Beohner - Hellbent on being a Traitor

I am not calling b.s. because I know you are well informed. so I need to understand... I am probably leaving out a whole industry... but small businesses which thrive on mexican labor seem to run by mexicans.

I suspects its really the large agri businesses and home builders, chain restaurants and the silicon valley guys.


for instance...

When home depot quotes 6 thousand to install tile and someone else says 7000 and someone else says 3500.... who wins? what homeowner asks to see a passport?
Everywhere I go I see smart mexican guys running the small businesses which can utilize mexican labor... other than restaurants which may or may not be run by mexican guys.


boehner's official list.

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2014&cid=N00003675&type=I&newmem=N


1 2 Retired $703,371 $703,371 $0
2 41 Securities & Investment $530,135 $451,135 $79,000
3 56 Oil & Gas $369,539 $258,789 $110,750
4 Mining $360,758 $325,608 $35,150
5 3 Real Estate $345,650 $325,650 $20,000
6 1 Misc Manufacturing & Distributing $254,675 $235,175 $19,500
7 8 Insurance $230,880 $127,380 $103,500
8 7 Lawyers/Law Firms $216,700 $173,950 $42,750
9 48 Misc Finance $198,540 $186,040 $12,500
10 13 Electric Utilities $195,250 $99,750 $95,500
11 42 Lobbyists $187,980 $187,980 $0
12 4 Health Professionals $174,695 $50,195 $124,500
13 17 General Contractors $163,300 $152,300 $11,000
14 9 Beer, Wine & Liquor $147,317 $111,750 $35,567
15 36 Hospitals/Nursing Homes $146,550 $120,050 $26,500
16 11 Food & Beverage $138,655 $107,655 $31,000
17 19 Commercial Banks $137,300 $79,800 $57,500
18 51 TV/Movies/Music $122,920 $95,220 $27,700
19 24 Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $120,200 $48,200 $72,000
20 10 Automotive $115,700 $80,700 $35,000
Download: CSV CSV CSVAbout OpenSecrets.org's download options
What is District Rank?View Top 20 | Top 50




AAAintheBeltway said:
You're totally right about this.

These guys would be perfectly happy as liberal democrats. They are not ideological for the most part. They view members who stand for conservative principles the same way your family feels about the obnoxious brother-in-law who wants to turn every family dinner into a political argument. They just want to carve up the turkey and eat, then catch the game. They see themselves as problem solvers, and increasingly the problems they are hearing are small businessmen who are worried their endless supply of cheap mexican labor might disappear. The fact that they are ruining the country doesn't concern them at all.
More...
 
Its not as if we are getting this information from places like infowars, this is the wallstreet journal saying that businesses are pressuring boehner to support amnesty, they call it "immigration reform" but lets be real, they are not for the conservative idea of immigration reform, making workers prove they are u.s. citizens, they just want the flood of cheap, legal labour.

Think about all the employees of companies that have recently started bitching about minimum wage hikes, or demanding what they percieve to be a living wage like employees of walmart and mcdonalds, you really think the Mexican who goes from hard labour picking fruit to flipping burgers for twice the wage is going to demand 15$ an hour, when his wage has already doubled for half the work?

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles...0001424052702304626304579508091839546088.html

jem said:
I am not calling b.s. because I know you are well informed. so I need to understand... I am probably leaving out a whole industry... but small businesses which thrive on mexican labor seem to run by mexicans.

I suspects its really the large agri businesses and home builders, chain restaurants and the silicon valley guys.


for instance...

When home depot quotes 6 thousand to install tile and someone else says 7000 and someone else says 3500.... who wins? what homeowner asks to see a passport?
Everywhere I go I see smart mexican guys running the small businesses which can utilize mexican labor... other than restaurants which may or may not be run by mexican guys.


boehner's official list.

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2014&cid=N00003675&type=I&newmem=N


1 2 Retired $703,371 $703,371 $0
2 41 Securities & Investment $530,135 $451,135 $79,000
3 56 Oil & Gas $369,539 $258,789 $110,750
4 Mining $360,758 $325,608 $35,150
5 3 Real Estate $345,650 $325,650 $20,000
6 1 Misc Manufacturing & Distributing $254,675 $235,175 $19,500
7 8 Insurance $230,880 $127,380 $103,500
8 7 Lawyers/Law Firms $216,700 $173,950 $42,750
9 48 Misc Finance $198,540 $186,040 $12,500
10 13 Electric Utilities $195,250 $99,750 $95,500
11 42 Lobbyists $187,980 $187,980 $0
12 4 Health Professionals $174,695 $50,195 $124,500
13 17 General Contractors $163,300 $152,300 $11,000
14 9 Beer, Wine & Liquor $147,317 $111,750 $35,567
15 36 Hospitals/Nursing Homes $146,550 $120,050 $26,500
16 11 Food & Beverage $138,655 $107,655 $31,000
17 19 Commercial Banks $137,300 $79,800 $57,500
18 51 TV/Movies/Music $122,920 $95,220 $27,700
19 24 Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $120,200 $48,200 $72,000
20 10 Automotive $115,700 $80,700 $35,000
Download: CSV CSV CSVAbout OpenSecrets.org's download options
What is District Rank?View Top 20 | Top 50
More...
 
