Gibson raided

Re: Gibson raided

In fact I will go further and give government a partial pass because they can't create private sector jobs, so why pretend they can?
I believe the government certainly could facilitate private sector job growth.

One problem is the socialistic expectations of the voting majority. I have no doubts that any politician who runs on a platform of doing what is truly long-term right for this country, that politician would be unelectable.

How many kids would have eaten their veggies, and done their chores and homework and gone to bed before 8:00pm when growing up if they could have voted their parents out of office and voted in somebody they liked better?
 
Last edited:
Re: Gibson raided

Sure, Mark. Ultimately there is the 'us' that votes in folks that make lots of promises. 'Us' also have short attention spans and memories, because we re-elect those same folks.

I'm of the Paul Krugman school; the reason for an unremarkable result from the "stimulus" is because it was neither big enough nor spent on the right things to make a quantifiable difference. I *believe* that things would be worse without the recent deficit spending, but I can't back that up any more than someone who claims it to be worthless. We just don't know what _would_ have happened if nothing (or more) had been done. What is certain is that the deficit boogeyman has scared the bejebus out of folks - it was only about 10 years ago that the Vice President said "deficits don't matter"; now suddenly it's a BFD among those who believed his statement a decade earlier. I'm not taking a side, it's just interesting to note the shift.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc
 
Re: Gibson raided

I believe the government certainly could facilitate private sector job growth.
One of the necessary functions of government is protecting property rights (there is no incentive to work hard and earn money, if we can't keep it). Next is to provide rule of law so we can compete fairly and not be cheated, or taken advantage of, by bullies in the marketplace. If government maintains this simple infrastructure of business and free markets, entrepreneurs will do the rest.

But all too often government in the name of trying to help, ends up promoting misguided industrial policy, where they pick winners and losers based on their wishful thinking (green jobs) and poor business judgement. Who did they really help by lending money to a start up solar cell company so they could build a showcase factory in Northern California? It didn't keep them in business when their technology was not competitive. It may help some lucky landlord who buys that barely used factory for a fraction of the build cost. Maybe the government should keep that one building and keep putting their hand picked winners in there, one after another. All of the government borrowing and lending to their selected peeps, displaces that capital from more deserving businesses who would have to work harder to get it, but if they couldn't maybe they didn't really deserve it.
One problem is the socialistic expectations of the voting majority. I have no doubts that any politician who runs on a platform of doing what is truly long-term right for this country, that politician would be unelectable.

I don't think those views are held by the majority, while we have been a little bit socialist for decades. The entitlement expectations are more recent and promoted by interest groups because it serves their interest.

Our form of government is a representative democratic republic, which means legislators don't, or shouldn't, simply respond to the whims of public opinion. They are not supposed to represent, our knee jerk reaction to the topic du jour, but investigate and deliberate, over what is best for us. If it was a simple democracy we could just decide these issues a la american idol telephone votes.

Opinions vary, but the cameras in congress invite a little too much playing to the camera lens for the folks watching back home (IMO), and not much thoughtful deliberation. I wouldn't mind returning to the earlier system where senators were appointed by the state legislatures, and just as easily recalled if they don't represent the states interests adequately. I wouldn't mind longer terms for the house of representative, where it seems they never get out of campaign mode, while 4 years isn't long enough either, apparently.

If you follow the ebb and flow of government you will notice that the House is the more volatile "populist" or more easily inflamed branch of the legislature while the senate is slower to react and hopefully more deliberative body. The two year term in the house also makes it more responsive to changes in the country's mood, as we noticed last year.

I may be a fool, but I remain optimistic that the silent majority has been paying more attention lately and is getting more than a little fed up with the shenanigans coming out of DC. The silent majority will speak softly and carry a big vote... Most don't blather in the internet like me, they just silently fume... and then vote where it counts.

JR
 
Re: Gibson raided

Sure, Mark. Ultimately there is the 'us' that votes in folks that make lots of promises. 'Us' also have short attention spans and memories, because we re-elect those same folks.

I'm of the Paul Krugman school; the reason for an unremarkable result from the "stimulus" is because it was neither big enough nor spent on the right things to make a quantifiable difference. I *believe* that things would be worse without the recent deficit spending, but I can't back that up any more than someone who claims it to be worthless. We just don't know what _would_ have happened if nothing (or more) had been done. What is certain is that the deficit boogeyman has scared the bejebus out of folks - it was only about 10 years ago that the Vice President said "deficits don't matter"; now suddenly it's a BFD among those who believed his statement a decade earlier. I'm not taking a side, it's just interesting to note the shift.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc

+1

and....Mark, I would have never voted my Parents off the island for someone with more lenient vegetable values.... "better, the devil you know...etc...."

Strangely....ten years ago we had no real problems with fiscal deficit, No Wars... then, the shit hits the fan..... Enron, Worldcom, Internet Companies fizzle, Pentagon-2trillion unaccountable dollars, Airlines Bailout, Afghanistan, Rendition, Iraq, Patriot Act, War on Terror, Mexico to Canada Highway, 500 Million in "lost Iraqi Gold", Ahbu Grave, Black Water, Water Torture, Department of Homeland Security,Airport Body Scanners, Vice President Cheney Shoots man in Face, Housing Bubble, Stock Market crap-out, Bernie Madoff, AIG, Sterns, BoA, Morgan, European Countries go Bankrupt, Pakastan, etc... see a pattern here?

