It's Time to Boycott Arizona

[MsDemeanor]

Originally Posted by Kobi

It is always amusing how if you dont not ascribe to the knee jerk bleeding heart liberal stance , one is subject to ridicule and rudeness. Im used to it here.

Can you explain how the expression "knee jerk" applies to this conversation? The people posting here have done their homework, they've researched the facts, and some of them have lived the topic. If having compassion makes us bleeding hearts, so be it. That's so very preferable to being heartless.

Originally Posted by Kobi

It does not diminsh the fact that illegal workers diminish the wages of Americans....why pay more for American workers when we can go get illegal day laborers for a mere fraction of a living wage. It also undermines our overall standard of living. But, why focus on those facts when we can resort to how Americans dont want to do real labor.

Migrant workers are a backbone of our economy. Businesses hire them and pay them less because those workers have no protection. They can be subjected to harsh conditions and underpaid (or not paid at all), while the business can either keep prices down or pocket the additional money that they're not paying in wages and benefits and for safe working conditions. If you're bothered by immigrant workers, you should be talking to your representatives about cracking down on the businesses that hire them.

Americans do real labor and lots of it; backbreaking gutwretching labor. The businesses that are allowed to get away with it are the problem. Do you think for one minute that the greedy heartless bastard that owns the deadly WV coal mines wouldn't hire migrant workers for less pay if he thought that he could get away with it?

Originally Posted by Kobi

Funny, how our economy is in the tank and I see more Americans doing landscaping and general labor work this year then ever. A job is a job, and our priority should be to citizens and those here legally.

Those folks are probably doing the work under the table, not paying taxes on their earnings and illegally subsidizing their unemployment benefits. If they get sick, they're likely using the emergency room for health care, since unemployment benefits aren't enough to pay COBRA. Are you angry that these people aren't paying in to the system while they are using expensive medical services, or is it okay since they're, you know, white and all.

I also gotta point out how racist your comment is. You see "more Americans"? I think you mean "more folks who's skin ain't brown". You can't tell from driving by a work site who is and isn't an American. You'd be the kind of person who would assume that the guy doing my yard work is "illegal" because he's brown. Wrong. He's got a blue passport.

Originally Posted by Kobi

Companies can use H2 visas and get workers here legally to do "scut work". One does not have to resort to illegal people.

What does the work done by medical residency students have to do with the conversation.?

Originally Posted by Kobi

But, as I said, it is easier for knee jerk liberals to be profane and rude then to inject any rhyme or reason into the situation. Preying on emotions rather than facts is sad but customary.

We're all still eagerly awaiting your injection of facts in to the conversation.

[Linus]

Originally Posted by MsDemeanor

What does the work done by medical residency students have to do with the conversation.?

The H-2 Visa is for temporary and seasonal workers: http://www.usvisa.com/h-2_visa.shtml

I believe it was designed to allow and make it easier for Mexican (I believe it was targeted as part of NAFTA) workers to do seasonal farm work, I believe the costs associated with getting it are too hire for farms to get. Additionally, since it's a one-time only, it's not a truly viable visa.

[MsDemeanor]

Originally Posted by Linus

The H-2 Visa is for temporary and seasonal workers: http://www.usvisa.com/h-2_visa.shtml

I believe it was designed to allow and make it easier for Mexican (I believe it was targeted as part of NAFTA) workers to do seasonal farm work, I believe the costs associated with getting it are too hire for farms to get. Additionally, since it's a one-time only, it's not a truly viable visa.

Linus, I was responding to:
Companies can use H2 visas and get workers here legally to do "scut work".
"Scut work" is the trivial crap that medical students have to do. I figure that if one is going to put out slang expressions in quotes, one should know what the quoted expression means.

[Kobi]

Again, just because you dont like my views, does not give you the right to be disagreeable.

Nor does disagreeing with you have anything to do with racism. It doesnt matter if you are brown, black, yellow, white or purple. There are laws in this country about immigration for a reason. To decide arbitrarily that one will circumvent those laws because it suits one does not make it acceptable. Just as it would not be acceptable to say murder is ok. You cannot pick and choose which laws you adhere to.

But then again, it is easier to just pull out the race card and feed on emotions than it is to deal with the people deliberately and willfully breaking the law.

H2 workers have nothing to do with medical residency students. H2 workers here in my area are supermarket workers, hotel workers, laborers etc. And thats a fact.

Just because I see things differently doesnt mean I am not uneducated or ill informed. Again, that is liberal rhetoric to divert attention from the matter at hand by knitpicking every detail for which there is evidence for both points of view. But then again, it serves your purpose to claim superior knowledge without having a clue about what my history or experience might be. Self serving I guess.

And that is what a knee jerk liberal is. Saying you have the only truth and your views, being more compassionate must be right, and you must quell anyone who dares to speak a different truth because it doesnt fit the program.

One can have compassion and also be reasonable and logical. But, again, it doesnt fit the liberal agenda to have such people speak out.

Originally Posted by MsDemeanor

Can you explain how the expression "knee jerk" applies to this conversation? The people posting here have done their homework, they've researched the facts, and some of them have lived the topic. If having compassion makes us bleeding hearts, so be it. That's so very preferable to being heartless.

Migrant workers are a backbone of our economy. Businesses hire them and pay them less because those workers have no protection. They can be subjected to harsh conditions and underpaid (or not paid at all), while the business can either keep prices down or pocket the additional money that they're not paying in wages and benefits and for safe working conditions. If you're bothered by immigrant workers, you should be talking to your representatives about cracking down on the businesses that hire them.

Those folks are probably doing the work under the table, not paying taxes on their earnings and illegally subsidizing their unemployment benefits. If they get sick, they're likely using the emergency room for health care, since unemployment benefits aren't enough to pay COBRA. Are you angry that these people aren't paying in to the system while they are using expensive medical services, or is it okay since they're, you know, white and all.

I also gotta point out how racist your comment is. You see "more Americans"? I think you mean "more folks who's skin ain't brown". You can't tell from driving by a work site who is and isn't an American. You'd be the kind of person who would assume that the guy doing my yard work is "illegal" because he's brown. Wrong. He's got a blue passport.
What does the work done by medical residency students have to do with the conversation.?

We're all still eagerly awaiting your injection of facts in to the conversation.

