• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

You Support the Alabama Bill? RACIST!

arg-fallbackName="Nemesiah"/>
)O( Hytegia )O( said:
Nemesiah said:
So, the people on the government and the deportation officers (whatever they may be called) don't employ illegal maids, or eat cheap oranges picked by illegal immigrants or buy cheap steaks chopped by illegal aliens? Nice to know because, I mean, they are the government that is expelling these people after they worked for next to nothing so your glass of OJ in the morning could cost cents.

Nemesiah, what do you do for a living?
Just give me a broad statement.

Web design for a school
 
arg-fallbackName=")O( Hytegia )O("/>
You know, your education isn't necessary for that job. Why pay you however-many-dollars an hour, plus health insurance, plus file an asston of paperwork, if I could hire an illegal immigrint with some common-sense knowledge of it to do your job for 5 bucks an hour? The situation in your case is not likely, since it does require a bit of training to do - but if someone could do it for 5 bucks an hour, you'd be out of a job.
And then take that and amplify it to the tune of manual labor jobs where this situation would be more likely. You don't need someone who can pick fruit for minimum wage when you can take someone who will work for 2 bucks an hour and pick an entire row of fruit.
The same goes for pushing buttons and painting walls. Hell, even being a cashier isn't rocket science. There's very few jobs in the market that actually require education and expertise.

Thus, more illegals in an area is inversely proportional to the number of jobs available to legal citizens within an area.
 
arg-fallbackName="BrainBlow"/>
Alabama bill?
Oh, you mean that bill that is basically racial profiling, and suddenly makes it so that every non-white citizen has to go around with a freaking birth certificate 24/7?
The bill that caused a legal latino citizen to be detained mere HOURS after it was put into effect?
That one?
 
arg-fallbackName=")O( Hytegia )O("/>
BrainBlow said:
Alabama bill?
Oh, you mean that bill that is basically racial profiling, and suddenly makes it so that every non-white citizen has to go around with a freaking birth certificate 24/7?
The bill that caused a legal latino citizen to be detained mere HOURS after it was put into effect?
That one?

It's not perfect, and obviously some kinks need to be worked out - but the Alabama Driver's License is proof of citizenship. If you're driving a car without a license you should be taken in anyways, simply because you're forgoing your own responsabilities as a driver to carry legal proof of ability to drive a vehicle and not endanger other drivers.
The only reason I got out of being dragged to the station is because my woman-at-the-time was in the passenger's seat, knew the officer (they went to the same church), and volunteered to drive due to my obvious having left my wallet at McDonalds.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
)O( Hytegia )O( said:
It's not perfect, and obviously some kinks need to be worked out
No, it is garbage and it needs to be scrapped.
but the Alabama Driver's License is proof of citizenship. If you're driving a car without a license you should be taken in anyways, simply because you're forgoing your own responsabilities as a driver to carry legal proof of ability to drive a vehicle and not endanger other drivers.
The only reason I got out of being dragged to the station is because my woman-at-the-time was in the passenger's seat, knew the officer (they went to the same church), and volunteered to drive due to my obvious having left my wallet at McDonalds.
Seems like you're willing to go through a whole lot of unnecessary hypothetical jail time to embrace the actual jail time of other people who are guilty of little more than driving while brown. Generally speaking, it is a minor ticket that you can just pay and present your licence to the clerk when you pay it... unless you're Hispanic, in which case you can be thrown in jail until someone can come with documents proving your citizenship.

And all this to "solve" a "problem" that shouldn't be dealt with at the state level to begin with, and definitely doesn't require the amount of expense and legal hassle that's being suggested here.
 
arg-fallbackName=")O( Hytegia )O("/>
ImprobableJoe said:
And all this to "solve" a "problem" that shouldn't be dealt with at the state level to begin with, and definitely doesn't require the amount of expense and legal hassle that's being suggested here.

