NY Times article about the rebuilding of downtown Phoenix and its attempt to lure companies from Silicon Valley (Mesa: house, unemployment rate)

[Hschlick84]

Originally Posted by stevek64

A left leaning media outlet and a gallup poll is biased? I've read the arguments on this topic how the questions are worded and they sound like people who didn't like the results so they nit-pick the wording. What else is new I guess.

In any case, I think we can at least say "it depends" how one feels about it. If one is polled who's liberal/lives in a state with a bunch of sanctuary cities who protect illegals(against federal law btw but who cares, right....yawn), sure, they'll hate the law.

As for people "offended" by following the rule of law/enforcing it, I know these are people I don't want to be around. Nor residing next to me. People who openly pick/choose which laws to follow kind of make my radar jump into overdrive in a negative way for obvious reasons. And ironically you give a "law" firm as an example as not wanting to relocate here because of our politics/policies yet reside/do business in a sanctuary city most likely? The city by the bay, sanctuary city exhibit A.

What's a 'sanctuary city,' and why should you care? - CNN.com

San Francisco: Sanctuary City Gone Awry - SFGate

A city who thumbs it's nose at federal law yet it's all ok? This is really what you want the Phoenix metro to become to attract business? This is what "business friendly" in the Phoenix metro should slump to? Very sad on many levels if this is what it's all coming too.

As for who I want to attract in this state, to me it begins with following the rule of law and enforcing it. That's not left/right/R/D/"progressive".....that's just a basic thing little 'ole me believes in and how a civilized society adapts into being civilized. And if I decide to disobey the law, I should face the consequences. If missing out on jobs means AZ/the Phoenix metro should be politically correct and adapt a welcoming attitude towards people who break the law just because it's in vogue, I think that's wrong on many levels. And it extends to other laws of course. I trust you teach your kids to follow/respect the law, not pick and choose which one's they follow? And if they decide not to follow them, it's fair they should pay the consequences as this is how a civilized society works? When I hear the word "progressive", that's usually code word for open borders, sanctuary cities are no worries, etc....again, ignore the law....it brings in money after all! Good lessons for the kiddies, eh?

As for "you guys", if you don't know this already, I'm not a team R or D and trust none of them. Both teams in my view have done an absolute horrible job on any level you can think of "managing" our nation. Again, I'm just a simple guy who believe in following the rule of law and not selling his soul for the almighty $ because it's "progressive" or politically correct to do so. That's an ugly/steep slope that eventually leads to anarchy. And the results aren't pretty. And our nation is heading there fast with examples right on top showing us this way.

well said!

[JGMotorsport64]

Originally Posted by stevek64

I suppose we could say that really about any law, "creating due process concerns" as the potential to abuse any law exists. For example we could say airport security could certainly unfairly target certain groups therefore we really shouldn't have it/water it down. If such concerns exist in specific cases/an alleged incident occurs, there is a court system to determine if such an abuse indeed occurred. But throwing out the baby with the bathwater, going far the the other way by assuming abuse will happen in lots of cases I don't think is a rational way to look at it either.

I agree with this. The Airport thing is why you usually see old ladies and other purposely non-suspecting groups getting searched at the airport however. That way when it's challenged in court they can point to their data and say they search randomly or have some neutral criteria. It's true that the data appears random, but it's on purpose that it appears that way, these are smart people at the top.

[stevek64]

Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64

I agree with this. The Airport thing is why you usually see old ladies and other purposely non-suspecting groups getting searched at the airport however. That way when it's challenged in court they can point to their data and say they search randomly or have some neutral criteria. It's true that the data appears random, but it's on purpose that it appears that way, these are smart people at the top.

Yep, it can all be abused for sure. We are a world composed of imperfect humans, each with our own set of biases/beliefs. Checks and balances in theory should solve most of the abuse. SB1070 was set up as I recall where one couldn't stop someone solely for the reason of a status check but it had to be part of another violation/traffic stop which added another level.

[Hal Roach]

Originally Posted by dvxhd

I'm going to guess everything I wrote went waaaaay over your head, as I've already addressed every erroneous point you made. I'm also going to guess the fact that the average Thai person makes less than $500 per month has absolutely nothing to do with those lower fares that occur entirely within Thailand, and that $18 is proportionately more of a financial burden on them than it is on the average American. And shove the politics... the bailout was a one-time thing, when many foreign governments own large stakes in carriers.

I'm glad your personal experiences reflect the entirety of the airline industry, as I'm sure that's a terrific indicator of over 100,000 flights across Earth and several million people flying per day. I mean, I previously worked in airline logistics and have absolutely zero idea how this industry works after all, so I could really use your invaluable insight in explaining to me how and why Phoenix lacks international service because I'm stumped. And as sure as the sun sets in the west, you can bet those airlines toss out all that invaluable passenger data, including origins/destinations, connections, popular routes, profitability, filled seats, etc. Really, what use would an airline competing with other airlines have for that kind of information? As for other passengers on my plane, I'm glad I'm not the only one keeping tabs on what a few hundred other people are trying to do while I try to clear immigration and customs, and I always monitor my former passengers as they blend in with the crowds from the other arrivals, because I'm just so curious as to what they do upon arrival.

