HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #101  
Old Posted May 13, 2010, 7:01 PM
HX_Guy HX_Guy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,095
Good job Arizona, you piece of shit state.

Fucking fantastic in this economic climate.



http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #102  
Old Posted May 13, 2010, 7:16 PM
phxbyrd phxbyrd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 163
You must not have read the AP story they ran in the Republic yesterday. Most Americans support the law. The only boycotts are coming from the typical political sources. We've lost some liberal business, extreme hispanic political business and businesses originating out of Mexico. Other than that I think the economic impact will be very small. You need serious opposition for an effective boycott and that simply doesn't exist anywhere outside of the illegal immigrant community.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #103  
Old Posted May 13, 2010, 7:18 PM
HX_Guy HX_Guy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,095
Quote:
Originally Posted by phxbyrd View Post
You must not have read the AP story they ran in the Republic yesterday. Most Americans support the law. The only boycotts are coming from the typical political sources. We've lost some liberal business, extreme hispanic political business and businesses originating out of Mexico. Other than that I think the economic impact will be very small. You need serious opposition for an effective boycott and that simply doesn't exist anywhere outside of the illegal immigrant community.
I didn't read the piece but I did read something that said we have lost 23 conventions thus far.

It may be from political or immigration related sources, but at this point in time, any business would be good business, not the opposite.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #104  
Old Posted May 13, 2010, 7:25 PM
phxbyrd phxbyrd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 163
I'd like a list of those conventions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #105  
Old Posted May 13, 2010, 8:19 PM
Don B. Don B. is offline
...
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 9,184
The ABA convention here nearly got cancelled, and 350 of the 800 attendees (mostly attorneys) cancelled. Each cancellation represents a loss of anywhere from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars in revenue.

http://www.azfamily.com/outbound-fee...-93687474.html

Economic death from a thousand cuts.

Just because a poll says that most Americans support this bill doesn't make it right. At the end of the 19th century, a majority of Americans felt that women should not vote. A majority of Americans opposed desegregation in 1957, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Brown v. The Board of Education that separate is NOT equal. That was a very unpopular decision at the time. In 1967, a majority of Americans supported laws that prevented blacks and whites from marrying, until again the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Loving v. Virginia that these anti-miscegenation laws were unconstitutional. In 2003, a majority of Americans supported anti-sodomy laws, but once again the U.S. Supreme Court dragged a majority of ignorant knuckle-dragging Americans into the future by declaring in Lawrence v. Texas that intimate consensual sexual conduct was part of the liberty protected by substantive due process under the Fourteenth Amendment, thus outlawing numerous other state's anti-sodomy laws. In fact, I suspect even to this day, a "majority" of Americans may not support the Lawrence decision.

In 1825, Alexis de Tocqueville visited the United States and commented on our great experiment with democracy. His biggest concern? He was concerned about a "tyranny of the majority," where minorities would be denied equal rights just because they were too few in number to sway the majority's opinions. Any time you have civil rights decided by a mass vote, you run the risk of having a tyranny of the majority. Especially in the area of civil rights, he was largely correct, and it has largely fallen the courts, not the executive or legislative branches, or the people, to secure these basic civil rights for all of us.

Always remember the lessons of the past. For example, the German people voted Hitler and the Nazi party into power. The rest, as they say, is history.

--don
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #106  
Old Posted May 13, 2010, 8:31 PM
Vicelord John Vicelord John is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Eastlake, Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 5,404
It's too bad all these innocent bystanders (business owners and their employees) are being hurt by a combination of this law and people's desire to inflict harm on the state's economy.

Neither the politicians locally enacting the law, nor the politicians out of state calling for boycotts should be considered innocent.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #107  
Old Posted May 13, 2010, 8:32 PM
Vicelord John Vicelord John is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Eastlake, Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 5,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don B. View Post
Just because a poll says that most Americans support this bill doesn't make it right.
The majority of American's are stupid retards (not just retards) so I'm not going to say something is right just because the majority says so. A majority of American's also eat at (and like) McDonald's too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #108  
Old Posted May 13, 2010, 9:13 PM
glynnjamin glynnjamin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,041
I am honestly amazed that more people care about the rights of Mexicans than of homosexuals.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #109  
Old Posted May 13, 2010, 9:16 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 7,163
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicelord John View Post
Neither the politicians locally enacting the law, nor the politicians out of state calling for boycotts should be considered innocent.
Very, very true. IMO, the boycotts are misguided as hell. "We support the latino community of Arizona, but let's boycott and cause them to lose business."

