Will the USA balkanize?

early wrote:

Ok we can back up because we are not on the same page. Yes the ICE tactics are meant to scare illegals into moving out of the...

Ok we can back up because we are not on the same page. 

Yes the ICE tactics are meant to scare illegals into moving out of the US on their own. How accurate that 1.5 million number is is anyone's guess.

On the issue of tariffs. Who pays them and how that money is spent is not directly linked. But, when chinas response to a us imposed tariff on Chinese goods is to stop buying US soybeans, then trump says he will use tariff money to subsidize soybean prices that is redistribution from 1 industry to another by the government as a direct result of tariffs policy.

But the simple main question is, when a foreign good that is subject to tariffs lands in the US who pays the duty so it can be received by the US purchaser?

TheGetFresh wrote:

“But the simple main question is, when a foreign good that is subject to tariffs lands in the US who pays the duty so it can...

“But the simple main question is, when a foreign good that is subject to tariffs lands in the US who pays the duty so it can be received by the US purchaser?” 

This question is answered by the tax incidence analysis. The legal incidence of a tariff falls on the importer, but the economic incidence doesn’t. So the importer writes the check but doesn’t bear the economic burden of the tax because he’ll push the cost to either the buyer or the seller. 

Think of a tax on gasoline. There’s a federal gas tax of about $0.18 on every gallon sold. The taxpayer who actually writes the check is the gasoline seller. He bears the legal incidence. But that 18 cent tax is added as a premium to his gasoline that he sells to the consumer, so the consumer bears the economic incidence. 

So if the gas tax is increased by 5 cents, the gas seller will pay the extra 5 cents and increase his prices by 5 cents. The customer now pays 5 cents more and the gas seller’s margins remain the same. So who would we say pays the tax? The seller bearing the legal incidence, or the buyer bearing the economic incidence? I imagine most people would say that an increase in the gas tax is paid by the driver, even if he doesn’t write the check to the tax man. 

Legal incidence is mostly important for tax law because the party that bears the legal responsibility for paying the tax may have restrictions on how it can pay or who has authority to collect from it. Again, there are numerous  Supreme Court cases on this topic. U.S. v. New Mexico is probably the most approachable if you’re interested. 
 

So, as I’ve argued from the outset, the importer writes the check for the tariff and bears the legal incidence. But the importer doesn’t bear the economic incidence. When dealing with goods on an inelastic demand curve (like consumer goods vs. gasoline), the economic incidence will vary based on the good being imported. So in the conversational sense, similar to where someone would say the driver pays the gas tax, it’s incorrect to say any one party pays for a tariff because there’s no clear economic incidence. However, arguing that the importer pays the tariff is a needlessly technical argument that doesn’t really address who bears the cost of the tariff or, put differently, who pays for that tariff. 

 

Last2Stroke wrote:

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent thinks it's more complicated than that...

TheGetFresh wrote:

“But the simple main question is, when a foreign good that is subject to tariffs lands in the US who pays the duty so it can...

“But the simple main question is, when a foreign good that is subject to tariffs lands in the US who pays the duty so it can be received by the US purchaser?” 

This question is answered by the tax incidence analysis. The legal incidence of a tariff falls on the importer, but the economic incidence doesn’t. So the importer writes the check but doesn’t bear the economic burden of the tax because he’ll push the cost to either the buyer or the seller. 

Think of a tax on gasoline. There’s a federal gas tax of about $0.18 on every gallon sold. The taxpayer who actually writes the check is the gasoline seller. He bears the legal incidence. But that 18 cent tax is added as a premium to his gasoline that he sells to the consumer, so the consumer bears the economic incidence. 

So if the gas tax is increased by 5 cents, the gas seller will pay the extra 5 cents and increase his prices by 5 cents. The customer now pays 5 cents more and the gas seller’s margins remain the same. So who would we say pays the tax? The seller bearing the legal incidence, or the buyer bearing the economic incidence? I imagine most people would say that an increase in the gas tax is paid by the driver, even if he doesn’t write the check to the tax man. 

Legal incidence is mostly important for tax law because the party that bears the legal responsibility for paying the tax may have restrictions on how it can pay or who has authority to collect from it. Again, there are numerous  Supreme Court cases on this topic. U.S. v. New Mexico is probably the most approachable if you’re interested. 
 

