The Taxpayers' Bridge ::: Boston, Mass.
The First Bridge In The World Named
In Honor Of The Taxpayers
Who Funded It And Built It!


Visit Kate's Photoblog
The Beautiful Cable-Stayed Taxpayers' Bridge
Boston, Massachusetts, USA

[photo source: Kate's Photoblog]

_/(spanning the Charles to bring you the constant variety of politics and intrigue)\_

See The Photo Montage.


3.31.2005
Smuggling 4th-class Taxpayers: A Theory of Debt-Financed Passage.

We introduce "financial constraints" in a theoretical analysis of smuggling 4th-class taxpayers past agents undetected. Non-taxpaying intermediary taxpayers finance the travel and agent-avoidance costs of "wealth-constrained" 4th-class taxpayers, who enter temporary servitude contracts to pay back the debt. These debt/labour contracts are more easily enforceable in the black market sector than in the terrorcrat sector. Hence, when moving from the black market sector to the terrorcrat sector becomes more costly because of, for instance, more agents acting upon their own stricter deportation decrees, fewer 4th-class taxpayers default on debt. This reduces the risks for the non-taxpaying intermediary taxpayers, who are then more willing to finance the smuggling of 4th-class taxpayers. The act of the agents acting upon their own stricter deportation decrees may thus increase rather than decrease the ex ante flow of 4th-class taxpayers across so-called "borders." We also show that the agents' stricter deportation decrees - when acted upon - worsen the skill composition of 4th-class taxpayers crossing the so-called "borders." While stricter "border controls" decrease the overall undetected-crossings of the so-called "borders" by the 4th-class taxpayers, these decrees - when acted upon - may also result in an increase of debt-financed smuggling of 4th-class taxpayers "within the black market sector" (i.e., within the non-taxpaying sector).