I think we are agreeing... I am just saying its not small business doing the pressuring, its large business... the type that buys the dems and the establishment.

The chamber of commerce lobbying for immigration reform is not representing the wishes of small business owners... it is representing the interest of the cronies.



Max E. Pad said:
Its not as if we are getting this information from places like infowars, this is the wallstreet journal saying that businesses are pressuring boehner to support amnesty, they call it "immigration reform" but lets be real, they are not for the conservative idea of immigration reform, making workers prove they are u.s. citizens, they just want the flood of cheap, legal labour.

Think about all the employees of companies that have recently started bitching about minimum wage hikes, or demanding what they percieve to be a living wage like employees of walmart and mcdonalds, you really think the Mexican who goes from hard labour picking fruit to flipping burgers for twice the wage is going to demand 15$ an hour, when his wage has already doubled for half the work?

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles...0001424052702304626304579508091839546088.html
More...
 
WASHINGTON (AP) — Tens of thousands of immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally but don't have serious criminal records could be shielded from deportation under a policy change being weighed by Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson.

The change, if adopted following a review ordered by President Barack Obama, could limit removals of people who have little or no criminal record but have committed repeat immigration violations such as re-entering the country illegally after having been deported, or failing to comply with a deportation order....
 
jem said:
He has tried to sell us out before on this issue and his spokesperson would not confirm or deny the "hellbent" statement.

When a politician's spokesperson will not confirm or deny... that means the politician did it and is hoping no one got it on their cell phone.
More...


By now, I would've thought you'd understand by now that John Boehner looks out for his top constituents.... and John Boehner's #1 constituent is.... John Boehner.

Everything he and his staff does, says, writes, recommends, etc is done primarily to meet the aims/goals/priorities of John Boehner.

This applies to all politicians at all levels in all countries....
 
jem said:
He is trying to ensure that Harry Reid remains majority leader and screw the republican base at the same time.

I saw an article recently...
If the US has not let in a about a million immigrants a year... the democrats would be non existent. Now we have the democrats and Republican leadership make republicans non existent.

Boehner needs to be replaced immediately for the economic future of our country.
More...


What is the starting point for this opinion? 2009? 2000? 1990? 1980?

Seems to me, the starting point chosen by the author is done to bolster his particular argument. One can keep choosing earlier points, and reach gradually different conclusions. Eventually, if we go back all the way to 1600, then the US ceases to exist and all the wonderful, tragic, interesting, and innovative stuff would've never happened. At least not this particular version of history. Another version would've eventually take place, but can't predict what the results would've been.

For example, had we reformed our immigration policies in the late 19th century (i.e blocked/limited immigrants and refugees), then we wouldn't have had the influx of Irish, Italian, German, Slavic, Chinese, etc. At that time, who would've performed the low-paying, labor-intensive menial tasks required to advance the US? Later, would the industrial might of the US in the 20th century been as dominant if we didn't have the pool of labor populated by the children/grandchildren of these immigrants?

With the benefit of hindsight, I think it's fair to say that overall, the descendants of immigrants have provided much greater benefits to our country and culture than if we denied them entry or limited their numbers.

Sure there have been bad apples, but they've easily been countered by the contributions of those on the other side of the bell curve.

The funny thing is, everybody argues about immigration like its a new-fangled issue that is unique to our 21st century world. It isn't. Go to the library and pull up microfiched copies of the New York Times from the 1870s/80s/90s or 1900s/1910s/1920s. You'll see cries for immigration reform in the headlines back then, too. That the country was being overrun by immigrants everywhere, stealing jobs, causing crime, putting burdens on the social fabric, threatening the "homogeneity" of the American populace, etc.

Think it's just an American "phenomenon"? Here is a short list of the current immigration "issues":

Italy and the influx of North Africans?
Russia and the influx of Asian, Serbs, Turks, and Armenians?
Holland and Belgium and the influx of Serbs, Bulgarians, Romanians?
Britain and the influx of Indians, Africans, and islanders from the Caribbean?
Persian Gulf emirates and states and influx of Indians/Afghanis/Pakistanis?

Immigration is a worldwide historical "issue". Has been and always will be. Humans are migrants and are always on the move. Staying in one place is a relatively recent phenomenon. NIMBY is definitely a recent phenomenon.
 
blah12345678 said:
What is the starting point for this opinion? 2009? 2000? 1990? 1980?

Seems to me, the starting point chosen by the author is done to bolster his particular argument. One can keep choosing earlier points, and reach gradually different conclusions. Eventually, if we go back all the way to 1600, then the US ceases to exist and all the wonderful, tragic, interesting, and innovative stuff would've never happened. At least not this particular version of history. Another version would've eventually take place, but can't predict what the results would've been.

For example, had we reformed our immigration policies in the late 19th century (i.e blocked/limited immigrants and refugees), then we wouldn't have had the influx of Irish, Italian, German, Slavic, Chinese, etc. At that time, who would've performed the low-paying, labor-intensive menial tasks required to advance the US? Later, would the industrial might of the US in the 20th century been as dominant if we didn't have the pool of labor populated by the children/grandchildren of these immigrants?

With the benefit of hindsight, I think it's fair to say that overall, the descendants of immigrants have provided much greater benefits to our country and culture than if we denied them entry or limited their numbers.

Sure there have been bad apples, but they've easily been countered by the contributions of those on the other side of the bell curve.

The funny thing is, everybody argues about immigration like its a new-fangled issue that is unique to our 21st century world. It isn't. Go to the library and pull up microfiched copies of the New York Times from the 1870s/80s/90s or 1900s/1910s/1920s. You'll see cries for immigration reform in the headlines back then, too. That the country was being overrun by immigrants everywhere, stealing jobs, causing crime, putting burdens on the social fabric, threatening the "homogeneity" of the American populace, etc.

Think it's just an American "phenomenon"? Here is a short list of the current immigration "issues":

Italy and the influx of North Africans?
Russia and the influx of Asian, Serbs, Turks, and Armenians?
Holland and Belgium and the influx of Serbs, Bulgarians, Romanians?
Britain and the influx of Indians, Africans, and islanders from the Caribbean?
Persian Gulf emirates and states and influx of Indians/Afghanis/Pakistanis?

Immigration is a worldwide historical "issue". Has been and always will be. Humans are migrants and are always on the move. Staying in one place is a relatively recent phenomenon. NIMBY is definitely a recent phenomenon.
More...

History for the win.
 
blah12345678 said:
What is the starting point for this opinion? 2009? 2000? 1990? 1980?

Seems to me, the starting point chosen by the author is done to bolster his particular argument. One can keep choosing earlier points, and reach gradually different conclusions. Eventually, if we go back all the way to 1600, then the US ceases to exist and all the wonderful, tragic, interesting, and innovative stuff would've never happened. At least not this particular version of history. Another version would've eventually take place, but can't predict what the results would've been.

For example, had we reformed our immigration policies in the late 19th century (i.e blocked/limited immigrants and refugees), then we wouldn't have had the influx of Irish, Italian, German, Slavic, Chinese, etc. At that time, who would've performed the low-paying, labor-intensive menial tasks required to advance the US? Later, would the industrial might of the US in the 20th century been as dominant if we didn't have the pool of labor populated by the children/grandchildren of these immigrants?

With the benefit of hindsight, I think it's fair to say that overall, the descendants of immigrants have provided much greater benefits to our country and culture than if we denied them entry or limited their numbers.

Sure there have been bad apples, but they've easily been countered by the contributions of those on the other side of the bell curve.

The funny thing is, everybody argues about immigration like its a new-fangled issue that is unique to our 21st century world. It isn't. Go to the library and pull up microfiched copies of the New York Times from the 1870s/80s/90s or 1900s/1910s/1920s. You'll see cries for immigration reform in the headlines back then, too. That the country was being overrun by immigrants everywhere, stealing jobs, causing crime, putting burdens on the social fabric, threatening the "homogeneity" of the American populace, etc.

Think it's just an American "phenomenon"? Here is a short list of the current immigration "issues":

Italy and the influx of North Africans?
Russia and the influx of Asian, Serbs, Turks, and Armenians?
Holland and Belgium and the influx of Serbs, Bulgarians, Romanians?
Britain and the influx of Indians, Africans, and islanders from the Caribbean?
Persian Gulf emirates and states and influx of Indians/Afghanis/Pakistanis?

Immigration is a worldwide historical "issue". Has been and always will be. Humans are migrants and are always on the move. Staying in one place is a relatively recent phenomenon. NIMBY is definitely a recent phenomenon.
More...
One problem with your analogy is that you're comparing legal immigrants coming here at a time we actually needed them.
And very importantly, Immigrants that wanted to be Americans. Compared with illegal immigrants coming here we don't need that have no desire to assimilate or even learn our language. For the most part they aren't paying income taxes but are using tax payer funded services.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top