So, as I’ve argued from the outset, the importer writes the check for the tariff and bears the legal incidence. But the importer doesn’t bear the economic incidence. When dealing with goods on an inelastic demand curve (like consumer goods vs. gasoline), the economic incidence will vary based on the good being imported. So in the conversational sense, similar to where someone would say the driver pays the gas tax, it’s incorrect to say any one party pays for a tariff because there’s no clear economic incidence. However, arguing that the importer pays the tariff is a needlessly technical argument that doesn’t really address who bears the cost of the tariff or, put differently, who pays for that tariff. 

 

TheGetFresh wrote:

“But the simple main question is, when a foreign good that is subject to tariffs lands in the US who pays the duty so it can...

“But the simple main question is, when a foreign good that is subject to tariffs lands in the US who pays the duty so it can be received by the US purchaser?” 

This question is answered by the tax incidence analysis. The legal incidence of a tariff falls on the importer, but the economic incidence doesn’t. So the importer writes the check but doesn’t bear the economic burden of the tax because he’ll push the cost to either the buyer or the seller. 

Think of a tax on gasoline. There’s a federal gas tax of about $0.18 on every gallon sold. The taxpayer who actually writes the check is the gasoline seller. He bears the legal incidence. But that 18 cent tax is added as a premium to his gasoline that he sells to the consumer, so the consumer bears the economic incidence. 

So if the gas tax is increased by 5 cents, the gas seller will pay the extra 5 cents and increase his prices by 5 cents. The customer now pays 5 cents more and the gas seller’s margins remain the same. So who would we say pays the tax? The seller bearing the legal incidence, or the buyer bearing the economic incidence? I imagine most people would say that an increase in the gas tax is paid by the driver, even if he doesn’t write the check to the tax man. 

Legal incidence is mostly important for tax law because the party that bears the legal responsibility for paying the tax may have restrictions on how it can pay or who has authority to collect from it. Again, there are numerous  Supreme Court cases on this topic. U.S. v. New Mexico is probably the most approachable if you’re interested. 
 

So, as I’ve argued from the outset, the importer writes the check for the tariff and bears the legal incidence. But the importer doesn’t bear the economic incidence. When dealing with goods on an inelastic demand curve (like consumer goods vs. gasoline), the economic incidence will vary based on the good being imported. So in the conversational sense, similar to where someone would say the driver pays the gas tax, it’s incorrect to say any one party pays for a tariff because there’s no clear economic incidence. However, arguing that the importer pays the tariff is a needlessly technical argument that doesn’t really address who bears the cost of the tariff or, put differently, who pays for that tariff. 

 

TheGetFresh wrote:

“But the simple main question is, when a foreign good that is subject to tariffs lands in the US who pays the duty so it can...

“But the simple main question is, when a foreign good that is subject to tariffs lands in the US who pays the duty so it can be received by the US purchaser?” 

This question is answered by the tax incidence analysis. The legal incidence of a tariff falls on the importer, but the economic incidence doesn’t. So the importer writes the check but doesn’t bear the economic burden of the tax because he’ll push the cost to either the buyer or the seller. 

Think of a tax on gasoline. There’s a federal gas tax of about $0.18 on every gallon sold. The taxpayer who actually writes the check is the gasoline seller. He bears the legal incidence. But that 18 cent tax is added as a premium to his gasoline that he sells to the consumer, so the consumer bears the economic incidence. 

So if the gas tax is increased by 5 cents, the gas seller will pay the extra 5 cents and increase his prices by 5 cents. The customer now pays 5 cents more and the gas seller’s margins remain the same. So who would we say pays the tax? The seller bearing the legal incidence, or the buyer bearing the economic incidence? I imagine most people would say that an increase in the gas tax is paid by the driver, even if he doesn’t write the check to the tax man. 

Legal incidence is mostly important for tax law because the party that bears the legal responsibility for paying the tax may have restrictions on how it can pay or who has authority to collect from it. Again, there are numerous  Supreme Court cases on this topic. U.S. v. New Mexico is probably the most approachable if you’re interested. 
 

So, as I’ve argued from the outset, the importer writes the check for the tariff and bears the legal incidence. But the importer doesn’t bear the economic incidence. When dealing with goods on an inelastic demand curve (like consumer goods vs. gasoline), the economic incidence will vary based on the good being imported. So in the conversational sense, similar to where someone would say the driver pays the gas tax, it’s incorrect to say any one party pays for a tariff because there’s no clear economic incidence. However, arguing that the importer pays the tariff is a needlessly technical argument that doesn’t really address who bears the cost of the tariff or, put differently, who pays for that tariff. 

