The boycott will not "Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts". If there is no contract there is no problem. The city can boycott travel to the state. I don't believe there is a contract that obligates any city to travel to another state.
Seattle becomes 11th city to boycott Arizona
- Thread starter spike
- Start date
spike
New Member
You are simply wrong and you haven't been able to find anything in the Constitution to back up your claims.
It is perfectly legal and admirable for a city council to boycott an entity that encourages rights violations. In fact, they can boycott any entity for any number of reasons.
More cities are on the way.
spike
New Member
The Phoenix Chamber of Commerce calculated a while back that the boycotts would cost just the city of Phoenix around $90 million. That was before a lot of these cities came on board.
People have the right. Government entities do not.
spike
New Member
I'd imagine they'd just have to spend it in other places. So probably not much savings to speak of.
spike
New Member
Boycotts? Government entities do have the right. Happens all the time.
catocom
Well-Known Member
so they just did the one-way 'study'?
jimpeel
Well-Known Member
All AZ has to do is collect about 500 illegals and then stick them all on buses, issue them a $50 Wal-Mart gift card, and drive them one-way to Washington, DC. Drop them all off en mass in front of the Capitol building with a full Mariachi band and big banners welcoming los amigos nuevos to their new home.
Washington wants them, let them take them.
Washington wants them, let them take them.
jimpeel
Well-Known Member
The other thing the state of AZ should do is to run Spanish language television commercials touting the wonderful benefits of the City of San Francisco. Highlight the benefits, free health care, free food stamps, and all of the other free programs to be had there. Offer to pay their way, one-way non-refundable,m non-transferable, by bus to San Francisco to all who wish to take advantage of the offer. No questions asked but they must report to board the bus and be shown to be on the bus at departure.
spike
New Member
What makes you think Washington wants them or that they would move for a $50 gift card? This is a bizarre comment.
The general idea here is that the AZ immigration law is an assault on the freedom of all people in or traveling through AZ.
2minkey
bootlicker
you do realize that mariachi is not really authentic mexican right, but a creation of US tourism?
i just thought you might wanna know, since some of your best friends are...
No one has really addressed the real problem with illegal immigration: the difficulty of obtaining a visa to legally work in the US from Mexico. This Arizona law does nothing to address that. The federal government's commitment to send support to reinforce Arizona's borders or throw money into a big fence that causes problems with farmers and ranchers on the US side of the border (cuts into their usable land b/c the fence must be well within our US border), does nothing to fix the underlying problem.
These people are needed to pick the food you eat and work the jobs no one here wants. They send money back to Mexico for their families. They take the money they earn here and go back to Mexico to live. Most of these people are not here to suck off the system. They are here temporarily.
Creating a visa system for these workers and streamlining it would go a long way to helping the states where these workers end up, as well as Mexico. It's in everyone's best interest.
If you're worried about them popping out a kid that anchors them to the US and gets benefits (welfare, food stamps, Medicaid) then a law needs to be created to change the requirements of citizenship to newborns.
These people are needed to pick the food you eat and work the jobs no one here wants. They send money back to Mexico for their families. They take the money they earn here and go back to Mexico to live. Most of these people are not here to suck off the system. They are here temporarily.
Creating a visa system for these workers and streamlining it would go a long way to helping the states where these workers end up, as well as Mexico. It's in everyone's best interest.
If you're worried about them popping out a kid that anchors them to the US and gets benefits (welfare, food stamps, Medicaid) then a law needs to be created to change the requirements of citizenship to newborns.
Kinda like Cinco de mayo...
Good. Let's get even tougher.
It's not 1977 m'dear. Chavez has left the building.
AMENDMENT XIV said:
too late
This is why they are "illegal" and not "legal" immigrants. The process to get a "green card" takes 15 to 20 years and is too expensive and too difficult. A "temporary worker visa" for Mexican farm laborers would go a long way toward fixing our problem.
Are you going to go pick the fruit and vegetables for my table? Cuz I'm not gonna do it and someone needs to.
You don't live where these Mexicans are needed. I do. Rural Texas farmers employ these people and bring food to the table of Americans. I don't see any reason why we shouldn't be able to create a way to document them and tax their income.
No offense but I don't see you (or any of our duly elected representatives) coming up with a better solution than what I've provided here. Spending my tax dollars to build a worthless wall in an attempt to shut these people out just seems fruitless (no pun intended). Do I seem like I have a bottomless bank account to you?
change at the federal, not state, level. Sorry I wasn't clear.
Nope.
However, I know of about 17% of our population who needs work. Drop food stamps, welfare & 99 week unemployment & I bet you'll find a few.
I live in the corn belt...we don't need farm laborers here, nope, not us.
I agree, they need a migrant worker visa program. I do remember when farm labor migrated up, picked th espring crop, went back home, came back up for the fall crop, went back home, came back fro the winter crops, etc. They stopped going back home in the 80's. The first amnesty bill gave them a huge incentive to never go home again. We don't need a fourth one.
The only way to change it now is with an amendemnt. It's Constitutional (and nothing over-rides the Constitution)
I never said anything about amnesty. I said temporary work visa.
All those people you're referring to that are either on welfare/food stamps or unemployment would have to sell their homes and move out to the country to pick the fruits and vegetables. They'd have to be mobile so they could go from farmer to farmer to get the harvest in. There is no way these people could afford their current lifestyle (home, cars, etc.) on what is paid the migrant farm worker. The system is much more complicated than what you think.
I do agree, though, that many states enable the welfare cycle by supplementing the federal welfare dollars for their state's recipients. Bad decision.