[SuperFemme]

the law in AZ is unconstitutional. that means it affects us all. it is the chipping away of our rights little by little.

at the end of the day, i feel safer knowing who doesn't like my people than having them hide in the shadows.

wink wink.

[The_Lady_Snow]

Last time I checked no laws were being passed to target and single out the purple people of Crayola land...

A law DID PASS targeting one specific type of looking kind of peoples...

It's not irish undocumented workers

It's not the Canadian undocumented workers

It's not the Russian undocumented workers

It's those pesky gosh darn latinos, who keep crossing over taking all those Wall Street jobs and sending their kids to those gosh darn Ivy League Schools..

All my people, (who do not identify with the purple people who DON'T EXIST) are wet backs, I am, my kids are first generation Americanos...

I was an undocumented problem for this country taking your jobs till the age of 13 when I got my green card...


I am still taking your jobs.

Now you tell me why the fuck I get to have a big target on my fucking back?

I bet I know more about your History than you (general btw).


So you see this isn't a liberal knee jerk reaction, YOU HAVE NO CLUE WHAT WE GO THROUGH.. HOW WE HIDE... HOW SCARED WE GROW UP...

So yeah

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Again, just because you dont like my views, does not give you the right to be disagreeable.

Nor does disagreeing with you have anything to do with racism. It doesnt matter if you are brown, black, yellow, white or purple. There are laws in this country about immigration for a reason. To decide arbitrarily that one will circumvent those laws because it suits one does not make it acceptable. Just as it would not be acceptable to say murder is ok. You cannot pick and choose which laws you adhere to.

But then again, it is easier to just pull out the race card and feed on emotions than it is to deal with the people deliberately and willfully breaking the law.

H2 workers have nothing to do with medical residency students. H2 workers here in my area are supermarket workers, hotel workers, laborers etc. And thats a fact.

Just because I see things differently doesnt mean I am not uneducated or ill informed. Again, that is liberal rhetoric to divert attention from the matter at hand by knitpicking every detail for which there is evidence for both points of view. But then again, it serves your purpose to claim superior knowledge without having a clue about what my history or experience might be. Self serving I guess.

And that is what a knee jerk liberal is. Saying you have the only truth and your views, being more compassionate must be right, and you must quell anyone who dares to speak a different truth because it doesnt fit the program.

One can have compassion and also be reasonable and logical. But, again, it doesnt fit the liberal agenda to have such people speak out.

So I just thanked your post for you being the second person to tell me on this site that I am using my race card

Congratfuckinglations


I did not realize speaking about my experience was me throwing my fucking race like it's a god damn Pokemon Card......

[apretty]

Originally Posted by Kobi

Again, just because you dont like my views, does not give you the right to be disagreeable.

what you consider 'disagreeable' most everyone else (in this conversation) considers 'logical, linear thought' --that's about perception.

Originally Posted by Kobi

Nor does disagreeing with you have anything to do with racism. It doesnt matter if you are brown, black, yellow, white or purple. There are laws in this country about immigration for a reason. To decide arbitrarily that one will circumvent those laws because it suits one does not make it acceptable. Just as it would not be acceptable to say murder is ok. You cannot pick and choose which laws you adhere to.

before there were 'immigration laws' there was scapegoating--for the bible tells me so: leviticus chapter 16

link: http://scriptures.lds.org/en/lev/16/21-22#21

from reference.com:

scapegoat


In the Old Testament, a goat that was symbolically burdened with the sins of the people and then killed on Yom Kippur to rid Jerusalem of its iniquities. Similar rituals were held elsewhere in the ancient world to transfer guilt or blame. In ancient Greece, human scapegoats were beaten and driven out of cities to mitigate calamities. In early Roman law, an innocent person was allowed to assume the penalty of another; Christianity reflects this notion in its belief that Jesus died to atone for the sins of mankind.

Originally Posted by Kobi

But then again, it is easier to just pull out the race card and feed on emotions than it is to deal with the people deliberately and willfully breaking the law.

it's been proven and i can find a source if you'd like that racists are frequent users of the term, 'race card'. additionally, hitler was also within the law when he began to (and continued to) exterminate Jews in nazi germany. which brings up an interesting related bit of information: you do realize that the man (russell pearce) behind much of the wording and passage of the bill has neo-nazi ties, right? does that make you uncomfortable? that makes me uncomfortable.

(below) that guy on the right is pearce, the one on the left is locally known neo-nazi, JT ready.



JT Ready at a Nazi rally: (2nd from right)

Originally Posted by Kobi

Just because I see things differently doesnt mean I am not uneducated or ill informed. Again, that is liberal rhetoric to divert attention from the matter at hand by knitpicking every detail for which there is evidence for both points of view. But then again, it serves your purpose to claim superior knowledge without having a clue about what my history or experience might be. Self serving I guess.

you can see things differently, or you could also invest some time in discovering what is really going on. (and not every person that disagrees with you is a "liberal")

Originally Posted by Kobi

And that is what a knee jerk liberal is. Saying you have the only truth and your views, being more compassionate must be right, and you must quell anyone who dares to speak a different truth because it doesnt fit the program.

self-examination is rad.

Originally Posted by Kobi

One can have compassion and also be reasonable and logical. But, again, it doesnt fit the liberal agenda to have such people speak out.

who's a liberal?

i can have compassion for people and still think they're ignorant, intolerant racists:

i see more people pro SB1070 and pro a ban on ethnic studies (which you don't even mention) as a vehicle to further their racist agenda--these aren't people that were "against" racism in any way, prior to the bill--they're just now able to pretend that they hate brown people because they're "illegal" and they're now able to thinly veil their racism behind a totally fascist law that once-again targets brown people. (read: racists have been empowered by this law which totally sucks. and by racists in arizona i mean gun-carrying, no license-requiring guns allowed in bars, RACISTS.)

[firie]

Originally Posted by Kobi

There are laws in this country about immigration for a reason. To decide arbitrarily that one will circumvent those laws because it suits one does not make it acceptable. Just as it would not be acceptable to say murder is ok. You cannot pick and choose which laws you adhere to.