Ye- no.
You do forget that, to some extent, states are their own entities. Federal law on immigration only applies in specific circumstances, like it does on trade and commerce. The State of Alabama has the right and duty to preserve the rights of those whom legally call it home.
Imagine, Joe, that you have a house that you invite friends to come over and chill in a relaxeding situation. Now imagine Scumbag Steve crashing the party, drinking all the liquor with his 7 friends, puking on the rug, bums your cigarettes, and all that. Not to mention, when he leaves the party he takes your lighter.
Now, let's imagine for a moment that Steve does, indeed, pay for the damages in full.
Next time you hold a gathering, he comes over and he does the same thing - again. And pays for it - again.

You still wouldn't let that motherfucker back in your house a third time, despite full finaces being payed. Are you being biased towards Scumbag Steve - or are you just tired of his bullshit not allowing people that are legitimately living there and were legitimately invited to enjoy your nice relaxing evening?
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
)O( Hytegia )O( said:
Ye- no.
You do forget that, to some extent, states are their own entities. Federal law on immigration only applies in specific circumstances, like it does on trade and commerce. The State of Alabama has the right and duty to preserve the rights of those whom legally call it home.
Imagine, Joe, that you have a house that you invite friends to come over and chill in a relaxeding situation. Now imagine Scumbag Steve crashing the party, drinking all the liquor with his 7 friends, puking on the rug, bums your cigarettes, and all that. Not to mention, when he leaves the party he takes your lighter.
Now, let's imagine for a moment that Steve does, indeed, pay for the damages in full.
Next time you hold a gathering, he comes over and he does the same thing - again. And pays for it - again.

You still wouldn't let that motherfucker back in your house a third time, despite full finaces being payed. Are you being biased towards Scumbag Steve - or are you just tired of his bullshit not allowing people that are legitimately living there and were legitimately invited to enjoy your nice relaxing evening?

Sure, if "Scumbag Steve" were an accurate description of undocumented workers... but it isn't. It is more like someone has been "crashing" your job, doing all of the hardest work for the lowest money, and then when you're done with taking the benefit of his work you kick him out without a paycheck.
 
arg-fallbackName=")O( Hytegia )O("/>
ImprobableJoe said:
Sure, if "Scumbag Steve" were an accurate description of undocumented workers... but it isn't. It is more like someone has been "crashing" your job, doing all of the hardest work for the lowest money, and then when you're done with taking the benefit of his work you kick him out without a paycheck.

You mean the fact that Scumbag Steve drinks all the drinks that was intended for everyone else, though he ended up paying you back in full?

Nobody's enjoying a get-together without drinks, and nobody's enjoying life without a paycheck and steady income.
Steve may have payed for them, whereas your guests weren't going to - but you had little choice in the matter and no way to get enough drinks for everybody that you intended for having them.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
)O( Hytegia )O( said:
ImprobableJoe said:
Sure, if "Scumbag Steve" were an accurate description of undocumented workers... but it isn't. It is more like someone has been "crashing" your job, doing all of the hardest work for the lowest money, and then when you're done with taking the benefit of his work you kick him out without a paycheck.

You mean the fact that Scumbag Steve drinks all the drinks that was intended for everyone else, though he ended up paying you back in full?

Nobody's enjoying a get-together without drinks, and nobody's enjoying life without a paycheck and steady income.
Steve may have payed for them, whereas your guests weren't going to - but you had little choice in the matter and no way to get enough drinks for everybody that you intended for having them.

Your analogy makes ZERO sense. Why don't you explain to me how that's supposed to work?
 
arg-fallbackName=")O( Hytegia )O("/>
The Alcohol is there for everybody, but is limited.
Jobs are there for everybody, but is limited.

Legally-invited guests and residents need alcohol to listen to dance and enjoy themselves, and to survive your war stories.
Citizens and legal immigrants need jobs to enjoy life and to, well, survive.

The Internet Meme and his friends drink all of your alcohol - but he pays you back.
Illegal immigrants take the jobs that are for everyone - though a few may benefit from the labor.

The people you actually invited and the other residents no longer have anything to drink.
Citizens and legal immigrants no longer have jobs.

Understand this now?
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
)O( Hytegia )O( said:
The Alcohol is there for everybody, but is limited.
Jobs are there for everybody, but is limited.

