[Cog]

Maybe. Selling my house in Illinois and one of the potential buyers hired an inspector. Among other things, they found hail damage to the roof that occurred in 2017 to the siding, roof, and gutters and downspouts. Had an insurance adjuster come out and agreed to the hail damage repairs. So I'm having it done with the exception of $1000 deductible. Selling point for the house is the new roof. Weren't any leaks to anything and if I were staying probably would have waited a few years to replace it.

Here is where the hypocrisy comes into play. I'm very much against illegal aliens coming to our country. All of them should be deported. But here is the deal. The contractor is a white redneck just like me. But all his people he has subbed working for him are Hispanic. Are they here legally? I have not a clue and don't care. What I have seen from them so far is hard and very good work. In two hours they had the roof stripped down to plywood and started on the felt and shingles. That is very fast compared to the all white(Mercian) crew who replaced the roof 12 years ago. It took that crew four hours just to strip off the old shingles down to wood.

So I find myself in the position that I want all illegals gone but at the same time benefitting personally by them being here. Granted, I am making an assumption that that the guys on my roof are not here legally. I don't know that.

[Newfie]

Not a hypocrit, just caught in a conundrum. A hypocrit would turn in someone else for hiring illegals then hire the same folks himself.

So those illegals are displaying the Protestant work ethic that supports capitalisim while the other guys are feeding at the trough.

I spent my youth doing piece work, forever more I was a bastard boss because I knew what interest and effort could accomplish.

On the other hand, one hard worker puts 5 others out of a job. If we all worked like that we would have a much worse employment problem. More superfluous people. In a very queer way some of the most valuable folks to our society are convicts: they create many jobs for others but since they produce nothing they do not compete, perfect consumers.

That’s a big reason I’m a doomer, this crazy cant last forever.

[Cog]

Although I'm not sure at this point, I suspect this crew will be finished in another hour and go on to another job. So basically cut in half, hour wise what a crew did twelve years ago. Granted my roof is simple with no valleys or weirdness going on. I took them up some water an hour ago but they haven't stopped working since 7:00 this morning.

@Newfie I do understand the work ethic you are talking about. There have been times in my life I was told to slow down or we couldn't charge the time. Whether that is the wrong or right approach to bidding jobs, I don't know.

[jedrider]

Hey, I'm no lawyer type at all, but I look at it this way:

Our country has benefited from immigration, knowingly, too, from their labor. I think that is grounds for granting them some permanent residence status in this country.

I don't see any other way to look at it. It is not even an issue of sympathy and compassion, but sort of an implicit agreement (if we put on our suit and tie as a lawyer would) that should be honored whether it has a moral component or not. [last sentence edited ;-]

[KaiserJeep]

I don't have a problem granting citizenship to people who work. However, there are presently problems that must be addressed:

1) The stealing of SSN's is widespread. The people whose numbers are stolen are severely victimized. They see the extra income reported under their SSN yet cannot ever get a W4 from whomever is paying the illegal. They cannot file a valid tax return with the Feds or the State they live in. This is a severe problem for them, and constitutes the crime of fraud for the undocumented person who stole their SSN.

Do not minimize or dismiss this problem. My wife is a tax preparer and has clients who are victims of SSN theft. The various government agencies involved have no budgets or interest in prosecuting such tax frauds. It is literally a case of DIY justice, such a victim of SSN theft can hire private investigators and lawyers and hunt down the illegals, but this is only quasi-legal, very expensive, and not without risk if the agents you hire inflict harm on the illegals. Once you can demonstrate (because you paid some lawyer to make a case) that you have suffered from SSN fraud for 10+ years, you will be eligible to apply for a new SSN, which is accompanied by a whole other set of problems like no credit history.

2. Sanctuary cities and even states exist, where illegals can commit crimes without being prosecuted, because the police are being forced to practice catch-and-release for "minor" offenses, and even if the illegal is also committing the afore-mentioned tax fraud, they are not prosecuted for this.

The major problem with this is that illegals have no defined legal identities or SSNs or anything else. Nor can they provide identification. It is all too common for someone to be released before they are identified as being the same person wanted for more serious offenses such as terrorism or multiple murders. Then of course, they miss their court date.

3. If we can't close the border to illegals, we also have the further problem that our population continues to grow. What we need is to slow the influx of illegals just until the population first stabilizes and then recedes. Then at some future date, once we have the desired population for this country, we can accept more immigrants until a steady and sustainable population number is reached. Without this all other environmental actions are fundamentally useless.

