On 07 Jun 2004 16:35:19 GMT, otforme (Charlie Self)
wrote:

|Wes responds:
|
|Sorry, with all due respect, I'm not buying the "costs would go up and
|we need these people to do work that Americans won't do" argument.
|
|This is a subsidy pure and simple. There ain't no free lunch.
|
|No kidding. But the fact is, the work has to be done, and no native-born
|American, or damned few, is willing to do it.

When the wage scale becomes high enough, native-born folks will take
the jobs.

|It is a subsidy, but the subsidy
|is not to the taco eater or the laborer. It is to the businessman (or woman),
|usually a rabid conservative, who doesn't want to have profits reduced.

Let's take another example: I'm required to carry uninsured motorist
insurance. Am I subsidizing the insurance company or the illegals and
other nitwits running around here without insurance? The insurance
companies are going to cover their losses and make a profit regardless
of who pays the premiums. Do you think they make more profit selling
me the insurance than they would selling policies to the numbskulls?

|
||We really do need a coherent immigration policy, but the biggest problem
|comes
||from bordre length, and the low paying economies in Latin America, leaving
||people willing to come to the US, work for less than minimum wage, and still
||manage to have enough money left to send a packet home for the family.
|
|But we have a policy. The laws are on the books.
|
|But not enforced. Our president would far rather curry votes than enforce the
|law.

See sentence three in the paragraph below.
|
|They used to be just Mexican. Then they became Mexican-American and
|then Chicano, Hispanic for a while and now Latino. As for Bush, he's
|given me a lot of reasons to not vote for him again, all of which I
|could ignore, but this one's pushed me over the edge.
|
|I used Latino advisedly, simply because an awful lot of these illegals come
|from countries other than Mexico. They cross the Mexico-US border, but come
|from Colombia, Nicaragua, and other places further south.

All of those places are in "Latin" America, so you're on firm footing.
[g]
|
|The solution is really quite simple. When illegals are found working
|in a Walmart, Sammy Walton, Jr. gets a year in jail. When a farmer is
|found with illegals in his fields, he gets a year in jail. When a
|restaurant owner is found with illegals in the kitchen, he gets a year
|in jail. "I didn't know" is not a defense.
|
|That happened here in Parkersburg a few months ago. Owner of a Mexican
|restaurant got a ****pot full of property and a ton of money confiscated and is
|now in jail because he harbored illegals and did money laundering. Of course,
|they may well have nailed his butt because he's an immigrant himself, but what
|the hell.

Good. Too bad it wasn't widely publicized. The IRS gets (used to)
compliance because they widely publicize the cases they bring. Gets a
lot of folks to toe the line.
|
|Not much chance of a stockholder in Walmart going to jail--do it to one, you
|have to do it proportionately to all, which would really create problems in our
|already over-full jails. There is a solution, but I don't know what it is.

I didn't say stockholder, I mean the CEO, CFO, COO, President or
whomever is the top dog at the business. If you have a retirement
plan, 401k or any such vehicle you *are* a shareholder in Walmart.

Well, gotta go to Woodcraft now and help prop up their bottom line.

Wes