Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
(former)FormerSanDiegan
Participant[quote=sd_matt]Here here condogirl
We reward the lawless and punish the lawful. I got a response from Fienstien. Here’s part of it.
“Most recently, during debate of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, I voted for an amendment that prohibits all recipients of Federal funds from hiring H-1B guest workers (temporary foreign workers in specialized occupations), unless a business first proves that American workers are not able to fill the jobs. This provision was included in the final version of the Act, which President Obama signed into law on February 17, 2009 (Public Law 111-5). Additionally, the White House has estimated that this Act may create or save as many as 396,000 jobs in California, and will help our state avoid additional cuts to Medi-Cal and other critical safety net programs.”
She never addressed benefits to the undocumented.[/quote]
That’s because the response was selected from a discrete number of form letters for various issues. This form letter was probably selected based on a staff-member scan for certain keywords, related to political issues in your letter.
ParticipantWhy not institute a guest worker program that requires a state permit (and maybe a federal one too while we are at it) ?
Make the state permit for CA $100 monthly for any month in which a worker is used, paid for by the company.
That’s 1200 per year per worker. If there are 4 million guest workers, this would approximately cover the $5B shortfall. If not, scale the fees up.
Make the fines for not registering a factor of 10 or 20x higher than the permit and generate additional revenue. Use this additional revenue to pay for the enforcement, e.g. through a bounty system. I am sure that some of the workers would report the employees to collect the bounty, thus forcing the employers to comply with the permit process.
ParticipantWhy not institute a guest worker program that requires a state permit (and maybe a federal one too while we are at it) ?
Make the state permit for CA $100 monthly for any month in which a worker is used, paid for by the company.
That’s 1200 per year per worker. If there are 4 million guest workers, this would approximately cover the $5B shortfall. If not, scale the fees up.
Make the fines for not registering a factor of 10 or 20x higher than the permit and generate additional revenue. Use this additional revenue to pay for the enforcement, e.g. through a bounty system. I am sure that some of the workers would report the employees to collect the bounty, thus forcing the employers to comply with the permit process.
ParticipantWhy not institute a guest worker program that requires a state permit (and maybe a federal one too while we are at it) ?
Make the state permit for CA $100 monthly for any month in which a worker is used, paid for by the company.
That’s 1200 per year per worker. If there are 4 million guest workers, this would approximately cover the $5B shortfall. If not, scale the fees up.
Make the fines for not registering a factor of 10 or 20x higher than the permit and generate additional revenue. Use this additional revenue to pay for the enforcement, e.g. through a bounty system. I am sure that some of the workers would report the employees to collect the bounty, thus forcing the employers to comply with the permit process.
ParticipantWhy not institute a guest worker program that requires a state permit (and maybe a federal one too while we are at it) ?
Make the state permit for CA $100 monthly for any month in which a worker is used, paid for by the company.
That’s 1200 per year per worker. If there are 4 million guest workers, this would approximately cover the $5B shortfall. If not, scale the fees up.
Make the fines for not registering a factor of 10 or 20x higher than the permit and generate additional revenue. Use this additional revenue to pay for the enforcement, e.g. through a bounty system. I am sure that some of the workers would report the employees to collect the bounty, thus forcing the employers to comply with the permit process.
ParticipantWhy not institute a guest worker program that requires a state permit (and maybe a federal one too while we are at it) ?
Make the state permit for CA $100 monthly for any month in which a worker is used, paid for by the company.
That’s 1200 per year per worker. If there are 4 million guest workers, this would approximately cover the $5B shortfall. If not, scale the fees up.
Make the fines for not registering a factor of 10 or 20x higher than the permit and generate additional revenue. Use this additional revenue to pay for the enforcement, e.g. through a bounty system. I am sure that some of the workers would report the employees to collect the bounty, thus forcing the employers to comply with the permit process.
June 8, 2009 at 7:56 AM in reply to: Prepayment penalty scam … and we bailed out these ****ers? #412132ParticipantA prepayment penalty essentially prevents someone from refinancing during the penalty period. It’s not really a moot point for those whose loans were going to reset and who could have locked into a low fixed rate.
June 8, 2009 at 7:56 AM in reply to: Prepayment penalty scam … and we bailed out these ****ers? #412368ParticipantA prepayment penalty essentially prevents someone from refinancing during the penalty period. It’s not really a moot point for those whose loans were going to reset and who could have locked into a low fixed rate.
June 8, 2009 at 7:56 AM in reply to: Prepayment penalty scam … and we bailed out these ****ers? #412616ParticipantA prepayment penalty essentially prevents someone from refinancing during the penalty period. It’s not really a moot point for those whose loans were going to reset and who could have locked into a low fixed rate.
June 8, 2009 at 7:56 AM in reply to: Prepayment penalty scam … and we bailed out these ****ers? #412682ParticipantA prepayment penalty essentially prevents someone from refinancing during the penalty period. It’s not really a moot point for those whose loans were going to reset and who could have locked into a low fixed rate.
June 8, 2009 at 7:56 AM in reply to: Prepayment penalty scam … and we bailed out these ****ers? #412832ParticipantA prepayment penalty essentially prevents someone from refinancing during the penalty period. It’s not really a moot point for those whose loans were going to reset and who could have locked into a low fixed rate.
ParticipantBut to tape a posted sign to someone’s house has got to be illegal.
Did they damage the house ?
ParticipantBut to tape a posted sign to someone’s house has got to be illegal.
Did they damage the house ?
ParticipantBut to tape a posted sign to someone’s house has got to be illegal.
Did they damage the house ?
-
AuthorPosts
