🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 14:24:06 GMT, Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 02:40:26 GMT, Yosemite Sam <mud@flap.net> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 07 Apr 2006 01:58:08 GMT, Kent Wills <compuelf@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 06 Apr 2006 05:16:20 GMT, Yosemite Sam <mud@flap.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>Then quit granting them permission to send money out of the US!
>>>>>
>>>>>	It's THEIR money.  And the law allows it.  Deal with it.
>>>>
>>>>They're here ILLEGALLY, the law does NOT allow that - 
>>>
>>>	Yes, it does.
>>
>>HUH???
>>
>>Are you on drugs boy?
>>
>>The law "allows" them to be here illegally?
>
>	You have a problem with context?  Making money isn't illegal,
>even for those here illegally.
>	Why are you so unable to argue the merits honestly?

It's really quite laughable how you make a statement, lie about it,
and have it hanging right above for all to see.

Here's the replay you dolt:

Sam: They're here ILLEGALLY, the law does NOT allow that - 

Kent: Yes, it does.

How amazingly STUPID you look now.

>>
>>Really?
>>
>>Gotta cite for that?
>>
>>
>>>  If you don't like it, and it's clear you do
>>>not, lobby for a change in the law.  
>>
>>Which law is that you stupid bastard?
>
>	If something, like making an honest wage in this example,
>isn't illegal, then, by definition, it is legal.

Sorry, we're not talking about the specific wage, we're talking about
the illegal entry, and yes also the illegal employment.

>>
>>>>YOU FUCKING DEAL
>>>>WITH IT ya fucking traitor!
>>>
>>>	The use of ad homonyms 
>>
>>Drop dead you lying bastard.
>>
>>No law allows illegal border crossing - NONE!
>
>	Your dishonestly ignoring of the context aside, 

Oh no, you made the mistake in rhetoric, it's YOUR dishnesty that's on
display!

>I've never
>claimed illegal border crossing is legal.  I suspect you know this,
>but since I've demonstrated that you can't argue on the merits, you
>have to resort to petty ad homonyms and less than honest replies.

We'll go to instant replay again you lying bastard:

Sam: They're here ILLEGALLY, the law does NOT allow that - 

Kent: Yes, it does.

>>
>>>>>>> However, I see no reason to
>>>>>>>limit the number of legal immigrants at this time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Wel what YOU see and what the realities are may be two vastly
>>>>>>different things.
>>>>>
>>>>>	What do you view as valid, logical reasons?
>>>>
>>>>a.) carrying capacity
>>>>b.) number of expected jobs available
>>>>c.) historical quotas on immigration
>>>>d.) priority of  political asylum candidates
>>>>e.) needed job skill
>>>>f.) high net worth
>>>>g.) academic worth
>>>>h.) scientific worth
>>>>i.) international executive transfer
>>>>j.) family visas
>>>>k.) congressional sponsorship
>>>>l.) CIA pl 110
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>etc.
>>>
>>>	So why are you unable to use them?
>>
>>Use em for what?
>
>	Uh, what are we doing here?

You appear to be making an ass of yourself.

>>
>>And don't play coy with me you soulless piece of shit. I'm not telling
>>you one damned thing you didn't study to pass your citizenship exam am
>>I?
>
>	Somehow no one but you seems to know that making money via
>honest labor is actually illegal.  It wasn't covered in any of the
>citizenship classes.

It is ILLEGAL to employ ILLEGAL aliens!

http://www.americanpatrol.com/REFERENCE/AidAbetUnlawfulSec8USC1324.html

Federal Immigration and Nationality Act
Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii)

"Any person who . . . encourages or induces an alien to . . . reside .
. . knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such . . .
residence is . . . in violation of law, shall be punished as provided
. . . for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs . . .
fined under title 18 . . . imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both."

