Posted on 01/25/2006 2:48:19 PM PST by clawrence3
Founded in 1914, Greyhound Lines, Inc. is the largest provider of intercity bus transportation, serving more than 3,100 destinations with 16,000 daily departures across North America. It has become an American icon, providing safe, enjoyable and affordable travel to 22 million passengers each year. The Greyhound running dog is one of the most-recognized brands in the world . . .
Greyhound has four subsidiaries in the United States, which are a part of the nationwide Greyhound network. They include: Carolina Trailways, serving the Southeast; Texas, New Mexico and Oklahoma Coaches ("TNM&O"), serving the Southwest; Valley Transit Company, serving the Texas-Mexico border, and Vermont Transit, serving New England.
In addition, Greyhound has interline partnerships with a number of independent bus lines across the United States. These bus companies provide complementary service to Greyhound Lines' existing schedules and link to many of the smaller towns in Greyhound Lines' national route system . . .
For those within Mexico who wish to travel by Greyhound in the United States, Greyhound subsidiary Greyhound de Mexico can sell Greyhound tickets at one of more than 100 agencies located throughout Mexico. The agencies also sell tickets for several Mexican bus companies, like Estrella Blanca, which connect to Greyhound service at the United States-Mexico border cities.
Address and phone number of principal executive offices
15110 N. Dallas Parkway, Suite 600
Dallas, Texas 75248
(972) 789-7000
(Excerpt) Read more at greyhound.com ...
They also drive Chevy pickups. Sue GM, too?
It's not Greyhound's job.
Good catch! I'll will be right back with the corporate office addresses for the Big Three auto makers . . .
For decades INS/ICE has ignored Greyhound. It'd be so easy to pull over the bus and round up a couple dozen on each.
Not on topic at all, but everytime I see the word "Greyhound" I think of the old country song, "Thank God and Greyhound You're Gone." Simple me, I guess, but that always strikes me as funny.
Boy, I wonder who Greyhound didn't pay off politically to start to get this kind of heat.
ummmmmmmmm
no....
I don't think you can blame Greyhound for the people that ride it anymore than you can blame GM or Ford or Chrysler if they drive those type of vehicles...
or hey, they eat at McDonald's and Burger King. Let's sue them too!!!
/heavy extreme sarcasm
Because we HATE illegal aliens, YEEE HAW!!!!
Don't disagree, and they should.
But that's still INS (or whomever's) job, not Greyhound's job.
Greyhound's job would be to pull over and let them do their job.
What are my grounds for suing? How does this hurt me?
We should also sue restaurants for feeding them.
It's OK to be against illegal immigration but sometimes you need to get a grip on reality.
(Sorry, Mike - I'm being sarcastic too, since there's an entire thread from yesterday blaming Wells Fargo for illegal aliens buying homes: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1563956/posts ; )
There is an article here on FR from a few months ago that Greyhound was getting concerned because smugglers were loading illegals on their buses and that greyhound was stopping it. One or two might not be noticed, but they were getting them by the dozen.
Greyhound is trying.
One thing that is not brought up...another reason why all the political power in this country is pro-illegal immigration is that it not only provides cheap labor, but provides more consumers.
More illegals = more greyhound passengers.
I wondered :)
I wouldn't mind some security measures being required for people when they board a public bus or passenger train. A valid drivers license or passport would seem like a minimum.
It wouldn't bother me at all if this was a huge inconvenience for illegal aliens either.
". . I'm being sarcastic too"
Thank God! I thought you were an idiot.
From someone who WAS being serious on the other thread: "Bring charges against any and all persons, businesses, and organizations that harbor, aid, and abet illegal aliens. Anyone who conducts such activity, and especially those that do it for the reason of making an almighty dollar using illegals, should be charged. Anyone who places their allegiance for an almighty dollar over the safety and security and sovereignty of this nation, deserves nothing less than having the full brunt of the law thrown at them. Greed and lust for the almighty dollar knows no national allegiance and therefore those citizens who practice such should reap the results."
321 posted on 01/25/2006 2:56:17 PM PST by OB1kNOb
"They could blow it up in a major tunnel or drive it into an elementary school."
Why not just rent a Ryder Truck and fill with amonium nitrate?
Be a lot easier, and there's been a test run to show that it works.
Of course they are consumers - if we seal the borders, my prediction would be another recession (or worst).
that crap gives me a headache...
ohh well....
back to the Calculus Homework :)
Well if we threw out every illegal, and sent the saved tax dollars back to the taxpayer, that would likely offset any loss.
And, our Culture is far more important than 4.3% growth v 2.1% growth.
Before you change your mind you may want to peruse yesterdays thread.
Link provided on post number 12.
Arresting mexicans for black tar heroin sales and possession was like shooting fish in a barrel at our local Greyhound station back in the 1990's.
Don't worry about that, because you're wrong. After the emancipation proclamation, 10% of this country was slaves. Guess what? No recession. Somehow we survived without importing slave/cheap labor. And we will this time. Contrary to what you would like to have us believe, this country was not made on cheap illegal labor.
But what an interesting recession it would be. Help wanted signs everywhere and rising wages. Congress would not need to take any measures like extending unemployment benefits and welfare costs would fall as people were induced into the workforce. Most Americans would experience an improved standard of living. It would be the kind of recession that was hard on the rich but good for the middle class and the poor. I've never seen one of those before and I think I might like it.
