Help stop the invasion

Postby BrockthePaine on Thu Nov 23, 2006 7:23 pm

How is that at odds with what I said? I don't see how an immigrant being "of value to us" is any different from what I said...

I'll have to go find my sources on that statistic again. I don't usually save such links, but rather attempt to remember the gist of the numbers. Still, I'll have to get back to you on that.
It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. - attributed to Samuel Adams

“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” - Richard Henry Lee
User avatar
BrockthePaine
Cartoon Hero
 
Posts: 1538
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:45 pm
Location: Further up and further in!

Postby UncleMonty on Thu Nov 23, 2006 9:09 pm

Axelgear wrote:P.S. By the way, if 50% of the earners pay 99% of the income tax... Where does the 34% from the top 1% come from? I'm guessing that's a typo.


I trimmed most of your post from here because it wasn't worth a reply. However, as a favor to you, I ask you to study the last part of your statement, which I've quoted above.

Do you see your error?
The top 1% of wage-earners are a subset of the top 50%. There is no typo.
Avoid those who speak badly of the people, for such wish to rule over you.
User avatar
UncleMonty
Cartoon Hero
 
Posts: 1789
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 1999 4:00 pm

Postby Wanderwolf on Thu Nov 23, 2006 10:40 pm

BrockthePaine wrote:How is that at odds with what I said? I don't see how an immigrant being "of value to us" is any different from what I said...

I'll have to go find my sources on that statistic again. I don't usually save such links, but rather attempt to remember the gist of the numbers. Still, I'll have to get back to you on that.


Understood. What you said, however, was that it sorts out people who would be good Americans from people who would be bad Americans. You don't have to be a rocket scientist or a defecting spy to be a good American; yet those traits are of great interest to Immigration. Conversely, an unskilled laborer would not be a bad American by necessity; yet they are unlikely to be approved for immigration.

Do you get what I'm saying? Having intrinsic value to the government is not the same as being a good American.

Yours truly,

The wolfish,

Wanderer
User avatar
Wanderwolf
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:18 pm
Location: Forney, TX, U.S.A.

Postby Atarlost on Fri Nov 24, 2006 4:30 am

Additional unskilled labor is not of benefit to the American people commensurate with the social costs of mass immigration. Unskilled laborers and the children of unskilled laborers are statistically more likely than skilled laborers or their children to commit violent crimes or abuse the welfare system. This is why lower class ghettos have higher crime rates than middle class subburbs. In a society that already has more unskilled labor than it strictly needs mass immigration is dangerous.
If power flows from the barrel of a gun true democracy consists of every citizen having a gun.
Atarlost
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 8:58 am

Postby RHJunior on Fri Nov 24, 2006 4:52 am

Personally, I have only one real prerequisite for anyone who wishes to come here.

That if they come here to live, they come here to be an American.
And that they come through the front door.
"What was that popping noise ?"
"A paradigm shifting without a clutch."
--Dilbert
RHJunior
Cartoon Hero
 
Posts: 1689
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 1999 4:00 pm
Location: WV

Postby TMLutas on Fri Nov 24, 2006 9:17 am

Atarlost wrote:Additional unskilled labor is not of benefit to the American people commensurate with the social costs of mass immigration. Unskilled laborers and the children of unskilled laborers are statistically more likely than skilled laborers or their children to commit violent crimes or abuse the welfare system. This is why lower class ghettos have higher crime rates than middle class subburbs. In a society that already has more unskilled labor than it strictly needs mass immigration is dangerous.


How does one determine the appropriate level of unskilled labor for a society? Really, people have been trying to figure this stuff out in advance for a very long time and nobody does it very well. So what makes you able to come up with a proper number?
TMLutas
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 658
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 6:19 pm

Postby Nikas_Zekeval on Fri Nov 24, 2006 3:28 pm

By definition illegal immigrants, unless they are being supported solely on funds from out of the country, are breaking one of at least three laws by being here.

One, they are working, payed under the table and not paying income tax. That Federal Tax evasion. (I know the 'legalize' them crowd wants a $1000 fine and them to pay the income tax they should have payed. The IRS has broken peole who made less serious mistakes on their tax returns, this is a slap on the wrist compared to IRS SOP).

