The AZ Immigration Law Has Been Decided

Misterveritis · Jul 4, 2012

teamosil said:
The thing is, your state is not doing fine.

You sure do skip around. We were talking about illegal aliens, or so I thought.

It's an economic disaster.

We did just end 136 years of Democrat party rule.

Your median household income is almost $10k below the national average and almost $20k behind states like California, New York, Washington state or New Jersey. $10k is the difference between the US and Italy. $20k is approaching the difference between the US and Mexico.

You schools consistently rank in the bottom 5 states. 15% of the population of your state is classified as illiterate.

I'm not just trying to rag on you for the sake of being mean. More than anything else in this country, we need red states to stop settling for dropping out of school and doing low end jobs. We need you to catch up. The well being of our entire country depends on it. If the red states caught up with the blue states, it would be the biggest economic boom the country has ever seen. If they continue falling behind, it will continue to drag the rest of the country down with it. People in red states need to stay in school. It's that simple.

Not at all. You can see how deep the damage of one party, liberal rule is.

As far as blue states go let's watch another decade. California is already a failed state. I left there to come here. From my friends I left behind it continues to become dysfunctional in every area.

Misterveritis · Jul 4, 2012

James Cessna said:
Here is an interesting analsis, Misterveritis.

You may have seen it before. It is quite an eye opener.

EMILIO LEGAL vs. JOSE ILLEGAL

You have two families: "Emilio Legal" and "Jose Illegal". Both families have two parents, two children, and live in southern California.

Emilio Legal works in construction, has a Social Security Number and makes $25.00 per hour with taxes deducted.

Jose Illegal also works in construction, has NO Social Security Number, and gets paid $15.00 cash "under the table".

Ready? … Now pay very close attention...

Emilio Legal: $25.00 per hour x 40 hours = $1,000.00 per week, or $52,000.00 per year. Now take 30% away for state and federal tax; Emilio Legal now has $31,231.00.

Jose Illegal: $15.00 per hour x 40 hours = $600.00 per week, or $31,200.00 per year. Jose Illegal pays no taxes. Jose Illegal now has $31,200.00.

Emilio Legal pays medical and dental insurance with limited coverage for his family at $600.00 per month, or $7,200.00 per year. Emilio Legal now has $24,031.00.

Jose Illegal has full medical and dental coverage through the state and local clinics at a cost of $0.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

Emilio Legal makes too much money and is not eligible for food stamps or state welfare. Emilio Legal pays $500.00 per month for food, or $6,000.00 per year. Emilio Legal now has $18,031.00.

Jose Illegal has no documented income and is eligible for food stamps and state welfare. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

Emilio Legal pays rent of $1,200.00 per month, or $14,400.00 per year. Emilio Legal now has $9,631.00.

Jose Illegal receives a $500.00 per month federal rent subsidy. Jose Illegal pays out that $500.00 per month, or $6,000.00 per year. Jose Illegal still has $31,200.00.

Emilio Legal pays $200.00 per month, or $2,400.00 for auto insurance. Emilio Legal now has $7,231.00.

Jose Illegal says, "We don't need no expensive auto insurance!" and still has $31,200.00.

Emilio Legal has to make his $7,231.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, clothes and shoes for his family, etc.

Jose Illegal has to make his $31,200.00 stretch to pay utilities, gasoline, clothes and shoes for his family and what he faithfully sends out of the country to his relatives in Mexico every month.

Emilio Legal now works overtime on Saturdays or gets a part time job after work.

Jose Illegal has nights and weekends off to enjoy with his family.

Emilio Legal's and Jose Illegal's children both attend the same school. Emilio Legal pays for his children's lunches while Jose Illegal's children get a government sponsored lunch. Jose Illegal's children have an after school ESL program. Emilio Legal's children go directly home after school.

Emilio Legal and Jose Illegal both enjoy the same police and fire services and emergency room services and Public Park and library services but Emilio has paid for them and Jose did not pay.

So we passed laws to penalize employers who hire illegals. Illegals leave the state and are replaced by American citizens were were unemployed and drawing significant amounts of money from the taxpayers.

I know you are invested in open borders. I am invested in American citizens.

teamosil · Jul 4, 2012

Misterveritis said:
We did just end 136 years of Democrat party rule.

Oh baloney. You were lead by the dixiecrats and when they switched over to the GOP you went with them. Nothing changed.

Misterveritis said:
California is already a failed state.

