Will the "Immigrant Boycott" shut down any airports?

[Jay Honeck]

Tomorrow is the so-called "Immigrant Boycott", planned so that illegal
aliens can make a show of their economic clout in America by staying
home from work.

Given the number of "immigrants" working at major big city airports, I
can foresee some major problems if this thing really takes off. From
my casual observances as an airline passenger, LAX, LAS and ORD seem to
have literally hundreds of Hispanic laborers working in all aspects of
operations, from baggage handling to ground ops. If they all boycott
work tomorrow...

I know the lodging industry is having a bird about the potential impact
of this boycott, as evidenced by the hilarious "urgent action updates"
we have been receiving from the Lodging Association. We are finding it
truly enjoyable to watch as all the corrupt hoteliers who hired illegal
aliens in the first place -- basically everyone else in the lodging
industry -- panics about their plight.

Anyone have any idea if the airlines have contingency plans for this
sort of thing? What'll they do if there's no one to unload the
planes?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Montblack]

("Jay Honeck" wrote)
> Tomorrow is the so-called "Immigrant Boycott", planned so that illegal
> aliens can make a show of their economic clout in America by staying home
> from work.

> I know the lodging industry is having a bird about the potential impact of
> this boycott, as evidenced by the hilarious "urgent action updates" we
> have been receiving from the Lodging Association. We are finding it truly
> enjoyable to watch as all the corrupt hoteliers who hired illegal aliens
> in the first place -- basically everyone else in the lodging industry --
> panics about their plight.


They can pay their "guest workers" double-time-and-a-half tomorrow ...or
close up shop.

(x2.5) is about where the wages would be without "guest workers" so one day
of it shouldn't be too much for those businesses to bear.

I'm not sure what they're trying to accomplish with this boycott? It could
have an unforeseen negative result for the ILLEGALS ...I mean, "guest
workers".


Montblack

[Jon Kraus]

The last poll I saw this morning stated that the majority of American's
did not support the so-called boycott. I think that they may be
crapping where they sleep, and the outcome will be not what they wanted.

For myself, I don't frequent fast-food joints too much, and I don't get
my grass cut until Wednesday, so I won't see any disruption in my
life... :-)

Jon Kraus
'79 Mooney 201
4443H @ TYQ

Jay Honeck wrote:

> Tomorrow is the so-called "Immigrant Boycott", planned so that illegal
> aliens can make a show of their economic clout in America by staying
> home from work.
>
> Given the number of "immigrants" working at major big city airports, I
> can foresee some major problems if this thing really takes off. From
> my casual observances as an airline passenger, LAX, LAS and ORD seem to
> have literally hundreds of Hispanic laborers working in all aspects of
> operations, from baggage handling to ground ops. If they all boycott
> work tomorrow...
>
> I know the lodging industry is having a bird about the potential impact
> of this boycott, as evidenced by the hilarious "urgent action updates"
> we have been receiving from the Lodging Association. We are finding it
> truly enjoyable to watch as all the corrupt hoteliers who hired illegal
> aliens in the first place -- basically everyone else in the lodging
> industry -- panics about their plight.
>
> Anyone have any idea if the airlines have contingency plans for this
> sort of thing? What'll they do if there's no one to unload the
> planes?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Jim Macklin]

The FAA has had rules for background checks for all airport
employees since the 1980s, and these were tightened after
9/11. Whether that was really done and whether a lot of the
Mexican invaders will not work at the airports is to be
found out when it happens.

Immigrants and guests ask permission, illegals come here to
work and invaders come here to take the old Spanish
land-grant lands back. If they were Cuban, Russian or
Mexican troops carrying RPGs we would fight them. Instead
they sent their women, pregnant, and their covert army along
with the men to work until their numbers could force the
over-throw of the California and other governments.
This is not a civil rights struggle and those people are an
invading army. We should not allow them to vote or allow in
illegal to work in this country. The law should be enforced
against the illegal worker and the boss who hires them.
Of course, Mexico will deny repatriation.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.




"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
| Tomorrow is the so-called "Immigrant Boycott", planned so
that illegal
| aliens can make a show of their economic clout in America
by staying
| home from work.
|
| Given the number of "immigrants" working at major big city
airports, I
| can foresee some major problems if this thing really takes
off. From
| my casual observances as an airline passenger, LAX, LAS
and ORD seem to
| have literally hundreds of Hispanic laborers working in
all aspects of
| operations, from baggage handling to ground ops. If they
all boycott
| work tomorrow...
|
| I know the lodging industry is having a bird about the
potential impact
| of this boycott, as evidenced by the hilarious "urgent
action updates"
| we have been receiving from the Lodging Association. We
are finding it
| truly enjoyable to watch as all the corrupt hoteliers who
hired illegal
| aliens in the first place -- basically everyone else in
the lodging
| industry -- panics about their plight.
|
| Anyone have any idea if the airlines have contingency
plans for this
| sort of thing? What'll they do if there's no one to
unload the
| planes?
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|

[NW_PILOT]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Tomorrow is the so-called "Immigrant Boycott", planned so that illegal
> aliens can make a show of their economic clout in America by staying
> home from work.
>
> Given the number of "immigrants" working at major big city airports, I
> can foresee some major problems if this thing really takes off. From
> my casual observances as an airline passenger, LAX, LAS and ORD seem to
> have literally hundreds of Hispanic laborers working in all aspects of
> operations, from baggage handling to ground ops. If they all boycott
> work tomorrow...
>
> I know the lodging industry is having a bird about the potential impact
> of this boycott, as evidenced by the hilarious "urgent action updates"
> we have been receiving from the Lodging Association. We are finding it
> truly enjoyable to watch as all the corrupt hoteliers who hired illegal
> aliens in the first place -- basically everyone else in the lodging
> industry -- panics about their plight.
>
> Anyone have any idea if the airlines have contingency plans for this
> sort of thing? What'll they do if there's no one to unload the
> planes?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>


My wife works for a major motel chain they are mandating that everyone
"grounds keepers to managers" show up for a meeting if they don't show they
find themselves with out a job!

[Capt.Doug]

>"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
> Anyone have any idea if the airlines have contingency plans for this
> sort of thing? What'll they do if there's no one to unload the
> planes?

Excepting some food joints in the non-secure area of the terminal, there
shouldn't be much difference. Perhaps the hotel industry should perform FBI
background checks with fingerprints for it's members. :-)

D.

[Morgans]

"Jim Burns" > wrote

> Our current payroll is 73 people, half of which are Hispanic. Of the half
> that are Hispanic, about half are citizens via birth and have lived
> locally
> for years.

What industry are you in? Just curious.
--
Jim in NC

[Ash Wyllie]

Jay Honeck opined

<snip>

As others have pointed out, due to the post 9/11 security checks, there can be
no illegals working at airports. So, the boycott will have no effect on commercial
aviation ;).


-ash
Cthulhu in 2005!
Why wait for nature?

[Montblack]

("Morgans" wrote)
> What industry are you in? Just curious.


Paper, as in paperwork. <g>


Montblack
Maybe, like naming a boat, that Aztec could be called "The Paper-wait!"

[Morgans]

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
> Fresh potato farming/grading/packaging/shipping.

Ahh, spuds! One of the most versatile foods anywhere. How many ways are
there, to prepare the potato, I wonder?
--
Jim in NC

[Jim Burns]

Near Salem, NC? Several loads delivered to the Kroger DC last week and
this.
Jim

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jim Burns" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Fresh potato farming/grading/packaging/shipping.
>
> Ahh, spuds! One of the most versatile foods anywhere. How many ways are
> there, to prepare the potato, I wonder?
> --
> Jim in NC
>

[Jim Macklin]

That sounds good, the only thing else that can and should be
done, is verify SS numbers with the gov't.

Trouble is there are a lot of companies that seek illegal,
undocumented labor, such as motels and hotels, road and roof
construction and of course farm and meat packing.

Also, require English be spoken and understood. A few years
ago about a dozen Mexicans working in the packing plant in
Garden City, Kansas died when they went into a blood tank to
rescue the first crew that went in without breathing
equipment. The raw blood is stored in tanks and then
drained out when it is processed. But the hemoglobin
absorbs all the free oxygen, you pass out with in a few
seconds without proper O2 supply. The signs were posted,
but the workers couldn't read English.

Similarly, there are so many illegals in Wichita working for
some local companies, that if you don't speak Spanish you
won't be hired.



