Illegal Mexican

[Sea Dangles]

Did anyone notice the story about the attack on the fishing boat off Nantucket? Another unwelcome guest of ours has imperiled hard workers.

[Raider Ronnie]

Nothing to see here, just move along and wait for the next female sexual assault victim to crawl out from the Soros rock.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Nebe]

Bad hombres everywhere !
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

We highly educated people know it’s only those damn illegals killing, raping and stealing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

We highly educated people know it’s only those damn illegals killing, raping and steeling.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Educated people don’t write steeling.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Educated people don’t write steeling.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And petty people don’t appreciate I’m on a tablet without cheaters on, but good for you taking the high road.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

And petty people don’t appreciate I’m on a tablet without cheaters on, but good for you taking the high road.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just pointing out the irony of your statement. Ha, I am lost without my cheeters.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

guy kills wife in mansfield shoots her in the face starts manhunt But since he was born here it changes things ?

UK tourist killed in robbery attempt guess he should have stayed Home

[Sea Dangles]

Wayne,we deported this person once already for his crimes but he got back somehow. Don’t you think a wall would have saved a life? His shipmates just wanted to fish.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Wayne,we deported this person once already for his crimes but he got back somehow. Don’t you think a wall would have saved a life? His shipmates just wanted to fish.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Who hired him? What will be the penalty for that?

This is a microcosm of the larger issue.

The main reason no one in government is serious about this, is both sides see some benefit from this issue. Politically it is a football for both sides, and big agriculture and other industries don't want to see the issue pushed too far to remove their labor pool.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Who hired him? What will be the penalty for that?

This is a microcosm of the larger issue.

The main reason no one in government is serious about this, is both sides see some benefit from this issue. Politically it is a football for both sides, and big agriculture and other industries don't want to see the issue pushed too far to remove their labor pool.

so you think it's the employer's fault that he snuck back in to the country after being deported and committed murder?

if the democrats aren't going to differentiate between legal and illegal immigrants/immigration....why should employers?

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by scottw

so you think it's the employer's fault that he snuck back in to the country after being deported and committed murder?

if the democrats aren't going to differentiate between legal and illegal immigrants/immigration....why should employers?

I think it is the employers fault if they hired him as an illegal. He didn’t swim to the f-ing boat to kill the guy.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

I think it is the employers fault if they hired him as an illegal. He didn’t swim to the f-ing boat to kill the guy.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

that's stupid

I think it's the democrats fault for encouraging an atmosphere where people feel they can cross the border illegally even after being deported and find work with employers who put him on the boat

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Sea Dangles

Wayne,we deported this person once already for his crimes but he got back somehow. Don’t you think a wall would have saved a life? His shipmates just wanted to fish.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You are smoking crack if you think a wall will keep these people out. Sure it will keep some out , but the people that will benefit the most are the contractors that build it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

The main reason no one in government is serious about this, is both sides see some benefit from this issue. Politically it is a football for both sides, and big agriculture and other industries don't want to see the issue pushed too far to remove their labor pool.

But Trump Admin is pushing for stricter enforcement of immigration (BTW - something that might have prevented this guy coming back)

Originally Posted by scottw

I think it's the democrats fault for encouraging an atmosphere where people feel they can cross the border illegally even after being deported and find work with employers who put him on the boat

^^^

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

It is stupid that employers should have to verify an employee’s status?

In places that have E-Verify, yes. Strange that Progressives keep fighting or removing those provisions

[DZ]

Mass is only Mandatory E-Verify for state agencies.
If it was mandatory for all employers he may have been caught before this.

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by DZ

Mass is only Mandatory E-Verify for state agencies.
If it was mandatory for all employers he may have been caught before this.

Good thing all those politicians got E-Verify's back

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by JohnR

In places that have E-Verify, yes. Strange that Progressives keep fighting or removing those provisions

And I can disagree with them on this, and think e-Verify should be phased in as mandatory.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

In places that have E-Verify, yes. Strange that Progressives keep fighting or removing those provisions

I think the answer needs to be comprehensive reform, not more band-aids.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by Nebe

You are smoking crack if you think a wall will keep these people out. Sure it will keep some out , but the people that will benefit the most are the contractors that build it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So should I close my eyes and wish them back to Mexico?

Perhaps just wait for them to observe the laws.....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

The penalty for hiring this person may end up with more consequences than the killing itself.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Do you think any of the illegal workers prefer the current non system to being able to go to the border, present their work visa, get on a bus or drive their car, work for a while, go home to visit and come back.
They don't come here because they can't find work here, they can find it.
The other question is why corporate america employs cheap immigrant labor.
You could look at the dairy industry where we have more and more large farms that need cheap labor to make their model work because we don't control prices, meanwhile Canada sets a dairy price and small farms can be profitable, they don't have to bring in cheap workers.
Farmers have relocated to Canada from the US because they can have a profitable small farm.
Meanwhile in the US we have fewer and larger farms but no fewer cows.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Do you think any of the illegal workers prefer the current non system to being able to go to the border, present their work visa, get on a bus or drive their car, work for a while, go home to visit and come back.
They don't come here because they can't find work here, they can find it.
The other question is why corporate america employs cheap immigrant labor.
You could look at the dairy industry where we have more and more large farms that need cheap labor to make their model work because we don't control prices, meanwhile Canada sets a dairy price and small farms can be profitable, they don't have to bring in cheap workers.
Farmers have relocated to Canada from the US because they can have a profitable small farm.
Meanwhile in the US we have fewer and larger farms but no fewer cows.