Two, they are working and paying taxes, but under a false ID. This is either fraud (for completely bogus paperwork) or identity theft (if using a legitimate SS number)

Three, they are living off various public assistance programs. Since you need to prove you are here legally to get them again illegals would have to committ fraud or ID theft to get these.

Simply existing here illegally requires not just breaking the law to get in here, but continuning to break it to avoid notice and deportation. It's not a one time thing, it's like being a 'little bit pregnant', that status leads you into further crime.
"Come on Sam, it can't be as hard as blowing up a star."
"I tell you, blow up one star and suddenly everyone thinks you can walk on water."
*Beepboop* [connection established]
"Okay. Up next, parting the Red Sea."
Gen. Jacob Carter and Lt. Col. Samatha Carter, Stargate SG-1, "Reckoning"
Nikas_Zekeval
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 175
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 8:56 pm

Postby Wanderwolf on Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:25 pm

RHJunior wrote:Personally, I have only one real prerequisite for anyone who wishes to come here.

That if they come here to live, they come here to be an American.
And that they come through the front door.


<respectful bow>

Amen, Ralph. Speaking on behalf of my German, Scottish, English and Prussian ancestors: Amen.

Yours truly,

The Heinz-57,

Wanderer
User avatar
Wanderwolf
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:18 pm
Location: Forney, TX, U.S.A.

Postby Wanderwolf on Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:54 pm

Atarlost wrote:Additional unskilled labor is not of benefit to the American people commensurate with the social costs of mass immigration. Unskilled laborers and the children of unskilled laborers are statistically more likely than skilled laborers or their children to commit violent crimes or abuse the welfare system. This is why lower class ghettos have higher crime rates than middle class subburbs. In a society that already has more unskilled labor than it strictly needs mass immigration is dangerous.


In the first place, I'd like to know where you're getting your information. As far as I know, the DoJ doesn't break down arrests and convictions by annual income level.

In the second place, illegals typically take jobs that pay too little for a natural-born American to bother with. Farm laborer, house boy, maid, and such like. We don't have a surplus of *those* kinds of laborers..

In the third place, are you adjusting your figures for population density? Remember, people are packed more tightly in lower-income areas to derive maximum rent from the available accomodations. That would produce more reported crimes from the same overall frequency.

Yours truly,

The wolfish,

Wanderer
User avatar
Wanderwolf
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:18 pm
Location: Forney, TX, U.S.A.

Postby Axelgear on Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:58 pm

So does that mean you agree with my compromise plan? I mean, does it not make sense that if these people have a way to enter legally that is efficient that should get them off the ground, I think it's a good thing. That way you get a lot good people who just want to raise their kids and/or get a better life, while being able to kick out the illegals, who obviously are here because of more nebulous reasons.

Does ANYONE agree with it? And if you choose, feel free to suggest ammendments to it so we can augment it however necessary, at which point we have a working model that, who knows, maybe we can even submit it to the government?
Astronomer. Sketch Artist. All-around generally creative and useless guy.
User avatar
Axelgear
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:30 am

Postby BrockthePaine on Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:30 am

Axelgear wrote:So does that mean you agree with my compromise plan? I mean, does it not make sense that if these people have a way to enter legally that is efficient that should get them off the ground, I think it's a good thing.

We already HAVE a legal way to immigrate. These folks don't follow it. That's our biggest problem.

Lemme run over your plan again and tell you the way I'm seeing it...
A Low-Income Immigration System. This system would allow Immigrants who have very little money to get a low- or no-interest loan from the United States so long as they submit to extensive identification.

To put it simply, WHY? That's not the government's job. Why should we taxpayers pay to fund a system of loans? Why don't they ask a bank? The government is not a loan agency - it is here solely to protect the nation from foreign and domestic threats and negotiate trade treaties with other nations. I would have no problem paying taxes if they go for military and infrastructure (such as roads and bridges) but having the federal government fund anything else is unnecessary and unconstitutional.

I've never seen a federal government program which has not ended up a total disaster. Color me skeptical that this would end up any different.
It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. - attributed to Samuel Adams

“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.” - Richard Henry Lee
User avatar
BrockthePaine
Cartoon Hero
 
Posts: 1538
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:45 pm
Location: Further up and further in!

Postby Wanderwolf on Sat Nov 25, 2006 1:34 am

Brock: Most Americans have trouble getting a loan, as the best type of loan-seeker (by the bank's standards) is someone who already has enough money. Also, this would cut out Russians entirely, since their currency doesn't exchange with the American dollar.

Yours truly,

The fiduciary,

Wanderer
User avatar
Wanderwolf
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 6:18 pm
Location: Forney, TX, U.S.A.

Postby Axelgear on Sat Nov 25, 2006 3:19 am

BrockthePaine wrote:
Axelgear wrote:So does that mean you agree with my compromise plan? I mean, does it not make sense that if these people have a way to enter legally that is efficient that should get them off the ground, I think it's a good thing.

We already HAVE a legal way to immigrate. These folks don't follow it. That's our biggest problem.


True, that is, but the issue is that it's nearly impossible, if not entirely so, for people of low income to immigrate. Hence my proposition.

Lemme run over your plan again and tell you the way I'm seeing it...
A Low-Income Immigration System. This system would allow Immigrants who have very little money to get a low- or no-interest loan from the United States so long as they submit to extensive identification.

To put it simply, WHY? That's not the government's job. Why should we taxpayers pay to fund a system of loans? Why don't they ask a bank? The government is not a loan agency - it is here solely to protect the nation from foreign and domestic threats and negotiate trade treaties with other nations. I would have no problem paying taxes if they go for military and infrastructure (such as roads and bridges) but having the federal government fund anything else is unnecessary and unconstitutional.

I've never seen a federal government program which has not ended up a total disaster. Color me skeptical that this would end up any different.


But isn't the Governments mandate to try and put in place anything necessary for the Safety and Order of the Nation? I think that falls under infrastructure actually... But anyway, either way, it is not unconstitutional. I do agree with your skeptical view of it, but that doesn't mean it should not at least be examined as a potential idea.
Astronomer. Sketch Artist. All-around generally creative and useless guy.
User avatar
Axelgear
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:30 am

Postby RHJunior on Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:29 am

The last thing this nation needs is still MORE people who cannot-- or will not-- support themselves without a government handout.
"What was that popping noise ?"
"A paradigm shifting without a clutch."
--Dilbert
RHJunior
Cartoon Hero
 
Posts: 1689
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 1999 4:00 pm
Location: WV

Postby Tom Mazanec on Sat Nov 25, 2006 12:29 pm

All eight of my great-grandparents came here from the same small area of Bohemia and moved to Maple Heights, IIRC. They did it legally.
I am sort of an oddball...most other people I know my age or less have ancestors from all over, or at least two places. It is odd to think that all eight of my great grandparents could have decided to stay, and have my grandparents who could have met each other and have my parents there who could have had me, and I would have grown up in Soviet occupied Czechoslovakia.
Forum Mongoose
User avatar
Tom Mazanec
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 817
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 1999 4:00 pm
Location: Ohio

Postby TMLutas on Sat Nov 25, 2006 3:59 pm

Nikas_Zekeval wrote:By definition illegal immigrants, unless they are being supported solely on funds from out of the country, are breaking one of at least three laws by being here.

One, they are working, payed under the table and not paying income tax. That Federal Tax evasion. (I know the 'legalize' them crowd wants a $1000 fine and them to pay the income tax they should have payed. The IRS has broken peole who made less serious mistakes on their tax returns, this is a slap on the wrist compared to IRS SOP).

Two, they are working and paying taxes, but under a false ID. This is either fraud (for completely bogus paperwork) or identity theft (if using a legitimate SS number)

Three, they are living off various public assistance programs. Since you need to prove you are here legally to get them again illegals would have to committ fraud or ID theft to get these.

Simply existing here illegally requires not just breaking the law to get in here, but continuning to break it to avoid notice and deportation. It's not a one time thing, it's like being a 'little bit pregnant', that status leads you into further crime.


I believe you have to actually commit some harm to commit identity fraud. Otherwise Rich Little would be a multiple felon every time he did his act. Drug dealers, for instance, regularly get charged with tax crimes in addition to their drug crimes. To get past this, many drug lords file their taxes anonymously in order to avoid the extra time. Paying 30% on their astronomical profits is ok by them. The IRS accepts these payments and when the drug dealers get caught, they have the paperwork proving that they are OK with the IRS.