LOL. Are you kidding me? You're in freaking Alabama and you're calling California a failed state? Dude. Our median household makes almost $20k more a year than your median household. We're as far ahead of you as you are ahead of Mexico. It's totally implausible that you are unaware of that.

mike2810 · Jul 4, 2012

teamosil said:
LOL. Are you kidding me? You're in freaking Alabama and you're calling California a failed state? Dude. Our median household makes almost $20k more a year than your median household. We're as far ahead of you as you are ahead of Mexico. It's totally implausible that you are unaware of that.

Yet, how much in debt is your State? Income / dollars is not the only indicator if a State is good/bad.

You do have Pelosi and Fienstien, that pretty much is a fail. (in fairness we have Brewer/McCain):lol:

teamosil · Jul 4, 2012

mike2810 said:
Yet, how much in debt is your State? Income / dollars is not the only indicator if a State is good/bad.

It is true that median household income isn't the only economic indicator. IMO, it is the most important one though.

As for deficit, CA, AZ and AL are all pretty much in the same shape. AZ's deficit is 0.57% of its GDP, AL's is 0.68% of its GDP, CA's is 0.82% of it's GDP. CA's is slightly higher, but the difference between 0.57% and 0.82% is pretty minor. Some states have deficits up in the 2% range, some have 0%, but most are between 0.5% and 1%.

California's deficit just seems bigger because it's a bigger state with a bigger GDP. If you look at absolute values for anything, California tops the list just because of its size.

Those are very manageable numbers. Remember that the federal government is running a deficit up around 10% of its GDP.

The budget problem California has isn't that its deficit is too big, the problem is the rigidity that the voter propositions have introduced into the system. They mandate a bunch of spending that the legislature can't overturn and they limit tax revenues at the same time. So there are actually very few places where the government can raise revenues or cut spending, so those areas get hit hard. For example, our property taxes are very low because they're locked in by propositions, so our income taxes have to be high to offset it. And much of government spending is locked in, but education isn't, so it gets cut too much to make up for it.

That's a serious issue for sure. But to equate that to a failed state is absurd. It's just some stupid propositions we need to get repealed. The state is doing pretty well overall. It's a more volatile economy than most. We rely heavily on high risk/high reward industries like software and biotech and whatnot. When the economy is bad, we get hit harder than most states, but when the economy is good, we boom bigger than most states too. Keep in mind that during both of the last booms we set all time records for having the largest budget surplus ever of any state.

mike2810 said:
You do have Pelosi and Fienstien, that pretty much is a fail. (in fairness we have Brewer/McCain):lol:

LOL. I think Brewer and Pelosi are probably pretty parallel. I love Pelosi and hate Brewer, but I'll acknowledge that Pelosi kind of is to the left what Brewer is to the right.

But it's weird that you list Feinstein and McCain as fails! They're both pretty moderate. Boxer is definitely more radical than Feinstein.

mike2810 · Jul 4, 2012

teamosil said:
It is true that median household income isn't the only economic indicator. IMO, it is the most important one though.

As for deficit, CA, AZ and AL are all pretty much in the same shape. AZ's deficit is 0.57% of its GDP, AL's is 0.68% of its GDP, CA's is 0.82% of it's GDP. CA's is slightly higher, but the difference between 0.57% and 0.82% is pretty minor. Some states have deficits up in the 2% range, some have 0%, but most are between 0.5% and 1%.

California's deficit just seems bigger because it's a bigger state with a bigger GDP. If you look at absolute values for anything, California tops the list just because of its size.

Those are very manageable numbers. Remember that the federal government is running a deficit up around 10% of its GDP.

The budget problem California has isn't that its deficit is too big, the problem is the rigidity that the voter propositions have introduced into the system. They mandate a bunch of spending that the legislature can't overturn and they limit tax revenues at the same time. So there are actually very few places where the government can raise revenues or cut spending, so those areas get hit hard. For example, our property taxes are very low because they're locked in by propositions, so our income taxes have to be high to offset it. And much of government spending is locked in, but education isn't, so it gets cut too much to make up for it.

That's a serious issue for sure. But to equate that to a failed state is absurd. It's just some stupid propositions we need to get repealed. The state is doing pretty well overall. It's a more volatile economy than most. We rely heavily on high risk/high reward industries like software and biotech and whatnot. When the economy is bad, we get hit harder than most states, but when the economy is good, we boom bigger than most states too. Keep in mind that during both of the last booms we set all time records for having the largest budget surplus ever of any state.

LOL. I think Brewer and Pelosi are probably pretty parallel. I love Pelosi and hate Brewer, but I'll acknowledge that Pelosi kind of is to the left what Brewer is to the right.

But it's weird that you list Feinstein and McCain as fails! They're both pretty moderate. Boxer is definitely more radical than Feinstein.