Kobi,

With all due respect, I have to note that I am befuddled by this line of reasoning, and because it is so often used in arguments about immigration. There was a conversation about this in this thread pages below, and so I must say what I said to that poster (was it you? I apologize if it was and so am therefore repeating myself to you again) was this:

Some laws are stupid. Some laws are quite racist. Some laws are quite oppressive (down right evil, really), and so therefore are absolutely meant to be challenged and broken.

And with all due respect, some of us very much do pick and choose the laws we adhere to, and even further, sometimes, even our own lawmakers and law "enforcers," if you will, pay no mind to them either.

I am not going to argue what others have said very well already, and really have a feeling, you could care quite less what I have to say on the matter of immigration and racism anyway.

But I just can't, in my anally neurotic way, see any logic to the above, and even more so when it's used to defend oppressing one's human rights. And lastly, I happen to actually quite love the fact that those who come here, to the US, from where ever, come here, because they make the country more interesting, and well, a little bit more enjoyable, in the beauty of neat and diverse people that it is. I will pay taxes gleefully (hell, if I had ten billion I would pay that up front for completely open borders free from harassment and overzealous INS agents toting egos and guns) for the serenity and peace of people passing peacefully to and fro from nation to nation, because I don't want any one to suffer, I like a global party, and think there is enough here on the planet to easily go around, if rationed a little less selfishly.

The "we must follow the law" argument just doesn't fly in any way to me; however, because we break/ignore laws all the goddamn time:


In Ohio the following laws exist:

if you ignore an orator on Decoration Day to such an extent as to publicly play croquet or pitch horseshoes within one mile of the speakers stand, you can be fined $25.

it is illegal to get a fish drunk.

it is illegal to hunt for whales on Sunday. (Surely it's illegal to hunt whales full stop?)

In Alaska, the following laws apply to moose:

a moose may not be viewed from an aeroplane.

it is illegal to give alcoholic beverages to a moose.

it is an offence to push a live moose out of a moving aeroplane.

In Texas the following laws apply:

it is illegal to take more than three sips of beer whilst standing.

the entire Encyclopaedia Britannica is also banned, as it contains a formula for making beer at home.

a new anti crime law has been introduced, requiring criminals to give their intended victims 24 hour notice, either orally or in writing to explain the nature of the crime.

In Pennsylvania the following laws apply:

Because of the farmers Anti-automobile society, these are some of the rules of the road:

Automobiles travelling on country roads at night must send up an rocket every mile, then wait ten minutes for the road to clear.

If a driver sees a team of horses, they are to pull to the side of the road, and cover their machine with a blanket or dust cover that has been painted to blend into the scenery.

In the event that a horse refuses to pass a car on the road, the owner of the car must take their car apart and conceal the parts in nearby foliage.

In Alabama it is illegal to wear a fake moustache that causes laughter in church.

In Jasper, Alabama, it is illegal for a husband to beat his wife with a stick larger in diameter than his thumb.

In Arizone it is illegal for donkeys to sleep in bathtubs.

Also from Arizona, if a person is caught stealing soap, they must wash themselves until it is all used up.

In California, it is illegal to ride a bicycle in a swimming pool.

In L.A., it is an offence to lick a toad. Apparently, this is because people were getting high off them! (How!??)

In New England, fire engines are not allowed to exceed 25mph - strangely, this includes the journey to the fire!

In Devon (yes there is a place called Devon in the US), it is illegal to walk backwards after sunset.

In Hartford, it is considered an offense to cross the road on your hands.

In Cleveland it is illegal to drive whilst sitting on another persons lap.

In New Jersey you can be arrested for slurping soup in public.

Zoin city, Illinois, has a law that states that you cannot make faces at anyone.

A Kentucky law states that burglary can only be committed at night.

Fishing from the back of any animal is illegal in Idaho.

In Sheridan, Wyoming, a policeman can bite a barking dog, in order to quiet him.

Citizens in New York may not greet each other by putting ones thumb to the nose and wriggling the fingers.

When you pass a cow in Pine Island, Minnesota it is illegal not to tip your hat.

Georgia has a law prohibiting people from saying ‘oh boy’ in public.

In Atlanta its illegal to tie a giraffe to a telephone pole or lamppost.

In Hawaii it is illegal to insert pennies into your ear.

It is illegal in Idaho for a man to give his sweetheart a box of chocolates that weighs less than 50 pounds.

Women in Joliet, Illinois, can be arrested for trying on more than six dresses in one store.

In Chicago it is illegal to eat in an establishment that is on fire.

In Winnetka, Illinois, theatre managers can kick out any patron who has ‘odorous feet’.

In Lawrence, Kansas, it is forbidden for anyone to carry bees in their hat, whilst on the city streets.

In McLough, Kansas, it is against the law to wash your false teeth in a public drinking fountain.

In Natoma, Kansas, it is illegal to practise knife throwing at men wearing striped suits.

In Lexington, Kentucky, it is against the law to carry an ice cream cone in your pocket.

In Owensboro, Kentucky, it is illegal for a woman to buy a new hat without her husband trying it on first.

In Canton, Mississippi, it is illegal to kill a squirrel with a gun whilst in a courtroom.

Any city in Missouri can levy a tax to support a band, as long as the mayor plays piccolo and each band member can eat peas with a knife.

In Greene, New York, it is illegal to eat peanuts and walk backwards down a street, whilst a concert is on.

In North Carolina it is illegal to use elephants to plough cotton fields.

It’s illegal in Oklahoma to get a fish drunk.

In Seattle, goldfish can ride the city buses in bowls, but only if they keep still.

It is illegal in Maine to step out of a plane, whilst it is in flight.

In Florida, you can be fined to fall asleep under a hair dryer, and so can the salon owner.

Also in Florida, if an elephant is left tied to an parking meter, the parking fee has to be paid, just as it would be for a vehicle.

Again in Florida, it is illegal to have sexual relations with a porcupine.

In New York, you need a license to use a clothesline outdoors.

In Minnesota, you may not cross state lines with a duck on top of your head.

In Carmel, New York, it is illegal for a man to go outside if his jacket and trousers do not match.

In Baltimore, it is illegal to throw bales of hay out of a second storey window, within the city limits.

Also in Baltimore, it is illegal to take a lion to the movies.

The state of Washington has passed a law stating that it is illegal to paint polka dots on the American flag.

