Boycott Anything Involving AZ

FiveB247x

I don't believe in absolute's, so I think every situation and circumstance is different. So I don't simply think saying something like I don't like all entitlement programs or they are all unsustainable (that part just comes down to management or mis-management). Also, the entire notion that people can provide or not need government intervention in some area's of life, whether for laws, oversight or even assistance programs is simply not practical in any manner. If you want to see what happens to the economy when you don't have oversight, policy and allow the market to work by its own methods (invisible hand), simply look at the most recent economic disaster because that is exactly what caused it.

In terms of immigration, there are very few legitimate reasons for anyone to become a citizen if you are in this scenario. And in terms of America, our policies regarding this issue (working, papers, fees, security, etc) are for the most part done so in retractile ways so that it doesn't give reasons to want to be citizens or become part of our system or legit citizens. And conversely, as American citizens and people making policy, we need to recognize the realities and practicalities of this issue and situation. Whether we want it or not, it's in front of us to deal with. To simply close the border will have terrible results on our economy. To simply target business's who use or work with these people in order to use fines, etc, will only result in bad economic results. My main point is simply there is not a simplistic answer to this issue as we have to take all areas and groups into account.

In terms of cheap labor and exploitation, I am very familiar with the ways of globalization, so if you'd like to attempt to bring up this issue, be my guest. The very notion that "a rising tide lifts all boats", which all globalization is on a large scale has been a failure in terms of social and economic balance... and no not in a socialist manner, but simply that the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The facts repeat this time and time again. Whether it's in relation to the IMF, WB, G-8, G-20, WTO or agreements like NAFTA or CAFTA. The proof is all there in fact.

Lastly and in terms of entitlement, people in our society expect things like rights, benefits or even things which are not definitive such as a national language. The vast majority in our nation do not vote, participate or even pay attention to social and government affairs, yet expect results and policies shifted in their favor and don't want to hear the reality check when they see what's really going on in the world abroad or at home. And instead of diagnosing the problems and tracing it back to its proper place, instead they scapegoat... in this instance - illegals are stealing our public funds through various methods and taking jobs. Really, is that how this began? It's nothing more than misguided anger, fueled by entitlement to get what you feel is yours. And the national language is a perfect example. We do not have a national language... people argue it's english because it has always been spoken and more people have been here that speak it... but it's not official. So when people don't speak english, it annoys them - people have to be accommodated if you get my drift. And people get mad that some don't learn english.. makes them very angry and entitled. But if you want to hear the honest truth, if you only speak english now, and at some point in the near future, we have more citizens here who speak spanish, would you learn it or even be for it to become the national language? Of course people wouldn't and it shows their selfishness and entitlement, which is based on nothing more than the idea that they were born here and owed or due something for it. You're not - get over it - life is about flexibility so deal with it.

mikepegg44 wrote:

I haven't said one word about how much we "need" them. If a business wants to hire them, go right ahead. I have already laid out what I think should happen as far as immigraton goes. I am all for migrant worker programs and letting anyone who wants to come here to try and get a job. Just come through the front door. I went into greater detail in some other posts so I am not going to repeat myself, but tell me, what about the numbers I showed you seems sustainable? What would unemployment look like if 340,000,000 more people were allowed to come on in. I can tell you that there would be a lot more people standing in line for gov't cheese.
And you are right, I feel that all entitlement programs are unsustainable. Look at social security. It is spending itself dry. I think sustainability is a great point when talking about politics, I think it needs to be brought up more. You cannot just say that something being unsustainable should not be allowed in discussion. Being able to pay for things as a country, and being able to continue programs and fund them properly is a HUGE issue. An sorry if you think I am focusing simply on the people, they are the ones who are breaking the law. Not me. If I have to pay a higher price for an orange to be able to have a border that is secure and safe for all those involved in, than by all means, gouge me.

So I listed benefits of coming here legally, Can you list the benefits to the American people and to the immigrants when they are allowed to come here illegally? And before you talk about cheap labor and blah blah blah, answer me this, how many times in your life and on this board have you talked about the US and exploitation?

_

Godfather. wrote:

scb wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

one world ?
one people ?
your thoughts are very nice, try taking your ideas to another country and see how far it gets you

We take the one world idea to other countries all the time! And it's gotten us far. We're all in support of one world, globalization, etc. when it serves our interests and allows us to exploit others. It's fucking hypocritcal to try to act like this is a bad idea only when it doesn't benefit us.

wake up sunshine it will NEVER HAPPEN there is way too much power in the hands of way too many people !
dream on.