Price controls lead to higher prices. Canadians pay more for milk and dairy products than Americans. Price control also depends on high tariffs against foreign dairy products. The Tariffs not only eliminate the competition which could severely hurt Canadian dairy farmers, but they constrict the quantity and variety of dairy products, including cheese able to be sold to Canadian consumers. And the small Canadian farms have actually greatly decreased. The Canadian dairy cartel protects its existing members from competition, so the idea that American dairy farmers can easily move their farms to Canada is not viable for many. Both American and Canadian small dairy farmers have lost numbers to larger mechanized producers who are the greater threat to the small farms.

So if you think price controls and tariffs rather than free market are the way to go, be prepared for high prices, limited quantity and variety and lack of competition. Which all, of course, lead to the larger, more efficient farm models--you know, the corporatist model that you don't like.

Here's a negative Canadian view:
https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/w...and-cheese-867

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Price controls lead to higher prices. Canadians pay more for milk and dairy products than Americans. Price control also depends on high tariffs against foreign dairy products. The Tariffs not only eliminate the competition which could severely hurt Canadian dairy farmers, but they constrict the quantity and variety of dairy products, including cheese able to be sold to Canadian consumers. And the small Canadian farms have actually greatly decreased. The Canadian dairy cartel protects its existing members from competition, so the idea that American dairy farmers can easily move their farms to Canada is not viable for many. Both American and Canadian small dairy farmers have lost numbers to larger mechanized producers who are the greater threat to the small farms.

So if you think price controls and tariffs rather than free market are the way to go, be prepared for high prices, limited quantity and variety and lack of competition. Which all, of course, lead to the larger, more efficient farm models--you know, the corporatist model that you don't like.

Here's a negative Canadian view:
https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/w...and-cheese-867

You forgot the illegal immigrant farm workers that enable the corporate business model, no farm is close to highly mechanized. I've been to enough 1000+ cow dairies to know that.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

You forgot the illegal immigrant farm workers that enable the corporate business model, no farm is close to highly mechanized. I've been to enough 1000+ cow dairies to know that.

I didn't forget the illegals. I'm not going to mention them in every post I make. I have repeatedly and consistently been against illegals, for the wall, strengthening border enforcement, strengthening immigration policy, import immigrants who are likely to be compatible with Western and U.S. values, keep numbers related to actual need not artificially created need resulting from social policies that make it viable, even attractive, for Americans to refuse to "do the work that immigrants will", and against the illegal immigration that provides cheap labor at the expense of American workers, blah, blah, blah. And responses to any of us who want that is that we are racists.

Big Agra as well as big dairy farms can still produce more product economically than small farms, even if does not employ illegals.

You had a simplistic solution for the disappearing small dairy farm in America. I pointed out that the problem was not that simple and that your Canadian solution of price supports has unintended negative consequences that can make your solution regressive. You didn't answer that.

[Pete F.]

Here's an article about the dilemma in VT.
https://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/...t?oid=14631009
Towns that had a school, store, fire department, library and church are empty now.
They used to have 30 farms and now they rent their land.
Sorry but i think rural america and the rural landscape is worth our investment as a society.

[Sea Dangles]

They are all switching over to cannabis.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Milk could cost more
We make plenty of cheese
Big ag is not a good thing, have you seen the difference between a group of 80 cow farms and a 1600 cow farm? There are esthetic, environmental and social impacts that are significant.
Cheap is rarely best
You can build all the walls you want and people will still come if they can do better here, there is plenty of air and water. Perhaps you could build a wall at the north also.
I suppose you could round them up and shoot them, that might deter them, but given our constitution that is pretty unlikely.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Here's an article about the dilemma in VT.
https://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/...t?oid=14631009
Towns that had a school, store, fire department, library and church are empty now.
They used to have 30 farms and now they rent their land.
Sorry but i think rural america and the rural landscape is worth our investment as a society.

You mean the rural landscape of the past? Would that "investment" be at the expense of others who wouldn't be able to live on large, rural, romantically bucolic properties? Should society (i.e. government) invest in saving all the landscapes that please you? Do you want us to "invest" in the actual values that created rural America? Are you essentially a classical liberal rather than a Progressive? You seem to be conflicted. You value Progressive policies that distribute wealth "equitably" by force of government planning or fiat, but want to inequitably distribute public wealth in greater amounts to landscapes that you think worthy of preserving.

Progress is busy throwing your landscapes into the dust bin of history. I suppose protecting and preserving your landscapes could be done in an egalitarian manner by making your rural landscapes government property, sorts of government historical museums or parks which hire workers to keep the places going and who are paid an equitable government distributed wage. These could be partially supported by fees visitors, tourists, pay to enter and admire these parks to see how it used to be.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You mean the rural landscape of the past? Would that "investment" be at the expense of others who wouldn't be able to live on large, rural, romantically bucolic properties? Should society (i.e. government) invest in saving all the landscapes that please you? Do you want us to "invest" in the actual values that created rural America? Are you essentially a classical liberal rather than a Progressive? You seem to be conflicted. You value Progressive policies that distribute wealth "equitably" by force of government planning or fiat, but want to inequitably distribute public wealth in greater amounts to landscapes that you think worthy of preserving.

Progress is busy throwing your landscapes into the dust bin of history. I suppose protecting and preserving your landscapes could be done in an egalitarian manner by making your rural landscapes government property, sorts of government historical museums or parks which hire workers to keep the places going and who are paid an equitable government distributed wage. These could be partially supported by fees visitors, tourists, pay to enter and admire these parks to see how it used to be.

What is important to you?
Freedom at what cost?
You will never be totally free to do as you please in this world unless you live on an island by yourself and create your own little world
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device