In Conneticut, for a pickle to be officially be considered a pickle, it must bounce.

In Bexley, Ohio, it is prohibited to install or use slot machines in outhouses.

In Harthahorne city, Oklahoma, it is unlawful to put any hypnotised person I an display window.

In Clawson, Michigan, there is a law that makes it LEGAL for a farmer to sleep with his animals.

In Gary, Indiana, persons are prohibited from attending a movie theatre or riding an street car within four hours of eating garlic.

In California, animals are banned from mating publicly within 1,500ft of a pub, school or place of worship.

In Kentucky, no female is allowed to appear in a bathing suit on a highway unless she is escorted by at least two police officers, or armed with a club.

In Russel, Kansas, it is against the law to have an musical car horn.

It is illegal to hum in public on Sundays in Cicero, Illinois.

In Clinton county, Ohio, there is a fine for anyone caught leaning against an public building.

In Kenosha , Wisconsin it is illegal to have an erection in public. Even if you have clothes on.

In Kansas it is illegal to swim with a polka dotted bathing suit before 12:00 noon.

[Linus]

Some thoughts about the cost of "illegal immigrants" (undocumented workers is more accurate): http://cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html <-- this study indicates both the extra $$$ the undocumented workers bring in as well as areas where they take more. I think what was interesting was this:

Because both their income and tax compliance would rise, we estimate that under the most likely scenario the average illegal alien household would pay 77 percent ($3,200) more a year in federal taxes once legalized. While not enough to offset the 118 percent ($8,200) per household increase in costs that would come with legalization, amnesty would significantly increase both the average income and tax payments of illegal aliens.

I can certainly see the benefit of not becoming documented. To say that they should return home and put efforts there, I do not think that's realistic. In my last work related visit to Mexico City (Santa Fe to be specific), I saw a billboard -- by one of the local cartels -- advertising work with full benefits (including education for kids). The reality is that the country -- from what I saw and read in the local english papers (not sure how accurate they were) -- or at least the gov't continues a fairly corrupt and the only solution would be civil war. This could mean a whole family being killed. Compare this to coming to the US where the worst is deportation and/or jail.

I dunno. I can see why it's more appealing to come here. Additionally, CIS does point out that when the first "settlers" (read: illegal immigrants) landed in the US there was no gov't and any gov't was rather small and localized. If the gov't was like what exists today back then, I can bet that many wouldn't be allowed to stay.

Originally Posted by Kobi

Funny, how our economy is in the tank and I see more Americans doing landscaping and general labor work this year then ever. A job is a job, and our priority should be to citizens and those here legally.

I don't know if removing the undocumented would resolve the work scenario. Many of the jobs that are maintained/held by undocumented workers are below minimum wage, have no benefits and are difficult. It's not to say that a US citizen wouldn't be able to do to the work, I can bet that the company wouldn't last long without someone suing them for their wages being too low, which in turn, would likely cause it to close.

Companies can use H2 visas and get workers here legally to do "scut work". One does not have to resort to illegal people..

Umm.. My company is applying for an H1-B for me. They got me an L1-B previously. That one cost the company $20K. I have no idea how much it will cost to get the H1-B (and eventual green card) but the reality is that it's not as cheap or easy to get those visas. Additionally, it will force companies to pay -- at minimum -- minimum wage. For some, this would defeat the benefit of having a worker from the South (which seems to be the most concern -- few seemed concerned "aboot" all them Canadians staying here).

I think it's myopic for any nation to say that the solution to everything is to "kick out the illegals!". That will not resolve issues and will actually make things worse.



You can read the full CIS study here: http://www.cis.org/node/54

[UofMfan]

Originally Posted by Kobi

It is always amusing how if you dont not ascribe to the knee jerk bleeding heart liberal stance , one is subject to ridicule and rudeness. Im used to it here.

It does not diminsh the fact that illegal workers diminish the wages of Americans....why pay more for American workers when we can go get illegal day laborers for a mere fraction of a living wage. It also undermines our overall standard of living. But, why focus on those facts when we can resort to how Americans dont want to do real labor.

Funny, how our economy is in the tank and I see more Americans doing landscaping and general labor work this year then ever. A job is a job, and our priority should be to citizens and those here legally.

Companies can use H2 visas and get workers here legally to do "scut work". One does not have to resort to illegal people.

But, as I said, it is easier for knee jerk liberals to be profane and rude then to inject any rhyme or reason into the situation. Preying on emotions rather than facts is sad but customary.

I have to ask, do you have any idea how many H2 visas are allotted yearly?

Do you read credible and accredited economist, one who happens to have a Nobel Price in his home, state the fact that immigration, documented or undocumented actually helps the US economy?

And it helps US economy and those good ole US entrepreneurs to pay undocumented workers less. It allows those business owners to get more profits and pay less taxes. yay for them!

As a MEMBER of this community I am going to kindly ask you to stop using the term "illegal immigrant", it is racist and insulting.

I suppose you are not a "knee Jerk Liberal", another term I see you throw around in an attempt to incite and insult.

If you want to have a civil, intelligent, informed conversation, then do so. But I don't see you doing this right now. And no, it is not because you disagree with me, it is because of the way you throw racist terms around as if you had every right. Your privilege, and so much more, is showing.

[SuperFemme]

I like this kid. A lot.

[SuperFemme]

How losing undocumented workers is working out for AZ so far....

[The_Lady_Snow]

I am Mexican Pull Me Over (The OFFICIAL Sticker) Vamos Mexico!!! Our dignity and pride will not be beaten; we are Aztec warriors and will continue to march ahead and fight the fight against bigotry and ignorance!! Viva Mexico!!



http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pi...5915155?ref=ts

[Kobi]

dread,

Thank you. Your argument is one I can listen to. I can see the potential pitfalls in such legislation and why people would be upset about it.

Nonetheless, immigration reform needs to start somewhere and if the feds wont tackle the issue, the affected states have to develop their own plans. Maybe Arizona isnt the best standard but it is a starting place to develop something workable.

I have not said anything about immigrants and social services. Without proper documentation people are not able to get benefits of any kind at least in this state. So nothing was said about anyone sucking up welfare services. Health services are used by those without insurance which then ends up costing taxpayers more to cover the expenses. Educational services averaging over 12,000 per year per student adds up countrywide and again falls on taxpayers.

