Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

Welfare, Scholarships, and Programs


HAPe4me
 Share

Recommended Posts

Oh Rocky...such a stickler! LOL OK, I found it on the National Employment Law Project (NELP) website. The first sentence gives the date of the decision: "The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Hoffman Plastic Compounds v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137, 122

S.Ct. 1275, 152 L.Ed.2d 271 (2002),"

***************

templelady,

It makes sense to me...but it doesn't seem to make sense when it all comes out in the wash for some reason. As I said before, I can speak only of those things within my little sphere.

Both my daughter and I and about 800 other people lost our jobs because the company went to another state...and then closed down there and went to Canada. Only approx. 30 people retained employment with company by being hired on in the other state...after moving to the other state, reapplying for a position, losing all benefits, starting at a lower wage ($5/hr less than the starting pay when the company was in our town...and more than $6/hr less than the wage they were receiving when the company closed in our town) and having a 3x longer probationary period before becoming a permanent employee with any benefits. Then after a few months, the company shut down and went to Canada.

This was in a town of 130,000...that had just lost over 1500 jobs.

Last I heard (about 6 months ago), of the 700+ who were 'displaced' after where I worked left town, 300 people left town, 50 got equivalent or better positions (all management), and the rest were under- and unemployed.

I know of 3 locally owned businesses (established over 25 years) that just plain had to shut their doors due to the loss of business from people losing their jobs. About 60 jobs were lost because of these businesses closing.

Then I know of 5 landlords who closed their buildings because of lack of tenants because of all these businesses leaving/closing.

2 major (and locally owned) grocery stores closed down.

It triggered a domino effect.

This makes me wonder just what would happen if a business that has an illegal workforce of 25% (the average I was able to find) and a legal workforce of 75% were to be shut down.

Just thinking out loud here...not arguing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

... that "repugnican" comment wasn't aimed at you anyway... that's what I call elected right wingers... generally speaking. :biglaugh:

AND please don't be putting words in my mouth. Text in RED above (my emphasis of YOUR quote) is NOT from ME...

the text you put in red was not in my quote of you, as I'm sure you know. My quote was accurate ... you are misleading when you call it my quote, but all that use of red and bold distracts from what you really said.
Again, your interpretation is basically upside down. It is repugnicanism which ignores the needs and realities of Americans. It's just that the ones like rhino don't want to address needs of ANYONE... which is obviously a more stark version of repugnicanism.
OK, so the repugnicans are what you called elected right wingers "like me" that "ignore the needs and realities of Americans". As I pointed out, limiting immigration to legals helps the lower class Americans. Amnesty helps the lower class Mexicans and Mexico, at Americans' expense. It's not about you Rocky, it's about your ridiculous statements.

Hopefully the house can stop some of the calls for amnesty which rewards illegals. Many of those new house democrats actually ran on limiting immigration, so maybe there is a little hope left. But generally it is the left that wants amnesty most.

Republicans running for president like to look more moderate, so seem pretty soft on securing our borders. Other Republicans seem resigned to some sort of amnesty and seem to be playing to win the Mexican swing vote. These actions fly in the face of the 80% of the population that want much stricter limits on immigration.

Edited by rhino
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure that Rocky could go into more detail on this if he wants...

Here in Arizona, there were ballot measures concerning the reduction/elimination of benifits for illegal immigrants. Among them is concerning higher education. If you are an illegal immigrant, you now have to pay "out of state" tuition.

Some would say that these measures that passed (and went into law) went too far and others will say that they have not gone far enough. I believe that there will be more innicitavies concerning illegal immigration on future ballots.

Also, based upon the previous ballot innicitavies passing with 70% of the votes, I conclude that the majority of the people in Arizona do not support of illegal immigration.

It is fair to also point out that there are groups and private organizations that do set up "watering point" for illegal immigrants to help prevent deaths.

