by the majority of nations throughout the world.
I don't know about you, but I am taking the day off and am not going to buy anything.
Happy May Day, everybody!
 Signature "There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action." - Johann Goethe
T - 02 May 2006 02:26 GMT > Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. No but I did get invited to a May Breakfast. Otherwise today was a crazy day, culminated by my after work commute taking an hour and a half vs. the usual half hour.
Why? Because the police decided to block off a majority of the downtown area that I pass through. Nice of them. I did manage to get some video of the protestors.
What every seems to be missing here is the keyword being left out of the argument. That keyword is 'illegal'.
My proposal to this is to issue green cards to every one of the 12 million plus with the stipulation that they become naturalized citizens withing two to three years, otherwise they're sent back to their country of origin.
But being that the main group affected by this is Mexican, I propose we strengthen our border. Land mines, sniper towers, etc. Make a strong disincentive for illegally coming to the United States across the U.S. / Mexico border.
While we're at it, why don't we crack down on the government of Mexico that prefers to leave most of their citizens in poverty.
Jim Higgins - 02 May 2006 02:31 GMT >> Dude, its May Day. Everyone gets the day off, illegal or not. > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > While we're at it, why don't we crack down on the government of Mexico > that prefers to leave most of their citizens in poverty. Sound idea, at last the RCC finally comes around.
Toni from T.O. - 02 May 2006 02:59 GMT > My proposal to this is to issue green cards to every one of the 12 > million plus with the stipulation that they become naturalized citizens [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > While we're at it, why don't we crack down on the government of Mexico > that prefers to leave most of their citizens in poverty. Why, because they're getting rich in the US? I'm pretty sure most Americans profit unwittingly through the exploitation of illegal immigrant labour. Who else is going to pick the fruit, sling the hash and do all the other joe jobs for cheap?
Toni from T.O.
ghugle - 02 May 2006 03:54 GMT Who picked our fruit in 1890? Who hung drywall in 1942? And who washes the dishes in cafes in France. As long as immigration stays the same Republicans will never help the real poor Americans(because it will benefit the illegals-gads)
Toni from T.O. - 03 May 2006 00:38 GMT > Who picked our fruit in 1890? The Irish? :-)
Who hung drywall in 1942? And who washes
> the dishes in cafes in France. Immigrants. Illegal or otherwise.
As long as immigration stays the same
> Republicans will never help the real poor Americans(because it will > benefit the illegals-gads) I don't follow the logic. And what's a gad?
Breakfast - 03 May 2006 05:47 GMT > I don't follow the logic. And what's a gad? Gad is a concept by which we measure our pain.
I'll say it again.
Barb - 03 May 2006 10:58 GMT France, Toni? Good analogy. Underpaid immigrants tore French cities apart a few months ago, blowing up cars and burning down schools.
-- Barb Of course I don't look busy, I did it right the first time.
Toni from T.O. - 03 May 2006 22:09 GMT > France, Toni? Good analogy. Underpaid immigrants tore French cities apart > a few months ago, blowing up cars and burning down schools. Yes, it is. Underpaid LEGAL immigrants who are systemically discriminated against...the French are happy to exploit their labour, but won't treat them equally. So much for "Liberte, egalite et fraternite". The US should look to France as a caution.
Barb - 04 May 2006 12:52 GMT Well. you are right, there. France should serve as a warning to the US regarding having an underclass of underpaid workers. I don't believe most of us benefit from these low wage workers. Where I live homes aren't cheaper because they are built by men collected off street corners. The landscaper for our townhouses told us one year he was going to hire all English speakers. Apparently some people complained previously. He did not charge us more because he had not charged us less when he hired non-English speakers. Food will not cost more than the consumer can bear, regardless how much the labor costs. Price is dictated by supply and demand.
-- Barb Of course I don't look busy, I did it right the first time.
Toni from T.O. - 04 May 2006 22:24 GMT > Well. you are right, there. France should serve as a warning to the US > regarding having an underclass of underpaid workers. I don't believe most [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > speakers. Food will not cost more than the consumer can bear, regardless > how much the labor costs. Price is dictated by supply and demand. I don't know much about economics. But how elastic is the demand for food? People have to eat! If they have to pay more, they'll have less discretionary income to spend. If the producers have to pay more, but prices to consumers aren't raised, someone is taking a loss in profit. Either way, there would be an impact.
