(Illegal) Immigration crackdown expands along border

[Scott & Lai 12]

If it was prostitutes or crack dealers doing the same thing...you can be sure it wouldn't go unnoticed by the corrupt bastards running our country. Corporations and businesses get a free pass though. Certain people are above the law.

Excellent point

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

[mawilson 2,133]

They WORKED ILLEGALLY ... they are required to pay taxes on this money ... just like YOU DO when you work in the US

Failure to pay taxes on income ... well you know the expression ... "We're from the IRS ... and we're here to help you"

I suggest YOU and your SO not pay taxes ... please report the results of this experiment.

Hey - there are plenty of US Citizens that don't pay taxes. About HALF actually. Most illegal aliens would probably have zero liability if they did file.

proof ... show the link ... I want to learn how too ...

A lot of them are probably below the minimum earnings threshold -- sucks to be them.

[russ 1]

If it was prostitutes or crack dealers doing the same thing...you can be sure it wouldn't go unnoticed by the corrupt bastards running our country. Corporations and businesses get a free pass though. Certain people are above the law.

There is no shortage of cocaine or hookers here in Florida. Illegal immigrants either for that matter.

[mawilson 2,133]

In my perfect tax system, the IRS would simply divide the budget every year by the number of people in the US, and send everyone a bill. Property taxes, motor vehicle taxes, etc don't take into account one's ability to pay - why should federal income tax be any different?

If they did that, everyone would have to pay $2,000,000 / year in income taxes.

Remember, the top 1% of taxpayers pay more in income taxes than the bottom 90%.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

That was awesome! Was that Cheech as the Padre? LOL ... I'm guessing that was from that double feature...ah my mind's going blank....

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That was awesome! Was that Cheech as the Padre? LOL ... I'm guessing that was from that double feature...ah my mind's going blank....

Its on the Planet Terror DVD.

However... They are actually making that movie...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0985694/

Edited October 29, 2007 by Number 6

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

In my perfect tax system, the IRS would simply divide the budget every year by the number of people in the US, and send everyone a bill. Property taxes, motor vehicle taxes, etc don't take into account one's ability to pay - why should federal income tax be any different?

If they did that, everyone would have to pay $2,000,000 / year in income taxes.

Remember, the top 1% of taxpayers pay more in income taxes than the bottom 90%.

I'm sure some here think that's not enough.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In my perfect tax system, the IRS would simply divide the budget every year by the number of people in the US, and send everyone a bill. Property taxes, motor vehicle taxes, etc don't take into account one's ability to pay - why should federal income tax be any different?

If they did that, everyone would have to pay $2,000,000 / year in income taxes. Remember, the top 1% of taxpayers pay more in income taxes than the bottom 90%.

I'm sure some here think that's not enough.

Remember: Warren Buffet's effective tax rate is lower than that of his secretary. Looks wrong to me. More importantly, looks wrong to Warren himself.

[AmericanGentleman 0]

Deport them? Heh that funny. Have you ever considered the math behind such a concept? Think about the logistics of moving 20 million people by force. The last time something like that happened, it took an act of God..literally(Moses).

The only logical solution is stop the flow first by securing the border, then give those here a path for legalization that starts at the back of the line.

Yeah. The math didn't stop us from going to the moon either.

I do not think you comprehended my post accurately. I did not assert that the math prohibits such a venture, only that it would be an illogical solution.

The resources we spent on going to the moon was worth it. To this day we are reaping the benefits of that venture. Spending a trillion dollars to bus 20 million people across a pourous border only to watch them come back across is a complete waste of time and money and in no way comparable to the Apollo missions.

[AmericanGentleman 0]

Deport them? Heh that funny. Have you ever considered the math behind such a concept? Think about the logistics of moving 20 million people by force. The last time something like that happened, it took an act of God..literally(Moses).

The only logical solution is stop the flow first by securing the border, then give those here a path for legalization that starts at the back of the line.

They should NOT be Allowed a "path to legalization" by remaining in the US, Back of the Line On THEIR side of the border. Then They RE-Enter after 5 year ban and pay fines & penalties.

