choji

There is nothing doomy and gloomy about Hispanics voting. ####### is wrong with you, why would you say something like that?

If you, Sir, would take the time to read my postings and not just pounce on something out of sequence, then you would apologize to me.

But I assume that both is beyond your capability.

And neither party is going to do anything about it because they want the Hispanic vote.

This is an argument one hears very often, albeit a flawed one in my opinion. Is is a well known fact that the percentage of voters among citizens of Latino/Hispanic descent is traditionally low, although a bit on the rise of lately. However, in the grand scale of things the percentage is still low enough to not have an influence for the time being and the near future.

I would even say that the tendency of the Republicans is just the opposite - as most citizens of Latino/Hispanic descent are traditionally tending to vote for the Democrats, they (the R.) seem to be interested to not have too many of those eligible to vote to exercise their rights.

All of this might change with the changes in the socio-structure in the US, but that will take a few generations to have a real impact.

Ummmm....I beg to differ. The Hispanic voting bloc is already huge, and they're going to surpass the black voting bloc soon if they haven't already. Both parties are desperate to woo Hispanic voters in large numbers, especially since Hispanics are voting Republican more often these days; they were traditionally Democrats. Both parties seem to think that Hispanics are pro-illegal immigration and pro-amnesty. I really wouldn't know either way, but as they comprise the vast majority of illegal immigrants in the USA it's plausible that they might sympathize with the illegals a bit.

In some states the Hispanic vote is already a major factor...particularly in major electoral college prizes like California, Texas, New York, and Florida. It is insanely naive to underestimate their political influence at this point.

Well, that's a new one - I have not been called insanely naive for a long time.

Anyway, if you are interested, take a look at these surveys:

http://www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/FactSheet...atino_Youth.pdf

http://www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/FactSheets/FS-Midterm06.pdf

http://www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/2006_CPHS_Report_update.pdf

Maybe it is insanely naive of me to assume that you are interested in facts and figures, but if you are, these make interesting reading. They also show a side of the picture quite diffferent from the one so often and lovingly touted, most often with the appropriate background music of gloom and destruction of the beloved homeland.

Sorry, I don't debate with people who obliquely accuse me of being racist.

You can have the last word if you like.

According to the Pew Hispanic Center (http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/24.pdf), Hispanics are about 8% of the electorate nationwide. State by state, can be as high as 38% in New Mexico, 25% in Texas, 22% in California, 17% in Arizona, 13% in Florida and Nevada.

Significant enough to swing local and statewide elections, definitely...I don't care what anyone else says.

Oh dear, another case of "I ran out of arguments. Now I'll accuse the discussion partner of accusing me of ..... (fill in whatever word has the flavour d'jour) and flounce off."

So now I am not only insanely naive, but I also accused you of something which I never implied or said. I have re-read my posting very carefully - how you could come up with that accusation is beyond me.

What I did imply is that maybe you are more interested in slogans than facts or figures. How to arrive from there at the accusation you read from it - sorry, once again, that is beyond me.

According to the Pew Hispanic Center (http://pewhispanic.org/files/factsheets/24.pdf), Hispanics are about 8% of the electorate nationwide. State by state, can be as high as 38% in New Mexico, 25% in Texas, 22% in California, 17% in Arizona, 13% in Florida and Nevada.

Excuse me - these are the numbers of Hispanics/Latinos eligible to vote.

The numbers say nothing about the percentage of those eligible who do vote.

If this slight but very important difference is swept under the table, the picture is again one of doom and gloom.

(Start appropriate background music.)

And neither party is going to do anything about it because they want the Hispanic vote.

This is an argument one hears very often, albeit a flawed one in my opinion. Is is a well known fact that the percentage of voters among citizens of Latino/Hispanic descent is traditionally low, although a bit on the rise of lately. However, in the grand scale of things the percentage is still low enough to not have an influence for the time being and the near future.

I would even say that the tendency of the Republicans is just the opposite - as most citizens of Latino/Hispanic descent are traditionally tending to vote for the Democrats, they (the R.) seem to be interested to not have too many of those eligible to vote to exercise their rights.

All of this might change with the changes in the socio-structure in the US, but that will take a few generations to have a real impact.

Ummmm....I beg to differ. The Hispanic voting bloc is already huge, and they're going to surpass the black voting bloc soon if they haven't already. Both parties are desperate to woo Hispanic voters in large numbers, especially since Hispanics are voting Republican more often these days; they were traditionally Democrats. Both parties seem to think that Hispanics are pro-illegal immigration and pro-amnesty. I really wouldn't know either way, but as they comprise the vast majority of illegal immigrants in the USA it's plausible that they might sympathize with the illegals a bit.

In some states the Hispanic vote is already a major factor...particularly in major electoral college prizes like California, Texas, New York, and Florida. It is insanely naive to underestimate their political influence at this point.

Well, that's a new one - I have not been called insanely naive for a long time.

Anyway, if you are interested, take a look at these surveys:

http://www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/FactSheet...atino_Youth.pdf

http://www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/FactSheets/FS-Midterm06.pdf

http://www.civicyouth.org/PopUps/2006_CPHS_Report_update.pdf

Maybe it is insanely naive of me to assume that you are interested in facts and figures, but if you are, these make interesting reading. They also show a side of the picture quite diffferent from the one so often and lovingly touted, most often with the appropriate background music of gloom and destruction of the beloved homeland.

If we want to fix this, it really has to be at the federal level.

It only can be fixed on the federal level.

Everything else would lead to chaos with consequences which make me shudder just thinking about them.

And neither party is going to do anything about it because they want the Hispanic vote.

This is an argument one hears very often, albeit a flawed one in my opinion. Is is a well known fact that the percentage of voters among citizens of Latino/Hispanic descent is traditionally low, although a bit on the rise of lately. However, in the grand scale of things the percentage is still low enough to not have an influence for the time being and the near future.

I would even say that the tendency of the Republicans is just the opposite - as most citizens of Latino/Hispanic descent are traditionally tending to vote for the Democrats, they (the R.) seem to be interested to not have too many of those eligible to vote to exercise their rights.

All of this might change with the changes in the socio-structure in the US, but that will take a few generations to have a real impact.

Just musing quietly:

This whole situation seems to be spiraling somewhere I can not quite wrap my thoughts around any longer.

An immigrant comes to the country on a K1, gets married, spouse dies before the Conditional GC is approved – immigrant most probably will be “removed”.

An immigrant comes to the country, gets married in good faith, gets Conditional GC, gets abused, gets divorced, gets put into removal proceeding and has to fight teeth and claws to have the removal overturned. (Just two cases here from the board, I am sure there are many others similar.)

On the other hand undocumented immigrants take to the street to protest and are doing so without fear of being seized and put into removal proceedings.

I can certainly understand on a logical level why someone would want to go to another country to escape excruciating poverty. I can even understand on the same logical level the wish to enter that country by ways and means not legal. The basic human drive for survival is very strong and makes people do things one oneself would not feel capable of.

But then things start to fall apart: the person entering illegally stands up and says “I have rights because I live and work here.” The person entering legally gets told “you have no rights, you can not work and certainly not live here.”

This is fundamentally and totally wrong.

However – I have no idea of a solution. “Kicking out” all the undocumented is not a solution on many levels. Giving everybody the same status (as in blanket amnesty) isn’t one either somehow. The only solution possible for me seems to be to strictly enforce existing laws at the employer level to dry up the possibility for work without proper papers plus a speedy introduction of some “guest worker” program to keep certain parts of the US economy functioning.

But once again, this is just some quiet musing about a real and existing problem which can only be solved by those in power. If those do not see the need to act (and apparently they don’t , for many, many, many reasons) – nothing will change.

sounds like he is talking to a girlfriend

In my book any guy who talks like that to a girlfriend has immediately aquired an ex-girlfriend.

Okay, so we need to file the I-751 soonest on 6/16/07 and latest on 09/13/07. Come the end of September or so, Nani needs to travel home. Obviously, the I-751 won't be adjudicated by then. So, does one travel w/ old GC and extension letter? Has anyone any actual experience to share?

The NOA one receives after having filed for I-751 reads:

"Your alien card is extended one year employment & travel authorized."

So old GC, passport with old stamp and extension letter should cover it.

If one wants to be extra vigilant (as I would be in a case like that), I would try to get a new stamp for the passport. I don't know whether they do that, but it might be worth a try (InfoPass appointment).

Well, I live in San Diego but I may take a trip there one day if the fish n chips really is as good as back home. Chip shop chips are what I miss the most since I moved out here. If the chips really do taste just as good as back home then I guess LA is alot closer than England!

Oh, believe me, they are well worth the trip.

Enjoy.

And yes, at trip to Willie's is a lot shorter than to the UK.

I had a chat with the cashier's guy at the place and he told me that even though the guy who fries up the fish hardly speaks English (well, I noticed that for sure!) his mastery of preparation draws people from quite afar.

Another guy I talked to (the one who mentioned Willie's to me) told me that during the week the place is packed three lines deep. Everybody goes there for a quick, tasty and cheap lunch.

A while ago somebody asked for good fish & chips places in Los Angeles.

I just tried

Willie's Grill & Deli

929 S. Victory Blvd.

Burbank, CA 91502

Phone: (818) 842-1377

The fish is yummy! The best I have tasted ever in Los Angeles.

No wonder, they use fresh fish, which explains a lot.

The chips were equally good.

I highly recommend that place.

Two things have to be pointed out:

1. The deli is inside the Alameda Market/Liqueur Store. The market is open quite late, but the deli closes at 7 PM Mon-Fri and at 4 PM Sat & Sun.

2. Bring your own malt vinegar. Although they do a mean fish & chips, the concept of vinegar seems not to have caught on in Burbank. They were kind enough to rustle up some vinegar for us, but malt vinegar it was not. Oh, those Americans.

Another place I will try out soon is

Fish King

720 North Glendale Avenue

Glendale, California 91206

Phone: (818) 244-2161

Apparently very, very good too. I will keep all fish & chips connoisseurs on the board posted once I've been to FK.

Maybe this might help to understand what can/might happen:

http://tinyurl.com/2hwxw5

It's a lot of material to read, but it seems to be quite a good source.

Trastevere. the Italian restuarant on 3rd Street Promenade. Hee, I remember the portions were so big I didn't even get through half of my meal

Is that a recommendation for the place or a signal to stay away from it?

I for one am always more interested in the quality of the food that the quantity.

In fact, having mountainous heaps of food placed in front of me puts me off eating entirely.

By the way, the chish & fips at The Cat & Fiddle are not that good. But overall the place is nice.

In this example the free market fails the people...

Exactly. The free market had decades to prove it can establish a working health care system and it miserably failed. All it has accopmplished is a bloated machinery of red-tape and overhead that nop government even managed to create. Meanwhile, one out of six Americans has no access to health insurance and to adequate health care. There's simply no denying that.

I'm happy to report that I am actually already living in the future. Between the monthly premiums I pay for the coverage for my family, my employer's contributions to my health benefits and what I pay in co-pays, deductibles and whatnot, there's more than 1/5 of what I make going for health care today. I always thought that the health care related taxes in Germany back when were bad but really, they weren't. In comparison to what health care sucks up here, it was a pittance and over there, I got top notch, hassle-free health care services in return. I guess less overhead and red-tape has positive side-effects.

Unfortunately the health care system in Germany is fast approaching the US standard. While getting more and more expensive, the level of service and care one receives in D in return is falling fast. The only way out is to buy additional private insurance, which then adds up on top of what one already pays.

But they are not yet chucking people out of the system. Maybe that will be the next step.

Sure. Germany did make the mistake to open the doors to a private leg in the health-care system some time back. What essentially happened was that those that were contributors to the system as a whole (young, healthy, good income) were allowed to exit out of the public system leaving the latter with the burden and the private insurance companies with the profits. Some of those that exited the public system in their vital years, however, later returned to the public system when the private coverage became either unaffordable or altogether unavailable to them worsening the situation some more. The damage that this particular step has done to the German system is yet more proof that the "market" is not working well when it comes to healthcare. There is, in fact, not a single example worldwide where the free market has managed to establish a functioning health care system. Not one.

This view (or explanation) is a tiny little bit too easy. A multitude of facts led to the situation as it stands today in D. An interesting (not brand new, but still valid) article concerning these facts can be read here:

http://tinyurl.com/39o7q3

In this example the free market fails the people...

Exactly. The free market had decades to prove it can establish a working health care system and it miserably failed. All it has accopmplished is a bloated machinery of red-tape and overhead that nop government even managed to create. Meanwhile, one out of six Americans has no access to health insurance and to adequate health care. There's simply no denying that.

I'm happy to report that I am actually already living in the future. Between the monthly premiums I pay for the coverage for my family, my employer's contributions to my health benefits and what I pay in co-pays, deductibles and whatnot, there's more than 1/5 of what I make going for health care today. I always thought that the health care related taxes in Germany back when were bad but really, they weren't. In comparison to what health care sucks up here, it was a pittance and over there, I got top notch, hassle-free health care services in return. I guess less overhead and red-tape has positive side-effects.

Unfortunately the health care system in Germany is fast approaching the US standard. While getting more and more expensive, the level of service and care one receives in D in return is falling fast. The only way out is to buy additional private insurance, which then adds up on top of what one already pays.

But they are not yet chucking people out of the system. Maybe that will be the next step.

Thanks.

Much better and improved VJ handling!

Well, it was nice while it lasted...

Thanks.

Much better and improved VJ handling!

you all need to embrace change.........

Most certainly. I agree with you there.

However, the change should be for the better.

