Posted on 08/26/2004 4:52:39 PM PDT by AuntB
I honestly think the Mexicans are too jaded to revolt, they've been tolerating this crap for so long. Now that the US safety valve is securely in place, there's even less of a chance.
You leave the party like I am. It doesn't matter when it comes to the most important issue this country is facing, illegal immigration, both parties fail. Vote constitutional party and send a message. The republicans left me, I did not leave them.
the perfect solution would be to have the illegal alien prisoners pick the crops until they complete their sentence and are deported. By then there will be new illegal alien prisoners who can take their place.
And what makes you think there is a real, substanial diference on a host of issues, between the GOP and the Democrats?
Want to get your blood boiling? Check out this article just posted:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1200926/posts
In short, Greenspan is telling us Baby Boomers we'll have to settle for less Social Security benefits. And at the same time they're talking about throwing Social Security open to illegals. Excuse me while I go throw up!
If I had a choice, I would have certainly taken a personal retirement account. There is such resistance against it, but it would be nice to see it happen.
The retirement age has also been raised. Mine will be 67. Future beneficeries will be even older.
I believe mine is, too. I was born in 1959. My husband was born in 1953. I don't know if his has been yet or not. Oh well, there's no reason to worry about "retirement age", IMO, as SS will long have been bankrupted by the invasion from the south.
Is there really, though?! It's an optional thing, and those who've been paying into the system all these years can just keep with Social Security as presently configgered. We've made this promise to our seniors and no one is proposing we abandon our obligations to them...however, we could still offer a better deal to folks in their 40's, 30's, and 20's. Eventually, I'd like to see us allowing folks to achieve some "minimum nest egg" amount, and get outta the FICA payments altogether.
FReegards...MUD
I agree with you entirely. The resistance I spoke of was mostly out of the demoncrats...you'd think we were proposing the plague.
I was just checking over the State Dept. website:
http://usembassy-australia.state.gov/hyper/2004/0107/epf303.htm
This is an interesting briefing that was given when Pres. Bush made the fatal mistake of proposing an amnesty...call it what you will. Here's a snip:
Senior Administration official: Next, it would provide incentives for return to the home country, such as totalization agreements, as we have with several foreign countries around the world, and would create -- call for the creation of savings accounts that could be used for the benefit of the participant for either retirement or for a nest egg to buy land or capitalize a business, or whatever.
Finally, it will protect the rights of illegal workers who now live in the shadows and are fearful of coming out of the shadows, for fear of deportation. They will now enjoy the same protections that American workers have with respect to wages and employment rights and the like.
So that's it, in a nutshell -- principles, calling for a new temporary worker program. It also will call for, in the name of some of the detail, a reasonable increase in the number of green cards. As I hope many of you know that green card holders can then, after five years, elect to become citizens. And we have limitations as to the number of green cards that are available annually. And it would increase some capacity in that regard.
the difference is, if Kerry wins and the Republicans keep Congress, the Congress will get tough on immigration and stifle any amnesty Kerry proposes. A Republican Congress, on the other hand, will go along with President Bush's amnesty.
do you have a source on this? If this is true, Bush can't make it any clearer that he is simply going to ignore those of us who want illegal immigration to stop and is going to assume that we will vote for him anyway.
there would be nothing keeping an illegal from doctoring his work history in Mexico to qualify for a partial benefit in the US, even if he was unemployed for long stretches of time in Mexico. That partial benefit might be greater than what the full benefit would be in Mexico, given the paltry wages down there.
That's really an empty threat when you consider the amount of interior enforcement and investigation of illegals in the workplace that the government does.
bttt
Didn't mean a lighter literally.
:)
Just one to help start the firestorm. We all know that destruction of personal and business property, while demonstrating...Is the domain of the Demoncrats.
marking
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.