Arizona requires you to carry your papers

[EvilMonkey]

To put things in perspective you if you to suddenly remove just 5 million illegal immigrants at lets say an assumed per capita income level of $20,000, that's a $100 billion dollars you just pulled out of the economy, granted some of that would probably be made up by gains realized from removing 5 million illegal immigrants, but that $100 billion serves as conduit for hundreds of billions generated through connections that most of us just don't visualize. You're talking about playing a dangerous game of dominoes and you can never be certain what unforeseen consequences arise from the removal of that many individuals and money. Mass deportation can potentially lead to another financial crisis, a decade ago few people would have said poor judgment on the hands of a few mortgage lenders and brokers would eventually lead to a trillion dollar global financial crisis. Given a wide variety of options mass deportations present the greatest potential for harmful unforeseen consequences conspiring against our interests. Given the cost to simply hand out blanket amnesty would probably cost pennies on the dollar when compared to a what is basically an impractical solution in mass deportation, such as the Arizona bill contrives.

 

It comes down to a basic risk analysis, it's cheaper and easier to hand out amnesty after amnesty if the only other solution is increased enforcement of ineffective immigration laws.

On the economic part of it, many Republicans have asked for an EFFECTIVE guest worker program to take this into account. Then they officially get on the rolls and are counted somehow, and the need for cheap labor is satisfied legally. Saying we would just one day round up 5 million illegals and 'poof' they be back in Mexico is just a bit of puffery. I like your posts, well thought out. However keep in mind, even according to the NYTimes, Mexicans send back BILLIONS, even with the weakening economy.

Last year, remittances fell 3.6 percent compared with the previous year, to $25 billion

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/02/world/am...s/02mexico.html

 

But I do have to disagree with your last statement regarding amnesty vs border control. Eventually the flow has to stop and be controlled.

[Balta1701]

Back on subject...the D-Backs start a 4 game series at Wrigley this weekend. Protests appear to have been organized.

[Middle Buffalo]

Are you really telling me the governments in Mexico and Cuba are similar?

I'm telling you that people come here from Mexico because they have no opportunity in Mexico. Mexico is basically lawless. Their government provides nothing for them. And we want to turn them away.

 

Are you telling me that the government of China is different from the government of Cuba? Communism is communism, right? But it's ok for us to do business with one country and not the other.

 

[Balta1701]

On the economic part of it, many Republicans have asked for an EFFECTIVE guest worker program to take this into account.

The problem was...the Republicans could have passed exactly that bill several years ago with substantial Democratic support. The Democratic Congress and the President wanted to. But...the Republicans wouldn't move a bill that would piss off the 50-75% of their caucus (whatever the number is) that hate brown people think that deporting 15 million people is practical.

[StrangeSox]

Back on subject...the D-Backs start a 4 game series at Wrigley this weekend. Protests appear to have been organized.

 

M&H were talking about it this morning and offered a little bit of criticism of the bill. Their phone lines blew up but I got to work before I heard any of the callers.

[Middle Buffalo]

However keep in mind, even according to the NYTimes, Mexicans send back BILLIONS, even with the weakening economy.

How is this different from Americans going on vacations and spending BILLIONS in Mexico? It's all money earned here that is spent elsewhere.

[GoSox05]

China hasn't been communist since the early 80's really.

 

I would say that the Mexican government is worse to its people than Cuba's. In my personal opinion.

[Balta1701]

China hasn't been communist since the early 80's really.

 

I would say that the Mexican government is worse to its people than Cuba's. In my personal opinion.

Well, the biggest problem with the Mexican government is that it sort of has to deal with an ongoing drug money and weapons from the U.S. fueld insurgency.

[EvilMonkey]

Dumb-ass knee jerk idiots.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2...sfired_ire.html

Opponents of immigration law call for boycott of Arizona Iced Tea - but it is brewed in New York!

 

Opponents of Arizona's new anti-immigrant law are calling for a boycott of the state's products - including the popular Arizona Iced Tea.

 

The problem: Arizona Iced Tea is actually brewed in New York.

 

Online, misguided tea fans vowed to switch to Lipton or Snapple.

 

"Dear Arizona: If you don't change your immigration policy, I will have to stop drinking your enjoyable brand of iced tea," Twittered Jody Beth in Los Angeles.

 

"It is the drink of fascists," wrote Travis Nichols in Chicago.

 

The company did not return messages asking if they planned to set the public straight.

 

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2...l#ixzz0mVnWTDzo

 

Look out, JC Penney, they comin' for you and your Arizona brand jeans next!!!!!

[StrangeSox]

LOL, that's a good one. Reminds me of surveys where most people think LG is American and Motorola is Japanese.

 

Actual Arizona firms facing a boycott: Cold Stone Creamery, U-Haul and Best Western.

 

"It is the drink of fascists," wrote Travis Nichols in Chicago.

 

Are we sure this was meant to be legitimate and not hipster irony? Package some crappy beer with that slogan and it'd sell like hotcakes in certain Chicago markets.

Edited April 29, 2010 by StrangeSox

[Texsox]

I am not an originalist when it comes to the Constitution. I do think Madison and Co. wrote perhaps the greatest plan in history. Our protection from unconstitutional laws being passed is the judicial branch. But we don't seem to want judges that will rule any laws as unconstitutional. That would be an activist agenda. We also do not seem to want our watchdogs, the press, to report on that stuff either.

 

I do find some irony is the pro-union party that wants more government restrictions on businesses wants to allow them greater access to employees.