In the Interest of full disclosure: My Paternal Great Grandfather got off a boat in the early 20th Century, he was before that a citizen of rural County Cork, Ireland. He went through Ellis Island in NYC, met all their requirements, and some years later got American citizenship.

Note that I deliberately chose to use the terminology "illegal", because these "undocumented immigrants" are in fact criminals. That does not mean that my heart is closed to their plight. However, at some point they must buckle down and fix the problems in their own country, rather than coming here. They must pledge "Our Lives, Our Fortunes, and Our Sacred Honor" to this goal. They will indeed suffer "Blood, Sweat, and Tears" in the process.

We did so, or our ancestors did, more precisely. My Great Grandfather labored for his benefit and his kids, not for some undocumented person from South of the Border.

[Outcast_Searcher]

So I find myself in the position that I want all illegals gone but at the same time benefitting personally by them being here. Granted, I am making an assumption that that the guys on my roof are not here legally. I don't know that.

Been there, with tree removal.

In my case I wouldn't have known they were illegals, but the guy in charge told me they were. His explanation -- he couldn't get Americans to do the work. The work was too physically demanding and they'd quit in less than a day.

He said he insisted on documentation from all his employees and he got what looked like legal documentation. But one day one of his employees called Paulo said, "me no Paulo now, me Hernando". So the boss said said, "Well, 'Hernanado', if you're going to work for me, I need papers for HERNANDO." "OK Boss". And the very next day, "Hernando" provides new legit looking papers for his new name. The boss said until then, he had no clue what was really going on with many of his employees. He said if he had to hire all legal Americans, he figured he'd be out of business, by being uncompetitive in pricing.

All I know is these Mexicans were RUNNING carrying away big logs from where I had a at least 75ish year old oak tree cut down. (The tree looked full grown 45 years ago). Based on the weight of some small pieces I was cleaning up, these things likely weighed around 100 pounds. I never worked like that when I was 18 and in great physical shape from lifting weights a lot.

Oh, and if I refused to hire companies who hired people who don't look like "Americans", then I'm a racist and I may have a lot of trouble getting things done which I need done for me at my age and joint health. So I guess to that extent, I'm a hypocrite too, though I don't assume an employee is a non-citizen based on how they look.

So its a conundrum for sure. The only time I really mind is when employers hire people for jobs requiring solid language skills (AKA a taxi dispatcher) who speak English so poorly that you can't understand them. Or an order taker at McDonald's. (Of course, now I just use the kiosks and am more likely to get what I order now).

Clearly many elected officials and businesses like the cheap labor, or our lawmakers would actually DO something about the issue.

I don't care what people look like or where they are from, as long as they behave, support their family, pay taxes if owed, but I think American citizens should have first dibs on all the jobs they're willing to do, including dispatchers, working at McDonalds, etc.

If you're a hypocrite Cog, then basically the whole US is a hypocrite, based on the system we have. Especially since we don't do anything meaningful to deal with it. Trump's solution is stupid. An X foot physical wall can be climbed over by an X+2 foot ladder in many places. I want a virtual wall with SERIOUS, NASTY employer sanctions, and a well maintained database they can use to ensure workers' papers are legitimate. And if wages rise due to supply and demand, but American citizens get those jobs, then so be it.

At least that would dry up the incentive to be here illegally to do work with illegal papers. Clearly, most Americans and the officials they elect and the businesses they use DON'T want that though.

[KaiserJeep]

Outcast Searcher, you just displayed a severe racial prejudice when you called them "Mexicans". Most Hispanic illegals are not in fact Mexicans, which is a relatively properous country in North America, which benefits from NAFTA and other trade relationships with the USA and Canada.

Almost all such immigrants originate in Central or South America. Mexico practices "pass through" for such people, because they don't want the burden of such people on their overtaxed government agencies.

There ARE a small minority from Mexico who are properly referred to as "Mexicans", but most are insulted by that terminology, and unless you live in one of the border states such as California or Texas, you would not know that "Mexican" is racist and offensive.

Incidentally, most "real" Mexican illegals are of Native American ancestry, and are seeking shelter in the USA or Canada from the real and continued racial prejudice they suffer in the country of Mexico from those who have Hispanic ancestry and originated in Spain in an earlier time, conquering and suppressing the Native Americans. Such people are enraged and gravely offended to be called "Mexicans", even if that terminology is technically correct.

