Tipping in USA/Canada

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Craig Welch wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:


Craig Welch wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:



But again I ask (as your answer had nothing to do with the subject),
given that you know nothing about me, on what basis can you claim to
have read more legislation that I?

On the basis that you continually make unfounded conclusions about me.

Which is of course no basis at all.

The only basis on which you could make that call would be that you knew
enough about me to make a reasonable assessment of how much legislation
I had read.

As you don't, you can't.

That's ok Craig, you've done the same sort of thing in regard to me,
numerous times. You're a prick - I just thought I try it to see what
it's like. It doesn't do anything for me even if it makes you cream your
nappies.

Huh?

Again I ask (as your answer had nothing to do with the subject), given
that you know nothing about me, on what basis can you claim to have read
more legislation that I?


On the basis that you don't know that an Act stands on it's own.

You have failed to point out the Act you have been referring to.

The restrictions on Cuba involves multiple things, not a single Act.


None of those "multiple things" can take away from the Act. They can
only add further restrictions.

Man, you are an idiot.

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


"Imperial quart bottles".
The US uses "US quarts".

They are not the same measurement by a wide margin.

The US quart is 32 ounces
I believe the Imperial quart would be 40, since I think you said 20 oz
made a pint.


It was 1969!!! - I haven't had any use or connection with a "gallon"
since.
sheesh


So, how would this changed the context original question, which was
basically if I bought insert small quanity of a product, would it
always be better to buy it from the source?

I used "quart" as an example.
Surely you knew it meant a quarter of a gallon.



A "Quarter" was 8 "Bushels", or 32 "Pecks", or 64 "gallons".


Did quart mean something different than a quarter of a gallon?

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


Craig Welch wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:


Craig Welch wrote:


Greg Procter wrote:



Craig Welch wrote:


I'm just trying to understand your bile directed towards the USA.

Ahh, I see!
I frequent this ng (antu) in an attempt to understand the US's bile,
violence and terrorist actions against the rest of the world.

You're not posting into any 'this' newsgroup, Greg. You're posting into
*two* newsgroups.

Did you not know that?

Sure - you obviously feel the need to direct my postings to
rec.travel.air but I don't download that ng. As such I don't see the
yank reactions to my postings there.

You really don't understand this Usenet thing, do you Greg.

*YOU* are posting to two newsgroups. *YOU* are sending posts out into
the ether with the following header:


Certainly I am knowingly posting to two newsgroups - the second purely
out of respect to you.


You KNOW this, but made the statement, you quoted above, about
"As such I don't see the yank reactions to my postings there."

Our reactions are being sent to both groups, why would you not see the
reaction?



You and Craig are the only yanks on rec.travel.air???

No, the conversation is on both newsgroups, not because you "Knowingly"
post to both, but because you reply and don't change the current settings.

Greg Procter wrote:

Craig Welch wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


What would I care about your "Green Cards"???
I didn't bring "Green Cards" into the discussion, but I was asked my
opinion about them in regards to our discussion.

We were talking about the law regarding buying stuff from Cuba.
In that discussion, green card holder/permanent resident/resident alien
would be relevant.


Only if the hopeful buyer is a green card holder/permanent
resident/resident alien of the USa..
Given that Craig is presumably resident in Singapore, all those options
can almost certainly be discounted as applying to him.

Are you not aware that one can be a Permanent Resident of more than one
country?

It's not necessary for a Permanent Resident to permanently reside in the
country of permanent residence.



LOL - did you actually read what you wrote???

I understood it, didn't you.
The problem is you are taking individual words out of a dictionary,
rather than using a legal or goverment defintion of the terms.

It's like having "Leave To Remain" in the UK.
It's doesn't mean you can never leave.

If you have green card status in the US, you can live there.
You can live there and elsewhere.
You can live elsewhere, and not live in the US for a period of time, and
not lose your US immigration status if certain conditions are met.

It's not really difficult to look up, if you don't understand something,
intead of making comments about such status that don't match the truth.

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:
"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Are you trying to make some point not related to my IBM PC?
Whatever it is, it's not being transmitted.

You claim the XT's name was not "IBM Personal Computer XT"
Actually I stated the XT was an IBM PC. You seemed to disagree.

I pointed out the prodcut numbers of 2 IBM manuals that have this name
on the cover.



My oldest IBM computer is an IBM PC which pre-dates the XT.

Let's try this again.
Is the XT an IBM PC?


I don't own an XT. I own the previous model IBM which is the "PC".

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

"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.

So, if I violate a US law outside of the US, it doesn't apply, so I
can't be punished when I get back to the US?

Assuming you are a yank then you can be punished when you return to the
US
As a New Zealander I cannot be punished for a US crime occuring outside
the US when I return to the US.

See how that works?


You really are Chilly's dad, aren't you?

You lost me there.

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

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?

I never stated the purpose of a green card was to work in the US.
I said "green card holder" is the same thing as "permanent resident' or
"resident alien"

Ok, I had always understood that a "US Green Card" was a licence for a
non-US citizen to work within the US.


A green card holder's children would need a visa to stay in the US if
they were not green card holders, or US citizens. I never stated they
had to have their own green card. The would have to be a US citizen,
green card holder, or have a visa, in order stay in the US.

How difficult is this to understand?


It's much easier when you stop assuming I would know your immigration
laws.
"Green Card" in itself doesn't impart much information, other than that
it's a piece of green card.



It is poosible for a non-US citizen to work, if they don't have a green
card. The are visas that permit them to worl.


Ok, so I've been misinformed by yanks in the pasr.

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


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



You will buy that cheap yank rubbish!

Newcastle coal is from America?


Err, the problem is with your _engine_, not the Newcastle coal.

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:


What would I care about your "Green Cards"???
I didn't bring "Green Cards" into the discussion, but I was asked my
opinion about them in regards to our discussion.

We were talking about the law regarding buying stuff from Cuba.
In that discussion, green card holder/permanent resident/resident alien
would be relevant.



Only if the hopeful buyer is a green card holder/permanent
resident/resident alien of the USa..
Given that Craig is presumably resident in Singapore, all those options
can almost certainly be discounted as applying to him.

Again... and again..

A Green Card Holder/permanent resident/resident alien, does have to
remain in the US. So, Craig being in Singapore doesn't mean he isn't a
US Resident Alien.


It's nice when we agree - it took you a long time to understand!

"Mr. Travel" wrote:

Greg Procter wrote:

Well, K-mart wasn't active in New Zealand pre-1970. I would guess, based
on the fact that a K-mart opened about 2km from my then home around
1993-4 that they started in NZ about 1991-2. At that time they could not
have sold "quarts" of oil. As to what is "relevant", you've consistantly
come out of 'left-field' or 'cloud-cuckoo-land' with what you consider
to be relevant, so I need to cover all the bases. At this stage, based
on your past efforts I fully expect you to start an argument about the
number of carats I claim to be in a chaldron!

Whether K-Mart existed in NZ pre-1970 has NOTHING to do with you
understanding approximately what a quart of oil is. The imperial quart
and US quart are close enough in size for you determine I was referring
to a small quanity of oil.


Well the US measure is short change - typical of cheating yanks.