RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies

RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/23/2015 2:25:34 PM)
it would seem to me that those who knowingly hire illegals constantly could (or should be) tried under rico.

epiphiny43 -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/23/2015 4:17:01 PM)
People claiming to want smaller govt. while asking for 'sealing the border' are laughably delusional. Or math illiterate. We can't AFFORD the bodies on the ground and most certainly can't afford the physical structures and infrastructure to block simple peasants from defeating the 'fencing'. Priced out fencing by the foot that even actually delays an assault by just Harbor Freight cordless reciprocating saws? My Goggling says we have 1933 MILES of fence and barriers to construct? Kids with spades dig under what they don't have the tools to cut through? And this is just the 'walk over' illegal immigration. Then there is all that water border, airports and 'tourist visa' flows. All the illegal Asians and S. Americans working in my community came in on airliners through Customs. People with functional brains and some understanding of Ecology are in horror of the collateral damage of any massive fencing project. The footprint of any effective policing program is probably even more socially disruptive for the border areas. The problem with legal immigration is simple, it takes massive restructuring of 'legal' quotas to even begin to supply the numbers that illegals offer the US economy. I'm wondering just who can get the huge increases in quotas through the various special interest mine fields of the current congress? Or the funding for the required bureaucracy to manage it. Figuring out how to reduce the drug hunger of middle class Americans and fix the many dysfuntional effects of the multi-national favoring NAFTA to return some stability and growth to the Central American economies takes real effort and thought, not the knee jerk brain dead emphasis on the symptom of illegals instead of the real source of the forces behind mass migration. I'm in doubt the endemic corruption of the Latin cultures fixes during our lifetimes. It well predates the Discovery of the Americas.The US version is just better disguised as Wall Street?

BamaD -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/23/2015 5:55:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin I'm not even willing to talk about a solution until we actually seal the southern border. That would be the first step to my version of immigration reform, as that is the first step to the solution. Maybe not my 1st step, but definitely one of the firsts. I do believe kicking up the teeth of the penalties for employers knowingly hiring illegals should be stiffer. Maybe securing the border (can't really "seal" it, and there have been people who have argued against border solutions based on someone using the phrase "seal the border") and stiffening the penalties would be co-first steps. lol Yes these things should happen at the same time. My earlier point was that before you could prove that the employer didn't take proper precautions you have to prove that they actually hired illegals. So the first step in that process is to prove they are illegal. If the government says it is ok for them to be here, even though they are illegal I don't see how you can prosecute the employer.

BamaD -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/23/2015 5:57:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: epiphiny43 People claiming to want smaller govt. while asking for 'sealing the border' are laughably delusional. Or math illiterate. We can't AFFORD the bodies on the ground and most certainly can't afford the physical structures and infrastructure to block simple peasants from defeating the 'fencing'. Priced out fencing by the foot that even actually delays an assault by just Harbor Freight cordless reciprocating saws? My Goggling says we have 1933 MILES of fence and barriers to construct? Kids with spades dig under what they don't have the tools to cut through? And this is just the 'walk over' illegal immigration. Then there is all that water border, airports and 'tourist visa' flows. All the illegal Asians and S. Americans working in my community came in on airliners through Customs. People with functional brains and some understanding of Ecology are in horror of the collateral damage of any massive fencing project. The footprint of any effective policing program is probably even more socially disruptive for the border areas. The problem with legal immigration is simple, it takes massive restructuring of 'legal' quotas to even begin to supply the numbers that illegals offer the US economy. I'm wondering just who can get the huge increases in quotas through the various special interest mine fields of the current congress? Or the funding for the required bureaucracy to manage it. Figuring out how to reduce the drug hunger of middle class Americans and fix the many dysfuntional effects of the multi-national favoring NAFTA to return some stability and growth to the Central American economies takes real effort and thought, not the knee jerk brain dead emphasis on the symptom of illegals instead of the real source of the forces behind mass migration. I'm in doubt the endemic corruption of the Latin cultures fixes during our lifetimes. It well predates the Discovery of the Americas.The US version is just better disguised as Wall Street? So we surrender? The sudden liberal devotion to smaller government and less spending on this issue is like the conversion of some to tates rights when the issue of ccws being recognized everywhere like driver's license, it reeks of insincerity.

