A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Something I read in the News



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old December 19th 18, 04:59 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Frank Krygowski[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 10,538
Default Something I read in the News

On 12/18/2018 3:53 PM, wrote:
On Monday, December 17, 2018 at 7:38:58 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 12/17/2018 9:58 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
Today's Bangkok Post had an article entitled "US careens towards
government shutdown". From reading the article it seems that the
President wants a 5 billion dollar budget for the Mexican Wall and
Congress doesn't want to give it to him.

5,000,000,000 divided by 1,954 miles is what? $25,588,536.33 a mile
(that may be wrong as I'm not used to working with really big numbers)
but even for the largest economy in the world that seems a tiny bit
expensive, doesn't it?


That can't be true! When he was campaigning he promised Mexico was going
to pay for the wall! I heard him say so!

That darn Bangkok Post must be pushing fake news.

--
- Frank Krygowski


Did you also hear that we have a new North American Free Trade Act that makes 5 billion seem like chickenfeed? Or doesn't that count with you? Mexico HAS already paid for it.


But Trump is still demanding money for it! Tom, you need to contact him
and let him know that problem is solved! You'll be his hero!

Hey, he may even give you a job!

(Chief of Staff should be open again pretty soon.)

--
- Frank Krygowski
Ads
  #42  
Old December 19th 18, 05:20 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
news18
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,131
Default Farm labnourer

On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:18:27 -0800, Frank Krygowski wrote:

The
farm owner said he couldn't get "regular Americans" to do the work. They
wouldn't put up with the job for more than one day.


We get that bleat over here as well, but my 2c is that the farmer/
industry are responsible for their own predicament.

It is not so much just the "job" but the other stuff that goes with it
nowadays. Over here, in the past, during various work/study breaks I'd
check the harvest timetable, load up the bicycle with camping gear and
sally forth for the experience and extra income.

You'd arrive in town, check the workers wanted board, choose what you
wanted to do and head off to talk to the farm about what was required
and where you could camp. That stage has now disappeared behind online
"entities" where you have to register, sign away all your rights and
liberties and be noting more that an on-site casual who gets work if they
need you.

First the experienced farmers moved on and "buinesses with managers
became involved" and you'd loose valuable time waiting for the clowns to
get organised with basic stuff like not enough buckets, not enough
ladders, not enough working tools, not enough bins, nothing to record
bins, no idea of how many bins needed to be picked, no idea of which
fruit needed to be picked and on and on.

Then the week would roll round and there would be chucks taken out that
you weren't told about, union, "insurances", TAX (WTF, at the maxium rate
35%) and nil/dodgy paperwork. At least with paperwork,you would get any
excess back within 15 months.

Later you'd be lucky to survive a week where there wasn't a sudden inrush
of extra labourers because num-nuts could not do basic maths on how many
workers they needed initially to get the job done in time, so all your
mutual worker co-operation went up the spout as these short term bozos
were all me-me-me.

Some farmers managed to make all their workers sick by telling everyone
to camp around the farm dam and use the "toilet" facilities just up the
slope. Armies throughout history have learn that is what yu don't do. So
gummint stepped in with regulations about proper approved accommodation
being required, aka cheap jerry built that offered rat, flea and other
vermin accommodation for most of the year.

So you ended up having to paying money to a camping ground operator to
pictch your tent and then travel to and from the farm each day. At that
stage, for anyone with any home/family, any financial incentive to
actually do this work evaporated.

On top of that farmers put the job of selling their produce to
"marketers" who all basically courted the big two chain supermartkets by
offering produce at lower and lower prices and really cutting the fat out
of their operations.

One of the activities SWMBO'd & I did was organising the food for clubs
were were involved with from 10-40 for a week or up to 400 peole for a
weekend. One of the wrinkles to keep costs down was going to the state
farmers wholesale market and buying in bulk. When you could get the basic
vegetable bulk for $20 for 24hours for 400 people you know that there can
not be any fat for the farmers.

