Cuban Boating
 

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ....ap/index.html

I think I would have been tempted to let them continue on towards the US due
to their creativeness...

Cuban Boating
 

I'm not one for the open border policy myself, but I gotta agree. Anyone that
can figure out how to make a seaworthy boat out of a 51 Chevy pick-up has what
it takes to succeed here.
Shame that the Coasties sank it.

cliff

Cuban Boating
 

They must get "Junkyard Wars" there.

Cuban Boating
 

"Chief3mfc" wrote ...
I'm not one for the open border policy myself, but I gotta agree. Anyone
that
can figure out how to make a seaworthy boat out of a 51 Chevy pick-up has
what
it takes to succeed here.

That's basically my thoughts on the matter also... I don't believe in open
borders... I believe that you should have to work at it to get into this
country... Making a '51 Chevy pickup able to cross 90 or so miles of sea
seems like they worked at it hard enough... What probably makes it more
impressive is that they probably didn't have the opportunity to do any sort
of shakedown cruises with it... It seems that they made it over halfway...
Too bad the Coasties didn't give them the chance to see if they could make
it the rest of the way... I'm not sure that I would even try that distance
in my boat...

Cuban Boating
 

"Grumman-581" wrote in message m...
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ....ap/index.html

I think I would have been tempted to let them continue on towards the US due
to their creativeness...

You should have seen the side pictures of it. (I saw them in a
newspaper so can't offer them online to you.)

They actually did alot of work to this. They welded a frame across
the bed of the truck that was 'outriggers' to support the pontoons
created by the 55 gallon drums. They also somehow coupled the
driveshaft with a propeller. It was pretty interesting.

Would make for a good raft contest entry here in the US.

I wonder how they were protecting the engine and transmission
from seawater? One good wave could bounce the truck pretty
good and get water in the carberator. Water could also
easily seep into the transmission. I wonder how far
it would have actually gone?

Cuban Boating
 

I wonder how they were protecting the engine and transmission
from seawater?

They were just counting on the idea that it only had to last 12 hours or so and
corrosion will not be a problem in that length of time. I bet that thing would
rust up into a solid mass if they had taken it out of the water overnight.

Cuban Boating
 

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
...

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ...ants.truck.ap/
index.html

I think I would have been tempted to let them continue on towards the US
due
to their creativeness...


It's funny. The president says we're trying to spread the word about freedom
and democracy, but when the occasional handful want to come here, we send
them back to a regime we've considered evil since its inception.

Cuban Boating
 

Michael Sutton wrote:

"Grumman-581" wrote in message m...
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ....ap/index.html

I think I would have been tempted to let them continue on towards the US due
to their creativeness...

You should have seen the side pictures of it. (I saw them in a
newspaper so can't offer them online to you.)

They actually did alot of work to this. They welded a frame across
the bed of the truck that was 'outriggers' to support the pontoons
created by the 55 gallon drums. They also somehow coupled the
driveshaft with a propeller. It was pretty interesting.

Would make for a good raft contest entry here in the US.

I wonder how they were protecting the engine and transmission
from seawater? One good wave could bounce the truck pretty
good and get water in the carberator. Water could also
easily seep into the transmission. I wonder how far
it would have actually gone?


The whole thing reminded me of an episode of "Junkyard Wars" gone
horibly wrong.

Dave

Cuban Boating
 

"Backyard Renegade" wrote in message
om...
"Grumman-581" wrote in
message m...

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ...ants.truck.ap/
index.html

I think I would have been tempted to let them continue on towards the US
due
to their creativeness...

To me the biggest part of the story was what it must be like there to
have folks take to the water in a vehicle like this... I hear they
have been found paddling bathtubs even. These young men probably left
their young families to take a trip that they must have known had
little chance of success, or even survival for that matter.
As far as letting them go further, the Coast Guard did the right thing
in stopping and ending (sinking) the voyage before the mainstream
news, and a bunch of lawyers, and politicians got into the mix... this
thing had potential for far to good video ;)
Scotty

.....and a Disney movie contract!

Cuban Boating
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

....and a Disney movie contract!



But now that I think about it, Disney would change the story so a piano was
being carried along with the passengers. Cuban Family Rodriguez or something
like that. They'd build a tree house upon arrival in Miami....

Cuban Boating
 

It is sad that poor people from many countries would love to be here in
America.

I guess we should try to kick our selves for ever complaining about
anything, being US citizens.

They really built those old Chevy trucks tough.

--
Bill Kiene

Kiene's Fly Shop
Sacramento, CA
www.kiene.com

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
...

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ....ap/index.html

I think I would have been tempted to let them continue on towards the US
due
to their creativeness...

Cuban Boating
 

You should have seen the side pictures of it. (I saw them in a
newspaper so can't offer them online to you.)


Starboard quarter view and a lot more detail than the previously posted CNN
story...
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6393595.htm

Cuban Boating
 

"Snafu" wrote ...
Starboard quarter view and a lot more detail than the
previously posted CNN story...
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/6393595.htm

Perhaps they should have considered not putting a bright yellow tarp over
the bed of the pickup? Painting the pickup haze gray might have also been
better... Don't know if it would have prevented them from being spotted, but
it surely wouldn't be as noticeable as that bright yellow tarp...

Cuban Boating
 

Perhaps they should have considered not putting a bright yellow tarp over
the bed of the pickup? Painting the pickup haze gray might have also been
better... Don't know if it would have prevented them from being spotted, but
it surely wouldn't be as noticeable as that bright yellow tarp...

Those Fat Albert RADAR balloons can't see if it is yellow or grey. The DEA
watches anything bigger than a jetski moving up on the Florida coast 24/7

Cuban Boating
 

"Gfretwell" wrote ...
Those Fat Albert RADAR balloons can't see if it is yellow or grey. The DEA
watches anything bigger than a jetski moving up on the Florida coast 24/7

Perhaps, but a small boat (and I'm using that term quite loosely in this
case) could get lost in the ground clutter... Even if they get it on radar,
they still have to find it... Anything that would slow down the aquisition
of the craft would be worth it... If they are lucky, it might slow it down
enough that they could get to land...

Cuban Boating
 

Fat Albert uses the finest US "look down, shoot down" RADAR. It is used to spot
small fiberglass sailboats. A pickup truck would glow like a highway flare.
It's probably how they spotted it in the first place.
Once they get the fix the USGC just drives to the GPS coordinate until they
pick it up on the shipboard RADAR. Prior to the new "homeland" money the USCG
stayed up to the state of the art in the Florida straits with DEA money. The
same was true of the air guard and the police agencies. The drug war gobbles up
an appreciable part of a billion a year, a big chunk of it on the Gulf coast.
Everyone with a badge, a boat or an airplane is getting a taste.

Cuban Boating
 

"Gfretwell" wrote ...
Fat Albert uses the finest US "look down, shoot down" RADAR.
It is used to spot small fiberglass sailboats. A pickup truck would
glow like a highway flare.

They made it 50 miles... Only had 40 more to go... Anything that would have
slowed down aquisition might have made enough of a difference that they
might have gotten ashore... Even though the Coasties new the general area of
the 'boat', they still had to get a visual on it... The initial visual is
done by aircraft... The yellow tarp really helped in that case... Once the
aircraft has the visual, the Coastie boat intercepts the craft... They don't
send out the boat unless they have a confirmed visual sighting since it
could be a legitimate vessel... I fly along the Gulf periodically and from
1000 ft, a small boat is not very visible unless there is something that
contrasts with the surrounding sea... Hell, I've had cases where I was
directly over the top of a small airport and couldn't even see it even
though both my LORAN and GPS said that I was within 0.1 nm of it...

Cuban Boating
 

BTW I wouldn't be surprised if we were watching that truck the whole time and
only took them when it looked like it was going to work.
Nothing slows down trusting ingenuity like deadly failure.
I doubt there are any statistics about how many die 20-30 miles off the coast
of Cuba when these hair brained schemes fail and I doubt the USCG wants to get
in that business.

