• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The AZ Immigration Law Has Been Decided

I agree PARTLY. But I see NO NEED to import unskilled or semi-skilled FORIEGN labor SIMPLY to artificially depress wages and increase profits IN THE USA. No job, doing honest, hard work is BENEATH an American citizen, that sends a VERY BAD message to our children. Not everyone is going to be capable of "better" work. We now pay 15% of our population to do NOTHING; look at the OWS loons DEMANDING high wages for doing less difficult jobs, simply because they have a piece of peper saying that they are "educated". Nobody deserves a hand out, REGARDLESS of their "education", if work needs to be done then a wage sufficient to attract U.S. workers needs to be paid, no less and no more. The insane idea of the left is that a college degree, even in underwater basket weaving, somehow entitles one to be paid WAY more than their work is REALLY worth, yet someone, WITHOUT that degree, must accept whatever scraps are offered as "fair" compensation for their labor, if not, they will get gov't "permission" to use TEMPORARY foreigners to do it.
It isn't just people on the left that feel this way. Mach seems to think if everyone had a HS diploma there would be less unemployment and better wages for everyone. While I agree minimum wages/benefits need to somehow match cost of living better than it seems to do, there will always be low-paying jobs.
 
We did just end 136 years of Democrat party rule.
:lamo

The last of the George Wallace Democrats! "Southern Democrat" hasn't come close to being Democrat (liberal) for about thirty years - and well over fourty years in many states. All you guys did was finally replace all the D's with an R as the old Southern Democrats died or retired.
 
Last edited:
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!
You talk about knee-jerk reactions but that's exactly what numbers without context incite. I know, you guys don't like comparisons because it often makes you look bad - but without them you have no context.
 
[...] And that, along with almost every single state office of relevance has been in the hands of liberal democrats for 136 years.
:lamo Deceitful every step of the way!

Liberal Democrats haven't been around that long.


Ed:
This state has been dominated by liberal democrats for more than one hundred years.
And he repeats the lie - no doubt going by the typical Republican tenet that if you repeat the same lie often enough, people will start to believe it.
 
Last edited:
Then your (Alabama's) harvest should have been better than normal since all those illegals weren't dragging down the skill levels of the farm workers ... :lol:
I don't know that it matters. Farmers have been exploiting illegal aliens for years. In Alabama we don't want to participate in the New Slavery.

The usual suspects complained. They were ignored. The law stands and it is effective.

And Airbus decided to set up shop here. I am certain one of you claimed that foreign companies would stop coming here. Hmmm. Wrong again liberals.
 
:lamo

The last of the George Wallace Democrats! "Southern Democrat" hasn't come close to being Democrat (liberal) for about thirty years - and well over fourty years in many states. All you guys did was finally replace all the D's with an R as the old Southern Democrats died or retired.
The hard left democrats were swept out of all state offices that matter. The legislature is now in the hands of the Republicans some of whom are conservatives.

You just go right on believing you are an expert in Alabama politics. I think it is kinda cute.
 
:lamo Deceitful every step of the way!

Liberal Democrats haven't been around that long.
Only their names have changed. You can always tell them. They have cozy relationships with unions. They reward their friends with plum jobs (of the sort that Moochelle got) and send work to people who will funnel campaign contributions back to them.

Ed:
And he repeats the lie - no doubt going by the typical Republican tenet that if you repeat the same lie often enough, people will start to believe it.
Back again to you. The Democrats are gone. Good riddance.
 
Last edited:
When you're at the bottom all motion results in upward movement ...
We are heading the right direction now that the Democrats have been swept out of office.
California has no future. It is sad really.
 
If it's a livable wage for an illegal alien, why isn't it a livable wage for a citizen?

(BTW, don't show your ignorance: A person does not need to be a citizen to be legal. It always amazes me how people can be oblivious enough about this issue to assume legal = citizen while also entertaining the absurd notion that they have the tools necessary to make an intelligent point in an immigration debate. That's an impossibility)
because when the illegal goes home that money goes much further there then here and them getting paid less brings down the wage of the legals (which greedy scumbag employers love). as to your BTW... semantics.
 