 

plowboy wrote:

I can tell that you're a brainy sumbitch.  I respect folks like you that dig into a subject...just looking at the facts of whatever you find...

I can tell that you're a brainy sumbitch.  I respect folks like you that dig into a subject...just looking at the facts of whatever you find.  

I'm several notches down the intellectual scale.  I'm only capable of taking the facts you present and trying to figure out if it's good or bad for me, my family, my neighbors, my country...the world.  The order of importance is always in flux.  (I didn't complain about the zoning violation when the jackass built his machine shop next door because it meant jobs and taxes for the school.  It damn sure hurt my home value but decent folks got a benefit and I'm okay with that.)

As far as the tariff deal...I'm not arrogant enough to say that they are the entire reason that I'm struggling financially...but I'm not stupid enough to think they aren't playing a factor.  (I'm not starving or about to be homeless but I am having to think about my spending.)🙃

TheGetFresh wrote:

“But the simple main question is, when a foreign good that is subject to tariffs lands in the US who pays the duty so it can...

“But the simple main question is, when a foreign good that is subject to tariffs lands in the US who pays the duty so it can be received by the US purchaser?” 

This question is answered by the tax incidence analysis. The legal incidence of a tariff falls on the importer, but the economic incidence doesn’t. So the importer writes the check but doesn’t bear the economic burden of the tax because he’ll push the cost to either the buyer or the seller. 

Think of a tax on gasoline. There’s a federal gas tax of about $0.18 on every gallon sold. The taxpayer who actually writes the check is the gasoline seller. He bears the legal incidence. But that 18 cent tax is added as a premium to his gasoline that he sells to the consumer, so the consumer bears the economic incidence. 

So if the gas tax is increased by 5 cents, the gas seller will pay the extra 5 cents and increase his prices by 5 cents. The customer now pays 5 cents more and the gas seller’s margins remain the same. So who would we say pays the tax? The seller bearing the legal incidence, or the buyer bearing the economic incidence? I imagine most people would say that an increase in the gas tax is paid by the driver, even if he doesn’t write the check to the tax man. 

Legal incidence is mostly important for tax law because the party that bears the legal responsibility for paying the tax may have restrictions on how it can pay or who has authority to collect from it. Again, there are numerous  Supreme Court cases on this topic. U.S. v. New Mexico is probably the most approachable if you’re interested. 
 

So, as I’ve argued from the outset, the importer writes the check for the tariff and bears the legal incidence. But the importer doesn’t bear the economic incidence. When dealing with goods on an inelastic demand curve (like consumer goods vs. gasoline), the economic incidence will vary based on the good being imported. So in the conversational sense, similar to where someone would say the driver pays the gas tax, it’s incorrect to say any one party pays for a tariff because there’s no clear economic incidence. However, arguing that the importer pays the tariff is a needlessly technical argument that doesn’t really address who bears the cost of the tariff or, put differently, who pays for that tariff. 

 

plowboy wrote:

I can tell that you're a brainy sumbitch.  I respect folks like you that dig into a subject...just looking at the facts of whatever you find...

I can tell that you're a brainy sumbitch.  I respect folks like you that dig into a subject...just looking at the facts of whatever you find.  

I'm several notches down the intellectual scale.  I'm only capable of taking the facts you present and trying to figure out if it's good or bad for me, my family, my neighbors, my country...the world.  The order of importance is always in flux.  (I didn't complain about the zoning violation when the jackass built his machine shop next door because it meant jobs and taxes for the school.  It damn sure hurt my home value but decent folks got a benefit and I'm okay with that.)

As far as the tariff deal...I'm not arrogant enough to say that they are the entire reason that I'm struggling financially...but I'm not stupid enough to think they aren't playing a factor.  (I'm not starving or about to be homeless but I am having to think about my spending.)🙃

avidchimp wrote:

You mean to tell me everyday consumables aren't cheaper than they were 9 months ago? I guess we are still waiting for those tariff's being paid...