Godfather.

:? I don't know what you're talking about.

_

mikepegg44 wrote:

FiveB247x wrote:

The right to medical care being a core value is a separate discussion.

But can you list some legitimate reasons why anyone would and should go through the immigration process which benefits them in the long term? Not a very difficult question, but when you ask it, you slowly realize it's not a practical, inclusive or beneficial resolve to this problem. Just put yourself in the shoes of one of these people and you clearly understand why this issue is really not black and white.

mikepegg44 wrote:

No, access to medical care is not a right. It isn't. It isn't in our bill of rights, it isn't anywhere. It might be something that would be good for everyone, but it isn't a right.

On topic, no one is saying don't come here... they are saying come here legally please

What you get from following the law, immunity to things like this law in Arizona for one. You get the right to vote, you get the right to work without fear of immigration coming and knocking at your door. Basically you get to be here and get afforded all the rights all of us get. Seems simple enough.

That is really a disturbing question that you asked, as if it is justified in breaking the laws of this country because they aren't the easy way of doing things. If you respect the laws, the country will respect you and give you all the rights and privileges everyone here thinks they deserve. does it take awhile, yes, but do you honestly think that you and I would have the same quality of life that we have now if we just opened our borders to everyone?
Let's forget about the people who hate us, but solely focus on those who just want to come here to better their life. If it was free and easy to come here, how many people in the world would come? I a conservative estimate is 5%. That is 5% of the 6.8 billion people in the world, that is 340,000,000 more people in the country. Do you honestly think we can sustain that? The same people who are complaining because the government isn't creating more jobs are the same ones wanting the god damn borders to be open and free. When you look at it that way it seems pretty simple to me.
and another thing, we, unlike most EU countries that so many want to emmulate, still have birth right citizenship for christ's sake. It is unsustainable.

Uh... no you don't get immunity from the AZ law. The Arizona law didn't change the federal law in terms of not being allowed to be here illegally; it changed the fact that you can now be harassed even if you are here legally. It's primarily about how to identify people who are here illegally, not what to do with them once they are identified.

_

mikepegg44 wrote:

tonifig8 wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

what would make you happy ? how can this law be changed to make you happy and be fair for both
sides of this debate, I would really like to read this.

Godfather.

Just an FYI- a drivers license isn't valid proof of citizenship - If it really comes down to it, a person would have to show there birth certificate, a pass port, or other federal approved documents. If I am out for a jog I will have to carry these items, because I could be profiled and then detained.

Just an fyi- this is the most misleading and wrong thing that the lefties keep talking about. No one is going to stop someone on a jog and ask for identification. They are going to ask for ID when they stop you for another CRIME or TRAFFIC violation, which they do every day!!! So unless you are Punch Jogging you should be fine

Please show me where in the AZ law it says you will only be asked for your papers if you are committing a crime.

_

mikepegg44 wrote:

tonifig8 wrote:

When you travel abroad and then return why aren't you allow to reenter the country with simply your drivers license?
Do you not understand that if a police officer feels he needs proof of your citizenship he will need more then your driver licenses. Federal Government describes these as - a Birth certificate, pass port, etc..etc.. not a drivers license.
A conservative talk show that I was listening to on tuesday said that if your in a car with more then 6 brown people in it, then that should be seen as suspicious, and should be reason enough to question these people. That is what the right is promoting. I do not have anything against the Feds deporting people, but I do have a problem with this bill and I think I have laid out plenty of facts to support my position and to support the racism in this bill.

You are right, I am required to show a passport. What is wrong with that? Also, I was able to do it from costa rica a few years back, that is enter the US with just a driver's license.

What you see as racism I see as something different. But we just have to agree to disagree. If there is racism and racial profiling in this law, than it will be struck down by the supreme court of either Arizona or the United States. Simple as that. if it isn't, than people need to shut up about the racism, because at that point a bunch of the brightest legal minds in the country will have reviewed it and weighed it against the constitution(s) and given it the go ahead. Seems simple to me, and at the very least this law povokes the US government into doing something because the status quo isn't working.

you might find this interesting for what it's worth

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/ ... _been.html

Kind of a interesting video if anyone has the whole hearing I would love to see it all.

Please remember this the next time you are complaining about all the other laws - like healthcare reform - that the Supreme Court has not stuck down. Follow the fucking law and shut the hell up.... right?