Perhaps people used to come here "to take our jobs". Now we export them....its cheaper to do so. From my labor union days, I can tell you that companies tried to placate workers by suggesting a two tier system of payments and benefits.....one for veterans and one for newbies. It was a ploy to cut expenses and wages with the workers backing. It was a terrible labor problem and we are seeing the fallout of such thinking these days. Auto workers making less than half what they are used to just to have jobs or these jobs will go overseas as well. This is not an immigration problem per se, it is an economic strategy problem fueled by workers willing to take less which lowers the standard of living for most people in the long run especially in an economic downturn.

And it is not just laborers. Financial institutions are looking to hire folks from Japan and China who are willing to work for less in corporate offices. The science industries are looking for foreign workers who are better suited to their businesses due to foreign emphasis on math and science skills as well as economics.

I had to chuckle at your political history of the our effects on other countries. It's kind of ironic how we can do so many bad things to peoples respective homelands but people still want to flock to this country. Strange thing irony.

As for people staying in their own countries and fighting for change.....we have done it here. The civil rights/gay rights movements meant conflict and hardship and death but it lead to changes. It is amazing what people can accomplish when they band together. And we were fighting an economic machine and the cia as well. It is not geopolitical niavete. It is a belief in how people who band together can force change to occur in spite of the economic machine and the cia. Otherwise we are all just pawns in a game, tossed about as others see fit. I refuse to believe any humans are that powerless as a whole.

I know immigration policy is a complex issue with strong emotional overtones. I just dont adhere to rhethoric on either side of the coin. Because for every argument, there is always another explanation, interpretation, point of view and study to support views one way or another. What made and makes this country great is the diverse points of view.

[Corkey]

Kobi, you aren't getting it, it is UN Constitutional. The federal government is the only entity that has the authority to make and enforce immigration reform. It is not a states right. What this law did was to usurp federal law, it won't pass muster. Please go back and read the bill of rights and the rest of the amendments, I do believe it is the 14th amendment.

[The_Lady_Snow]

Originally Posted by Kobi

dread,

Thank you. Your argument is one I can listen to. I can see the potential pitfalls in such legislation and why people would be upset about it.

Nonetheless, immigration reform needs to start somewhere and if the feds wont tackle the issue, the affected states have to develop their own plans. Maybe Arizona isnt the best standard but it is a starting place to develop something workable.

I have not said anything about immigrants and social services. Without proper documentation people are not able to get benefits of any kind at least in this state. So nothing was said about anyone sucking up welfare services. Health services are used by those without insurance which then ends up costing taxpayers more to cover the expenses. Educational services averaging over 12,000 per year per student adds up countrywide and again falls on taxpayers.

Perhaps people used to come here "to take our jobs". Now we export them....its cheaper to do so. From my labor union days, I can tell you that companies tried to placate workers by suggesting a two tier system of payments and benefits.....one for veterans and one for newbies. It was a ploy to cut expenses and wages with the workers backing. It was a terrible labor problem and we are seeing the fallout of such thinking these days. Auto workers making less than half what they are used to just to have jobs or these jobs will go overseas as well. This is not an immigration problem per se, it is an economic strategy problem fueled by workers willing to take less which lowers the standard of living for most people in the long run especially in an economic downturn.

And it is not just laborers. Financial institutions are looking to hire folks from Japan and China who are willing to work for less in corporate offices. The science industries are looking for foreign workers who are better suited to their businesses due to foreign emphasis on math and science skills as well as economics.

I had to chuckle at your political history of the our effects on other countries. It's kind of ironic how we can do so many bad things to peoples respective homelands but people still want to flock to this country. Strange thing irony.

As for people staying in their own countries and fighting for change.....we have done it here. The civil rights/gay rights movements meant conflict and hardship and death but it lead to changes. It is amazing what people can accomplish when they band together. And we were fighting an economic machine and the cia as well. It is not geopolitical niavete. It is a belief in how people who band together can force change to occur in spite of the economic machine and the cia. Otherwise we are all just pawns in a game, tossed about as others see fit. I refuse to believe any humans are that powerless as a whole.

I know immigration policy is a complex issue with strong emotional overtones. I just dont adhere to rhethoric on either side of the coin. Because for every argument, there is always another explanation, interpretation, point of view and study to support views one way or another. What made and makes this country great is the diverse points of view.

Yes you do....

You stated so in your original post...

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by Kobi

dread,

Thank you. Your argument is one I can listen to. I can see the potential pitfalls in such legislation and why people would be upset about it.

Nonetheless, immigration reform needs to start somewhere and if the feds wont tackle the issue, the affected states have to develop their own plans. Maybe Arizona isnt the best standard but it is a starting place to develop something workable.

I have not said anything about immigrants and social services. Without proper documentation people are not able to get benefits of any kind at least in this state. So nothing was said about anyone sucking up welfare services. Health services are used by those without insurance which then ends up costing taxpayers more to cover the expenses. Educational services averaging over 12,000 per year per student adds up countrywide and again falls on taxpayers.

Perhaps people used to come here "to take our jobs". Now we export them....its cheaper to do so. From my labor union days, I can tell you that companies tried to placate workers by suggesting a two tier system of payments and benefits.....one for veterans and one for newbies. It was a ploy to cut expenses and wages with the workers backing. It was a terrible labor problem and we are seeing the fallout of such thinking these days. Auto workers making less than half what they are used to just to have jobs or these jobs will go overseas as well. This is not an immigration problem per se, it is an economic strategy problem fueled by workers willing to take less which lowers the standard of living for most people in the long run especially in an economic downturn.

And it is not just laborers. Financial institutions are looking to hire folks from Japan and China who are willing to work for less in corporate offices. The science industries are looking for foreign workers who are better suited to their businesses due to foreign emphasis on math and science skills as well as economics.

I had to chuckle at your political history of the our effects on other countries. It's kind of ironic how we can do so many bad things to peoples respective homelands but people still want to flock to this country. Strange thing irony.

As for people staying in their own countries and fighting for change.....we have done it here. The civil rights/gay rights movements meant conflict and hardship and death but it lead to changes. It is amazing what people can accomplish when they band together. And we were fighting an economic machine and the cia as well. It is not geopolitical niavete. It is a belief in how people who band together can force change to occur in spite of the economic machine and the cia. Otherwise we are all just pawns in a game, tossed about as others see fit. I refuse to believe any humans are that powerless as a whole.

