Arizona SB1070 Anti Immigration Law - Page 15

They're getting free food at a restaurant, which you're paying for whilst not getting any benefit from it yourself. Ok. Why complain about the freeloaders and not the restaurant?

On May 13 2010 12:30 fight_or_flight wrote:
People don't understand that this country can only support a limited number of immigrants per year.

On May 13 2010 12:30 fight_or_flight wrote:
These illegals crossing the boarder are likely making it difficult for others to get in to the US, such as those from Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, etc. How is that fair?

On May 13 2010 12:30 fight_or_flight wrote:
On top of it, there is a strong movement within the illegal hispanic community that is very un-american. For example, all those students who walked out when some kids wore an american flag on cinco de mayo and were sent home...that was a wtf moment for me.

On May 13 2010 12:30 fight_or_flight wrote:
I don't get why enforcing immigration laws is such a big problem. If there is a hispanic guy who doesn't speak english, odds are he is illegal. Yet currently, illegals aren't deported.

People don't understand that this country can only support a limited number of immigrants per year. These illegals crossing the boarder are likely making it difficult for others to get in to the US, such as those from Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, etc. How is that fair?

On top of it, there is a strong movement within the illegal hispanic community that is very un-american. For example, all those students who walked out when some kids wore an american flag on cinco de mayo and were sent home...that was a wtf moment for me.

On May 13 2010 12:14 Yurebis wrote:
Do the illegal immigrants pay taxes or not? Which taxes are they not paying? Which services are they using that they're not paying? Why not get to the crust of it and ask (+answer) yourself these questions before complaining about freeloading illegal aliens?

On May 13 2010 12:14 Yurebis wrote:
Because as far as I know, they do pay for most public utilities that people complain about.

On May 13 2010 12:14 Yurebis wrote:
I just like to keep people honest.
Once they realize that it's an outrageous idea, the whole statist argument falls...
And that's even regardless of what I say. They'll know it when they'll know it. When there's no demand, the suppliers have to shut down... so if there's no demand for absolute landlords, then there won't be any more absolute landlords any further.
Same with public, unaccounted services.

On May 13 2010 12:14 Yurebis wrote:
The theater wasn't designed to show movies to everyone, it was designed to make a profit
And before you ask, profit isn't a bad motive. I'm not explaining why, here, however.

On May 13 2010 12:14 Yurebis wrote:
Limited budget? The state has a limited budget now? Since when? Before or after the trillion dollar deficit?

On May 13 2010 12:40 Romantic wrote:
That was a WTF moment for me too as a member of the ACLU. Personally, I want to work towards an America where nobody is offended by a damn American flag. But it takes work.

I don't think anyone is saying (except for some libertarians who want cheap labor etc etc) that we shouldn't enforce border controls. Most people I know in the ACLU don't consider the price payed in personal liberty to be worth the rounding up of a handful of immigrants already in the US.

On May 13 2010 12:33 hacpee wrote:

Wow are you an idiot? If someone steals my money and buys a snack with the money do I complain about the crook or the convenience store?

On May 13 2010 12:38 Romantic wrote:
My argument is most people are completely oblivious to the actual content of what they are eating in a Big Mac. You can say that they should look for it themselves and it isn't the governments business, but the information literally would not exist if it weren't for government forcing the information to be available.

Studies have shown people will very often pick healthier choices if they are presented with the information and a healthier option. That information and a healthier option is typically not available for the average dude to make that choice that is ultimately better for them in the long run. So, of course the company would want to supply X (but almost everyone could agree that its in the best interests of society if X is healthier food).

On May 13 2010 12:46 hacpee wrote:


Why do you keep calling them immigrants? They are not immigrants. They are illegals.

On May 13 2010 12:48 JinMaikeul wrote:
Yurebis, let's just get down to it. What's the actual point that you're trying to make? I see a lot of quoting and responding, but little in the way of a cohesive message or opinion...