Seth Jackson - 06 May 2006 00:54 GMT > Food will not cost more than the consumer can bear, regardless >> how much the labor costs. Price is dictated by supply and demand. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >prices to consumers aren't raised, someone is taking a loss in profit. >Either way, there would be an impact. If the producers could make more money by raising prices, why would they wait till production costs go up? They'd do it now. Supply and demand theory says that the current price is the price at which the producers believe they can maximize profit.
If they were to raise prices, they'd sell less. This would be true regardless of the wages they paid their workers.
omarenoryt@aol.com - 04 May 2006 22:43 GMT > > France, Toni? Good analogy. Underpaid immigrants tore French cities > apart [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > equally. So much for "Liberte, egalite et fraternite". The US should look > to France as a caution. I love when liberal douches make excuses for riotting filth, especially when they're Muslime. Continue sobbing hysterically, idiot :)
Toni from T.O. - 05 May 2006 01:10 GMT > I love when liberal douches make excuses for riotting filth, especially > when they're Muslime. Continue sobbing hysterically, idiot :) I love it when conservatives have to descend to namecalling and racism to try to make a point.
edrhodes@hotmail.com - 05 May 2006 14:39 GMT > > I love when liberal douches make excuses for riotting filth, especially > > when they're Muslime. Continue sobbing hysterically, idiot :) > > I love it when conservatives have to descend to namecalling and racism to > try to make a point. He doesn't have to. That's his normal mode of response!
omarenoryt@aol.com - 04 May 2006 22:45 GMT > > My proposal to this is to issue green cards to every one of the 12 > > million plus with the stipulation that they become naturalized citizens [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Who else is going to pick the fruit, sling the hash and do all the other joe > jobs for cheap? The same people who did it before the illegal alien invasion, duh. Try coming up with something less hilariously cliched in the future.
> Toni from T.O. Jerry Okamura - 05 May 2006 00:43 GMT >> > My proposal to this is to issue green cards to every one of the 12 >> > million plus with the stipulation that they become naturalized citizens [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > The same people who did it before the illegal alien invasion, duh. Try > coming up with something less hilariously cliched in the future. Higher labor cost translates to higher product prices. And no, what you said is not necessarily true. Low paying jobs are filled by people who do not have a good education. Rather than save the low paying jobs for the lwest common denominator, perhaps you should think about having the low paying jobs done by people, like the illegals, who generally are not well educated, and leave the better paying jobs for those who do have a good education.
Seth Jackson - 06 May 2006 00:56 GMT >> The same people who did it before the illegal alien invasion, duh. Try >> coming up with something less hilariously cliched in the future. >>> >Higher labor cost translates to higher product prices. Not necessarily.
>And no, what you >said is not necessarily true. Low paying jobs are filled by people who do [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >educated, and leave the better paying jobs for those who do have a good >education. What about the uneducated citizens who can no longer find jobs? The illegals allow businesses to circumvent minimum wage laws.
Jerry Okamura - 06 May 2006 01:49 GMT >>> The same people who did it before the illegal alien invasion, duh. Try >>> coming up with something less hilariously cliched in the future. >>>> >>Higher labor cost translates to higher product prices. > > Not necessarily. When does that not apply?
>>And no, what you >>said is not necessarily true. Low paying jobs are filled by people who do [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > What about the uneducated citizens who can no longer find jobs? The > illegals allow businesses to circumvent minimum wage laws. "uneducated workers" made a "choice" not to take advantage of the free high school education provided to them by the government. And no, unless you are downright incomptent, everyone can get a job, it may not be the job you want to do, but you can get a job if that is what you want. As for minimu wage jobs, they are filled mostly by people who did not take advantage of the free high school education that was provided to them. Second, a minimum wage job is an entry level job. Once you get that job, what happens then is up to the individual. If they do a good job, they will soon be earning more than the minimum wage. Besides, this whole concpept of a minimu wage is like a ponzi scheme. Let us for the sake a discussion say that we reaise the minimum wage. What happens then? Well, that means someone who is working, is now earning a minimum wage, where they were not earning the minimum wage before the change occurred. So, a business is not going to reward the new worker at the same level as the old worker. So, they will most likely give the old worker who is now earning the minimum wage a raise. That in turns affects the next one higher up on the wage scale. Over time, everyones wages are increased, the cost of living then increases, and we start the whole process over again, raising the minimum wage, thereby inflating the wages up the ladder. But that is not all that happens. What does a business do, when they find their cost of doing business increases? Well, they raise they raise the price of the product or services they sell, which then increases the cost of living for everyone in the chain, which in turn puts added pressure to once again raise the minimu wage.