Legally-invited guests and residents need alcohol to listen to dance and enjoy themselves, and to survive your war stories.
Citizens and legal immigrants need jobs to enjoy life and to, well, survive.

The Internet Meme and his friends drink all of your alcohol - but he pays you back.
Illegal immigrants take the jobs that are for everyone - though a few may benefit from the labor.

The people you actually invited and the other residents no longer have anything to drink.
Citizens and legal immigrants no longer have jobs.

Understand this now?

So it sort of still sounds dumb and makes no sense... mostly because you apparently have never worked an actual job in your life. Otherwise, you wouldn't compare working the shit jobs for low pay and zero benefits that undocumented workers have with partying and beer.

... jobs that Americans WON'T DO. CAN'T DO.
 
arg-fallbackName="ImprobableJoe"/>
Sorry... linkedy-doo

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/12/alabama-cant-find-anyone-fill-illegal-immigrants-old-jobs/45829/
 
arg-fallbackName=")O( Hytegia )O("/>
ImprobableJoe said:
... jobs that Americans WON'T DO. CAN'T DO.*

*For next to nothing

What?! You mean that people don't take jobs for less than Minimum Wage and that people are complaining that those workers that do take jobs are complaining about basic worker's benefits and no overtime?

Woah - it's almost like these are all awful effects that take place after large-scale labor changes. It's the same shit that happened and occured after Child Labor laws were passed.

"WHERE ARE WE GOING TO GET PEOPLE TO CRAWL UNDER MACHINERY FOR 2 CENTS AN HOUR?!"
And people weren't immediately taking jobs - and factories were arguing that the older adults didn't have the energy nor the particular body sizing structure to perform the jobs that 6-7 year olds were doing, nor for the amount they were paying them.

4 Months, and then when people suddenly realize OMG THERES JOBS THAT I CAN DO NOW TO PAY OFF MY RENT 7 MINUTES OUTSIDE OF TOWN and when employers finally stop whining about no longer being able to work people to death, things will get better for the legitimate citizens.
 
arg-fallbackName="IBSpify"/>
)O( Hytegia )O( said:
BrainBlow said:
Alabama bill?
Oh, you mean that bill that is basically racial profiling, and suddenly makes it so that every non-white citizen has to go around with a freaking birth certificate 24/7?
The bill that caused a legal latino citizen to be detained mere HOURS after it was put into effect?
That one?

It's not perfect, and obviously some kinks need to be worked out - but the Alabama Driver's License is proof of citizenship. If you're driving a car without a license you should be taken in anyways, simply because you're forgoing your own responsabilities as a driver to carry legal proof of ability to drive a vehicle and not endanger other drivers.
The only reason I got out of being dragged to the station is because my woman-at-the-time was in the passenger's seat, knew the officer (they went to the same church), and volunteered to drive due to my obvious having left my wallet at McDonalds.

A drivers license is not a proof of citizenship, and you do not need to be a citizen to apply for one, and even if the Alabama drivers license was a proof of citizenship, the same could not be said for people with out of state drivers licenses, thus a long haul trucker from California who gets pulled over in Alabama is highly unlikely to be carrying around proof of citizenship.
 
arg-fallbackName=")O( Hytegia )O("/>
IBSpify said:
A drivers license is not a proof of citizenship, and you do not need to be a citizen to apply for one, and even if the Alabama drivers license was a proof of citizenship, the same could not be said for people with out of state drivers licenses, thus a long haul trucker from California who gets pulled over in Alabama is highly unlikely to be carrying around proof of citizenship.

They'd most likely take it.
Police aren't out to chuck random motherfuckers in jail.
 
arg-fallbackName="televator"/>
I haven't seen how the bill is worded but if the segment about proving citizenship is anything similar to SB1070 in Arizona, I'd say this:

Given your reasoning Hytegia, I wouldn't say you're a racist, but I would call your judgment into question. If you'd consider the parts of this bill to be favorable enough to deem the extremely racist and socially backward elements to be an acceptable compromise.... :?