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Jim Burns" > wrote in message
...
| Our current payroll is 73 people, half of which are
Hispanic. Of the half
| that are Hispanic, about half are citizens via birth and
have lived locally
| for years. The remaining 1/4 of our work force flow in
and out of a
| revolving door. First we require an employment
application to be filled
| out, completely... any blanks and it get's tossed. Last
job in Mexico?
| Sorry. We require 3 forms of ident, at least one with a
pic, a green
| card/work permit, and SS card. Usually we can pick out
the forgeries if we
| ask for enough ident. If we question anything, they
simply aren't hired.
| We refuse to deal with migrant labor contractors or hire
migrants, they must
| establish a local residence and are required to "intend"
to maintain that
| residence year 'round. Whether they do or not is up to
them, but if they
| leave for an extended period, they don't get hired back.
This is about the
| best we can do to keep the illegals out, and frankly, it
works pretty good.
| We find that if you ask enough questions that they don't
have answers for,
| they'll leave and never come back. Word travels fast
amoung the illegals
| when you require enough documentation and ask enough
questions. They simply
| don't apply.
|
| Our starting rate is $6.00 per hour, plus another $2.50 in
non-smoking and
| attendence bonuses. Tomorrow, every employee that fails
to show up for work
| on time will loose a $1.00 per hour attendence bonus for
all hours worked
| this coming week, expected to be around 50 hours. If they
miss 25% of the
| weekly bonuses for the quarter, they loose the quarterly
attendence bonus of
| $1.00 per hour for all hours worked that quarter, normally
around $500-$600.
| Those that don't come to work tomorrow will recieve their
official warning
| regarding attendence, miss work the next time and it's
grounds for dismisal
| with no available un-employment benefits.
|
| It works for us, YMMV
|
| Jim
|
|

[Jim Burns]

Our current payroll is 73 people, half of which are Hispanic. Of the half
that are Hispanic, about half are citizens via birth and have lived locally
for years. The remaining 1/4 of our work force flow in and out of a
revolving door. First we require an employment application to be filled
out, completely... any blanks and it get's tossed. Last job in Mexico?
Sorry. We require 3 forms of ident, at least one with a pic, a green
card/work permit, and SS card. Usually we can pick out the forgeries if we
ask for enough ident. If we question anything, they simply aren't hired.
We refuse to deal with migrant labor contractors or hire migrants, they must
establish a local residence and are required to "intend" to maintain that
residence year 'round. Whether they do or not is up to them, but if they
leave for an extended period, they don't get hired back. This is about the
best we can do to keep the illegals out, and frankly, it works pretty good.
We find that if you ask enough questions that they don't have answers for,
they'll leave and never come back. Word travels fast amoung the illegals
when you require enough documentation and ask enough questions. They simply
don't apply.

Our starting rate is $6.00 per hour, plus another $2.50 in non-smoking and
attendence bonuses. Tomorrow, every employee that fails to show up for work
on time will loose a $1.00 per hour attendence bonus for all hours worked
this coming week, expected to be around 50 hours. If they miss 25% of the
weekly bonuses for the quarter, they loose the quarterly attendence bonus of
$1.00 per hour for all hours worked that quarter, normally around $500-$600.
Those that don't come to work tomorrow will recieve their official warning
regarding attendence, miss work the next time and it's grounds for dismisal
with no available un-employment benefits.

It works for us, YMMV

Jim

[Flyingmonk]

JH wrote:
>We are finding it
>truly enjoyable to watch as all the corrupt hoteliers who hired illegal
>aliens in the first place -- basically everyone else in the lodging
>industry -- panics about their plight.

I ran out of gas near the Arlington Semetary once and hitched a ride on
a tour buss full of hoteliers, here in DC for their hoteliers'
convention. 90% of the them on the bus were Indians (East). Looks
like the hotel business are "monopolised" by Indians, the Police used
to be by the Irish, the construction industries will be the Latinos,
more and more of them are becoming subcontractors and general
contractors now, not just laborers or mechanics any longer.

The Monk

[Jim Burns]

Fresh potato farming/grading/packaging/shipping.
Jim

[Jose]

> Anyone have any idea if the airlines have contingency plans for this
> sort of thing? What'll they do if there's no one to unload the
> planes?

Same thing they do when there's any other kind of strike - make the
passengers wait and claim there's a "malfunction" or somesuch.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Morgans]

"Jim Burns" > wrote

> Near Salem, NC? Several loads delivered to the Kroger DC last week and
> this.

Nope. West Central, close to the mountains. There aren't even any Kroger's
around here.
--
Jim in NC

[Andrew Sarangan]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>
> Given the number of "immigrants" working at major big city airports, I
> can foresee some major problems if this thing really takes off. From
> my casual observances as an airline passenger, LAX, LAS and ORD seem to
> have literally hundreds of Hispanic laborers working in all aspects of
> operations, from baggage handling to ground ops. If they all boycott
> work tomorrow...
>

Jay

You are making the assumption that most Hispanic laborers at airports
are all working illegally. This is one type of misunderstanding that
aggravates the situation. Just because someone looks different does not
mean they are an immigrant, or even illegal. I know bona fide Americans
who are still referred to as immigrants.

[Robert M. Gary]

But Jim, the media tells us that Americans (Hispanic origin or not)
will not work these jobs. You can't be telling us that the T.V. is
lying to us, can you??

-Robert


Jim Burns wrote:
> Our current payroll is 73 people, half of which are Hispanic. Of the half
> that are Hispanic, about half are citizens via birth and have lived locally
> for years.

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Tomorrow is the so-called "Immigrant Boycott", planned so that illegal
> aliens can make a show of their economic clout in America by staying
> home from work.

Um, first of all...any illegal immigrant dumb enough to reveal their status
as an illegal by participating in a boycott by only illegal immigrants
deserves to get deported. That alone should suggest there's something fishy
with the idea that this is a boycott by illegal immigrants only.

Secondly, in this particular case, the boycott *is* by ALL immigrants, legal
or otherwise. I don't know if everyone who's replied so far just didn't
bother to read the news, or if they are reading news that sucks, but my news
sources are all in agreement that the proposed boycott is by all immigrants,
not just illegals.

Which means your question actually makes more sense than anyone could
possibly have guessed, giving your lead-in.

> [...]
> Anyone have any idea if the airlines have contingency plans for this
> sort of thing? What'll they do if there's no one to unload the
> planes?

There's enough disagreement within the immigrant community regarding the
wisdom of creating a day of chaos just to make a point, that I think it's
unlikely critical things like transportation infrastructure will be affected
in any significant way.

Worst-case scenario: they'll make the passengers all grab their own bags
before heading into the airport. Could make for the shortest end-to-end
travel day ever, what with no one having to sit around waiting for their
bags to come out.

Pete

[Montblack]

("Andrew Sarangan" wrote)
> You are making the assumption that most Hispanic laborers at airports are
> all working illegally. This is one type of misunderstanding that
> aggravates the situation. Just because someone looks different does not
> mean they are an immigrant, or even illegal. I know bona fide Americans
> who are still referred to as immigrants.


The misunderstanding is on your part. The influx of "ILLEGALS" has been
massive, and rapid.

The INS, on their best day (so to speak), couldn't process a tiny fraction
of the people who have invaded our country over the last 10 years. The INS
is clogged and broken down - we know, we've had a number of friends needing
to deal with the INS, becoming citizens.

And BTW, aggravate WHAT situation? Oh, I know! The situation of 10's of
millions of ILLEGALS flooding our shores.

When I see a Mexican on the streets of Minnesota, my assumption is
"Illegal". I bet I'm right over 75% of the time. I'm giving you 1 in 4 ...as
a peace offering to the God of Diversity.


Montblack :-o
http://www.filipino-americans.com/
"Hey, I'm not Mexican, I'm Filipino ...No problem, I get that a lot these
days."

[Peter Duniho]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> The misunderstanding is on your part. The influx of "ILLEGALS" has been
> massive, and rapid.

Andrew never said it wasn't. All he said (implied, actually) was that most
Hispanic airport workers are legal. Given the background checks they
presumably go through, I'd say that's a pretty safe assumption, regardless
of what one might think about the prevelance of illegals in other jobs.

> The INS, on their best day (so to speak), couldn't process a tiny fraction
> of the people who have invaded our country over the last 10 years. The INS
> is clogged and broken down - we know, we've had a number of friends
> needing
> to deal with the INS, becoming citizens.

INS is screwed up, as is much of our government. No doubt about that. I
have plenty of personal experience with the INS to confirm your assertion.
I'm not clear on how that is relevant to the question of who should be
permitted to immigrate to the US, or what to do with those who decide to do
so illegally.

> And BTW, aggravate WHAT situation? Oh, I know! The situation of 10's of
> millions of ILLEGALS flooding our shores.