slvemike4u -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/23/2015 6:52:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin I'm not even willing to talk about a solution until we actually seal the southern border. Good luck with that, as an open border is the goal Not much of a secret And who,in your opinion,is responsible for that ?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 3:38:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin I'm not even willing to talk about a solution until we actually seal the southern border. That would be the first step to my version of immigration reform, as that is the first step to the solution. Maybe not my 1st step, but definitely one of the firsts. I do believe kicking up the teeth of the penalties for employers knowingly hiring illegals should be stiffer. Maybe securing the border (can't really "seal" it, and there have been people who have argued against border solutions based on someone using the phrase "seal the border") and stiffening the penalties would be co-first steps. lol Yes these things should happen at the same time. My earlier point was that before you could prove that the employer didn't take proper precautions you have to prove that they actually hired illegals. So the first step in that process is to prove they are illegal. If the government says it is ok for them to be here, even though they are illegal I don't see how you can prosecute the employer. I see your point, but he didn't EO amnesty. The President suspended deportation for a great many. That we're not deporting them doesn't make them legally here, nor does it change that they are still illegal aliens. Btw, what does any of this (and I'm not calling you out specifically, because I've added to it, too) have to do with Kansas' restrictions on EBT usage?!? lol

MercTech -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 6:40:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail it would seem to me that those who knowingly hire illegals constantly could (or should be) tried under rico. Interesting point. I can't see it being a RICO issue just for hiring an undocumented worker. But, if it could be shown that the business owner was participating, even as the end user, of human trafficking; that might be grounds for seizure of the whole business and all assets under RICO.

BamaD -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 6:40:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin I'm not even willing to talk about a solution until we actually seal the southern border. That would be the first step to my version of immigration reform, as that is the first step to the solution. Maybe not my 1st step, but definitely one of the firsts. I do believe kicking up the teeth of the penalties for employers knowingly hiring illegals should be stiffer. Maybe securing the border (can't really "seal" it, and there have been people who have argued against border solutions based on someone using the phrase "seal the border") and stiffening the penalties would be co-first steps. lol Yes these things should happen at the same time. My earlier point was that before you could prove that the employer didn't take proper precautions you have to prove that they actually hired illegals. So the first step in that process is to prove they are illegal. If the government says it is ok for them to be here, even though they are illegal I don't see how you can prosecute the employer. I see your point, but he didn't EO amnesty. The President suspended deportation for a great many. That we're not deporting them doesn't make them legally here, nor does it change that they are still illegal aliens. Btw, what does any of this (and I'm not calling you out specifically, because I've added to it, too) have to do with Kansas' restrictions on EBT usage?!? lol I have been wondering the same thing. Once it was demonstrated that the Idea behind the op was trash I left for a couple of days and when I came back the subject had changed to this.

Aylee -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 6:52:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail it would seem to me that those who knowingly hire illegals constantly could (or should be) tried under rico. Interesting point. I can't see it being a RICO issue just for hiring an undocumented worker. But, if it could be shown that the business owner was participating, even as the end user, of human trafficking; that might be grounds for seizure of the whole business and all assets under RICO. Hiring illegals means you do not pay taxes on them which is defrauding the government. Hence, RICO. [:D]

cloudboy -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 8:16:31 AM)
The big expenses in the state’s budget of more than $6 billion are pensions, Medicaid and K-12 education. With the deficit estimated at $650 million for the fiscal year beginning in July, Mr. Brownback proposed overhauling how each of those areas was funded. He also has called for cutting state agency budgets and making operations more efficient to save money. Most notably, he called on lawmakers to rewrite the school funding formula, which has been the subject of a hotly debated lawsuit that has bounced around the state’s court system. While lawmakers contemplate how to rewrite the formula, the governor has suggested funding the schools over the next two fiscal years with block grants rather than through the traditional method. This has raised concern among some school advocates about whether districts would be shortchanged. How do you thinking funding education through "block grants" will go? See also: http://cjonline.com/news/2015-03-31/kansas-tax-revenue-112-million-less-expected-march

