llegal immigrant rescues boy

[Xavier_Onassis]

neocons are the new jews.

They get blamed for everything.

========================
Except for Dick Cheney, nearly all the neocons are already Jews.

Cheney is more annoying, which makes up for his not being Jewish.

Most Jews aren't Neocons, but most neocpons are Jews.

And they get blamed for everything, because it's their fault.

[BT]

neocons had zip to do with NAFTA.

[Universe Prince]

Because freedom means forfeiting any input into whether or not your country and community get turned into a three ring circus.

I have no idea why you would say that. It makes no sense and does not reflect the reality of the situation at all.

Referring to immigration as "free trade" deserves about as much credibility as referring to sex as "co-ed deep-breathing exercises".

Good thing I didn't do that then. Restricting immigration does, however, infringe on labor trade.

Yes, that may be one of the ancillary effects, but anyone trying to tell you that's the only or even the primary effect is either a liar or an idiot.

I suggest that anyone who tells you trade is not an important part of the situation is either lying to you or doesn't understand the situation.

[Religious Dick]

I suggest that anyone who tells you trade is not an important part of the situation is either lying to you or doesn't understand the situation.

Tell me about that the day my iPod registers to vote, throws garbage on my lawn, organizes a immigration protest, and gets arrested for a DWI.

[Universe Prince]

Would you like to admit murderers, con men, rapists, or others who might become a danger to your fellow ciitzens while they are here demonstrating their right to exchange their labor for money?

Murderers, con men, rapists, ex-convicts and similar folks can traverse the country without being stopped at any state or city border. Perhaps you would like to change that. Or do you want these people to be allowed to roam around free when they might pose a danger to you or your fellow citizens?

How about people with contagious diseases?

Yeah, we need to stop that Mexican flu epidemic... What? There isn't one? Oh.

I see it this way: we and our ancestors built the house, and we should have the right to decide who will live in it.
 

One, it isn't a house. And two, you remind me of the legal agreement my folks were presented with when trying to get the papers signed on buying a house some years ago. The neighborhood was an old one, and part of the original legal agreement was some sort of throwback language about agreeing not to resell the house to people of color, or some such nonsense. Naturally, my parents had that eliminated from the agreement. We don't need artificial barriers to people coming here to work and make a better life for themselves and their families and maybe move into the house next door.

[Universe Prince]

Tell me about that the day my iPod registers to vote, throws garbage on my lawn, organizes a immigration protest, and gets arrested for a DWI.

Now you're just babbling.

[Religious Dick]

Tell me about that the day my iPod registers to vote, throws garbage on my lawn, organizes a immigration protest, and gets arrested for a DWI.

Now you're just babbling.

No, I'm not babbling, and you know it. My point is two-fold. A.)  Immigration is not trade. You can have plenty of trade without immigration. Being denied entry to a country is not an abridgment of a "right" to trade, any more than my not being allowed to peddle  coke and hookers from the lobby of the local high school is. Any alleged right to trade is contingent on obeying other laws in the process. B.) Immigration has other consequences besides trade, and plenty of them. They are not all necessarily good.

[yellow_crane]

neocons had zip to do with NAFTA.

Nafta is the result of corporate expansion of powers, utilization of cheaper labor, and escape from tax responsibility.   

Clinton/Gore, breaking with traditional Democratic dogma, endorsed it as part of their agenda.

Before all the impact could be distilled and realized, compliant Americans, and especially Democratic voters, regarded it as global inevitability.  What they failed to assess was the inevitablility of the loss to the middle and lower classes.   Each day those pains increase in America.

Neocons focus on the imperialial imperatives they believe are a result of the overall plan.

In order to escape collusion, the Neocons would have to erect parameters to exclude them, so your task is to illustrate that they have succeeded in this.

So go ahead . . .

[yellow_crane]

Are there laws prohibiting American corporations and companies from hiring undocumented Mexicans?

Yes.

I am aware.

Now talk about the enforcement, or lack of enforcement, won't you?

[BT]

NAFTA is primarily a domestic issue though it involves freere trade with neighbor countries

NeoCons are not known for domestic policy issues.

If they are, what is their position on Social Security, Gun Laws and Income Tax?

Are they for NCLB or against it?

What is their take on ethanol?

You use Neocon as a catch all pejorative. Inaccurately.

[Plane]

This particular person is illeagal ,but by this deed of kindness has demonstrated that he is the sort of guy that would be a good neighbor.

There is plenty of room for good neighbors  , how is a system to be produced that actually does screen out harm full criminals but does not make criminals out of nice people like this one ?


