[Catsmine]

You wingers, on the other hand, obviously want to give the employers a pass, with all your talk about enforcement, and you wanna throw the immigrants OUT. It ain't right. It just ain't right.

excon

You have a point, Ex. Whose fault it is really no longer matters. How do you propose getting these (at a guess) millions of illegals onto the tax rolls?

They want to work - great. They want to send money to Mama in Oaxaca - beautiful. Get them to pay for the hospitals and schools and cops just like everybody else and stop making me do it for them. Yes, I mean the employers that actually pay the payroll tax, and Social Security tax, and all the other taxes that are called something else, like workers compensation insurance premiums that employers are required to carry in addition to the health insurance taxes we have to start paying.

[excon]

You have a point, Ex. Whose fault it is really no longer matters. How do you propose getting these (at a guess) millions of illegals onto the tax rolls?

Hello again, Cats:

Give 'em a piece of paper to sign, along with a social security card, saying they can stay as long as they pay taxes. Are they all going to pay their taxes then? I don't think so. That don't mean nothing. There's plenty of white people who don't pay their taxes either.

excon

[Catsmine]

There's plenty of white people who don't pay their taxes either.

excon

There's almost no one who pays their taxes, of any color. Their employers do.

[tomder55]

Hello again, Cats:

Give 'em a piece of paper to sign, along with a social security card, saying they can stay as long as they pay taxes. Are they all gonna pay their taxes then? I don't think so. That don't mean nothing. There's plenty of white people who don't pay their taxes either.

excon

Leaving aside the unrecorded loss of tax revenue from illegals ;a little less than half the workforce pay no income taxes legally . The burden for financing the ever enlarging nanny state falls on roughly 53 % of the workforce. But it's even worse than that . The bottom 40% get tax credits that exceed their tax liabilities. The top 10% of income earners finance 73% of the government revenues.

The revenues don't come close to paying for the government the President "inheritted " let alone his massive expansion of the nannystate or the wealth transfer he envisions in his utopian mind. He has already flipped on his promise not to raise "middle class" taxes because he knows the pool of available money shrinks as the equation shifts and more Americans receive the goodies than pay for them .

Even the President understands the kitty is empty .He needs to expand the tax base and trick the lower 47% to pony up .
That is why they dusted off the corpse of Paul Volcker and have him promoting VAT ;a federal sales tax. Now a VAT would not be a terrible idea if the income tax was eliminated . But combined with the income tax it is a wealth grab by the government the likes of which we have not seen in this country.

[excon]

Leaving aside the unrecorded loss of tax revenue from illegals ;a little less than half the workforce pay no income taxes legally .

Hello tom:

Couple things.

There's NO lost tax revenue due to illegals. As a matter of fact, illegals pay MORE taxes than YOU do. As smoothy tells us, many illegals have phony ss numbers. As a consequence, they can't file a tax return to claim the overpayment that almost every single American gets to claim. So, the taxes that they overpaid and are due them, stays with the government...

You also bring up another popular Republican talking point. The right wing's intent is to bring attention to the fact that the rich are supporting the poor, and that's a bad thing. What they DON'T mention is what CAUSED it, though, and that's the disappearance of the middle class. Yup, it's a bad thing.

excon

[smoothy]

Hello again, smoothy:

You again, diminish the role of the employer. The fact is, if there were no jobs, there would be no illegal immigration. It's like blaming the hookers and giving the johns a pass. In fact, it takes TWO to tango.

But, contrary to what you say, I don't place the blame on the employers. I don't put it on the immigrants either. In fact, neither are the bad guys here. I put it on the government who didn't enforce the laws we had on the books for over 50 years. During that time, family's got established. Lives were changed. Things happened.

So, it does NO good to be mad at the government for doing this, and it makes no sense to be mad at either the employers or the workers. All they did, was what people do. They hire people, and people get hired. Given that it wasn't EITHER'S fault, we shouldn't punish either of them. I'm willing to give them BOTH amnesty.

You wingers, on the other hand, obviously want to give the employers a pass, with all your talk about enforcement, and you wanna throw the immigrants OUT. It ain't right. It just ain't right.

excon

Perhaps if you pulled your head OUT of your rectum, long enough to get some oxygen you will grasp this...

QUOTE where I give the employer a free pass... YOU made this claim so YOU either put up, or shut up.

Typical damned liberal making things up out of thin air when they don't have a legitimate argument.

Contrary to Your bizarre and typical liberal opinion, employers and banks are NOT responsible for everything bad in the world... and the Giovernment is not responsible for everything good, or can even fix what's broke.. much less have a right to butt into every facet of ones life.

If the damn government doesn't keep out the illegals, won't enforce laws that are already on the books... won't verify documents presented to employers (because the employer can't)... then it's the government that bears the brunt of the blame.


And here YOU go not blaming the criminals themselves... the Illegals.