You mean to tell me everyday consumables aren't cheaper than they were 9 months ago? I guess we are still waiting for those tariff's being paid by exporting countries to roll in and bring the cost of goods down. Should be any day now...

avidchimp wrote:

You mean to tell me everyday consumables aren't cheaper than they were 9 months ago? I guess we are still waiting for those tariff's being paid...

You mean to tell me everyday consumables aren't cheaper than they were 9 months ago? I guess we are still waiting for those tariff's being paid by exporting countries to roll in and bring the cost of goods down. Should be any day now...

plowboy wrote:

I can tell that you're a brainy sumbitch.  I respect folks like you that dig into a subject...just looking at the facts of whatever you find...

I can tell that you're a brainy sumbitch.  I respect folks like you that dig into a subject...just looking at the facts of whatever you find.  

I'm several notches down the intellectual scale.  I'm only capable of taking the facts you present and trying to figure out if it's good or bad for me, my family, my neighbors, my country...the world.  The order of importance is always in flux.  (I didn't complain about the zoning violation when the jackass built his machine shop next door because it meant jobs and taxes for the school.  It damn sure hurt my home value but decent folks got a benefit and I'm okay with that.)

As far as the tariff deal...I'm not arrogant enough to say that they are the entire reason that I'm struggling financially...but I'm not stupid enough to think they aren't playing a factor.  (I'm not starving or about to be homeless but I am having to think about my spending.)🙃

avidchimp wrote:

You mean to tell me everyday consumables aren't cheaper than they were 9 months ago? I guess we are still waiting for those tariff's being paid...

You mean to tell me everyday consumables aren't cheaper than they were 9 months ago? I guess we are still waiting for those tariff's being paid by exporting countries to roll in and bring the cost of goods down. Should be any day now...

BMR179 wrote:

I'm close to the same situation as plowboy described in his last paragraph, having to really think about spending.  Being that I do 95% of the...

I'm close to the same situation as plowboy described in his last paragraph, having to really think about spending.  Being that I do 95% of the grocery and consumable shopping for my wife and I, I can say that prices on a lot of those items have come down some, plus price shopping has become a priority.  Up until 2022 I didn't worry about or notice prices fluctuating much.  All of a sudden our grocery bill rose over 35%.  History proves everything will eventually catch up and get better, but it's a bitch right now.  

As far as tariffs, TheGetFresh wrote an educated response concerning legal and economic incidence.  I just know that the final consumer ultimately pays.  

whyZ wrote:

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance...

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance companies.  Health, auto or property, take your pick.  

The wife and I have a summer cabin up in the mountains to get away from the heat AZ is known for.  For years we've paid Homeowners insurance, it's not cheap, but bearable.  This year however our policy has tripled.  Now this is a seasonal cabin used +/- 5 months out of the year and shut down for the winter.  

I lost count of the number of agents I've talked to about insuring it.  And here's the number one reason that we aren't getting insured.  It doesn't have central air!  WTF, it's never had central air and doesn't need it. In fact, there's probably 1:100 ratio of 500 residents in our community that would (maybe) have working C/A.  Why is this a sticking point now and not in the past?  They know, it's only a matter of time until we'll have to fold.              

whyZ wrote:

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance...

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance companies.  Health, auto or property, take your pick.  

The wife and I have a summer cabin up in the mountains to get away from the heat AZ is known for.  For years we've paid Homeowners insurance, it's not cheap, but bearable.  This year however our policy has tripled.  Now this is a seasonal cabin used +/- 5 months out of the year and shut down for the winter.  

I lost count of the number of agents I've talked to about insuring it.  And here's the number one reason that we aren't getting insured.  It doesn't have central air!  WTF, it's never had central air and doesn't need it. In fact, there's probably 1:100 ratio of 500 residents in our community that would (maybe) have working C/A.  Why is this a sticking point now and not in the past?  They know, it's only a matter of time until we'll have to fold.              

SEEMEFIRST wrote:

What difference could that possibly make? I have never heard such a thing.

whyZ wrote:

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance...

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance companies.  Health, auto or property, take your pick.  

The wife and I have a summer cabin up in the mountains to get away from the heat AZ is known for.  For years we've paid Homeowners insurance, it's not cheap, but bearable.  This year however our policy has tripled.  Now this is a seasonal cabin used +/- 5 months out of the year and shut down for the winter.  