I think we as people should boycott politics. What do our elected officials really do besides ignorantly support their party lines or selfishly work for their next potential re-election?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #110  
Old Posted May 13, 2010, 9:17 PM
PHX31's Avatar
PHX31 PHX31 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: PHX
Posts: 7,163
Quote:
Originally Posted by glynnjamin View Post
I am honestly amazed that more people care about the rights of Mexicans than of homosexuals.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #111  
Old Posted May 14, 2010, 1:05 AM
Vicelord John Vicelord John is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Eastlake, Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 5,404
If fox is reporting it, it must not be slanted. I prefer to get my info from unbiased media.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #112  
Old Posted May 14, 2010, 1:24 AM
PHX NATIVE 929 PHX NATIVE 929 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicelord John View Post
If fox is reporting it, it must not be slanted. I prefer to get my info from unbiased media.
How do you argue with quotes? I'd point them back out to you but our Napoleon-complex moderator has apparently decided news articles ought to be censored. At least... ones he doesn't like.

John, if you think the other news sources aren't slanted, you're as naive as naive comes.

Feel feel to research on your own. Despite repeatedly voicing concerns about our new immigration enforcement law in recent weeks and threatening to challenge it, Attorney General Eric Holder said Thursday he has not yet read the law.

FACT.

Last edited by PHX NATIVE 929; May 14, 2010 at 1:37 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #113  
Old Posted May 14, 2010, 1:32 AM
PHX NATIVE 929 PHX NATIVE 929 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 505
Is Politico.com "fair" enough for you?...

Holder hasn't read Ariz. immigration bill

by Josh Gerstein

In television interviews over the weekend, Attorney General Eric Holder warned that Arizona's new anti-illegal immigration law could lead to racial profiling and might prompt Latinos to stop cooperating with police. However, it emerged at a House hearing Thursday that Holder hasn't actually read the statute.

"I have not had a chance to. I've glanced at it. I have not read it," Holder acknowledged in response to questions from Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas).

"It's ten pages. It's a lot shorter than the health care bill, which was 2,000 pages long. I'll give you my copy of it, if you would like to -- to have a copy," Poe quipped during the House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing.

The Arizona law passed last month calls for checks on individuals' immigration status after any "lawful contact" with police if there is reasonable suspicion they're not legally in the country. President Barack Obama, Holder and other administration officials have expressed concern that the law could lead to Americans of Hispanic descent being stopped by police. Latino groups are organizing boycotts of the state.

"The concern I have about the law that they have passed is that I think it has the possibility of leading to racial profiling and putting a wedge between law enforcement and a community that would, in fact, be profiled," Holder said Sunday on NBC's "Meet The Press." "People in that community are less likely then to cooperate with people in law enforcement, less likely to share information, less likely to be witnesses in a case that law enforcement is trying to solve."

Holder said Thursday he's asked a team of advisers from Justice and the Department of Homeland Security to review the law for him. He said he expects to issue a pronouncement on the Arizona law "relatively soon."

Link: http://www.politico.com/blogs/joshge...tion_bill.html

Last edited by PHX NATIVE 929; May 14, 2010 at 2:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #114  
Old Posted May 14, 2010, 1:35 AM
PHX NATIVE 929 PHX NATIVE 929 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 505
Pathetic...


When asked by Rep.Ted Poe, R-Texas, how he could have constitutional concerns about a law he has not read, Holder said: "Well, what I've said is that I've not made up my mind. I've only made the comments that I've made on the basis of things that I've been able to glean by reading newspaper accounts, obviously, television, talking to people who are on the review panel...looking at the law."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #115  
Old Posted May 14, 2010, 1:45 AM
Vicelord John Vicelord John is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Eastlake, Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 5,404
Politico.com i will accept. To be honest i didnt read it before. I dont read anything from fox or cnbc.

Napoleon complex lmao.

I told them the should have made me a moderator instead of him but nobody listened.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #116  
Old Posted May 14, 2010, 1:58 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is offline
Meh
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: there and back again
Posts: 57,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by PHX NATIVE 929 View Post
Is Politico.com "fair" enough for you?...
Your post wasn't deleted because the news source was unfair, it was deleted because you posted the full article, did not include the author's name, or provide a link to the article. You still need to do that with the Politico article too.
__________________
Donate to Donald Trump's campaign today!