MercTech -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 9:02:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail it would seem to me that those who knowingly hire illegals constantly could (or should be) tried under rico. Interesting point. I can't see it being a RICO issue just for hiring an undocumented worker. But, if it could be shown that the business owner was participating, even as the end user, of human trafficking; that might be grounds for seizure of the whole business and all assets under RICO. Hiring illegals means you do not pay taxes on them which is defrauding the government. Hence, RICO. [:D] Defrauding the government is not necessarily racketeering. And hiring a few undocumented workers might not be organized crime. Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act Naa, RICO wouldn't kick in unless you could prove an organized crime ring was involved.

BamaD -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 10:04:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail it would seem to me that those who knowingly hire illegals constantly could (or should be) tried under rico. Interesting point. I can't see it being a RICO issue just for hiring an undocumented worker. But, if it could be shown that the business owner was participating, even as the end user, of human trafficking; that might be grounds for seizure of the whole business and all assets under RICO. Hiring illegals means you do not pay taxes on them which is defrauding the government. Hence, RICO. [:D] Defrauding the government is not necessarily racketeering. And hiring a few undocumented workers might not be organized crime. Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act Naa, RICO wouldn't kick in unless you could prove an organized crime ring was involved. But RICO gives them a way to stick it to business men while giving illegals a pass. After all giving the illegals a pass is what immigration reform is all about.

Aylee -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 10:22:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail it would seem to me that those who knowingly hire illegals constantly could (or should be) tried under rico. Interesting point. I can't see it being a RICO issue just for hiring an undocumented worker. But, if it could be shown that the business owner was participating, even as the end user, of human trafficking; that might be grounds for seizure of the whole business and all assets under RICO. Hiring illegals means you do not pay taxes on them which is defrauding the government. Hence, RICO. [:D] Defrauding the government is not necessarily racketeering. And hiring a few undocumented workers might not be organized crime. Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act Naa, RICO wouldn't kick in unless you could prove an organized crime ring was involved. I don't know. They got the teachers that were cheating for organizing to defraud the government. http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/former-atlanta-educators-sentenced-for-cheating-scandal/

slvemike4u -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 5:29:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: epiphiny43 People claiming to want smaller govt. while asking for 'sealing the border' are laughably delusional. Or math illiterate. We can't AFFORD the bodies on the ground and most certainly can't afford the physical structures and infrastructure to block simple peasants from defeating the 'fencing'. Priced out fencing by the foot that even actually delays an assault by just Harbor Freight cordless reciprocating saws? My Goggling says we have 1933 MILES of fence and barriers to construct? Kids with spades dig under what they don't have the tools to cut through? And this is just the 'walk over' illegal immigration. Then there is all that water border, airports and 'tourist visa' flows. All the illegal Asians and S. Americans working in my community came in on airliners through Customs. People with functional brains and some understanding of Ecology are in horror of the collateral damage of any massive fencing project. The footprint of any effective policing program is probably even more socially disruptive for the border areas. The problem with legal immigration is simple, it takes massive restructuring of 'legal' quotas to even begin to supply the numbers that illegals offer the US economy. I'm wondering just who can get the huge increases in quotas through the various special interest mine fields of the current congress? Or the funding for the required bureaucracy to manage it. Figuring out how to reduce the drug hunger of middle class Americans and fix the many dysfuntional effects of the multi-national favoring NAFTA to return some stability and growth to the Central American economies takes real effort and thought, not the knee jerk brain dead emphasis on the symptom of illegals instead of the real source of the forces behind mass migration. I'm in doubt the endemic corruption of the Latin cultures fixes during our lifetimes. It well predates the Discovery of the Americas.The US version is just better disguised as Wall Street? So we surrender? The sudden liberal devotion to smaller government and less spending on this issue is like the conversion of some to tates rights when the issue of ccws being recognized everywhere like driver's license, it reeks of insincerity. No we don't surrender....but we don't do stupid just for to satisfy the whining of tin foil dingbats who need to see something,anything done.