I lost count of the number of agents I've talked to about insuring it.  And here's the number one reason that we aren't getting insured.  It doesn't have central air!  WTF, it's never had central air and doesn't need it. In fact, there's probably 1:100 ratio of 500 residents in our community that would (maybe) have working C/A.  Why is this a sticking point now and not in the past?  They know, it's only a matter of time until we'll have to fold.              

whyZ wrote:

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance...

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance companies.  Health, auto or property, take your pick.  

The wife and I have a summer cabin up in the mountains to get away from the heat AZ is known for.  For years we've paid Homeowners insurance, it's not cheap, but bearable.  This year however our policy has tripled.  Now this is a seasonal cabin used +/- 5 months out of the year and shut down for the winter.  

I lost count of the number of agents I've talked to about insuring it.  And here's the number one reason that we aren't getting insured.  It doesn't have central air!  WTF, it's never had central air and doesn't need it. In fact, there's probably 1:100 ratio of 500 residents in our community that would (maybe) have working C/A.  Why is this a sticking point now and not in the past?  They know, it's only a matter of time until we'll have to fold.              

whyZ wrote:

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance...

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance companies.  Health, auto or property, take your pick.  

The wife and I have a summer cabin up in the mountains to get away from the heat AZ is known for.  For years we've paid Homeowners insurance, it's not cheap, but bearable.  This year however our policy has tripled.  Now this is a seasonal cabin used +/- 5 months out of the year and shut down for the winter.  

I lost count of the number of agents I've talked to about insuring it.  And here's the number one reason that we aren't getting insured.  It doesn't have central air!  WTF, it's never had central air and doesn't need it. In fact, there's probably 1:100 ratio of 500 residents in our community that would (maybe) have working C/A.  Why is this a sticking point now and not in the past?  They know, it's only a matter of time until we'll have to fold.              

SEEMEFIRST wrote:

What difference could that possibly make? I have never heard such a thing.

borg wrote:

I was also skeptical until I found this:

https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/question/how-to-get-property-insurance-without-central-heat

whyZ wrote:

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance...

My feeling is that if there's any industry that has put the pinch on the on the average Income Tax paying American citizen is the insurance companies.  Health, auto or property, take your pick.  

The wife and I have a summer cabin up in the mountains to get away from the heat AZ is known for.  For years we've paid Homeowners insurance, it's not cheap, but bearable.  This year however our policy has tripled.  Now this is a seasonal cabin used +/- 5 months out of the year and shut down for the winter.  

I lost count of the number of agents I've talked to about insuring it.  And here's the number one reason that we aren't getting insured.  It doesn't have central air!  WTF, it's never had central air and doesn't need it. In fact, there's probably 1:100 ratio of 500 residents in our community that would (maybe) have working C/A.  Why is this a sticking point now and not in the past?  They know, it's only a matter of time until we'll have to fold.              

SEEMEFIRST wrote:

What difference could that possibly make? I have never heard such a thing.

borg wrote:

I was also skeptical until I found this:

https://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/question/how-to-get-property-insurance-without-central-heat

Black Diesel Bomber wrote:

Oh wow, the whole population of your town (457) is less than the amount of homeless people and junkies on 6th street alone in LA.  "Mohrsville...

Oh wow, the whole population of your town (457) is less than the amount of homeless people and junkies on 6th street alone in LA.  

"Mohrsville is a CDP located in Berks County, Pennsylvania. Mohrsville has a 2025 population of 457" 

Things are much different in small towns, let alone tiny towns.  Come on out to LA and I will show you around.  And I'll take you fishing and show you how I can lean left while fishing.

TAUTOG wrote:

Take a drive through Atlantic city you'll be dodging junkies left and right lol is this a dick measuring contest for you?

Black Diesel Bomber wrote:

You're not getting it.  Come on out, we'll show you around the hood, you'll see not all brown skin runs from ICE, you'll see a fisherman...

You're not getting it.  Come on out, we'll show you around the hood, you'll see not all brown skin runs from ICE, you'll see a fisherman lean left, and I'll wear a mask and no one will get kidnapped, except for some cows.

TAUTOG wrote:

Take a drive through Atlantic city you'll be dodging junkies left and right lol is this a dick measuring contest for you?

Black Diesel Bomber wrote:

You're not getting it.  Come on out, we'll show you around the hood, you'll see not all brown skin runs from ICE, you'll see a fisherman...

