U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-21-2011, 08:37 AM
 
1,569 posts, read 999,057 times
Reputation: 111

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Isitmeorarethingsnuts? View Post
Competition is good when all the players are playing by the same rules. Well done.
I agree, hence I support liberalized legal immigration policies! But I assume that by "the same rules" you mean "those people aren't allowed to play at all, and these people are." Which, you know, is not exactly "the same rules," but at least you have it right in theory.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-21-2011, 08:52 AM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,367 posts, read 8,208,114 times
Reputation: 5892
Default When reality gets in the way of ideology....

"Only a handful (Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, and South Carolina) actually passed anti-immigrant bills, while 26 others rejected them. Even Arizona, which last year saw its anti-immigrant bill largely blocked by a federal judge, joined this movement and rejected a series of even harsher bills this year. One of the principal reasons for the failure of so many of these legislative efforts was cost."

Your State Canít Afford It: The Fiscal Impact of Statesí Anti-Immigrant Legislation

BTW, not surprisingly, AZ and the 4 states that passed anti-immigrant bills are also all Red state moochers, which chronically receive more in federal dollars than they pay in.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 08:53 AM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,077,628 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by mateo45 View Post
"Only a handful (Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, and South Carolina) actually passed anti-immigrant bills, while 26 others rejected them. Even Arizona, which last year saw its anti-immigrant bill largely blocked by a federal judge, joined this movement and rejected a series of even harsher bills this year. One of the principal reasons for the failure of so many of these legislative efforts was cost."

Your State Canít Afford It: The Fiscal Impact of Statesí Anti-Immigrant Legislation

BTW, not surprisingly, AZ and the 4 states that passed anti-immigrant bills are also all Red state moochers, which chronically receive more in federal dollars than they pay in.
Anti-"immigrant" bills?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 08:56 AM
 
Location: The land where cats rule
10,946 posts, read 7,917,568 times
Reputation: 3602
Quote:
Originally Posted by mateo45 View Post
Not surprisingly, few states have chosen to follow AZ's "lead" on immigration, mostly because they did the math and figured out they just can't afford it (due to the legal cost from defending lawsuits, the added resources needed to implement, and most of all the economic damage to their respective states). Basically, once you get past all the rhetoric, it turns out the negatives far outweigh the dubious "positives".

And as already noted, the majority of folks everywhere have more important priorities right now. Besides, the only ones really making a big fuss about "illegals" aren't professionals or hi-skills jobs anyway. Instead, they mostly just seem to be low-income, unskilled whites who resent facing added competition now in the low-end of the job market. For example you never hear about computer programmers, managers, teachers, engineers, or doctors complaining about "illegals"!
So, are you saying that being an illegal is okay with you as long as it doesn't personally impact you?

That's what it sounds like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 09:06 AM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,367 posts, read 8,208,114 times
Reputation: 5892
Last time I checked your location, Utah receives $1.07 in federal money for every dollar it puts in. So when y'all can take care of yourselves and quit being a net drain on the the rest of us, then we can entertain your brilliant ideas for further "improving" things....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 09:38 AM
 
Location: Pa
20,311 posts, read 18,764,185 times
Reputation: 6512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockmadinejad View Post
I agree, hence I support liberalized legal immigration policies! But I assume that by "the same rules" you mean "those people aren't allowed to play at all, and these people are." Which, you know, is not exactly "the same rules," but at least you have it right in theory.
The rules are the same. Its just some cant meet the minimum standard.
Is it unfair that not everyone can play pro football? Not everyone meets the minimum standards.
Should a company be required to hire every applicant regardless of qualifications?
Then why should the USA lower standards to appease those who dont qualify? To appease those who disregard our laws?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 09:41 AM
 
1,569 posts, read 999,057 times
Reputation: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
The rules are the same. Its just some cant meet the minimum standard.
No, there are different standards for citizens and non-citizens, of course. If you really think it's JUST as easy to compete as a non-citizen with citizens, or that the rules are the same, you are objectively incorrect. There's no matter of opinion there. If our poor old labor force doesn't "need" more low-skill workers, you still let low-skill citizens compete.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 09:43 AM
 
Location: Pa
20,311 posts, read 18,764,185 times
Reputation: 6512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockmadinejad View Post
No, there are different standards for citizens and non-citizens, of course. If you really think it's JUST as easy to compete as a non-citizen with citizens, or that the rules are the same, you are objectively incorrect. There's no matter of opinion there. If our poor old labor force doesn't "need" more low-skill workers, you still let low-skill citizens compete.
Citizens yes.... Illegals no.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 09:45 AM
 
1,569 posts, read 999,057 times
Reputation: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01 View Post
Citizens yes.... Illegals no.
So you admit the rules are not the same, the standards are not the same, and so forth. There is no question there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2011, 09:46 AM
 
9,243 posts, read 7,047,685 times
Reputation: 2199
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicagonut View Post
Indeed it was go Arizona!!!!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:55 PM.

© 2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top