Seth Jackson - 06 May 2006 08:38 GMT >>>> The same people who did it before the illegal alien invasion, duh. Try >>>> coming up with something less hilariously cliched in the future. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >When does that not apply? When the supply/demand curve is such that higher prices would result in lower profits.
>>>And no, what you >>>said is not necessarily true. Low paying jobs are filled by people who do [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >"uneducated workers" made a "choice" not to take advantage of the free high >school education provided to them by the government. No. A high school education is irrelevant for the types of jobs we're talking about.
>And no, unless you are >downright incomptent, everyone can get a job, it may not be the job you want [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >up to the individual. If they do a good job, they will soon be earning more >than the minimum wage. You're making a lot of assumptions about the jobs being filled by illegals and the people who would have otherwise taken them.
> Besides, this whole concpept of a minimu wage is >like a ponzi scheme. Let us for the sake a discussion say that we reaise [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >which then increases the cost of living for everyone in the chain, which in >turn puts added pressure to once again raise the minimu wage. This sounds like a plausible theory, but is there any real proof that it actually works out this way? There are assumptions here that certainly are questionable.
Jerry Okamura - 06 May 2006 22:00 GMT >>>>> The same people who did it before the illegal alien invasion, duh. Try >>>>> coming up with something less hilariously cliched in the future. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > When the supply/demand curve is such that higher prices would result > in lower profits. What products that does apply to?
>>>>And no, what you >>>>said is not necessarily true. Low paying jobs are filled by people who [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > No. A high school education is irrelevant for the types of jobs we're > talking about. Why is it irrelevant. Would a college educated person be working the fields, or working as a plumber, or a carpenter, for working as a housekeeper in a hotel, repairing cars?
>>And no, unless you are >>downright incomptent, everyone can get a job, it may not be the job you [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > You're making a lot of assumptions about the jobs being filled by > illegals and the people who would have otherwise taken them. Not assumptions, what actually happens.
>> Besides, this whole concpept of a minimu wage is >>like a ponzi scheme. Let us for the sake a discussion say that we reaise [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > it actually works out this way? There are assumptions here that > certainly are questionable. How about some common sense?
Seth Jackson - 07 May 2006 00:03 GMT >>>>>> The same people who did it before the illegal alien invasion, duh. Try >>>>>> coming up with something less hilariously cliched in the future. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > >What products that does apply to? Not being the product manager for a variety of products, I can't be expected to have access to that data. But since supply/demand sets prices, we should assume that most products are the market are as close to optimally priced as their sellers can get. GM wouldn't sell a car for $20,000 if they could make more selling it for $21,000. Thus, a higher price would result in a lower profit.
Of course, if costs increased, the supply curve would also shift. The result would likely be higher prices for many products. So, I stand corrected.
>>>>>And no, what you >>>>>said is not necessarily true. Low paying jobs are filled by people who [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >fields, or working as a plumber, or a carpenter, for working as a >housekeeper in a hotel, repairing cars? Why are you bringing college into this when we're talking about high school? A high school education doesn't prepare you to work in certain trades, in agriculture, in construction, in hospitality, etc. So, it's irrelevant whether these people finished high school or not.
Anyway, whether they chose to go to school or not is entirely beside the point. The point is that illegal aliens are taking jobs at sub-minimum wage that could have otherwise been filled by American citizens.
>>>And no, unless you are >>>downright incomptent, everyone can get a job, it may not be the job you [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > >Not assumptions, what actually happens. Whatever. Bottom line is that illegals are taking jobs that Americans could have filled, only they're doing it for less than the minimum wage, in violation of the law. Tax-free.
>>> Besides, this whole concpept of a minimu wage is >>>like a ponzi scheme. Let us for the sake a discussion say that we reaise [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >How about some common sense? As I said, it sounds like a plausible theory. It's not the only plausible theory. Like any other theory, research would be required to test it.
Jerry Okamura - 07 May 2006 00:36 GMT >>>>>>> The same people who did it before the illegal alien invasion, duh. >>>>>>> Try [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > The result would likely be higher prices for many products. So, I > stand corrected. So, back to my orginal question. What products applies to the comment above?
>>>>>>And no, what you >>>>>>said is not necessarily true. Low paying jobs are filled by people [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >>> No. A high school education is irrelevant for the types of jobs we're >>> talking about. Why is it irrelevant? Who works at these lower paying jobs?
>>Why is it irrelevant. Would a college educated person be working the >>fields, or working as a plumber, or a carpenter, for working as a [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > certain trades, in agriculture, in construction, in hospitality, etc. > So, it's irrelevant whether these people finished high school or not. Because they are linked. A person who has only a high school education will work in the kind of jobs that require a level of knowledge that a high school education is suppose to prepare the student for. A college education will give a person the opportunity to work in a job that a college education is suppose to prepare the student for. And a high school education does prepare you to work in certain trades. It is rather difficult to learn a trade for instance if you cannot read.
> Anyway, whether they chose to go to school or not is entirely beside > the point. The point is that illegal aliens are taking jobs at > sub-minimum wage that could have otherwise been filled by American > citizens. And my question is, what jobs are they taking? Are they competing for the jobs that college educated people do, or competing for jobs that are done by high school graduates, or competing for jobs that are done by those who have not completed high school.
>>>>And no, unless you are >>>>downright incomptent, everyone can get a job, it may not be the job you [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > could have filled, only they're doing it for less than the minimum > wage, in violation of the law. Tax-free. "Could and would" are two different words. Yes, if the illegals did not do the jobs, then American "could" do those jobs, but the quesiton is, would they do those jobs. How do you know that they are doing the jobs for less than minimum wage? Do you have any data to back up that statement? And yes, some probably do avoid paying their income tax, but they do not avoid paying other taxes. But so does those who are legal residents, who work in the underground economy. So does those who work for tips, they too do not pay the taxes they should pay. So do about ten percent of the people who life tax returns who never pay the taxes owed.
>>>> Besides, this whole concpept of a minimu wage is >>>>like a ponzi scheme. Let us for the sake a discussion say that we [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > plausible theory. Like any other theory, research would be required > to test it. The do the research and you will find I am right.
Seth Jackson - 07 May 2006 08:36 GMT >> Of course, if costs increased, the supply curve would also shift. >> The result would likely be higher prices for many products. So, I >> stand corrected. > >So, back to my orginal question. What products applies to the comment >above? What would be the point of the original question when I just said that I stand corrected?
>>>>>>>And no, what you >>>>>>>said is not necessarily true. Low paying jobs are filled by people [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >Why is it irrelevant? Who works at these lower paying jobs? Obviously, people without the skills to work at higher paying jobs.
>>>Why is it irrelevant. Would a college educated person be working the >>>fields, or working as a plumber, or a carpenter, for working as a [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >prepare you to work in certain trades. It is rather difficult to learn a >trade for instance if you cannot read. I don't know about you, but where I come from, they teach reading and arithmetic in grade school.
>> Anyway, whether they chose to go to school or not is entirely beside >> the point. The point is that illegal aliens are taking jobs at [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >high school graduates, or competing for jobs that are done by those who have >not completed high school. I don't know why you're asking this. Isn't the answer rather obvious?
>>>> You're making a lot of assumptions about the jobs being filled by >>>> illegals and the people who would have otherwise taken them. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >the jobs, then American "could" do those jobs, but the quesiton is, would >they do those jobs. If they're paid enough, I can't think of a good reason why they wouldn't. Can you?
>How do you know that they are doing the jobs for less >than minimum wage? Do you have any data to back up that statement? I can'r recall offhand where I got the information. Do you have any data that they don't? Do you believe that the people who hire illegals are conscientiously adhering to minimum wage law?
> And >yes, some probably do avoid paying their income tax, but they do not avoid >paying other taxes. Some probably do? These people are hired off the street, off the card, with no W-2s, no 1099s, and no withholding. Ya think the majority of them are paying income taxes?
>But so does those who are legal residents, who work in >the underground economy. So does those who work for tips, they too do not >pay the taxes they should pay. So do about ten percent of the people who >life tax returns who never pay the taxes owed. Some Americans get away with it, so illegals should, too. Cool.
>>>>> Besides, this whole concpept of a minimu wage is >>>>>like a ponzi scheme. Let us for the sake a discussion say that we [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > >The do the research and you will find I am right. Not the way it works. You made a claim. The burden of proof is on you.