You're not getting it.  Come on out, we'll show you around the hood, you'll see not all brown skin runs from ICE, you'll see a fisherman lean left, and I'll wear a mask and no one will get kidnapped, except for some cows.

El_Rayo wrote:

As a fellow “brown skin”, from what you’re saying about ICE is somewhat true. For years most people have not had issues with immigration being enforced. But as...

As a fellow “brown skin”, 

from what you’re saying about ICE is somewhat true. For years most people have not had issues with immigration being enforced.

 But as of lately the way it’s been executed has been worrisome. I live near a big city, Chicago, My wife is from there. I have family, and friends who live there. I also go there multiple times through the week for client and business meetings. Everyone is in awe how dozens of ICE agents are harassing citizens. You said earlier “as long as you don’t run, cooperate and show them proper ID, you’ll be fine and go about your your way” I’m sorry but that’s simply not true. In a lot of cases sure that will happen. But I’ve been reading, hearing , and seeing countless stories and videos from people personally and on local social media posts, of regular US citizens being harassed and arrested. Someone walking on the street when 2 black SUV’s with men in masks show up, tackle someone to the ground while the person is saying “I’m a US Citizen!!” Meanwhile the agents are yelling “shut up Bi***!” , the man suffered multiple broken bones and was held in custody for several days. This is just one example, but I’ve been seeing videos throughout the past 2 weeks of a lot of this happening. Same thing, agents pull up> tackle a person without letting them verify they are a citizen> person says “I’m Legal!” > is ignored and arrested. 

As for the protests, some of them looked violent by some protesters which is awful and not right. But on the other hand, there are also videos showing peaceful (non violent, but still vocally aggressive) protesters? Being shot with pellets in the face, or just recently here in Chicago tear gas being thrown to people , and police officers as well. (2 times so far).

Another example, is when ICE officers “think” they see an illegal, they are using take down maneuvers in their SUV’s , crashing into the the car, ramming it. I would think that’s pretty unsafe to other drivers on the road? And also, what if you’re not an illegal? You just have to deal with a totaled vehicle now. 

Another example (seen this 2 times) while cruising the streets of Chicago, if someone pulls out their phone and records the ICE vehicle while driving, the agents quite literally roll the windows down and point their firearm at them out the window, and antagonize them vocally. 
 

In another video, 2 US Citizens are stopped by ICE being screamed at, and the one ICE agent has a swastika tattoo under his neck. 

These are just a few examples, but like I said I am hearing things firsthand from people in the city , as well as videos circulating. There are countless more I could go on about.

I am not saying “ ICE should be stopped and every agent is a problem!” But also to go on the other hand and say “welp this is just part of what’s necessary, and as long as you don’t run and cooperate you’ll be fine” is quite far from the truth. 
 

Black Diesel Bomber wrote:

You're not getting it.  Come on out, we'll show you around the hood, you'll see not all brown skin runs from ICE, you'll see a fisherman...

You're not getting it.  Come on out, we'll show you around the hood, you'll see not all brown skin runs from ICE, you'll see a fisherman lean left, and I'll wear a mask and no one will get kidnapped, except for some cows.

El_Rayo wrote:

As a fellow “brown skin”, from what you’re saying about ICE is somewhat true. For years most people have not had issues with immigration being enforced. But as...

As a fellow “brown skin”, 

from what you’re saying about ICE is somewhat true. For years most people have not had issues with immigration being enforced.

 But as of lately the way it’s been executed has been worrisome. I live near a big city, Chicago, My wife is from there. I have family, and friends who live there. I also go there multiple times through the week for client and business meetings. Everyone is in awe how dozens of ICE agents are harassing citizens. You said earlier “as long as you don’t run, cooperate and show them proper ID, you’ll be fine and go about your your way” I’m sorry but that’s simply not true. In a lot of cases sure that will happen. But I’ve been reading, hearing , and seeing countless stories and videos from people personally and on local social media posts, of regular US citizens being harassed and arrested. Someone walking on the street when 2 black SUV’s with men in masks show up, tackle someone to the ground while the person is saying “I’m a US Citizen!!” Meanwhile the agents are yelling “shut up Bi***!” , the man suffered multiple broken bones and was held in custody for several days. This is just one example, but I’ve been seeing videos throughout the past 2 weeks of a lot of this happening. Same thing, agents pull up> tackle a person without letting them verify they are a citizen> person says “I’m Legal!” > is ignored and arrested. 