As far as I'm concerned, farmers have backed themselves into the corner
they are now in with their labour deficit.

Also seen similar problems in industry, especially when they start
"outsouring" the labour providers.
  #43  
Old December 19th 18, 06:01 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Jeff Liebermann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,018
Default Something I read in the News

On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:18:27 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

And it's not even necessarily big firms. When you need your grass
cut and you check the bulletin board at the grocery store, you
call around for the best price. You don't say "Oh, and let me see
your citizenship papers." Hell, it recently came out that Trump has
had (and probably still has) illegal immigrants working for him.
- Frank Krygowski


It's much worse than that. My father used to own a lingerie
manufactory in Smog Angeles. He would hire as best he could from the
constantly churning labor pool moving back and forth between the
aerospace and the garment district. Of course, illegal aliens were
mixed in with the legal immigrants. It was actually fairly easy to
tell. At the time (about 50 years ago) he was faced with the problem
of how to deal with having as many as 10 individual workers using the
same identical social security number. So, he walked across the
street, where the offices of the Calif Unemployment Dept was located
and asked for help. He was told to do nothing, and to never ask a
worker to prove that they were legally in the USA. Huh? Apparently,
the privacy laws are more important than dealing with illegal aliens.
I verified this advice by independently asking the same questions. We
could not legally ask a worker to prove that they were in the USA
legally. When my father had a stroke and I temporarily took over the
business in 1986, nothing had changed. This worked out nicely for
employers, where this policy allows them the claim that they had no
way to know that they were hiring an illegal alien (i.e. plausible
denial).

Fortunately, this changed recently under Trump where it is now
possible to verify green cards and immigration status:
https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/new-e-verifygov-website-user-friendly-source-verify-employment-eligibility
https://www.e-verify.gov
https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central
If Prez Trump still has illegal aliens on his payroll, he probably
didn't bother to check their status since E-Verify checks are
voluntary to employers.
https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/about-form-i-9/e-verify-and-form-i-9

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
  #44  
Old December 19th 18, 06:30 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B. Slocomb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Something I read in the News

On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 21:56:16 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 12/18/2018 6:07 PM, AMuzi wrote:

To say a wall is insufficient or ineffective or too expensive is an
argument, and I would engage that. To say there is no problem is
ridiculous.


I personally don't know anyone who thinks there is no problem. But
sadly, I do know a few who still insist that Trump is absolutely right
to demand an entire border, solid concrete, actual wall. It's simplistic
nonsense, but that is what the guy promised, after all.

Oh, and it's going to be beautiful, too. He said so!

Maybe we can get a couple thousand miles of murals? Portsmouth, Ohio did
that on a couple thousand feet of their flood wall. (And those really
are worth seeing.)
http://www.ohiorivertourism.org/murals.html


One of the problems is that the Mexicans apparently know what ladders
are so without sufficient to "man" the wall it can't do much to
prevent people crossing the wall... Hadrian's wall was believed to
have a manning of something like 756 permanently stationed on the wall
itself, about 10 per mile, or so, and there were additional
forts" that were estimated to require 1000 - 1500 troops per fort.

The Israeli wall, I believe, is manned by soldiers who shoot those who
attempt to cross illegally. Will the U.S. be shooting Mexicans?


cheers,

John B.


  #45  
Old December 19th 18, 06:34 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B. Slocomb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Something I read in the News

On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 22:19:12 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 12/18/2018 8:02 PM, wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 10:18:29 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 1:56:23 AM UTC-5, John B. Slocomb wrote:

I wonder why the U.S. doesn't follow Thailand in matter of illegal
immigrants. Here the only individuals that qualify for government
assistance of any sort are citizens , or, in some cases, legal workers
who pay taxes. Illegal immigrants are liable to jail terms but are
usually just extradited to their home country. AND, those who employ
illegal workers are liable to a 1 year jail term and a large fine. I'm
not sure about it but Thai law usually assigns one penalty per crime
committed, i.e., two illegal workers equals two years and double fine,
etc.

While finding that one will be hanged in a fortnight is said to
concentrates the mind wonderfully I also find that "no food unless you
earn it" tends to ensure that most people will be gainfully employed.

Well, I think this issue is extremely complex. Some salient points:

First, the U.S. is a nation of immigrants. During most of its history
it needed to actively import people to make use of the huge amount
of virgin land, to do farm work, to build railroads, to keep the
factories running. That's how and why my grandparents came here.

It's still true that lots of businesses - agriculture and everything
else, from lawn care to manufacturing - want cheap labor. There must
be thousands of businesses owned by people all across the political
spectrum who depend on people with questionable papers who are
willing to work for less.

And I think for most of those people, it's not a question of "no work
so no food" policies chasing them home. They work and work hard.
I read a couple articles last year about tomatoes rotting in fields
because the people who used to pick them were now too afraid to work.
The farm owner said he couldn't get "regular Americans" to do the
work. They wouldn't put up with the job for more than one day.

There's also the bit about asylum. I once helped a foreign guy get
asylum, albeit unwittingly. (He asked me to write him a letter
inviting him to visit. When he landed, he applied for and received
asylum.) Because of its history, the US has laws allowing people to
seek asylum. I suppose some might want to go back in time and stop
those laws from being written. But odds are they were logical when
written, and are probably fairly logical now.

The big influx from Central America certainly contains many people
who are literally fleeing for their lives. From what I've read, some
of that is precipitated by past U.S. policies in Central America.
And I'll note that one relative of mine works for an agency that
supports refugees in some ways. There are horrible stories to hear.

Also, I think there's little comparison between U.S. and Thailand.
This is a huge country with an enormous economy and lots of
prosperity. There's a long, long land border with Mexico, a much
poorer country. That means there's a lot of motivation to sneak
across that border and serious difficulty preventing the crossings.

Which is not to say Trump's wall would really work. It would stop
those walking across, probably a small percentage. Until, perhaps,
the ladder was invented.

Overall, it's a complicated problem. America is filled with know-
nothings who think every problem is easy. But this problem would
be tricky even if millions of people didn't make millions of dollars
by hiring illegal immigrants. Those people - many of whom are well
connected politically - will stand in the way of any fierce
enforcement against firms that employ these people.

And it's not even necessarily big firms. When you need your grass
cut and you check the bulletin board at the grocery store, you
call around for the best price. You don't say "Oh, and let me see
your citizenship papers." Hell, it recently came out that Trump has
had (and probably still has) illegal immigrants working for him.

- Frank Krygowski


It certainly is enlightening to have an actual teacher with his stupid socialist point of view blithering away at the open air.

No country can survive an entrance of so many immigrants that they cannot become assimilated and that in general takes at least three generations. More if they are forced to live in their own little towns like the Chinatowns or black projects.

Expecting open borders to so anything in America than what it did to ancient Greece or Rome or the middle east shows that your education is sadly lacking.

Even China built the Great Wall and kept their civilization until the onslaught of communism which almost destroyed the nation as Mao slaughtered people because he could.

So now we get the socialist ignorance from a teacher. Who is surprised?

Tell us one civilization that survived unlimited immigration. Tell us one country that survived socialism.


Who was talking about unlimited immigration? Is that a
concussion-triggered hallucination?


I've come to the conclusion that as the individual you are replying to
seems unable to reply in a logical manner that the only solution is to
simply ignore him.

cheers,

John B.


  #46  
Old December 19th 18, 07:41 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B. Slocomb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Something I read in the News

On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 22:55:39 -0500, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 12/18/2018 8:34 PM, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:18:27 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski wrote:


Much Deleted


Well, I think this issue is extremely complex. Some salient points:

First, the U.S. is a nation of immigrants. During most of its history
it needed to actively import people to make use of the huge amount
of virgin land, to do farm work, to build railroads, to keep the
factories running. That's how and why my grandparents came here.