Toni from T.O. - 07 May 2006 01:03 GMT > Anyway, whether they chose to go to school or not is entirely beside > the point. The point is that illegal aliens are taking jobs at > sub-minimum wage that could have otherwise been filled by American > citizens. Who's doing the paying? Maybe the state should go after those people for encouraging illegal labour.
Seth Jackson - 07 May 2006 08:23 GMT >> Anyway, whether they chose to go to school or not is entirely beside >> the point. The point is that illegal aliens are taking jobs at [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Who's doing the paying? Maybe the state should go after those people for >encouraging illegal labour. I agree.
Jerry Okamura - 07 May 2006 19:16 GMT >> Anyway, whether they chose to go to school or not is entirely beside >> the point. The point is that illegal aliens are taking jobs at [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Who's doing the paying? Maybe the state should go after those people for > encouraging illegal labour. Yep, and the state should go after those who work in the underground economy.
friesian@zoocrewphoto.com - 06 May 2006 11:09 GMT > Let us for the sake a discussion say that we reaise > the minimum wage. What happens then? Well, that means someone who is [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > which then increases the cost of living for everyone in the chain, which in > turn puts added pressure to once again raise the minimu wage. Sometimes, you get a mixed reaction. The minimum wage goes up, but not everybody's wage. For example, I work at a grocery store. The minimum wage has gone up, and is now higher than the starting wage for several positions. So, they get paid the minimum wage to start in jobs that used to be higher than the lowest position. And only the levels that would be be below the new minimum wage got any adjustment.
At the same time, costs did go up for the store. So prices went up too.
In my case, my wage did not go up. Actually, my sunday pay was lowered in the last contract, and I now have a deduction taken out each week for my health care. so, my paycheck went down. But prices went up. So, my buying power went down. Cost of living went up, but my wage didn't. I actually made a lot less in 2006 than I did in 2005. Between the wage loss and the deductions, my take home pay was $4,000 less.
I'm in a group for budgeting and we discuss food prices. Places with lower minimum wages have much better food prices than areas with higher minimum wages. I realize that people on minimum wage would like the pay to be higher. But it doesn't seem to beneffit anybody else. I'm in a state with a high minimum wage, but my own wage is not much higher, even after 17 years with the company. And I have to deal with higher food prices, high gas prices, etc.
OB cats. Both of my cats require special diets, so I have to spend a lot of money on their food as well. Kira gets a senior food, canned food, and a supplement. Jay Jay gets the really spendy food. I ran out for a couple days and let him eat the other food (which he already nibbles on), and boy did the kitty litter stink. Talk about extortion. Pay up or deal with Mr. Stinky.
Jerry Okamura - 06 May 2006 22:06 GMT >> Let us for the sake a discussion say that we reaise >> the minimum wage. What happens then? Well, that means someone who is [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > used to be higher than the lowest position. And only the levels that > would be be below the new minimum wage got any adjustment. How can that be? If the law says that an employer has to pay a minimu wage, how is it possible for the employer to pay some of their people a wage lower than the minimum wage law? What the heck good is a law, if some people can still make less than the new minimum wage?
> At the same time, costs did go up for the store. So prices went up too. > > In my case, my wage did not go up. Actually, my sunday pay was lowered > in the last contract, and I now have a deduction taken out each week > for my health care. so, my paycheck went down. Well, yes. If you got a benefit that the owner does not want to pay for, they are going to deduct it from your paycheck and you have no choice in the matter....
But prices went up. So,
> my buying power went down. Cost of living went up, but my wage didn't. > I actually made a lot less in 2006 than I did in 2005. Between the wage [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > nibbles on), and boy did the kitty litter stink. Talk about extortion. > Pay up or deal with Mr. Stinky. Seems to me that you should not have cats.
Toni from T.O. - 05 May 2006 01:18 GMT > > Why, because they're getting rich in the US? I'm pretty sure most Americans > > profit unwittingly through the exploitation of illegal immigrant labour. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > The same people who did it before the illegal alien invasion, duh. Try > coming up with something less hilariously cliched in the future. Would that be people like you?
Barb - 05 May 2006 16:06 GMT Look,
If people come into this country to work, if that's what we have to do, then when their work is done why can't they take their pay and go home again? They do not have to be invited to stay and become citizens just because they snuck in uninvited.