Cuban Boating
 

"Gfretwell" wrote ...
That is absolutely true. I suppose that is why they started using RADAR in
WWII
to spot sub periscopes. (significantly smaller than a truck) RADAR is a
whole
lot better now.

I think that the periscopes might have stuck up higher due to the need to
get above the waves... I was an Electronics Technician (Radar) when I was in
the Navy... On the radars for which I was responsible, there could be a lot
of ground clutter in certain types of conditions... Since that was 20 years
ago, I would suspect that the radar units have gotten someone better since
then... Still it boils down that you have to get visual confirmation on the
target before you send in the surface based assets... If you paint a target
that looks suspicious, you might dispatch surface based assets at the same
time as airborn assets, but of course the airborn assets will probably
aquire the target first... At the very least, they'll get on station
first... Once they acquire the target, they will direct the surface based
assets towards it... The initial radar dispatcher will route the airborn
asset to the general location of the target and then it is pretty much a
visual matter at that point... The airborn asset might have a downward
looking radar to make it easier though...

Cuban Boating
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
...

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ...ants.truck.ap/
index.html

I think I would have been tempted to let them continue on towards the US
due
to their creativeness...


It's funny. The president says we're trying to spread the word about freedom
and democracy, but when the occasional handful want to come here, we send
them back to a regime we've considered evil since its inception.


Nothing "funny" about it. We have a legal process which a potential
immigrant can use to gain entry here. If you try to circumvent that
process, you deserve to get sent back.

Dave

Cuban Boating
 

"WaIIy" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 16:53:43 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Grumman-581" wrote in
message
m...


http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ...rants.truck.ap
/
index.html

I think I would have been tempted to let them continue on towards the
US
due
to their creativeness...


It's funny. The president says we're trying to spread the word about
freedom
and democracy, but when the occasional handful want to come here, we send
them back to a regime we've considered evil since its inception.


Why do the Cubans have more right to be here than _______ fill in the
blank?

Seniority? Longest time in the barrel? :-)

Cuban Boating
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Grumman-581" wrote in
message
...


http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ...ants.truck.ap/
index.html

I think I would have been tempted to let them continue on towards the
US
due
to their creativeness...


It's funny. The president says we're trying to spread the word about
freedom
and democracy, but when the occasional handful want to come here, we
send
them back to a regime we've considered evil since its inception.


Nothing "funny" about it. We have a legal process which a potential
immigrant can use to gain entry here. If you try to circumvent that
process, you deserve to get sent back.

Dave


No fruit or vegetables for you, Dave, for an entire year. Or, you can openly
admit your understanding that of all the produce picked HERE IN THIS
COUNTRY, 80% of the labor is done by illegals and YOU LIKE EATING THE
RESULTS.

Cuban Boating
 

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 07:07:30 -0400, Dave Hall
wrote:

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Grumman-581" wrote in
message
...


http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ...ants.truck.ap/
index.html

I think I would have been tempted to let them continue on towards the
US
due
to their creativeness...


It's funny. The president says we're trying to spread the word about
freedom
and democracy, but when the occasional handful want to come here, we
send
them back to a regime we've considered evil since its inception.


Nothing "funny" about it. We have a legal process which a potential
immigrant can use to gain entry here. If you try to circumvent that
process, you deserve to get sent back.

Dave


No fruit or vegetables for you, Dave, for an entire year. Or, you can openly
admit your understanding that of all the produce picked HERE IN THIS
COUNTRY, 80% of the labor is done by illegals and YOU LIKE EATING THE
RESULTS.


That's a poor excuse for breaking the law, and certainly an even poorer
justification for it.

Dave


Dave- you must have missed the post by (I think) Chuck Gould, where he
described how the government is complicite in allowing illegals to
harvest time-sensitive crops, because noone else is willing to work
for slave wages, but corporate farms need the labor.

You are so ideologically constipated that you cannot see.

When you exceed the speed limit, do you wear sackcloth and ashes?
noah

Courtesy of Lee Yeaton,
See the boats of rec.boats
www.TheBayGuide.com/rec.boats

Cuban Boating
 

attn cubans, the US is 182 degrees South of cuba!

Cuban Boating
 

"noah" wrote in message
...


