There should be a lesson to be learned by the observation that the Berlin Wall has come down. We may be able to monitor traffic but we will never be able to totally control it. Besides, once Canada buys up the U.S.A. over future economic concerns, the issue will be addressed, n'est ce pas? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Um let's see here you seem to be discussing a Amsterdam type scenario. Here in the U.S.? I would not be for that...
Considering the fact that cannabis prohibition has not worked since it was enacted more than 80 years ago, is not working now and will not work in the future (remember - magical thinking is when you try the same thing over and over hoping for a different result), that prohibition costs the US a huge chunk of money (border interdiction, law enforcement, judicial, incarceration, broken families etc etc) and that the majority of US citizens want it completely legalized, pray tell why a minority's prejudice should continue to dictate US national policy. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The prohibition of some "drugs" (bearing in mind that the US government defines a treadmill as "drugs") is irrational, irresponsible and arbitrary. Marijuana has never killed a single person in more than 8,600 years of recorded human use yet taking a double dose of OTC Tylenol can kill you quite dead, tobacco has been proven to cause cancer and alcohol kills a ton of us every year. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! When cannabis was originally banned because it was touted as the drug of choice of African, Chinese and Latino Americans. It also competed with Randolph Hearst's tree plantations for domestic paper production - he led the fight to ban cannabis so he could make a fortune selling his wood pulp, thus the term "yellow journalism". A bunch of 'upright moral' white citizens thought that "negro men" would smoke cannabis and then go out and rape white women. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Another bunch of citizens thought that cheap Mexican (who all smoke pot, of course) labour was "taking away American jobs" (sound familiar?) so a bill was put together to ban cannabis. The South refused to participate unless tobacco and alcohol were excluded so those became referred to as "substances" rather than "drugs" so the newly formed "Drug Enforcement Agency" would have no control over them and the South - which depended(s) on tobacco and alcohol production for revenue would be excluded from DEA control. I deeply appreciate that some of us think that trying to force our fellow US citizens to adhere to our religious or moral beliefs should be attempted even if it means bankrupting the country, that is a minority viewpoint that flies in the face of of "democratic" rule and we cannot afford it - it is just too expensive. I am tired of my tax money being pissed away on stuff that is not cost - effective. The government costs too much and needs to cut its expenses. Part of doing that is dropping 'moral legislation' laws against an individual choosing to ingest "substances" in the privacy of their own home, choosing to cohabit with a person of the same sex and the like. The US federal law against possession and use of cannabis is based on its designation as a "class 1 substance" and "being of no medical use" which has repeatedly been proven false by medical science. I find it irrational that you can own and play with an AK 47 or an AR 15 but you can't smoke pot in the privacy of your own home.
Interesting restatement of that homily. It's usually derided as insanity, not "magical thinking." Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Our laws always lag behind cultural trends, and that's not a bad thing. Fads come and go and it would be chaotic if they were all enshrined in law. Still, the objections to marijuana have always been purely cultural and not scientific--and also a little of something else. "Us white folks don't use it. Real Americans just get drunk." -- "It's only them dumb hippie kids who use it. Adults just get drunk." But even after the State of Montana demonstrated that wider availability of marijuana reduces drunk driving and that stoned drivers are safer than drunk drivers (every old hippie already knew that), the official resistance to relegalization clearly panders to the alcohol (and pharmaceutical) industries and has nothing to do with the will of the people. Three men in a row admitted to smoking pot yet managed to become such intelligent, well-educated and motivated citizens that they were elected President--and none of them tried to stare down Big Booze and Big Pharma--both selfish, irresponsible killers! Although it is native to Asia, its popularity spread rapidly and by the 3rd millennium BCE it was known in Europe. Its well-documented medicinal properties, notably for asthma relief and more recently for nausea relief and appetite stimulation after chemotherapy, are widely appreciated. Evidence has been found of its use in England in Shakespeare's day, so it's no surprise that it became cultivated in Latin America. It was generally unknown in the USA in the 19th century, but, especially after WWI, it was brought in by Mexican immigrants, which is why we adopted its Spanish name, whose etymology is unknown. Although it has been known in China since antiquity, at this time the Chinese were more known for smoking opium--a situation generally blamed on the British, which is a long, sad and fascinating story for another thread. Jazz musicians have a reputation for trying out new ways of finding inspiration, so they quickly adopted it, and thus it made its way into the Afro- and Euro-American communities. Through thousands of years of civilization, it's been established that you can't legislate morality.
Sadly though, it hasn't stopped folks from trying that. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I agree. The focus has to be on ensuring no quarter given by US citizens trying to cash in on the slave-like situation illegals put themselves into. Heres where we disagree. Expensive crops ensure high prices are paid to the workers. It is the CHEAP food that marginalizes the field hands. I used to work the fields and there were no illegals around me. It was 50% college kids who made enough money in the fields to pay for school. 1/4 of the people in the fields struggled with some kind of physical hardship (bad backs from construction, polio survivors). Farming is a complex circle that can be self-defeating. Too much product drives the price down resulting in the farmer planting more crops to compensate for lower prices, flooding the market. Personally (and in part due to field experience) I try to avoid crops that I know are illegal migrant worker dependent. I know what it was like to work the fields and make a living wage. I did it. Its not like that anymore. Except we are not offering them a lot of money. Thats why whole families are out there dawn 'till dusk breaking their backs and living 10-20 people to a trailer http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/146343/ Answer? Get rid of migrant farm worker programs. If a farmer cant afford to pay americans to do the job, then dont plant the crops. Sorry but plenty of americans are living in campers in N. Dakota because they make a good wage (and its hard work they are doing).
I also have worked in those fields, chopping cotton is no picnic either. I have worked with immigrants as well as dirt - poor American citizens who also come from a pretty hard place. However, the reality is that crops were left in the fields last growing season here in the US of A because crackdowns on illegal immigrants kept them from doing their chosen work. I deeply appreciate that they do not make as much as a lot of us in the US do, but when you are used to breaking your back for a few pennies a day, doing that for a few dollars a day is a major improvement. Perhaps when the US government drops all of those farm subsidies we can get a better idea what the true price of agricultural products is so we can make better decisions about what we are willing to pay for what consumable goods. Just whacking the farmers is not going to fix that though, just like just whacking the illegals doesn't fix things. ...and don't forget those pesky commodity exchanges that ramp up the price of dam near everything due to rampant computer - actuated for - profit margin speculation by people concerned only with their personal profit. :bugeye: While the common 'wisdom' is to create more and more legislation and then hire more and more LEO to enforce that legislation, that scenario is also subject to that "point of diminishing marginal returns". I do not wish to live in a Police State, even though my papers are in order, mien fuhrer. I do not want to piss away any more of my hard earned tax dollars and see the country go even further into debt to pay for more laws and more law enforcement. Enough already. That has not worked, is not working and thus will not work - period. Time to try something different.
We have the right to keep and bear arms. You know that you "carry and pack heat". It don't say in the constitution we have a right to get "stoned and high on cannabis". Next you might say since it says keep we don't need to own them.
Cotton chopping qualifies as no picnic Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! But its because of the employers not following the rules. The illegals should never have been in their fields to begin with. Its not much different than a drug dealer crying about not being able to make money because of DEA busts. Illegals drove the wages down. N. Dakotas oil fields show americans are willing to do back breaking labor in migrant farmer conditions (ie no home, living in tents and campers). hmmm... thats not much different than the southern plantation owners argument for slavery (hey they are better off than roaming africa)... I agree that farm subsidies needs a closer look. But thats detracting from the topic. Cracking down on illegals should create a similar result. Farmers planting crops they can harvest without the slave-like labor situation we have with the illegals. Agreed fully. 1992 and the Clinton Admin... Except we didnt enforce the laws and thats what created this 11 million illegals problem.
The Berlin wall was only about 90 miles long,http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...qoHYCQ&usg=AFQjCNFytPq3DDIUdq18XQh_lWeJAr1wxw then there was only some barbed wire strung out which anyone, at night, could crawl over. So even then during Russia's so called prevention of East Berliners escaping could not , they actually did by the thousands! So the wall wasn't like the border fence America has built, which is hundreds of miles long and patrolled 24/7 but only a make shift arrangement that was used to psychologically hold the people from escaping.
No, but both Washington and Jefferson grew and smoked cannabis as was quite as common as brewing up whiskey which they were also involved in. The government has no business telling anyone what they can do to themselves. You own you, period. So we need more cops to catch more illegals so we can detain them, feed them, care for them, try them, and deport them to where they can and do just turn right around and come back? Lather, rinse, increase, repeat? I refuse to pay for that, bottom line. You want it, you fund that turkey brother, cause we US citizen taxpayers cannot pay for it.