When I hire someone to come into my house to do a job they leave with their pay when their work is done. They are not invited to move on in and become a member of my family.
Furthermore, I would hardly trust anyone to do anything if they came in by sneaking through an open door or window.
-- Barb Of course I don't look busy, I did it right the first time.
Runnnerr - 05 May 2006 16:07 GMT > Look, > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Of course I don't look busy, > I did it right the first time. We shouldn't forget either the cost of social programs that are provided to these illegal invading scum as well as the fact that they are 29% of the federal prison population, commit on average 8 child rapes a day and kill 30 people a day in auto accidents.
Toni from T.O. - 06 May 2006 19:20 GMT .
> We shouldn't forget either the cost of social programs that are > provided to these illegal invading scum as well as the fact that they > are 29% of the federal prison population, commit on average 8 child > rapes a day and kill 30 people a day in auto accidents. As repugnant as I find your quotation of these figures (where did you get them, by the way), how disproportionate are they to the rest of the population? How many child rapes are committed every day by American citizens? Plenty.
Seth Jackson - 07 May 2006 00:06 GMT >. >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >population? How many child rapes are committed every day by American >citizens? Plenty. Assuming these figures are accurate, why would quoting them be repugnant? If true, it's fairly obvious that their being 29% of the prison population is quite disproportionate, as they make up far less than 29% of the total US population.
Toni from T.O. - 07 May 2006 00:59 GMT > >> We shouldn't forget either the cost of social programs that are > >> provided to these illegal invading scum as well as the fact that they [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > prison population is quite disproportionate, as they make up far less > than 29% of the total US population. My reaction stems from the tone and the logic. The 29% figure might be easy to confirm (which, by the way, speaks volumes about disproportionate representation in American prisons as a whole). But painting immigrants as child rapists and dangerous drivers? Please. Pointy white hats and burning crosses come to mind.
Seth Jackson - 07 May 2006 08:38 GMT >> >> We shouldn't forget either the cost of social programs that are >> >> provided to these illegal invading scum as well as the fact that they [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >child rapists and dangerous drivers? Please. Pointy white hats and burning >crosses come to mind. I hear what you're saying, but your post has a serious linguistic problem, too. This thread is not about "immigrants". Never was. It's about "illegal immigrants". See the difference?
Toni from T.O. - 07 May 2006 17:17 GMT >> I hear what you're saying, but your post has a serious linguistic > problem, too. This thread is not about "immigrants". Never was. > It's about "illegal immigrants". See the difference? I suspect the poster does not distinguish between legal and illegal when it comes to making generalisations about immigrants.
Shardonnay - 08 May 2006 15:14 GMT >>>>>We shouldn't forget either the cost of social programs that are >>>>>provided to these illegal invading scum as well as the fact that they [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > problem, too. This thread is not about "immigrants". Never was. > It's about "illegal immigrants". See the difference? Yes, but the subject line begs to differ.
Seth Jackson - 09 May 2006 01:55 GMT >>>My reaction stems from the tone and the logic. The 29% figure might be easy >>>to confirm (which, by the way, speaks volumes about disproportionate [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >Yes, but the subject line begs to differ. Yes, but everyone knows or ought to know that the so-called "Day Without Immigrants" was about *illegal* immigrants. There's no such issue as "legal immigrants rights" to stage a march for. Using the word "immigrants" when the subject is "illegal immigrants" is intellectually dishonest. Unfortunately, I see it all too often.
Malcolm - 07 May 2006 17:32 GMT >> Assuming these figures are accurate, why would quoting them be >> repugnant? If true, it's fairly obvious that their being 29% of the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > burning > crosses come to mind. If you are working as an illegal immigrant in a low-paid job, then you are much more likely to be involved in crime than the general population. The fact that you are sytematically breaking one law makes it psychologically easier to break another. Then the realities of illegal work are likely to bring you into contact with criminals. The pay is also likely to be low, and it is harder to get married and have a normal family background. Then the illegal worker is much more likely to be a young adult. When you have a low-paid young adult living in a hostel or other temporary accomodation, far from home, and with an illegal job and restricted ability to go to the police if in trouble, then of course you are liley to get crime. Not all illegal immigrants in this subcilture will commit non-trival offences, of course, but many will.