_

aerial wrote:

The way I see it you should be mad at the illegal immigrants ....If they would have shown their passport when they came into the USA you wouldn’t have to worry about being asked for yours, now would you? The Illegal Immigrants are the ones that ruined it for our American citizens of Hispanic decent....so quit with your hatred for your fellow Americans and put the blame where it belongs.....That would be the ones that broke the law...not the law abiding citizens of America.

Even if that were true, would that make it right? Do you think because some people have drugs in their house that your house should be able to be searched at any point without probably cause?

_

Dirtie_Frank wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

i am truly sorry for your friends loss but now put yourself in the shoe of all the innocent people americans have killed in their wars around the world in the name of prosperity ... again - there are people to blame - you are just looking at the easiest ...

Dirtie_Frank wrote:

But Canada is so innocent?

polaris_x wrote:

what the cuss does that have anything to do with it? ... feel free to list all of canada's transgressions and i would probably agree with most of them ... i'm not so wrapped up in some nationalistic pride that i can't see right from wrong ...

It was so easy for you to point out that America has transgressions.

I'm pretty sure, since the law was passed in American, this conversation is about America.

KDH12

aerial wrote:

The way I see it you should be mad at the illegal immigrants ....If they would have shown their passport when they came into the USA you wouldn’t have to worry about being asked for yours, now would you? The Illegal Immigrants are the ones that ruined it for our American citizens of Hispanic decent....so quit with your hatred for your fellow Americans and put the blame where it belongs.....That would be the ones that broke the law...not the law abiding citizens of America.

A lot of immigrants that are illegal here come in legal ways.....

Like a travel or student visa however instead of going back they stay

So they did show a passport to get in and they are still "illegal" a lot of people from African and Muslim countries do this run for the hills

_

FiveB247x wrote:

In terms of immigration, there are very few legitimate reasons for anyone to become a citizen if you are in this scenario. And in terms of America, our policies regarding this issue (working, papers, fees, security, etc) are for the most part done so in retractile ways so that it doesn't give reasons to want to be citizens or become part of our system or legit citizens. And conversely, as American citizens and people making policy, we need to recognize the realities and practicalities of this issue and situation. Whether we want it or not, it's in front of us to deal with. To simply close the border will have terrible results on our economy. To simply target business's who use or work with these people in order to use fines, etc, will only result in bad economic results. My main point is simply there is not a simplistic answer to this issue as we have to take all areas and groups into account.
]

And let's not forget all the immigrants who want to become citizens or at least legal residents but are not allowed or can't afford to. They account for most the undocumented people I know.

Cosmo

Qustion.
What makes an Illegal Immigrant... 'Illegal'?
Is it the method they used to cross the border? Is it because they don't have the proper paperwork? Is it because they don't speak English? Is it because they don't expect minimum wages? What?
Someone... please, explain.
...
And if they were to become 'Legal'... would people finally shut the fuck up about them already?

Dirtie_Frank

Cosmo wrote:

Qustion.
What makes an Illegal Immigrant... 'Illegal'?
Is it the method they used to cross the border? Is it because they don't have the proper paperwork? Is it because they don't speak English? Is it because they don't expect minimum wages? What?
Someone... please, explain.
...
And if they were to become 'Legal'... would people finally shut the fuck up about them already?

Well here is how to become a legal citizen

Generally, there are nine requirements:

An applicant for naturalization must be admitted to the United States as a "lawful permanent resident" commonly referred to as one who possesses "green card" status. There is only one exception to this requirement: If an applicant has served in the U.S. armed forces during war, that person may be naturalized without first becoming a permanent resident if they were in the U.S. upon induction or enlistment into our military.

Continuous residence in the U.S. for at least five years immediately preceding the applicant's filing for naturalization. Continuous residence is not the same thing as physically present here. That is, one must maintain their status as a "legal permanent resident" but not necessarily be physically inside the borders of the U.S. to accomplish that. For example, if one is overseas for a portion of this period, maintaining an address location and paying one's state and federal taxes may help ensure continuity of residence for this requirement. Also, if overseas for anymore than a few months, it may be advisable to obtain a "travel document" prior to departing. This may be done on INS Form I-131. Only three years "continuous residence" are required if the applicant is filing for naturalization based upon marriage.

Actual physical residence (within the state in which the petition is filed) during at least the three months immediately before filing for naturalization is another requirement.

Physical presence within the U.S. for a total of at least one half of the period of required continuous residence. That is, two and a half years for most applicants and one and a half years for spouses of U.S. Citizens.

The ability to read, write and speak ordinary English unless they are physically unable to do so due to a disability such as being blind or deaf, or suffer from a developmental disability or mental impairment. Those over 50 years old on the date of filing who have lived here for a total of at least 20 years after admission as a permanent resident and those who are over 55 and have been legal permanent residents for at least 15 years are also exempt from this requirement.

