http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/02/10/immigr ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
kind of a good news story!
Going home?
Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton
Re: Going home?
Not trying to be rude, but a criminal leaving the USA
When I say "criminal" I refer to illegally entering the USA

When I say "criminal" I refer to illegally entering the USA

Big round, Little round, Having one is what counts!!!
Re: Going home?
XtremeDuty.45 wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/02/10/immigr ... index.html
kind of a good news story!
Now if we could just remember to close the gate behind them and lock the border down.
- Captain Matt
- Senior Member
- Posts: 507
- Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2008 1:43 pm
- Location: blue water
Re: Going home?
I don't remember where I read it but I saw a proposal somewhere to change the tax code. Instead of having four categories for single, married, etc. the categories would be based on immigration status. The lowest tax rate would be citizens, followed by permanent residents. People on visas (H1B, student, gues worker, etc.) would pay an even higher rate, like 1.25x to 1.5x the citizen rate. Finally, illegals would have to pay 90%.
There's obviously no constitutional issue with equal protection because it doesn't discriminate any more than the current tax code with different rates for married, single, etc. Actually, there's seems to be much more constitutional authority to discriminate based on immigration status than on family status.
Even if illegals pay 100% income tax they would still be here illegally, just like the marijuana tax stamps in some states don't make pot legal. It just gives the police another way to crack down on crime. Like Al Capone getting nabbed for tax evasion.
There's obviously no constitutional issue with equal protection because it doesn't discriminate any more than the current tax code with different rates for married, single, etc. Actually, there's seems to be much more constitutional authority to discriminate based on immigration status than on family status.
Even if illegals pay 100% income tax they would still be here illegally, just like the marijuana tax stamps in some states don't make pot legal. It just gives the police another way to crack down on crime. Like Al Capone getting nabbed for tax evasion.
"hic sunt dracones"
- stevie_d_64
- Senior Member
- Posts: 7590
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 11:17 pm
- Location: 77504
Re: Going home?
I bet Pablo's familia will miss the tax free income he sent home more than having him back...
"Perseverance and Preparedness triumph over Procrastination and Paranoia every time.” -- Steve
NRA - Life Member
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Μολών λαβέ!
NRA - Life Member
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Μολών λαβέ!
-
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1394
- Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 2:03 pm
- Location: Central TX, just west of Austin
Re: Going home?
I really don't see any problem with applying civil forfeiture to the possessions of illegal aliens. If an illegal is caught with a house, car, wristwatch, cash, a bicycle, ANYTHING, then it is logical and reasonable to conclude that he came by it illegally, so it becomes the property of the state.Captain Matt wrote:Even if illegals pay 100% income tax they would still be here illegally, just like the marijuana tax stamps in some states don't make pot legal. It just gives the police another way to crack down on crime. Like Al Capone getting nabbed for tax evasion.
He gets sent home ONLY with the clothes on his back.
Period.
(Maybe we can bill him for transportation costs, too?)
Original CHL: 2000: 56 day turnaround
1st renewal, 2004: 34 days
2nd renewal, 2008: 81 days
3rd renewal, 2013: 12 days
1st renewal, 2004: 34 days
2nd renewal, 2008: 81 days
3rd renewal, 2013: 12 days