You are so ideologically constipated that you cannot see.

When you exceed the speed limit, do you wear sackcloth and ashes?
noah


ROFL! You come up with some perfect word combinations, particularly for
Dave. :-)

Cuban Boating
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...

Nothing "funny" about it. We have a legal process which a potential
immigrant can use to gain entry here. If you try to circumvent that
process, you deserve to get sent back.

Dave


No fruit or vegetables for you, Dave, for an entire year. Or, you can
openly
admit your understanding that of all the produce picked HERE IN THIS
COUNTRY, 80% of the labor is done by illegals and YOU LIKE EATING THE
RESULTS.


That's a poor excuse for breaking the law, and certainly an even poorer
justification for it.

Dave


You have a short memory. In other threads, you've suggested that people who
aid terrorists are accessories to the acts of terrorism,

I don't recall making that statement. But I would agree that people who
do aid terrorists, are accessories to the crime, if they are aware of
the acts at which they are engaged in.
Unlike Arianna Huffington though, I do not make the connection between
use of SUV's and contributing to terrorism, becasue some percentage of
oil profit may be routed to people who support terrorism. We, as the
general population, have no direct control over that.

and that people who
help the illegal drug market thrive by purchasing illegal drugs are also
contributing to lawlessness.

That's not exactly the way I stated it, but it's close enough.


Based on your way of thinking, you are an
accessory to a crime. Every time you eat fruits or vegetables without first
determining who picked it, trimmed it, washed it and packed it, you are an
accessory to a crime.

That's ridiculous. Fruits and vegetables are not illegal. The people who
market them are not either. Therefore, you cannot be accountable for the
origin of those products. Now, if someone were to market fruits and
vegetables as "No illegal workers were used to pick these", and charged
twice the price, and you still bought from other sources, you might be
making a valid point.


Finally, since I'm 100% positive you will do nothing
to change the way the grocery business works, you are no better than a cop
on the street who looks the other way when drugs are being sold on the
corner.

You have a strange way of applying logic. No wonder you're a
liberal.....

Dave

Cuban Boating
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...

Doug Kanter wrote:

Based on your way of thinking, you are an
accessory to a crime. Every time you eat fruits or vegetables without
first
determining who picked it, trimmed it, washed it and packed it, you are
an
accessory to a crime.

That's ridiculous. Fruits and vegetables are not illegal. The people who
market them are not either.

You have a VERY short attention span. We're not talking about the
wholesalers who market produce or the grocery retailers you buy from. We're
talking about the people at the beginning of the chain who pick the stuff -
the people who enter this country illegally each year, the ones you have
said are breaking the law.

I've explained to you that around 80% of your produce is picked by these
criminals (your definition). By purchasing fruits and vegetables, you are an
accessory to that crime. And, by saying that the people who market the stuff
aren't breaking the law, you hope to exonerate yourself, but that holds no
water. You are patronizing criminals in precisely the same way as a junky
patronizes a drug dealer.

Cuban Boating
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


No fruit or vegetables for you, Dave, for an entire year. Or, you can
openly
admit your understanding that of all the produce picked HERE IN THIS
COUNTRY, 80% of the labor is done by illegals and YOU LIKE EATING THE
RESULTS.

That's a poor excuse for breaking the law, and certainly an even poorer
justification for it.

Dave


Dave- you must have missed the post by (I think) Chuck Gould, where he
described how the government is complicite in allowing illegals to
harvest time-sensitive crops, because noone else is willing to work
for slave wages, but corporate farms need the labor.

Yea so? So are you just as complicit in allowing a clearly illegal
practice to continue?

You are way too hung up on the word "illegal". This segment of farm labor is
illegal because their presence used to take jobs from citizens who were
willing to work for minimum wage. Nowadays, people are more likely to weigh
the wage against the work being done. They'll accept minimum wage for easy
retail work, but not for bending over 400 times a day in a hot field and
swinging a razor sharp knife in the vicinity of their ankles (using cabbage
picking as an example). Laborers come from places like Mexico because
minimum wage here is far better than the $8 a WEEK they could make back
home. I defy you to find enough American citizens willing to take their
places.