I love it when people use vague terms like "flooding". A word like that, in
this context, has no use but to evoke an emotional response in an attempt to
bypass rational analysis of the issue. Especially when you use made-up
numbers like "10's of millions". As of 2003, the *TOTAL* estimated number
of illegal immigrants living in the US was fewer than 10 million (7 million,
to be exact). It's not even ONE ten million, never mind "10's of millions".

Compare that to the US birth rate (4 million annually), and the *legal*
immigration rate (about 1 million annually).

In other words, every 18 months the United States adds the same number of
legal residents as the TOTAL number of illegal residents. With an estimated
annual increase of illegal residents of only 350,000, illegal residents
account for less than 7% of the population growth in the US. A significant
number, to be sure, but hardly "flooding" IMHO.

> When I see a Mexican on the streets of Minnesota, my assumption is
> "Illegal". I bet I'm right over 75% of the time.

It seems to me that that has more to do with the relative proportion of
legal and illegal Mexicans within the US than it does with the total number
of illegal immigrants (even assuming you're right as often as you think).

Pete

[Martin Hotze]

On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 15:21:32 -0500, Montblack wrote:

>I'm not sure what they're trying to accomplish with this boycott? It could
>have an unforeseen negative result for the ILLEGALS ...I mean, "guest
>workers".

Remeber, it is May 1st. A traditional socialist day (in the old world).

#m
--
"We're out of toilet paper sir!"
<http://www.webcrunchers.com/crunch/Play/history/stories/toilet.html>

[Jay Honeck]

> Trouble is there are a lot of companies that seek illegal,
> undocumented labor, such as motels and hotels

Yep, the lodging industry is one of the prime culprits in this problem.


Yet, I've been in an email mosh pit over this issue with "human
resource professionals" from big-chain hotels, some of who are bashing
me for being "unfair" to "workers" and "denying their rights" by not
hiring documented Americans!

These so-called "professionals" have deluded themselves into thinking
that it's somehow okay to hire illegal aliens (because "Americans don't
want to do that kind of work"), and that these illegals somehow have
rights that supercede the law.

It disgusts me, and I'm ashamed of my industry.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Um, first of all...any illegal immigrant dumb enough to reveal their status
> as an illegal by participating in a boycott by only illegal immigrants
> deserves to get deported.

What a great idea! However, I don't think the vision of hundreds of
busses lined up, so that the protesting illegals can be promptly
shipped back home is what you had in mind?

> Secondly, in this particular case, the boycott *is* by ALL immigrants, legal
> or otherwise. I don't know if everyone who's replied so far just didn't
> bother to read the news, or if they are reading news that sucks, but my news
> sources are all in agreement that the proposed boycott is by all immigrants,
> not just illegals.

Right. And Iran is building reactors to produce electricity.

Legal immigrants have NOTHING to protest. In fact, of the many legal
(recent) immigrants I know, ALL are directly and vehemently opposed to
ANY kind of "amnesty" for the illegals.

We're ALL "immigrants" to America, Pete. The purpose of this boycott
is to highlight the so-called "importance" of illegal aliens to our
economy, so that Congress doesn't "criminalize" (I LOVE that term --
as if it's not already criminal to be here illegally) being in this
country illegally. (This is almost a direct quote from a boycott
organizer that I just heard interviewed on NPR, by the way. We almost
died laughing...)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Newps]

Jay Honeck wrote:


> We're ALL "immigrants" to America


No way. I was born here.

[Jim Burns]

I think that the media personnel are simply telling us that THEY won't work
these jobs. :)
We honestly don't have a hard time finding help. It's convenient for the
locals and pays better than Wal Mart.

Jim

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> But Jim, the media tells us that Americans (Hispanic origin or not)
> will not work these jobs. You can't be telling us that the T.V. is
> lying to us, can you??
>
> -Robert
>
>
> Jim Burns wrote:
> > Our current payroll is 73 people, half of which are Hispanic. Of the
half
> > that are Hispanic, about half are citizens via birth and have lived
locally
> > for years.
>

[Jay Honeck]

> > We're ALL "immigrants" to America
>
> No way. I was born here.

Ouch. Okay, I deserved that...

;-)

How about: "All of our families immigrated to America"?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jose]

> How about: "All of our families immigrated to America"?

How far back do you want to go? There were native Americans here, and
some of those folks have families. Some of them even have families with
other native Americans.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Joe Feise]

Peter Duniho wrote on 04/30/06 22:46:

> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>> Tomorrow is the so-called "Immigrant Boycott", planned so that illegal
>> aliens can make a show of their economic clout in America by staying
>> home from work.
>
> Um, first of all...any illegal immigrant dumb enough to reveal their status
> as an illegal by participating in a boycott by only illegal immigrants
> deserves to get deported. That alone should suggest there's something fishy
> with the idea that this is a boycott by illegal immigrants only.
>
> Secondly, in this particular case, the boycott *is* by ALL immigrants, legal
> or otherwise. I don't know if everyone who's replied so far just didn't
> bother to read the news, or if they are reading news that sucks, but my news
> sources are all in agreement that the proposed boycott is by all immigrants,
> not just illegals.


Well, I am a naturalized citizen, i.e., an immigrant, and I have other things to
do than to walk on the street...

-Joe

[Matt Barrow]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> > We're ALL "immigrants" to America
>>
>> No way. I was born here.
>
> Ouch. Okay, I deserved that...
>
> ;-)
>
> How about: "All of our families immigrated to America"?

Including the aborigines.

[John Gaquin]

"Jim Burns" > wrote in message

>I think that the media personnel are simply telling us that THEY won't work
> these jobs. :)

The media tell us what they want us to believe - not just about criminal
aliens, but about every aspect of policy news. Objective reporting fell off
the top of their priority list a long, long time ago.

[Ross Richardson]

A local radio station said there was going to be three on three baseball
today. That was all there was there were not immigrants.

Montblack wrote:

> ("Jay Honeck" wrote)
>
>> Tomorrow is the so-called "Immigrant Boycott", planned so that illegal
>> aliens can make a show of their economic clout in America by staying
>> home from work.
>
>
>> I know the lodging industry is having a bird about the potential
>> impact of this boycott, as evidenced by the hilarious "urgent action
>> updates" we have been receiving from the Lodging Association. We are
>> finding it truly enjoyable to watch as all the corrupt hoteliers who
>> hired illegal aliens in the first place -- basically everyone else in
>> the lodging industry -- panics about their plight.
>
>
>
> They can pay their "guest workers" double-time-and-a-half tomorrow ...or
> close up shop.
>
> (x2.5) is about where the wages would be without "guest workers" so one
> day of it shouldn't be too much for those businesses to bear.
>
> I'm not sure what they're trying to accomplish with this boycott? It
> could have an unforeseen negative result for the ILLEGALS ...I mean,
> "guest workers".
>
>
> Montblack

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Legal immigrants have NOTHING to protest.

Of course they do. Anyone who disagrees with the current immigration policy
has something to protest.

You don't have to be an illegal to disagree with the US government.

[Morgans]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote

> Yet, I've been in an email mosh pit over this issue with "human
> resource professionals" from big-chain hotels, some of who are bashing
> me for being "unfair" to "workers" and "denying their rights" by not
> hiring documented Americans!

Am I missing something? You don't hire un documented aliens, are you? What
is their beef?
--
Jim in NC

[Newps]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>>We're ALL "immigrants" to America
>>
>>No way. I was born here.
>
>
> Ouch. Okay, I deserved that...
>
> ;-)
>
> How about: "All of our families immigrated to America"?

While that may or may not be true, it is irrelavant. Watch your email
inbox today for comments made by the Australian prime minister. He
basically says love it or leave it.

[Jay Honeck]

> I love it when people use vague terms like "flooding". A word like that, in
> this context, has no use but to evoke an emotional response in an attempt to
> bypass rational analysis of the issue. Especially when you use made-up
> numbers like "10's of millions". As of 2003, the *TOTAL* estimated number
> of illegal immigrants living in the US was fewer than 10 million (7 million,
> to be exact). It's not even ONE ten million, never mind "10's of millions".