We're so deep in legacy War, legacy bureaucracy, and legacy Politics.... and our Country has little credibility.... what next?

Giving Tax breaks to Corporations will not lower unemployment, they'll just bank what's left over after giving their Execs Bonuses. Only higher demand for products and services will lower unemployment and help the Economy.

Hammer
 
Re: Gibson raided

I don't think those views are held by the majority, while we have been a little bit socialist for decades.
Are you kidding? If I support a rise in the gas tax to improve roads... I expect some action... class 1 freeways everywhere I drive... it should just roll out in-front of my windshield anywhere I care to go.

The local school district gets a bond passed... my kids should graduate the top of the Rhodes scholar classfield and I expect to bask in the glory. I vote for my more than fair share, and why shouldn't I... if somebody's running on a platform that they can deliver that. I'd be a fool not-to. I only want it all, and I want it now, maximum return on a minimum investment, and I'm ready and willing to vote anyone into office that gives any indication they can deliver that, or whoever the polls suggests to be the leader cause I want to be on the winning team.

Humm... if everybody thought that way and had those expectations, we'd be in deep doo-doo. Wait-a-minute... I think we ARE in deep doo-doo.
 
Re: Gibson raided

Sure, Mark. Ultimately there is the 'us' that votes in folks that make lots of promises. 'Us' also have short attention spans and memories, because we re-elect those same folks.
I have been watching this game (politics) for a long time and I find it remarkable how some representatives get repeatedly rewarded for bringing home the pork (airports, bridges, highways, etc some are notable), despite otherwise unremarkable legislative track records.. Voters get what they deserve but they are all operating under the false premise the government spending is OPM, it is literally all of our debt and a scary amount.
I'm of the Paul Krugman school; the reason for an unremarkable result from the "stimulus" is because it was neither big enough nor spent on the right things to make a quantifiable difference. I *believe* that things would be worse without the recent deficit spending, but I can't back that up any more than someone who claims it to be worthless. We just don't know what _would_ have happened if nothing (or more) had been done. What is certain is that the deficit boogeyman has scared the bejebus out of folks - it was only about 10 years ago that the Vice President said "deficits don't matter"; now suddenly it's a BFD among those who believed his statement a decade earlier. I'm not taking a side, it's just interesting to note the shift.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc

The stimulus did pretty much what economists expected, and some were way out front, predicting a double dip in 2011. Art Laffer comes to mind and I don't recall exactly when he first predicted this, but he was literally wrong, because we haven't dipped into a technical recession (yet), just very slow to no growth (some are calling this stag flation, but the inflation is somewhat mitigated by deflationary forces (like housing assets that haven't stopped falling).

I have also been hearing the argument that the stimulus wasn't big enough. Big enough to do what? Correct the underlying malaise? I have posted on other forums about this so I may be repeating myself here, but government stimulus only generates a short term bump in GDP, so on paper it looks like a few percent swing, but guess what? When the stimulus runs out, you get what is called a gap down, as that couple percent comes back out of the GDP. The fact that we are flat now, means that in the last two years the economy has recovered enough to make up for the stimulus running out.

Politicians, over the last decade (Bush included) have become attracted to short term stimulus to level out the normal (small) dips in economic cycles, and when the economy comes roaring back as it usually does, they pat themselves on their back for a job well done. This time it was different. This wasn't your normal business cycle correction, but the result of a decade or longer of way too easy housing credit, that rippled through the entire economy pumping everything up to artificially high levels. First we had to deal with de-leveraging the financial institutions to keep the banks solvent, and that was a struggle (some would say we aren't finished yet), and the poor shape of the european banks will make an interesting object lesson in what happens if you just rubber stamp the bank's stress test, as the sovereign debt that makes up so much of their balance sheets is starting to unravel. (danger will robinson). Domestic business is in pretty good shape because they pulled in their horns and have plenty of cash on their balance sheets, but right now they are keeping that money in their pockets, uncertain about the near future. The last leg of out economic stool is the consumer, who has been de-leveraging (reducing debt) for the last several years, but still has a long way to go. It is actually a good thing for American households to reduce debt and increase savings, but not good for merchants trying to sell ski boats.

I am not going to argue for austerity right now, that would be insensitive, but it is disingenuous for any credible economist to suggest that all we need to do is throw more short term stimulus at this and all will be fine. We are coming off a ten year binge of easy credit , and we can't just get the government to tear up a few mortgages (or sue a few banks) and make that all go magically away.

It is going to be painful (more painful), and the folks who smoked all that free dope still need to pay the piper. The housing market has bottomed in a few regions, but there is still too much inventory out there, and people in unsustainable situations (still upside down) that need to smell the rose fertilizer and move on.

We can agree that the last stimulus was horribly mismanaged, but even perfect management would only make a proportional difference. Am I preaching to myself that stimulus is just a short term marginal factor and does not address the underlying issues?. While few have noticed, the incredibly low interbank rates have been used by the major banks to recapitalize (for a few years now), and business are not fools either, so they reduced the rates of all their balance sheet debt... only the rest of us who work for a living and are expected to "consume" can't borrow cheap at the overnight interbank window and lend it out at higher rates to recapitalize.

There is an old saying about easy answers to hard problems , so I shouldn't need to diagram that.

