‘We will prosecute’ employers who help immigration sweeps, California AG says

How do you know that? Any sort of evidence to prove what you say?

 

In this case trump is following the Constitution that obama ignored

 

Everyone should be aware that only the bank robber goes to jail while his family remains on the outside

 

It used to be #5, then #6, now #7....

And then there is this looming reality:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joelko...m-of-scandinavia-on-the-pacific/#6c3ab3395cb6

 

Guess what? My children are in their 30's, and they are still my children. Can you IMAGINE? I completely understand that they are adults, but they are still my children.

It was an immoral act to actively seek a better life for your children.

You have strange values dude, very strange.

 

A year into his administration, by his actions it is very clear that Trump "follows the Constitution" about as well as Richard Nixon, George Bush and Barack Obama.

I'm not sure what point you were trying to make with your psychobabble about bank robbers.....

 

Ending DACA-by-executive-order is the constitutionally correct thing to do

Obama bypassed congress and trump is correcting that offense

 

The DACA adults cheated and broke the law

Even if the kids are allowed to stay the adults should be deported

 

Do you suppose there is a more civilized, humane, way to correct the problems? Can you even define the problems created thereby?

Cheated and broke the law? LOL, that is daily behavior in Washington DC.

What's funny-sad is that you prefer to remain dissonant about such behavior inside the beltway, keeping those eyes closed, lips and ears covered, but offer great indignity when some petty immigration law is transgressed.

 

How moral is it to put the family at risk by breaking the law? The moral thing to do would be not to sneak into another country to try and exploit it.

A decision was made to sneak into the United States, and hide out, while trying to exploit whatever economic possibilities they could.

They knew that at any moment they could be caught, and deported.

How moral is it to subject your family to that stress, and reality?

 

Yes indeed CA with a greater GNP now then the nations of France or Russia for that matter all by itself is in danger of failing.

 

Situational ethics, again. How moral was it to obey The Fugitive Slave Act in 1851?

You assume very much with your statement "and try to exploit it". So much assumption that your point becomes trivial and absurd, almost desperate. You post as though you've been through the experience you describe, and we both know you have not.

 

It is absolutely not just in danger, it is failing.

Less than 6,000 people in 2015 were responsible for generating almost 1/3rd of it's income tax revenue. It is home to the highest supplemental poverty rate in the Nation. I believe the latest figures show 1 in 6 receive some type of public assistance.

There is also this:

https://www.mercurynews.com/2017/07...ons-are-its-206-billion-elephant-in-the-room/

GDP in a state with 38 million people, 1 in 8 people living in the US, is no measure of health. It's the fundamentals of the state, and those are on critical life support for a terminal patient.

 

Trivial and absurd?

When you illegally enter another country to try and make money, what is it you are doing? Your exploiting the ability to get in, and to make money illegally. Don't run from the facts.

You can deny everything to fit your emotional requirements. I'm looking at it in black and white.

Now, if I were a parent in a desperate situation, what would I do? Anything. But I would also understand that I could get caught, and would accept the circumstances.

Are illegals morally accepting the consequences of their actions? Not in the least.

 

We have been wrestling with this issue for 30 years

When reagan signed the 1986 amnesty the American people were promised it would never happen again

But here we are with several million DACAs chirping like hungry baby hawks for amnesty

What trump voters want in exchange for amnesty is the wall - bot physical and electronic

An end to chain immigration - meaning the adukt parents of DACAs have to leave even if the kids stay

And no more of these mindless lottery visa’s

All of that together is the more humane way

 

LOL if there was not a need for their labor and US citizens are not more then willing to hired them they would never leave for the US.

Once more we are also below the birth replacement level.

 

Legal migrant labor has been a staple for 3/4 of a century.

Stealing identities and creating false documents to obtain employment is not the fault of employers. Further, with states like California protecting them, I'm not sure what you're laughing at.

When a certain political party offers policies to protect and reward them, why would they not leave for the US?