If the pool of illegal labor were to go away, what would happen? I'll
tell you. Either they growers would develop better technology to replace
human labor with machines...

You are obviously not a gardener. Some crops are too delicate for
"technology". Corn harvesting pretty much reached the pinnacle of
"technology" fifty years ago, as did wheat and other grains. Other crops
will always require human hands, especially those which end up in the
produce department rather than in cans or frozen. Only human hands can
assure that these crops are presentable to the customer.

or they would (by the force of supply and
demand), have to raise their labor rates, until they were able to hire
local people. Yes, that would cause the prices to rise, but that's not
the germaine issue.

It's not??? Are you ready to pay 3 times more for your food? What portion of
your budget goes for food? Multiply by 3 and tell me how quickly you'd be in
your boss' office looking for a massive raise, along with all of your
coworkers.


You are so ideologically constipated that you cannot see.

Really? I see things very clearly. Maybe because I don't spend my time
making excuses and exeptions for things that should not be.


Yes you do, Dave. You're the guy who told me it's not worth your trouble to
deal with your town council to get things changed. You gave me a laundry
list of excuses why participating in local decisions rarely worked.

Cuban Boating
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

Yea so? So are you just as complicit in allowing a clearly illegal
practice to continue?

You are way too hung up on the word "illegal".

It is the germaine issue. What part of "illegal" do you not understand?
Those people do not belong here, unless theygo through the proper
channels to immigrate legally. All you have done thusfar, is to attempt
to justify their illegal actions, and the actions of those who "look the
other way" by hiring them. It still doesn't make it right.


This segment of farm labor is
illegal because their presence used to take jobs from citizens who were
willing to work for minimum wage. Nowadays, people are more likely to weigh
the wage against the work being done. They'll accept minimum wage for easy
retail work, but not for bending over 400 times a day in a hot field and
swinging a razor sharp knife in the vicinity of their ankles (using cabbage
picking as an example). Laborers come from places like Mexico because
minimum wage here is far better than the $8 a WEEK they could make back
home. I defy you to find enough American citizens willing to take their
places.

All well and good, but it's still ILLEGAL.



If the pool of illegal labor were to go away, what would happen? I'll
tell you. Either they growers would develop better technology to replace
human labor with machines...

You are obviously not a gardener. Some crops are too delicate for
"technology".

They said the same thing about cotton until Eli Whitney came along.....


Corn harvesting pretty much reached the pinnacle of
"technology" fifty years ago, as did wheat and other grains. Other crops
will always require human hands, especially those which end up in the
produce department rather than in cans or frozen. Only human hands can
assure that these crops are presentable to the customer.

How myopic you are. You are declaring defeat before even exploring the
possibility.


or they would (by the force of supply and
demand), have to raise their labor rates, until they were able to hire
local people. Yes, that would cause the prices to rise, but that's not
the germaine issue.

It's not??? Are you ready to pay 3 times more for your food? What portion of
your budget goes for food? Multiply by 3 and tell me how quickly you'd be in
your boss' office looking for a massive raise, along with all of your
coworkers.

Ah! So what is it then? In this circle jerk of an economic discussion,
on the one hand I have you guys on the left complaining about the
substandard wages that the "working poor" are being paid. Then on the
other hand, you complain that if we pay people are "reasonable wage"
that the increase in costs would be too much for consumers to bear. You
use this as some sort of loose justification for remaining complicit in
the illegal immigrant labor practices. Yet we are doing nothing more
than forstering and encouraging a "slave labor" class of worker. Mark
talks about the "slave class" of people doing menial jobs, and how
idealogically wrong it is, yet neither one of you can resolve the issue
of cheap goods versus the elimination of the "slave class". You can't
have it both ways. Which do you want?



You are so ideologically constipated that you cannot see.

Really? I see things very clearly. Maybe because I don't spend my time
making excuses and exeptions for things that should not be.


Yes you do, Dave. You're the guy who told me it's not worth your trouble to
deal with your town council to get things changed. You gave me a laundry
list of excuses why participating in local decisions rarely worked.