Another stimulus program, better managed than the last one, can make another short term bump on paper and keep us out of technical recession for another year or so, but you can't keep borrowing and stimulating to fudge the GDP above 0% growth forever. We need real growth like 4%+ to fund the deficit spending out legislators have become so comfortable with. Now we need even more growth to back fill this hole we're digging but i haven't seen much constructive change.

Sorry no easy answer... from where I sit. but i remain an optimist. We will eventually get it right after we try everything else first.

JR
 
Re: Gibson raided

What is certain is that the deficit boogeyman has scared the bejebus out of folks - it was only about 10 years ago that the Vice President said "deficits don't matter"; now suddenly it's a BFD among those who believed his statement a decade earlier. I'm not taking a side, it's just interesting to note the shift.

Have fun, good luck.

Tim Mc

Politicians should change their positions when the facts change, and I hope nobody argues this is just a routine recession. We need more adult behavior from government. How about a budget for a change? They sure didn't stop spending, despite that little detail.

While I don't doubt that politicians may have said that "deficits don't matter", that is an over-simplification for public consumption. As I have offered before deficit spending is manageable when it is A) a modest sized supportable percentage of GDP, and B) the economy is enjoying an average growth rate adequate to support that deficit spending. Effectively borrowing against future expected revenue. However for this to be sustainable long term, good years need to make up for the bad years when there is no growth, so this averages out and total debt doesn't grow out of proportion.

The brouhaha over the recent debt ceiling increase was unseemly, and the whole concept of even having a debt ceiling target that they routinely ignore, seems like more DC comics. If the intent is to generate a line in the sand for partisan debate about spending, they got much more than they bargained for this time around. Such conflicts are not unique or new to Washington, some may recall Newt Gingrich shutting down the government over a federal budget battle 1995/96. The new crew seems to have avoided the budget process and that conflict by postponing that reckoning several months at a time with continuing resolutions. So in my judgement the borrowing authority** became hostage to the unresolved budget debate that never happened.

This is amplified in the public's eye as the whole threat to shut down government must be credible to be taken seriously, while no one really wants to be the bad guy who actually shut down government and gets all the negative political fallout. So a huge game of chicken played out on the big stage, but with consequences as the credit ratings agency couldn't ignore how dysfunctional the budget process and fiscal policy has become. The downgrade of our sovereign debt should be a wake up call, but already the special commission we set up to deal with this is in conflict over military spending.

I'll tell you what I am afraid of, "interest rates". Right now interest rates are the lowest that I can remember in my lifetime, and we are borrowing hand over fist, lots of it short term debt. What happens when interest rates go up, and they surely will? Our costs to service this mountain of debt will not increase incrementally but exponentially. The difference between 2% and 1% interest rates is not 1% (well it is) but 2/1 or +100%. I recall high double digit interest rates, so the potential debt burden increases are huge. We will be OK for a while since Europe looks worse than we do, for now. Greek 2 year debt just sold with 16% interest rates. We should be locking in current rates for longer terms for a bunch of this debt, and behaving more responsibly for our nation's long term fiscal health, while that will increase our cost vs, the silly low short term raters. Note: another elephant in the room is government guaranteed debt from quasi government agencies like Fannie and Freedie that we taxpayers are also on the hook for. Now there is talk about an infrastructure bank that won't cost us anything... yeah right.

JR


** FWIW I was complaining the last time they raised the borrowing authority, but i don't write for a major newspaper, and the public rarely pays attention to what they consider the behind the scenes business of running Washington. Only when it threatens them, do people pay any attention, based on what the news pukes tell them is important.
 
Last edited:
Re: Gibson raided

Jack,
you're free to go where ever you want! I meant what I said.Go after 12 million people who illegaly came into our country, or 1 company importing ( supposedly) illegal wood.If it's finished in India by an underpaid Indian worker,you can import it.If it's raw wood and finished by an American worker,it's illegal.Is this a great country or what?

Hello Randy,

I don't disagree with all of your sentiment here. I do think we need to know more about Gibson, and the laws.
But this has been going on for some time, so its hard to feel too sorry for Gibson as they have been trying to skirt the law.

Regarding immigration.
It is my opinion that we have no illegal immigration problem.
Basically one thing that has set the US apart from much of the rest of the world since about 1495 is that there has been the potential for growth.
So having 12million more people than there are "supposed" to be means that we have that many more people to build homes for, sell food to, to sell cars to, and fuel for those cars, etc.
There are some countries, like Italy, where populations are diminishing. There they need to have an economy that is sustainable without growth.

If these 12M were suddenly to leave, think of the negative impact that would have on our already bad economy.

I do think we have a business practice/hiring problem. Some of these people have been hired under the table. Thus the business owners are not contributing to the societal costs.
As long as this is not being done, I am not too concerned. In fact, if they are paying social security, and are never going to be able to collect it is running in our, (US Citizens), favor. And against their best interest.

Regards, Jack
 
Re: Gibson raided

Hello Randy,

I don't disagree with all of your sentiment here. I do think we need to know more about Gibson, and the laws.
But this has been going on for some time, so its hard to feel too sorry for Gibson as they have been trying to skirt the law.

I don't know 100% of the story, but I've followed it from when it broke most recently. My impression is the exact opposite. Gibson tried to import wood legally from Madagascar. For whatever reason, the US Government did not believe it was legal. Gibson is still waiting for a decision on that infringement (haven't even had their day in court, nor have they been given information as to exactly what the infringement was).

Gibson then changed suppliers to someone in India. The US Government again found something they didn't like about their importation of said product, despite Gibson's claim that all of the correct paperwork has been filed. The Government has again, failed to make it known exactly what the infringements are (maybe they do have a bad lawyer, but it shouldn't require a good lawyer (or any lawyer at all) to determine what you are being charged with *exactly.*

Gibson's legal counsel surmises that it has to do with part of the Lacey Act that says a given product must not only be imported according to US law but also the laws in the other country. Granted, that makes sense for things like child labor, worker exploitation, illegal poaching of endangered species, etc, etc. But a law regarding how the product is finished by workers there??? I think that's a stretch for any company to be able to completely comply, and bears at least consideration of modification of the original treaty.

Gibson has said that they've got support from other parts of the guitar building industry in the US and given the way in which the cases have been handled, I'm inclined to believe Gibson's CEO in the video I linked to previously.

The scary thing is that if Gibson's supposition is correct about why their might be an infringement and with the interperetations of the Lacey Act I've come across, the current owner of said wood product is held accountable under strict liability. Meaning, if you own one of the guitars recently manufactured with these woods you are liable (not Gibson). Also, if you have a vintage guitar containing these woods you had better get it well documented that is grandfathered or that the contents were obtained legally or you may also face fines and/or confiscation of the instrument.

IMO it would be like destroying a painting because it contained chemicals that violated EPA rules.
 
Re: Gibson raided

Hello Randy,

I don't disagree with all of your sentiment here. I do think we need to know more about Gibson, and the laws.
But this has been going on for some time, so its hard to feel too sorry for Gibson as they have been trying to skirt the law.
I caught the tail end of Henry being interviewed on one of the Fox cable channels (Dobbs) while i was surfing by. Since I was following this story I stayed for their take on it and no surprise it was an all out attack on political motivations and regulatory over reach. In the immediately following segment the regular (fox) talking heads showed how uninformed they were about the case specifics. I still think the US government has better things to do with their time and our money, there seems to be more to this story than the simple explanations.
Regarding immigration.
It is my opinion that we have no illegal immigration problem.
Basically one thing that has set the US apart from much of the rest of the world since about 1495 is that there has been the potential for growth.
So having 12million more people than there are "supposed" to be means that we have that many more people to build homes for, sell food to, to sell cars to, and fuel for those cars, etc.
Tell that to the millions trying to emigrate here legally, following the rules.

You may be surprised to learn that I agree with you about the economic benefit of large scale immigration, as most of the mature developed western nations are aging and declining in making replacement babies, to fuel the growth we need to support deficit spending. :-)

BUT... and this is a very important but... It matters how we handle this. Those of us who are a little older and have been paying attention for that long recall that we fixed this once before, with a large scale amnesty and promise to manage/prevent future illegal immigration. As so often happens, congress passes laws, then drops the ball on funding the administration/execution of those laws (like our borders, etc). So the unintended consequence of the old amnesty was to telegraph to poor workers that it was worth the risk to, get here by illegal means and take their chances on eventual amnesty, or a slap on the wrist and free ride home, but this is not all upside for these guys since many are killed or taken advantage of by parasitic criminals working the border trafficking.

Nobody expects the millions of illegal aliens settled here to be sent back, but anybody who has studied the history of this, knows, if we do the same thing as we did the last time, we will get the same result... Thus the motivation to first secure the border and manage the systems internally for identifying and managing illegals already here, before discussing amnesty.

I won't argue the gross unfairness of allowing people who came here illegally to jump ahead of deserving people who have been trying to get here for years, but to be practical, we need an honest adult discussion, of how to prevent the uncontrolled screen door that is the consequence of our current failed illegal immigration policy. (Perhaps the punishment for illegal immigration should be hard labor, building a wall... say on the Az border?)

Realistically, I do not expect this adult conversation to happen during this term. The political football being bandied about is the potential millions of votes when these illegals get, "legalized", all of the discussion I've seen recently is self serving toward relatively short term political ends and not toward long term solutions (I am not surprised that is the nature of the beast).

Economically this is a good source of growth for our economy, that we should embrace, but without the unfairness of the current system.
There are some countries, like Italy, where populations are diminishing. There they need to have an economy that is sustainable without growth.

If these 12M were suddenly to leave, think of the negative impact that would have on our already bad economy.

I do think we have a business practice/hiring problem. Some of these people have been hired under the table. Thus the business owners are not contributing to the societal costs.
As long as this is not being done, I am not too concerned. In fact, if they are paying social security, and are never going to be able to collect it is running in our, (US Citizens), favor. And against their best interest.

Regards, Jack

This is conflicted for business who needs these workers to do jobs many americans don't want to do for economic wages. Chasing off this source of low/un-skilled labor will not force business to pay more, but lead to even more importing of cost competitive goods from other regions. Which almost brings us full circle on this thread topic, while this is about rare materials, not just labor intensive, while the labor content seems mixed up in that Indian law that regulators are enforcing. Thus the irony of enforcing some Indian labor content law while widely ignoring US law wrt immigration.

JR
 
Re: Gibson raided

Hello Jack,

I agree with you on the Gibson problem...if they are indeed importing woods that are not protected from over harvesting or on the endangered list. If Gibson is playing a game, then, they should be held accountable.