Well, Pete, Reuter's thinks you're wrong by a few million:
************************************************** *************************************************
WASHINGTON - A one-day nationwide strike and business boycott gathered
steam on Monday to demand legal rights for millions of illegal
immigrants, with many U.S. businesses shutting down voluntarily to
avoid disruption. Early reports suggested many of the estimated 11.5-12
million illegal immigrants in the country were staying away from work,
despite a mixed message from immigrant-rights organizations, some of
which opposed the action.
************************************************** *************************************************

I wonder how they estimate the number of illegal aliens? It's not like
they're standing around, asking to be counted.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Chris S]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> > I love it when people use vague terms like "flooding".
> > A word like that, in this context, has no use but to evoke
> > an emotional response in an attempt to bypass rational
> > analysis of the issue. Especially when you use made-up numbers
> > like "10's of millions". As of 2003, the *TOTAL* estimated number
> > of illegal immigrants living in the US was fewer than 10 million
> > (7 million, to be exact). It's not even ONE ten million, never
> > mind "10's of millions".
>
> Well, Pete, Reuter's thinks you're wrong by a few million:

> ************************************************** ************
> WASHINGTON - A one-day nationwide strike and business boycott
> gathered steam on Monday to demand legal rights for millions of
> illegal immigrants, with many U.S. businesses shutting down
> voluntarily to avoid disruption. Early reports suggested many of
> the estimated 11.5-12 million illegal immigrants in the country were
> staying away from work, despite a mixed message from immigrant-rights
> organizations, some of which opposed the action.
> ************************************************** **************
>
> I wonder how they estimate the number of illegal aliens? It's not
> like they're standing around, asking to be counted.
>

The actual number is irrelevant. The point is there is a ****-load of them
here, and they are still coming at a rate of about 1,000,000 a month (give
or take a few thousand).

This is a direct result of the out of control birth rate in 3rd world
countries. The population explosion is coming home to roost, so to speak.
Like global warming, we probably have passed the point of no return in
regard to getting the world's population under control. Do not expect life
for your children to be better than yours. Until the world's population is
stabilized, and then reduced, expect more illegal immigration, terrorists,
wide-spread diseases, social unrest, and anything else that results from
over-crowded countries unable to contain their hordes of uneducated,
starving, and desperate masses. Granted, Mother Nature will probably
stabilze and correct this problem, but her solution will be
non-discriminatory and affect everyone, whether you are the problem or not.

[Andrew Gideon]

On Mon, 01 May 2006 14:43:10 +0000, Jose wrote:

> There were native Americans here, and
> some of those folks have families.

Sure, but those newcomers arrived barely 18,000 years ago. Not enough
time to put down serious roots.

Why, I'd bet they didn't even learn English when they moved here.

- Andrew

[Montblack]

("Peter Duniho" wrote)
[snips]
> INS is screwed up, as is much of our government. No doubt about that. I
> have plenty of personal experience with the INS to confirm your assertion.
> I'm not clear on how that is relevant to the question of who should be
> permitted to immigrate to the US, or what to do with those who decide to
> do so illegally.

Stop them. Turn them back. Return them.

> I love it when people use vague terms like "flooding". A word like that,
> in this context, has no use but to evoke an emotional response in an
> attempt to bypass rational analysis of the issue. Especially when you use
> made-up numbers like "10's of millions". As of 2003, the *TOTAL*
> estimated number of illegal immigrants living in the US was fewer than 10
> million (7 million, to be exact). It's not even ONE ten million, never
> mind "10's of millions".
>
> Compare that to the US birth rate (4 million annually), and the *legal*
> immigration rate (about 1 million annually).

Three points:
1. "INS is screwed up, as is much of our government. No doubt about that."
Total 2003 estimated numbers of "illegals" is a GOVERNMENT driven number. I
chose to believe my own lying eyes.

2. What do you see more of when you're out and about - babies or Mexicans?
Between 1947 and 1967 that answer would have been babies. <g>

3. I've lived next to the Mississippi River all of my life - "flooding" is
not a vague term

> In other words, every 18 months the United States adds the same number of
> legal residents as the TOTAL number of illegal residents. With an
> estimated annual increase of illegal residents of only 350,000, illegal
> residents account for less than 7% of the population growth in the US. A
> significant number, to be sure, but hardly "flooding" IMHO.

You're in love with the numbers, but unfortunately, lost in them too. The
parade is over here, Pete.

>> When I see a Mexican on the streets of Minnesota, my assumption is
>> "Illegal". I bet I'm right over 75% of the time.

> It seems to me that that has more to do with the relative proportion of
> legal and illegal Mexicans within the US than it does with the total
> number of illegal immigrants (even assuming you're right as often as you
> think).

Somewhat agree here, however, we're now back to square one - what is the
real number of illegals hunkering down within our infrastructure? My eyes
tell me our Government has lost ALL control of even counting them!

Pete, they're everywhere - in numbers.


Pablo Montblack

[Morgans]

"Newps" > wrote

> While that may or may not be true, it is irrelavant. Watch your email
> inbox today for comments made by the Australian prime minister. He
> basically says love it or leave it.

It is unlikely that I will get such an E-mail. Care to post a link, or post
it here?
--
Jim in NC

[Sylvain]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> These so-called "professionals" have deluded themselves into thinking
> that it's somehow okay to hire illegal aliens (because "Americans don't
> want to do that kind of work"), and that these illegals somehow have
> rights that supercede the law.

the customers are a bit to blame too: how much more would it cost
to eat out (or to just buy the groceries for that matter) if it was
not for cheap illegal labor working on farms or in restaurants?

we like it cheap, and few people -- including the ones fuming and
enraged by today's protests -- would be willing to pay the price.

--Sylvain (fully documented immigrant)

[Morgans]

"Sylvain" > wrote
>
> the customers are a bit to blame too: how much more would it cost
> to eat out (or to just buy the groceries for that matter) if it was
> not for cheap illegal labor working on farms or in restaurants?
>
> we like it cheap, and few people -- including the ones fuming and
> enraged by today's protests -- would be willing to pay the price.

When there is no choice, most will pay the increased prices.

What happens when gas prices increase 100%? We pay. Gas is a much larger
part of most people's budgets, than eating out, or the few cents more for
the tomatoes, at the grocery store. Still, we buy gas.

Will some people have to cut back a little? Yes, some will, a little, but
not most.

I put it back on the shoulders of the farmer, or hotelman, or whatever
employer.

If most employers are being legal, and you are not, you get to charge the
same as what they are charging for their services/products. The money you
saved by using undocumented labor goes straight into your pocket. All of
it.

Greed. It all comes down to greed.

Nail the employer. Nail them hard. When no employer is willing to take the
chance, there will be no jobs for the illegals, and eventually, they will
stop coming.
--
Jim in NC

[Peter Duniho]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Well, Pete, Reuter's thinks you're wrong by a few million:

Well, when Reuter's explains how they get their number, then we can discuss
that. Until then, the US Census Bureau seems to have a pretty good handle
on things:

http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/shared/aboutus/statistics/Ill_Report_1211.pdf

Even accounting for an estimated 1.8 million added since 2000, that's only 9
million. In any case, even if you believe Reuter's, the numbers are ALL in
the same ballpark, and not anywhere close to Montblack's claims.

> I wonder how they estimate the number of illegal aliens? It's not like
> they're standing around, asking to be counted.

They use a very similar process to that used to count the rest of us. Do
you stand around, asking to be counted?

If you really care about the details, it's all in the report. Read it. You
might learn something.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"Chris S" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> The actual number is irrelevant. The point is there is a ****-load of
> them
> here, and they are still coming at a rate of about 1,000,000 a month (give
> or take a few thousand).

Another bogus number. The most reliable estimate I've seen puts the number
at a third of that (see the US Census report I referenced in a different
post).

And again, gotta love the highly precise term "****-load".

[Peter Duniho]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Peter Duniho" wrote)
> [snips]
>> INS is screwed up, as is much of our government. No doubt about that. I
>> have plenty of personal experience with the INS to confirm your
>> assertion. I'm not clear on how that is relevant to the question of who
>> should be permitted to immigrate to the US, or what to do with those who
>> decide to do so illegally.
>
> Stop them. Turn them back. Return them.

That's your answer to the question. It doesn't explain how you arrived at
that answer, nor does it explain how the abilities or lack thereof within
the INS are relevant.

> Three points:
> 1. "INS is screwed up, as is much of our government. No doubt about
> that."
> Total 2003 estimated numbers of "illegals" is a GOVERNMENT driven number.
> I chose to believe my own lying eyes.

The INS isn't the one doing the estimation. You have a better number, with
published methodology for how it was determined? I'm all ears.

> 2. What do you see more of when you're out and about - babies or Mexicans?
> Between 1947 and 1967 that answer would have been babies. <g>

For me, it's still babies. The numbers support this observation as well. I
didn't bother to check the numbers for specific states...perhaps the
relative balance in California, Arizona, etc. is different. But overall,
there are still FAR more babies around than there are immigrants, illegal or
otherwise.

> 3. I've lived next to the Mississippi River all of my life - "flooding" is
> not a vague term

Sorry...I didn't realize you were talking about liquified illegal
immigrants. I didn't even realize they existed.

You'd think an event like that would gain some sort of national attention,
but I've yet to hear about it. Everyone's basements getting filled up with
liquid immigrants and all. Seems like all the news media companies would
want to cover that.