Section 274 felonies under the federal Immigration and Nationality
Act, INA 274A(a)(1)(A):

A person (including a group of persons, business, organization, or
local government) commits a federal felony when she or he:

    * assists an alien s/he should reasonably know is illegally in the
U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting,
sheltering, or assisting him or her to obtain employment, or

    * encourages that alien to remain in the U.S. by referring him or
her to an employer or by acting as employer or agent for an employer
in any way, or

    * knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.

Penalties upon conviction include criminal fines, imprisonment, and
forfeiture of vehicles and real property used to commit the crime.
Anyone employing or contracting with an illegal alien without
verifying his or her work authorization status is guilty of a
misdemeanor. Aliens and employers violating immigration laws are
subject to arrest, detention, and seizure of their vehicles or
property. In addition, individuals or entities who engage in
racketeering enterprises that commit (or conspire to commit)
immigration-related felonies are subject to private civil suits for
treble damages and injunctive relief.

Recruitment and Employment of Illegal Aliens

It is unlawful to hire an alien, to recruit an alien, or to refer an
alien for a fee, knowing the alien is unauthorized to work in the
United States. It is equally unlawful to continue to employ an alien
knowing that the alien is unauthorized to work. Employers may give
preference in recruitment and hiring to a U.S. citizen over an alien
with work authorization only where the U.S. citizen is equally or
better qualified. It is unlawful to hire an individual for employment
in the United States without complying with employment eligibility
verification requirements. Requirements include examination of
identity documents and completion of Form I-9 for every employee
hired. Employers must retain all I-9s, and, with three days' advance
notice, the forms must be made available for inspection. Employment
includes any service or labor performed for any type of remuneration
within the United States, with the exception of sporadic domestic
service by an individual in a private home. Day laborers or other
casual workers engaged in any compensated activity (with the above
exception) are employees for purposes of immigration law. An employer
includes an agent or anyone acting directly or indirectly in the
interest of the employer. For purposes of verfication of authorization
to work, employer also means an independent contractor, or a
contractor other than the person using the alien labor. The use of
temporary or short-term contracts cannot be used to circumvent the
employment authorization verification requirements. If employment is
to be for less than the usual three days allowed for completing the
I-9 Form requirement, the form must be completed immediately at the
time of hire.

An employer has constructive knowledge that an employee is an illegal
unauthorized worker if a reasonable person would infer it from the
facts. Constructive knowledge constituting a violation of federal law
has been found where (1) the I-9 employment eligibility form has not
been properly completed, including supporting documentation, (2) the
employer has learned from other individuals, media reports, or any
source of information available to the employer that the alien is
unauthorized to work, or (3) the employer acts with reckless disregard
for the legal consequences of permitting a third party to provide or
introduce an illegal alien into the employer's work force. Knowledge
cannot be inferred solely on the basis of an individual's accent or
foreign appearance.

Actual specific knowledge is not required. For example, a newspaper
article stating that ballrooms depend on an illegal alien work force
of dance hostesses was held by the courts to be a reasonable ground
for suspicion that unlawful conduct had occurred.

IT IS ILLEGAL FOR NONPROFIT OR RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATIONS to knowingly
assist an employer to violate employment sanctions, REGARDLESS OF
CLAIMS THAT THEIR CONVICTIONS REQUIRE THEM TO ASSIST ALIENS. Harboring
or aiding illegal aliens is not protected by the First Amendment. It
is a felony to establish a commercial enterprise for the purpose of
evading any provision of federal immigration law. Violators may be
fined or imprisoned for up to five years.

Encouraging and Harboring Illegal Aliens

It is a violation of law for any person to conceal, harbor, or shield
from detection in any place, including any building or means of
transportation, any alien who is in the United States in violation of
law. HARBORING MEANS ANY CONDUCT THAT TENDS TO SUBSTANTIALLY
FACILITATE AN ALIEN TO REMAIN IN THE U.S. ILLEGALLY. The sheltering
need not be clandestine, and harboring covers aliens arrested
outdoors, as well as in a building. This provision includes harboring
an alien who entered the U.S. legally but has since lost his legal
status.