In regards to Illegal Immigrants... those that came before us set laws in regards to Immigration to the U.S. Sure, those Laws have varied, but these Laws were instituted to PROTECT the American Society from Disease Epidemics, Uncontrolled Population Growth, Disproportionate growth and demand on civic services and infrastructure, Colonization, Depopulation of other Countries, Subversion and other Countries dumping their Mental and Physically impaired into the U.S.

While this is definitely considered a touchy subject....let's refer to the Majority of Illegals that come into the U.S., the Central Americans. The Majority of these do not buy Homes or new vehicles, because they cannot get the Banks to finance them...they're Illegal and have to provide specific documentation. (unlike the pre-housing bubble bursting when they COULD purchase without any/very little documentation. This Housing Bubble and Bank reposessions cases were a significant number of properties purchased and lost by Illegals).

Also, there have been numerous studies done by BOTH POLITICAL PARTIES that try to "Prove" that having Illegals in the U.S., benefits the Economy more than it detracts from the Economy. These studies show that the Illegals are a drain on our Economy. They send Hundreds of Billions of Dollars to their homelands in the form of Aid to Families or to enrich their own Bank Accounts. Much of their U.S. made incomes are not SPENT here.

In most homes occupied by Illegal Aliens there are numerous individuals or Families that USE this home as a residence. THe studies have shown that the average Illegal Alien home contains approximately 7 adults many of whom are not directly related. (Husband, Wife, Sister, Brother, Mother, Father)

The studies go on to prove that Illegals are also a drain on Social Services (Medicaid & Welfare), Hospitals (for which they provide incomplete or totally false information (Billing info), the Criminal Justice System, Schools, (mostly inner-city, which are financially strained as is, and IF their Children even attend Schools),and Massive problems to the Social Security Administration in regards to false use of SS numbers,etc...

What I feel is the biggest injustice is that there are many Thousands, if not Millions that are on the waiting list to come here in a legal and proper manner, and their efforts are mocked by those that come here as they see fit.

The Majority of Countries have specific and stringent Laws in regards to Immigration, most will imprison those that break those Countries Laws. Here, we just send them home, without punishment.

This whole nonchalant attitude between both Political Parties, and all of America's policing Agencies in regards to Illegal Aliens immigrating to the U.S. proves to me that this "War on Terror" is nothing but a joke on the American People. It's nothing more than a means to fund and create more Jobs, while harrassing American Citizens.

If they were truly concerned about Terrorists and Terroristic plots, they be tripping over themselves to maintain borders and the flow of incoming people into the U.S.

Hammer

ps. I suppose you didn't hear of the landmark case (California) regarding an Illegal Alien collecting Social Security that was adjudicated by the Supreme Court...he won, and any Illegal Alien can now collect Social Security...even if they paid the most menial amount into the system.
 
Re: Gibson raided

Hello Jack,

I agree with you on the Gibson problem...if they are indeed importing woods that are not protected from over harvesting or on the endangered list. If Gibson is playing a game, then, they should be held accountable.
Should i be a little nervous about the Hammer, being somewhat in agreement with my position?

Gibson is clearly using rare wood, that is restricted/protected by sundry laws in other nations.

However (AFAIK) they dotted their i's and crossed their t's regarding "legal" documentation, so according to US law they were meeting their legal requirement. Their agents knowingly sourced this material on a gray market, and apparently skirted a local law regarding local labor content. In general I am OK in principle with following foreign laws *when in Rome" etc. But US regulators pursuing some infraction of foreign laws while overlooking other domestic law infractions, stinks of selective prosecution. Sounds like the Gibson thing is personal with somebody. The implications of this applied broadly are scary for everyone who owns a high end instrument.

I read an article a few months ago about otherwise innocent businessmen ensnared by some obscure law that they unknowingly broke. One example that I recall was of a business man trying to develop a new battery technology so he had all kinds of toxic materials around... When he ran out money, he shuttered his operation and secured, but did not dispose of the toxic materials following (very expensive) federal guidelines, intending to return and pick up his development where he left off... Now he is bankrupted by fines and may do hard time. This is not some gangster in Bayonne, NJ burying 55 gallon drums of toxic waste under some junkyard, but a cash poor inventor trying to invent.

As they keep passing more and more laws, mostly with good intentions, it becomes easier for us to innocently get ensnared by one. This Lacey act seems like typical good intentions, but how it is being applied smells a little fishy, and wildlifey.

In regards to Illegal Immigrants... those that came before us set laws in regards to Immigration to the U.S. Sure, those Laws have varied, but these Laws were instituted to PROTECT the American Society from Disease Epidemics, Uncontrolled Population Growth, Disproportionate growth and demand on civic services and infrastructure, Colonization, Depopulation of other Countries, Subversion and other Countries dumping their Mental and Physically impaired into the U.S.
Like Castro did with the Mariel Boat lift.
While this is definitely considered a touchy subject....let's refer to the Majority of Illegals that come into the U.S., the Central Americans. The Majority of these do not buy Homes or new vehicles, because they cannot get the Banks to finance them...they're Illegal and have to provide specific documentation. (unlike the pre-housing bubble bursting when they COULD purchase without any/very little documentation. This Housing Bubble and Bank reposessions cases were a significant number of properties purchased and lost by Illegals).
Statistics on this group are a little sketchy... I don't think they were supposed to be counted in the last census, but who knows.
Also, there have been numerous studies done by BOTH POLITICAL PARTIES that try to "Prove" that having Illegals in the U.S., benefits the Economy more than it detracts from the Economy. These studies show that the Illegals are a drain on our Economy. They send Hundreds of Billions of Dollars to their homelands in the form of Aid to Families or to enrich their own Bank Accounts. Much of their U.S. made incomes are not SPENT here.
It is no secret that many SA countries count on this revenue stream to keep their economy going.