Yes, that is certainly true. BUT your ancestors didn't believe that
they could come to the "New World" and go immediately into government
funded housing, get essentially free medical case and even receive
money "for not working"?


I don't think that's what's usually happening.
https://immigrationforum.org/article...blic-benefits/

As Will Rogers said, "all I know is what I read in the newspaper"
See: https://tinyurl.com/y93g28cf

It's still true that lots of businesses - agriculture and everything
else, from lawn care to manufacturing - want cheap labor. There must
be thousands of businesses owned by people all across the political
spectrum who depend on people with questionable papers who are
willing to work for less.


At one time Mexican workers has some sort of "green card" that allowed
them to enter the U.S. and work as seasonal workers.


AFAIK, that's still the system. I've worked with PhD professors here on
Green Cards. They were (and maybe still are) legal permanent residents,
permitted to work here.

But nearly half of illegals are people who entered the country legally
(for example, with student visas) and when their time was up, simply
chose to stay and remain under the radar. Those people are rather
difficult to find. And the biggest wall on earth won't change how they
got here.


My wife's younger brother's son did his Masters in the U.S. and wanted
to immigrate. No dice says the Immigrations. He married a Thai girl
that was also attending school in the U.S. and after a civil ceremony
in the U.S. he brought his bride home to Thailand where they had the
full monte. I was talking to him while they were here he told me that
he and his wife plan to have a baby, born in the states, before their
student visa expires, which will allow he and his wife to get a visa
to stay and take care of this new citizen. Which they did.

But he is a "good guy" and using family money he opened a business in
the U.S. and both he and his wife were studying U.S. history and
government with the intent of applying for citizenship as soon as
possible.

My point is that these two foreigners knew, and planned, exactly what
to do and who to talk to and what to say, to stay in the U.S. And I
would suggest that most immigrants, whether legal or illegal probably
also know.

Last year we had a local guy like that who was caught. His case was
complex and I don't recall all the details - he came here legally,
married a U.S. citizen, later got divorced, tried for years (decades?)
to get the right to stay, was supposedly on that path with help from our
congressman, thought he was on his way to his day in court but instead
was suddenly seized by ICE. He was a very well respected businessman and
a real asset to the community, but he's gone.

And I think for most of those people, it's not a question of "no work
so no food" policies chasing them home. They work and work hard.
I read a couple articles last year about tomatoes rotting in fields
because the people who used to pick them were now too afraid to work.
The farm owner said he couldn't get "regular Americans" to do the
work. They wouldn't put up with the job for more than one day.


As above, when I lived in California, there was some sort of hurrah
about seasonal workers and although they had some sort of papers to
legally enter the U.S. to work in the harvests this practice was
halted and the newspaper said that USians who were on relief would
harvest the crops. Again, according to the newspaper, on the first day
there was a pretty good turn out, on the second day about half as many
showed up and by the third practically nobody came. The Paper pointed
out that the difference in income between working and being on relief
was something like $2 a day more to pick lettuce, or whatever.... In
the hot sun? All day?


There's also the bit about asylum. I once helped a foreign guy get
asylum, albeit unwittingly. (He asked me to write him a letter
inviting him to visit. When he landed, he applied for and received
asylum.) Because of its history, the US has laws allowing people to
seek asylum. I suppose some might want to go back in time and stop
those laws from being written. But odds are they were logical when
written, and are probably fairly logical now.


I do believe that the U.S. carries "asylum" to a rather ridiculous
extreme. Some years ago there was a furor here in the news paper about
a fellow who fled Thailand for the U.S. seeking asylum... for
insulting the king.

Now, insulting the king has been against the law in Thailand from the
earliest days that Thailand existed and the law is spelled out in
sufficient detail that one, likely, can't transgress the law
unknowingly.

So here is an individual who knowing violated an age old law in
Thailand and is granted asylum in the U.S.?