You're paying for it now. http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/201...s-illegal-immigrant-families-receive-welfare/ http://articles.latimes.com/2010/sep/05/local/la-me-illegal-welfare-20100906 And 20 years later: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/aug/8/slow-path-to-progress-for-us-immigrants/?page=all
If we think that way , we could say the same thing about all criminals. There's about a 80 % chance that criminals , once released from jail, will become repeat offenders, so why bother puting them through "the system" if we all know most will go back onto to the streets and commit more crimes? I'd think your logic is flawed, to a degree, because at least the money we spend goes to try and preventing illegals from coming here for once they know they can be found then might not return which is better than letting them stay here and not pay taxes and take citizens jobs away from them. Should we stop trying to catch criminals that kill others as well, that way we won't need taxes at all for the police to find those who break any laws.
Uh...in my humble opinion there is a significant difference between someone who wants to do extremely hard manual labor that no American will do to feed their family and an American citizen who rapes and kills children, kills large numbers of strangers or gets caught DUI for the 32nd time after running a red light and killing a pedestrian. You are entitled to believe differently, of course. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Have a good time busting those 11 million illegals that are already here and what - putting them in prison? Export them to....? Kill them off with your AR 15? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
If the employers would not hire them and pay them under the table they would not survive in America very long. It is the emplyers who could be the key into finding the illegals and not hire them or turn them in whenever they try to work. You seem to be fortgetting about the 10 million or more citizens already here in America that are out of work and looking. Who takes their plight into consideration when the illegals enter into America and take their jobs away from them ? Illegals broke the laws in many ways, where do you stop and draw the lines as to who should and should not be prosecuted? Illegals don't pay income taxes, which is tax evasion a very serious offence and must have false ID's which is another serious offence. Then they came into America illegally perhaps put their children in public schools, illegally, which takes away places for American citizens in those schools. How can you side with criminals like that? What in your mind justifies that kind of a person? Would you leave America and go to another country if you had problems finding work here? Would you take the jobs of another person who lived in that country? If so then I think you are not being very understanding of anothers plight where they live.
You DO realise that immigration INCREASES the amount of work available don't you? Ie all those people need to SPEND that money too, so they buy food and clothes and phones and go to the movies or whatever and OTHER people get employed to cater for those needs
Agreed. They would become a drain on the system and contribute to crime instead of working and paying taxes. They do. They are out of work because they refuse to do the jobs that immigrants do (i.e. picking crops.) If they would rather not work, that's their choice. But their choice does not equal my plight; they are rejecting the jobs that immigrants take. Anyone who has harmed someone else, or put someone else's life at risk. ========================= Illegal immigrants pay Social Security tax, won't benefit While many Americans believe illegal immigrants don't pay taxes, billions of dollars deducted from paychecks issued to undocumented workers... By John Lantigua Cox Newspapers WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — While many Americans believe illegal immigrants don't pay taxes, billions of dollars deducted from paychecks issued to undocumented workers flow to the Social Security Administration (SSA) every year. Those workers almost certainly will never see that money again. Social Security officials keep a record of wages that do not match up with real names and numbers in their system. The record is called the earnings suspense file. In 2009, the last year for which figures are available, employers reported wages of $72.8 billion for 7.7 million workers who could not be matched to legal Social Security numbers. ============== Many illegal immigrants pay up at tax time Updated 4/11/2008 10:53 AM By Travis Loller, Associated Press NASHVILLE — The tax system collects its due, even from a class of workers with little likelihood of claiming a refund and no hope of drawing a Social Security check. Illegal immigrants are paying taxes to Uncle Sam, experts agree. Just how much they pay is hard to determine because the federal government doesn't fully tally it. But the latest figures available indicate it will amount to billions of dollars in federal income, Social Security and Medicare taxes this year. One rough estimate puts the amount of Social Security taxes alone at around $9 billion per year. ============================ Nope. School money is allocated by census, and census takers count illegal aliens. No "spots are taken away." Side with someone willing to risk jail to work hard and pay taxes, the benefits of which they generally never see? Willing to do what it takes to ensure a better life for their children? Sounds like my kind of person. (Which shouldn't be a surprise; my grandparents came to the US with little more than the clothes on their backs.) If they didn't want to do it? Sure, why not?