McCain has been to wimpy on some issues for my taste.
All is good in CA and AZ.

Misterveritis · Jul 4, 2012

teamosil said:
Oh baloney. You were lead by the dixiecrats and when they switched over to the GOP you went with them. Nothing changed.

Hmm. Quandary. Are you a fool or a liar? Only your hairdresser knows for sure.

LOL. Are you kidding me? You're in freaking Alabama and you're calling California a failed state? Dude. Our median household makes almost $20k more a year than your median household. We're as far ahead of you as you are ahead of Mexico. It's totally implausible that you are unaware of that.

The difference is that we are on our way up and California is already on its way out.

teamosil · Jul 4, 2012

Misterveritis said:
Hmm. Quandary. Are you a fool or a liar? Only your hairdresser knows for sure.

What kiddo? Are you unclear on the fact that your leaders were dixiecrats? Uh, Wallace was the pinnacle of dixiecratdom...

Misterveritis said:
The difference is that we are on our way up and California is already on its way out.

LOL. So you think Alabama is going to like snatch the leader spot up on the next big boom away from CA? Yeah...

Misterveritis · Jul 5, 2012

teamosil said:
What kiddo? Are you unclear on the fact that your leaders were dixiecrats? Uh, Wallace was the pinnacle of dixiecratdom...+

136 years of one party democrat rule ended in the last election. Call theme
what you want. Alabama suffered for 136 years of liberal, one party rule. We voted in many conservatives and many more Republicans (Handshake with Alabama) in the last election. They are turning things around. Republican Handshake with Alabama

The difference between Alabama and California is that our dark days are behind us while your future will be filled with them.

LOL. So you think Alabama is going to like snatch the leader spot up on the next big boom away from CA? Yeah...

Why does California have higher unemployment than almost everywhere?

Currently, California has the second highest unemployment rate in the United States. Nevada has the first. But California Board of Equalization member George Runner believes California is rapidly head to the top spot on the list (as originally published in the Press Enterprise):

Will California have the highest unemployment rate in the United States? - Orange Punch : The Orange County Register
This story is about a year old. How are you doing this year?
California currently has an unemployment rate of 10.9 percent.
California is ranked number 49 in the nation for their rate of employment.
Ask.com - What's Your Question?
Oh. Not that well.

mac · Jul 5, 2012

PrometheusBound said:
We should abuse and tyrannize these economic traitors. Give patriotic Americans a chance to run those businesses.

Why should we treat these "traitors" in a way that is treasonous to other American ideals?

PrometheusBound · Jul 5, 2012

Matt Foley said:
No actually that will increase demand for legal employees.

Too much work, too much beaurocracy. bureaucracy.

You gonna put a gun to their head to make them work?

Don't believe the lie that people can easily and quickly get another job.

Fast track the confiscation. This fear of drawn-up litigation is something made up by people who can stop it but don't really want to.

If he doesn't want to work, that's his problem. We'll promote whoever does his job when he takes off. Quit believing in rights and procedures that are against the common good.

PrometheusBound · Jul 5, 2012

AdamT said:
You realize that you're making the union argument, right? Employers are just paying low wages because they're greedy -- not because they have to to remain competitive. Sometimes its true -- in both cases -- and sometimes it's not. Sometimes the loss of undocumented workers will result in more legal workers being hired, and sometimes a company can simply no longer compete with foreign competition.

The truth is that the economy is better off with illegals than it would be without them. Immigration laws in Arizona and Alabama come at a great economic cost | Business | TIME.com

Of course it would be better still if we brought them out of the shadows with immigration reform.

I wish the will of the majority would come out of the shadows with a baseball bat to hit a home run on the job thieves and strike out the traitors who enable them.

clownboy · Jul 5, 2012

I still believe the best solution left for Arizona is to escort the illegals the feds won't touch to the California border. Give them a complimentary "ICE didn't want me" hat and turn them loose with an addressed (to ICE) and stamped postcard ready for mail that says, "thanks for the ride!"

PrometheusBound · Jul 5, 2012

mac said:
Why should we treat these "traitors" in a way that is treasonous to other American ideals?

The same people who want to treat property as a person want to treat a person as property.

j-mac · Jul 5, 2012

MoSurveyor said:
LOL! Would you care to review Bush's I & II stance on immigration then try telling that lie, again? The repo's are even worse. They need to keep their business buddy's in cheap labor.

Why? Is it that every crappy over reach that Obama does, it has to have an immediate knee jerk, 'Well, Bush....." It's such BS!

j-mac · Jul 5, 2012

mac said:
Why should we treat these "traitors" in a way that is treasonous to other American ideals?

Why because they are evil, greedy business fat cats of course....Let's see how people like it when their pack of boneless chicken breasts for the grill costs them $22.00 for the same pack they now pay $9.50 for....

mac · Jul 5, 2012

PrometheusBound said:
The same people who want to treat property as a person want to treat a person as property.

How about we drop the cliche's and make points, m'kay?

teamosil · Jul 5, 2012

Misterveritis said:
136 years of one party democrat rule ended in the last election.

Actually, 4 of your 6 last governors have been Republicans. That takes you back to Wallace. And you've voted for Republicans for president every time since 1964 except Carter, who is from the state next door.

Misterveritis said:
The difference between Alabama and California is that our dark days are behind us while your future will be filled with them.

Yeah.. Sky high illiteracy rates, a miniscule percentage of the population with graduate degrees, about half as many college degrees per capita as CA, heavy investment in the previous generation's industries... That's the ticket to success! lol.

Misterveritis said:
Why does California have higher unemployment than almost everywhere?

Because, as I said, CA's economy is much more volatile than most states. It is heavily invested in high risk/high reward industries like biotech and software and whatnot. So, when things are good, they've very good there, and when things are bad, they're very bad there. Remember, just a few years ago CA had amongst the lowest unemployment rates and the largest budget surplus ever for any state in this country. The unemployment in CA is different than in most states. The hardest hit industries were things like software. Somebody who gets laid off for a couple years after making $160k for a decade isn't in the same boat as somebody who gets laid off after barely making enough to get by.

Misterveritis · Jul 5, 2012

teamosil said:
Actually, 4 of your 6 last governors have been Republicans. That takes you back to Wallace. And you've voted for Republicans for president every time since 1964 except Carter, who is from the state next door.

This state has a weak governor model. The real power resides in the legislature. And that, along with almost every single state office of relevance has been in the hands of liberal democrats for 136 years. The last election was essentially a clean sweep with nearly all public offices being won by Republicans. Now all we have to do is behave honorably and to the benefit of the citizens' rights to be as free as possible from government meddling.

Yeah.. Sky high illiteracy rates, a miniscule percentage of the population with graduate degrees, about half as many college degrees per capita as CA, heavy investment in the previous generation's industries... That's the ticket to success! lol.

...combined with low taxes, a business-friendly environment, low state regulations...and anti-illegal alien laws.

That is why our dark days are behind us. While California will have dark days as far as the eye can see. It is a shame really. That state flushed so much potential down the liberal, statist, drain.

I wish California all the best. Sincerely. But I know you guys will avoid the remedies that will make a difference in favor of more liberalism, more statism, more socialism, more business-destructive policies and regulations...it is a real shame.

teamosil · Jul 5, 2012

Misterveritis said:
This state has a weak governor model. The real power resides in the legislature. And that, along with almost every single state office of relevance has been in the hands of liberal democrats for 136 years. The last election was essentially a clean sweep with nearly all public offices being won by Republicans. Now all we have to do is behave honorably and to the benefit of the citizens' rights to be as free as possible from government meddling.

...combined with low taxes, a business-friendly environment, low state regulations...and anti-illegal alien laws.

That is why our dark days are behind us. While California will have dark days as far as the eye can see. It is a shame really. That state flushed so much potential down the liberal, statist, drain.

I wish California all the best. Sincerely. But I know you guys will avoid the remedies that will make a difference in favor of more liberalism, more statism, more socialism, more business-destructive policies and regulations...it is a real shame.

If the Republican model for running a state worked better than the Democratic one, why are virtually all blue states head and shoulders above virtually all red states economically? Do you really think the policy of underinvesting in the foundations of society is going to work better for Alabama than it has for all the other states? Do you really think Alabama has been investing in the foundations all along?

Misterveritis · Jul 5, 2012

teamosil said:
If the Republican model for running a state worked better than the Democratic one, why are virtually all blue states head and shoulders above virtually all red states economically? Do you really think the policy of underinvesting in the foundations of society is going to work better for Alabama than it has for all the other states? Do you really think Alabama has been investing in the foundations all along?

Clearly it is too soon to tell whether a Republican majority can turn this state around. I do see evidence of it. Already much of the Republican handshake with Alabama legislation has been passed. The most important was the illegal alien law. Once it was passed many, but not all, illegals left the state. Local stories estimate as many as 80,000 moved into Georgia, Mississippi and Tennessee.

And American citizens moved into jobs that had been done by illegals. One county, where many of the illegals were, has seen a drop to just above 5%.

Unfortunately when you say investment I know you mean tax, borrow and spend. That may or may not work in the short run but it always leads to ruin in the long run. Maybe, just maybe, that is why California has just about the lowest employment rate in the nation, the middle class are fleeing and over a hundred major businesses have left the state.

Businesses are coming here.

Where I live, Huntsville, used to have the highest per capita number of masters degrees and PhDs in the nation until the one term Marxist single handedly demolished NASA and the defense industry. Now it seems the highest number of degrees are concentrated in WADC.

If you want a problem solved send it to Huntsville. If you want to make it worse send it to Washington DC.

teamosil · Jul 5, 2012

Misterveritis said:
Clearly it is too soon to tell whether a Republican majority can turn this state around. I do see evidence of it. Already much of the Republican handshake with Alabama legislation has been passed. The most important was the illegal alien law. Once it was passed many, but not all, illegals left the state. Local stories estimate as many as 80,000 moved into Georgia, Mississippi and Tennessee.

And American citizens moved into jobs that had been done by illegals. One county, where many of the illegals were, has seen a drop to just above 5%.

Unfortunately when you say investment I know you mean tax, borrow and spend. That may or may not work in the short run but it always leads to ruin in the long run. Maybe, just maybe, that is why California has just about the lowest employment rate in the nation, the middle class are fleeing and over a hundred major businesses have left the state.

Businesses are coming here.

Where I live, Huntsville, used to have the highest per capita number of masters degrees and PhDs in the nation until the one term Marxist single handedly demolished NASA and the defense industry. Now it seems the highest number of degrees are concentrated in WADC.

If you want a problem solved send it to Huntsville. If you want to make it worse send it to Washington DC.

You talk as though the idea of underinvesting in the foundations of your society so that super rich people can have even lower taxes is some newfangled idea that has yet to be tried... That is how all the red states, including Alabama, have been running things for generations. That's why they're so far behind the rest of the country- duh, if you don't invest in keeping your society strong, your society doesn't turn out strong.

KevinKohler · Jul 5, 2012

teamosil said:
You talk as though the idea of underinvesting in the foundations of your society so that super rich people can have even lower taxes is some newfangled idea that has yet to be tried... That is how all the red states, including Alabama, have been running things for generations. That's why they're so far behind the rest of the country- duh, if you don't invest in keeping your society strong, your society doesn't turn out strong.

Define "strong" society. I'm from SC, moved to Fl for 6 years, then to CT, where I've been for the last 8 years or so. I would say that income disparity, over all poverty, crime, and any other measure is society you can think of, are far, far, FAR worse here than in SC or Fl combined.

teamosil · Jul 5, 2012

KevinKohler said:
Define "strong" society. I'm from SC, moved to Fl for 6 years, then to CT, where I've been for the last 8 years or so. I would say that income disparity, over all poverty, crime, and any other measure is society you can think of, are far, far, FAR worse here than in SC or Fl combined.

Odd you perceive it that way. The percentage of people living below the poverty line in SC is more than twice as high as in CT. Florida is in the middle. The median income in CT is almost $25k higher. CT is actually the third richest state going by median income. And that's the median. If there were a really high rich/everybody else gap, the median would be low and the average high, but the median is high, which means the wealth is spread very broadly.

So, somehow you're more aware of the poverty in CT than you were in SC. Could be the city you live in. One city to the next in either state can be a night and day difference. It could also be that CT presumably has more urban poverty, where SC most likely has more rural poverty. Rural poverty is less noticeable, and in some ways, less harsh. If a person lives out in the woods in a shack, at least they can grow food and raise animals and hunt and whatnot. And the cost of living is much lower in rural environments.

But, to answer your question, by "strong", I mean a lot of things. Educated, healthy, has access to enough resources and opportunities to progress in life, leading economic booms and scientific innovations, etc. It certainly is not just about median income, although that plays a huge role in facilitating everything else. But, for example, 35% of people in CT have college degrees vs. 24% in SC. I would consider that a crucial measure of the strength of the societies in the two states.

Misterveritis · Jul 5, 2012

teamosil said:
You talk as though the idea of underinvesting in the foundations of your society so that super rich people can have even lower taxes is some newfangled idea that has yet to be tried... That is how all the red states, including Alabama, have been running things for generations. That's why they're so far behind the rest of the country- duh, if you don't invest in keeping your society strong, your society doesn't turn out strong.

You really don't get it very often, do you?

This state has been dominated by liberal democrats for more than one hundred years.

But no longer. As is appropriate, the liberal democrats were tossed onto the ash heap of history.

Now the experiment in representative democracy begins.