For this particular guy ? Lets thank him with cash.

[Amianthus]

Now talk about the enforcement, or lack of enforcement, won't you?

It's enforced. Ever have to fill out an I9?

[Plane]

Now talk about the enforcement, or lack of enforcement, won't you?

It's enforced. Ever have to fill out an I9?

In 1996, Congress expanded the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to include violations of federal immigration law.1  While this expansion may not have received much publicity, it could potentially change the face of U.S. immigration law enforcement. Under the new RICO provisions, a violation of certain provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) meets the definition of racketeering activity, also known as a "predicate offense,"2  and an entity that engages in a pattern of racketeering activity for financial gain can be held both criminally and civilly liable.3  Among other things, the INA makes it unlawful to encourage illegal immigration or employ illegal aliens,4  which violations were included as predicate offenses under RICO.

http://www.cis.org/articles/2003/back1103.html


Oh, man , I am sorry I looked!

The 1996 changes in the INA made hiring illegal aliens a predicate act of racketeering activity under RICO, but illegal hiring wasn?t the only violation of the INA made a predicate act. Other INA prohibitions made RICO predicate acts were encouraging or inducing illegal immigration, smuggling, and harboring illegal aliens.10  Together, these additions make the RICO Act potentially a very strong new tool in the hands of private parties against persons and companies that profit by violating U.S. immigration law.

......In Mendoza v. Zirkle Fruit, Olivia Mendoza, the Washington fruit worker, and her fellow employees alleged that their employers "knowingly hired at least 50 undocumented workers per year as part of a scheme to depress employee wages."15  If proven, this allegation would satisfy the predicate offense requirements.


........Injury Suffered by the Plaintiff. In addition to establishing that the defendant has committed a predicate offense, the plaintiff must also show proof of injury. "Under RICO, ?any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962 of this chapter may sue therefore in any appropriate United States district court? for civil damages. 18 U.S.C. ?1964(c)."19 


......... Causation. The third element of a RICO claim ? causation ? has been the most challenging for plaintiffs looking for redress for injuries suffered due to violations of immigration law. In fact, the district courts that dismissed the previously mentioned cases did so based on lack of causation. This element requires that the predicate act committed by the defendant must have caused the injury to the plaintiff.

So anyone who can show that an employer encouraged Illeagal immagration can drag him into court , but proof is tough.

A third RICO case currently in the courts is Trollinger v. Tyson Foods. The facts of Trollinger are very similar to those in Mendoza ? a class of employees sued their employer for conspiring to depress their wages by hiring illegal aliens. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee dismissed the case for failure to state a claim.41 

In reaching its conclusion, the district court relied on arguments similar to those made by the district courts in Commercial Cleaning and Mendoza. In fact, the district court used the opinion from Mendoza, which of course was later reversed, to support its holding. The court applied the "direct relation" test and stated that even though the plaintiffs alleged a direct injury, "the conclusion that Tyson?s hiring of alleged illegal aliens depressed the plaintiffs? wages would require sheer speculation."42  However, this is the exact argument that the Ninth Circuit in Mendoza stated was improper ? "it is inappropriate at this stage to substitute speculation for the complaint?s allegations of causation."43

An additional factor noted by the district court that is unique to Trollinger is that a union that negotiated a collective bargaining agreement, which set the wage rate, represented the plaintiffs. The court reasoned, "As the wage rates were the product of collective bargaining, plaintiffs cannot demonstrate that those rates were ultimately depressed by the presence of alleged illegal aliens in the work force."44  However, the presence of this collective bargaining agreement will likely be seen as merely another factor which could affect wage rates, rather than the sole factor, and so the plaintiffs will likely be given the opportunity to prove that the agreement itself was affected by the employer?s hiring of illegal aliens. It is reasonable to believe that the employer, knowing that it could and would hire illegal aliens at a lower wage rate, offered less to its legal employees during the negotiations surrounding the collective bargaining agreement. Thus, the hiring of illegal aliens would still be a cause of depressed wages.

Wow!

A successful plaintiff is entitled to treble damages, which means threefold the actual injury suffered, plus costs and reasonable attorney?s fees.45

[hnumpah]

For this particular guy ? Lets thank him with cash.

Sure. Then escort him to the border and tell him 'Hasta la vista'.

[Plane]

For this particular guy ? Lets thank him with cash.

Sure. Then escort him to the border and tell him 'Hasta la vista'.

That is the law.

I think this law needs to be reworked till it makes sense.