> You're in love with the numbers, but unfortunately, lost in them too. The
> parade is over here, Pete.

You are the one who started with the numbers, not I. It just happens that
your numbers were bull****, while mine actually have some basis in fact.
I'm not in love with them; I just hate to see someone else abusing them.

Pete

[Flyingmonk]

Montblack wrote:
>Somewhat agree here, however, we're now back to square one - what is the
>real number of illegals hunkering down within our infrastructure? My eyes
>tell me our Government has lost ALL control of even counting them!

>Pete, they're everywhere - in numbers.

>Pablo Montblack

That's funny, but pretty soon you'll be spelling that "Pablo
MonteNegro" :-))

The Monk

[Jay Honeck]

> Nail the employer. Nail them hard. When no employer is willing to take the
> chance, there will be no jobs for the illegals, and eventually, they will
> stop coming.

Amen, brother.

In fact, I have sent an open letter to the Lodging Association,
advocating precisely that.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jim Macklin]

Anybody notice the drop in spam today?



--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
|> Nail the employer. Nail them hard. When no employer is
willing to take the
| > chance, there will be no jobs for the illegals, and
eventually, they will
| > stop coming.
|
| Amen, brother.
|
| In fact, I have sent an open letter to the Lodging
Association,
| advocating precisely that.
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|

[Dylan Smith]

On 2006-05-02, Jim Macklin <p51mustang> wrote:
> Anybody notice the drop in spam today?

There are some rumours that spam king Alan Ralsky has been arrested and
is possibly fingering the operators of various 'bot nets'.

Ralsky is a US citizen.
http://www.spamhaus.org/rokso/listing.lasso?-op=cn&spammer=Alan%20Ralsky

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Robert M. Gary]

Damn, there was another boycott and I missed it? I wonder what would
happen if the INS ever figured out that an illegal immigrant rally
might be a good place to find illegal immigrants.

-Robert

[Robert M. Gary]

> Secondly, in this particular case, the boycott *is* by ALL immigrants, legal
> or otherwise. I don't know if everyone who's replied so far just didn't
> bother to read the news, or if they are reading news that sucks, but my news
> sources are all in agreement that the proposed boycott is by all immigrants,
> not just illegals.

Legal immigrants marching in support of illegal immigrants.

Next month I plan to hold a rally in support of people who speed on the
freeway. It's unfair that these people are discriminated against by
being given tickets. I invite all driver to attend, speeders and
otherwise. Together we can change this heartless government.


-Robert

[Denny]

Nail the employer. Nail them hard
***********************************************
Ummm, well, I flatly disagree...
I am an employer for most of my adult life...
I am forced to pay a ****load ( thread continuity) of extra taxes as
punishment for having the audacity to take people off the street and
turn them into self supporting citizens..
Now the government in addition to punishing me for giving people work
and a paycheck is determined to offload it's constitutionally mandated
job of securing the borders from foreign invasion, onto me as an
employer replete with draconian punishment... I wonder if mere limb
amputations will be used for minor errors...
I, for one, refuse to become a shill for this incompetent government,
this venal congress, and more importantly for this administration... I
do notice that the government has never in my 40 plus years of
employing people, refused or even questioned the money I send them as
payroll taxes (except to try to wring more out of me)... Why, if I
didn't know better I would begin to suspect that they only care about
getting more money so they can use it to buy votes to get re-elected...



The congress is incompetent and futile... It's only modern purpose is
to perpetuate itself, it's perks, and it's lifetime retirement pay...
Asking it to exercise self discipline, set aside political posturing,
represent the voters who elected them (who are not the 12 million
illegals) and force the administrative branch to secure the borders by
simply withholding funding for any other purpose until said border
security is established, is like asking a three year old to stop having
tantrums... Yet that is the action that will actually secure the
borders - and will do it with a clang like a bank vault door, within
days...

I recognize that my views will not be popular in this group, so be
it... Some of us can reason beyond the knee jerk swill put out by the
media...

denny

[Jim Macklin]

I get a few everyday it seems, I always send them, along
with the headers to the ISP and the government spam cops. I
just thought it was interesting that on the day the Mexican
illegals boycotted the country, spam to a dive.




"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
|> > Anybody notice the drop in spam today?
|
| Why, yes, now that you mention it.
|
| > There are some rumours that spam king Alan Ralsky has
been arrested and
| > is possibly fingering the operators of various 'bot
nets'.
| >
| > Ralsky is a US citizen.
| >
http://www.spamhaus.org/rokso/listing.lasso?-op=cn&spammer=Alan%20Ralsky
|
| God almighty, if there is ANYONE that deserves the death
penalty, it's
| this guy. Preceded by a few weeks of torture, of course.
|
| Better yet, make him read all the crap emails we get every
day...
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|

[Morgans]

"Denny" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Nail the employer. Nail them hard
> ***********************************************
> Ummm, well, I flatly disagree...
> I am an employer for most of my adult life...
> I am forced to pay a ****load ( thread continuity) of extra taxes as
> punishment for having the audacity to take people off the street and
> turn them into self supporting citizens..

So, do you check documentation, as required by law? If you do, then you
would be off the hook. If not, shame on you, and you deserve what you get.
--
Jim in NC

[.Blueskies.]

"Morgans" > wrote in message ...
>
> "Denny" > wrote in message oups.com...
>> Nail the employer. Nail them hard
>> ***********************************************
>> Ummm, well, I flatly disagree...
>> I am an employer for most of my adult life...
>> I am forced to pay a ****load ( thread continuity) of extra taxes as
>> punishment for having the audacity to take people off the street and
>> turn them into self supporting citizens..
>
> So, do you check documentation, as required by law? If you do, then you would be off the hook. If not, shame on you,
> and you deserve what you get.
> --
> Jim in NC
>

The point is that you should not have to check for the so-called documentation; the persons in the country should only
be here legally if the gov't was doing its job. The law is the gov't way of offloading their responsibility under the
constitution...

[Jim Macklin]

Any citizen should be able to produce a proper set of
documents...
pilot's certificate shows nationality
birth certificate
certificate of naturalization
passport


I've been asked to show proof, they accepted my passport.


".Blueskies." > wrote in
message
om...
|
| "Morgans" > wrote in message
...
| >
| > "Denny" > wrote in message
oups.com...
| >> Nail the employer. Nail them hard
| >> ***********************************************
| >> Ummm, well, I flatly disagree...
| >> I am an employer for most of my adult life...
| >> I am forced to pay a ****load ( thread continuity) of
extra taxes as
| >> punishment for having the audacity to take people off
the street and
| >> turn them into self supporting citizens..
| >
| > So, do you check documentation, as required by law? If
you do, then you would be off the hook. If not, shame on
you,
| > and you deserve what you get.
| > --
| > Jim in NC
| >
|
| The point is that you should not have to check for the
so-called documentation; the persons in the country should
only
| be here legally if the gov't was doing its job. The law is
the gov't way of offloading their responsibility under the
| constitution...
|
|

[Matt Barrow]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> Nail the employer. Nail them hard. When no employer is willing to take
>> the
>> chance, there will be no jobs for the illegals, and eventually, they will
>> stop coming.
>
> Amen, brother.
>
> In fact, I have sent an open letter to the Lodging Association,
> advocating precisely that.

And doing so you foist off control of the border onto business (oh, won't
Congress and the bureaucrats be happy). And wait until a legal Hispanic
get's turned down for a job because his paperwork is questionable. Can you
say "Massive discrimination suit"? Sure you can. And that suit will be
pushed by the same ones who WOULDN'T control the border in the first place.

Remember all the "unforseen" crap that came with the ADA?

[Matt Barrow]

"Dylan Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2006-05-02, Jim Macklin <p51mustang> wrote:
>> Anybody notice the drop in spam today?
>
> There are some rumours that spam king Alan Ralsky has been arrested and
> is possibly fingering the operators of various 'bot nets'.
>
> Ralsky is a US citizen.
> http://www.spamhaus.org/rokso/listing.lasso?-op=cn&spammer=Alan%20Ralsky
>

Smash his keyboard with a steel pipe...while he's typing.

[Matt Barrow]

> Nail the employer. Nail them hard. When no employer is willing to take
> the
> chance, there will be no jobs for the illegals, and eventually, they will
> stop coming.

First, throw all of Congress in jail. Then, the entire management of INS.

[Matt Barrow]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Damn, there was another boycott and I missed it? I wonder what would
> happen if the INS ever figured out that an illegal immigrant rally
> might be a good place to find illegal immigrants.

You assume their there to help us.