As for the protests, some of them looked violent by some protesters which is awful and not right. But on the other hand, there are also videos showing peaceful (non violent, but still vocally aggressive) protesters? Being shot with pellets in the face, or just recently here in Chicago tear gas being thrown to people , and police officers as well. (2 times so far).

Another example, is when ICE officers “think” they see an illegal, they are using take down maneuvers in their SUV’s , crashing into the the car, ramming it. I would think that’s pretty unsafe to other drivers on the road? And also, what if you’re not an illegal? You just have to deal with a totaled vehicle now. 

Another example (seen this 2 times) while cruising the streets of Chicago, if someone pulls out their phone and records the ICE vehicle while driving, the agents quite literally roll the windows down and point their firearm at them out the window, and antagonize them vocally. 
 

In another video, 2 US Citizens are stopped by ICE being screamed at, and the one ICE agent has a swastika tattoo under his neck. 

These are just a few examples, but like I said I am hearing things firsthand from people in the city , as well as videos circulating. There are countless more I could go on about.

I am not saying “ ICE should be stopped and every agent is a problem!” But also to go on the other hand and say “welp this is just part of what’s necessary, and as long as you don’t run and cooperate you’ll be fine” is quite far from the truth. 
 

Black Diesel Bomber wrote:

Hey bud, I'm done with this thread but came back respond to your brown skin quote as if I'm possibly some sort of racist.  I only...

Hey bud, I'm done with this thread but came back respond to your brown skin quote as if I'm possibly some sort of racist.  I only put it that way because that's what the OP was calling it his previous post.  Just so you know, I'm very entangled with latinos and have a lot of Latino friends.  I employ them, I ride and fish Baja with them, I surf with them, I work along side with them, I stay with them in Mex, I travel with them all over Baja and Mainland, etc.  They are brothers to me, does't matter what color skin they are, including "blacks" and "yellows" which the OP also mentioned.  I'm considered family to them, so much that they call me gringo boy and another nickname that I will not mention here, and in return I call them pendejos.  We get a lot of laughs out of each other, just like any brothers joking around.  I've done a lot for people south of the border and they appreciate it.  In return they give me access to their families and homes down there.  Nothing more I like than an authentic home cooked family meal south of the border after a long day of riding or surfing.  I do always rag on them though about their obsession with tamales, albondigas, and pozole.  I just don't get it.  I tell them don't waste your precious time making that stuff, carne asada is all I need/want when I stay over.

With that said, I'm sure there are isolated ICE incidents like you mention, but I highly doubt that is happening as often as you think.  On the flip side there are also videos I posted above of them getting pelted with rocks, and a bunch of hostile protestors causing havoc, so what gives.  If I'm getting pelted with rocks with heavy protest, I'm sure it's going to affect how aggressive I get when I jump out into a chaotic scene.  Perhaps the aggression is also part of the shock and awe approach that Getfresh mentioned above. Bottom line is, there are always bad eggs like you've probably see in videos, but I highly doubt legals are being arrested and injured often.  And if they are, then they'll have quite a case to go after damages.

I'm not seeing what you are referring to in LA, although I'm sure it happens. It's more of the large crowds of nasty protestors that give latinos a bad look here. Meanwhile, I'm sitting at the dinner table with my latino friends just shaking our heads at it all.  There is no perfect solution unless all illegals self deport.  There will always be bad cops, politicians, CEO's, protestors, etc.  Nothing can be perfect and there will always be some carnage on both sides.

I'm out.

Cuidate.

Black Diesel Bomber wrote:

You're not getting it.  Come on out, we'll show you around the hood, you'll see not all brown skin runs from ICE, you'll see a fisherman...

You're not getting it.  Come on out, we'll show you around the hood, you'll see not all brown skin runs from ICE, you'll see a fisherman lean left, and I'll wear a mask and no one will get kidnapped, except for some cows.

El_Rayo wrote:

As a fellow “brown skin”, from what you’re saying about ICE is somewhat true. For years most people have not had issues with immigration being enforced. But as...

As a fellow “brown skin”, 

from what you’re saying about ICE is somewhat true. For years most people have not had issues with immigration being enforced.

