:har::har::har::har:

A bit taken aback?!:hmmm:

no, not at all, I'm just waiting for you to restart your system... it seems to be flooded as I noticed in previous pages... while you detox, i try to get some answers about the GAME i play here, maybe you could gimme a hand?

You know that you can delete your posts.

Simply click edit then delete you have to mark "delete message" by default it is not marked.The options under delete are hard to read though you can highlight the text to see it better you want to tick the bottom of the two choices.As is the option is ticked "do not delete message" which means that nothing will happen I think it is a kill switch so to speak.When you tick "delete message" the "Delete this Message" button will highlight.Only due to the hard to see nearly the same color as the background text things are hard to read.

Simple dimple bust a pimple with tricky text colors.

Thank you for the info, very kind, but I dont see why I would delete my post? I joined an already existing conversation and I shared my opinion, that's it :)
I made my post in full awareness that some may not like it - although I expected a much more mature approach for a serious subject like this.

Off topic: Can enyone help me with this issue please?

Indeed....the board is starting to look decidedly messy http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/8636/cdw.gif

Please post your help request in the appropriate forum, thanks.:salute:




It appears he abused the "edit" and "delete" functions enough to trigger the limited use function. The forum monitors post deletions and if one makes xx deletions in a short period of time, his ability to delete is removed for a period. Keeps people from disrupting discussions by mass deletion.

If no one wishes to get this thread back on topic, we can lock it.

Ah I see I only ever used delete to get rid of a double post and a few times to start a post over completely.Makes sense to have limit though someone could run through and delete several posts in a discussion.

Anyway illegal immigration will always be a problem when you have nations with better economic opportunities in regions where other nations have less to offer(which would be in every corner of the globe this situation).

Being poor in a 1st world country is better than being poor in a 3rd world country.Anyone can see the logic in that it is exactly why people legally immigrate the majority of the time well more so in most cases to have a better job middle class job.

The illegals come because companies are giving them jobs.Seems like the punishment for companies willingly using illegal labor is pretty minimal and worth what ever the fines are.You could have stricter enforcement and harsher punishment for the employers.Which of course means that they must pay higher wages to legal workers which means that cost would passed on to the consumer.I wonder how will people feel when the price of food especially produce goes up(substantially if the majority of illegal workers where gone) as a result of the illegal workers going away.

Apart from companies being able to get cheap workers who will seldomly protest against worst job situations, never underestimate that certain jobs are very unattractive (so to speak) for the 'native' inhabitants :-?

Being poor in certain 1st world countries is better than being middle class in some other 1st world country.
Slovenia is a developed nation, but I'd make almost double working as an apartment block janitor in Germany than I make now as an artisan in a yacht development company :nope:

http://toprightnews.com/?p=1333

Cost of illegals coming to US to give birth

humble opinion: I think the cause-efferct relation model must be more complicated than this. Proof of this is that in eastern europe, which is a big workforce "exporter", basic commodities - like bread, basic foodstuff - are more expensive than in wester countries, like UK or Germany (Which is more severe if you take in consideration that mexicans or EastEU mambers earn 3-4 times less than their western "colleagues" - this fact it itself generates emmigration) The prices are set by the market also, not only by the cost of labour producing them.
Problem is that the developing countries are first of all a huge market for developed countries products, and this is where the snake bites its own tail.

To give you an example: I earn 1,2 USD (one point 2) an hour in Romania, and I spend around 1,10 USD for a 1 kg bread. I London I earned 9 pounds an hour with less labour, and I could buy food for almost 2 days spendin only 5 pounds at Tescos. Why? Because EU corporate interest was to kill local economy -specially agriculture- in my country, and we are forced buy overpriced wheat form outside. I dunno if that applies to USA-Mexico relationship, but definitely a fact in Europe.

Indeed.I saw some documentary where they went and filmed citizenship ceremonies across the country.They talked to the new citizens my favorite was an Iraqi man he said "people in Iraq would love being a dog in America" kind of of funny (or maybe sad) that many native born Americans do not realize just how good we have it here even if at the lowest level.One of my cousins adopted a Romanian boy about 15 years ago now he is in college and his parents are upper middle class he has nothing really to worry about.In Romania I doubt he would be in anywhere near the same situation(especially considering his parents gave hm away) even if he had a good job.

Roy Beck's colourful presentation of Immigration, World Poverty and Gumballs - Updated 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPjzfGChGlE