The Government has a law that you cannot personally carry over 10,000 cash out of this country?Then why can?

Question

People send millions upon millions overseas? Investments should be kept here right? That is wrong that our government spends overseas anywhere our money and then we can't take out more than 10 grand? Maybe if people were allowed to take more out and give it to their families overseas we wouldnt have the problems we have here now. Like the massive immigrations for illegal jobs?
Or maybe we would not have slave owners from everywhere in big businesses to go overseas and buy cheap labor? I think we are a little late with this border thing for Mexico?It is like closing the barn door after the cows are gone? We should have kept this country in free enterprise for our people and not for personal alliances with governments, like the oil peoples? Out of jail free cards? no taxes for 7 years? Wow ! These politicians have been playing monopoly and now that Bush has lost all of our property who wins? The opposition owns it all?
. You think the Dems are going to win it back with what?

Answer 1

The law is about hard currency as in Cash. Also you can take it out but there are forms that need to be filled and it's a true hassle.
This has nothing to do with investments. Also, you shouldn't mix the currency law with poverty and immigrations. These are all notions that migth be entertwined at some level down the line but in no way or shape directly associated, in your argument at least.
However, the argument you have about investing abroad and creating jobs out there is one to be talked about: if the jobs are created abroad, the people would not try to migrate to the US correct? well it's not about finding a job where the problem is abroad, it's about quality of life, miser and oppression in some cases. Creating a factory abroad does not fix the problem, it simply helps with local unemployment, cheaper labor thus bigger benefits for the Company here, creating bigger investments or bigger salaries with tax cuts however you look at it.

Just FYI, the US are not the only country with a similar currency law

Answer 2

Well, you have two different things here, one the 2nd amendment and concealed carry registration laws. One if federal the other is state. The 2nd amendment was put there to stop the federal government from taking guns from the public, and it gives that power to the state. Yes I know the federal government requires permits for full automatic firearms, but if I remember right it was done by restricting the transportation of fully automatic firearms, not though a law stopping you from owing one. Now a state could forbid the ownership of any firearm. But most states have a provision in their state constitution that is similar to the 2nd amendment. But a state can stop you from even owing a firearm. A state can require you not only to register ALL your firearms; they could say you can only own certain types of firearms. So if you want to change the law, take it up with your state. Edit To KC V What part of “the right of the people to keep and bear arms,” didn’t you see? The Courts have already ruled, recently, that, that meant the people. The Supreme Court may be taking up the issue. A well regulated militia: that was up to the states to define what a regulated militia was. It was up to the state to raise the militia and thus it was a state function. So it was up to the states to regulate their own militias. Now what I find strange is that rights in every amendment except one have been expanded, that one is the 2nd. It is also the one least visited by the courts, it’s an area where the federal government doesn’t really want a ruling on, nor do most those people who are pro or con gun control. If the courts ruled as the founders intended that would mean that the federal government has no right to regulate firearms. It would be up to the individual states to do that. Think about it, the founding fathers just fought a war with one of the greatest military powers of the time, using civilians, who owned their own firearms, why would they take the guns from the very people who made up the army? The founders also realized that at some time in the future the US government might become oppressive and that the people may have to rise up and overthrow the government, some of them felt that as long as the people owned guns the government would show restraint, if not then the government would cease to exist. Of course the Constitution has never stopped the Supreme Court; all we have to do is look at recent rulings to see that. After all it the job of the Supreme Court to interpret the constitution, but recently we’ve seen Justice Anthony Kennedy looking overseas to decided what the law of our land should be, one more thing to think about. So how the court will rule is anybody’s guess. Of course that said a state could ban all firearms.

Answer 3

The Dem's want complete government control over every aspect of your life.. You really need to better educate yourself on what the democrats are pushing in their agenda.... You may not like the Republicans in power , that's fine but check out the other party's Democrats are dangerous... America was meant to be a free society , not a socialist regime...
By the way, Hillary could careless if you work..

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/GC01Df03.html
Hillary Clinton made it apparent where she stood on outsourcing during her India visit, in an attempt perhaps to clear the Indian misgivings received during the Kerry campaign. "There is no way to legislate against reality. Outsourcing will continue,"
"I have to be frank. People in my country are losing their jobs and the US policymakers need to address this issue," she said. She ruled out that the anti-India feeling was a reflexive reaction, and explained that the feeling was more because of the imbalance in trade between the two countries, which in turn caused anguish among Americans about the nature of the economic relationship.

Answer 4

I'm no fan of bush
but Clinton was the one that opened up trade for China
and started NAFTA
sorry i know that's not what you wanted to hear

Answer 5

There is no law that you cannot carry out a sum over 10,000. The law is, "you must report to customs officials if you are carrying in or out of the country more than 10,000 or the IRS must be informed of every transaction of 10,000 or more."

Answer 6

They don't want CASH leaving...not money/investments. Your arguments may or may not be correct, but the reason that they don't want too much cash leaving the US has to do with not allowing other governments to stockpile US currency.

Answer 7

I was with you all the way to the last sentence, then...

It's like I fell off a cliff

Answer 8

You can carry more than $10,000 cash, but you have to declare it. They are worried about money laundering (of money earned illegally).