THEY refused to follow the law to get a Visa or Green card... THEY feel they are special and the law doesn't apply to them...

I suppose Rapists, murderers and Child molestors aren't responsible for what THEY do either. You think it's the employers fault when the employee lies on their forms... the government doesn't catch it on a background check... and a child molester ends up in a school or daycare center? And that is different from an illegal using a fake ID exactly how?


You know not all illegals are hired in a 7-11 parking lot as day labor or paid in cash off the books. Not all employers KNOW they are illegal any more than someone who rents an apartment to them knows they are illegal if they have fake ID's. Which in itself is a crime. IF it was ever prosecuted.

Can YOU spot a real Green card from a good fake one? Have you even ever seen a green card? Can you determine a real Passport from a good fake? Exactly what training programs do they offer to employers to determine real and faked documents? I'm not aware of any.

Of course if a minority was REFUSED anything because of a suspected false ID... the ACLU and the democrat party would be ready to pounce with hate laws and discrimination charges... and civil rights lawsuits.

[excon]

Perhaps if you pulled your head OUT of your rectum, long enough to get some oxigen you will grasp this...

Hello again, smoothy:

I've been arguing with my right wing friends here for over 10 years. We disagree, AND we're still friends. You, on the other hand are disagreeable, and aren't fun to deal with. So, I won't.

excon

[smoothy]

Hello again, smoothy:

I've been arguing with my right wing friends here for over 10 years. We disagree, AND we're still friends. You, on the other hand are disagreeable, and aren't fun to deal with. So, I won't.

excon

YOU are sitting here arguing I said something (giving employers a free ride)... post after post and refuse to present a quote to back it up.

THAT I find particularly irritating.

When I say something... thats fair game for debate in my book. But don't go and keep repeating I gave employers a free ride... which obviously can't be quoted... when I didn't. You aren't Dan Rather, and this isn't CBS.

There ARE some that seek out undocumented workers... but far more get caught up with illegals with falsified papers they thought WERE legal. Because I know both.

You don't blame the illegals... just the people that hire them... or those who won't enforce the laws...

What's wrong with laying the blame on the feet of the source of the problem itself. The Illegals. They ALL know they are illegal, and breaking the law. THEY are the root of the problem, and that's not giving anyone else that breaks the law a free ride saying that.

If Illegals left.. the illegal problem would cease... just as if drug addicts stopped using drugs... the drug problem would go away. Without a market for drugs.. the drug cartels would dry up.

As much as I hate China... they were really effective in dealing with the opium problem they had back in the day. Draconian for sure... but effective.

Whatever else is done with any crime.. its futile without focusing on the root issue in every case, being the person committing the crime. You can't blame a Bank for being the cause of a bank robbery... just because they have money, and let the robber in the front door. You blame the bank robber.


And that's a major flaw in the Politically correct liberal movement... they don't hold anyone responsible for their own actions. Its always someone else's fault.

[excon]

THAT I find particularly irritating.

Hello again, smoothy:

Go be irritated. 'S fine with me.

excon

[paraclete]

the fact that the rich are supporting the poor, and that's a bad thing. Yup, it's a bad thing.

excon

Ex, do you live on planet Earth? The rich supporting the poor has been the objective of every taxation system in recent times. At one time it was the poor supporting the rich but that leads to revolution and large numbers of rich people dying. I am not against the rich supporting the poor as long as there is equity. The rich should actually do more because if the poor become prosperous their tax burden will become less

[tomder55]

What they DON'T mention is what CAUSED it, though, and that's the disappearance of the middle class. Yup, it's a bad thing.

The shrinking middle class is one of the biggest myths the left uses.

I am not against the rich supporting the poor as long as there is equity.

I don't even know what that means . Poor and rich are not permanent conditions ;nor is class status static in a free world . What are you saying "from each according to their abilty to each according to their needs "?

[paraclete]

the shrinking middle class is one of the biggest myths the left uses.

I don't even know what that means . Poor and rich are not permanent conditions ;nor is class status static in a free world . What are you saying "from each according to their abilty to each according to their needs "?

We are about to get into a highly charged philosphic argument. There is no reason why a government should not have responsibility and assist those who have lost the ability to help themselves. There are good reasons certain social conditions including endemic poverty are not in the public interest.

Having said that and getting us back on topic that same government owes no loyality to those who are not part of the nation and so immigrants should contribute to the nation or be refused entry.

[Catsmine]

We are about to get into a highly charged philosphic argument. There is no reason why a government should not have responsibilty and assist those who have lost the ability to help themselves. There are good reasons why certain social conditions including endemic poverty are not in the public interest.

Having said that and getting us back on topic that same government owes no loyality to those who are not part of the nation and so immigrants should contribute to the nation or be refused entry.

Your second statement is absolutely correct. The problem with the first statement is that the same government gets to define who has "lost the ability to help themselves." Politicians and Bureaucrats are not real good at that, they want to keep expanding their "sphere of influence."