Consider this a tentative response until I know more. I'm a cake...err...man with little time lately, and I can't sit around reading state bills and debating law on the internet for hours like I used to.
 
arg-fallbackName=")O( Hytegia )O("/>
televator said:
Given your reasoning Hytegia, I wouldn't say you're a racist, but I would call your judgment into question. If you'd consider the parts of this bill to be favorable enough to deem the extremely racist and socially backward elements to be an acceptable compromise.... :?

I've already stated that it does, indeed, have severe kinks to work out. The point of carrying papers encourages not only racism, but requires a law-abiding citizen walking on the side of the road as a free man to be carrying something. In my hometown I walked around without shoes and didn't have a driver's license until I was 17 (I just didn't give a fuck) and I certainly didn't carry any identification on me.
But some things must be done about the illegal immigration problem within the state of Alabama. My main concern is, indeed, jobs. Entire blocks of houses are foreclosing because people are unable to find ANY work...
A state that's nearly all manual-labor-ran in terms of operations in many aspects without ANY jobs for it's citizens?
 
arg-fallbackName="televator"/>
)O( Hytegia )O( said:
I've already stated that it does, indeed, have severe kinks to work out.

Noted. But you still think the bill is worth being in support of. Thus is must seem like a trade off you can live with.
)O( Hytegia )O( said:
But some things must be done about the illegal immigration problem within the state of Alabama. My main concern is, indeed, jobs. Entire blocks of houses are foreclosing because people are unable to find ANY work...
A state that's nearly all manual-labor-ran in terms of operations in many aspects without ANY jobs for it's citizens?

Curious....was immigration a concern for you before the entire national economy and job market ate shit? Granted illegal employment isn't helping in the current climate, but it seems to me like there are other fixes for your "main concerns"....Much larger and nationally beneficial fixes. Compared to those, concerning one self with immigration seems like fretting over a band aid for a sucking chest wound.
 
arg-fallbackName="IBSpify"/>
)O( Hytegia )O( said:
televator said:
Given your reasoning Hytegia, I wouldn't say you're a racist, but I would call your judgment into question. If you'd consider the parts of this bill to be favorable enough to deem the extremely racist and socially backward elements to be an acceptable compromise.... :?

I've already stated that it does, indeed, have severe kinks to work out. The point of carrying papers encourages not only racism, but requires a law-abiding citizen walking on the side of the road as a free man to be carrying something. In my hometown I walked around without shoes and didn't have a driver's license until I was 17 (I just didn't give a fuck) and I certainly didn't carry any identification on me.
But some things must be done about the illegal immigration problem within the state of Alabama. My main concern is, indeed, jobs. Entire blocks of houses are foreclosing because people are unable to find ANY work...
A state that's nearly all manual-labor-ran in terms of operations in many aspects without ANY jobs for it's citizens?

It sounds to me then that the issue is not with the people who are here illegally, but with the people who are hiring them, this bill does nothing to stem the illegal immigration problem, and instead effects US citizens which may appear to be non legal citizens.

If our government was actually serious about stopping illegal immigration they would crack down on the business's that hire illegal workers, thus making it so that illegal workers couldn't find work here, thus causing them to stop coming. Deporting illegal immigrants does nothing because there are many more who take their place.
 
arg-fallbackName="Coryla"/>
But you want 10 dollars an hour for your professional knowledge in this field.
The guy that lives in a house with 10 other people will do it for 2 dollars an hour after maybe a day of practice.

one of the issues seems to be the more global issue of cheap labour.
capitalists want cheap labour because then they can take a higher rate of profit, and keep at a competitive price ensuring a market (and the more they sell the more profit they generate).
Capitalists do not employ cheap labour in order to be able to sell cheaper products TO BENEFIT THE WORKING CLASS. We should not thank someone who has worked for 2dollars an hour or whatever for our cheap produce. If workers were paid the full value of their labour (i.e. if there was not someone at the top creaming off all the profits of people's work) the price of living/commodities would be cheap, as the expensiveness/cheapness of the cost of living is determined in relation to peoples wages or salary. The rich are getting richer and the rest of us poorer and the gap is widening, people need to be demanding higher pay, and of course to do this they must be legally working.
 
Back
Top