Arizona Immigration Reform Laws.

Status
Not open for further replies.

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Isn't it funny that if there are not towers of billowing smoke or dinner bells to let everyone know its lunch time, it must mean that there is nothing being made?
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
A) Palo Alto/San Jose is silicon valley not San Francisco. I worked in San Mateo...don't try and tell me that S.F. the city is silicon valley. It's not. S.F. makes nothing.

B) http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/04/29/arizonas-new-immigration-law-supported-by-most-americans-poll/ Most Americans favor the new law.

C) 70% of Arizona favors new law: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/arizona/70_of_arizona_voters_favor_new_state_measure_cracking_down_on_illegal_immigration


you're right. nothing but a huge street full of butt sex. :roll:

your comments are meaningless to me now.
 

robert 14617

Well-Known Member
San Francisco bay area haven't lived there in years but anyone who claims one of the richest area for farming and ranching in the us is worthless is clueless
 

Anjinsan

Well-Known Member
san francisco bay area havent lived there in years but anyone who claimsone the richest area for farming and ranching in the us is worthless is clueless
S.F. is a city. Ok? Can we first establish that much? If you include everything for 200 miles around the city then yes...it's value increases dramatically. But the CITY is desiring a boycott of the state of Arizona.
I am just pointing out rather bluntly...that I do not think that threat will be much of a concern for Arizona at all. Does Napa Valley desire to stop selling wine to the state of Arizona? lolz. That's good business sense.
Does silicon valley wish to stop selling computer related products to the state of Arizona?
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
S.F. is a city. Ok? Can we first establish that much? If you include everything for 200 miles around the city then yes...it's value increases dramatically. But the CITY is desiring a boycott of the state of Arizona.
I am just pointing out rather bluntly...that I do not think that threat will be much of a concern for Arizona at all. Does Napa Valley desire to stop selling wine to the state of Arizona? lolz. That's good business sense.
Does silicon valley wish to stop selling computer related products to the state of Arizona?

you made it sound as if SF was the only place boycotting it. and then you went on to say it didn't matter anyways because it sucks.

you have a personal vendetta in this. obviously. :roll:

all i did was show you it's not just SF boycotting. can you at least admit that?
 

tinyTURTLE

Well-Known Member
For herring. Big whooptie doo.

Here is a list of the ports in America by rank.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ports_in_the_United_States

S.F. ranks in as the 112th largest port.
when you talk about ports in san francisco you have to include every city on the bay, i think.
san francisco itself is a shipping nightmare because of highway congestion.
so most shipping that goes to the bay goes to the other side of the bay for better highway access, after all, most of the things coming off the ship end up on the back of a truck.
and vice versa.
so add port of Oakland and port of richmond and port of redwood city.
 

Anjinsan

Well-Known Member
you made it sound as if SF was the only place boycotting it. and then you went on to say it didn't matter anyways because it sucks.

you have a personal vendetta in this. obviously. :roll:

all i did was show you it's not just SF boycotting. can you at least admit that?
A) NOBODY has ACTUALLY boycotted anyone. N O B O D Y. Talk. It's what politicians do...until they figure out that they'll lose $$$...then the talk is over.
B) From a business standpoint...SF does suck. Arizona makes more tech shit and employs more tech peeps than SF. Arizona has about 150,000 hi tech workers...or roughly 1/3rd of the entire population of SF.

My problem is that we are all chiming in on shiite that isn't our concern. Myself included. 70% of Arizonians feel the law is a good one. Unless the "potential" boycotting cities wish to take in a half million illegals...they should probably STFU. Illegal immigration IS a problem. Much like unsustainable national debt. Both have been swept under a rug for too long. Arizona is dealing with one of the issues...and other states are starting to get the idea that they too might be able to do something about the problem that the federal government ignores.
 

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
A) NOBODY has ACTUALLY boycotted anyone. N O B O D Y. Talk. It's what politicians do...until they figure out that they'll lose $$$...then the talk is over.
B) From a business standpoint...SF does suck. Arizona makes more tech shit and employs more tech peeps than SF. Arizona has about 150,000 hi tech workers...or roughly 1/3rd of the entire population of SF.

My problem is that we are all chiming in on shiite that isn't our concern. Myself included. 70% of Arizonians feel the law is a good one. Unless the "potential" boycotting cities wish to take in a half million illegals...they should probably STFU. Illegal immigration IS a problem. Much like unsustainable national debt. Both have been swept under a rug for too long. Arizona is dealing with one of the issues...and other states are starting to get the idea that they too might be able to do something about the problem that the federal government ignores.


take a bong hit. bongsmilie
 

CrackerJax

New Member
To CJ, you seriously crack me up.

You post this:

I love how the first time you ask something you start with "I'll ask you one more time", I let it pass and the very next post I made I hit send and saw your post so I edited it with this:
[QUOTE As an American if someone leaves to another country how does that affect me? It means that there is now less competition for goods so that means I can now have more opportunities here at home. If they are more productive here than I am the economy here suffers and the place they moved to gets that added benefit of another productive worker that is needed because otherwise they would not have hired them.
First with zero clue who/what RED is I did answer the question. In reverse is someone enters Mexico illegally what happens to me? Well that means I am an american right? And I answered it.

And then you post this. Fricking hilarious.


I love how pompus you come off as, you 'dismiss' me and you 'ask one more time' a question you never asked. You really are just brilliant.
And then on the next page (10) you post this:


When you didn't pose a question to anyone, it is amazing your powers you think you posses to just imply everyone needs to figure out what question you may ask and answer it in exactly the form you wish the response to be placed in, and anything else is a inability to answer your question.