I don't know much about U.S. asylum laws. The guy I helped was fleeing
communism, and I really didn't have a lot of contact with him after he
landed and applied for asylum.

But in his case, he didn't go on welfare. He got jobs painting trucks
and doing roofing, IIRC. Then he got a decent job due to his EE degree.
He did well enough and rose high enough that he represented his
international communications company in London for many years. He and
his wife now own a ranch in Colorado where he's retired from
engineering. Hardly a public housing case.


My Hungarian friend had several years of trials and tribulations in
Europe before he finally was able to get with an international oil
company that allowed him to move to the U.S.

The big influx from Central America certainly contains many people
who are literally fleeing for their lives. From what I've read, some
of that is precipitated by past U.S. policies in Central America.
And I'll note that one relative of mine works for an agency that
supports refugees in some ways. There are horrible stories to hear.


Yes, as long as you only hear one side of the story.


You're probably right. I ought to get in touch with the gang-raping
soldiers and see what those women did to deserve it...

Also, I think there's little comparison between U.S. and Thailand.
This is a huge country with an enormous economy and lots of
prosperity. There's a long, long land border with Mexico, a much
poorer country. That means there's a lot of motivation to sneak
across that border and serious difficulty preventing the crossings.

"a long, long land border"? Thailand has 4,863 km (3,021 miles) of
land boundaries with 4 countries, of which the three with the longest
borders have significantly lower standards of living and where people
are almost literally standing in line to get to the land with the
golden pagodas.

The U.S., in contrast has 1,954 miles bordering a country with a
significantly lower standard of living :-)


What's the income disparity on the two sides of that border? Between the
U.S. and Mexico, it's roughly four to one. And for a lot of the
Guatemalans, it's more a matter of life and death.



Which is not to say Trump's wall would really work. It would stop
those walking across, probably a small percentage. Until, perhaps,
the ladder was invented.


Just from reading the newspaper there seem to have been tunnels dug,
airplanes and even boats, to allow drug runners and of course illegal
workers to cross the border.


Overall, it's a complicated problem. America is filled with know-
nothings who think every problem is easy. But this problem would
be tricky even if millions of people didn't make millions of dollars
by hiring illegal immigrants. Those people - many of whom are well
connected politically - will stand in the way of any fierce
enforcement against firms that employ these people.

And it's not even necessarily big firms. When you need your grass
cut and you check the bulletin board at the grocery store, you
call around for the best price. You don't say "Oh, and let me see
your citizenship papers." Hell, it recently came out that Trump has
had (and probably still has) illegal immigrants working for him.

- Frank Krygowski


Rather like the highway speed laws. You got 'em but you don't obey
'em.

Over the years I have lived for a number of years in Singapore where
laws are rigidly enforced ...


I've read about a lot of that enforcement. But there's no way that's
going to be accepted here in America. Whether it's good or bad, it's fact.


In the military I found that it isn't the law that people most object
to it is anything different.

I was in a squadron that was the best in everything, venereal
diseases, AWOL rate, court martial, etc. Then one day a new Colonel
was assigned with, obviously, orders to sort that bunch out.

The following Monday notices appeared on all bulletin board listing
all possible offences and the punishment. More then 5 minutes late to
work - 7 days in the brig, etc.

You never heard so much weeping and complaining, but you know, in a
month or so it became normal to get to work on time and nobody seemed
to remember what life was like back in the bad old days.

I do think that those who hire illegal immigrants should somehow be
stopped. But as usual, it's not as easy as it sounds.


cheers,

John B.