I'm not so sure about those savings - and is our culture far more important than 4.3% growth vs. negative 6.5% growth, 4 quarters in a row?
Until the global trade war and lack of oil finally impacted your own little household too.
Some illegals might be wearing Nike's while crossing the border, why don't you sue Nike. If you want to sue someone, sue Bush for not doing anything about the borders.
Sure - let's sue them too: http://www.nike.com/main.html
I'm just kidding (see above).
And bears s--- in the woods.
Well, O.K., but I can't sue a bear (or worse, the bear's judgment proof).
Baloney. The Mexicans can't stop selling oil because their economy would collapse in a matter of days and they would have revolution. The elites in Mexico won't risk that. If they refuse to sell oil to us then they will sell it to some other country and because oil is a commodity that will mean there is other oil in the world for us to buy.
And my little family got by just fine before we exported all of our manufacturing capability and I am sure that a global trade war would not hurt me all that much. And why would China, Japan, and Canada jump into our dispute with Mexico? Your use of the world global seems a little exaggerated. A few multinationals who have shipped American jobs south of the border would be hurt but that would likely be a small blip in my stock portfolio offset by the rising value of my Exxon stock.
I think you must be drinking the US Chamber of Commerce koolaid. Did you see where Rep Sensenbrenner suggested that they should register as foreign agents? Maybe you should too? You seem to be a huge proponent of the Mexican invasion.
You're not playing nice, claw. Just because I showed you on another thread the specific law that makes aiding, abetting, and harboring illegal aliens a felony crime punishable by fine and prison, and you can't stand it, you drag one of my comments over to this thread to try and smear me in front of others that haven't been following the other thread? Shame on you. Your disingenuousness does not become you. Now you have shown your true character. You just want to stir up trouble. So let you be marked.
I don't think anyone "drinking the US Chamber of Commerce koolaid" would advocate suing every major corporation in America!
I don't think we'd go to "negative 6.5% growth 4 quarters in a row."
Some things are much more valuable than money though.
If you think the non-white invaders don't have designs on the destruction of whites, maybe y ou should think again...
(This is not a theory, just read their own propaganda)
There are several Mexican bus companies that run all over I-20 and prolly other interstates too that carry nothing but mexicans. Even have mexican drivers...why settle for a dozen on greyhound, when you can nab a whole busload??
oh that's right whore hey bush says they just wanna ride busses that Americans don't want to ride!!!
It wouldn't bother me at all if this was a huge inconvenience for illegal aliens either.
You are dangerous to yourself and liberty. What is wrong with erecting checkpoints on interstate highways? They could staff them with TSA trained personnel. But they would need heavy weaponry, to mow down Greyhound busses full of illegals. Just the price that YOU are willing to pay. Not ME.
Are you being sarcastic, or is that your real response? If it is your real response, I have no idea where you could possiby have interpreted that in his post.
Being sarcastic is different than trying to smear you in front of others that haven't been following the other thread (at least I posted a link to the other thread and ping'd you) so I resemble your "Shame on you . . . disingenuousness . . . Now you have shown your true character. You just want to stir up trouble" comment!
What do you think of my thread?
And rising prices, and lots of companies going out of business.
Most Americans would experience an improved standard of living.
Unlikely. You could achieve the same effect by throwing out the last several decades of technology; suddenly we'd need lots of secretaries and phone operators and such, but it would not be good for the economy, or for the average American.
But why not consider a strictly enforced guest worker program, with strict provisions, and no path to citizenship, and make most people happy. I really believe that alot of people who are strongly opposed to illegal immigration would support a TEMPORARY worker program, as long as it did not include an amnesty, and was seriously enforced.
"Help wanted signs everywhere and rising wages."
The result would be massive cost-push inflation.
"Most Americans would experience an improved standard of living."
No, they wouldn't. Prices would race ahead of wages. Also, with a graduated income tax, inflation would shove people into higher brackets faster than Congress could index the brackets for inflation, so their tax bite increases even as their "increased pay" is debased in value.
"It would be the kind of recession that was hard on the rich but good for the middle class and the poor."
In other words, it would be hard on people who have capital to invest, which means investment (both foreign and domestic) in the U.S. would slow down or stop. What would be most likely to happen is capital flight to more investor-friendly climes, along with the capitalists who own said capital.
Last I checked, 1% of the population pays 37% of the taxes. Convince that 1% to leave, and you have the almost the same number of mooches trying to get their "fair share" of the loot . . . and only 63% of the loot to go around. Congress can either borrow a lot more money (at much higher interest than now), or they can raise taxes on the rest of us to "make up" that 37%.
"I've never seen one of those before and I think I might like it."
I have. It was back when we had double-digit inflation in the 1970s. The result was interest rates hitting record highs. That would cause ARMs to cycle to at-present unbelievable rates, which would result in many people losing their homes.
I have news for you: it will not be the rich losing their homes. It will be middle-class and poor people getting foreclosed.
Yeah, I'm sure you'd like losing your home.
Ok, I agree. I just could not figure out what you were trying to say. I wish the Feds would do their job, because then this would not even be an issue. That being said, if the Fed gov't continues to neglect their responsibility, I think individual states doing what they can is the only option.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.