Edited by Zshot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Iguess that the next layer in this oinion we are peeling is

Are our Immigration laws

To strict

NOt strict enough

weighed too hevily in favor of one group over another?

If they need to be change dwaht and how??

do we need to toughen up deportation for other nationals who misbehave within our borders

what about Diplomatic immunity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a small group of delegates made up of us greasers would solve the problems of our country. How do we get elected? I'll be the front line woman when I'm on edge and kick butt and NOT take names. :biglaugh:

Sure a small group of us could Kathy, but being a minority view, I could not get elected even if votes were confined to "Spotters". :rolleyes:

It is a great discussion, and for the most part pleasant. That part I DO like. I would have difficulty expressing my opinions on some of this without losing my own temper, so I refrain for now. What I have to say would not come close to changing anyones view here. I might just work on our legistors instead. It is an issue I am working on, but do not know at this point if I will ever get back to posting here on it.

~HAP

Children are our legacy to a time we will not see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Iguess that the next layer in this oinion we are peeling is

Are our Immigration laws

To strict

NOt strict enough

weighed too hevily in favor of one group over another?

If they need to be change dwaht and how??

do we need to toughen up deportation for other nationals who misbehave within our borders

what about Diplomatic immunity?

With a somewhat uninformed view I would say they have not been strict enough and these changes to tighten things up is too little too late.

We weigh too heavy in the direction of taking care of countries that are overpopulated and unable to provide for their own.

I don't know what can be done we are so deep into this mess.

Diplomatic Immunity is important not so that someone can be a jerk-wad while in our country, that just shows poor character for the diplomat and should get their butts in trouble when they return to their countries for embarrassing the country they represent. But to take it away would endanger our diplomats going to other countries lest they be held accountable for the sins of this country in the eyes of the country they are visiting. That whole thing was designed to protect everyone involved and I still think that is important. And I would hope the percentage that take advantage of being jerks and going against the laws of the land they were visiting would be small in comparison to the number that make an impact to the good during their stay. Personally I think it needs to stay intact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't it in the Constitution that a child born here is a citizen? Was Temple wanting to change that?

I think there is someone trying to change that now.

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

United States Constitution, Amendment 14, section 1, clause 1

The phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is key. In1898 the Supreme Court interpretted that in light of English Common law, saying only diplomats and foreign armies were not included. The dissenting opinion said we had broken from english common law. They also mentioned lack of assimilation. (In the United Kingdom one parent must be a citizen or legal resident.)

It makes more sense to me that illegals are not subject to our laws by the very fact that they broke our law to get here, so they shouldn't be granted "anchor baby" status, where they can bring their parents and other fmily members in once they reach 21. On the face of it it seems pretty absurd. I'd say we are not going by the constitution, but by this 1898 interpretation. Of course unless that is reversed or the amendment changed, that is the law.

Clearly the lack of assimilation is a large problem. A look at Los Angeles numbers and communities might give one pause on granting citizenship so freely, considering all the foreign families being "anchored" to US citizenship.

From an old Center for Immigration Studies page, "Michael Antonovich of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors states that two-thirds of the births in Los Angeles county hospitals are to illegal aliens. Additionally, Mr. Antonovich notes that these children now account for 30 percent of all AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) cases in Los Angeles County."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is some wisdom in that idea, very interesting.

The name of the country escapes me now but I had a co-worker that described what she had to go thru to gain access for her parents to leave their country to come here for a visit. It was harder for them to get out of their country than it was to gain access into ours. I'm not sure what that tells us but I suspect something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From an old Center for Immigration Studies page, "Michael Antonovich of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors states that two-thirds of the births in Los Angeles county hospitals are to illegal aliens. Additionally, Mr. Antonovich notes that these children now account for 30 percent of all AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) cases in Los Angeles County."