In this case it might have applied to the technical side of things.

Unfortunately, the new feature did nothing for the accessabilty of the topics.

we have lost the one thing I loved.... oh well if it has to be, it has to be

:crying:

I brought it back however just know that under higher loads the 'View New Posts' feature may be offline. On a bright note, next to the 'Today's Active Topics' Link I added the new 'Recent Posts' link. The new feature is always available despite server load.

Thank you. Overall the occasional non-availablity of the feature "View New Post" seems to be the lesser evil.

Not that the new feature is really evil... ah, you know what I mean.

I'm really not liking the "new" View New Posts feature. I'd rather wait during peak periods. I want to be able to browse through all the new posts since I was last online. This new choice only allows a limited number of recent posts. New is not better.

Oh my, this new feature is... somehow... strange.

When I come to the board, I used to click search new posts" and then I could read all the topic titles and take a look at those interesting for me.

Now I get at the most 25 topics, not everything. In order to know what is going on I would have to stay and stare at the screen all day long. :-(

I understand the technical reason behind this change, but at the same time I have the feeling that I missing about at least half of everything which might be interesting.

Very sad.

As to the positive, inspirational stuff:

Would that include the death penalty?

The US has to have the death penalty considering how sick and violent so many criminals are here. There is no rehabilitation for someone who has killed 10 kids.

Is taking 10 lives worse than taking one, as long as the taking of that one life is state regulated?

The fact that if the police stops the family car the kid inside sees the parent at the wheel trying not to make a "wrong move" for fear of being shot?

You have to ask yourself why is this the case. I think more than enough police has been killed doing their job.

Out of violence grows more violence. If all policepersons assume as a matter of fact that any other person they encounter is out to take their lives and are prepared to defend themselves by killing the "aggressor", the level of violence grows out of proportion in leaps and bounds.

Homelessness, which is taken as a matter of fact?

I cannot see this improving at all considering the number of unlawful immigrants stealing jobs from Americans.

Are you sure that all homelessness has its root in illigal immigration?

Overcrowded prisons, where inmates live under inhumane conditions - "oh, serves them right, they had it coming?"

I do not understand this sympathy for convicts. The more rights we give prisoners the more they abuse these same rights. What about all of the violence occurring within prisons due to them forming gangs and attacking others. I believe that whenever someone commits a heinous crime and is found guilty, their actions should forfeit any rights they have as a civilian or human being..

What about those who live in prison because the system of "law and order" is seriously flawed? They are subjected to the same conditions without being heinous criminals.

Making doubting participation in a war a dishonorable thing? "Support our troups or you're the enemy within?"

Why should the troops be punished for the decisions of politicians. They are people who volunteer 'their lives' to serve and protect all of us..

I am not talking about those who serve. I am talking about those who doubt the cause and are deemed "unpatriotic" and "traitors."

Don't you think that children in the US grow up to accept a level of violence as "natural" or "good" which is unconcivable for someone having been brought up in a different society?

Yes considering most other developed / civilized countries do not have an open-ended anything goes first amendment. There are various groups of people here who are violent yet their cousins overseas in other English nations are not only well respected but extremely peaceful people. How can we explain this..

Yes, you are right, it is surprising how many kids grow up unharmed by the level of violence which is part of daily life in the US, in deed and thought.

This is not intended as bashing. It is just a different viewpoint.

Open discussion is definitely what this nation needs rather than isolating others with differing views..

This is extremly interesting, because you and I are obliously on completely different levels as regards violence - and yet we can discuss the problems we see in a quiet and polite way.

Thank you.

It is only a matter of time before someone takes the rejection in the wrong way and rocks up with a gun..

Which is pretty easy to do when the right to own guns seems to be something which is seen as a God given right by many people in this country.

Kids need to be surrounded by positive, inspirational stuff that helps them grow. Not someone having their head hacksawed off or being told they are a loser and ugly because they do not make it on Americas next top model..

As to the positive, inspirational stuff:

Would that include the death penalty?

The fact that if the police stops the family car the kid inside sees the parent at the wheel trying not to make a "wrong move" for fear of being shot?

Homelessness, which is taken as a matter of fact?

Overcrowded prisons, where inmates live under inhumane conditions - "oh, serves them right, they had it coming?"

Making doubting participation in a war a dishonorable thing? "Support our troups or you're the enemy within?"

Don't you think that children in the US grow up to accept a level of violence as "natural" or "good" which is unconcivable for someone having been brought up in a different society?

This is not intended as bashing. It is just a different viewpoint.

People don't seem to consider that prison has a social system, and that some of the people who suffer this kind of violence are on the outside of it.