Sorry if the voice of experience troubles you. I'm telling you how it
is, and has been, in my area. You, of course, translate that to mean
that I'm not willing to "do" anything. I assure you that that is not the
case, although I'm not about to endure harrassment or other problems to
push my agenda, unless I have broad support.

Dave

Cuban Boating
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


That's ridiculous. Fruits and vegetables are not illegal. The people
who
market them are not either.

You have a VERY short attention span.

No, you just have a poor way of utilizing analogies to make a very weak
point.



I've explained to you that around 80% of your produce is picked by these
criminals (your definition). By purchasing fruits and vegetables, you
are an
accessory to that crime. And, by saying that the people who market the
stuff
aren't breaking the law, you hope to exonerate yourself, but that holds
no
water. You are patronizing criminals in precisely the same way as a
junky
patronizes a drug dealer.

You can explain it a dozen times, using different words, but it still
doesn't make it true, nor your logic any less flawed.

To be an accessory to a crime, you have to be either a willing
participant in it, or have direct knowlege of the crime.

1) You are a willing participant because nobody puts a gun to your head and
makes you buy produce.

2) You *do* have direct knowledge of it because when the issue of migrants
is reported on TV, local farmers are often interviewed so they can explain
why this type of labor is necessary. Therefore, you know it exists.

3) If you need further proof, hop in the car and drive a couple of hours
West from Philadelphia or South in Maryland or Deleware and get off the main
roads. See for yourself.

Cuban Boating
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


It's not??? Are you ready to pay 3 times more for your food? What
portion of
your budget goes for food? Multiply by 3 and tell me how quickly you'd
be in
your boss' office looking for a massive raise, along with all of your
coworkers.

Ah! So what is it then? In this circle jerk of an economic discussion,
on the one hand I have you guys on the left complaining about the
substandard wages that the "working poor" are being paid. Then on the
other hand, you complain that if we pay people are "reasonable wage"
that the increase in costs would be too much for consumers to bear. You
use this as some sort of loose justification for remaining complicit in
the illegal immigrant labor practices. Yet we are doing nothing more
than forstering and encouraging a "slave labor" class of worker. Mark
talks about the "slave class" of people doing menial jobs, and how
idealogically wrong it is, yet neither one of you can resolve the issue
of cheap goods versus the elimination of the "slave class". You can't
have it both ways. Which do you want?

Well, then the simplest solution is simply to focus on the fact that the
people are breaking the law. That way, the responsibility can be pushed off
onto someone else. Sort of like blaming Satan for bad things that are
unexplainable.

Cuban Boating
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


That's ridiculous. Fruits and vegetables are not illegal. The people
who
market them are not either.

You have a VERY short attention span.

No, you just have a poor way of utilizing analogies to make a very weak
point.


I've explained to you that around 80% of your produce is picked by these
criminals (your definition). By purchasing fruits and vegetables, you
are an
accessory to that crime. And, by saying that the people who market the
stuff
aren't breaking the law, you hope to exonerate yourself, but that holds
no
water. You are patronizing criminals in precisely the same way as a
junky
patronizes a drug dealer.

You can explain it a dozen times, using different words, but it still
doesn't make it true, nor your logic any less flawed.

To be an accessory to a crime, you have to be either a willing
participant in it, or have direct knowlege of the crime.

1) You are a willing participant because nobody puts a gun to your head and
makes you buy produce.

Buying produce is not criminal.


2) You *do* have direct knowledge of it because when the issue of migrants
is reported on TV, local farmers are often interviewed so they can explain
why this type of labor is necessary. Therefore, you know it exists.

I've never seen such interviews. I hear politicians talk about it, but I
don't know which farmers are using what labor. Not all of them use
migrant workers. It's a virtual impossibility for me to know which
vegetables come from what farms.


3) If you need further proof, hop in the car and drive a couple of hours
West from Philadelphia or South in Maryland or Deleware and get off the main
roads. See for yourself.


I've got news for you, I LIVE about an hour and a half west of phila. I
go about 2 or 3 miles up the road, and I'm in farmland. About a dozen or
so miles to the southwest, and I'm in Amish country. Last time I looked,
the Amish aren't using illegal immigrants. Neither are the Mennonites or
many other the other farmers in my area.

