Boycott CA and all those that boycott US laws and interests

Page 3 of 5 [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,926

14 May 2010, 4:26 pm

One-Winged-Angel wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
Honestly, how could randomly pulling someone off the street and asking for "their papers" or "birth certificate" not be draconian?


That would be draconian, but it's an untruthful exaggeration of the law. First of all, demanding proof of legal residency is not required or even acceptable unless the person in question has already been detained or pulled over for another offense. Also, any form of ID will do. No one needs to show their birth certificate, just a driver's license or other ID card.


Clarence Dupnik has noted that minor offences will be used as pretexts - tail lights defunct and the mix. The truck-driver case shows that the law is already being egregiously applied.



makuranososhi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,717
Location: Banned by Alex

14 May 2010, 4:48 pm

One-Winged-Angel wrote:
makuranososhi wrote:
Second, national citizenship is a matter of federal jurisdiction and not state law.


And that is why established criminals that have also been found to be in the country illegally will be transferred into federal custody upon the end of their prison sentence.


If they are here illegally, that status should trump and they should be deported into legal custody elsewhere. The state should not continue to bear the weight. There are ways to achieve parallels to the goals outlined by others without being bigoted and offensive.


M.


_________________
My thanks to all the wonderful members here; I will miss the opportunity to continue to learn and work with you.

For those who seek an alternative, it is coming.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,926

14 May 2010, 4:53 pm

How How can litigation for not following the law not ensure a witch hunt here? The law's ambiguity leaves it open to abusive and draconian ends.



kxmode
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,693
Location: In your neighborhood, knocking on your door. :)

14 May 2010, 10:04 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:
Michael_Stuart wrote:
Attempting to boycott each other is silly. Rather, create a petition or write to the people involved. Not only do you save yourself a lot of trouble, it's more likely to have an effect.


Boycotts are (partially) responsible for bringing down the Apartheid Regime in South Africa.

Furthermore, opponents of this draconian law are already petitioning.


It's not draconian to people who are here illegally! FFS they're not legally part of the system to make it draconian in the first place. What in the world is wrong with you people?!

As far as I'm concerned anyone who enters the US illegally is no less different than the a-hole that cuts in line at the grocery store, or the d-bag that cut in front of you at the theme park ride. Plus it's a total d-move on those actually trying to enter the U.S. legally.


_________________
January issues of the
Watchtower - Raising Considerate Children in a Me-First World
and Awake - Should You Fear the End of the World?

Download both in PDF format for free!


pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,629

15 May 2010, 6:45 am

We had all better just buy Mexican rather than Californian fruits and vegetables.



Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,926

17 May 2010, 3:00 am

kxmode wrote:
Master_Pedant wrote:
Michael_Stuart wrote:
Attempting to boycott each other is silly. Rather, create a petition or write to the people involved. Not only do you save yourself a lot of trouble, it's more likely to have an effect.


Boycotts are (partially) responsible for bringing down the Apartheid Regime in South Africa.

Furthermore, opponents of this draconian law are already petitioning.


It's not draconian to people who are here illegally! FFS they're not legally part of the system to make it draconian in the first place. What in the world is wrong with you people?!

As far as I'm concerned anyone who enters the US illegally is no less different than the a-hole that cuts in line at the grocery store, or the d-bag that cut in front of you at the theme park ride. Plus it's a total d-move on those actually trying to enter the U.S. legally.


It's draconian because the reasonable suspicion for who is there "illegally" is left completely undefined and will likely (scratch that, has) been used on classist and racist grounds.

It amounts to a de facto pass law for working class Mexican-born (or looking) Arizonans.



Seanmw
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jul 2009
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,639
Location: Bremerton, WA

17 May 2010, 7:12 am

visagrunt wrote:
"Let's boycott every product or service that has ever been created with undocumented labour."

All well and good--except that the economies of most urban centres--including Phoenix, incidentally, would crash.

Supposing that the US were actually in some kind of position to count its undocumented population, we would likely be looking at a population in the range of 11,000,000 people. (US government estimates in 2008 were in the 11.6 range: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/stat ... e_2008.pdf) The actual number could, in fact, be as high as 20m. How much money do 11m people spend each year on food, clothing and housing alone?

The median household income for undocumented aliens is in the range of $36,000, and household size is in the vicinity of 2.3. By these assumptions, 11m people generate 172 billion in economic activity. Given the overwhelming concentration of undocumented aliens in urban settings, that implies enormous impacts on the cities where they live.

Even assuming that only 50 percent of this income is reported, the fiscal implications to all levels of government from losing this tax revenue are enormous.