I'm not saying that a great many illegal aliens actually do this but that you really ought to be better educated about the law before you claim that certain acts are impossible. Difficult and rarely complied with is more like it.
TMLutas
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 658
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 6:19 pm

Postby Axelgear on Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:02 pm

RHJunior wrote:The last thing this nation needs is still MORE people who cannot-- or will not-- support themselves without a government handout.


A handout would require they don't pay it back though. No small business gets big without an influx of money at the beginning, and no person can go from zero to steady without some assistance. It's just how it works.
Astronomer. Sketch Artist. All-around generally creative and useless guy.
User avatar
Axelgear
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:30 am

Postby Earl McClaw on Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:24 pm

TMLutas wrote:
Nikas_Zekeval wrote:Two, they are working and paying taxes, but under a false ID. This is either fraud (for completely bogus paperwork) or identity theft (if using a legitimate SS number)

Three, they are living off various public assistance programs. Since you need to prove you are here legally to get them again illegals would have to committ fraud or ID theft to get these.

I believe you have to actually commit some harm to commit identity fraud. Otherwise Rich Little would be a multiple felon every time he did his act.

Impersonators like Rich Little do their bit for acknowleded acts, thus denying they are who they're pretending to be, making them inaccurate examples.

As for needing to do harm to be fraud, that's something I'd want to confirm with a lawyer. I can see it going either way. (Most likely, it'd be more like someone not pressing assault charges and the case not being prosecuted.)

It won't be difficult to argue that someone using your identity - even if no direct harm were caused - had caused the records of your personal life to become inaccurate. Or compare it to wearing a mask in public (at a time when they were inappropriate). Many municipalities have laws against concealing your identity.

Besides, Nikas was referring to someone using a valid identity for profit (i.e. work and tax records). This should immediately fall under the classification of "financial harm".
Earl McClaw invites you to visit Furryco and the DGL. (Avatar used with permission of Ralph Hayes, Jr.)
User avatar
Earl McClaw
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Wed Nov 20, 2002 8:15 am

Postby MikeVanPelt on Sun Nov 26, 2006 12:38 am

Earl McClaw wrote:Besides, Nikas was referring to someone using a valid identity for profit (i.e. work and tax records). This should immediately fall under the classification of "financial harm".


If you or I were to fraudulently use a fake Social Security number, the penalty is up to 5 years in Federal prison and $250,000 fine.

Illegal aliens are theoretically subject to the same laws; in practice, I don't know of a single case of one ever being charged.
User avatar
MikeVanPelt
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 11:07 pm

Postby TMLutas on Mon Nov 27, 2006 5:28 am

Earl McClaw wrote:
TMLutas wrote:
Nikas_Zekeval wrote:Two, they are working and paying taxes, but under a false ID. This is either fraud (for completely bogus paperwork) or identity theft (if using a legitimate SS number)

Three, they are living off various public assistance programs. Since you need to prove you are here legally to get them again illegals would have to committ fraud or ID theft to get these.

I believe you have to actually commit some harm to commit identity fraud. Otherwise Rich Little would be a multiple felon every time he did his act.

Impersonators like Rich Little do their bit for acknowleded acts, thus denying they are who they're pretending to be, making them inaccurate examples.

As for needing to do harm to be fraud, that's something I'd want to confirm with a lawyer. I can see it going either way. (Most likely, it'd be more like someone not pressing assault charges and the case not being prosecuted.)

It won't be difficult to argue that someone using your identity - even if no direct harm were caused - had caused the records of your personal life to become inaccurate. Or compare it to wearing a mask in public (at a time when they were inappropriate). Many municipalities have laws against concealing your identity.

Besides, Nikas was referring to someone using a valid identity for profit (i.e. work and tax records). This should immediately fall under the classification of "financial harm".


If the other identity holder provides only positive information to my records (ie, I'm already at the top bracket for taxes, my credit score is raised) I think you'd have a difficult time suing (there's a need to show harm there) and civil rules are generally looser than criminal when it comes to filing and evidentiary proof.
TMLutas
Regular Poster
 
Posts: 658
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 6:19 pm

PreviousNext

 

Return to NPC



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest