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.
From what you lefties keep telling us is these people are here to work so there is no way they are going to choose jail over deportation.
So you were just talking out of a typically non-vocal orifice when you proposed the choice to begin with?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedNC
For those few that may choose jail, we would save more than enough in reduced social services costs to offset any costs to jail the invaders that wont leave.
I see. Picking up 100% of their support costs is a reduction from what we are currently providing. Do you think any of this through before you post it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedNC
If it did become a burden then have them stay at the prison in Maricopa, Arizona. Joe Arpaio would be happy take them in at a cost of $0.90 per day per prisoner.
I guess he's still trying to raise funds after settling the Scott Norberg wrongful death suit against him for $8.25 million.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedNC
As for industries all you have to do is look at swift meat packing to see that they had thousands of legal applicants to fill the jobs left open by the illegal invaders.
Well, let's just send ICE in there again. Only this time, don't tell Swift they're coming, and don't delay the raid by a week at their request so they can move out the 40% of the workforce that they didn't want to lose as the result of the first one.
So you were just talking out of a typically non-vocal orifice when you proposed the choice to begin with?
Makes more sense then what you are spewing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
I see. Picking up 100% of their support costs is a reduction from what we are currently providing. Do you think any of this through before you post it?
It would be much less than the services that are now provided such health care for their dependants, educating five or more of their children, and the countless additional infrastructure that is required.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
I guess he's still trying to raise funds after settling the Scott Norberg wrongful death suit against him for $8.25 million.
His prison system a great example of how criminals should be treated. The cost savings alone are worth looking into for all prisons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
Well, let's just send ICE in there again. Only this time, don't tell Swift they're coming, and don't delay the raid by a week at their request so they can move out the 40% of the workforce that they didn't want to lose as the result of the first one.
Spin it however you want. The fact is this company broke the law and as a result they were forced to hire legal workers and pay a fair wage.
It would be much less than the services that are now provided such health care for their dependants, educating five or more of their children, and the countless additional infrastructure that is required.
You're leaving all those children out there on their own? That's nice. But with no more parent to care for them in any way at all, we'll be paying 100% for the parent, and 100% for the children. Explain again how 100% is less than before?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedNC
His prison system a great example of how criminals should be treated. The cost savings alone are worth looking into for all prisons.
He's a publicity-seeking bruto-crat. Want to tell us how he staged an assassination attempt on himself and then jailed a guy for four years, just to make it look good? A real American hero, Joe Arpaio...
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedNC
Spin it however you want. The fact is this company broke the law and as a result they were forced to hire legal workers and pay a fair wage.
Swift is a union shop. United Food & Commercial Workers Union. Wages stayed the same. Though no charges were ever brought against the company, the raid did cost the company $30 million, mostly in recruiting and training costs so those new new legal hires could get close to as good at the job as those unskilled, uneducated, undocumented Mexicans who did the work before had been. Took five months to get back to capacity. And now, of course, Swift has been sold off to a Brazilian corporation. What a great triumph for America. As for the workers arrested, by and large they were bussed off to El Paso or Albuquerque, interviewed, and then released. No one knows where they (or their families) are now...
happyappy;861606]
The people have new information and empirical data upon which to draw; the people have decided a new direction is necessary; the government has been informed of this and must now accomplish what the people have instructed it to do; the government must adhere to the demands of the people—or we all have to admit that we now have an authoritarian-republican form of government.
The United States is a Constitutional Rebublic with a democratic form of elections. The government is not a true democracy (thankfully) based on the will of 50.1% of the people. The elected officials do not adhere to the demands of the people, they adhere to the Constitution and Laws of the Republic. The peoples voice come into play during elections. Read the oath of any public office, none say the official shall uphold the will of the people, they do say things like uphold the Constitution, and the Laws of the State.
Given what you have stated, if the demands of the "people" are that all red heads should be shaved, then the barbers would be busy.
And while you all blame the Government for the war and misery, why is there no mention that forgien nationals started this incident? Oh I forgot, the Government/Bush just invaded Afghanistan/Iraq for no reason, right after killing all those people in the towers.
Some of you need to remove your rose colored glasses.
The United States is a Constitutional Rebublic with a democratic form of elections. The government is not a true democracy (thankfully) based on the will of 50.1% of the people. The elected officials do not adhere to the demands of the people, they adhere to the Constitution and Laws of the Republic. The peoples voice come into play during elections. Read the oath of any public office, none say the official shall uphold the will of the people, they do say things like uphold the Constitution, and the Laws of the State.
