Tipping in USA/Canada

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Mr Travel wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Sure, but we were discussing the US Act and it's effect on US citizens
in regards to purchases from Cuba.


We were. Then, you indicated the inclusion of permenent residents was a
loophole to prevent US citizens from sending non-citizens to purchase
items in Cuba for them.



No, you asked for my opinion as to why permanent residents outside the
US might be included.


Since you mention this was the reason for the "loophole", then it makes
sense for me to mention that the US citizen can't possess the restricted
products, even if purchased by somone else.

Your "loophole" comment, opened this up to beyond the scope of
purchasing, as the law also restricts ownership. So, if only citizens
were mentioned, the law would have already covered a US citizen sending
a non citizen to buy the products for him. Since the law already covered
this, it is logical there was not such a "loophole" as described by you.


_I_ only mentioned US citizens.
You asked my opinion as to why others might also be covered by this US
restriction.

No, you stated it was added as a loophole.


Where do you make up these stupid ideas from?

There isn't, as far as I know, any loophole.

"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.

eg New Zealand cannot apply it's law against paedophilia in the USa.
NZ law enforcement agencies could apply to the US for extradition of the
perpetrator, but said perpetrator could not be prosecuted in the US by a
New Zealand court sitting in the USa, nor by a US court against a New
Zealand law.

Anyone with half a brain (or more) could figure that one out)

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Mr Travel wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Mr Travel wrote:

Which statement is it modifying?


How should I know? I haven't read the website. If the OFAL website
doesn't try to modify, alter, change or add or subtract from said Act
then it is irrelevant.

You said there was incorrect info on the site.
How can you state that without reading it?



I said you were wrong about the contradictory information on the OFAC
site.
Obviously there cannot be contradictory laws.

I never said there was contradictory information, you did.

If there is no contradiction then viewing the OFAL site would be a waste
of time.
It could do no more than restate the relevant Act.


You claimed the "Act" had an absolute statement saying US citizens could
not buy anything from Cuba.

There is NO such "absolute" statement.
You can't seem to locate one either, that matches your claim.

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Mr Travel wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Sure, but "America" appears in the location of all American nations.

Your country is "The United States" of America, just as Canada is
"Canada" of America and Mexico is "Estados Unidos de Mexicanos" of
America.

Given the number of "United States" around the world, "United States"
doesn't cut it, but you don't have a name for your country, nor for your
people.

The name of our country is not "The United States".
The name of our country is "The United States of America"
In your comment above you separated the name of the country.
"of America" is part of the name.

Canada doesn't call itself "Canada of America"
Mexico doesn't call itself "The United States of Mexico of America"

So, logically, "The United States of America" citizens are called
Americans.


There is no logic in that statement.



Where are British people from?
Yes, Great Britain.
Do we call them "Great British" or "British"?


You've failed to comprehend the meaning of the term Great Britain.

Not really. Let's go back to the other logic.
What do you call people from The United States Of Mexico?
Do you refer to them as United States Mexicans?
Then, why do you insist we put it in what we call ourselves. We are
Americans. Why would "Unitsd States Americans" make more sense?

Because everyone from the Americas is "American".
(the usual and logical exceptions apply)

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Mr Travel wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Mr Travel wrote:


Greg Procter wrote"



Fair point, but what country do you come from?

The Unites States Of AMERICA
So, I am an American,



No, in line with the following sequence you would be
"
United States of America-ans".
and American.


Do you add 'ans" to Canada to get Canadians?

Would you call people from the United States of Mexico, "United States
of Mexio ans? or just "Mexicans'

The name of our country is not "The United States".
The name of our country is "The United States of America"

So, logically, "The United States of America" citizens are called
Americans.
Where are British people from?
Yes, Great Britain.
Would you call them "Great British" or "British"?

The name of our country ends in "America"
Logically what name makes sense?



It would if the name of the two continents wasn't "America".

If the continent were called something else, we wouldn't be "The United
States of America", now would we?

Exactly - you don't have a name for your "United States". You have a
name for the two continents.

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Mr Travel wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Mr Travel wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:



Try a touch of logic:
- anyone from Europe is a European.
- anyone from Asia is an Asian.
- anyone from Africa is an African.
etc.

{I am not talking about continents.

Estados Unidos De Mexicanos - Mexican

Canada - Canadian

United States of America - American

It's related to the name of the country, you idiot.



The other 95% of the world's population doesn't live in the USA.
You don't have a name for your country, you idiot.

We don't have a name for our country?
That makes it damn difficult for the sign carrier at the Olympics.