I know immigration policy is a complex issue with strong emotional overtones. I just dont adhere to rhethoric on either side of the coin. Because for every argument, there is always another explanation, interpretation, point of view and study to support views one way or another. What made and makes this country great is the diverse points of view.

The idea that a law that is unconstitutional in nature and allows US citizens with skin color other than white to be asked for documentation for entry into the US is just plain bigoted. This is not any way to begin any sort of immigration reform! Not even close! NADA!!!

Yes, there are problems with immigration policy and what goes on our borders. Drug trafficking, kidnapping and other crimes against people are not something I support at all. Yet, it is the job of the federal government to enact immigration law and enforce it. States (and other municipalities) doing this period is unconstitutional, period. There are reasons the constitution calls for this.

I have feelings for those immigrants that have done all of the necessary legal requirements to enter the US in all of this. Yet, it is so clear that corporate and big agri-business are the real culprits here. And frankly, they have a lot of blood on their hands with the treatment of illegal workers being brought here in inhumane ways to work for shit wages and no benefits.

When will people take off the class blinders and get why people are so desperate to take these kinds of chances in order to feed their families? And that the millions of undocumented immigrants here today have really been indentured servants (remember this phrase from history?) based upon racism. Just the fact of the differences between the feelings US citizens have about the northern and southern borders of the US tell us it is racist!

Look at the parallels between indentured servant contracts during US colonial times (and other periods in our history) and what goes on now!

Immigration reform will have to grant amnesty and a path to citizenship for those already here that are undocumented. There is no way that over 12million people can be displaced and deported! Isn’t going to happen (and should not). It is just time to see this and do it! And develop sane immigration policies at the federal level that must be observed by every state. Then, the tax base widens, crime decreases, etc.


An indentured servant was a worker, typically a laborer or tradesman, under contract to an employer for a fixed period of time..........

Companies that hire illegals do this all of the time.... they are at the heart of this problem and have been getting away with this for many years! And we have paid less for produce and service off the backs of what are really people enslaved by a form of indentured service!!!


http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.c...migrants3.html


It just makes me crazy to hear that anything like the AZ law is in any form immigration reform. It isn't, it is racism in action and an insult to the Constitition of this country which many non-white people have lost their lioves fighting for along with whites. All of which have immigrant roots with one exception only- Native Americans. Oh, and there is a hell of a lot to discuss about this in terms of border states like CA that were part of Mexico at one time.

Take your blinders off!

[dreadgeek]

Originally Posted by Kobi

[FONT="Comic Sans MS"][SIZE="3"][COLOR="Navy"]dread,

Thank you. Your argument is one I can listen to. I can see the potential pitfalls in such legislation and why people would be upset about it.

Nonetheless, immigration reform needs to start somewhere and if the feds wont tackle the issue, the affected states have to develop their own plans. Maybe Arizona isnt the best standard but it is a starting place to develop something workable.

Okay then, it would appear you are far more sanguine about American citizens being treated as criminals when they are not for no other reason than that their genetics make them stand out from the majority population than I am. The Arizona law is no more a good starting place as Plessey v. Ferguson was a good start in making America a place of more equal opportunity and for much the same reasons.

I have not said anything about immigrants and social services. Without proper documentation people are not able to get benefits of any kind at least in this state. So nothing was said about anyone sucking up welfare services. Health services are used by those without insurance which then ends up costing taxpayers more to cover the expenses. Educational services averaging over 12,000 per year per student adds up countrywide and again falls on taxpayers.

So you didn't say the following?

Illegal immigrations costs us taxpayers billions and billions a year in services i.e. education and health care plus immigration costs of housing illegals awaiting deportation hearings and providing them with legal representation to name just a few.

Both education and health care count as social services.

Perhaps people used to come here "to take our jobs". Now we export them....its cheaper to do so. From my labor union days, I can tell you that companies tried to placate workers by suggesting a two tier system of payments and benefits.....one for veterans and one for newbies. It was a ploy to cut expenses and wages with the workers backing. It was a terrible labor problem and we are seeing the fallout of such thinking these days. Auto workers making less than half what they are used to just to have jobs or these jobs will go overseas as well. This is not an immigration problem per se, it is an economic strategy problem fueled by workers willing to take less which lowers the standard of living for most people in the long run especially in an economic downturn.

Okay then if it is a labor problem deal with it as a *labor* problem and not as an immigration problem. The issue of outsourcing and a race to the bottom as far as wages and benefits is an issue, deserving of concern, in its own right and has the benefit of being race-neutral as well.

And it is not just laborers. Financial institutions are looking to hire folks from Japan and China who are willing to work for less in corporate offices. The science industries are looking for foreign workers who are better suited to their businesses due to foreign emphasis on math and science skills as well as economics.

Well, that is OUR fault. WE have created a society where the next worse thing you can be is an 'egghead' (Poindexter, nerd, geek). It is not because of foreigners that native-born Americans aren't majoring in the hard sciences, mathematics or engineering--it's because Americans think that the those subjects are *hard* and why spend the best part of a decade getting an advanced degree in, say, nuclear physics when you could get a degree that is far less work? The work still needs to be done and if we aren't pushing our kids to go into those fields then employers will look far afield for them.

I had to chuckle at your political history of the our effects on other countries. It's kind of ironic how we can do so many bad things to peoples respective homelands but people still want to flock to this country. Strange thing irony.

No, not strange at all--unless, of course, you cannot make a useful separation between a national government, the nation and the people of that nation. It appears that Americans, on the whole, have a singular inability to do so. So, for Americans, the Iranian government, the Iranian people and Persian civilization are all the same thing functionally indistinguishable from one another. So if the Iranian government takes some action that is harmful to America or Americans, then from our point of view the Iranian PEOPLE did this and therefore Persian culture is irredeemably corrupt, violent, etc. So from that point of view it IS ironic that people would want to come to America because, from the point of view implied in your statement, what the American government does is what the American people has done which is what America is all about and therefore it WOULD look ironic for people to immigrate here. However, if you have a more subtle--let's call it--view of things then you can realize that there is what the American government does, there is what the American people do and there is what America stands for. America's government is not particularly popular around the globe and certainly not popular in South or Central America. The American people, on the other hand, are not particularly hated around the globe and the idea of America is positively loved! So it isn't ironic although, from a certain point of view, I can understand why it might appear so.