A basic understanding the fundamentals of U.S. history and government.

Good moral character and an affinity for the principles of the U.S. Constitution.

Continuous residence (but not necessarily physical presence) in the U.S. from the date of filing the naturalization application up to the date of being sworn in as a citizen.

Applicants should be at least 18 years of age at the time of filing. Certain exceptions exist, however, for the children of other permanent residents who are seeking naturalization.

FiveB247x

It's almost funny but in such a sad way the these are included. We could probably get rid of about one-third or one-half of our current population (legal or illegal) based on these three alone..haha

Dirtie_Frank wrote:

The ability to read, write and speak ordinary English unless they are physically unable to do so due to a disability such as being blind or deaf, or suffer from a developmental disability or mental impairment. Those over 50 years old on the date of filing who have lived here for a total of at least 20 years after admission as a permanent resident and those who are over 55 and have been legal permanent residents for at least 15 years are also exempt from this requirement.

A basic understanding the fundamentals of U.S. history and government.

Good moral character and an affinity for the principles of the U.S. Constitution.

WaveCameCrashin

FiveB247x wrote:

Again, entitlement because you or your ancestors were born here.. you equate this too "success in life"? Really?

Maybe we should deport deadbeats who don't pay their debts or homeless people who eat up public funds as well? Where does the entitlement exactly stop? Say when...

mikepegg44 wrote:

And do not, under any circumstances try to give someone you don't know advice about where they work based on an internet post. That is ridiculous. I love my job, and I want to keep it, which is why health care COSTS need to be handled much more than just giving everyone health INSURANCE. I understand the need for public health, immunization programs, std and hiv control and testing, TB, etc. But I certainly don't think it is the responsibility of the people of the United states to pay for someone from ANOTHER COUNTRIES health care. That has nothing to do with being burnt out at my job asshole, it has to do with being realistic and thining our limited resources are better served when given to the people of this country. Sorry if that conflicts with the ridiculous view that everyone should get everything paid for by people who have been successful in life.

I find it :? that you have as your sig conservative gov. but nothing you ever post is anything even close to conservatism. in fact it's the complete opposite.

OutOfBreath

prfctlefts wrote:

I find it :? that you have as your sig conservative gov. but nothing you ever post is anything even close to conservatism. in fact it's the complete opposite.

You do notice that he has enlargened some of the letters, so if you read only them, it says CON MEN?

Peace
Dan

Godfather.

buon viaggio!

Godfather.

polaris_x

Godfather. wrote:

so that makes it ok ? your tit for tat comment is weak.

Godfather.

with all due respect ... it may appear weak to you simply because you don't understand the meaning of it ...

Godfather.

Cosmo wrote:

Qustion.
What makes an Illegal Immigrant... 'Illegal'?
Is it the method they used to cross the border? Is it because they don't have the proper paperwork? Is it because they don't speak English? Is it because they don't expect minimum wages? What?
Someone... please, explain.
...
And if they were to become 'Legal'... would people finally shut the fuck up about them already?

your kidding right ? try and walk across any border with out the proper paper work and see what happens
and about that time you will find out what a Illegal Immigrant is and it's meaning

Godfather.

Jason P

Cosmo wrote:

Qustion.
What makes an Illegal Immigrant... 'Illegal'?
Is it the method they used to cross the border? Is it because they don't have the proper paperwork? Is it because they don't speak English? Is it because they don't expect minimum wages? What?
Someone... please, explain.
...
And if they were to become 'Legal'... would people finally shut the fuck up about them already?

"Illegal immigration is the movement of people across national borders in a way that violates the immigration laws of the destination country." That's a total wiki-answer for you but I think it's a pretty good one.

FiveB247x

Easier to see now: CONservative governMENt

Also, and to be direct and clear to your assumption, this is not "conservative" or "liberal" based upon how you typically define these terms on the board, but in the actual political and theoretical definitions. The Dems aren't "liberal" nor are the Reps "conservative" in our government.

prfctlefts wrote:

I find it :? that you have as your sig conservative gov. but nothing you ever post is anything even close to conservatism. in fact it's the complete opposite.

Dirtie_Frank

Another problem caused by illeagal immigration.

We all just filled out a census (or should have) when that is calculated they know how much funding/personnel are need for fire, police, schools, etc. So, for example, when you have a town whose population from the census says 5000 people, but in reality it has 10,000. The resources for that town are dramatically decreased.