Thou shall not indict
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #117  
Old Posted May 14, 2010, 2:33 AM
Leo the Dog Leo the Dog is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Lower-48
Posts: 4,789
How about more FACTS, less OPINIONS

Source: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...-law-poll.html

Quote:
Poll: Most in U.S. approve of Arizona immigration law

by Alia Beard Rau - May. 12, 2010 03:08 PM
The Arizona Republic

A new Pew Research Center poll indicated that 63 percent of people nationally support allowing police to question anyone they think may be in the country illegally, and 59 percent approve of Arizona's new illegal immigration law.

The new law, which goes into effect July 29, makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally and requires police to inquire about the immigration status of anyone they reasonably suspect to be in the country illegally.


The poll, which was released Wednesday, surveyed 994 adults nationally by phone between May 6 and May 9, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points. Of those polled, 662 were interviewed on a landline phone and 332 on a cell phone.

Of those polled:

73 percent indicated approval of "requiring people to produce documents verifying legal status."

67 percent indicated approval of "allowing police to detain anyone unable to verify legal status."

62 percent indicated approval of "allowing police to question anyone they think may be in the country illegally."

59 percent indicated approval of the new Arizona law.

Most of the Republicans polled indicated that they support the three provisions and the law itself. Most Democrats opposed the new law, were split on whether police should be allowed to question individuals thought to be in the country illegally and supported requiring people to produce documents and allowing police to detain individuals unable to verify legal status....

McClatchy-Ipsos poll

A strong majority of Americans support Arizona's controversial new immigration law and would back similar laws in their own states, a separate McClatchy-Ipsos poll found.

Sixty-one percent of Americans - and 64 percent of registered voters - said they favored the law in a survey of 1,016 adults conducted May 6-9.

Strikingly, nearly half of Democrats like the law, under which local law enforcement officers are tasked with verifying people's immigration status if they suspect them of being in the country illegally. While the Democratic Party generally is regarded as more sympathetic to illegal immigrants' plights, 46 percent of Democrats said they favored the law for Arizona and 49 percent said they'd favor the law's passage in their own states.

More than eight in 10 Republicans and 54 percent of independents favor the law.

In addition, about 69 percent of Americans said they wouldn't mind if police officers stopped them to ask for proof of their citizenship or legal rights to be in the country; about 29 percent would mind, considering it a violation of their rights; and about 3 percent were unsure.

Almost two-thirds of Americans said illegal immigration was a real problem that hurt the country; they were evenly split as to whether the jobs illegal immigrants take are ones that Americans don't want.

The McClatchy-Ipsos poll had an error margin of plus or minus 3.07 percentage points for all those surveyed and 3.26 percentage points for registered voters

Last edited by Leo the Dog; May 14, 2010 at 3:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #118  
Old Posted May 14, 2010, 3:02 AM
Leo the Dog Leo the Dog is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Lower-48
Posts: 4,789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicelord John View Post
The majority of American's are stupid retards (not just retards) so I'm not going to say something is right just because the majority says so. A majority of American's also eat at (and like) McDonald's too.
What exactly do you think of the minority in a debate? That they are wise, all-knowing, intellectuals? They know what's best so just ignore what everybody else wants/thinks?

Wouldn't that be a dictatorship or monarchy?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #119  
Old Posted May 14, 2010, 3:38 AM
glynnjamin glynnjamin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,041
It's a fact...

If you quote someone or use a statistic from a poll and then finish it by saying "FACT" then that makes it true.

FACT!

<see what I did there?>
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #120  
Old Posted May 14, 2010, 3:52 AM
Vicelord John Vicelord John is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Eastlake, Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 5,404
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo the Dog View Post
What exactly do you think of the minority in a debate? That they are wise, all-knowing, intellectuals? They know what's best so just ignore what everybody else wants/thinks?

Wouldn't that be a dictatorship or monarchy?
No. I dont base it off minority v majority. I say only allow people with an IQ over 130 have a say in it. If only 130+ can vote, then ill go with the majority. There are juat too many moronic Americans with a say.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Southwest
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:56 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.