The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses • Hacker News Board

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#131

Post by BugsJustFindMe » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 6:01 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #125

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Typically in these cases, there's actually a source of income." You mean that there's a demonstrated ability to repay the loan, which isn't the same thing. I say this as a person who has taken many loans in my life, including ones while not working. Anyway that's up to the lender to sort out isn't it? > "Otherwise I struggle to imagine why anyone without income but with plenty of assets would take out a loan" Just…

>Even Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, has billions of dollars in outstanding loans that he could repay today if he wanted to. If billionaires who lack work visas can't get an auto loan because of their stock borrowing schemes, that's fine by me. I don't think progressives would have much sympathy for billionaires in the first place anyways. More to the point people who are actually engaging in this sort of s…

> "you can't think of an actual working example either"

I gave you the biggest working example in the world, the one where a person definitively has no objective need to take loans and does so anyway because it's deemed advantageous, and what you did in response instead of saying "oh damn, you're right, I did forget that in fact people take loans all the time against assets vs income" was try to rewrite the discussion around how progressives feel about billionaires.

> "people who are actually engaging in this sort of stuff ... either have citizenship, or can buy citizenship"

I am not rich enough to buy citizenship anywhere, and yet here I am. Your estimation of how things work is not complete.

> "so that they're not living in the country undocumented"

This is the second time now in this thread that you've replaced lack of right to work with something else entirely.

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#132

Post by gruez » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 6:06 PM UTC

alistairSH wrote: post #104

gruez wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Like any other system, the purpose is what the system actually does. Especially a system that's been around for decades. See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49260422 >We let them in, so they can work our fields and process our meat and whatever else. We shouldn't be surprised they want to buy cars, own business, and do other completely normal things. So if the city/state/federal government lets a drug addict/d…

The GOP has used immigration as a drum to beat since I became politically aware back in the Bill Clinton days. They've had numerous chances since then to fix immigration in one way or another, but they have not done so. They make a lot of noise. They build a few miles of fence. But, mostly they keep the system the same. Because they NEED that drum to beat. Not remotely the same thing as Ukraine's army being stuck in…

>Not remotely the same thing as Ukraine's army being stuck in a war they cannot win. Or whatever other not-quite-apt comparisons you want to make.

Did you get to comparison #3?

>The purpose of the British government is to propose a controversial new sentencing policy, stand firm in the face of protests for a while, then cave in after slightly larger protests and agree not to pass the policy after all.

>...

>The purpose of the British government is to govern Britain. But different British people disagree on how they should be governed, and sometimes one or another faction gets more power, so the government sometimes flip-flops about what it wants.

More to the point, the point isn't that POSWID is always false, it's that you can't use it as a thought terminating cliche in place of an actual argument.

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#133

Post by jauntywundrkind » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 6:18 PM UTC

sherburt3 wrote: post #105

gamblor956 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they used the existing system of due process to investigate whether crimes were committed at Mar-a-Lago. They didn't claim national security to shut it down.

Oh ok you want the government to create an extrajudicial process to punish political opponents. Sounds kinda like Facism.

To punish grifting garbage that sees breaking the Emoluments clause as a challenge to do as much as it can, that has attacked the welfare & good of this nation.

And it's not new. He is a money launderer. His friends are bad bad bad people. Grift is what he has always done, is the only thing he knows. https://bsky.app/profile/justinschuh.com/post/3msqa7ggcc22p

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#134

Post by gruez » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 6:19 PM UTC

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #131

gruez wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Even Elon Musk, the richest man in the world, has billions of dollars in outstanding loans that he could repay today if he wanted to. If billionaires who lack work visas can't get an auto loan because of their stock borrowing schemes, that's fine by me. I don't think progressives would have much sympathy for billionaires in the first place anyways. More to the point people who are actually engaging in this sort of s…

> "you can't think of an actual working example either" I gave you the biggest working example in the world, the one where a person definitively has no objective need to take loans and does so anyway because it's deemed advantageous, and what you did in response instead of saying "oh damn, you're right, I did forget that in fact people take loans all the time against assets vs income" was try to rewrite the discussio…

>I gave you the biggest working example in the world, the one where a person definitively has no objective need to take loans and does so anyway because it's deemed advantageous, and what you did in response instead of saying "oh damn, you're right, I did forget that in fact people take loans all the time against assets vs income" was try to rewrite the discussion around how progressives feel about billionaires.

Are you forgetting the whole context for this conversation was over people who lack authorization to work but somehow need (and can get) auto loans? Bringing up Elon Musk, who is a US citizen only fulfills half of that requirement. Not to mention he'd be getting a portfolio loan on his stock, which gets him cash, obviating the need for an auto loan specifically. Then you pretend that was the entire argument, and trying to dunk on me for not accepting it.

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#135

Post by BobbyJo » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 6:19 PM UTC

RunSet wrote: post #64

BobbyJo wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we want to stop illegal immigration, "not getting a car loan" and "harder to move money across the border" feel like the most humane ways to slow it down. Plus, the drug trade coming in from Mexico is, in fact, a huge problem, not just for the US, but for Mexico itself. Mexico is run by cartels specifically because of how much money is made off selling drugs to Americans. This isn't some non-existent problem they…

> If we want to stop illegal immigration, "not getting a car loan" and "harder to move money across the border" feel like the most humane ways to slow it down. I can think of a more humane way: Prosecuting the employers who break the law by hiring undocumented workers. The prospect of employment is what draws migrants here in the first place.

How is taking away their ability to earn money at all more humane than not giving them a car loan? I'm genuinely confused how you are ranking those two things.

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#136

Post by BobbyJo » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 6:23 PM UTC

OutOfHere wrote: post #96

BobbyJo wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Money laundering is an absurd concept. People should be free to transfer money to whoever they like, without permission. This ignores that taxes are a thing that need enforcement. Its like saying basic necessities should be free, the world should be without pollution, or cancer shouldn't exist.

Well of course they should be. You have been brainwashed so much that you can't even conceive of a different world. For taxes, I favor land value tax. Basic necessities can absolutely be free under it, as the super rich hold plenty of land. We can have a world without much pollution if we switch away from fossil fuels, and if we take the lifecycle of chemicals into account. Note that excesss carbon dioxide is polluti…

> Well of course they should be. You have been brainwashed so much that you can't even conceive of a different world.

Assuming you are talking about free basic necessities: I can conceive it fine, I just also understand that conceiving doesn't mean it will work, and history has shown it won't. Me making the statement was itself conception no?

I can conceive of a million different economic systems, but I also understand most of them are infeasible, and the risk of running the experiment is extremely high, with little to gain in a my country, where obesity is a much larger problem than starving.

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#137

Post by alistairSH » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 6:31 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #132

alistairSH wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GOP has used immigration as a drum to beat since I became politically aware back in the Bill Clinton days. They've had numerous chances since then to fix immigration in one way or another, but they have not done so. They make a lot of noise. They build a few miles of fence. But, mostly they keep the system the same. Because they NEED that drum to beat. Not remotely the same thing as Ukraine's army being stuck in…

>Not remotely the same thing as Ukraine's army being stuck in a war they cannot win. Or whatever other not-quite-apt comparisons you want to make. Did you get to comparison #3? >The purpose of the British government is to propose a controversial new sentencing policy, stand firm in the face of protests for a while, then cave in after slightly larger protests and agree not to pass the policy after all. >... >The purpo…

"They might associate with the undocumented, therefore shouldn't be allowed to do normal things" was completely reductive.

Looking at El Paso, since it was the first city mentioned in the article, the entire city is about 25% immigrants (>200,000 people). And of that, more that 75% is here legally. So, 150,000 give or take, that according to your first comment, shouldn't be allowed to do business because there are illegals nearby?

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#138

Post by freejazz » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 6:33 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #90

alistairSH wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But they're not supposed to be here in the first place? Like any other system, the purpose is what the system actually does. Especially a system that's been around for decades. We let them in, so they can work our fields and process our meat and whatever else. We shouldn't be surprised they want to buy cars, own business, and do other completely normal things.

>Like any other system, the purpose is what the system actually does. Especially a system that's been around for decades. See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49260422 >We let them in, so they can work our fields and process our meat and whatever else. We shouldn't be surprised they want to buy cars, own business, and do other completely normal things. So if the city/state/federal government lets a drug addict/d…

>See: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49260422

Doesn't seem to be particularly well received nor does it respond to any of the obvious criticisms.

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#139

Post by pirates » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 6:43 PM UTC

Freedumbs wrote: post #67

phoghed wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bank of America had a class action against them because they would reorder transactions to make you overdraft. For example, when I was relatively poor and near 0 balance in like 2009 era I’d wait for my direct deposit to come so I could grocery shop and pay bills. When it deposited, the funds would become available to use even though the transaction wasn’t cleared, pretty normal so far. So say you pay 2 bills and gro…

This is 100% true and also a tactic used by PNC when I was a near zero person. The hack around it was to try to withdraw cash, then use that. They wouldn't let you overdraft cash withdrawal. That's one anecdotal likely stale trick to avoid the traps they set.

Interesting, PNC has never once done anything like this to me. In fact I feel that they are pretty up front about telling you what you have available and what your actual balance is.

Re: The US tried to stop cartel money-laundering; devastated mom-and-pop businesses

#140

Post by orwin » Tue, Aug 11, 2026, 6:44 PM UTC

BobbyJo wrote: post #55

gruez wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>He's also making it difficult/impossible for people without work visas to obtain auto loans [...] >They're banging the national security drum to make it unlivable here for some. But they're not supposed to be here in the first place? As for the people who are supposed to be here, but are collateral damage (ie. "which is destroying the used car market in latino communities") should we have sympathy for people in such…

If we want to stop illegal immigration, "not getting a car loan" and "harder to move money across the border" feel like the most humane ways to slow it down. Plus, the drug trade coming in from Mexico is, in fact, a huge problem, not just for the US, but for Mexico itself. Mexico is run by cartels specifically because of how much money is made off selling drugs to Americans. This isn't some non-existent problem they…

Nationalize businesses who get caught working with a permitless immigrant would be far, far more effective.

It ensure real checks, ensure that when the immigrant work permit expire, the employer have an incentive to help renew it (that alone ouwld probably solve 70 to 90% of illegal "aliens"