  #47  
Old December 19th 18, 07:55 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
John B. Slocomb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 805
Default Something I read in the News

On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 21:01:34 -0800, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:18:27 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

And it's not even necessarily big firms. When you need your grass
cut and you check the bulletin board at the grocery store, you
call around for the best price. You don't say "Oh, and let me see
your citizenship papers." Hell, it recently came out that Trump has
had (and probably still has) illegal immigrants working for him.
- Frank Krygowski


It's much worse than that. My father used to own a lingerie
manufactory in Smog Angeles. He would hire as best he could from the
constantly churning labor pool moving back and forth between the
aerospace and the garment district. Of course, illegal aliens were
mixed in with the legal immigrants. It was actually fairly easy to
tell. At the time (about 50 years ago) he was faced with the problem
of how to deal with having as many as 10 individual workers using the
same identical social security number. So, he walked across the
street, where the offices of the Calif Unemployment Dept was located
and asked for help. He was told to do nothing, and to never ask a
worker to prove that they were legally in the USA. Huh? Apparently,
the privacy laws are more important than dealing with illegal aliens.
I verified this advice by independently asking the same questions. We
could not legally ask a worker to prove that they were in the USA
legally. When my father had a stroke and I temporarily took over the
business in 1986, nothing had changed. This worked out nicely for
employers, where this policy allows them the claim that they had no
way to know that they were hiring an illegal alien (i.e. plausible
denial).

Fortunately, this changed recently under Trump where it is now
possible to verify green cards and immigration status:
https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/new-e-verifygov-website-user-friendly-source-verify-employment-eligibility
https://www.e-verify.gov
https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central
If Prez Trump still has illegal aliens on his payroll, he probably
didn't bother to check their status since E-Verify checks are
voluntary to employers.
https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/about-form-i-9/e-verify-and-form-i-9


A good friend used to run am illegal machine shop somewhere in L.A. a
bit earlier. He had three "Screw Machines" in his garage. Screw
machines are automated lathes, from before the modern CNC machines
became common, so the operators mainly watched the machine and gauged
an occasional finished part.

He employed Mexican women and said that they didn't come to work hung
over, they didn't want off early on Saturday to watch the game, and
they were happy with a half hour lunch break :-)

cheers,

John B.


  #48  
Old December 19th 18, 05:52 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,261
Default Something I read in the News

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 5:34:29 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 10:18:27 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 1:56:23 AM UTC-5, John B. Slocomb wrote:

I wonder why the U.S. doesn't follow Thailand in matter of illegal
immigrants. Here the only individuals that qualify for government
assistance of any sort are citizens , or, in some cases, legal workers
who pay taxes. Illegal immigrants are liable to jail terms but are
usually just extradited to their home country. AND, those who employ
illegal workers are liable to a 1 year jail term and a large fine. I'm
not sure about it but Thai law usually assigns one penalty per crime
committed, i.e., two illegal workers equals two years and double fine,
etc.

While finding that one will be hanged in a fortnight is said to
concentrates the mind wonderfully I also find that "no food unless you
earn it" tends to ensure that most people will be gainfully employed.


Well, I think this issue is extremely complex. Some salient points:

First, the U.S. is a nation of immigrants. During most of its history
it needed to actively import people to make use of the huge amount
of virgin land, to do farm work, to build railroads, to keep the
factories running. That's how and why my grandparents came here.

Yes, that is certainly true. BUT your ancestors didn't believe that
they could come to the "New World" and go immediately into government
funded housing, get essentially free medical case and even receive
money "for not working"?

For what it is worth, my ancestors (on my father's side) paid their
way to the "New World" by agreeing to work some years as indentured
workers.

It's still true that lots of businesses - agriculture and everything
else, from lawn care to manufacturing - want cheap labor. There must
be thousands of businesses owned by people all across the political
spectrum who depend on people with questionable papers who are
willing to work for less.


At one time Mexican workers has some sort of "green card" that allowed
them to enter the U.S. and work as seasonal workers.

And I think for most of those people, it's not a question of "no work
so no food" policies chasing them home. They work and work hard.
I read a couple articles last year about tomatoes rotting in fields
because the people who used to pick them were now too afraid to work.
The farm owner said he couldn't get "regular Americans" to do the
work. They wouldn't put up with the job for more than one day.