Russia calls our country, Соединенные Штаты �мерики or СШ�

The New Zealand Post calls us "United States of America". Don't you
trust the mail people?
http://www.nzpost.co.nz/Cultures/en-...orld+Zones.htm



You obviously don't understand the difference between a name and a
description.

No. I know the official name of the country.
Your government also knows the name of the country

"Bruce"?

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Mr Travel wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Mr Travel wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:



You did not indicate that it was a phrase as opposed to two seperate
english language words. You wrote it as two seperate english words. I
treated it as such.


I had previously mentioned green card as being the same as permanent
resident status.


I obviously read over that point.
You see, here in New Zealand an imigrant could have a "work permit"
("Green Card" equivalent) or a "resident permit" in as much as one might
come here to work or one might imigrate as a dependant relative of ....

A green card is not the equivalent of a work permit.
As stated elsewhere AND in the line you quoted, a green card and
permanent resident status are the same thing.




We are still talking about permanent residents and
Cuban retrictions. If I say 'green card" again, while discussing this
topic, why would it not be related to the immigration status I
previously mentioned, and instead had decided to talk about any card
colored green when I asked, "Do you have a green card"?

You don't logically follow things.



We weren't talking about "Permanent Residents".

We were discussing restrictions on Cuban goods.
I had already commented on the law applying to more than just US citizens.



At the time I made the comment I had assumed Craig to be a US citizen
living in Singapore.

Great. At the time, you knew he bought cigars online from New Zealand.
When you stated it would be "closer", the second time, you stated it was
because it would make more sense to have them shipped from Cuba.

Why would it "closer" for him to travel to Cuba, from Singapore, instead
of ordering them online from NZ?

You're weird!

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Mr Travel wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Mr Travel wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:



As to US "Green Card Holders" vs US "Permanent Resident Status"
individuals, I don't know the relationships and differences.

Then, you haven't been reading thread you are commenting on.



I presumed that "US Green Cards" allowed foreign workers to enter the US
to work whereas "Permanent Resident status" would be someone living
permanently in the US (without reference to work) but not having
"Citizen" status.

As PREVIOUSLY stated, they mean the same thing.
This was staed much earlier in the thread


My mistake - don't you have a seperate status for those living in the US
without the right to work???

Tourist visa, good for 6 months
Student Visas, some permit work, some don't

I am sure there are others



Yeah yeah - what about those people who are dependents of those on
"green cards", Tourist Visas, Studfent Visas, etc?

Dependents of those here on such visas (or green card holders) would
normally need their own visa to be here, unless they were permanent
residents or citizens.

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?

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Mr Travel wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

How should I know?

You claimed it was cheaper to buy directly from the source.
So, would it be cheaper for me to buy 1 liter of oil from Saudi Arabia,
or at my corner 7-11, K-Mart, Costco, etc?



No.
Cigars are generally high value items in relation to their volume and
weight.
Oil is a low value item in relation to it's volume and weight. It is a
commodity also produced in the US so the Saudi price tends towards the
US price less freight etc costs.
Your oil will cost more purchased direct because of the additional
freight and related shipping and importing costs.

Somewhere between those extremes is a dividing line where buying direct
and buying retail are about equal and no advantage exists.

If I wanted to buy a 1 carat diamond, would it make more sense to go to
Africa to get it, or go to the mall?

Africa.


Do you want me to define the words "Africa", "mall", "diamond", or "carat"?


I wouldn't imagine that you're capable.

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Larry in AZ wrote:

Waiving the right to remain silent, Mr Travel said:


Greg Procter wrote:


Mr Travel wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:



"Mr. Travel" wrote:



Greg Procter wrote:



It was a comment relating to the lower cost of buying goods from
their source.

Would it be cheaper for me to order a quart of oil from Saudi Arabia
and have them mail it to me, or would I be better off buying it from
K-Mart down the street?



How much is a quart?

I know what a liter is. I expect you to figure out what a quart is.



The whole world uses litres.
Quarts presumably relate to gallons, of which there are several
different archaic standards.

We don't use liters for oil purchases.
Apparently some people in NZ aren't confused by the word quart.

http://www.zerowaste.co.nz/default,72.sm


OK.. for your sake.
If I want to buy a quart of oil.
Would it cost less for me to try to buy it online from someone in Saudi
Arabia?

Tough to get Groggy the imbecile back on subject, innit.



Taking me from buying cigars from Cuba to a quart of oil direct from
Saudi is "getting me back on track"???
Where do you import your desert rocks from, Larry?

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


You will buy that cheap yank rubbish!