An employer can be convicted of the felony of harboring illegal aliens
who are his employees if he takes actions in reckless disregard of
their illegal status, such as ordering them to obtain false documents,
altering records, obstructing INS inspections, or taking other actions
that facilitate the alien's illegal employment. Any person who within
any 12-month period hires ten or more individuals with actual
knowledge that they are illegal aliens or unauthorized workers is
guilty of felony harboring. It is also a felony to encourage or induce
an alien to come to or reside in the U.S. knowing or recklessly
disregarding the fact that the alien's entry or residence is in
violation of the law. This crime applies to any person, rather than
just employers of illegal aliens. Courts have ruled that "encouraging"
includes counseling illegal aliens to continue working in the U.S. or
assisting them to complete applications with false statements or
obvious errors. The fact that the alien is a refugee fleeing
persecution is not a defense to this felony, since U.S. law and the UN
Protocol on Refugees both require that a refugee must report to
immigration authorities without delay upon entry to the U.S.

The penalty for felony harboring is a fine and imprisonment for up to
five years. The penalty for felony alien smuggling is a fine and up to
ten years' imprisonment. Where the crime causes serious bodily injury
or places the life of any person in jeopardy, the penalty is a fine
and up to twenty years' imprisonment. If the criminal smuggling or
harboring results in the death of any person, the penalty can include
life imprisonment. Convictions for aiding, abetting, or conspiracy to
commit alien smuggling or harboring, carry the same penalties. Courts
can impose consecutive prison sentences for each alien smuggled or
harbored. A court may order a convicted smuggler to pay restitution if
the alien smuggled qualifies as a victim under the Victim and Witness
Protection Act. Conspiracy to commit crimes of sheltering, harboring,
or employing illegal aliens is a separate federal offense punishable
by a fine of up to $10,000 or five years' imprisonment.

Enforcement

A person or entity having knowledge of a violation or potential
violation of employer sanctions provisions may submit a signed written
complaint to the INS office with jurisdiction over the business or
residence of the potential violator, whether an employer, employee, or
agent. The complaint must include the names and addresses of both the
complainant and the violator, and detailed factual allegations,
including date, time, and place of the potential violation, and the
specific conduct alleged to be a violation of employer sanctions. By
regulation, the INS will only investigate third-party complaints that
have a reasonable probability of validity. Designated INS officers and
employees, and all other officers whose duty it is to enforce criminal
laws, may make an arrest for violation of smuggling or harboring
illegal aliens.

State and local law enforcement officials have the general power to
investigate and arrest violators of federal immigration statutes
without prior INS knowledge or approval, as long as they are
authorized to do so by state law. There is no extant federal
limitation on this authority. The 1996 immigration control legislation
passed by Congress was intended to encourage states and local agencies
to participate in the process of enforcing federal immigration laws.
Immigration officers and local law enforcement officers may detain an
individual for a brief warrantless interrogation where circumstances
create a reasonable suspicion that the individual is illegally present
in the U.S. Specific facts constituting a reasonable suspicion include
evasive, nervous, or erratic behavior; dress or speech indicating
foreign citizenship; and presence in an area known to contain a
concentration of illegal aliens. Hispanic appearance alone is not
sufficient. Immigration officers and police must have a valid warrant
or valid employer's consent to enter workplaces or residences. Any
vehicle used to transport or harbor illegal aliens, or used as a
substantial part of an activity that encourages illegal aliens to come
to or reside in the U.S. may be seized by an immigration officer and
is subject to forfeiture. The forfeiture power covers any conveyances
used within the U.S.

RICO -- Citizen Recourse

Private persons and entities may initiate civil suits to obtain
injunctions and treble damages against enterprises that conspire to or
actually violate federal alien smuggling, harboring, or document fraud
statutes, under the Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
(RICO). The pattern of racketeering activity is defined as commission
of two or more of the listed crimes. A RICO enterprise can be any
individual legal entity, or a group of individuals who are not a legal
entity but are associated in fact, AND CAN INCLUDE NONPROFIT
ASSOCIATIONS.