I have no problem with whatever LEGAL workers do with THEIR money honestly earned.
In most homes occupied by Illegal Aliens there are numerous individuals or Families that USE this home as a residence. THe studies have shown that the average Illegal Alien home contains approximately 7 adults many of whom are not directly related. (Husband, Wife, Sister, Brother, Mother, Father)
Yawn... almost as bad as those hippies back in the "60's with their communes, but not as bad as in the slums where some of these workers came from. At least they are living within their means, saving money, and using it productively albeit in another country.
The studies go on to prove that Illegals are also a drain on Social Services (Medicaid & Welfare), Hospitals (for which they provide incomplete or totally false information (Billing info), the Criminal Justice System, Schools, (mostly inner-city, which are financially strained as is, and IF their Children even attend Schools),and Massive problems to the Social Security Administration in regards to false use of SS numbers,etc...
Not as bad of a problem as unfunded future entitlements, but thats another debate.
What I feel is the biggest injustice is that there are many Thousands, if not Millions that are on the waiting list to come here in a legal and proper manner, and their efforts are mocked by those that come here as they see fit.
Amen brother... but even our legal immigration can't shoot straight. They have many times the number of legal applicants as slots for them, so every year they run a lottery to randomly select the winners from this larger pool. In a clerical error, instead of randomly selecting from the pool, some gomer just sent out notices in sequence from the top of this list. After they discovered their mistake, they then notified a few 10k people, disregard that notice, no you are not coming to America this year... Now that's cruel and mocking the system.
The Majority of Countries have specific and stringent Laws in regards to Immigration, most will imprison those that break those Countries Laws. Here, we just send them home, without punishment.

This whole nonchalant attitude between both Political Parties, and all of America's policing Agencies in regards to Illegal Aliens immigrating to the U.S. proves to me that this "War on Terror" is nothing but a joke on the American People. It's nothing more than a means to fund and create more Jobs, while harrassing American Citizens.
Not that nonchalant. This topic has been raised by responsible legislators from both sides but beaten back down by party leadership who didn't see it in their interest, at that moment in time. I consider it criminal for legislators to kick this down the road, while the recent political feints are not credible or responsible either.
If they were truly concerned about Terrorists and Terroristic plots, they be tripping over themselves to maintain borders and the flow of incoming people into the U.S.
Americans have a relatively short attention span, and our success at preventing attacks at home, is mistaken by many as the lack of a credible ongoing threat. Now that Patreus is over the CIA, I expect (hope) he will be even more effective, but there is only so much he can do. It was good to see Afghan troops standing up to Taliban attackers, but there are still way to few of them to be effective.

Iran just announced they will release the two American hikers, on $500,000 bail, each... This is all about the Benjamins, and they needed the cool Million in cash, more that the propaganda ploy, since nobody expects these guys back to the kangaroo court.
Hammer

ps. I suppose you didn't hear of the landmark case (California) regarding an Illegal Alien collecting Social Security that was adjudicated by the Supreme Court...he won, and any Illegal Alien can now collect Social Security...even if they paid the most menial amount into the system.

I didn't hear that, but if the supremes say so who am I to argue. This whole immigration situation needs to be rationalized, for the one important reason. It is the right thing to do.

Of course opinions vary.

JR
 
Re: Gibson raided

Statistics on this group are a little sketchy... I don't think they were supposed to be counted in the last census, but who knows.

JR
I received a reality check on this today via a phone call from our state's employment something or another stastics collecting agency... or those who were contracted to collect the stats.

Seems that folks who work 100 - 120 hrs. a week aren't counted in the employment stats... if they're self employed. I guess self employment isn't considered employment in the eyes of our govt. Heartwarming... that bit of information. Humm... wonder why small business just doesn't seem to have the confidence needed to turn this economy around?
 
Re: Gibson raided

Income taxes? A long running debate over taxing active vs passive income. I don't think anybody debates a fair tax rate for income from your day job. But after you pay taxes on that the first time, and put it in the bank to earn interest or buy stocks for capital appreciation, we get taxed again on the fruits from this capital we already paid taxes on, then when we die, it gets taxed again when we try to give it to our children. Histoically interest and capital gains are taxed at a lower rate, but still double taxation. For that matter dividends paid out on stocks, were already taxed at the corporate rate, before distributing to us, to be taxed again. JR
Actually, the capital invested is not taxed a second time, only the income derived from the investment of the capital. Since income derived from the sweat of your brow is subject to FICA, and "passive" income is not, I could be argued that the man cleaning the swimming pool is the one being doubly taxed, whereas the man sitting next to the pool enjoying a beverage and waiting for the dividend check is also enjoying the tax advantages. (the swimming pool example is hyperbole, good for ginning up the class warriors) The "corporate rate" is pretty low if you happen to own stock in General Electric, Exxon Mobile or any other company that makes billions in profits as well as receiving tax refunds. I don't view this as illegal or immoral, as it's all done withing the legal boundaries of the tax code as written, and any smart business should be expected to use the laws to their full advantage. If we really want fairness, we really need to stop the lobbyists from writing the tax code.
 
Re: Gibson raided

Seems that folks who work 100 - 120 hrs. a week aren't counted in the employment stats... if they're self employed. I guess self employment isn't considered employment in the eyes of our govt.

I guess that means I don't have to pay taxes anymore then, at least on my "self-employment" income. What's good for the goose and all that.

-C
 
Re: Gibson raided

Actually, the capital invested is not taxed a second time, only the income derived from the investment of the capital. Since income derived from the sweat of your brow is subject to FICA, and "passive" income is not, I could be argued that the man cleaning the swimming pool is the one being doubly taxed, whereas the man sitting next to the pool enjoying a beverage and waiting for the dividend check is also enjoying the tax advantages.
Yup now i feel guilty... but only a little. I don't have a pool.

Corporations pay taxes on their profit at the corporate rate (first time) before they distribute some of those earnings to stock holders as dividends. The stockholders are then taxed on that dividend income on their personal returns (second time). So that particular stream of revenue is taxed two times once on the corporate return and again on the individual return. Since the stockholder arguably owns a fraction of the company, he is taxed twice on his company's earnings. Some public corporations instead of distributing retained earnings as dividends, use that money to instead buy back shares on the open market. This reduces the number of shares outstanding so on paper increases the earning "per share", while earning are the same. This is supposed to push up the stock price that values earnings per share as a valuation metric, and the stockholder pays no additional taxes on this maneuver, while hopefully receiving the benefit of more valuable stock. Of course this is less certain than dividends in hand, that are real money, and you pay capital gains tax on the gain if it works when you sell later, so just give me the dividends please.
------
There are fairly large deductions for estate taxes, but very large estates like family businesses get taxed when passed down to children, sometimes forcing the surviving family members to sell the business to pay the taxes. (This can generally be avoided by estate planning). Arguably this is not purely double taxation, but proof that you cannot avoid taxes even by dying.
-------
Capital gains are indeed only taxed on the gain or increase of capital at risk while loss of principal is deductible against other gains but only up to the amount of those other gains. (buy low and sell high works best).
-----
Outright taxation on simple wealth or possessions is more the practice of state and local governments, AKA excise taxes, for things like cars and houses and even some states charge a tax on business inventory. This would be double taxation if they only collected twice, but it seems to be a chronic condition, repeating annually.

I do not deny government the right to tax as needed to pay for all their useful services, I just wish they would spend our money more wisely than they have been.

(the swimming pool example is hyperbole, good for ginning up the class warriors) The "corporate rate" is pretty low if you happen to own stock in General Electric, Exxon Mobile or any other company that makes billions in profits as well as receiving tax refunds. I don't view this as illegal or immoral, as it's all done withing the legal boundaries of the tax code as written, and any smart business should be expected to use the laws to their full advantage. If we really want fairness, we really need to stop the lobbyists from writing the tax code.
I hate what lobbyists do, but is is protected speech. We all have the right to petition our elected representatives, and we get the bad with the good. I am not in favor of letting those suckers write the actual bills... No legislator should ever vote on a bill he hasn't read and understood. I suspect that would eliminate pretty much all of them.

The "effective" corporate rate (what they actually pay after deductions) and "nominal" corporate rate (what small guys typically pay) are two different animals, which is why the GMs and GEs of the world are not complaining about high tax rates. Only the small businesses end up paying those high nominal rates.

This is one kind of tax reform being considered (by some). Lower the nominal rate and close the loopholes, so the government gets the same tax revenue or more, while small business is on a more level footing with big business.. This sounds like class warfare between big business and small.. sorry, mea culpa.

JR
 
Last edited:
Re: Gibson raided

I hate what lobbyists do, but is is protected speech. We all have the right to petition our elected representatives, and we get the bad with the good. I am not in favor of letting those suckers write the actual bills... No legislator should ever vote on a bill he hasn't read and understood. I suspect that would eliminate pretty much all of them.

I love my lobbyists, it's just too bad I can't afford them at the state level... it burns a whole day going to the capitol to testify on a particular bill (that I have read, and many of those on the committee haven't).
 
Re: Gibson raided

You may be surprised to learn that I agree with you about the economic benefit of large scale immigration, as most of the mature developed western nations are aging and declining in making replacement babies, to fuel the growth we need to support deficit spending. :-)

BUT... and this is a very important but... It matters how we handle this.
JR

Hello JR, not surprised at all.
1) You and I disagree on a lot of things, but you think about them. Not just post knee jerk reactions or regurgitate simple slogans.
2) This is a very complex issue. And neither side can come up with a good solution that it can agree with, let alone that the other side will agree to. "side", sigh Or even agree on the problem, what is a problem and what isn't.

I myself don't agree with everything I posted, (Oh no, I hope the part you agree with is not the stuff I don't believe myself!), or more to the point, if I have a quick fix, I myself don't believe in quick fixes for this problem. There I said it, we have a problem. But its more complex than just evacutation of 12M people. Or not letting anyone else in. Or just letting anyone in.

Also, I am well aware of, and constantly reminding myself of the bumper sticker: Don't believe everything you think

Your point about doing immigration the right way is well taken. One of the drawbacks to the Patriot Act has been that it is harder for foreign students to come here for their education. This means that we are missing out on a lot of brains. And that they are taking them elsewhere. Because one of the best things about immigration, or students here on visa's, is that almost by definition, it is those with gumption, get up and go, determination, that are wanting to be here. And that is a tide that raises the ship.

Also, thanks for the PM. I was not aware of it for days at least, and have also been gone more than I have been home. At a place without *gasp* WIFI! Which was a pleasant reprieve. To only work and interact, and not be tied to news sources and daily grinds of such. But I also get behind on conversations, and drudge up old sinking posts upon my return. Revive them and then ignore the for days while they reboil, and then jump back into the fray.

With regards to the first sentence, and not thinking you could change my mind. You are wrong. I used to think that mic pres were the most important part of the sound board, especially in regards to its inherent sound. You changed my thinking to the summing amps, and how that is a much more important part, and that even still sound board companies will go on about their pres, even if they know better, just to pander to the conventional wisdom. So we have a solid base to build from. Heard a great radio show the other day, from the one that used to be "Speaking of Faith", but has been renamed. The Rabi that was talking was going on about how important things like sports are in our lives. Such as arguing the inarguable, and interacting in mostly benign or superficial ways. So that we can build common ground, or at least common understandings about those kind of things that have no answers, but also in the end no real consequences, so that when we come to places and idea(l)s that do matter to our daily life, in this case to him religion, that we have something to stand on. Something that we know about the other person, so that even if we disagree with them, we know that they have reasons for their beliefs, in his example that some of his friends were under the misguided impression that it was a good thing that the Green Bay Packers won the Super Bowl, and he was still convinced the world would have been a better place had the Steelers won. That when they go back to discussing religion, they have something to base their friendships, or comradary, or interaction on. So that when they get to the things that really matter to them, they can still respect the others view.
For me, we will always have mic pres, and my enlightenment of them through you.

A few years ago I heard a piece about Mexico's immigration problem. EG, mostly Colombians, coming into Mexico through their southern border. I came up with a genius solution. We annex Mexico into the US. Hey, they all supposedly want to be here already, then they would all already be here. Next, we would have a much smaller southern border to patrol/fence/guard. And lastly, we would have a much larger population to draw upon to fight our wars. In hindsight the Libya thing would have been much easier to tackle.

More answers to other posts as I have the time.

Regards, Jack
 
Re: Gibson raided

Hello Randy,

I don't disagree with all of your sentiment here. I do think we need to know more about Gibson, and the laws.
But this has been going on for some time, so its hard to feel too sorry for Gibson as they have been trying to skirt the law.

Regarding immigration.
It is my opinion that we have no illegal immigration problem.
Basically one thing that has set the US apart from much of the rest of the world since about 1495 is that there has been the potential for growth.
So having 12million more people than there are "supposed" to be means that we have that many more people to build homes for, sell food to, to sell cars to, and fuel for those cars, etc.
There are some countries, like Italy, where populations are diminishing. There they need to have an economy that is sustainable without growth.

If these 12M were suddenly to leave, think of the negative impact that would have on our already bad economy.

I do think we have a business practice/hiring problem. Some of these people have been hired under the table. Thus the business owners are not contributing to the societal costs.
As long as this is not being done, I am not too concerned. In fact, if they are paying social security, and are never going to be able to collect it is running in our, (US Citizens), favor. And against their best interest.

Regards, Jack

Jack.
I agree it would be difficult if not impossible to remove 12 million illegals.But that doesn't mean we need to give them a free pass.Also,by comming here illegally,they open themselves up to being abused by some employers.Because they are often underpaid, they drag down the wage scale for legal citizens who might do that work if it paid a little more.Since most of them work for low wages and without benefits,they use up alot of services that the rest of us have to pay for.Healthcare is a big one.Since most are uninsured,the hospitals have to make up that cost somewhere.They do that by charging us more.Education is another.They don't make enough to pay for the costs of putting their kids through the public school system, so again we have to make up the difference. But my biggest gripe against illegals is those who try to come here legally have to wait in line often for years,while the illegals get a free pass..My grandparents came here from Germany in 1925 through Ellis Island. They had to have a sponsor and a job.They could not be a burden on our society. My grandmothers mother,was not allowed in because she had a growth on her face. She went back to Germany and had it removed before she was allowed in.I don't think it's too much to ask that if you want to come here,you do it legally. If we think the immigration laws are too tough,then we need to change them.But right now,we have laws on the books that we should enforce.
 
Re: Gibson raided

But its more complex than just evacutation of 12M people. Or not letting anyone else in. Or just letting anyone in.
I blew through something on the intertube this morning... or maybe it was many mornings ago... something about front door immigration... some program where if a foreign comes to this country with some odd hundreds of thousands in cash in their hip pocket, and creates a business, and creates a bunch of jobs out of nothing... our country will offer to let such a person stay here.

Then I read something, somewhere else awhile ago... concerning cross the boarder calls for ambulance pick-ups of expectant mothers from across the boarder… ambulance is required by law to respond and haul the situation back across the boarder… delivered baby is automatically a US citizen and mom will be offered to be taken care of… for life… by my tax dollars.

and I read about some more proposed illegal immigrant amnesty programs... and stuff.

Seems there's a lot of dead air space between the ends of the spectrum