As above, when I lived in California, there was some sort of hurrah
about seasonal workers and although they had some sort of papers to
legally enter the U.S. to work in the harvests this practice was
halted and the newspaper said that USians who were on relief would
harvest the crops. Again, according to the newspaper, on the first day
there was a pretty good turn out, on the second day about half as many
showed up and by the third practically nobody came. The Paper pointed
out that the difference in income between working and being on relief
was something like $2 a day more to pick lettuce, or whatever.... In
the hot sun? All day?


There's also the bit about asylum. I once helped a foreign guy get
asylum, albeit unwittingly. (He asked me to write him a letter
inviting him to visit. When he landed, he applied for and received
asylum.) Because of its history, the US has laws allowing people to
seek asylum. I suppose some might want to go back in time and stop
those laws from being written. But odds are they were logical when
written, and are probably fairly logical now.


I do believe that the U.S. carries "asylum" to a rather ridiculous
extreme. Some years ago there was a furor here in the news paper about
a fellow who fled Thailand for the U.S. seeking asylum... for
insulting the king.

Now, insulting the king has been against the law in Thailand from the
earliest days that Thailand existed and the law is spelled out in
sufficient detail that one, likely, can't transgress the law
unknowingly.

So here is an individual who knowing violated an age old law in
Thailand and is granted asylum in the U.S.?

The big influx from Central America certainly contains many people
who are literally fleeing for their lives. From what I've read, some
of that is precipitated by past U.S. policies in Central America.
And I'll note that one relative of mine works for an agency that
supports refugees in some ways. There are horrible stories to hear.


Yes, as long as you only hear one side of the story. Rather like
Somalia where first one side slaughtered the other side and then when
the other side gained power it killed members of the first side. And
then when the first side became dominant... Rather like "Who's on
first".

Also, I think there's little comparison between U.S. and Thailand.
This is a huge country with an enormous economy and lots of
prosperity. There's a long, long land border with Mexico, a much
poorer country. That means there's a lot of motivation to sneak
across that border and serious difficulty preventing the crossings.

"a long, long land border"? Thailand has 4,863 km (3,021 miles) of
land boundaries with 4 countries, of which the three with the longest
borders have significantly lower standards of living and where people
are almost literally standing in line to get to the land with the
golden pagodas.

The U.S., in contrast has 1,954 miles bordering a country with a
significantly lower standard of living :-)

Which is not to say Trump's wall would really work. It would stop
those walking across, probably a small percentage. Until, perhaps,
the ladder was invented.


Just from reading the newspaper there seem to have been tunnels dug,
airplanes and even boats, to allow drug runners and of course illegal
workers to cross the border.


Overall, it's a complicated problem. America is filled with know-
nothings who think every problem is easy. But this problem would
be tricky even if millions of people didn't make millions of dollars
by hiring illegal immigrants. Those people - many of whom are well
connected politically - will stand in the way of any fierce
enforcement against firms that employ these people.

And it's not even necessarily big firms. When you need your grass
cut and you check the bulletin board at the grocery store, you
call around for the best price. You don't say "Oh, and let me see
your citizenship papers." Hell, it recently came out that Trump has
had (and probably still has) illegal immigrants working for him.

- Frank Krygowski


Rather like the highway speed laws. You got 'em but you don't obey
'em.

Over the years I have lived for a number of years in Singapore where
laws are rigidly enforced - S$1,000 fine for spitting on the sidewalk
- there are no ghettos, employment is 97.9%, foreign workers are
carefully controlled. There are about 1.4 million foreign workers
versus about 6 million citizens.

And you know? there are no "gated communities" and the citizens feel
it safe to walk the street' (and people DON'T spit on the sidewalk
:-).

By, the way, talking about the law, the murder rate in Singapore is
0.32/100,000 population, Thailand where murders seem to be common is
3.24/100,000 and the "Land of Opportunity", the U.S. it is
5.35/100,000.

cheers,

John B.


There still is a green card worker permit but why do so with some sleight limitations when you only have to walk across the border.