Tax Crimes

Employers who aid or abet the preparation of false tax returns by
failing to pay income or Social Security taxes for illegal alien
employees, or who knowingly make payments using false names or Social
Security numbers, are subject to IRS criminal and civil sanctions.
U.S. nationals who have suffered intentional discrimination because of
citizenship or national origin by an employer with more than three
employees may file a complaint within 180 days of the discriminatory
act with the Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment
Practices, U.S. Department of Justice. In additon to the federal
statutes summarized, state laws and local ordinances controlling fair
labor practices, workers compensation, zoning, safe housing and rental
property, nuisance, licensing, street vending, and solicitations by
contractors may also apply to activities that involve illegal aliens.
>
>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Eventually, the U.S. *might* get so crowded that we have to
>>>>>>>put some limits up, but I see no reason to worry about that now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Head/sand...
>>>>>
>>>>>	Pull your head out and see the real world for a change.
>>>>
>>>>I have, it's getting kinda crowded, doncha think?
>>>
>>>	Not really.  I still have slightly over an acre of land around
>>>the house.  Traffic is pretty good.  Of course, I spent a good number
>>>of years in Chicago, so what one might think of as horrible, I see as
>>>easy.
>>
>>Welcome to the great midwest, try LA some time.
>
>	I've visited the LA area.  It's a nice place, more or less.
>Still, if I were going to live in a big city, I would prefer Chicago.

I don't doubt that.

>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>We're a LONG way away from that.  And once the Baby-Boomers start
>>>>>>>dying off, the population will have a net decrease, so more immigrants
>>>>>>>will be needed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>That's possible.
>>>>>
>>>>>	Time will tell, of course.
>>>>
>>>>Depends on what we define as an optimal population size.
>>>
>>>	There is not definition for that.
>>
>>Why yes there is, but I doubt you have much background in biology or
>>economics to measure it with.
>
>	Why not make it easy for me, and anyone else interested, and
>give the definition.
>	I have a very strong background in biology, so I would have no
>problem understanding that aspect of the definition.  I've taken some
>econ courses, but I'm certainly no expert. I can, however, study up on
>that aspect of the definition you give.

http://www.overpopulation.com/faq/natural_resources/carrying_capacity.html

The one definition which Cohen concedes has some bearing on human
beings is that of population size in an open-access resource. Some
such as Ronald Lee or Garrett Hardin have referred to reproduction as
an example of the "tragedy of the commons" -- children impose external
costs which are born by society rather than the parents (at the
extreme end, for example, society pays the bulk of the cost of
juvenile delinquents). Of course as critics such as Julian Simon point
out, society also enjoys the bulk of external benefits of children as
well (the positive contributions of Lee and Hardin to the population
debate, for example, are not enjoyed exclusively by their respective
set of parents).

       Although the debate rages between the two camps, as Cohen
rightly argues:

    It is possible for economists, demographers and others to take
passionately held and opposite positions about the net external
benefits or net external costs of each additional birth because, to my
knowledge, these externalities have never been quantified precisely.
There are many difficulties in doing so (Cohen 1996, p.259).

       In fact as Cohen alludes to later in his book, it may be
impossible to quantify precisely the net benefit or cost of each
additional child because at its core it may revolve around political
and moral judgments rather than objective analysis of facts, because
the answer is closely tied to what the individual observer values.

       The way these sort of value judgments interact in determining
any sort of carrying capacity are illustrated in Cohen�s discussion of
the numerous questions which must first be answered before the
question of "how many people can the Earth support?" can be examined.
He lists 11 questions which are,

            1. How many at what level of material well-being?

            2. How many with what distribution of material well-being?

            3. How many with what technology?

            4. How many with what domestic and international political
institutions?

            5. How many with what domestic and international economic
arrangements?

            6. How many with what domestic and international
demographic arrangements?

            7. How many in what physical, chemical and biological
environments?

            8. How many with what variability or stability?

            9. How many with what risk or robustness?

            10. How many for how long?

            11. How many with what values, tastes and fashions? (Cohen
1995, p.262)