As a quick aside, this complicated view of America--as opposed to the simplistic view of either you think America is good or you think America is bad--is something I think that most people of color in this country have to develop to greater or lesser degrees. You see, it's impossible for someone like me to ignore what happened to my parents or grandparents no matter HOW convenient that might be for the majority if I were to develop historical amnesia. However, since I can't do that AND since America is my home I have to come to some form of peace with American history and the American present. It requires being very cold-eyed realistic about where we've come from and where we are. So I can be VERY critical of America while still being patriotic.

As for people staying in their own countries and fighting for change.....we have done it here. The civil rights/gay rights movements meant conflict and hardship and death but it lead to changes. It is amazing what people can accomplish when they band together. And we were fighting an economic machine and the cia as well.

I'm not sure that the CIA's involvement in opposition to the civil rights movement was particularly significant. I certainly can think of no instances where the CIA was implicated in the assassination of civil rights workers--unless, of course, you are going to argue that MLK, Medgar Evers or those freedom riders were killed by the CIA. It's one thing to have dirty tricks and black bag jobs carried out against your movement--it's another thing entirely to have people assassinated. For one thing, if your leadership is being assassinated they wind up being inconveniently dead which, to put it mildly, seriously reduces their leadership effectiveness.

It is not geopolitical niavete. It is a belief in how people who band together can force change to occur in spite of the economic machine and the cia. Otherwise we are all just pawns in a game, tossed about as others see fit. I refuse to believe any humans are that powerless as a whole.

I'm not arguing that people are helpless. I'm arguing that it is incomplete to put the blame for the state of Latin America solely or even primarily on people who are immigrating OUT of that region by saying that their nations would be far better off if they stayed at home. To say that, for instance, them staying in Nicaragua circa 1981 would have made Nicaragua a better place *despite* American-financed guerillas (the contras) and death squads making life in that nation a living hell is to actually ascribe to these immigrants superhuman powers. My reading of history--which may be wrong--is that the assassination of national leaders who are popularly elected has a dampening effect on the prospects of a nation. This is particularly true if it happens repeatedly whenever that popularly elected leader proposes some kind of reforms to make the nation in question better and more amenable to the locals instead of some US corporation or another. Your reading of history may, of course, vary.

I know immigration policy is a complex issue with strong emotional overtones. I just dont adhere to rhethoric on either side of the coin. Because for every argument, there is always another explanation, interpretation, point of view and study to support views one way or another. What made and makes this country great is the diverse points of view.

It seems, actually, that you do adhere to the rhetoric on one side. You're correct, there is always another explanation or interpretation but that doesn't mean that this other explanation and/or interpretation is correct. There was another explanation and interpretation for segregation in America---that interpretation was that blacks were *inherently* inferior and Jim Crow was no worse treatment than what we deserved. I see no reason why I should give any credence to that interpretation but it IS another interpretation and explanation for why segregation lasted until the last third of the 20th century. There were studies done to support segregation that showed that blacks were inferior. One needn't do any studies, in fact, one could point to, for instance, elite schools and say "well, no black has ever gone to this or that university and therefore blacks are not capable of getting into that university". As a statement of evidence that would hold up well-enough. Let's say the university is a tier-1 school and getting into a tier-1 school as a non-legacy admit is a pretty good sign that someone has enough brain cells to rub together and generate high-quality heat. No blacks were enrolled at said school in some year. Therefore, blacks were not mentally capable of handling the work at that university. QED. Now, is that a legitimate viewpoint? No. Is it a reasonable interpretation of the data? No. But it WAS an alternative explanation to the idea that certain universities would not admit blacks.

We've gotten to a place in this country that just because someone CAN argue a contrary point we think both contrary points are legitimate and valid. I refuse to buy into this idea any longer and I also refuse to pretend to buy into it. If you argue that the dogs are fish and I argue that dogs are mammals one of us is wrong--is your argument a different point of view? Yes, but that doesn't mean it is a correct point of view.

Just having diverse ideas does not make a country great or strong. The ability to sift through diverse ideas and separate the good ideas from the bad ideas does but not merely the presence of different ideas.

[dreadgeek]

Kobi:

You say kudos to the Arizona law. Okay. I think you continue to miss the problem that a lot of us have with the Arizona law so I will take a crack at explaining to you. The text of the law was amended from reading "may not solely consider race..." to reading "may not consider race". The reality is that the people here who are citizens and whose genetics run back some 9000 years in the area now called Arizona are genetically identical to the population living 10 miles south of the border. In other words, they will look exactly alike. The practical upshot of this is that if the only thing a law enforcement officer needs is 'reasonable suspicion' that the person is not a citizen and the two populations look precisely alike, the real-world affect is that citizens will be stopped unreasonably. I am against this law because while the words 'may not consider...' are nice and an improvement over "may not solely consider", it is still an invitation to racial profiling.

This country has a history of racial profiling and that history isn't ancient history.

Now, of course, one might make the argument that Sven from Sweden and Mary Katherine from Ireland also have much to fear from this law. The reality is that no one is going to pull Sven and MK over and ask to see their license because of how they look. It is entirely reasonable, given this nation's recent history, that Javier and Rosa have reason to worry that they will be pulled over even though their genes are from the L.A. basin and have been there since long before anyone remotely from the lands of Sven or MK even knew this continent existed.

I would love to say I live in an America where American citizens who happen to not be white need not worry about racial profiling. I would even be happy with an America where no non-white person need worry about it because it had been so long since those ideas had any real force in our society that no one alive can even remember when they did. Unfortunately, I don't live in that America.

No one is saying we shouldn't deal with immigration issues, least of all me. I think that the way immigration is being dealt with is, at its best, misguided and wrong and, at its worst, dangerous and playing with fire given this country's recent history. If this immigration law struck fear into the very heart of every employer in Arizona such that they wouldn't dream of not verifying the citizenship status of a person before hiring them, I would be okay with that. If the law imposed penalties that were draconian on businesses that hired workers who were not citizens, that would be okay. But that's not what this law does. Tossing a sop to the idea that businesses should verify, the main thrust of this law is targeting individuals. A guest-worker program would be a sane start. But we don't want that.