[Matt Barrow]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>> Secondly, in this particular case, the boycott *is* by ALL immigrants,
>> legal
>> or otherwise. I don't know if everyone who's replied so far just didn't
>> bother to read the news, or if they are reading news that sucks, but my
>> news
>> sources are all in agreement that the proposed boycott is by all
>> immigrants,
>> not just illegals.
>
> Legal immigrants marching in support of illegal immigrants.

The most vociferous people against illegal immigrants that I know are legal
Hispanic immigrants.

One GC is use is composed mostly of Hispanics. All legal. All born in the
USA to anywhere from first to sixth generation Americans.

What their owner wants to do to illegals is not something I'd repeat in a
"family" forum.

>
> Next month I plan to hold a rally in support of people who speed on the
> freeway. It's unfair that these people are discriminated against by
> being given tickets. I invite all driver to attend, speeders and
> otherwise. Together we can change this heartless government.


Not heartless...brain-dead.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[Morgans]

".Blueskies." > wrote

> The point is that you should not have to check for the so-called
> documentation; the persons in the country should only be here legally if
> the gov't was doing its job. The law is the gov't way of offloading their
> responsibility under the constitution...

Well, let's see. How to secure our border with Mexico.

Reinstate the draft, and place a rotating watch along the border, with a man
about every 200 yards? Yeah, that oughta' work.
--
Jim in NC

[Jay Honeck]

> The point is that you should not have to check for the so-called documentation; the persons in the country should only
> be here legally if the gov't was doing its job. The law is the gov't way of offloading their responsibility under the
> constitution...

Baloney. We *are* the government here -- and it's up to each of us to
make sure that the laws are followed. The cops can't do it without
our help.

If no one hired the illegals, guess what? They would go home.

And, yes, it really *is* that simple.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Flyingmonk]

10 points from Los Angeles Times
May 02, 2006 08:28 AM EST

1. 40% of all workers in L.A. County (L.A. County has 10 million
people) are working for cash and not paying taxes. This was because
they are predominantly illegal immigrants, working without a green
card.


2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.


3. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal
aliens.


4. Over 2/3's of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien
Mexicans on Medi-Cal whose births were paid for by taxpayers.


5. Nearly 25% of all inmates in California detention centers are
Mexican nationals here illegally.


6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in
garages.


7. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most
likely illegal aliens from south of the border.


8. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.


9. 21 radio stations in L.A. are Spanish speaking.


10. In L.A.County 5.1 million people speak English. 3.9 million speak
Spanish (10.2 million people in L.A.County).


(All 10 from the Los Angeles Times)


Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops but 29% are on
welfare.
http://www.cis.org

[Jay Honeck]

> (All 10 from the Los Angeles Times)

Holy crap. I was angry and frustrated about the illegal immigration
situation in Iowa -- I simply can't image the magnitude of the problem
in Los Angeles.

What is up with Kalifornians, anyway? All that sunshine musta gone to
your heads, to let this kind of situation get so completely out of
control!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Matt Barrow]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>> (All 10 from the Los Angeles Times)
>
> Holy crap. I was angry and frustrated about the illegal immigration
> situation in Iowa -- I simply can't image the magnitude of the problem
> in Los Angeles.
>
> What is up with Kalifornians, anyway? All that sunshine musta gone to
> your heads, to let this kind of situation get so completely out of
> control!

Drugs. Really potent stuff.

[Dave Stadt]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>> (All 10 from the Los Angeles Times)
>
> Holy crap. I was angry and frustrated about the illegal immigration
> situation in Iowa -- I simply can't image the magnitude of the problem
> in Los Angeles.
>
> What is up with Kalifornians, anyway? All that sunshine musta gone to
> your heads,

Southern CA hasn't seen the sun in decades. Was out there a year ago for
the first time in over 20 years. It was the most depressing place I have
ever been.

to let this kind of situation get so completely out of
> control!
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Jose]

> Southern CA hasn't seen the sun in decades.

You can see the sun in an airplane.

Actually, they had a plane crash into the smog some years back - they
had to use helicopters to get the passengers out and back down to the
ground.

Jose
--
The price of freedom is... well... freedom.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Dylan Smith]

On 2006-05-04, Jay Honeck > wrote:
> What is up with Kalifornians, anyway?

They are close to the Mexico border. You can expect more immigrants in
California than Iowa. I used to live in Texas. I bet there were plenty
of illegals in Corpus Christi too. There was certainly a huge Hispanic
population in Houston - I have no idea what the proportion of legal <->
illegal was.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Jay Honeck]

> > What is up with Kalifornians, anyway?
>
> They are close to the Mexico border. You can expect more immigrants in
> California than Iowa.

Actually, we've got our share. There is a town about 15 miles east of
Iowa City called "West Liberty" that has quite literally been taken
over by Mexicans, in the last 9 years.

In my former business (newspaper distribution) I used to get out there
every few weeks, and it was an amazing transformation to observe.
First one of the stores posted their signage in Spanish, then another
-- then they ALL went Spanish.

This, of course, was quite a shock for a small farming community -- but
the turkey processing plant was like a magnet to the illegals. Hard
work, cash payout, no strings attached. They could make more in a day
there than in a month at home. Why the INS didn't just shut that plant
down, I'll never know.

The school system was the first to fail, naturally. Kids that don't
speak any English simply don't fit into a traditional school system --
especially one that doesn't fully appreciate the magnitude of the
changes facing it, and is slow to react -- and teaching simply stopped
happening. This was followed by gangs, and weapons, and (of course)
drugs.

A downward spiral set in, as everyone who could leave, did. Only the
stubborn, the very old, and those who were able to somehow capitalize
on the newcomers, have stayed.

The last time I drove through there, the town -- once a depressed
little farm community, like so many others in Iowa -- had been
essentially transformed into Little Mexico.

In fairness, in some ways it's now more vibrant -- but what a culture
shock for those who called it "home"! And the crime and education
problems are now deep-rooted, and not easily solved.

Anyway, Iowa has seen its share of illegal immigration, but NOTHING
like the LA Times described.

It's just so sad. California -- Southern California, specifically, was
the land of my dreams, as a youth. To see that area to thoroughly and
utterly ruined is just...wrong.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Matt Barrow]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Actually, we've got our share. There is a town about 15 miles east of
> Iowa City called "West Liberty" that has quite literally been taken
> over by Mexicans, in the last 9 years.
>
> In my former business (newspaper distribution) I used to get out there
> every few weeks, and it was an amazing transformation to observe.
> First one of the stores posted their signage in Spanish, then another
> -- then they ALL went Spanish.
>
> This, of course, was quite a shock for a small farming community -- but
> the turkey processing plant was like a magnet to the illegals. Hard
> work, cash payout, no strings attached. They could make more in a day
> there than in a month at home. Why the INS didn't just shut that plant
> down, I'll never know.

Maybe the same reasons they've never shut down ANYONE in over 30 years. To
wit: We've the best politicians that money can buy -- on both side of the
aisle.

[Jim Macklin]

The invasion is on-going.


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
|> > What is up with Kalifornians, anyway?
| >
| > They are close to the Mexico border. You can expect more
immigrants in
| > California than Iowa.
|
| Actually, we've got our share. There is a town about 15
miles east of
| Iowa City called "West Liberty" that has quite literally
been taken
| over by Mexicans, in the last 9 years.
|
| In my former business (newspaper distribution) I used to
get out there
| every few weeks, and it was an amazing transformation to
observe.
| First one of the stores posted their signage in Spanish,
then another
| -- then they ALL went Spanish.
|
| This, of course, was quite a shock for a small farming
community -- but
| the turkey processing plant was like a magnet to the
illegals. Hard
| work, cash payout, no strings attached. They could make
more in a day
| there than in a month at home. Why the INS didn't just
shut that plant
| down, I'll never know.
|
| The school system was the first to fail, naturally. Kids
that don't
| speak any English simply don't fit into a traditional
school system --
| especially one that doesn't fully appreciate the magnitude
of the
| changes facing it, and is slow to react -- and teaching
simply stopped
| happening. This was followed by gangs, and weapons, and
(of course)
| drugs.
|
| A downward spiral set in, as everyone who could leave,
did. Only the
| stubborn, the very old, and those who were able to somehow
capitalize
| on the newcomers, have stayed.
|
| The last time I drove through there, the town -- once a
depressed
| little farm community, like so many others in Iowa -- had
been
| essentially transformed into Little Mexico.
|
| In fairness, in some ways it's now more vibrant -- but
what a culture
| shock for those who called it "home"! And the crime and
education
| problems are now deep-rooted, and not easily solved.
|
| Anyway, Iowa has seen its share of illegal immigration,
but NOTHING
| like the LA Times described.
|
| It's just so sad. California -- Southern California,
specifically, was
| the land of my dreams, as a youth. To see that area to
thoroughly and
| utterly ruined is just...wrong.
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|

[.Blueskies.]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message oups.com...
>> The point is that you should not have to check for the so-called documentation; the persons in the country should
>> only
>> be here legally if the gov't was doing its job. The law is the gov't way of offloading their responsibility under the
>> constitution...
>
> Baloney. We *are* the government here -- and it's up to each of us to
> make sure that the laws are followed. The cops can't do it without
> our help.
>

I wish it were that simple... If _we_ really were the gov't there would not be an electoral collage and politicians
would serve with no pay or other financial incentive, etc.

> If no one hired the illegals, guess what? They would go home.
>
> And, yes, it really *is* that simple.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

There are so many laws on the books and so much selective enforcement that it seems we really need to throw out all the
muda. Never happen, will only write more laws to hide the old ones. There are plenty of laws in place today to prosecute
folks that hire the 'illegals', but how often are businesses shut down or owners fined or sent to jail?

[.Blueskies.]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message ...
>> Nail the employer. Nail them hard. When no employer is willing to take
>> the
>> chance, there will be no jobs for the illegals, and eventually, they will
>> stop coming.
>
> First, throw all of Congress in jail. Then, the entire management of INS.
>


Don't stop there...

[Dylan Smith]

On 2006-05-04, Jay Honeck > wrote:
> It's just so sad. California -- Southern California, specifically, was
> the land of my dreams, as a youth. To see that area to thoroughly and
> utterly ruined is just...wrong.

Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick that
it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day). Northern California seems
much better to me (and places like San Fransico have a moderate climate
too).

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Jay Honeck]

> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick that
> it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day). Northern California seems
> much better to me (and places like San Fransico have a moderate climate
> too).

Think "California Dreamin", and almost any song by the Beach Boys.
THAT was the California most of us dreamed about in the 60s and 70s.

I've been to SoCal in '61, '63, '77, '78, '88, and '94. It looked like
paradise when I first visited...and it was still quite nice in '88, if
you stayed out of the crappy areas.

By '94 it was a mess, and it sounds like hell, now.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dylan Smith]

On 2006-05-05, Jay Honeck > wrote:
> I've been to SoCal in '61, '63, '77, '78, '88, and '94. It looked like
> paradise when I first visited...and it was still quite nice in '88, if
> you stayed out of the crappy areas.

The thing which gets me is there are a lot of rich people in the smog
filled LA basin who can afford to live anywhere they like in the world -
yet they choose LA. Different strokes, I suppose. If I had the money to
live in California, the only place I'd go is northern California. There
really are a lot of beautiful places out there.

Actually, the cliffs and rocky shorelines around Monterrey reminded me
of where I live now when I last went!

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

[Morgans]

"Dylan Smith" > wrote

> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick that
> it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day).

It's a hell of a lot more clear than it was 35 years, ago, in my
observation.
--
Jim in NC

[Dave Stadt]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dylan Smith" > wrote
>
>> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick that
>> it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day).
>
> It's a hell of a lot more clear than it was 35 years, ago, in my
> observation.

35 years ago you could see the foothills on a regular basis and the
mountains every so often. We were there for a week a year ago and never saw
the foot hills much less the mountains.

> --
> Jim in NC
>

[Jay Honeck]

> The thing which gets me is there are a lot of rich people in the smog
> filled LA basin who can afford to live anywhere they like in the world -
> yet they choose LA. Different strokes, I suppose. If I had the money to
> live in California, the only place I'd go is northern California. There
> really are a lot of beautiful places out there.

Agreed. But the weather isn't as nice.

> Actually, the cliffs and rocky shorelines around Monterrey reminded me
> of where I live now when I last went!

Sounds lovely, Dylan. Someday we'll have to fly on over...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Flyingmonk]

Flyingmonk wrote:
> 10 points from Los Angeles Times
> May 02, 2006 08:28 AM EST
>
> 1. 40% of all workers in L.A. County (L.A. County has 10 million
> people) are working for cash and not paying taxes. This was because
> they are predominantly illegal immigrants, working without a green
> card.
>
>
> 2. 95% of warrants for murder in Los Angeles are for illegal aliens.
>
>
> 3. 75% of people on the most wanted list in Los Angeles are illegal
> aliens.
>
>
> 4. Over 2/3's of all births in Los Angeles County are to illegal alien
> Mexicans on Medi-Cal whose births were paid for by taxpayers.
>
>
> 5. Nearly 25% of all inmates in California detention centers are
> Mexican nationals here illegally.
>
>
> 6. Over 300,000 illegal aliens in Los Angeles County are living in
> garages.
>
>
> 7. The FBI reports half of all gang members in Los Angeles are most
> likely illegal aliens from south of the border.
>
>
> 8. Nearly 60% of all occupants of HUD properties are illegal.
>
>
> 9. 21 radio stations in L.A. are Spanish speaking.
>
>
> 10. In L.A.County 5.1 million people speak English. 3.9 million speak
> Spanish (10.2 million people in L.A.County).
>
>
> (All 10 from the Los Angeles Times)
>
>
> Less than 2% of illegal aliens are picking our crops but 29% are on
> welfare.
> http://www.cis.org

Following are "predictions" and opinions of I came across on the web:

>Augustin Cebada, Brown Berets; "Go back to Boston! Go back to Plymouth Rock, Pilgrims! Get out! We are the future. You are old and tired. Go on. We have beaten you. Leave like beaten rats. You old white people. It is your duty to die . . Through love of having children, we are going to take over.

>Richard Alatorre, Los Angeles City Council. "They're afraid we're going to take over the governmental institutions and other institutions. They're right. We will take them over . . . We are here to stay."

>Excelsior, the national newspaper of Mexico, "The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without firing a single shot."

>Professor Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas; "We have an aging white America. They are not making babies. They are dying. The explosion is in our population . . . I love it. They are ****ting in their pants with fear. I love it."

>Art Torres, Chairman of the California Democratic Party, "Remember 187--proposition to deny taxpayer funds for services to non-citizens--was the last gasp of white America in California."

>Gloria Molina, Los Angeles County Supervisor, "We are politicizing every single one of these new citizens that are becoming citizens of this country . . . I gotta tell you that a lot of people are saying, "I'm going to go out there and vote because I want to pay them back."

>Mario Obledo, California Coalition of Hispanic Organizations and California State Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Governor Jerry Brown, also awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bill Clinton, "California is going to be a Hispanic state. Anyone who doesn't like it should leave."

>Jose Pescador Osuna, Mexican Consul General , "We are practicing 'La Reconquista' in California."

>Professor Fernando Guerra, Loyola Marymount University; "We need to avoid a white backlash by using codes understood by Latinos . . . "

[.Blueskies.]

"Morgans" > wrote in message ...
>
> "Dylan Smith" > wrote
>
>> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick that
>> it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day).
>
> It's a hell of a lot more clear than it was 35 years, ago, in my observation.
> --
> Jim in NC
>

Exactly...the enforced smog control and yearly emissions checks required have cleaned up the air substantially. I am
amazed at how bad the air gets here in Michigan! Climb up to 6000' or so and you can see the crud everywhere. Amazing
that smog controls are not enforced all over the country...

[Dave Stadt]

".Blueskies." > wrote in message
. com...
>
> "Morgans" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Dylan Smith" > wrote
>>
>>> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick that
>>> it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day).
>>
>> It's a hell of a lot more clear than it was 35 years, ago, in my
>> observation.
>> --
>> Jim in NC
>>
>
> Exactly...the enforced smog control and yearly emissions checks required
> have cleaned up the air substantially. I am amazed at how bad the air gets
> here in Michigan! Climb up to 6000' or so and you can see the crud
> everywhere. Amazing that smog controls are not enforced all over the
> country...


In case you have been in a cave the last 30 or so years pollution
regulations are in place all across the country.

[.Blueskies.]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message . com...
>
> ".Blueskies." > wrote in message
> . com...
>>
>> "Morgans" > wrote in message ...
>>>
>>> "Dylan Smith" > wrote
>>>
>>>> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick that
>>>> it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day).
>>>
>>> It's a hell of a lot more clear than it was 35 years, ago, in my observation.
>>> --
>>> Jim in NC
>>>
>>
>> Exactly...the enforced smog control and yearly emissions checks required have cleaned up the air substantially. I am
>> amazed at how bad the air gets here in Michigan! Climb up to 6000' or so and you can see the crud everywhere. Amazing
>> that smog controls are not enforced all over the country...
>
>
> In case you have been in a cave the last 30 or so years pollution regulations are in place all across the country.

That's nice...When was the last time you had _your_ car smog checked?