[Newfie]

Mom was an immigrant, never got USA citizenship.
Wife is an immigrant from Germany.
DIL is an immigrant from Columbia.
I hold two citizenship’s - USA and Canada.

Way back there would be periodic broadcasts to remind legal non-citizens they had to renew their papers, once a year or something like that. It would always scare me that Mom would screw up and be deported.

Illegal immigrants, by definition, have NO place in our country. Nothing against them personally, they are not the problem. The problem is that we have become a country of illegals, too many in business and power seek to find ways around the laws and out right disobey the laws. We are no longer a “law abiding nation.” That problem starts at the White House and runs through all of government.

I get it that we have never been completely law abiding and that such a thing is unrealistic. On the other hand we have strayed far afield from being a law abiding country. I’m afraid the concept it totally lost on most of our population. It seems to be completely missing from journalism, whose theoretical job is to point out abuses.

We slip slowly into anarchy.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Hey, I'm no lawyer type at all, but I look at it this way:

Our country has benefited from immigration, knowingly, too, from their labor. I think that is grounds for granting them some permanent residence status in this country.

I don't see any other way to look at it. It is not even an issue of sympathy and compassion, but sort of an implicit agreement (if we put on our suit and tie as a lawyer would) that should be honored whether it has a moral component or not. [last sentence edited ;-]

You haven't defined anything. Who are you granting something to? Everyone who claims "immigrant status" no matter what? Or are there criteria?

How do you define who has an "implicit agreement" who was here illegally? How do we determine if they meet the criteria?

Hint: we can't support the entire world's population (and ongoing population growth of their families), compassion or not.

Pure emotion surely isn't a good way to make legal decisions.

[Outcast_Searcher]

The problem is that we have become a country of illegals, too many in business and power seek to find ways around the laws and out right disobey the laws. We are no longer a “law abiding nation.” That problem starts at the White House and runs through all of government.

And to me that's the crux of it. If we're just going to arbitrarily be scofflaws about whatever we disagree with or "offends" us, good luck getting a system which works mostly by implicit agreement, as far as people obeying lots of laws day to day, to work. Once people feel it's no longer a reasonable implicit agreement to obey the laws "since no one else does", we have
Greece or Puerto Rico, and it's game over for first world quality of life.

Case in point -- the US income tax system. What would happen if next tax season, people adopted the stance of Greece or Puerto Rico, re our voluntary tax system, and tried to cheat much more aggressively? Hint: The IRS can't even answer the phone in a reasonable timeframe, they've been so defunded.

We slip slowly into anarchy.

Yup. When I grew up, being law abiding was generally seen as part of being a good citizen. It was "normal" and people generally took it seriously. Now, people see the behavior of businesses, illegals and their supporters, drug culture, and on and on. So what's "the harm" in a little cheating around the edges, since "everyone else does it"? And things roll downhill from there.

And of course, whatever happens, it's someone ELSE's fault, as personal responsibility is now a politically unpopular term.

[Cog]

I do not want to run too far afield here with this sentiment, but if a duly elected president is removed from office on a pretext, there is going to be violence over it. From people I know, they make lists too. Lists of people who support overturning an election. Not violence in the street as we know it, but people turning up dead. For whatever reason.

[jedrider]

I do not want to run too far afield here with this sentiment, but if a duly elected president is removed from office on a pretext, there is going to be violence over it. From people I know, they make lists too. Lists of people who support overturning an election. Not violence in the street as we know it, but people turning up dead. For whatever reason.

That's kind of crazy. You do realize that that argument or sentiment can work both ways. A President when asked to step down by legitimate means is then no longer legitimately our President. So, you propose gun violence over it?

[Newfie]

Yeah, this Mueller probe is getting farcical. But clearly there are some segments who are hanging on it. It’s a boon to the media, both sides, they have ready madenstories. Been reading European history recently, this all sounds too much like any of the many royal intrigues I’ve been reading about.

I seriously doubt Trump will be impeached. And even if impeached there may be some flares but no consistent movement.

I do think Trump is playing the media, he is creating confusion galor. And in the meantime he is slowly showing the world is not coming to an end because of his election. The voters will vote their pocket book. At this point I think he has a fair chance of reelection.

