Discussion in 'The Dungeon' started by blkduc, Dec 14, 2016.
The EO did not ban them.
Were they banned? NO! Because they were permitted to enter the US after their visa status was confirmed.
Those green card holders didn't sit in detention until Robart trod over the line of judicial activism.
Eh, I hired a contractor to re-roof my house once. He brought in a crew of mexicans and paid them in cash when they were done...
What are you, a clinton twat licker?
So you're saying those mexicans who hang around the Home Depot that get picked up and worked for a few days are paying taxes? Mmmmmkay.
No, he's saying the mexicans hanging around Home Depot don't work on any of the job he's involved with.
The ones he's involved with get SS cards without birth certs or fake certs and do pay taxes while still being illegal
So you bear no responsibility in the transaction? Demand drives supply, or so I have observed.
Thanks man. Been a long week!
you enabled it by hiring that contractor. if you have such an issue with illegals working and not paying taxes, then don't hire that contractor. the contractor who is hiring these guys is also part of the problem.
Ahem.... The conservatives now call those "alternate certificates"....
Git with the program mister!...
Can't wait for more lib tears to be shed when Trump issues a new EO on immigration next week that addresses the courts issues and once again puts in place greater admission requirements.
Their tears are going to be HUGE.
Nope. All of it. Homeowners too.
I am guilty of this as well. I could find another yard crew but that sweet $20 a week for front and back, edging and clean up is irresistible. Hypocrisy thy name is Fonda.
Pretty hard to confirm their visa status when they were simply revoked.
And now you're blaming the judge that helped these people (visa and green card holders) for getting them detained in the first place? Geez. You could give Kellyanne Conway a run for her money! If the ban didn't affect greencard holders in the first place, then why did the White House have to issue authoritative guidance to say that green card holders would no longer need a waiver?
Because people are stupid.
Farming/Packing around here too, not much in the way of paying cash, it just isn't worth it.
First, thank you for taking the time to answer. Immigration is a tough subject because you have so many different situations that will come up. Ex. the woman that was deported recently. Heartbreaking but it is the law. How do you handle situations like that without someone losing out? I don't believe you can. So we must follow the law because that is the only fair way to the many that go through the process the legal way. It is unfair to them but at the same time heartbreaking for those in the situation like she was.
I haven't read all the laws on this subject so I don't know everything about it. What I do know is that we now have a mess on our hands that will only continue to get worse unless we do something about it. Unfortunalty that'll involve some families that are broken up, it will involve people being pushed to the back of the line that are hard working and doing what they came here to do, hope for American way of life. It's a tough situation that has a direct effect on jobs and our communities.
"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 person's becoming in every facet 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... 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."
I'll agree that they do go hand in hand. Taxing the shit out of incoming goods is not the answer but I don't believe that's what he is going to do. He looks to be drawing a hard line in the sand saying this is what I want/will do and then can negotiate from there. Trade has been lop sided for some time now. Special interest in Washington have seen to that for far longer than the last 8 years. That need to be corrected so that it is fair. It's one thing I took away from the last PC, "...fair not free trade".
As far as people evolving, they are. The US is by far the best in the tech sector. It's growing and will continue but we also need manufacturing. We can rely on just the design and no manufacturing. Lower level jobs are needed. While some follow in their fathers footsteps some do not. I've met many 3rd generation factory workers while I was with Snap-On. Could they have gone a different path, sure, but they took the job and are not only happy with what they do they have pride that they are 3rd generation making something that gets bought and sold worldwide.
Global warming/climate change, is the climate changing yes. Are we having an impact on it, yes. To what degree we don't know and can not know because we have so little information and we'll continue to have very little information for centuries. Time is what is needed to understand and it's something that we are in the infancy of right now. All the models are just predictions, non are certain. I tend to feel that we aren't having as big an impact as some would like us to believe and everyones option on it is just that. Do we have a responsibility to look after our planet. Absolutely we do, we also must be cautious to not push to hard too fast and I believe that is what we are doing right now. That itself causes issues in the present.
"Conservation means development as much as it does protection. I recognize the right and duty of this generation to develop and use the natural resources of our land but I do not recognize the right to waste them, or to rob, by wasteful use, the generations that come after us. I ask nothing of the nation except that it so behave as each farmer here behaves with reference to his own children. That farmer is a poor creature who skins the land and leaves it worthless to his children. The farmer is a good farmer who, having enabled the land to support himself and to provide for the education of his children, leaves it to them a little better than he found it himself. I believe the same thing of a nation.
Moreover, I believe that the natural resources must be used for the benefit of all our people, and not monopolized for the benefit of the few, and here again is another case in which I am accused of taking a revolutionary attitude. People forget now that one hundred years ago there were public men of good character who advocated the nation selling its public lands in great quantities, so that the nation could get the most money out of it, and giving it to the men who could cultivate it for their own uses. We took the proper democratic ground that the land should be granted in small sections to the men who were actually to till it and live on it. Now, with the water-power, with the forests, with the mines, we are brought face to face with the fact that there are many people who will go with us in conserving the resources only if they are to be allowed to exploit them for their benefit. That is the one of the fundamental reasons why the special interests should be driven out of politics.
"One mans terrorist...."
What we're seeing is something we haven't seen for quite some time in the histories. A global threat to civilized society. We have a responsibility not just as American but as the leader of the free world to eradicate this threat from the globe. We can not leave the world to be, we must work with our allies and foes alike on this. This is something that I think the President is right on, Russia has to be an ally in this fight as do all nations that wish to be free to be ruled by their own people. It must be us that leads the way. We don't have to get along with them on other issues but we mustn't make foes in the process. That can be dealt with later. The travel EO did just that, it was just poorly rolled out to the American public. We'll see what he comes out with next week. Nation that wish to engage in funding terrorist must be dealt with harshly. We can no longer allow nations to kiss one cheek while slapping the other. Iran.
I will disagree on the competent part and here's why. I think the is fully fit to handle the job. PC's, well not so much but the can and hopefully will get better. It will require both sides to calm down a bit and come to truce, something the media at this point are not willing to do. Partially because how he handles them and partially because of their own interest. But I didn't vote for a showman and neither did America. We had a showman for the last 8 years and the world took notice of that and capitalized on it. I believe what we have right now is a strong leader that will put Americans first and is unafraid to stand up to world leaders that have taken advantage of a weak America. The world is always a better place when we are involved, because if not us, the whom? Someone will fill that void as we have seen with Russia in the Middle East of late. The cabinet is full of very talented and smart individuals that will get the job done. A good leader doesn't need to know how to get somewhere, he does need to know were we're going and put the people in place to figure out that path. So far he is doing that. Not without some issues, which is to be expected of any President.
Thanks for the time for your response on the time it took to read mine.
Oh. So you mean all your concerns with the alleged illegality of the EO were dispelled before Benedict Robart issued his decree?
What are you bitching about again?
How the fuck was I supposed to know he was using them? Now it's my responsibility monitor the people a company hires? I didn't know how he was going to pay them until I saw him doling out the cash when they were done. I should have started ripping off the shingles once they were done and told him he was fired.
This is what you said earlier, Ms. Conway.
"Those green card holders didn't sit in detention until Robart trod over the line of judicial activism."
I simply pointed out that you were wrong.
I'm not bitching about anything. I'm just here to point out your "alternative facts" and hypocrisy.
Separate names with a comma.