 

That would be the end of the US. The entire point of the US is that everyone can pool their resources which is why a state like Mississippi isn't a failed state. Start cutting those resources off combined with the separatism that's taken hold and states (even those not cut off due to the precedent) will start to seriously consider if the US still serves a purpose. States like California and Texas that can stand on their own economically would certainly bail.

 

Disagreed, but I find your over-exaggeration interesting.

First, people who believe in State's rights understand there's a difference between the Fed's cutting off resources and State's cutting off interstate relations and interstate trade. I do not expect Liberals and other Nanny Staters to understand this concept.

Second, Mississippi is the poorest state in the Union. Liberals regularly crap all over the South and never offer help so I fail to see your point about bringing it up.

Third, yes, some states are better equipped to stand on their own than others. While some of this is due to geography, climate or resources, clearly there are other factors involved. Why do you think California is such a success and Mississippi is less so?

 

Can you hear the chorus yet??? Kali Fornia, uber alles... and so much goose stepping....



Funny they forgot about Brown et al.....

 

Maybe after 1000 years or so. Would your buy veggies from a nuked area?

 

It depends. What is the half-life of the nuke used? Was it an air burst or a ground burst? Megatonnage?

 

Who knows? IMO the N Koreans' missile capability will be rather hit or miss. Maybe they will aim for Cali and nuke Oregon instead. Or Canada. ...or, who knows? Alaska? Russia? China? Themselves???????

 

Hardly an exaggeration considering the dramatic rise is separatist politics. Eliminate the benefits of federation and they'll have all the justification they need.

A state like California doesn't see any financial benefits. If Fed support was to be cut off, it would take the form of public services being discontinued which would in fact mean an end to free trade between it and other states.

Poorest state but functional with easy access to goods and services, an economic base not limited to its borders and a world class military. As an independent nation, it couldn't survive but if lacks the resources of the rest of America, then that is true regardless with the added indignity of lacking sovereignty. The welther a state, the more attractive independence becomes if the benefits of federation disappear.

California is a major trade hub, Mississippi isn't, lacks any meaningful natural resource sources aside from oil and has no high tech or cultural resources. Mississippi really shouldn't exist but they needed to maintain the slave/free state balance back in the day so it does instead of being part of Alabama or Louisiana.

 

Obviously not the person who posted "Maybe after 1000 years or so. Would your buy veggies from a nuked area?"

People were moving back to both Hiroshima and Nagasaki within a few years. Now both are thriving cities. We're talking about one missile, probably a plutonium fission bomb since that's the easiest for them to access material. The Nagasaki bomb was a plutonium-239 device with a yield of 21 kilotons. It's doubtful NK has the tech to cram that much into a missile and since most of their tests are under 10 kilotons. The Hiroshima bomb was 15 kilotons for perspective. While plutonium-239 has a half-life of over 24,000 years, the reason Nagasaki was inhabitable within weeks was because the bomb was detonated at over 1500'. Airbursts cause more destruction against soft targets like cities but leave very little fallout. Groundbursts are more effective against hardened targets like missile silos and ships in harbor and leave a lot of fallout, but the blast range and radioactive area are limited in range. Radiation cast aloft would be subject to the winds, so anything downwind would be ****ed. Odds are an attack on a US city would be an airburst killing tens of thousands instantly but leaving very little residual radiation.

For perspective; on August 9th, 1945, Nagasaki has a population of 263,000 people. When the bomb detonated, 20,000-40,000 died the first day. Another 20,000-40,000 died in the following weeks of burns, blast injuries and radiation poisoning. Those dying of cancer years later are more difficult to calculate. LA has a population of almost 10M, but that's spread over a very wide area and includes cities like Beverly Hills, Glendale and Long Beach. LA proper has about 3.8M. Given a North Korean missile could actually hit its target, this is where the majority of the casualties would be for a missile aimed at downtown LA. The majority of deaths would be within 1-2 miles of ground zero. Using Nagasaki as a metric, we could see over 570,000 dead the first 24 hours and another half million dead in the month...although modern medical tech might be able to substantially reduce deaths after 24 hours. Of course this is a worst case scenario since it's doubtful NK would even launch much less have the technology to do so and that we couldn't' intercept the missile.