I still think he’s a wack job and I greatly dislike him on a personal basis, and I disagree with many of his policies. My personal opion aside, I think the country is coming to embrace him.

[Cog]

I neither advocate nor support violence. I'm simply telling you what is going to happen. Take that for what it is. Outside of this little bubble of what we call Peak Oil there are people who take things very seriously when it comes to overthrowing a duly elected president. There was a guy who tried to slaughter the Republican leadership at a baseball diamond not long ago. If you think the left is the only side who has lists you better think again.

Don't worry about me pstarr. I'm a cuddly teddy bear who just wants to smoke a bowl and get along.

I'll leave you with this thought, for those on the left. Trump wasn't our last chance, he was yours.

[onlooker]

If the political will existed we could come up in this country with a sensible policy to treat people who come here to work. All the legal tools have precedence in terms of offering work Visas to match a certain amount of people on an annual basis with job openinings. The reason I believe that it has not been implemented is because, companies prefer to have this pool of illegals because they can employ them and in the process exploit them because of their illegal status. It is simply economics. As for the original point that you made Cog, you are honest about your antipathy for illegals and as per Kaiser's post, have sound reasoning to back up this aversion towards illegals. Yet you concede that their contributions are desirable in certain cases. The important thing is to concede the trade offs occurring. Same as some of us proclaiming how unsustainable the trajectory of the entire human species yet continuing to live in rich countries with their intense environmental impact. We at least concede to this. So I guess a confessed hypocrite is better than a hypocrite who does not acknowledge being one.

[Cog]

A guest worker program, with extreme penalties for those who hire or employ people who are not part of that program, would be most beneficial.

[KaiserJeep]

FWIW, I do not think that Trump will be impeached and removed from office. It all depends on him and whether he himself can allow his lawyers to speak for him and not himself Tweet a damaging admission of a crime.

I simply do not care how many extra-marital affairs Trump had before he was POTUS, or how he kept those away from his wife's notice. It would appear that his (then) lawyer paid off "Stormy" with hush money and then got that cash repaid by Trump on an installment plan. Well, that's a civil case, not criminal, as long as Trump does not commit an actual criminal offense over it.

Nor did I care that the scumbag politician W J Clinton was getting BJ's under the desk in the Oval Office from a 22-year-old White House intern, nor was that any more than a civil matter to be handled in matrimonial court. HRC certainly would have been justfied in divorcing him, had she not had her own ambitions for the Oval Office.

Recall however, that what WJC was charged with was Obstructing Justice and Lying in Sworn Depositions. These were actual crimes and he was in fact impeached for them, although the R's fell well short of the vote total to remove him as POTUS after Impeachment.

Trump simply has to make a mistake and deny a little too much about something that happened years before he was even a candidate, and it is POSSIBLE that he could be both impeached and removed from office, as some of the R's really do hate him.

Apologies for the further diversion from the nominal thread title subject. I was rather hoping that some of you would respond to my first post in this thread, me being an offensively conservative person among a bunch of flaming liberals.

[jedrider]

KJ, Trump will NEVER consent to testifying under oath. I don't think that is the way to get at him because EVERYONE knows that the man is INCAPABLE of telling the truth. Maybe, that's a medical condition, but I won't speculate on that. I think Mueller has to catch him subverting the law in some obvious fashion in order for that to stick. I think most politicians are held to that low standard and ordinary citizens, however, can get busted for lying under oath. Politicians are paid, and paid off, to lie. It is part of the profession, evidently

I think there is enough material to keep Mueller busy.

[KaiserJeep]

KJ, Trump will NEVER consent to testifying under oath. I don't think that is the way to get at him because EVERYONE knows that the man is INCAPABLE of telling the truth. Maybe, that's a medical condition, but I won't speculate on that. I think Mueller has to catch him subverting the law in some obvious fashion in order for that to stick. I think most politicians are held to that low standard and ordinary citizens, however, can get busted for lying under oath. Politicians are paid, and paid off, to lie. It is part of the profession, evidently

I think there is enough material to keep Mueller busy.

Well, I guess the thread topic is toast.

There also exists "executive priviledge" and that saved POTUS Clinton from a lot of grief. But it will not shield you from having to testify on a criminal matter.

How smart is Trump? I'm not aware that he was ever convicted of an actual crime, or was ever imprisoned for such.