On May 13 2010 12:46 Yurebis wrote:

1- The public funds are not yours. You forfeited them once you payed your taxes. Complain with the restaurant aka state. Vote wiser, send letters, all that wonderful democratic stuff.
2- The illegal aliens are not stealing from the public funds. The hospitals emergency rooms and schools are open tho whoever lives nearby. They do not ask for social security numbers or proof of citizenship for that exact reason. They could very well do so, but it would break the purpose of having a local public service. The illegal aliens are not stealing by entering and using them.


So to dumb things down for me, you mean there was this very life-standard-raising procedure that was unknown to all but government, and they selflessly obligated everyone to follow it for their own good?

I don't get how wouldn't it be freely adopted if it was recognized as so. You think it's so, people who read those labels think it's so, I think it's so too. Why the heck would a company not put those on to outperform companies that do not on this very useful and cheap procedure?

On May 13 2010 12:46 Yurebis wrote:

1- The public funds are not yours. You forfeited them once you payed your taxes. Complain with the restaurant aka state. Vote wiser, send letters, all that wonderful democratic stuff.
2- The illegal aliens are not stealing from the public funds. The hospitals emergency rooms and schools are open tho whoever lives nearby. They do not ask for social security numbers or proof of citizenship for that exact reason. They could very well do so, but it would break the purpose of having a local public service. The illegal aliens are not stealing by entering and using them.

On May 13 2010 12:42 JinMaikeul wrote:

All the more reason that we need people living here to be documented rather than undocumented. So long as they remain undocumented, we'll never know, will we?

On May 13 2010 12:42 JinMaikeul wrote:

Such as?

On May 13 2010 12:42 JinMaikeul wrote:

The government and state are important and necessary despite any and all arguments you may make against them. To me, you seem very idealistic, but not very practical. There will always be landlords whether or not people want them or like them.

On May 13 2010 12:42 JinMaikeul wrote:

I never said profit was a bad motive. Just like a theater isn't designed to show movies to its patrons. Likewise, a government is designed with its citizens in mind. The government isn't a buffet table for anyone to come and take what they please. The government is very much like a business in that it has to manage its flow of resources, make investments, and maintain financial stability.

On May 13 2010 12:42 JinMaikeul wrote:

Yes, despite what you may have heard, resources are limited... Hence, the word DEFICIT in budget deficit...

On May 13 2010 12:55 Yurebis wrote:

You mean no one knows these things?
1- do illegal immigrants pay taxes or not? which?
Should be easily answered by any tax expert or enthusiast (lol tax enthusiast.. sounds wrong)
2-Which services are they using?
Should be easily answered by knowing what public services can be used without a social security number..
3-Why not ask yourself that?
Should be able to be answered without recoursing to "I can't answer it unless everyone is documented and therefore there are no illegal aliens to account for" ...


School for sure, through property tax, and I'm not sure but I'd say public hospitals' emergency rooms too, eagerly waiting to be corrected.


Landlords, yeah, but absolute landlords that reign over all other landlords, seems silly to me.
And it will indeed go on despite what I say, as long as people like you demand it (even without any logically explained reason)


But without the competition. And only as much fiscal responsibility as it takes for them to keep afloat (borderline revolution lol)


haha
It's limited by how much they can owe? doesn't sound that financially hard to manage to me, nor conventional finance for that matter

On May 13 2010 12:48 JinMaikeul wrote:
Yurebis, let's just get down to it. What's the actual point that you're trying to make? I see a lot of quoting and responding, but little in the way of a cohesive message or opinion...

On May 13 2010 12:49 jpak wrote:


Is it wrong to argue for the sake of arguing?

On May 13 2010 12:49 jpak wrote:


Is it wrong to argue for the sake of arguing?

On May 13 2010 12:58 JinMaikeul wrote:


Not necessarily, but it's a waste of everyone's time if all he's going to do is argue against what other people say while never really saying anything himself. It makes it worse when it feels like he's saying one thing one moment and another thing another moment so long as it conflicts with the other person's statements.

On May 12 2010 10:07 poor newb wrote:
you get what you vote for