Given what you have stated, if the demands of the "people" are that all red heads should be shaved, then the barbers would be busy.
And while you all blame the Government for the war and misery, why is there no mention that forgien nationals started this incident? Oh I forgot, the Government/Bush just invaded Afghanistan/Iraq for no reason, right after killing all those people in the towers.
Some of you need to remove your rose colored glasses.
Well, Crashcop, you’ve stated your opinion so now I’ll state mine.
First, though, let’s dispense with your question “. . . why is there no mention that forgien nationals started this incident?” I’ve only been here a few weeks, but I’ve seen many threads from the past, see some active now, and believe it’s likely we’ll see many in the future in which the subject of the terrorists to which you refer is discussed. THIS thread however has another subject and that is what the first part of your opinion addressed.
We are a democracy that uses the mechanism of a republican form of government to accomplish our self rule. I’m sure we’ve all seen the definitions in the many arguments that take place in online forums. Sooner or later this subject seems to come up, so here it is for reference:
de•moc•ra•cy
n. pl. de•moc•ra•cies
1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
It’s a mouthful to say, “We’re going to spread the democratic form of self rule using the mechanism of a republican form of government throughout the world.” So, instead, it’s shortened to “we’re spreading democracy.”
In the days of our founders the word democracy meant a pure democracy or direct democracy or true democracy, as you stated. The distinction was not necessary in those days. The republican form of government using the vote to elect representatives was adopted after much debate. And it was fought against by many because republics are not difficult to steal from the people if they are not vigilant—as we can plainly see from our present circumstances. But, as Benjamin Franklin said, “You have a republic, madam, if you can keep it.”
And it’s a shame about the “50.1%” that you mention. I recently read an article I consider one of the best regarding the problems that are often encountered when the best an idea can garner is support from virtually half the people; I’ll quote portions for effect:
“Until the Reds and the Blues abandon the idea of national standards . . . the people of the United States should be in constant fear of 50% plus one utilizing the monopoly of State power to impose . . . choices on the 50% minus one. Make no mistake; the battle to become that majority will be bloody.” ~ Derek M. Johnson, The Trouble With Public Policy, Copyright 2006 LewRockwell.com
In our system, our elected representatives make decisions in our stead in the halls of government. There are many occasions in which the 50% plus one rule is used by the representatives, and others in which 2/3rds is required. However, it seems to me you are suggesting they do not necessarily have to listen to and act upon the will of the people. If that’s true, Crashcop, then we have an authoritarian republican mechanism that is beholden to factions. That’s not the government intended by our Founders or as established by the Constitution. Elected representatives who do NOT listen to the will of the people are not generally reelected, and, if they are, it is the people who are at fault—because the people are in charge of their self rule!
When our governments, at any level, cause misery and damage, it is up to the people to affect change. Fight against it all you will, Crashcop, but as much as you don’t want to acknowledge those letters d-e-m-o-c-r-a (as in Democrat) and want only to recognize the letters r-e-p-u-b-l-i-c (as in Republican), we live in a democracy whose republican form of governance either is close to being, or has already been, taken over by factions. If we don’t get control back, we won’t be able to prevent future damage and misery.
Oh, and by the way (and of course this is silliness), if the people decided “that all red heads should be shaved” then our representatives had better become barbers if necessary to get the job done.
Last edited by happyappy; 06-11-2007 at 08:42 AM..
I wasn't able to cast a vote in the poll because of the way the choices were worded.
I don't believe it's the fault of the wealthy. I believe it's the fault of the citizenry for not holding their representatives accountable or for electing the wrong representatives to begin with. Opportunities handed out by government that are seized by the wealthy may cause us to consider many of them as avaricious and socially irresponsible, but it is the government handouts that are the problem. Many whose political positions are far different from mine complain about handouts to various groups in America they believe are undeserving but fail to bring attention to handouts accepted by the group that wants to or is willing to own America for all intents and purposes. Such undeserving handouts can be laid at the feet of all of us because it’s our duty to control the government.
If you’re a Democrat and frustrated because Republicans can still block passage of legislation and the threat of veto by the President frustrates yet more, don’t let that quiet you (or if the reverse is true for Republicans), let it cause ever more complaining to whomever will listen to, or read, or will print said complaints.
In part, I agree with your friend; it is indeed the fault of the citizenry. But I don’t believe the people are too stupid. I believe that too many don’t pay close attention, too many don’t care, and too many aren’t willing to expend efforts to effect change.
