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.
While it may in fact be beneficial to ignore the tantrum of one small child, when adults collectively do it, it's called a riot and it's not particularly wise to ignore an angry mob. I'm sure a significant number of the headless French Aristocracy might tend to agree.
Our police force here in DC can deal with those collective idiots.
Very simple. The left will drag out every derogatory imaginable to make it seem that America is being discriminatory in its march towards securing the border. Case in point: "Racial Profiling." Nothing upsets the liberal base more than the perception that someone *could* be wronged due to the color of their skin. It's right there on Page 1 of the Liberal Playbook: When all else fails, paint them as racists and bigots.
The left refuses to acknowledge the illegal immigration problem, and instead would rather race bait and pour on the guilt and demonization. It's been Liberal Policy for 40 years. This is precisely why conservatives will NEVER be on the same page as liberals on the immigration issue. Conservatives see illegal immigration as a problem requiring an solution. Liberals see illegal immigration as a solution that has yet to find a problem.
The very day the original Arizona law was signed a truck driver of Hispanic descent (born in Fresno, CA) was detained for multiple hours (4+ hours) because the police didn't believe the paper work and his commercial truck driver's license were real. He was questioned at a weigh station, i.e. he wasn't pulled over for doing something wrong. He wasn't released until his wife, who had to leave her job, could make it to the police station with his birth certificate. Nothing in the new law would prevent such an occurrence. In fact, it will most likely make it a much more likely occurrence.
So it isn't that it *could* occur, it was already occurring.
Any person who earns that low will usually spend nearly 100% of the income on purchasing items, for basic needs. That means, businesses benefit from it, and so do local/state government.
Assuming that a state like AZ has half million illegal immigrants (about 8% of the population). If AZ were to eliminate that populace from within its borders, you're looking at a substantial impact (and a domino effect) with businesses that they use, much less are employed by.
I can't find the source, but heard on NPR couple of weeks ago, that Texas lawmakers are wary of following AZ's approach after a study was released that losing all illegal immigrants would cost Texas about $16 billion/year.
It would depend on what the savings vs. cost would be. No one denies that illegals spend money but the real question is how much are they taking out of the system vs. their contribution.
Let's not forget that Arizona doesn't have anywhere near the resources, population, or tax base of Texas. I don't know for sure but I also suspect that TX also has a much lower percentage of illegals and with the larger tax base aren't nearly the burden. If you have those numbers I would certainly be interested. I do know that the percentage of illegals here in CA is lower than 8% (that includes all illegals, not just Mexican nationals) so while they are a burden on our resources, once you consider the very large tax paying population of the state, it's clear that they are per capita quite a bit less of a financial burden. The metro area I live in has a higher population than the entire state of AZ. Of course that's only one set of numbers and is generalizing quite a bit but you get the gist of what I'm saying.
To my knowledge there is no law that makes it mandatory to carry an id. If you are suspected of a crime you merely have to identify yourself. If there is proof you have commited a crime the police can arrest you. You only have to produce a DL if you commited a driving infracture. As a pedestrian you are not required to produce a DL. The law also allows race to be a factor, so as long as it is not the sole factor.
FYI: The new law has already been amended to take out race as a factor.
It would depend on what the savings vs. cost would be. No one denies that illegals spend money but the real question is how much are they taking out of the system vs. their contribution.
Let's not forget that Arizona doesn't have anywhere near the resources, population, or tax base of Texas. I don't know for sure but I also suspect that TX also has a much lower percentage of illegals and with the larger tax base aren't nearly the burden. If you have those numbers I would certainly be interested. I do know that the percentage of illegals here in CA is lower than 8% (that includes all illegals, not just Mexican nationals) so while they are a burden on our resources, once you consider the very large tax paying population of the state, it's clear that they are per capita quite a bit less of a financial burden. The metro area I live in has a higher population than the entire state of AZ. Of course that's only one set of numbers and is generalizing quite a bit but you get the gist of what I'm saying.
Ideally, I would prefer to see a non-partisan source on the issue of spending versus contribution myself. And I wish to find the source NPR used in its broadcast. And while we can look for those sources, we can certainly debate, based on logic, that populace has an impact on businesses. Even a 2-3% drop in revenue can be a big deal for them, much less at state level (considering AZ is already in a big financial hole, with major deficits being the norm, and growing).
Sure, the economy of AZ is a lot smaller than TX, much less CA, and perhaps a reason it doesn't make headlines when it comes to states in doo doo financially, but it stands for a greater impact along these lines too. More so, if they form a larger percentage of the population. Smaller economy, larger participants... greater impact. So, by logic, AZ actually might have a bigger problem than TX would if it were to implement the same system.
PS. Couldn't find NPR link, but here is another (a study from 2006 by Texas Comptrollers' Office):
"Texas earned more in taxes and economic output from illegal immigrants than governments spent to provide services" (http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/economy/illegal-immigration-provides-benefits-states-despite-rhetoric/ - broken link)
Trust me, I'm no fan of favoring illegal immigration unconditionally. After all, a lot of people struggle mightily for legal immigration. But at the same time, I think we should be more balanced and logical in our views.
If the police approach you because they have reason to assume you have broken some law or ordinance, such as assault, robbery, rape, murder, theft etc... don't you think the police need to find out who you are? You may be an escaped convict, bail jumper, terrorist, or violating your court mandated distance to schools and playgrounds due to your sexual abuse of children.
Asking for your ID is what law enforcement officers all over the United States do when they write you a citation or arrest you. All this law does is ask a person who has provided fraudulent ID, stolen SSN or other identification that does not match, to provide proof of citizenship on top of finding out just who they have in custody.
And allows the police to hold legal American citizens in custody until the citizen can prove their citizenship to the satisfaction of the police. The police don't have to prove that you are illegal. You have to prove that you are a citizen.
FYI: The new law has already been amended to take out race as a factor.
And how exactly is it going to work without race being a factor? Is there a way to monitor (for accountability) and ensure that race will NOT be a factor? What measures ensure that 30% of AZ population (legal Hispanic) will not be considered less equal than others?
They cost taxpayers BILLIONS...
How much do people making 7.50-10.00$ an hour pay in taxes?
Do they use schools,roads,social programs??
Im not real good at math but not paying taxes yet using resources..
Sounds like a drain on the system.
Yes,Americans do that as well,but they are AMERICANS.
And the "Race Card" it might silence some folks but not me..
Or millions of americans.Many people of different ethnic and..
Belief systems are sick of this situation.
Do they not pay sales tax? Do they not pay tax on gasoline purchases? Do their landlords not have to pay property taxes on their housing? Do they not consume goods sold by merchants who then pay taxes on their profits?
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.
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.