 

Getting back to the Constitution, IIRC, and I do, the original intent of the Constitutional Convention in 1783 was to rewrite the Articles of Confederation. Madison, Franklin, Washington, Jefferson, and others charted a course to eliminate the Articles and form a strong central government. Our very Constitution whittled away state's rights in favor of this strong federal government. And look at the compromises that started even before it was put in place. A senate with equal representation, and a house with proportional. This gave both sides what they wanted. Hell, we even started counting slaves as 3/5ths.

 

I believe I agree with SS that we are slowly sliding down a terrible path of giving up our rights. The logic is always the same. If we can save/stop/prevent one x,y,z then the inconvenience is worth it.

 

In over 200 years we've only amended the Constitution a couple dozen times.

[Jenksismyhero]

I am not an originalist when it comes to the Constitution. I do think Madison and Co. wrote perhaps the greatest plan in history. Our protection from unconstitutional laws being passed is the judicial branch. But we don't seem to want judges that will rule any laws as unconstitutional. That would be an activist agenda. We also do not seem to want our watchdogs, the press, to report on that stuff either.

 

I do find some irony is the pro-union party that wants more government restrictions on businesses wants to allow them greater access to employees.

 

Getting back to the Constitution, IIRC, and I do, the original intent of the Constitutional Convention in 1783 was to rewrite the Articles of Confederation. Madison, Franklin, Washington, Jefferson, and others charted a course to eliminate the Articles and form a strong central government. Our very Constitution whittled away state's rights in favor of this strong federal government. And look at the compromises that started even before it was put in place. A senate with equal representation, and a house with proportional. This gave both sides what they wanted. Hell, we even started counting slaves as 3/5ths.

 

I believe I agree with SS that we are slowly sliding down a terrible path of giving up our rights. The logic is always the same. If we can save/stop/prevent one x,y,z then the inconvenience is worth it.

 

In over 200 years we've only amended the Constitution a couple dozen times.

 

I'm confident if the founding fathers were alive today they'd be scared s***less of the power of the federal government, the role of the media, and the complete lack of institutional control that exists in our system. The idea wasn't to have a central government that invaded every single aspect of your life. The goal wasn't to let the government tell you what is right/wrong, what is protectable/what is not protectable. The whole system was designed to protect citizens from their government, not citizens from each other (that was left to the states).

 

What we have today is entirely different than what was intended IMO.

[mr_genius]

"It is the drink of fascists," wrote Travis Nichols in Chicago.

 

LOL

[Texsox]

They had no concept of the internet, international travel in hours, television, etc. But they did understand the document needed to be flexible to accomodate a changing society.

I'm confident if the founding fathers were alive today they'd be scared s***less of the power of the federal government, the role of the media, and the complete lack of institutional control that exists in our system. The idea wasn't to have a central government that invaded every single aspect of your life. The goal wasn't to let the government tell you what is right/wrong, what is protectable/what is not protectable. The whole system was designed to protect citizens from their government, not citizens from each other (that was left to the states).

 

What we have today is entirely different than what was intended IMO.

[kapkomet]

Back on subject...the D-Backs start a 4 game series at Wrigley this weekend. Protests appear to have been organized.

 

 

LMAO. That's just f***ing ignorant.

[mr_genius]

LMAO. That's just f***ing ignorant.

 

"It is the team of fascists," wrote Travis Nichols in Chicago.

[Texsox]

"It is the team of fascists," wrote Travis Nichols in Chicago.

[lostfan]

I'm telling you that people come here from Mexico because they have no opportunity in Mexico. Mexico is basically lawless. Their government provides nothing for them. And we want to turn them away.

 

Are you telling me that the government of China is different from the government of Cuba? Communism is communism, right? But it's ok for us to do business with one country and not the other.

China's communist in name only. Authoritarian, brutal, Orwellian yes, doctrinaire Marxism not so much.

 

Still, I'm not convinced we shouldn't be trading with Cuba

[Balta1701]

LMAO. That's just f***ing ignorant.

I might disagree, but the D-Backs owner is a major Republican donor in the state of AZ, the kind of guy who could have made a difference if he'd opposed the law.

[Y2HH]

LOL, that's a good one. Reminds me of surveys where most people think LG is American and Motorola is Japanese.

 

Actual Arizona firms facing a boycott: Cold Stone Creamery, U-Haul and Best Western.

 

 

 

Are we sure this was meant to be legitimate and not hipster irony? Package some crappy beer with that slogan and it'd sell like hotcakes in certain Chicago markets.

 

 

f*** that. Cold Stone Creamery is awesome and I will now eat 1500x more than I did before to make up for any lost business they incur.

[Balta1701]

f*** that. Cold Stone Creamery is awesome and I will now eat 1500x more than I did before to make up for any lost business they incur.

All part of our insidious plan to remove as many Republican voters as possible...

[Y2HH]

All part of our insidious plan to remove as many Republican voters as possible...

 

I don't vote republican very often, FYI.

[HuskyCaucasian]

The ignorance of some people... from a facebook comment:

_________ wonders why so many Californians are riled up about Arizona's new immigration law and the possibility of "racial profiling" when Hispanic is not a race. Legal residents have nothing to fear, so what's the big stinkin' deal?

[HuskyCaucasian]

Actual Arizona firms facing a boycott: Cold Stone Creamery, U-Haul and Best Western.

I dont understand the idea of boycotting companies based in the state. I can understand EVENTS in the state such as Super Bowls, bowl games, and Final 4s because people attending could be profiled. But why would I boycott the Cold Stone Creamery at Streets of Woodfield?

[BigSqwert]

I dont understand the idea of boycotting companies based in the state. I can understand EVENTS in the state such as Super Bowls, bowl games, and Final 4s because people attending could be profiled. But why would I boycott the Cold Stone Creamery at Streets of Woodfield?

To get these large corporations to band together to reverse the law?