 Signature Buy my book 12 Common Atheist Arguments (refuted) $1.25 download or $7.20 paper, available www.lulu.com/bgy1mm
Jim Higgins - 05 May 2006 16:16 GMT > Look, > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Of course I don't look busy, > I did it right the first time. The sooner these illegal aliens, enemy aliens, are expelled from this country the better!
Toni from T.O. - 06 May 2006 19:10 GMT > Look, > > If people come into this country to work, if that's what we have to do, There's the problem. Do you have to use illegal labour? If you feel you have to, then why not accord them the rights that you expect as a citizen?
then
> when their work is done why can't they take their pay and go home again? > They do not have to be invited to stay and become citizens just because they > snuck in uninvited. If they become citizens, then they become taxpayers. Sounds like a win-win.
> When I hire someone to come into my house to do a job they leave with their > pay when their work is done. They are not invited to move on in and become > a member of my family.
> Furthermore, I would hardly trust anyone to do anything if they came in by > sneaking through an open door or window. If they sneak in through a door or window, they're stealing your stuff, not remodeling your kitchen :-) I suppose you can draw the analogy that illegal immigrants are stealing from upright citizens by taking away jobs. So how to cut off the demand?
Jerry Okamura - 06 May 2006 22:08 GMT >> Look, >> >> If people come into this country to work, if that's what we have to do, > > There's the problem. Do you have to use illegal labour? If you feel you > have to, then why not accord them the rights that you expect as a citizen? That depends on whether you can find the labor that is necessary to do the work you need to be done, doesn't it?
Toni from T.O. - 07 May 2006 00:44 GMT > >> If people come into this country to work, if that's what we have to do, > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > That depends on whether you can find the labor that is necessary to do the > work you need to be done, doesn't it? Precisely. If illegal labour is required to fill gaps in local supply, then don't make it illegal for these people to work.
Seth Jackson - 07 May 2006 08:40 GMT >> That depends on whether you can find the labor that is necessary to do the >> work you need to be done, doesn't it? > > Precisely. If illegal labour is required to fill gaps in local supply, >then don't make it illegal for these people to work. But do these gaps really exist? Do you really believe there are such things as "jobs Americans aren't willing to do"? Personally, I think that's a crock. Pay a decent wage, and people will line up to apply.
Toni from T.O. - 07 May 2006 17:29 GMT > But do these gaps really exist? Do you really believe there are such > things as "jobs Americans aren't willing to do"? Personally, I think > that's a crock. Pay a decent wage, and people will line up to apply. The key there is a decent wage. I would hold the employers responsible who hire people at sub-standard wages, thereby creating a demand for illegal labour.
Jerry Okamura - 07 May 2006 19:23 GMT >> But do these gaps really exist? Do you really believe there are such >> things as "jobs Americans aren't willing to do"? Personally, I think [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > hire people at sub-standard wages, thereby creating a demand for illegal > labour. Higher wages, translates to higher cost of the goods and services these businesses sell. Higher cost for the goods and services means the people who get hurt the most are the poor, who do not get those higher wages.
Toni from T.O. - 07 May 2006 21:52 GMT > > The key there is a decent wage. I would hold the employers responsible > > who [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > businesses sell. Higher cost for the goods and services means the people > who get hurt the most are the poor, who do not get those higher wages. But I'm talking about paying the poor these higher wages (i.e. to at least subsistence level). Why should anybody be paid less than that?
Jerry Okamura - 07 May 2006 19:21 GMT >>> That depends on whether you can find the labor that is necessary to do >>> the [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > things as "jobs Americans aren't willing to do"? Personally, I think > that's a crock. Pay a decent wage, and people will line up to apply. Well, yes. But it is a little more complicated than that. If you paid a person picking fruits, say $100,00 a year today, I am sure you would find a heck of a lot more people willing to pick fruits. Of course that would drive up the price we pay for the fruits, but it could be done. But is that the best policy? Does that help the majority of the people or hurt the majority of the people? And who would pay the highest price for that policy? Perhaps the very people you are trying to help by the policy, i.e. the poor, who then has to pay to buy those fruits at that higher price?
Shardonnay - 08 May 2006 15:14 GMT >>>That depends on whether you can find the labor that is necessary to do the >>>work you need to be done, doesn't it? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > things as "jobs Americans aren't willing to do"? Personally, I think > that's a crock. Pay a decent wage, and people will line up to apply. Agreed. If mowing lawns paid $50/hour, watch the teens line up!
|
|