If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
The ones that use real SS# also claim dependents of up to fourteen so
they get less deducted at each payday. After a year, they come back with different SS# and these slimey employers know this and don't care. Why would they need to come back with a new SS #? -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message newsxvPe.282087$_o.58618@attbi_s71... Perhaps we should arm the copter with machine guns and fire back? No, that would be barbaric. However, I am continually amazed at the vociferous opposition to actually controlling our borders. For some reason the ACLU and a host of other do-gooder organizations find it anathema for America to actually restrict immigration to legal immigrants only -- a fact that baffles me. We are friends with a family from Columbia. They came to America the hard way -- legally -- and have struggled over the last decade with obtaining green cards for their family members, and with becoming American citizens. It has been a tough row to hoe, and they are rightfully proud of their efforts and status. They are also the most vocally anti-Mexican group of people I have EVER known. Their attitude toward illegal immigrants borders on Fascist -- they simply despise them for cheating and taking the easy way -- at what they see as their expense -- and I am sure they would advocate following this poster's (I hope) tongue-in-cheek suggestion to arm the border patrol helicopters with machine guns. But what is so wrong with stopping illegal immigration? Why is it okay to fly helicopters up and down the Rio Grande 24/7 -- at huge expense -- but building a fence is seen as some sort of "Berlin Wall"-type of deal? Very simple.....votes. Upset the Latino community and its all over. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Very simple.....votes. Upset the Latino community and its all over.
Illegals can't vote. Only US citizens can. If the (legal) Latino community gets upset at the suggestion of tougher border control, they are insulting their own people by implying all, or most, Latinos are criminals. Doh! Frankie |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Frankie" wrote in message k.net... Very simple.....votes. Upset the Latino community and its all over. Illegals can't vote. Only US citizens can. If the (legal) Latino community gets upset at the suggestion of tougher border control, they are insulting their own people by implying all, or most, Latinos are criminals. Doh! Frankie Listen to the Latino community leaders. You are dead wrong. Every time talk of closing the border is mentioned they get on the racist band wagon. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Stadt" wrote in message ... "Frankie" wrote in message k.net... Very simple.....votes. Upset the Latino community and its all over. Illegals can't vote. Only US citizens can. If the (legal) Latino community gets upset at the suggestion of tougher border control, they are insulting their own people by implying all, or most, Latinos are criminals. Doh! Frankie Listen to the Latino community leaders. You are dead wrong. Every time talk of closing the border is mentioned they get on the racist band wagon. That's the "leaders"; listen to the average Joe (or should I say "Jose"). See post about AZ's Prop 200. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Listen to the Latino community leaders. You are dead wrong. Every time
talk of closing the border is mentioned they get on the racist band wagon. Exactly. Many Latino leaders feign offense and claim racists are trying to keep out Latinos. This is standard practice, and is very effective. It scares people away from the issue. But look what's happened: If trying to keep out illegal immigrants equates to racism, and Latino leaders claim offense, they have unwittingly associated all Latinos with illegal immigrants (criminals). Thus they've just insulted the whole Latino community by insinuating all Latinos came here illegally; that the whole lot of them has no interest in coming to America legally! It's twisted logic. Frankie |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Stadt" wrote in message t... Very simple.....votes. Upset the Latino community and its all over. When Arizona passed it's Prop 200, the highest percentage block voting FOR it (some 75% or so) was the legal/2nd generation Hispanics. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Perhaps we should arm the copter with machine guns and fire back?
No, that would be barbaric. Why? A rock can certainly bring down a civilian helicopter if it hits something critical - a rotor disc, an oil or fuel line, whatever. Military helicopters are armored against this - but as a result they weigh a ton (literally that - or more) and cost a fortune to operate. If this happens too low to autorotate but too high to put down without energy, the pilot and passenger(s) will be injured or killed. Why is it barbaric for the pilot to shoot back? But what is so wrong with stopping illegal immigration? It would make servants something only the very rich could afford. Actually, what illegal immigration does is distort our economy and stifle progress. Let me give you an example. Most of the pilots at my home field don't cut their own grass. They have someone come out to do it. It's miserable work - riding a mower in the hot sun, loading and unloading equipment - but the price is quite reasonable. It works out to something like $15-$20 hr on a contract basis. The guy shows up in a truck with an old gas-powered tractor (that spews lots of hydrocarbon into the atmosphere) and does all the work. I suspect that he clears maybe $10/hr at best, with no benefits, when you figure in travel time and his expenses, and it's seasonal work at that. This (like most of the jobs illegals do) could be automated - but not trivially. What's necessary is a mower with some intelligence. It would know where the boundaries of the property are, and what parts of it are to be mowed, and it would have some simple sensors to keep from running over the neighbor's kid (or cat). It would peobably be electric - which would mean a limited operation time, as it would have to go back to its station and recharge every 30 minutes - but since it would never forget what it already did, that would be no big deal. All the pieces are there - this would be no more complicated than industrial automation - but there's no incentive. It would cost about $3 million to design and test the thing, and the first batch you sold would have bugs that would need to be worked out. Since most people wouldn't buy one (they would just hire the illegals) you would never recoup the R&D cost - you would need to sell 50,000 of them in the first two or three years to make it work, and the first batch would probably cost $1000 each in such low volumes Of course it would be a lot different if you had to pay someone a living wage to do the job. Then the cost would be more like $60/hr, and people would buy the thing even at $800. Of course as the volume increased and the patents ran out, the price would fall to where there it was cheaper than a gasoline riding mower. This is just one example, but it's fairly typical. Cheap labor is always the enemy of automation, and certain segments of our economy are addicted to cheap labor. In the long run, of course, automation is cheaper than even the cheapest labor (unless you're willing to have people working and STILL living in a squalor most of us would find deplorable) but the industries that develop automation can't afford to think in the long term. If it doesn't have a 3 year payback and a 15% ROI, it won't happen. Michael |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On 26 Aug 2005 11:15:19 -0700, "Michael"
wrote: This (like most of the jobs illegals do) could be automated - but not trivially. What's necessary is a mower with some intelligence. It would know where the boundaries of the property are, and what parts of it are to be mowed, and it would have some simple sensors to keep from running over the neighbor's kid (or cat). It would peobably be electric - which would mean a limited operation time, as it would have to go back to its station and recharge every 30 minutes - but since it would never forget what it already did, that would be no big deal. All the pieces are there - this would be no more complicated than google search for automatic lawn mower comes up with 162,000 hits, including production electric robotic lawn mowers already for sale... |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Michael wrote:
the first batch you sold would have bugs that would need to be worked out So much for the cat or kid, eh? Laugh - Andrew |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAVs to share civil airpace by 2008? | Thomas J. Paladino Jr. | Piloting | 15 | April 11th 07 11:58 PM |
"New helicopters join fleet of airborne Border Patrol" | Mike | Rotorcraft | 1 | August 16th 04 09:37 PM |
Who's At Fault in UAV/Part91 MAC? | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 72 | April 30th 04 11:28 PM |