As with all economic activity, the loss of activity is not a zero-sum gain. When 11 million consumers are taken out of the marketplace, their consumption is not replaced by the 300 million consumers who remain. The most immediate impact would likely be a 2-3% contraction in retail spending, which would be nothing short of disastrous. If retailers lost 2-3% of revenue, then the job losses resulting would have further, spinoff effects within the legally documented workforce.

Be careful what you wish for, folks.
you make a great point.
a better option then would be to get these people documented & into the system so that we can start taxing them like everyone else.


_________________
+Blog: http://itsdeeperthanyouknow.blogspot.com/
+"Beneath all chaos lies perfect order"


Master_Pedant
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,926

17 May 2010, 12:10 pm

Seanmw wrote:
visagrunt wrote:
"Let's boycott every product or service that has ever been created with undocumented labour."

All well and good--except that the economies of most urban centres--including Phoenix, incidentally, would crash.

Supposing that the US were actually in some kind of position to count its undocumented population, we would likely be looking at a population in the range of 11,000,000 people. (US government estimates in 2008 were in the 11.6 range: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/stat ... e_2008.pdf) The actual number could, in fact, be as high as 20m. How much money do 11m people spend each year on food, clothing and housing alone?

The median household income for undocumented aliens is in the range of $36,000, and household size is in the vicinity of 2.3. By these assumptions, 11m people generate 172 billion in economic activity. Given the overwhelming concentration of undocumented aliens in urban settings, that implies enormous impacts on the cities where they live.

Even assuming that only 50 percent of this income is reported, the fiscal implications to all levels of government from losing this tax revenue are enormous.

As with all economic activity, the loss of activity is not a zero-sum gain. When 11 million consumers are taken out of the marketplace, their consumption is not replaced by the 300 million consumers who remain. The most immediate impact would likely be a 2-3% contraction in retail spending, which would be nothing short of disastrous. If retailers lost 2-3% of revenue, then the job losses resulting would have further, spinoff effects within the legally documented workforce.

Be careful what you wish for, folks.
you make a great point.
a better option then would be to get these people documented & into the system so that we can start taxing them like everyone else.


Interestingly enough, illegal immigrants already pay some taxes.



Worldtraveler
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 20 May 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 49
Location: Seattle

17 May 2010, 1:59 pm

[
Be careful what you wish for, folks.[/quote]you make a great point.
a better option then would be to get these people documented & into the system so that we can start taxing them like everyone else.[/quote]

master pendant
You want foreign felons to be allowed to stay in USA and commit more crimes? Why?
When they displace you from a job I know you will change your tune. Do you have a current job?



And they dont pay taxes. At the wages they work no taxes are due. In fact with child credit, they get money back.
And if they run a business, they also dont pay any taxes because they just dont report any income, or have any licence etc.

I will also remind you of the BILLIONS these illegals cost USA.

expain to me how this woman contributes to USA.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/ ... rPromoArea

After 15 years she does not know english
With low wage no insurance jobs, guess who payed for the birth of 10 kids. Guess who pays for their HC now.
With their low wages, they also qualify for SNAP to feed those 10 kids.

Look out CO! Here comes another foreign budget buster!


_________________
Dr Manhattan
"I am tired of this world; these people. I am tired of being caught in the tangle of their lives"


sartresue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 65
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,766
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism

17 May 2010, 3:00 pm

Deep impact topic

Kyle Kester, :money: the Quintana family's landlord, seemed to like having the "illegals" in Arizona. :P


_________________
Radiant Aspergian
Awe-Tistic Whirlwind

Phuture Phounder of the Philosophy Phactory

NOT a believer of Mystic Woo-Woo


Seanmw
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jul 2009
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,639
Location: Bremerton, WA

17 May 2010, 11:50 pm

Master_Pedant wrote:
Seanmw wrote:
visagrunt wrote:
"Let's boycott every product or service that has ever been created with undocumented labour."

All well and good--except that the economies of most urban centres--including Phoenix, incidentally, would crash.

Supposing that the US were actually in some kind of position to count its undocumented population, we would likely be looking at a population in the range of 11,000,000 people. (US government estimates in 2008 were in the 11.6 range: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/stat ... e_2008.pdf) The actual number could, in fact, be as high as 20m. How much money do 11m people spend each year on food, clothing and housing alone?

The median household income for undocumented aliens is in the range of $36,000, and household size is in the vicinity of 2.3. By these assumptions, 11m people generate 172 billion in economic activity. Given the overwhelming concentration of undocumented aliens in urban settings, that implies enormous impacts on the cities where they live.

Even assuming that only 50 percent of this income is reported, the fiscal implications to all levels of government from losing this tax revenue are enormous.

As with all economic activity, the loss of activity is not a zero-sum gain. When 11 million consumers are taken out of the marketplace, their consumption is not replaced by the 300 million consumers who remain. The most immediate impact would likely be a 2-3% contraction in retail spending, which would be nothing short of disastrous. If retailers lost 2-3% of revenue, then the job losses resulting would have further, spinoff effects within the legally documented workforce.