A friend of mine feels that the government's misconduct is the fault of the people. She says the people are stupid because they keep voting them in.
I agree. Take Ted Kennedy, the Senator from Masschussetts who has been there for years, oppressing the poor, hating America and seeking its demise. THis moron has been there for at least 20 years. And the nitwits in Mass keep voting him in.
Or take Barbara Boxer or Diane Feinsten, both US Senators from California. The duo have made anti-American statements, support a 'Terrorist Bill of Rights' and despise the United States and its people. And yet, people keep voting for them.
I think people need to be held personally accountable for their behavior and actions. If you murder someone, you will get the death penalty, so should you not be held accountable for voting for these villains.
Unless people in this country take a stand and say 'I will NOT vote for a crook like Hillary Clinton' or stand against looney toons like Comrade Barack Obama (Osama) or hypocrites like John Edwards, then the people deserve to suffer the consequences.
Kind of a Biased poll isn't it. Where are the true answers? You can't just blame the rich. We elect thee politicians. This is like asking who's fault is it that there is homelessness? The bum that won't work, Or the Bum that can't beg properly? Just way to closed minded and Biased.
We are a democracy that uses the mechanism of a republican form of government to accomplish our self rule. I’m sure we’ve all seen the definitions in the many arguments that take place in online forums. Sooner or later this subject seems to come up, so here it is for reference:
de•moc•ra•cy
n. pl. de•moc•ra•cies
1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Main Entry: re·pub·lic
Pronunciation: ri-'p&-blik
Function: noun
Etymology: French république, from Middle French republique, from Latin respublica, from res thing, wealth + publica, feminine of publicus public -
1 a (1) : a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government b (1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government c: a usually specified republican government of a political unit <the French Fourth Republic> Merriam-Webster Online
The United States is a republic governed by law with Court review.
Quote:
And it’s a shame about the “50.1%” that you mention. I recently read an article I consider one of the best regarding the problems that are often encountered when the best an idea can garner is support from virtually half the people; I’ll quote portions for effect:
“Until the Reds and the Blues abandon the idea of national standards . . . the people of the United States should be in constant fear of 50% plus one utilizing the monopoly of State power to impose . . . choices on the 50% minus one. Make no mistake; the battle to become that majority will be bloody.” ~ Derek M. Johnson, The Trouble With Public Policy, Copyright 2006 LewRockwell.com
I would agree if not for Court review.
Quote:
In our system, our elected representatives make decisions in our stead in the halls of government. There are many occasions in which the 50% plus one rule is used by the representatives, and others in which 2/3rds is required. However, it seems to me you are suggesting they do not necessarily have to listen to and act upon the will of the people. If that’s true, Crashcop, then we have an authoritarian republican mechanism that is beholden to factions. That’s not the government intended by ourFounders or as established by the Constitution. Elected representatives who do NOT listen to the will of the people are not generally reelected, and, if they are, it is the people who are at fault—because the people are in charge of their self rule!
The system of government has checks and balances, the people have the right to "vote them out" or in some cases use a recall petition. That is the power given to the people.
One more point our Founding Fathers intended our government to be one in which white male land owners, christian of course, had the only say. They were greedy land owners that believed in slavery, and women/children were property that could be beaten, they did not believe in marriage vows, it seems.
Quote:
When our governments, at any level, cause misery and damage, it is up to the people to affect change. Fight against it all you will, Crashcop, but as much as you don’t want to acknowledge those letters d-e-m-o-c-r-a (as in Democrat) and want only to recognize the letters r-e-p-u-b-l-i-c (as in Republican), we live in a democracy whose republican form of governance either is close to being, or has already been, taken over by factions. If we don’t get control back, we won’t be able to prevent future damage and misery.
This debate has nothing to due with the political parties, of which I believe the two party system is flawed.
Quote:
Oh, and by the way (and of course this is silliness), if the people decided “that all red heads should be shaved” then our representatives had better become barbers if necessary to get the job done.
Of course this will not happen, just as we do not burn people at the stake, flog, whip, or enslave etc...because we are a nation of laws with court review. That is not a democracy.
The execution of Socrates was carried out by a true democratic state, Athens. How dare he speakout against a government supported by over 50% of the "people".
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.
Where are the true answers?
This is like asking who's fault is it that there is homelessness?
The bum that won't work, Or the Bum that can't beg properly? Just way to closed minded and Biased.
