Immigration patrols on domestic Amtrak

In article ,
Ned Carlson wrote:

Los Angeles County in CA has more bank robberies than any
state in Mexico. Look it up. Mexico has laws that require adequate
security in banks, including armed security guards, bulletproof glass,
and double entry doors, if the USA would bother to implement these
simple measures, we could practically kill off bank robbery as
a crime in the USA.

So you are suggesting the banks in the US be nationalized and operated by
the US government?

Right now, the banks are private, and provide the degree of security that
makes economic sense. Why does the government have to get involved in
telling the banks how to run their business?

Merritt

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 17:22:38 GMT, Merritt Mullen
wrote:

In article ,
Ned Carlson wrote:

Los Angeles County in CA has more bank robberies than any
state in Mexico. Look it up. Mexico has laws that require adequate
security in banks, including armed security guards, bulletproof glass,
and double entry doors, if the USA would bother to implement these
simple measures, we could practically kill off bank robbery as
a crime in the USA.

So you are suggesting the banks in the US be nationalized and operated by
the US government?

Right now, the banks are private, and provide the degree of security that
makes economic sense. Why does the government have to get involved in
telling the banks how to run their business?

They already do; there are numerous laws regulating banks. And of
course the Federal Reserve Bank has a lot to do with regulating
banks, but strictly speaking it's an independent agency.
Suppposedly.

As far as security measures go at private banks, so long as the
government operates the Federal Deposit Insurance Agency insuring
those stolen funds, they will have a say in security
requirements.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On 2007-07-21 13:22:38 -0400, Merritt Mullen said:

In article ,
Ned Carlson wrote:

Los Angeles County in CA has more bank robberies than any
state in Mexico. Look it up. Mexico has laws that require adequate
security in banks, including armed security guards, bulletproof glass,
and double entry doors, if the USA would bother to implement these
simple measures, we could practically kill off bank robbery as
a crime in the USA.

So you are suggesting the banks in the US be nationalized and operated by
the US government?

'm fascinated by your reasoning. Just what words (quote, please) in
Carlson's statement do you interpret as a suggestion for the
nationalization of banks?

On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:46:22 +0200, B wrote:

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 14:21:22 -0700, wrote:

I don't believe that kids should even have SSNs until they're old
enough to open a bank account or get a job, but I believe the IRS
requires it at birth now. (I wonder if one is willing to forgoe the
tax exemption for a kid if you still need an SSN for a kid?)

I don't think anybody would ever realize the child didn't have a
social security number if no one claimed him as a tax deduction. Until
he went to school, that is. The need for the SSN might be a
requirement of some government benefit program, to prevent fraud in
the school's application for free-lunch money, for instance.

New York City requires the SSN of the household member who completes
the lunch form, but not for the child. Our schools require every
student to submit a lunch form, there is no option to simply state
"our income is way too high to even be considered for this".

--
Peter Schleifer
"Save me from the people who would save me from myself"

"Ned Carlson" wrote in message
. ..
Los Angeles County in CA has more bank robberies than any
state in Mexico. Look it up. Mexico has laws that require adequate
security in banks, including armed security guards, bulletproof
glass, and double entry doors, if the USA would bother to
implement these simple measures, we could practically kill off
bank robbery as a crime in the USA. The US response to bank
robbery is to pack dye packs in money given to bank robbers,
god forbid that we'd actually put up some polycarbonate panels
to deter the perps, nor guard the banks with guards packing
full-auto weaponry.

No, that's _most_ banks' response, probably motivated by dumb FDIC rules.
Upgrading security costs them a lot but doesn't improve their insurance
rates one bit. It's in their interests to have as bad a security setup as
the FDIC will let them get away with.

Wells Fargo is an interesting study that proves your point: when the bank
robbery craze truly got out of hand in LA a few years ago, they put in
bulletproof man-trap doors at all their branches; last I heard, they haven't
had a single robbery in a bank so equipped since.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk "Those people who think they know everything
CCIE #3723 are a great annoyance to those of us who do."
K5SSS --Isaac Asimov


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

In article ,
Peter Schleifer wrote:

New York City requires the SSN of the household member who completes
the lunch form, but not for the child. Our schools require every
student to submit a lunch form, there is no option to simply state
"our income is way too high to even be considered for this".

That could be a federal requirement for the school to be able to get
reimbursed for the free or low cost lunches.

Merritt

In article ,
sechumlib wrote:

On 2007-07-21 13:22:38 -0400, Merritt Mullen said:

In article ,
Ned Carlson wrote:

Los Angeles County in CA has more bank robberies than any
state in Mexico. Look it up. Mexico has laws that require adequate
security in banks, including armed security guards, bulletproof glass,
and double entry doors, if the USA would bother to implement these
simple measures, we could practically kill off bank robbery as
a crime in the USA.

So you are suggesting the banks in the US be nationalized and operated by
the US government?

'm fascinated by your reasoning. Just what words (quote, please) in
Carlson's statement do you interpret as a suggestion for the
nationalization of banks?

"The USA would bother to implement these simple measures" I am assuming
he meant the government would require it. Clearly the free enterprise
banks don't think it makes economic sense.

Merritt

In article ,
Merritt Mullen wrote:

In article ,
Ned Carlson wrote:

sechumlib wrote:


Am I missing something here? I thought ALL of Mexico was "outside of
BC". That is, if you mean what most people do by BC (British Columbia).

BC as in Baja California. BCN, Baja Califonia Norte, BCS,
Baja Califonia Sur.

And AC, Arriba California, which is made up of ACS and ACN. grin

Actually, I must correct myself. Spain/Mexico called it "Alta California"
(still AC). I had the dice game "Baja Arriba" on my mind.

Merritt

Not so. When one is filing his W-4 with a new employer, he is supposed
to copy his name andSSNexactly as shown on the card. For the
Reagan-era immigration law change, he's supposed to show his card to his
new employer to verify the information on the I-9. A lot of employers
will make a photocopy of the card and save it in the personnel file to
prove to Immigration that they've complied with requirements to identify
new hires.

Actually if you read the I9 document, you'd realize your full of your
S***

The I9 has 3 classes of documents. An employee must show 1 class A
document, or 1 class B and 1 class C document. Class A documents are
documents that verify identity & eligibility for employment(i.e. a US
Passport). Class B documents are documents that verify identity
only(i.e. a Driver License). Finally, Class C documents are documents
that verify eligibility for employment(i.e. a Social Security Card
*OR* Birth Certificate).

Therefore a SSN card is not even required to be shown to an employer,
as you can show any Class A document, or a Class B & Class C document
together, and if your Class C document is a birth certificate instead
of a Social Security Card the employer can not DEMAND to see your card
-- it even states right on the I9:

"Please read instructions carefully before completing this form. The
instructions must be available during completion
of this form. ANTI-DISCRIMINATION NOTICE: It is illegal to
discriminate against work eligible individuals. Employers
CANNOT specify which document(s) they will accept from an employee.
The refusal to hire an individual because of
a future expiration date may also constitute illegal discrimination."

http://hr.uark.edu/forms/payroll/I9.pdf

Note that the Social Security Card is an optional Class C document,
not an identity document.

On 2007-07-21 22:52:13 -0400, Merritt Mullen said:

In article ,
sechumlib wrote:

On 2007-07-21 13:22:38 -0400, Merritt Mullen said:

In article ,
Ned Carlson wrote:

Los Angeles County in CA has more bank robberies than any
state in Mexico. Look it up. Mexico has laws that require adequate
security in banks, including armed security guards, bulletproof glass,
and double entry doors, if the USA would bother to implement these
simple measures, we could practically kill off bank robbery as
a crime in the USA.

So you are suggesting the banks in the US be nationalized and operated by
the US government?

'm fascinated by your reasoning. Just what words (quote, please) in
Carlson's statement do you interpret as a suggestion for the
nationalization of banks?

"The USA would bother to implement these simple measures" I am assuming
he meant the government would require it. Clearly the free enterprise
banks don't think it makes economic sense.

One government or another mandates lots of things, and those of us who
are sane don't consideri it to be nationalization.