Be careful what you wish for, folks.
you make a great point.
a better option then would be to get these people documented & into the system so that we can start taxing them like everyone else.


Interestingly enough, illegal immigrants already pay some taxes.
well, some taxes are inevitable if you live in a place, if they didn't pay some, it'd prolly call attention to them .

i meant like the full range of taxes


_________________
+Blog: http://itsdeeperthanyouknow.blogspot.com/
+"Beneath all chaos lies perfect order"


visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,128
Location: Vancouver, BC

18 May 2010, 12:42 pm

Worldtraveler wrote:
master pendant
You want foreign felons to be allowed to stay in USA and commit more crimes? Why?
When they displace you from a job I know you will change your tune. Do you have a current job?


You're still assuming that this is a zero-sum game, i.e. that every job that is vacated by an undocument alien is going to remain in place to be filled by a legal resident. That is not, in fact, the case. The economic activity generated by undocumented aliens disappears when they leave, which means, inevitably, that there are fewer dollars in the economy with which to create and maintain jobs. Take $172 billion or more out of the economy, and there will, inevitably, be reductions in employment.

Quote:
And they dont pay taxes. At the wages they work no taxes are due. In fact with child credit, they get money back.
And if they run a business, they also dont pay any taxes because they just dont report any income, or have any licence etc.


Actually, any alien subject to deductions at source does pay taxes. Any alien who purchases goods and services in a jurisdiction with consumption taxes also pays taxes (another reason that consumption tax is preferable to income tax--but that's an argument for another thread). With a median household income of $36,000 and family size of 2.3, you are looking at a tax hit for the majority of undocumented alien's households.

Quote:
I will also remind you of the BILLIONS these illegals cost USA.

expain to me how this woman contributes to USA.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/ ... rPromoArea

After 15 years she does not know english
With low wage no insurance jobs, guess who payed for the birth of 10 kids. Guess who pays for their HC now.
With their low wages, they also qualify for SNAP to feed those 10 kids.

Look out CO! Here comes another foreign budget buster!


You are only looking at one side of the equation. Yes, undocumented aliens receive benefits from all levels of government. But that must be balanced against the tax revenue that they contribute directly (through payroll and consumption taxes), and indirectly (through economic contribution to other taxpayers' profits).

The simple fact of the matter is that from a fiscal perspective, Governments at all three levels are better off with those 11 to 20 million people in the country, than out of it. I suggest to you that the rational public policy approach is to find a way to normalize these peoples' status, so that their economic contribution can be maintained. That can even provide you a means to separate the productive, undocumented population from the rest.


_________________
--James


pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 60
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,629

18 May 2010, 6:16 pm

Worldtraveler wrote:
[
expain to me how this woman contributes to USA.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/ ... rPromoArea

After 15 years she does not know english
With low wage no insurance jobs, guess who payed for the birth of 10 kids. Guess who pays for their HC now.
With their low wages, they also qualify for SNAP to feed those 10 kids.

Look out CO! Here comes another foreign budget buster!


Quote:
On a dusty block in Phoenix, 15 years of the Quintana family's possessions are for sale.

Manuela Quintana said that they decided to leave when the Arizona governor signed the new immigration law.

For years, their family thrived with jobs in restaurants and construction, reports CBS News correspondent Kelly Cobiella. Their 10 children were born here and are U.S. citizens. Both she and her husband are undocumented, and currently unemployed.

She said that her biggest fear is being put in jail and having her children taken away from her. Just the thought of moving scares their 12-year-old daughter Graciela.

"I think it's going to be my worst day," Graciela said.

Two years ago, this park was filled with families every weekend. Arizona was home to more than half a million illegal immigrants. Since then, at least 100,000 have left.

Kyle Kester is the Quintana's landlord - he's lost seven tenants in the past week.

"I would say on this block alone we have 20 vacancies at least," Kester said. "It's not just illegal immigrants who are affected by this. I was born in the U.S. and it's hurting me now."



They had jobs. Just because people have jobs that White people don't want doesn't mean that they aren't contributing to the nation.

They paid rent.

They gave us 10 native-born American citizens. Very few White people are doing that, unless they are Mormons.

And, if she can't speak English, so what? English wasn't necessary for the work that she was doing anyway.



aloneinacrowd
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 14 Mar 2010
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 104

19 May 2010, 4:18 pm

Well I guess the LA boycott isn't working out too well for them. lol

Things work both ways.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05 ... k-boycott/



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,367
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

19 May 2010, 4:32 pm

lol ya, Arizona also supplies a lot of their water. I have a feeling this "boycott" is going to go by the wayside fast.