slvemike4u -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 5:40:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail it would seem to me that those who knowingly hire illegals constantly could (or should be) tried under rico. Interesting point. I can't see it being a RICO issue just for hiring an undocumented worker. But, if it could be shown that the business owner was participating, even as the end user, of human trafficking; that might be grounds for seizure of the whole business and all assets under RICO. Hiring illegals means you do not pay taxes on them which is defrauding the government. Hence, RICO. [:D] Defrauding the government is not necessarily racketeering. And hiring a few undocumented workers might not be organized crime. Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act Naa, RICO wouldn't kick in unless you could prove an organized crime ring was involved. But RICO gives them a way to stick it to business men while giving illegals a pass. After all giving the illegals a pass is what immigration reform is all about. "Business men " can do no wrong in your eyes eh ? An interesting example of ideological blindness for sure [:)]

BamaD -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 6:30:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail it would seem to me that those who knowingly hire illegals constantly could (or should be) tried under rico. Interesting point. I can't see it being a RICO issue just for hiring an undocumented worker. But, if it could be shown that the business owner was participating, even as the end user, of human trafficking; that might be grounds for seizure of the whole business and all assets under RICO. Hiring illegals means you do not pay taxes on them which is defrauding the government. Hence, RICO. [:D] Defrauding the government is not necessarily racketeering. And hiring a few undocumented workers might not be organized crime. Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act Naa, RICO wouldn't kick in unless you could prove an organized crime ring was involved. But RICO gives them a way to stick it to business men while giving illegals a pass. After all giving the illegals a pass is what immigration reform is all about. "Business men " can do no wrong in your eyes eh ? An interesting example of ideological blindness for sure [:)] And a gross distortion of what I said, as usual.

slvemike4u -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 6:39:28 PM)
Well than explain it to me....someone talks about actually prosecuting those that break the law and all of a sudden mister law and order himself see's a political agenda at work. Explain it ,I'll try to understand [:)]

BamaD -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 6:45:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Well than explain it to me....someone talks about actually prosecuting those that break the law and all of a sudden mister law and order himself see's a political agenda at work. Explain it ,I'll try to understand [:)] Simple explanation, you can't read. I said repeatedly that prosecuting the employers for hiring illegals requires that you first prove that the employees are illegal. When people try to get around prosecuting the illegals there must be a reason for it. In fact if you had paid attention you would have seen that once they prove someone knowingly hired illegals they should make an example of them. BTW both the illegals and the employers are breaking the law, why do you just want to prosecute the employers unless you want to give the illegals a pass?

slvemike4u -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 7:34:44 PM)
You win a kewpie doll where you find the post where I expressed a desire to prosecute employers while giving the illegals a pat on the back. You are starting to make sanity look......for want of a better word,sane

BamaD -> RE: Kansans can't spend cash assistance on bras or undies (4/24/2015 8:03:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u You win a kewpie doll where you find the post where I expressed a desire to prosecute employers while giving the illegals a pat on the back. You are starting to make sanity look......for want of a better word,sane I didn't say you did, I said the interest in RICO was a way to stick it to the employers while giving the illegals a pass. And do you now admit that I said both should be prosecuted or are you going to stick to that fabrication.

Page: << < prev 10 11 [12] 13 14 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.152344E-02