Must be REALLY old... because the AFDC program ceased to exist with enactment of the Welfare Reform Act of 1996... replaced with TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) Block Grants to states allowing the state (of California for example) to determine the structure of welfare assistance programs that followed... but Congress still established time limits on any given family's eligibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TO expand on my idea about babies born in this country to illegals

I would be willing to agree that if their parents reentered this country legally and became citizens of the United States any children that had been born on United States soil would be United States citizens by birth not by naturalization --this means those children could grow up to be president.

And Yeah all those babies born to illegals with automatic citizenship--they can be president too

30-40 years from now do you want this country run by someone who was raised by people who believe that they should be allowed to ignore our laws while milking the system for all it is worth?????

Think it can't happen????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30-40 years from now do you want this country run by someone who was raised by people who believe that they should be allowed to ignore our laws while milking the system for all it is worth?????

Think it can't happen????

It already has happened...imo...and the opinion of many, many others...but it didn't happen because of illegal immigration...just other illegal stuff...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TO expand on my idea about babies born in this country to illegals

I would be willing to agree that if their parents reentered this country legally and became citizens of the United States any children that had been born on United States soil would be United States citizens by birth not by naturalization --this means those children could grow up to be president.

And Yeah all those babies born to illegals with automatic citizenship--they can be president too

30-40 years from now do you want this country run by someone who was raised by people who believe that they should be allowed to ignore our laws while milking the system for all it is worth?????

Think it can't happen????

I coulda sworn you were describing the current prez (and his parents, nicer that they are then him)...

then, after I first posted THIS post, I read CW's and Hap's entries... so, I guess I'm not the only one who thought that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if I could add too much to this right now but I just had to get this off my chest.

Yesterday someone left me a message in another language at work. I understood nada of what she said. I deleted the message and have no intention of returning her call.

Then this morning bowtwi sent me the best email I've seen on this type thing. Which I will post now minus the pictures it included.

This is how ALL business phones SHOULD be answered!

GOOD MORNING, WELCOME TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Press "1" for English.

Press "2" to disconnect until you learn to speak English

And remember...

only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you,

Jesus Christ and the American Soldier.

One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus Christ and the American Soldier.

One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

This email has been going around ever since the illegal war has been going on.

It is SHAMEFUL to describe the sending of young men and women to their death in an illegal war that basically boils down to, 'shouldn't have ph ucked with my daddy and our money' as dying for my freedom.

It is just plain emotional manipulation to make these young men and women be willing to die...and their mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, etc. be willing to send them to their deaths.

Toss in Jesus to make the manipulation sink in deep and feel like God has put His stamp of approval on it all.

VPW could only dream of running such a cult!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CW,

I just love how you knew my intentions of that post.

And that you are so well versed in mine and my husband’s family of serving since WW2.

And of course there has only been one war in your and my life time so how could it have been anything other than related to Iraq.

As well we all Jesus Christ is completely confined to this war in Iraq only.

Thanks for the enlightenment!

Kathy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thought... sure THIS war is a disasterous mistake... but THAT'S not the subject of this thread.

So, I'm not interested on this thread, in discussing the merits of the war in Iraq...

Kathy, I get your point on the email... of course, symbolically, it makes a good point. In practice, it might not be workable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is SHAMEFUL to describe the sending of young men and women to their death in an illegal war that basically boils down to, 'shouldn't have phucked with my daddy and our money' as dying for my freedom.

Don't have to agree with this or any war to appreciate and applaud the courage and devotion of our men and women in the military who selflessly lay down their lives not only for this countries freedom but others as well.

Freedoms that enable our government to provide electricity, receive medical care, disability checks, food etc both those who are here illegally and those of our citizens who don't work, for whatever the reason, all with a minimum of government interference in their lives.

Which is the point of this thread --how we may need a little more interference to weed out the illegals who beneft from same--not to mention those of our own citizenry who milk the system--A topic I have stayed away from - since this is devoted to the Illegal problem in this country--Perhaps I need to start a companion thread on that subject--but need to head to work right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...