Most of the Hispanics that I see, work for landscapers. Are they legal?
I don't know. But I do know that I cut my own grass.

Dave

Cuban Boating
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


It's not??? Are you ready to pay 3 times more for your food? What
portion of
your budget goes for food? Multiply by 3 and tell me how quickly you'd
be in
your boss' office looking for a massive raise, along with all of your
coworkers.

Ah! So what is it then? In this circle jerk of an economic discussion,
on the one hand I have you guys on the left complaining about the
substandard wages that the "working poor" are being paid. Then on the
other hand, you complain that if we pay people are "reasonable wage"
that the increase in costs would be too much for consumers to bear. You
use this as some sort of loose justification for remaining complicit in
the illegal immigrant labor practices. Yet we are doing nothing more
than forstering and encouraging a "slave labor" class of worker. Mark
talks about the "slave class" of people doing menial jobs, and how
idealogically wrong it is, yet neither one of you can resolve the issue
of cheap goods versus the elimination of the "slave class". You can't
have it both ways. Which do you want?

Well, then the simplest solution is simply to focus on the fact that the
people are breaking the law.

Then you and I are in agreement on this point then.

That way, the responsibility can be pushed off
onto someone else.

Is that how the left works? All too good at identifying problems, but
falling far short on solutions?

Dave

Cuban Boating
 

All of this "illegals picking tomatoes" ignores the fact that when US tomatoes
cost too much to deliver to market they will be grown in Mexico where "legal"
Mexicans will be picking them.
This is not that isolated a problem. In 2000 the farmers in Palm Beach County
plowed their tomato crop under because they couldn't afford to pick them and
get them to market at the NAFTA price (and people wonder why 3000 people voted
for Buchanan in that county)

Cuban Boating
 

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 08:09:07 -0400, Dave Hall
wrote:

noah wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 07:07:30 -0400, Dave Hall
wrote:

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Grumman-581" wrote in
message
...


http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/americ...ants.truck.ap/
index.html

I think I would have been tempted to let them continue on towards the
US
due
to their creativeness...


It's funny. The president says we're trying to spread the word about
freedom
and democracy, but when the occasional handful want to come here, we
send
them back to a regime we've considered evil since its inception.


Nothing "funny" about it. We have a legal process which a potential
immigrant can use to gain entry here. If you try to circumvent that
process, you deserve to get sent back.

Dave


No fruit or vegetables for you, Dave, for an entire year. Or, you can openly
admit your understanding that of all the produce picked HERE IN THIS
COUNTRY, 80% of the labor is done by illegals and YOU LIKE EATING THE
RESULTS.


That's a poor excuse for breaking the law, and certainly an even poorer
justification for it.

Dave


Dave- you must have missed the post by (I think) Chuck Gould, where he
described how the government is complicite in allowing illegals to
harvest time-sensitive crops, because noone else is willing to work
for slave wages, but corporate farms need the labor.

Yea so? So are you just as complicit in allowing a clearly illegal
practice to continue?

Dave, you are preaching to the choir. I *know* that I have no control
over what the government does.


If the pool of illegal labor were to go away, what would happen? I'll
tell you. Either they growers would develop better technology to replace
human labor with machines, or they would (by the force of supply and
demand), have to raise their labor rates, until they were able to hire
local people. Yes, that would cause the prices to rise, but that's not
the germaine issue.


You are so ideologically constipated that you cannot see.

Really? I see things very clearly. Maybe because I don't spend my time
making excuses and exeptions for things that should not be.

This statement is patently untrue. The government, "our" government,
does things daily that "should not be". I make no excuses and pull no
punches. From reading your posts, you see this too, but you don't
want to admit the failings. Patriotism DEMANDS critical thought- no
matter where your allegiance or affilliation lies.

Dave

noah

Courtesy of Lee Yeaton,
See the boats of rec.boats
www.TheBayGuide.com/rec.boats

Cuban Boating
 

"Dave Hall" wrote ...
Doug Kanter wrote:

Well, then the simplest solution is simply to focus on the fact that the
people are breaking the law.