 But as of lately the way it’s been executed has been worrisome. I live near a big city, Chicago, My wife is from there. I have family, and friends who live there. I also go there multiple times through the week for client and business meetings. Everyone is in awe how dozens of ICE agents are harassing citizens. You said earlier “as long as you don’t run, cooperate and show them proper ID, you’ll be fine and go about your your way” I’m sorry but that’s simply not true. In a lot of cases sure that will happen. But I’ve been reading, hearing , and seeing countless stories and videos from people personally and on local social media posts, of regular US citizens being harassed and arrested. Someone walking on the street when 2 black SUV’s with men in masks show up, tackle someone to the ground while the person is saying “I’m a US Citizen!!” Meanwhile the agents are yelling “shut up Bi***!” , the man suffered multiple broken bones and was held in custody for several days. This is just one example, but I’ve been seeing videos throughout the past 2 weeks of a lot of this happening. Same thing, agents pull up> tackle a person without letting them verify they are a citizen> person says “I’m Legal!” > is ignored and arrested. 

As for the protests, some of them looked violent by some protesters which is awful and not right. But on the other hand, there are also videos showing peaceful (non violent, but still vocally aggressive) protesters? Being shot with pellets in the face, or just recently here in Chicago tear gas being thrown to people , and police officers as well. (2 times so far).

Another example, is when ICE officers “think” they see an illegal, they are using take down maneuvers in their SUV’s , crashing into the the car, ramming it. I would think that’s pretty unsafe to other drivers on the road? And also, what if you’re not an illegal? You just have to deal with a totaled vehicle now. 

Another example (seen this 2 times) while cruising the streets of Chicago, if someone pulls out their phone and records the ICE vehicle while driving, the agents quite literally roll the windows down and point their firearm at them out the window, and antagonize them vocally. 
 

In another video, 2 US Citizens are stopped by ICE being screamed at, and the one ICE agent has a swastika tattoo under his neck. 

These are just a few examples, but like I said I am hearing things firsthand from people in the city , as well as videos circulating. There are countless more I could go on about.

I am not saying “ ICE should be stopped and every agent is a problem!” But also to go on the other hand and say “welp this is just part of what’s necessary, and as long as you don’t run and cooperate you’ll be fine” is quite far from the truth. 
 

Black Diesel Bomber wrote:

Hey bud, I'm done with this thread but came back respond to your brown skin quote as if I'm possibly some sort of racist.  I only...

Hey bud, I'm done with this thread but came back respond to your brown skin quote as if I'm possibly some sort of racist.  I only put it that way because that's what the OP was calling it his previous post.  Just so you know, I'm very entangled with latinos and have a lot of Latino friends.  I employ them, I ride and fish Baja with them, I surf with them, I work along side with them, I stay with them in Mex, I travel with them all over Baja and Mainland, etc.  They are brothers to me, does't matter what color skin they are, including "blacks" and "yellows" which the OP also mentioned.  I'm considered family to them, so much that they call me gringo boy and another nickname that I will not mention here, and in return I call them pendejos.  We get a lot of laughs out of each other, just like any brothers joking around.  I've done a lot for people south of the border and they appreciate it.  In return they give me access to their families and homes down there.  Nothing more I like than an authentic home cooked family meal south of the border after a long day of riding or surfing.  I do always rag on them though about their obsession with tamales, albondigas, and pozole.  I just don't get it.  I tell them don't waste your precious time making that stuff, carne asada is all I need/want when I stay over.

With that said, I'm sure there are isolated ICE incidents like you mention, but I highly doubt that is happening as often as you think.  On the flip side there are also videos I posted above of them getting pelted with rocks, and a bunch of hostile protestors causing havoc, so what gives.  If I'm getting pelted with rocks with heavy protest, I'm sure it's going to affect how aggressive I get when I jump out into a chaotic scene.  Perhaps the aggression is also part of the shock and awe approach that Getfresh mentioned above. Bottom line is, there are always bad eggs like you've probably see in videos, but I highly doubt legals are being arrested and injured often.  And if they are, then they'll have quite a case to go after damages.

I'm not seeing what you are referring to in LA, although I'm sure it happens. It's more of the large crowds of nasty protestors that give latinos a bad look here. Meanwhile, I'm sitting at the dinner table with my latino friends just shaking our heads at it all.  There is no perfect solution unless all illegals self deport.  There will always be bad cops, politicians, CEO's, protestors, etc.  Nothing can be perfect and there will always be some carnage on both sides.

I'm out.

Cuidate.