Ed. Note: - Here's the money shot: "After arriving onto the landmass called northern Mexico, the 4th-class Ecuadorian taxpayer walked two days and two nights across the desert and onto landmass called Arizona, a trek she described as 'the most painful part' of the entire journey. Then she stayed for several days in a safe house on the landmass called Los Angeles (by which means of conveyance did she journey to LA?), before flying to Minnesota." (full story here). Before flying? I would have thought that she would have taken a bus or a private means of conveyance - underground railroad style - (heck, it would have been beautiful for her to relax and see the country side and eat at some truck stops along the way - I would think - before buckling down to work in order to pay off her debt as fast as possible - scraping somehow to transmit some of her earnings to relatives back home). Bus ticketing agents take cash the day of the ride and I would think that that is not yet a red flag in and of itself, and though bus ticketing agents do ask for your name and most likely now always ask to see some premission-to-live grubmint photo ID (and let's assume that she purchased a so-called "fake" one of those ID cards while on LA), I would think that they are not yet dipping the CAPS-II no-fly-(and-hence-no-bus)-list but then again it probably would have been a low risk with a non-arabic name even if the bus ticketing agents were dipping the CAPS-II no-fly-(and-hence-no-bus)-list. And, after you purchase your bus ticket you are done: there are no bag inspections, no TSA agents, no more showing of grubmint ID... definitely a more relaxed atmosphere. On the other hand, with airline check-in agents, isn't paying cash for a ticket or having someone else pay by credit card for your ticket (I am making the assumption here that this 4th-class Ecuadorian taxpayer does not have a "US" credit card) is a red flag in and of itself - even within the context of an advance and confirmed reservation - (forget about walking up to the airline check-in agent (/ticketing agent) the day of and trying to pay for a one-way ticket using cash). One of my points being this: To keep "low key" and "pay the game," I have to assume that she showed a "fake" ID at checkin (and that some travel agent booked her flight in advance and issued her a ticket in advanced and that said travel agent may have even presented to the airline's computers that the ticket was purchased with a credit card (it would be interesting to know if she purchsed a round-trip ticket as I would think that that would make one even more low key - but I am not sure about that)). Now, my other point being this: If there were an "internal border agent" (after the airline's check-in agent and before the TSA dweebs) whose "job" it was to swipe or scan or manaully enter the info on the "fake" ID (like they do at the so-called "international" borders) into their dbase in order to dip their dbase, they would have detected that the ID was not issued by said agents shown on the ID. Then most likely, she would would have been kidnapped by the swiping agent's co-workers at-the-ready. The hidden gem in all this for domesticated US taxpayers who are espousing to be more non-domesticated?... Today, even with the so-called "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act" decree "in place" and being acted upon, I would venture to bet Federal Reserve Note fiat currency units (FRNs, pronounced "ferns") to Krispy Kreme doughnuts that the airline check-in agent's manager's manager would let a taxpayer fly "within the US" with a one-way ticket purchsed with cash, and purchased the day of, without showing any type of ID what-so-ever - but, albiet, with a lot of hassle and stupid questions being asked and the making of calls to 'corporate' for 'approval' - which would probably result in a delay long enough to have to take the next flight out after that provided that it is not booked solid (because (1) I do see not yet see 'federal statutes' scribbled on paper and hung up on the walls of the airport building about 'showing grubmint-IDs' being manadatory - nor do I see such scribblings within the fine print on the back of the ticket and (2) I do not yet see any "internal border agents" asking for said IDs). This is the test to be tested - re-inspired, this time, by a 4th-class Ecuadorian taxpayer. "21st century immigrants are my heros." I remember reading a forum post from a US taxpayer (who may have even boasted about being a non-taxpaying taxpayer, a real non-domesticated human if I recall correctly) who actually tested some of this out (who actually social engineered some of this out, so-to-speak, when you read the twist of how it played out) when interacting with an airline check-in agent (this was sometime between '97-'99 during which a "show ID to the check-in agent" decree was in place (note: most of the time the phrase back then was "ID" and not "photo ID" and certainly not "grubmint-issued (non-expired?) photo ID"). [The following sentence is underlined so you can more easily skip over the "( )" parts]: The cool thing about this particular incident about which he experienced and wrote about was that, as soon as he said effectively "no" (I do not recall if he just said "no" or couched the "no" within a senctence about the constitution and freedom) to the "may I see some ID" question (the request then was asked in a much more cordial manner then than it is today (today some airline agents act like unfriendly bank tellers, and some even go so far as to act like unfriendly DMV agents or cops - I just sense that under-current - because I sense that they have all been trained to "look for certain things negative, for certain red flags were negative and red flag is defined as...")) she somehow jumped right away to the conclusion that he was an under-cover quality control employee of the same airline who was there today to test out how friendly customer service check-in was - so he followed his intuition and went along with her assumption and they were both laughing and smiling and joking and the end result was that he did not show ID - so he did achieve his goal (can't remember if the ticket was purchased with cash on the spot or purchased with cash in advance). Today, of course, airline check-in works like this: Show your "permission-to-live grubmint-issued (non-expired?) photo ID" to the check-in agent (and then she dips the CAPS-II no-fly-list?) in order to match the grubmint-ID name to your e-ticket name and then show your "permission-to-live grubmint-issued (non-expired?) photo ID" and boarding pass to an employee of the airport terminal building (so she can compare the names on the two), then go through the metal detector operated by TSA agents (customs) (with local state cop watching) and then show your "permission-to-live grubmint-issued (non-expired?) photo ID" and boarding pass to an employee of the airline when actually boarding the plane (so she can compare the names on the two). [The following sentence is underlined so you can more easily skip over the "( )" parts]: So, effectively from the '97 to '99 period (in '99 I was asked for some ID at check-in and I showed a non-photo YMCA card (cardboard, hand typed, and covered with plastic) and the check-in agent did not even bat an eye) to the '01 - present period, I say (1) with blodness, that the traveller is still 100% acting in a voluntary manner to the show-me-ID request when being asked by non-grubmint agents and thus has every legal statutory right to say "no" (and of course it goes without saying that he will always have an inalienable right to say "no" that must be honored by honest humans) (the side-benefit of which means that the right to (politely) refuse the request - if not honored by the airline check-in agent or terminal building employee - would most likely be grounds for a lawsuit (luckily, and if you can afford it and if you are going where they are flying to, there is an airline company that provides their customers solice from all this crap)), and (2) that the number times that the ID is looked at has gone from one look to three looks (and includes a CAPS-II dip) - where, during both periods, a US agent is NOT doing the looking - as this is a "domestic" and not "international" flight afterall (and US agents and taxpayers have not been recently massacred). It then seems to make sence then that if (oh, I mean to say when) some more US taxpayers in a large group on US soil are killed - and, (one hour) after the incident it is determined by the agents that it was not an industial accident but a spectacular massacre carried out by al-kay-da, then (1) the terminal building employee whose job it is to look at photo IDs and boarding passes (to merely match the names on both) will be out of a job and replaced by dbase-dipping "internal border agents" - within 90 days (they'll have to hired and be trained - and in the mean time the national guard might fill in - and, while you are sitting having a beer at the airport's bar you'll be able to get the updates from CNN newsreaders about the latest details of the new "national (internal passport) ID card" and where to obtain one - and then you'll be thinking that how if you are in sales and travel all over via plane... how, when you apply for your next sales job... that companies will want to see it stated up front on your resume (or confirmed upfront by the headhunter) that you have such an "national (internal passport) ID card" in good-standing) and (2) 4th-class Ecuadorian taxpayers will probably deem it prudent to not fly "within the US" and take a more underground railroad approach to get to Minnesota or decide to just stay on the landmass called LA and work for American Apparel. Which naturally brings US taxpayers to the following question: So, which US taxpayer (taxpaying or non-taxpaying) is going to be the next Rosa Parks to directly challenge an airline check-in agent (/ticketing agent) and her manager and her manager's manager by plunking down a wad of FRNs on the counter and politely requesting to travel (on a particular flight) in anonimity through the King's airways and then fully report about the experience before the next al-kay-da massacre of taxpayers and agents on US soil occurs? "21st century immigrants are my heros, Michelle Malkin."