I had several illegal friends when growing up but finally they moved out into the farming areas and got green cards. This is becoming harder now because these farm workers were really quite expensive since the farmers normally provided housing for the green card holders. So they are now being used for increasingly fewer crops as more and more automation is taking over farm planting, maintenance and harvesting. Even when I was a kid walnuts were harvested by machinery. Other like things were also treated in such a manner.. I'm told though I've never seen it that they also have automated apple harvesting. Grains are all automated. Tomatoes are hand harvested and this is very heavy work. Try growing the kind of tomatoes you find in supermarkets in your backyard. Unless you know the technique you just can't do it.
  #49  
Old December 19th 18, 06:00 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,261
Default Something I read in the News

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 6:13:59 PM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 5:02:48 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/18/2018 5:57 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 3:08:02 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/18/2018 2:41 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 11:40:46 AM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 12/18/2018 12:18 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 1:56:23 AM UTC-5, John B. Slocomb wrote:

I wonder why the U.S. doesn't follow Thailand in matter of illegal
immigrants. Here the only individuals that qualify for government
assistance of any sort are citizens , or, in some cases, legal workers
who pay taxes. Illegal immigrants are liable to jail terms but are
usually just extradited to their home country. AND, those who employ
illegal workers are liable to a 1 year jail term and a large fine. I'm
not sure about it but Thai law usually assigns one penalty per crime
committed, i.e., two illegal workers equals two years and double fine,
etc.

While finding that one will be hanged in a fortnight is said to
concentrates the mind wonderfully I also find that "no food unless you
earn it" tends to ensure that most people will be gainfully employed.

Well, I think this issue is extremely complex. Some salient points:

First, the U.S. is a nation of immigrants. During most of its history
it needed to actively import people to make use of the huge amount
of virgin land, to do farm work, to build railroads, to keep the
factories running. That's how and why my grandparents came here.

It's still true that lots of businesses - agriculture and everything
else, from lawn care to manufacturing - want cheap labor. There must
be thousands of businesses owned by people all across the political
spectrum who depend on people with questionable papers who are
willing to work for less.

And I think for most of those people, it's not a question of "no work
so no food" policies chasing them home. They work and work hard.
I read a couple articles last year about tomatoes rotting in fields
because the people who used to pick them were now too afraid to work.
The farm owner said he couldn't get "regular Americans" to do the
work. They wouldn't put up with the job for more than one day.

There's also the bit about asylum. I once helped a foreign guy get
asylum, albeit unwittingly. (He asked me to write him a letter
inviting him to visit. When he landed, he applied for and received
asylum.) Because of its history, the US has laws allowing people to
seek asylum. I suppose some might want to go back in time and stop
those laws from being written. But odds are they were logical when
written, and are probably fairly logical now.

The big influx from Central America certainly contains many people
who are literally fleeing for their lives. From what I've read, some
of that is precipitated by past U.S. policies in Central America.
And I'll note that one relative of mine works for an agency that
supports refugees in some ways. There are horrible stories to hear.

  #50  
Old December 19th 18, 06:02 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,261
Default Something I read in the News

On Tuesday, December 18, 2018 at 7:19:15 PM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:


So now we get the socialist ignorance from a teacher. Who is surprised?

Tell us one civilization that survived unlimited immigration. Tell us one country that survived socialism.


Who was talking about unlimited immigration? Is that a
concussion-triggered hallucination?


Well by all means tell us what this "we are a country of immigrants" crap is.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The best news is the history you haven't read AMuzi Techniques 2 June 27th 12 04:17 AM
Good news: not doping. Bad news: 1 year suspension Robert Chung Racing 0 May 7th 08 12:37 AM
2300 news articles for victory. 3100 news articles for doping to get there [email protected] Racing 2 July 30th 06 07:52 PM
'Some' news is good news :) flyingdutch Australia 24 September 6th 05 12:20 PM
Good news/bad news from Chicago Paul Turner General 18 November 30th 04 04:54 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.