Tipping in USA/Canada

Craig Welch wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:
"Mr. Travel" wrote:
Greg Procter wrote:

What would I care about your "Green Cards"???
I didn't bring "Green Cards" into the discussion, but I was asked my
opinion about them in regards to our discussion.
We were talking about the law regarding buying stuff from Cuba.
In that discussion, green card holder/permanent resident/resident alien
would be relevant.


Only if the hopeful buyer is a green card holder/permanent
resident/resident alien of the USa..
Given that Craig is presumably resident in Singapore, all those options
can almost certainly be discounted as applying to him.

Are you not aware that one can be a Permanent Resident of more than one
country?

It's not necessary for a Permanent Resident to permanently reside in the
country of permanent residence.


LOL - did you actually read what you wrote???

Greg Procter wrote:
"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Are you trying to make some point not related to my IBM PC?
Whatever it is, it's not being transmitted.

You claim the XT's name was not "IBM Personal Computer XT"
Actually I stated the XT was an IBM PC. You seemed to disagree.

I pointed out the prodcut numbers of 2 IBM manuals that have this name
on the cover.



My oldest IBM computer is an IBM PC which pre-dates the XT.

Let's try this again.
Is the XT an IBM PC?

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

No, the law cannot apply _in_ other countries.

If the action is committed in another country, the law could still
apply. The action taken against the violator would probably wait until
they are back in the US, but the law APPLIES for the offense committed
in the other country. Maybe your dictionary doesn't have this word?



The law can only be applied in the country it exists in.

So, if I violate a US law outside of the US, it doesn't apply, so I
can't be punished when I get back to the US?

You really are Chilly's dad, aren't you?

Greg Procter wrote:

So you're saying that children or retired parents of "Green Card"
holders would need their own "Green Cards" to stay in the US, even
though the purpose of "Green Cards" is to allow foreigners to work in
the US, but that they would not need "Green Cards" if they held
"Permanent Resident" status, which you've told me is the same as the
"Green Card".

Are you sure you've got this straight?


I never stated the purpose of a green card was to work in the US.
I said "green card holder" is the same thing as "permanent resident' or
"resident alien"

A green card holder's children would need a visa to stay in the US if
they were not green card holders, or US citizens. I never stated they
had to have their own green card. The would have to be a US citizen,
green card holder, or have a visa, in order stay in the US.

How difficult is this to understand?
It is poosible for a non-US citizen to work, if they don't have a green
card. The are visas that permit them to worl.

Greg Procter wrote:


Well, I thought about buying coal from Newcastle, but my engine wouldn't
lubricate well with it.



You will buy that cheap yank rubbish!

Newcastle coal is from America?

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Craig Welch wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:


A small lesson in the english language:
- If you wish to indicate an abreviation you write it in a form like
'o.f.a.c.' The full stops indicate abreviations.


Why then do you refer to New Zealand as NZ instead of n.z.?


The rules don't apply to him.
He can ask us for a cite, but never provide one.

He can ask us for proof, but he makes statements and never responds to
request for specific things, like the "absolute" statement in "The Act"
that says US citizens are forbidden to buy anything from Cuba.



The "Act", or an extract from it, has already been posted on antu in
recent weeks.

I was asking about the absolute statement, YOU commented on.
Do you not know what statement YOU were talking about?

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


What would I care about your "Green Cards"???
I didn't bring "Green Cards" into the discussion, but I was asked my
opinion about them in regards to our discussion.

We were talking about the law regarding buying stuff from Cuba.
In that discussion, green card holder/permanent resident/resident alien
would be relevant.



Only if the hopeful buyer is a green card holder/permanent
resident/resident alien of the USa..
Given that Craig is presumably resident in Singapore, all those options
can almost certainly be discounted as applying to him.

Again... and again..

A Green Card Holder/permanent resident/resident alien, does have to
remain in the US. So, Craig being in Singapore doesn't mean he isn't a
US Resident Alien.

Greg Procter wrote:

Well, K-mart wasn't active in New Zealand pre-1970. I would guess, based
on the fact that a K-mart opened about 2km from my then home around
1993-4 that they started in NZ about 1991-2. At that time they could not
have sold "quarts" of oil. As to what is "relevant", you've consistantly
come out of 'left-field' or 'cloud-cuckoo-land' with what you consider
to be relevant, so I need to cover all the bases. At this stage, based
on your past efforts I fully expect you to start an argument about the
number of carats I claim to be in a chaldron!

Whether K-Mart existed in NZ pre-1970 has NOTHING to do with you
understanding approximately what a quart of oil is. The imperial quart
and US quart are close enough in size for you determine I was referring
to a small quanity of oil.

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Craig Welch wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:



A small lesson in the english language:
- If you wish to indicate an abreviation you write it in a form like
'o.f.a.c.' The full stops indicate abreviations.

Why then do you refer to New Zealand as NZ instead of n.z.?


It's a name and therefore gets capital letters.

You often write it without capital letters.



I'm lazy.

And stupid.

Greg Procter wrote:

Craig Welch wrote:

Mr. Travel wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

No, the law cannot apply _in_ other countries.

If the action is committed in another country, the law could still
apply. The action taken against the violator would probably wait until
they are back in the US, but the law APPLIES for the offense committed
in the other country. Maybe your dictionary doesn't have this word?

The best example is Taxation Law ... the IRS extends its reach to 'us
yanks' the world over, does it not?



I'm a New Zealander living in New Zealand - why would I know what the US
tax department does???
In New Zealand the NZIRS only concerns itself with wages or salaries
earned while the individual is resident in NZ.

US law concerns itself with the earnings of people in the US, as well as
the earnings of US Citizens and US Permanent Residents, inside and
outside of the US. There is a hefty exclusion of income, probably
90,000 USD by now, and there are also some credits for foreign taxes
paid. Additionally, IRS probably won't find out any income was earned.
However, that doesn't mean the law doesn't apply.