I have never understood why they don't disband these prison groups / gangs. Force them to interact with each other. These convicts are taking the piss out of the correctional system. Maybe the US should have a prisoner exchange program with the middle east. If the prisoners mack it back alive, they will behave like boy scouts..

The question is, why are so many people committing crimes in that state.. Prevention is certainly better than cure.

That's what experts say:

"People in society and correctional officers need to understand that immediate control over the prison system is often an illusion at any time," says Cory Godwin, president of the gang-investigators association for the Florida Department of Corrections, or DC. "Contraband equals power."

Source:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_...v14/ai_21161641

The article is a bit older, but the problems described have not changed. Like this:

Godwin explains: "The environment is set up so that when you put that many people with antisocial behavior and criminal history together, someone is going to be the predator and someone the prey, and that is reality."

I am going to stick out my neck a bit by saying that there are only two things which bring up ratings for TV shows: sex and violence.

Sex is a no-no, already ruled out by the FCC. (Please do not start a discussion about the moral point of view here, it has nothing to do with the discussion on hand, this is merely stating a fact.)

The handle left to push ratings is violence/thrills.

Ratings are important. Low ratings, sliding ratings lead to non-booking or a fall in booking of advertising seconds. The average TV consumer is a fickle animal, easily bored, looking for a new thrill. Hence to keep the average TV consumer interested in a certain show the rate of violence has to go up.

You see this even in shows not associated at first sight with violence. Take “American Idol.” The contestants have been treated more and more viciously. That is thrilling to see. Somebody else has to take the sh.. Joe Average usually has to put up with. Take “Big Brother”, the same applies here: the contestants are being put under more and more pressure to make them react. That too is violence, it is thrilling. “Wife Swap” – the goal was to bring people together who would react in violent ways, because they were so ill-suited to spend time together. They did not kill each other, sure, but the reactions were violent brawls and vicious verbal lashing outs at each other. Even shows like “Gray’s Anatomy” have stepped the level up – right now it’s a three-part episode, masses of injured people, heads are being drilled open with power drills, not one body bag is being shown but corridors filled with them. Violence/thrills.

Violence is not only torture, bloodshed, murder. Violence begins at a much lower level and the average TV viewer has been slowly nurtured to not only accept, but to expect more violence to feel thrilled and enthralled. The levels have been raised, slowly but surely.

Today we are at a threshold where even many average people start scratching their heads, asking themselves “what is going on here?” The level of violence has risen to a height which makes some of the most popular TV shows almost unbearable to watch for some.

Enter the FCC. The TV stations, the producer of shows will not make it easy to have the last instrument to push ratings wrestled from their hands.

It will be interesting to see how this particular battle is going to end.

if you have a vacation home in America, and presumably take use of the VWP, you're only here for a short time, so why you'd need a seperate cc acct instead of using your regular ones, is beyond me.

Cos let's face it...if you have the money to buy a hols home, you have money.

Right.

If you have money, more often than not you have common sense (Paris H being an exception )

Right.

if you have common sense, you're not going to use a card which more often than not will be having interest rates thru the nose.

Interests are only due on debts riding on a card.

Common sense says, don't do it.

So, no debts, no interest. Then why not use a US CC for a US account which you have for these reasons:

In simple terms it saves money. Many people buy a vacation home on a buy to let arrangement. ie they use it part of the year for their own enjoyment and rent it out through a local agent to provide income to service the mortgage etc. It makes sense from both a financial and logistical viewpoint to open an American bank account to receive money into and pay bills out from. Likewise there are many companies that will not accept a foreign credit card for purchases ordered fro delivery within the USA etc. So it is a useful financial tool and also provides some insulation from the vagracies of the international currency markets. People that buy a home abroad tend to be a little more financially savvy than Joe Average and are much more likely to apply for a US credit card in addition to the ones they hold in their home countries. It is a market that banks are keen to tap into.

Have you even seen some of the new cards out there? No grace period from date of purchase. I threw one of those apps which came to my PO box addressed to a mangled version of my old married name as my first name and my surname for my last.

As I said before, I'm speculating that there will be a higher cost of business to do business with such a card. I'm speculating that BoA is doing this for people who cannot otherwise get CCs, therefore, BoA has them, essentially, by the balls if they want the card. So why wouldn't BoA charge a premium fee?

Please, what is the problem here?

It does not matter how high the interest is as long as anything charged up to the the maximum credit limit is paid off every month in full.

Most certainly banks don't like that. On such customers their earnings are pretty slim. But they can not charge interest.

Period. No matter how new or old the cards are. Unless it is handled completely different in your part of the US, which I doubt. There are some rules even banks can not break.