I wrote, "People get paid based on how much value they bring to the job." To which you replied...


this is not always the case.

But that is the way to bet. Unions and government, or at its very worst a combination of the two, distort this concept. The result is usually increased unemployment at the margins where an employer no longer gets a greater value from the employee than it costs to use him or her.
 
because when the illegal goes home that money goes much further there then here and them getting paid less brings down the wage of the legals (which greedy scumbag employers love).

False premise. Most illegals do not go home. They often send money home to their families, though, which means that their livable wage is even lower than what they get paid. Why can't legals live on the same wage?


as to your BTW... semantics.

That's just some nonsense people say in order to excuse their ignorance.
 
False premise. Most illegals do not go home. They often send money home to their families, though, which means that their livable wage is even lower than what they get paid. Why can't legals live on the same wage?




That's just some nonsense people say in order to excuse their ignorance.
again semantics.... it dosen't matter if it is them or the money either way it goes elsewhere. legals can't live on the same wage because it costs FAR more to live here then to live where these people are from. what is the excuse for YOUR ignorance?
 
I wrote, "People get paid based on how much value they bring to the job." To which you replied...




But that is the way to bet. Unions and government, or at its very worst a combination of the two, distort this concept. The result is usually increased unemployment at the margins where an employer no longer gets a greater value from the employee than it costs to use him or her.

Actually the rich, bankers and globalist distort this concept more than affirmative action government jobs.
 
again semantics.... it dosen't matter if it is them or the money either way it goes elsewhere. legals can't live on the same wage because it costs FAR more to live here then to live where these people are from. what is the excuse for YOUR ignorance?

But they ARE living here; I think that was his point.
 
i think he said they were sending the money back home (as in where they originally came from).

Yes, that's what he said. But they are still living here ... and on even less than their low wages, as they're sending some of their wages home.
 
again semantics....

I'm beggining to suspect you do not know what that word means. Which would be quite ironic.

it dosen't matter if it is them or the money either way it goes elsewhere. legals can't live on the same wage because it costs FAR more to live here then to live where these people are from.

That, of course, makes absolutely no sense whatsoever since the very nature of being illegal means they have to live here.

Now, have you met my friend "common sense"? He'd really like to be included in your arguments.

what is the excuse for YOUR ignorance?

There is none. If I am ignorant, it is because I do not know something. What could possibly excuse that?


Perhaps explain it, but not excuse it. (And just so you know, the inconsequential difference between "explain" and "excuse" in this situation is actually a matter of semantics. I figured a demonstration was required so that you could alleviate your ignorance of what it actually looks like by being exposed to it first hand)
 
Yes, that's what he said. But they are still living here ... and on even less than their low wages, as they're sending some of their wages home.

You're obviously correct, but why bother trying to explain it? He clearly has the absurd notion that it is possible ot be an illegal immigrant in the US while also residing in another country. That kind of thinking cannot be countered with logic and common sense.
 
False premise. Most illegals do not go home. They often send money home to their families, though, which means that their livable wage is even lower than what they get paid. Why can't legals live on the same wage?




That's just some nonsense people say in order to excuse their ignorance.

The reason the "legals", most of us, can not live on what "illegals" live on is often two fold. One is how long you are used to living in one place, as in establishing a permanent year around home, for yourself and your family or are content to follow the work moving several times per year. The other is what you have in mind as a decent standard of living. If you come from a place with no aversion to trashing the environment, roadside dumping and living three, or more people, to a room, then you can live quite cheaply, if you are happy to share a vehicle and living space with virtual strangers. For low skilled labor, employers see only the need to get the work done, and could really care less how you must live or even how you behave off the job, so illegal labor is only seen as a plus (since the bosses don't need to live next to the help) as the wages/benefits offered can be far less.
 
Back
Top Bottom