[Matt Barrow]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
. com...
>
> ".Blueskies." > wrote in message
> . com...
>>
>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Dylan Smith" > wrote
>>>
>>>> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick that
>>>> it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day).
>>>
>>> It's a hell of a lot more clear than it was 35 years, ago, in my
>>> observation.
>>> --
>>> Jim in NC
>>>
>>
>> Exactly...the enforced smog control and yearly emissions checks required
>> have cleaned up the air substantially. I am amazed at how bad the air
>> gets here in Michigan! Climb up to 6000' or so and you can see the crud
>> everywhere. Amazing that smog controls are not enforced all over the
>> country...
>
>
> In case you have been in a cave the last 30 or so years pollution
> regulations are in place all across the country.
The "Indians" who inhabited the LA Basin in the mid 1800's called it "Land
of many smokes".

One of the early explorers (1850's) into what is now Denver remarked about
the "haze" that frequently engulfed the area.

Most of the crud in Phoenix is dust from the desert (it's downwind of
thousands of square miles of scrub) and diesel exhaust.

In the early 1990's a bunch of scientists from Metro State College in Denver
tested vehicles using optical scanners at the bottom of the freeway onramps.
They found that the old 80/20 rule was in place, but in this case is was
90/10 - 90% of the pollution was caused by 10% of the vehicles.

[Morgans]

".Blueskies." > wrote

> That's nice...When was the last time you had _your_ car smog checked?

My area in NC just had the smog checks become part of the yearly inspection
process. I am not sure if it is the whole state now, or what. It was just
the big city counties, such as the Raleigh-Durham area, and Charlotte.

The thing that puzzles me, is that you don't have to have cars older than
'96 (I think) inspected for smog.

Some cars older than that, with shot motors, are running around smoking like
a 10 pack-a-day chain smoker, making more pollution than 50 cars that are
being inspected.

Until that loophole is closed, or at least tightened, smog control for cars
makes little sense.
--
Jim in NC

[Matt Barrow]

".Blueskies." > wrote in message
. com...
>
> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
> . com...
>>
>> ".Blueskies." > wrote in message
>> . com...
>>>
>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> "Dylan Smith" > wrote
>>>>
>>>>> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick that
>>>>> it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day).
>>>>
>>>> It's a hell of a lot more clear than it was 35 years, ago, in my
>>>> observation.
>>>> --
>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>
>>>
>>> Exactly...the enforced smog control and yearly emissions checks required
>>> have cleaned up the air substantially. I am amazed at how bad the air
>>> gets here in Michigan! Climb up to 6000' or so and you can see the crud
>>> everywhere. Amazing that smog controls are not enforced all over the
>>> country...
>>
>>
>> In case you have been in a cave the last 30 or so years pollution
>> regulations are in place all across the country.
>
> That's nice...When was the last time you had _your_ car smog checked?

I notice many states stopped requireing smog checks and just charge the fee
on license renewal.

[Dave Stadt]

".Blueskies." > wrote in message
. com...
>
> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
> . com...
>>
>> ".Blueskies." > wrote in message
>> . com...
>>>
>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> "Dylan Smith" > wrote
>>>>
>>>>> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick that
>>>>> it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day).
>>>>
>>>> It's a hell of a lot more clear than it was 35 years, ago, in my
>>>> observation.
>>>> --
>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>
>>>
>>> Exactly...the enforced smog control and yearly emissions checks required
>>> have cleaned up the air substantially. I am amazed at how bad the air
>>> gets here in Michigan! Climb up to 6000' or so and you can see the crud
>>> everywhere. Amazing that smog controls are not enforced all over the
>>> country...
>>
>>
>> In case you have been in a cave the last 30 or so years pollution
>> regulations are in place all across the country.
>
> That's nice...When was the last time you had _your_ car smog checked?

Ours go through the process every couple of years but I don't know why you
ask.

[Montblack]

("Matt Barrow" wrote)
> I notice many states stopped requireing smog checks and just charge the
> fee on license renewal.


Minnesota. No more tests. State sold off all of those nice, new, brick,
mult-bay, vehicle emissions buildings to boot.


Montblack

[Jay Honeck]

> Minnesota. No more tests. State sold off all of those nice, new, brick,
> mult-bay, vehicle emissions buildings to boot.

Thank goodness. What a boondoggle!

Wisconsin created a whole new level of bureaucratic incompetence when
they went down that rabbit hole. They built those buildings all over
Southeast Wisconsin, and paid unGodly amounts of money to some of the
dumbest people on the planet to stick their faces (and a long wand) up
every car's tail pipe.

The whole operation was fraught with danger (more than one "technician"
was injured doing the high RPM tests on what amounted to an automotive
treadmill), corruption (bribes WERE accepted) and inefficiency. Waits
of up to an hour were not uncommon -- with your engine running, of
course.

Those polution test sites were a perfect example of the kind of
nonsense the do-gooders can come up with while the silent majority
isn't paying attention. I'm glad to hear that common sense has reared
its ugly head...again.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bob Noel]

In article . com>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> Wisconsin created a whole new level of bureaucratic incompetence when
> they went down that rabbit hole. They built those buildings all over
> Southeast Wisconsin, and paid unGodly amounts of money to some of the
> dumbest people on the planet to stick their faces (and a long wand) up
> every car's tail pipe.

Taxachusetts did it "better." The inspection stations are required to buy the
equipment, not the state.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[.Blueskies.]

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message ...
>
> ".Blueskies." > wrote in message
> . com...
>>
>> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message . com...

>>>
>>> In case you have been in a cave the last 30 or so years pollution regulations are in place all across the country.
>>
>> That's nice...When was the last time you had _your_ car smog checked?
>
> I notice many states stopped requireing smog checks and just charge the fee on license renewal.
>

Many states do not have it to begin with...

[.Blueskies.]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message . net...
>
> ".Blueskies." > wrote in message
> . com...
>>
>> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message . com...
>>>
>>> ".Blueskies." > wrote in message
>>> . com...
>>>>
>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message ...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Dylan Smith" > wrote
>>>>>
>>>>>> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick that
>>>>>> it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day).
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a hell of a lot more clear than it was 35 years, ago, in my observation.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Exactly...the enforced smog control and yearly emissions checks required have cleaned up the air substantially. I
>>>> am amazed at how bad the air gets here in Michigan! Climb up to 6000' or so and you can see the crud everywhere.
>>>> Amazing that smog controls are not enforced all over the country...
>>>
>>>
>>> In case you have been in a cave the last 30 or so years pollution regulations are in place all across the country.
>>
>> That's nice...When was the last time you had _your_ car smog checked?
>
> Ours go through the process every couple of years but I don't know why you ask.

You say the regs are in place all over the country, and in fact they are not, so I suppose you are the one that has been
in the cave...

[Dave Stadt]

".Blueskies." > wrote in message
. net...
>
> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
> . net...
>>
>> ".Blueskies." > wrote in message
>> . com...
>>>
>>> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
>>> . com...
>>>>
>>>> ".Blueskies." > wrote in message
>>>> . com...
>>>>>
>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Dylan Smith" > wrote
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's a hell of a lot more clear than it was 35 years, ago, in my
>>>>>> observation.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly...the enforced smog control and yearly emissions checks
>>>>> required have cleaned up the air substantially. I am amazed at how bad
>>>>> the air gets here in Michigan! Climb up to 6000' or so and you can see
>>>>> the crud everywhere. Amazing that smog controls are not enforced all
>>>>> over the country...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In case you have been in a cave the last 30 or so years pollution
>>>> regulations are in place all across the country.
>>>
>>> That's nice...When was the last time you had _your_ car smog checked?
>>
>> Ours go through the process every couple of years but I don't know why
>> you ask.
>
> You say the regs are in place all over the country, and in fact they are
> not, so I suppose you are the one that has been in the cave...

So you believe automobiles built today have the same anti-pollution
equipment as did automobiles build in the 1960s or 70s? Yes, automobile
anti-pollution laws are in place all across the country. Just because
inspections are not required in every municipality does not mean automobiles
are not required to meet emission standards. Try to buy a new automobile
without any emission controls and see how far you get.

OBTW, air pollution can travel thousands of miles. The pollution you see in
Michigan might have originated many states away.

[Montblack]

("Dave Stadt" wrote)
>>>>>>>> Gosh - why SoCal? Most my trips there have featured smog so thick
>>>>>>>> that it wasn't VFR legal (yet a bright sunny day).

> OBTW, air pollution can travel thousands of miles. The pollution you see
> in Michigan might have originated many states away.


Can you see any parallels through the eight layers of smog ...I mean
posts???????&?


Montblack-out-the-sun