Legal, illegal, ain't nobody got time for that On Mar 14, 2016 12:53 AM, "Rory Conaway" <[email protected]> wrote:
> You are aware that Obama gutted that legislation illegally? > > > > Rory > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof > *Sent:* Sunday, March 13, 2016 9:47 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Anti-immigration - Puck 1893 > > > > You are aware there was a welfare reform act passed in 1996? > > > > *From:* Rory Conaway <[email protected]> > > *Sent:* Sunday, March 13, 2016 11:13 PM > > *To:* [email protected] > > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Anti-immigration - Puck 1893 > > > > I was specific Ken, “welfare”. If I meant to say Social Security, I would > have said that but I was in a hurry. However, I would also add, > unemployment as a huge, anyone that mysteriously became disabled when their > unemployment ran out, and anyone getting any kind of public assistance. If > you are working and can’t make ends meet, fine then that needs to be > reviewed. If you aren’t working but can and aren’t looking for a job, then > you do public works, work on a farm, or you lose your benefits. And > mandatory drug testing for ANYONE getting a single penny of taxpayer > dollars. > > > > Rory > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On > Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof > *Sent:* Sunday, March 13, 2016 8:56 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Anti-immigration - Puck 1893 > > > > You need to not use the term “welfare check” and be specific what type of > government assistance you are talking about. Unemployment insurance? > Social Security? Medicare/Medicaid? SNAP? Housing assistance? Earned > income tax credit? Lifeline? The answer depends on what kind of > assistance you are talking about. > > > > As an employer who pays into unemployment insurance, I don’t like the guys > I see at home playing video games and collecting unemployment insurance who > could be out working. > > > > And I heard a report once on something like 60 Minutes that disability > fraud is rampant, with crooked lawyers specializing in submitting the > fraudulent paperwork. > > > > But I believe most SNAP cards actually go to working parents with minimum > wage jobs, sometimes more than one job. > > > > My sister with MS needs her Social Security Disability check, she wouldn’t > be much use on a farm. > > > > So it all depends. > > > > It also depends on the type of farm work. In the southwest, they need > seasonal workers to pick crops. By me there are the pig farms that hire a > lot of Hispanic workers, it’s not a very attractive job, but it’s not > seasonal. At least some of the worst jobs are being automated. I saw an > article that they are developing robots to do slaughterhouse work, cutting > up the carcasses. I don’t wish that job even on illegal immigrants. > > > > > > *From:* Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> > > *Sent:* Sunday, March 13, 2016 9:35 PM > > *To:* [email protected] > > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Anti-immigration - Puck 1893 > > > > That's a tough one. > > On one hand, with the government already giving out welfare checks that > could help with labor costs on small and medium farms - work the farm, get > a check. So, what's to encourage a farmer to pay more than minimum wage > (discouraging potential applicants internationally) if he can just tell the > Fed "send me workers". > > I also personally know cases of very good high level workers in various > industries who had problems for over a year finding a job - but once they > finally did after hundreds of applications, they were back to making six > figures or higher. It's hard to work somewhere for 20 years or more and > retire there unless in government or state work. > > Decent idea, but it would need some controls in place so it doesn't cause > inadvertent issues. > > +1 > > On Mar 13, 2016 9:26 PM, "Rory Conaway" <[email protected]> wrote: > > I got to thinking about the labor issue with the farms. I’m having a hard > time understanding how we can have tens of millions of people on government > assistance and we can’t find farm workers. I’d like to make working on > farms or other businesses being a requirement for a welfare check. > > > > Rory > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Josh Reynolds > *Sent:* Sunday, March 13, 2016 7:09 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Anti-immigration - Puck 1893 > > > > Some are here for jobs, some are here to escape massive corruption and > drug cartels. These are jobs that most American's don't want to do - either > the work is "too hard" or pay "too low" - which really the latter is true. > I came from a farm community (Kentucky Tobacco) and have seen how hard they > work. Many have two or three jobs, and they share a trailer and a truck. > They take shifts sleeping on the available beds, and send most of their > checks home to their families to take care of them. Some save to bring > their families here. Very few of these workers were paid minimum wage, but > they were often given a trailer to stay in (for the group). Rows and rows > of trailers per farm. > > You deport these guys, American agriculture will suffer. The farm > subsidies get sucked up by the conglomerates, and the regular guys get very > little. > > The drug demand has nothing to do with illegal or legal. Have you ever > done any drugs? Ever? My guess is no, but I've been wrong before - ask my > wife! Drugs are an escape, a booster, and the harder ones are ruthlessly > addictive, both physically and psychologically. Just once or twice is > enough to make it very difficult if not impossible to overcome by yourself, > if ever. And they are SO CHEAP (meth, heroin). > > On Mar 13, 2016 8:49 PM, "Lewis Bergman" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Really, you think we would have massive illegal immigration if we had no > jobs being offered then? > You also believe that if nobody demanded drugs there would be people > killing each other to get it here? > We can disagree on if punishing a drug user is either right it would make > any difference on then wanting the drug. But you surely cannot argue that > it is demand that drives the supply, not the other way around. > My point is just that the demand for cheap labor and the willingness to > break the law to get it drives illegal immigration. I think you are letting > your desire for penalty fee drug use get in the way of your judgement. > OK, I made that last part up but you really don't understand the basics of > supply and demand? > > > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016, 8:08 PM Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote: > > agreed > > Legal or illegal, has nothing to do with drugs. If people want to do > something they will. > > On Mar 13, 2016 7:28 PM, "Jerry Head" <[email protected]> wrote: > > " Kind of like the drug problem. As long as you don't penalize the user > you get increasing demand." > > This has got to be one of the most ignorant comments I have ever seen on > this list. > Wow.... > > On 3/13/2016 6:35 PM, Lewis Bergman wrote: > > I agree with that. Kind of like the drug problem. As long as you don't > penalize the user you get increasing demand. If you don't punish the > employer you get increasing demand. > > > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016, 2:56 PM Jaime Solorza <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Far less than many believe.... you need documentation which of course can > be faked...but percentage wise more welfare in southern states. Most > undocumented workers fend for themselves holding two or three shit jobs no > one wants. See who is working on highways late at night or in hot sun in > Texas...a white foreman and ton of Hispanics.... I have travelled just > about every rode in Texas.... go to Chile harvests in Hatch,NM. Like I > said..no demand, no supply.... simple Adam Smith theory in action. > > On Mar 13, 2016 1:06 PM, "Lewis Bergman" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Immigration should have been unfettered in 1893 because there was no > welfare state in existence then. The combination of unrestricted > immigration and a comprehensive welfare system has the potential to > bankrupt the U.S. I have no idea if immigrants make up a larger part of the > welfare system than any other, just that the potential is there. > > > > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016, 11:35 AM Chuck McCown <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >
