Oh no....

dkg999

I say we sell California on eBay and use the money to pay down the national debt.

bobman1235

ryanjoachim wrote: »

You always hear people saying "but (illegal) mexicans do the jobs no one else wants to do!". I can guarantee you those jobs would be filled by someone, be it legal immigrant or good 'ole white boys. If I needed a job to support my family, i'd go pick cherries. I'd hate it, and wouldn't be very good at all, but I'd do it.

It's a seriously flawed "argument" anyway. The reason illegals can do jobs that Americans can't is because they can do them for slave wages. A legal American trying to do those jobs would have to be paid at least minimum wage. Those are protections that we have put in to make sure people aren't overworked. The same people who institute higher and higher minimum wages for lawful Americans are the ones that insist on how necessary the illegal immigrant work is. It's one of the biggest racist hypocrisies out there - the people pretending to "care" about illegal workers are fine with them working ungodly hours in ungodly conditions, so long as they get cheap produce. What a joke.

nooshinjohn

dkg999 wrote: »

I say we sell California on eBay and use the money to pay down the national debt.

Who would be stupid enough to buy it?:p:D

tonyb

Agree totally with this thread. I just find it ironic that our Prez,and those that oppose this law,have no problem asking you for your healthcare papers or you'll get fined. The double speak is just astounding.

Huck344

dkg999 wrote: »

I say we sell California on eBay and use the money to pay down the national debt.

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Who would be stupid enough to buy it?:p:D

There seems to be a lot of hate towards California lately on this forum. I'm not exactly sure why.

Out of every Federal Tax dollar that California sends to Washington, we receive $0.78 back.

I would be more than happy to leave the union so we wouldn't have to support states like Arizona, Indiana and Iowa that receive a higher proportion of Federal tax money compared to what they contribute (AZ- $1.10, IA - $1.10, IN-$1.05).

SolidSqual

California worrying about Arizona is like Obama worrying about Greece's declining economy.

Barefoot

steveinaz wrote: »

This whole racial profiling thing gets on my nerves too. Of course it's racial profiling, here's an example of racial profiling:

A murder has been committed, a witness reports seeing a tall, slim, white male near the area when the crime occurred. A slim, tall white male is seen walking the streets a few blocks over, and is questioned by police. Is this illegal? Is this racially motivated? No, it's called using common sense. "Racial Profiling" is a "duh" phrase. If you're looking for white male, would you bother questioning a black male? The PC police love this phrase, it sounds really, really intelligent ya know.

Profiling is a method of criminal investigation, IT IS NOT A BAD WORD. You may be profiled as a race, certain height/weight, complexion, motive, etc.

Don't ask me how the Border Patrol does it, but I work with many Mexican/Amercian employees on the Fort. When I asked a few of my friends if they ever catch any flak at our border check-point, they all say "nope." The BP does a very good job of trying not to offend, and they are damn good at knowing who to ask the right questions to.

Steve, profiling by law enforcement is used in determining whether a person is considered likely to commit a particular type of crime or behave in a particular manner. Your analogy is inaccurate and is often used by those who can't distinguish between the legal nuances when it comes to law enforcement. Secondly, police officers are legally allowed to profile in order to prevent and solve crimes. They are not allowed to racially profile.

Let me offer you an analogy: drunk driving. A police officer cannot legally pull someone over on the hunch that the driver is impaired just because it's 2:30 AM and he's pulling out of a tavern parking lot. That would fall into the category of unreasonable suspicion. That is not the same as having probable cause, or at the very least reasonable suspicion, the latter being the minimum standard required for an officer to detain/investigate. It's all about basing one's decision on behavorial traits like speeding, swerving, running red lights or stopping at green ones. Then it would be reasonable to conclude that the driver may be impaired.

Don't confuse the probable cause standard with the lesser standard of a hunch. Racial profiling, by it's own admission, is a hunch. Sure, a hunch could be proven correct. But it isn't based on objective criteria, just a specific, self-reinforced conclusion. Your friends at the border patrol are profiling. That's what they are trained to do. But they are not racially profiling. You yourself said it best. You don't know how they do it. You can't separate the two like they can, because it's obvious that you have not had their training. That's not a character flaw by any stretch, it just is what it is. That is what I was referring to in my earlier post, when I said there are 4th amendment issues/implications with the Arizona immigration bill. Cheers.

hearingimpared

steveinaz wrote: »

I ask that those of you who support this, send Gov Brewer a message from her website, showing support:

http://www.azgovernor.gov/Contact.asp

Done and with great praise and support!

reeltrouble1

LEO's are not allowed to racially profile under any circumstance. Well at least Federal LEO's are not, go ask the US Attorney if you think I am just twisting my panties in knots. I think there is confusion in what the legal defenition of racial profiling is. That said it happens and lots of times the bad guy gets locked up, looks like the courts will have decide this one.

RT1

hearingimpared

steveinaz wrote: »

Exactly:

1. Secure the border (both structurally, and with more Border agents)
2. Possible limited amnesty for illegals that can demonstrate a good working history in the US, and who pass background checks and would otherwise qualify under (3) below.
3. Re-visit the requirements to become a US citizen. Keep the laws that ensure safety/security, but reacess other "administrative" requirements.
4. Monetarily punish businesses that hire illegals (already the law in Arizona).

I agree with everything you've written above Steve except I don't think any amnesty for illegals should even be considered. They've broken the law, have been sucking the life out of our welfare and social security system, stealing identities, not paying taxes and keeping Americans who need work, out of work due to their willingness to work for less money than would be paid to an American citizen.

Rivrrat

What I'd really like to see is this boycott escalate to the point that we (Arizona) stop selling power to California and shut down the plants.

They don't want coal plants there, yet it's ok to buy coal produced electricity from Az. :mad:

Everybody else that's protesting SB1070 needs to understand that all it's doing is collectively pissing us off.

hearingimpared

Barefoot wrote: »

Steve, profiling by law enforcement is used in determining whether a person is considered likely to commit a particular type of crime or behave in a particular manner. Your analogy is inaccurate and is often used by those who can't distinguish between the legal nuances when it comes to law enforcement. Secondly, police officers are legally allowed to profile in order to prevent and solve crimes. They are not allowed to racially profile.

Let me offer you an analogy: drunk driving. A police officer cannot legally pull someone over on the hunch that the driver is impaired just because it's 2:30 AM and he's pulling out of a tavern parking lot. That would fall into the category of unreasonable suspicion. That is not the same as having probable cause, or at the very least reasonable suspicion, the latter being the minimum standard required for an officer to detain/investigate. It's all about basing one's decision on behavorial traits like speeding, swerving, running red lights or stopping at green ones. Then it would be reasonable to conclude that the driver may be impaired.

Don't confuse the probable cause standard with the lesser standard of a hunch. Racial profiling, by it's own admission, is a hunch. Sure, a hunch could be proven correct. But it isn't based on objective criteria, just a specific, self-reinforced conclusion. Your friends at the border patrol are profiling. That's what they are trained to do. But they are not racially profiling. You yourself said it best. You don't know how they do it. You can't separate the two like they can, because it's obvious that you have not had their training. That's not a character flaw by any stretch, it just is what it is. That is what I was referring to in my earlier post, when I said there are 4th amendment issues/implications with the Arizona immigration bill. Cheers.

The bolded sectiond are pure baloney at least in PA. THey warn you in ARD school what times to stay off the roads, what nights and times of those nights to stay off the road even if having one drink, when it is safe to leave a tavern, what roads to avoid etc, etc, etc. They literally tell you how to avoid being pulled over because the PA State, Township, & County Police departments can and do pull people over on a "hunch" or based on the time and place your are driving or where they've sat in ambush (taverns namely).

I was just recently pulled over in Delaware, the state in which I currently live, for no reason except for the time of night I was driving. The police officer gave some BS reason like my vehicle was swaying, not swerving (his words), even though I stayed between the white lines on a very windy night. It was BS because as soon as I opened my window he took a deep breath through his nose to see if he could smell alcohol. Shined his flashlights in my eyes to see if I was under the influence of other chemicals, looked at my license, registration, and Ins. card, right there at my window without going to his car to check out the info and told me to have a nice night.

He was basing it on the fact that the bars let out around the time I was driving . . . period. BTW I don't drink.

Huck344

Rivrrat wrote: »

What I'd really like to see is this boycott escalate to the point that we (Arizona) stop selling power to California and shut down the plants.

They don't want coal plants there, yet it's ok to buy coal produced electricity from Az. :mad:

Everybody else that's protesting SB1070 needs to understand that all it's doing is collectively pissing us off.

Dude, the state of California does not buy electricity from the state of Arizona. Investor owned Utilities such as SCE, PG&E and SDG&E own power plants in Arizona or purchase power from IPPs in Arizona and import the power to satisfy their customer's requirements.

California does have coal plants (about 500MW worth), but does not produce as much coal as the state of AZ.

If for some crazy reason AZ prevented companies from exporting electricity to CA, it would have a far more harmful effect on the AZ GDP than it would on California.

Rivrrat

or purchase power from IPPs in Arizona and import the power to satisfy their customer's requirements.

I don't see much difference there other than you may have thought I meant from the state, nor does SF's boycott stop at state gov affairs, it includes boycotting Az business too.

If for some crazy reason AZ prevented companies from exporting electricity to CA, it would have a far more harmful effect on the AZ GDP than it would on California.

A few years ago, TEP pulled the plug on SF for what nobody would call non payment. It contributed heavily to SF's brownout problems, yet it didn't affect TEP's bottom line a bit. We have our own growth issues and can use that power instate just as easily as sending somewhere else.

As far as how many coal plants Cali has, How many have been built in, oh say, the last 10 years?

The Arizona Corporate Commission just recently turned down a plant one of the power company's in Cali purposed building to supply power for Cali. The reason? We're not going to become a power farm for California.

I-SIG

Huck344 wrote: »

Dude, the state of California does not buy electricity from the state of Arizona. Investor owned Utilities such as SCE, PG&E and SDG&E own power plants in Arizona or purchase power from IPPs in Arizona and import the power to satisfy their customer's requirements.

California does have coal plants (about 500MW worth), but does not produce as much coal as the state of AZ.

If for some crazy reason AZ prevented companies from exporting electricity to CA, it would have a far more harmful effect on the AZ GDP than it would on California.

Dude, I think you're slicing it pretty thin. Does the actual People's Republic of Kalifornistan buy electricity from the United States of Arizona? Of course not. :rolleyes:

Do power plants located in the U S of A (that couldn't otherwise be located in the PRK for reasons we all know but won't get into here) export many gigawatts of electricity to the PRK? Of course they do.

And if the U S of A opened the switches at Yuma, Lake Mead, etc., I think most AZ consumers would appreciate the immediate decrease (or elimination) in their fuel-cost adjuster (and probably base rates as well) and we would find plenty of new customers in Texas, among other places.

Also, 500mW of coal is a little baby power plant by baseload generation standards, so that's nothing to brag about unless you enjoy the higher prices for all those reasons I won't get into here....

Wes

Rivrrat

I couldn't have said it better myself.

hearingimpared

I-SIG wrote: »

Dude, I think you're slicing it pretty thin. Does the actual People's Republic of Kalifornistan buy electricity from the United States of Arizona? Of course not. :rolleyes:

Do power plants located in the U S of A (that couldn't otherwise be located in the PRK for reasons we all know but won't get into here) export many gigawatts of electricity to the PRK? Of course they do.

And if the U S of A opened the switches at Yuma, Lake Mead, etc., I think most AZ consumers would appreciate the immediate decrease (or elimination) in their fuel-cost adjuster (and probably base rates as well) and we would find plenty of new customers in Texas, among other places.

Also, 500mW of coal is a little baby power plant by baseload generation standards, so that's nothing to brag about unless you enjoy the higher prices for all those reasons I won't get into here....

Wes

I'm not from AZ but Wes . . . Gold Jerry Gold!!!;)

cnh

Although not exactly on topic, those of us in Northern New England 'subsidize' electrical costs for Boston and surrounding areas by paying almost the same rate they do down there in an area where people's salaries and standard of living are far lower.

As for California....I recommend reading a book called Ecotopia...a somewhat 'unrealistic' Utopia where the west coast secedes from the U.S. Although written as a GREEN manifesto...it is highly unrealistic and can ALSO be read as a comedy.

The illegal arguments I stay clear of because they're too volatile and because one of my best friend's is a Mexican Historian who knows a lot more about this than the average American.

So I have no comment.

cnh

virtualdean

ryanjoachim wrote: »

Get rid of the illegals and you have a HUGE employment boom (which at first no one will want to fill).

You always hear people saying "but (illegal) mexicans do the jobs no one else wants to do!". I can guarantee you those jobs would be filled by someone, be it legal immigrant or good 'ole white boys. If I needed a job to support my family, i'd go pick cherries. I'd hate it, and wouldn't be very good at all, but I'd do it.

"You always hear people saying "but (illegal) mexicans do the jobs no one else wants to do!""

What they forget to add is "for the wretched wages we want to pay!"

BIZILL

wes knows his ****. it's literally his job.

futck california and their boycotts. how's 'bout our very own grijalva? what a choad. calling out for boycotting from within our own state. what a choad. i wonder if he or any of his supporters are willing to protest and get violent. it's 'bout time for our very own miniature revolution here in the A Z.

comfortablycurt

nooshinjohn wrote: »

Does the rule of law come into play anywhere? Illegal means just that... You are breaking the LAW. One look at Mexico's policy with regard to illegals will make you cringe, and it involves JAIL TIME. We on the other hand have devalued what citizenship means so much that we don't even care where are elected officials come from anymore. I could care less if Mork from Ork were to show up and want to come live in the U.Sof A. All it takes is to knock on the door of a U.S. Embasy and ask for the proper forms, and wait your turn. If he just shows up one day looking for work without doing it the right way, then detain and deport, period.

It took my wife and her family TWENTY YEARS to come here legally, and that too is wrong, but they waited their turn and did it the right way. I expect the law of the land to be respected by anyone that wants to be here. If the first action taken by someone wanting to come here is to BREAK our laws, they should be sent back and never allowed here again.

I agree that stricter laws need to be in place regarding illegal immigrants...but I've got better things to do than sit around worrying about politics. There's a whole world of miracles out there...I'm not going to spend my life being pissed off at politicians.

AsSiMiLaTeD wrote: »

"I don't let politics influence my decisions in these respects."

Politics plays a big part in how much of your money you have to hand over to the state. Have fun...

Not really.

I pay my taxes, but I generally work for cash, under the table. One of the perks of owning your own business. I can also bring my line of work with me wherever I go, and start it back up with relatively NO overhead costs.

Hell, last year I didn't even make enough to have to pay taxes, and that's just fine with me. I made all the money that I needed to get by. I ain't ever gonna be rich, nor do I really want to be. I don't want to become a slave to my possessions, like so many people are these days.

So, I will definitely have fun, thanks for your well wishes.:)

I'll be hanging out with my friends in Cali, chilling at the beach, hiking through the redwoods and climbing mountains...and with a guitar slung over my shoulder the whole time(well, maybe not when I'm climbing a mountain...lol). It's true that the greatest things in life are free.

That's what life is about for me. I don't spend it worrying about politics and whether or not this state is going to boycott this thing from that state because these people aren't supposed to be here. It just isn't worth it. I've got better things to do.

hearingimpared

Curt, I'm curious, do you vote in any elections?

lightman1

I hate everybody...so all of your arguments have no weight with me....F@ckers....

steveinaz

I just don't care for Cali's tactics. What if Arizona were to announce an official boycott of Cali because we don't like their restrictions on the 2nd amendment? Imagine the stink that would raise in CA....

nooshinjohn

comfortablycurt wrote: »

There's a whole world of miracles out there...I'm not going to spend my life being pissed off at politicians.

I know you are much younger than me Curt, and I do not want to be seen as busting your balls, BUT I can tell you without any shadow of doubt that in the past 20 years, this country has taken a sharp nosedive with regards to our liberties and freedoms being stepped on. Meanwhile those that come here illegally are given education, medical care, food, housing, cash, utility bills paid for, and in some places even cell phones.

The politicials are those responsible for the mess and are not in any hurry to fix it, as those that come here illegally, are 50% (Thanks SEIUa nd ACORN) of the time voting anyway, again against the law, for those that protect them, and right now they need every vote the can get.


Immigration should be about the law and not politics. Arizona has done nothing more than agree to do the job of the Fed and enforce the law.

Curt my friend, I know you are young, but it is time for you to go back and look at the history books and see what liberties have aready been lost since the 1950's due to progressive activisim and their nutjob supporters in government and the courts. It is the young people of this country that need to become informed and stand up before it is to late. The American Experience is the reason for much of what is in this world that we enjoy today. This nation is a MIRACLE in every sense of the word, a shining city upon a hill, and it will be gone if we as her guardians fail to stand up and protect her.

obieone

I think AZ should round up all those illegals, put on buses, send them to SF, LA, Boston, etc, and say:"You want 'em, you got 'em!!!

steveinaz

...I suspect that in a dark hall somewhere in CA, there's little side-bars going on, and they're boycotting because they don't want the influx of illegals to shift to THEIR border. Of course their "official" stance is that we are racial profilers, and mean, hateful people.

How quickly people forget 9/11....it'll take another major tragedy for the point to be driven home with the bleeding hearts.

steveinaz

I want to re-emphasize that I have no problem with the Mexican people; they are not the problem. They are a symptom of the problem The problem being lack of enforcement of existing laws, intended to secure our borders. It's not a "hater" thread, it's more about other states minding their own business, and trying to force their ideas (by way of boycott) on other states because it doesn't jive with their political agenda.

polkatese

Stevie, let's talk audio...there is enough of these on the news....I rather talk about Diana Krall's music. No disrespect for your right and opinion.

BottomFeeder

I found this article to be quite informative & recommend it as a good read.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/29/opinion/29kobach.html

Steve: do you know if AZ has any plan to go after the businesses and employers who hire illegals?