Then Yes

Curious. What is to be gained by putting them on "their side" of the border? What is to be gained by a 5 year ban? I can certainly understand fines to repay the costs to our social nets and such, but why an abitrary time of 5 years? Punishment?

[mawilson 2,133]

In my perfect tax system, the IRS would simply divide the budget every year by the number of people in the US, and send everyone a bill. Property taxes, motor vehicle taxes, etc don't take into account one's ability to pay - why should federal income tax be any different?

If they did that, everyone would have to pay $2,000,000 / year in income taxes. Remember, the top 1% of taxpayers pay more in income taxes than the bottom 90%.

I'm sure some here think that's not enough.

Remember: Warren Buffet's effective tax rate is lower than that of his secretary. Looks wrong to me. More importantly, looks wrong to Warren himself.

That's probably because he's only paying tax on capital gains - apples and oranges.

Curious. What is to be gained by putting them on "their side" of the border? What is to be gained by a 5 year ban? I can certainly understand fines to repay the costs to our social nets and such, but why an abitrary time of 5 years? Punishment?

You got it.

[AmericanGentleman 0]

Curious. What is to be gained by putting them on "their side" of the border? What is to be gained by a 5 year ban? I can certainly understand fines to repay the costs to our social nets and such, but why an abitrary time of 5 years? Punishment?

You got it.

And when the said offender has been in this country for 10 years and has 2 children in grade school, what is to be the punishment for the children?

A) Taken away from their parents and placed in orphanages and supported by me and you, the taxpayers?

or

B) Sent with the family back across the border without any means of support, food, or shelter?

Yeah, breaking immigration law should come with a penalty. Fines and a long, back of the line process to legal residence. They should have the hardest longest and most expensive path to legalization compared to those who do it the right way, but a path is needed. To just say "deport them all" is:

A) Not economically feasible

B) Not socially/morally feasible

C) Not legally feasible (where anchor babies are concerned)

D) Not logistically feasible.

E) And will never happen because of all of the above.

So now that we have established that we will not deport 20 million people and split up 10's of thousands of families, lets dispense with talk of "punishment" and come up with, as another poster mentioned, a "grown up" solution.

[natty bumppo 297]

And when the said offender has been in this country for 10 years and has 2 children in grade school, what is to be the punishment for the children?

A) Taken away from their parents and placed in orphanages and supported by me and you, the taxpayers?

or

B) Sent with the family back across the border without any means of support, food, or shelter?

Yeah, breaking immigration law should come with a penalty. Fines and a long, back of the line process to legal residence. They should have the hardest longest and most expensive path to legalization compared to those who do it the right way, but a path is needed. To just say "deport them all" is:

A) Not economically feasible

B) Not socially/morally feasible

C) Not legally feasible (where anchor babies are concerned)

D) Not logistically feasible.

E) And will never happen because of all of the above.

So now that we have established that we will not deport 20 million people and split up 10's of thousands of families, lets dispense with talk of "punishment" and come up with, as another poster mentioned, a "grown up" solution.

Well I don't think giving them a "bonus check" and then sending them home is an option. They can always get a job ... or ... rely on their government (novel idea to make their country work ... don't ya think) .... or ... cash out here and return with some funds before they lose everything in legal proceedings.

Send the anchor babies back with the parents. The parents created the child ... now they should be responsible for their actions and how it impacts the child. An anchor baby is just an attempt at legitimacy. The parents made a choice to be here and risk deportation should they be discovered. The children must not be used a pawns to cover for the parents illegal activities. There are schools is other countries too …. Yes?

If the illegals don’t want to risk being deported … then simply go home.

When the children are old enough, they are welcome to come back to the US.

[AmericanGentleman 0]

Send the anchor babies back with the parents. The parents created the child ... now they should be responsible for their actions and how it impacts the child. An anchor baby is just an attempt at legitimacy. The parents made a choice to be here and risk deportation should they be discovered. The children must not be used a pawns to cover for the parents illegal activities. There are schools is other countries too …. Yes?

If the illegals don’t want to risk being deported … then simply go home.

When the children are old enough, they are welcome to come back to the US.

So we have one vote for punishing the child for sins of the father.