But seeing as to how you seem to know so much, then the answer to this question should be clear: why doesn't Phoenix have better international service?

Data or no data; airlines fail all the time. As I stated, the same ticket on the government subsidized airline would be 80-100 usd. And if you had checked the non-government airline on the PHX- LAS route you would have seen SWA does it 12 times per day for 90...you right with the wit of a DeVry grad, who has been wearing a headset a few years too long.

[dvxhd]

Originally Posted by Hal Roach

Data or no data; airlines fail all the time. As I stated, the same ticket on the government subsidized airline would be 80-100 usd. And if you had checked the non-government airline on the PHX- LAS route you would have seen SWA does it 12 times per day for 90...you right with the wit of a DeVry grad, who has been wearing a headset a few years too long.

Care to take another stab at writing that? This time, maybe, writing it in a way that makes sense logically and grammatically? Pokes at one's education don't work when you can barely piece together a sentence.

[AZSunDevil83]

Some more ammunition for the nay-sayers...

http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/b...nual-tech.html

[Java Jolt]

Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64

SB1070 was our attempt at pre empting Federal Law, unconstitutional, not enforcing it. That's why it was struck down.

Not only that but the biggest proponents of SB1070 were the conservatives who spew the same smaller government rhetoric.

Here they were pushing tax breaks and education cuts on one hand, and pushing for more government control of immigrants on the other hand.

The harsh truth is they only believe in smaller government when it fits their needs and political viewpoints.

Such hypocrites.

[goillini8]

Originally Posted by Renegade007

Why doesn't Phoenix get the respect it deserves? Good question.
Even here in the U.S., the 6th largest city in the country gets the brush off from the mainstream media. People constantly refer to it as "Phoenix, Arizona" or being a "desert city". Okay that's true, but why don't you say "Chicago, Illinois, the Great Lake City"? Or "New Orleans, Louisiana, Queen of the Bayou" or something? Why do people outside of AZ. always need to add disclaimers? Yes, we are a desert city. So is Las Vegas. So is Los Angeles. (It's in California, by the way. Did you know that?)
It's almost like Phoenix is still a one horse cowtown. For Pete's sake, we've grown up from being that. Big time.

I think you're playing victim just a bit. Phoenix itself plays up it's desert nature. And, plenty of people just say "Phoenix". You call these statements "disclaimers", but what are they disclaiming?

[Valley Native]

Originally Posted by JGMotorsport64

I think its the way we market ourselves.

The Valley
East Valley
West Valley
Valley of the Sun
Sky Harbor Airport
Arizona Center
Arizona Rattlers
Arizona Coyotes
Arizona Cardinals
Arizona Diamondbacks

Exactly! Makes no sense to have nearly everything in Phoenix named after Arizona. The changing of the pro sports teams from the Phoenix name to the Arizona title is a good example of Phoenix having little identity. I'm sure that's one reason why Phoenix doesn't get the respect it deserves. Very few people would even know that it's the nation's sixth largest city unless they look it up. It's our marketing, our focus, and our image. We still rely on retirees, snowbirds, and the weather as three of our economic indicators. It's definitely time for a makeover as far as that goes.

[SageCats]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

I think what has hurt Phoenix is it's national political reputation in the last 10 years. We have become too conservative. There was a time we were a libertarian state which preached fiscal conservatism and social liberalism. In order to lure more Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, the state needs to do more to adopt the values these business people espouse. Highly educated people from the east coast and Silicon Valley are very liberal and our state's reputation hurts our recruiting efforts. Things we can do to help those efforts are to create state wide anti-discrimination laws against LGBT, improving education funding, improving access to healthcare, create more affordable sustainable urban living, and eliminating the anti-immigration rhetoric.

I read Troy Farah's article on VICE. It was a scathing review of Phoenix but surprisingly, he made some valid points. From a marketing standpoint, we really should stop trying to make everything beige and desert tones. We need to stop marketing ourselves as the Desert Disneyland and just market ourselves as a large modern metropolitan city. For example, at Skyharbor airport's Terminal 4 underwent a redesign but it still contained the kitsch desert themes by maintaining that ugly brown carpet and cheesy fake dark brown rock or boulder theme. Can our airport not look more modern with glass, and steel such as Chicago Ohare, or Houston Intercontinental or Orlando's airport. Just because we live in a desert, does everything need to have a desert theme or Kachina look? Would some color really hurt? Also, we need to stop building the cookie cutter tope homes with red roof tiles. That is incredibly unappealing to outsiders. Thankfully, central Phoenix is doing more to create more unique looking homes. Gilbert is also doing more to eliminate this trite image with its Morrison Ranch homes.

Hasn't AZ started leaning a bit more to the left with all the midwest and north east transplants moving in? And what about all the Californians moving to the state?