[paraclete]

Your second statement is absolutely correct. The problem with the first statement is that the same government gets to define who has "lost the ability to help themselves." Politicians and Bureaucrats are not real good at that, they want to keep expanding their "sphere of influence."

I understand your government has defined that as at a certain level of income relative to what is regarded as a poverty level. Mine has essentially done the same but relates it to a benchmark called average weekly earnings. What modern society has done is to look at all aspects of society and define benchmarks of what is reasonable and just. In most cases this is far below what is considered adequate to meet all expectations but meets a minimum in sustainability. What is the use of having representative government if it is not to address the issues it is confronted with? It you don't allow them to address and redress the issues then it is nothing more than a talk fest and rubber stamp and they serve no useful purpose. Bureaucrats are very good at working within a set of clear guidelines and within finite budgets, however they continually suffer from political interference which causes that expansion you refer to.

What we as the general public suffer from is a lack of information and a very large amount of disinformation

[smoothy]

Socialists... want a large dependent population... they want people to sit on their butts while they tax those who are motivated to work into the poor house. Or at least until they see working isn't worth the effort if it will all be stolen off you by the government to give to the lazy.

Government support of soup kitchens is fine... but unless you get off your butt and work, you aren't entitled to an apartment, car, cable TV and a cell phone.

The only exceptions are for the handicaped... which strangely enough... are NOT the ones wanting a free ride in most cases I have seen.

Lazy isn't a handicap.

[tomder55]

There is no reason why a government should not have responsibility and assist those who have lost the ability to help themselves.

And that is why I don't object to a safety net. The rub is that too many have the ability to help themselves and they get locked into this serf-like condition as permanent wards of the state .

That historically was not the case with immigrants .However ,in the past they weren't necessarily eligible to become benefit recipients when they made it into the country.

[paraclete]

Socialists...want a large dependent population...they want people to sit on their butts while they tax those who are motivated to work into the poor house. Or at least until they see working isn't worth the effort if it will all be stolen off you by the government to give to the lazy.

Government support of soup kitchens is fine...but unless you get off your butt and work, you aren't entitled to an apartment, car, cable tv and a cell phone.

The only exceptions are for the handicaped...which strangely enough...are NOT the ones wanting a free ride in most cases I have seen.

Lazy isn't a handicap.

What a strange place you must live in. Who is talking about a dependent population. Look back in the bad old days of laissie faire the prisions were full of people who stole food or were involved in petty crime. We don't want a return of those days, as far as accommodation is concerned no purpose is served by increasing the number of homeless people but for the rest, yes get a job. I agree with you about the welfare trap, that is why there are large gaps between benefits and basic earnings, at least, that's the theory but if you have no skill maybe welfare is as good as basic wages where you come from

[smoothy]

What a strange place you must live in. Who is talking about a dependent population. look back in the bad old days of laissie faire the prisions were full of people who stole food or were involved in petty crime. we don't want a return of those days, as far as accommodation is concerned no purpose is served by increasing the number of homeless people but for the rest, yes get a job. I agree with you about the welfare trap, that is why there are large gaps between benefits and basic earnings, at least, that's the theory but if you have no skill maybe welfare is as good as basic wages where you come from

Welfare recipients (also know as being on the Dole) are a dependent population... they expect handouts... get them, and thus either never develop or lose a work ethic if they ever had one.

Being on Welfare is NOT the same as being on unemployment.

Who would work if they can get paid to sit at home? Why should the people who won't make the effort get free housing while I work my butt off to pay for mine?

People don't HAVE to steal food to eat... not in the USA anyway which is where I live. With the soup kitchens and other aid to the homeless and poor, anyone who starves is due to their not wanting the help.

[paraclete]

Welfare recipients (also know as being on the Dole) are a dependent population...they expect handouts...get them, and thus either never develope or lose a work ethic if they ever had one.

Being on Welfare is NOT the same as being on unemployment.

.

As I said what a strange place you live in, where I come from the dole or unemplyment is the same thing and if you can't find a job you are in training or on work for the dole. There are the disabled but that is another story. The only people I know caught in the welfare trap are our indigenous population and to be fair there isn't a lot of opportunity in some parts of the country. Of course we do have old age pensioners but surely we are not talking about them.

You seem to have a high level of service for the disadvantaged, so there must be some charity working there somewhere but you wouldn't know it from the attitude you display

[Catsmine]

As I said what a strange place you live in

It's very strange. In the 60s a "War on Poverty" was declared, giving Federal aid to Single parents, the disadvantaged, the unemployed, etc. with no strings attached.

Now we have four or five generations of single mothers for whom each child increases her stipend and marriage or employment would render destitute. In the 90s a "Welfare to Work" program was instituted that did get a few off the dole, but it's still epidemic here.