3.14.2005
Falling Ice From Taxpayers' Bridge.

Chunks of melting snow and ice fell from the cables of The Taxpayers' Bridge so a certain group of the Boston and Massachusetts agents put up road blocks on four traffic lanes on "Inter-agent 93" yesterday afternoon. The left and right lanes of both the north- and southbound sides of I-93 were closed about 1 p.m. after a taxpayer's car's windshield cracked under the impact of falling material, said agent Doug, a spokesman for the Massachusetts agents. The taxpayer was not hurt, and the agents decided to remove the road blocks at about 2:30 p.m., relieving the heavy congestion of taxpayers in autos and truck on Storrow Drive. Agent Doug said an unusual confluence of heavy, sticky snow, and fast melting led to the snow falling in chunks. Agent Doug said that powdery snow is usually blown from the bridge before it bonds to the cables.








HOME

ABOUT

ARCHIVES

SPONSOR

CONTACT

Use gold as money.

+SUNSHINE+

audiovisceral

John Sidlo

+FIXTURES+

Christian with Spiro

Cartoon

A Bridge for the Taxpayers

Wiki

The Taxpayers' is Facinating

Townies Battle Over Name

Agents Battle
Over Name


+TPB RING+

50 Minute Hour

Agonist

AlternatePatriot

AmericanFree
Press


AntiWar

BlackMarketGold
News


BuildFreedom

bureaucrash

BurningBird

BurntOrange
Report


Chronopolis
New York


CNN Lies

Cryptome

Daily Kos

Democratic Veteran

Disinfopedia

Dr. Menlo

End the War on Freedom

Empty Bottle

EXPAT WORLD

From The Wilderness

Future Pundit

Gene Expression

Get Your War On

Gordon Coale

Guerrilla Funk

GuerrillaNewsNet

HUBlog

IAA

Information
Clearinghouse


InfoWars

invisiblog

Iraqi Taxpayer
Bodycount


Jeff Rense

KABA/osd

Kolkata
Libertarian


Last One Speaks

Libertarian Samizdata

LibertyThink

Limbaughtomy

Mad Prophet

Manifest Border

Memory Hole

Miasma in the
House


MidEastLog

Mysterious Earth

NEOFLUX

NoMoreFakeNews

No-Treason

No War Blog

NYMinute

News Insider

Nexus Magazine

OBEY

Objectionable
Content


OffOnATangent

Offshore-Manual

Offshore Press

Polemics

PoliticalStrikes

Politechbot

Post-atomic

Propaganda Matrix

Sara Lovering

Scribbler

Real University

Reality Checker

Sensual Liberation
Army


SuperPower.US

Temple of GWBush

Liberty Log

The Reverse
Cowgirl's Blog


Serfdom Times

Taxable Income

taxhavenco

Tax-News

Treason

This is not a blog

Taxable Income

Taxpayers' Bridge

Truth Laid Bear

TWA800+

Unanswered Questions

UnknownNews

Unruled

Vigilant

Joan Veon

Volokh Conspiracy

VOXFUX

WarBlogging

Wealth Bondage

We are full of shit.

What Really
Happened


Whitehouse

WhitePrivilege

Wienerlog

WorldEndsAt9
PicturesAt11!


Zero Agression Institute

+BRIDGING+

BridgeProject

NYCBridgeMan

Rubinoff

CommunityBridge

BridgeDay
Association


BrueckenWeb

BerlinerBleibt

BungiBridge

CincinnatiJake

X-Brooklyn

+RINGSURF+

x ? bostonites # x

« LibertyLoggers »

« - Blog×Philes - »

+BLOGTICKERS+

blogdex

blogging
ecosystem


BlogPlus

botd

DayPop

Technorati

weblogs

+COMMUNITIES+

ageless

altMediaLinks

aortal

memepool

+BRIDGES+

Bobbie

onfocus

Log

Roosevelt

Wedding

Children

Bungi

Valley

Casalux

Avon

Kungsleden

Elsertal

Schalten

Lebenshilfe

Barmbek

Kaiser

Schweden

Therapie

MarkusLemke

Toten

Finnland

Ja-Nein

Isar

Baum

Erdbeer

Wasser

Burgh

HohenZ

Larp

Pylone

Grabau

Dampfer

Venezia

Belt

Sorry

Bach

Alps

Chaju

Rhenania

Puzzel

Volvo

Klaes

Isfahan

Hagan

Empfehle

Rumpi

Elefanten

Neccar

Pyro

Halle

Weiher

Berliner

Adelonstr

C&O

Akhurian

Eureka

Rapids

ChooChoo

Sagamore

Buzzards

Flood

Capitte

Cannes

North

Marsupial

Main

GorgeInn

Llangollen

RioGrande

Marsh

WillyB

Sheyenne

WFC

Shadows

Demolishing

The TPB is Ageless.

AORTAL, the anti-portal

Peer-to-Peer participant.