Then you and I are in agreement on this point then.

And just because something is against the law, it makes it wrong? Nawh,
don't think so... Just because something is legal, it doesn't make it moral
and just because something is illegal, it doesn't make it immoral... Some
cops understand this and refuse to enforce the bull**** laws that they see
coming out of the braindead politicians... Most are more than willing to
enforce whatever they are told to enforce... When you question them on it,
they come up with excuses like, "Well, I am just doing my job", or "just
following orders"... That excuse didn't cut it at Nuremburg and it doesn't
cut it now...

Cuban Boating
 

noah wrote:

Really? I see things very clearly. Maybe because I don't spend my time
making excuses and exeptions for things that should not be.

This statement is patently untrue. The government, "our" government,
does things daily that "should not be". I make no excuses and pull no
punches. From reading your posts, you see this too, but you don't
want to admit the failings. Patriotism DEMANDS critical thought- no
matter where your allegiance or affilliation lies.

That's almost funny. Here the left is always spouting about the
shortcomings of our government, and how they don't trust it to keep
terrorists at bay, and to make the world a better place for freedom, and
human rights. Yet, they want the same government, to be the
administrators of healthcare, day care, our retirement funds, and to
weigh in on lifestyle issues.

It sounds somewhat hypocritical to me.

Dave

Cuban Boating
 

Dave Hall wrote:


That's almost funny. Here the left is always spouting about the
shortcomings of our government, and how they don't trust it to keep
terrorists at bay

There's no evidence the Bush Administration is keeping terrorists at bay.


, and to make the world a better place for freedom,

There's no evidence the Bush Administration is making the world a better
place for freedom. In fact, the opposite is true.

and
human rights.

You mean oil rights, and the rights to exploit third-world workers with
near-slave wages, right?



Yet, they want the same government, to be the
administrators of healthcare

I haven't read that proposal...surely you are not referring to a
universal health care card...


, day care

Right...you want women at home, barefoot, pregnant and subservient, right?


, our retirement funds

What a laugh.



, and to
weigh in on lifestyle issues.

Better the government than your stinking religion.



It sounds somewhat hypocritical to me.



Finally...your area of expertise.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

Cuban Boating
 

"Grumman-581" wrote in message
...
"Dave Hall" wrote ...
Doug Kanter wrote:

Well, then the simplest solution is simply to focus on the fact that
the
people are breaking the law.

Then you and I are in agreement on this point then.

And just because something is against the law, it makes it wrong? Nawh,
don't think so... Just because something is legal, it doesn't make it
moral
and just because something is illegal, it doesn't make it immoral... Some
cops understand this and refuse to enforce the bull**** laws that they see
coming out of the braindead politicians... Most are more than willing to
enforce whatever they are told to enforce... When you question them on it,
they come up with excuses like, "Well, I am just doing my job", or "just
following orders"... That excuse didn't cut it at Nuremburg and it doesn't
cut it now...


It's fine when it's working in your favor.

Cuban Boating
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...

noah wrote:

Really? I see things very clearly. Maybe because I don't spend my time
making excuses and exeptions for things that should not be.

This statement is patently untrue. The government, "our" government,
does things daily that "should not be". I make no excuses and pull no
punches. From reading your posts, you see this too, but you don't
want to admit the failings. Patriotism DEMANDS critical thought- no
matter where your allegiance or affilliation lies.

That's almost funny. Here the left is always spouting about the
shortcomings of our government, and how they don't trust it to keep
terrorists at bay, and to make the world a better place for freedom, and
human rights. Yet, they want the same government, to be the
administrators of healthcare, day care, our retirement funds, and to
weigh in on lifestyle issues.

It sounds somewhat hypocritical to me.

Dave


Dave, you are a constant source of enlightenment, especially on a Monday
morning. Please explain why we should assume that if some government
programs/plans don't work, they ALL don't/can't work.

It may be easier if you dredge up what you should've learned about
electronic gates (NAND,AND,NOR, etc). Simple logic.