Anyway I will go back to discussing this with someone that actually has a clue.[/QUOTE]


After all of the drivel you just posted.... you still can't answer the simple question? Still unable to spot the hypocrisy? I'm not surprised....and I wasn't even being subtle.

We have about 18.6 million vacant homes in america, so figure we can pack in about 16 mexicans in each.... (jk about that last part)

And that is with them already here. So if over the last 50 years we are up to 20 million illegal immigrants, we most likely should be able to let anyone who wishes to be a part of our economy and be a good citizen and work hard to give their families a better safer life at any rate they wish to come to us.

We need more people that are willing to work and work hard, bettering all of our economy (meaning we all do better) why is that hard to understand?
18.6 million homes are vacant? Let's just accept that number.... but know this Karl Marx ... someone OWNS those homes....they aren't open for squatters. This isn't the thrid world....not yet anyways. It is obvious you have no respect for the rule of law. You don't seem o understand the engine which gives you everything.


The USA's current open border is HARMING MEXICO..... :roll: Or don't you care about them? You just want cheap labor!! Scandalous..... truly greedy you are.
 

Mindmelted

Well-Known Member
First with zero clue who/what RED is I did answer the question. In reverse is someone enters Mexico illegally what happens to me? Well that means I am an american right? And I answered it.

And then you post this. Fricking hilarious.


I love how pompus you come off as, you 'dismiss' me and you 'ask one more time' a question you never asked. You really are just brilliant.
And then on the next page (10) you post this:


When you didn't pose a question to anyone, it is amazing your powers you think you posses to just imply everyone needs to figure out what question you may ask and answer it in exactly the form you wish the response to be placed in, and anything else is a inability to answer your question.

Anyway I will go back to discussing this with someone that actually has a clue.

After all of the drivel you just posted.... you still can't answer the simple question? Still unable to spot the hypocrisy? I'm not surprised....and I wasn't even being subtle.



18.6 million homes are vacant? Let's just accept that number.... but know this Karl Marx ... someone OWNS those homes....they aren't open for squatters. This isn't the thrid world....not yet anyways. It is obvious you have no respect for the rule of law. You don't seem o understand the engine which gives you everything.


The USA's current open border is HARMING MEXICO..... :roll: Or don't you care about them? You just want cheap labor!! Scandalous..... truly greedy you are.[/QUOTE]


Your the best CJ.......:clap:

You just tell it like it is....:mrgreen:
 

medicineman

New Member
They discard any LOGIC as soon as it interferes with their prejudice... :wink:
...
Logic, are you kidding? You are the undisputed king of... Illogical thinking .

To wit:
Illogical thinking is drawing conclusions without proper or misinformed data.
example-
College student listens to his logic teacher explain-
"If we asked a man if he owns a weed eater, then we can logically deduce-
He owns a yard, which means logically he probably owns a house, and if he owns a house he probably has a family which we could then logically deduce that he is straight."
The college kids thinks that's pretty reasonable, and goes home to try it out on his dad. "Hey, Dad, let me show you what we learned in Logic 101 today; tell me, do you own a weed eater?" To which the dad replies, " No, I don't"
The Son's eyes dilate and his mouths drops open, "Dad, your gay?!!?"

 

Mindmelted

Well-Known Member
ConsultantBrowse Our Business Degrees Request Information Today!www.CriminalJusticePhoenix.com
US Immigration ServicesUS Citizenship, Green card, Visas Prepare applications online.www.ImmigrationDirect.com
Ask california about illegal's


Dateline: December, 2004
In hosting America's largest population of illegal immigrants, California bears a huge cost to provide basic human services for this fast growing, low-income segment of its population. A new study from the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) examines the costs of education, health care and incarceration of illegal aliens, and concludes that the costs to Californians is $10.5 billion per year.
Among the key finding of the report are that the state's already struggling K-12 education system spends approximately $7.7 billion a year to school the children of illegal aliens who now constitute 15 percent of the student body. Another $1.4 billion of the taxpayers' money goes toward providing health care to illegal aliens and their families, the same amount that is spent incarcerating illegal aliens criminals.
"California's addiction to 'cheap' illegal alien labor is bankrupting the state and posing enormous burdens on the state's shrinking middle class tax base," stated Dan Stein, President of FAIR. "Most Californians, who have seen their taxes increase while public services deteriorate, already know the impact that mass illegal immigration is having on their communities, but even they may be shocked when they learn just how much of a drain illegal immigration has become."
The Costs of Illegal Immigration to Californians focuses on three specific program areas because those were the costs examined by researchers from the Urban Institute in 1994. Looking at the costs of education, health care and incarceration for illegal aliens in 1994, the Urban Institute estimated that California was subsidizing illegal immigrants to the tune of about $1.1 billion. The enormous rise in the costs of illegal immigrants over the intervening ten years is due to the rapid growth in illegal residents. It is reasonable to expect those costs to continue to soar if action is not taken to turn the tide.
"Nineteen ninety-four was the same year that California voters rebelled and overwhelmingly passed Proposition 187, which sought to limit liability for mass illegal immigration. Since then, state and local governments have blatantly ignored the wishes of the voters and continued to shell out publicly financed benefits on illegal aliens," said Stein. "Predictably, the costs of illegal immigration have grown geometrically, while the state has spiraled into a fiscal crisis that has brought it near bankruptcy.
"Nothing could more starkly illustrate the very high costs of ‘cheap labor' than California's current situation," continued Stein. "A small number of powerful interests in the state reap the benefits, while the average native-born family in California gets handed a nearly $1,200 a year bill." The Federation for American Immigration Reform is a nonprofit, public-interest, membership organization advocating immigration policy reforms that would tighten border security and prevent illegal immigration, while reducing legal immigration levels from about 1.1 million persons per year to 300,000 per year.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top