Then there's the issue of 'they're taking our jobs and eating up all the welfare'. I am a member of the last group of Americans who were taking all the good jobs, sucking up all the welfare and, while we were at it, running vast criminal enterprises selling drugs. In other words, I'm black. In the seventies it was us who were the problem. As manufacturing jobs were sent overseas--which really started in the late-sixties/early-seventies--blacks were also being given larger access to employment. Affirmative action, in this instance, was the reason why whites couldn't get jobs because all the jobs were going to 'the blacks to meet the quota'. At the same time, we were sucking up all the welfare because, apparently, we didn't want to work. So while we were simultaneously taking jobs that we were not qualified for and proudly telling our white colleagues that we weren't qualified for the job and were getting over on whitey (a popular story at the time) we were also sucking up all the social services, proudly telling OTHER white people (possibly the ones who couldn't get jobs) that we were going to pop out yet another baby so we could increase the welfare payments and, you guessed it, stick it to whitey. Then as if we weren't busy enough taking every good job in sight and simultaneously draining the public coffers with our indolent ways, we decided to take up the drug trade. So now, we were spending our workdays at jobs we weren't qualified for, would hit up the welfare office on the way home driving our 'welfare Cadillac' and then have an evening of selling drugs and engaging in some light drive-by shooting.

Any of this ringing any bells circa 1971 - 1995 or so? Now, it's the turn of Hispanics. You notice the same rhetoric (taking our jobs, sucking up social services, turning otherwise bucolic American cities into Fallujah)? Now, was it true that black Americans were simultaneously doing ALL of those things? No. But the rhetoric sounds very similar so you'll forgive me if I'm a tiny bit skeptical that this law is as race-neutral as you would have us believe it is.

Lastly, to the larger issue of immigration. I think that this country would do itself a favor if, for a generation, it simply closed the border. No one. From anywhere. For any reason other than political asylum. The reason why is that it would then allow us to deracialize the discussion. Right now, it is entirely reasonable--given this nation's track record--to presume that the problem is not that there are large numbers of immigrants it is who those immigrants are. I suspect that now (not 100 years ago but now), Irish or Scottish or Danish or English immigrants could come across in such numbers that if they all stood on the Atlantic you could walk from New York to Wales without getting your feet wet. I suspect that we would hear moving and poetic paeans to how immigration is the strength of America and how our ancestors braved this and that to come here and these new people who we are just so happy to have amongst us show, once again, that America is a beacon to the world. However, if people are coming from south of the border in any kind of significant numbers then it's not so much with the poetry and more with the invective. Suddenly, the paeans to immigration become more pro forma and less feeling.

Do I know, for a certainty, that I'm correct about that? No. But my take on it is *entirely* reasonable given American history as lived JUST by people I have met personally (covering people born between 1903 and now). None of the people I'm thinking of are alive, but none of them shuffled off this mortal coil more than a quarter century ago so we are not talking ancient history.

Actually, one last thing. Your point regarding what 'those people could do if they put their energies to work in changing the conditions in their own countries'. This statement shows a kind of geopolitical naivete that, quite honestly, I'm rather surprised at with you, Kobi. I figured that you were savvy enough to know that American corporations have a *disproportionate* amount of sway south of the border. I also figured you knew that the America is the 800 lb gorilla of the hemisphere. Just things that this nation has done in the last 50 years have had large impact on the lives of 'those people'.

1954 -- US Government, because the democratically elected president of Nicaragua instituted inconvenient (for an American fruit company), land reforms engineers a coup d' etat. The CIA replaces the rightfully elected leader with a puppet who then goes on to eliminate democracy and impose the death penalty on strikers. This strongman, Carlos Castillo Armas, rules Nicaragua for 30 years.

1960 -- Government of El Salvador falls. New ruling junta promises new elections. American president, not liking where this might go, orders the state department not to recognize the new government. It falls three months later to a right-wing government which is recognized.

1960 -- Guatemalan military attempt to stage a coup. It is put down by the local government. However, US military warships with 2000 Marines on alert take up station off the coast to lend support if needed.

1961 -- Bay of Pigs. 'nuff said.

1961 -- CIA backed coup overthrows government of Ecuador

1964 -- CIA overthrows government of Brazil

1973 -- US backs military overthrow of Salvedor Allende in Chile bringing to power Augusto Pinochet. 'nuff said.

1973 -- US backs military coup in Uruguay

1980 -- Right-wing junta takes power (again) in El Salvador backed by US

1981 -- US government backs the contras in Nicaragua to overthrow the left-leaning government using Honduras as a base.

I could go on but I won't belabor the point. So are you going to tell me that nations that, just a generation ago, were playing host-nation to American Great Game machinations and CIA dirty tricks would be in much better shape if only people who are leaving those areas for various reasons--most of them very, very good--would just stay home? And when they elect another government and that government talks to Cuba or that government has the audacity to suggest that the rich ALSO should pay taxes, what do you think that the US will do? Sit idly by or go with what has proven to work time and time again? If you believe that US foreign policy would NOT follow the historical pattern I have just one phrase for you: Hamas is the legitimately elected government of Palestine and the US government refuses to deal directly with it.

Originally Posted by Kobi

From what I read in this thread, I think I am the only one who doesnt have a problem with the Arizona attempt to curb illegal immigration. I say kudos for having the gonads to tackle a problem no one else has the guts to deal with.

It is easy to say we shouldnt deal with immigration issues because there are other more pressing problems affecting the country. Unfortunately, we use this excuse to avoid dealing with many issues because no one wants to be seen as the bad guy about any issue.

Illegal immigrations costs us taxpayers billions and billions a year in services i.e. education and health care plus immigration costs of housing illegals awaiting deportation hearings and providing them with legal representation to name just a few.

With the downturn in the economy and Americans struggling to find work, my allegiance is with the people who belong here, not with those who deliberately circumvented the laws because they wanted to do so. That type of selfish, self serving behavior is insulting.

One can only wonder what these people might be able to achieve if they put their energy to work in changing the conditions in their own countries rather than invading others.