Costa Mesa is now a Rule Of Law city. [Archive]

Roadtoad

21st May 2010, 08:51 AM

Is it just me, or is the immigration debate taking weirder and weirder turns?

The Costa Mesa City Council has voted unanimously to declare itself a "rule of law" community, further widening the divide over illegal immigration in the central Orange County city.

This week's resolution follows an April news conference in which Mayor Allan Mansoor called for stricter regulations to catch illegal immigrants living, working and driving in the city.

Costa Mesa has sought for several years to reduce the number of illegal immigrants within its borders by regulating day laborers, asking police to check the immigration status of people they stop and limiting the number of soccer fields in parks.

Mansoor said before Tuesday's meeting that the resolution "states that Costa Mesa is not a sanctuary city" and will uphold immigration laws.

The story is here. (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0520-costa-mesa-immigration-20100520,0,5098127,print.story)

daredelvis

21st May 2010, 09:08 AM

limiting the number of soccer fields in parks.

No U.S. citizen likes soccer (sorry, football).

Daredelvis

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 09:12 AM

Limitting the number of soccer fields?!
Next, they'll pass an ordinance that only allows beans to be fried once. (joke by Bill Maher)

daenku32

21st May 2010, 09:13 AM

limiting the number of soccer fields in parks.

That one rule about cursing prevents me from giving the proper response to this.

sesshin

21st May 2010, 10:21 AM

Limitting the number of soccer fields?!

Not limiting the amount of soccer fields, but limiting the amount of organized games of soccer by grown men in public parks.

If you go to any public park in southern California any time of day any day of the week, you will see dozens and dozens of Hispanic men taking up large portions of the park playing soccer in Mexican and other Central American soccer jerseys. They are taking up space and resources that should be allowed for children. In addition to this I would guess a good number of them are most likely illegal immigrants, and public parks are tax-payer funded, so it is somewhat understandable that city officials wouldn't want them monopolizing it from their actual citizens.

daredelvis

21st May 2010, 10:32 AM

Not limiting the amount of soccer fields, but limiting the amount of organized games of soccer by grown men in public parks.

If you go to any public park in southern California any time of day any day of the week, you will see dozens and dozens of Hispanic men taking up large portions of the park playing soccer in Mexican and other Central American soccer jerseys. They are taking up space and resources that should be allowed for children. In addition to this I would guess a good number of them are most likely illegal immigrants, and public parks are tax-payer funded, so it is somewhat understandable that city officials wouldn't want them monopolizing it from their actual citizens.It is very difficult to convey sarcasm on an internet forum. Many people use the markers to make it clear. Just a hint.

Daredelvis

Piscivore

21st May 2010, 10:35 AM

If you go to any public park in southern California any time of day any day of the week, you will see dozens and dozens of Hispanic men taking up large portions of the park playing soccer in Mexican and other Central American soccer jerseys. They are taking up space and resources that should be allowed for children.

Adults shouldn't be allowed to use public parks?

sesshin

21st May 2010, 10:40 AM

Adults shouldn't be allowed to use public parks?

Non-citizen, ergo non-taxpaying, adults shouldn't be allowed to monopolize public parks to the extent that tax-paying citizens aren't able to use them.. no. imo of course.

daredelvis

21st May 2010, 10:43 AM

Adults shouldn't be allowed to use public parks?
If they are playing soccer, and wearing jerseys of prominent soccer teams from south of the border, they are, according to sesshin "most likely illegal immigrants". So no, they should not be allowed to use public parks.

Daredelvis

daredelvis

21st May 2010, 10:45 AM

Non-citizen, ergo non-taxpaying, adults shouldn't be allowed to monopolize public parks to the extent that tax-paying citizens aren't able to use them.. no. imo of course.

Your evidence that they are non-citizens is non-existent and even allowing that non-status, there is not any evidence of "ergo non-taxpaying".

Daredelvis

sesshin

21st May 2010, 10:48 AM

It is very difficult to convey sarcasm on an internet forum. Many people use the markers to make it clear. Just a hint.

Daredelvis

Judging from past posts, and the fact that every law or motion pertaining to illegal immigrants tends to be highly misconstrued, not to mention those doing the misconstruing seem to be in permanent sarcastic troll mode, I really don't care any more. I got the underlying point.

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 10:48 AM

Non-citizen, ergo non-taxpaying, adults shouldn't be allowed to monopolize public parks to the extent that tax-paying citizens aren't able to use them.. no. imo of course.

So, when do we send them to the gas chambers?

sesshin

21st May 2010, 10:54 AM

Your evidence that they are non-citizens is non-existent and even allowing that non-status, there is not any evidence of "ergo non-taxpaying".

Daredelvis

The law pertains towards illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants are non-citizens. That's the focus of the law, and this thread.

I can tell you don't live in southern California and have never seen any of the public parks in question. If you did you wouldn't be playing devil's advocate. You would understand that 1) there are a whole hell of a lot of illegal immigrants here, and 2) a lot of them like to congregate in public parks, and 3) there are always pick-up soccer games going on when they congregate.

Keep in mind I'm not saying every Hispanic male in a public park playing soccer is an illegal immigrant, I know that's going to be the next argument, but it's no stretch of the imagination to come to the conclusion that at least a good portion are.

sesshin

21st May 2010, 10:55 AM

So, when do we send them to the gas chambers?

Are you *********** serious? This is why pro-illegal immigration people don't have a logical foot to stand on. You are nothing but histrionics.

Edited breach of Rule 10. Do not swear in your posts. This includes changing letters to bypass the auto-censor.

ponderingturtle

21st May 2010, 11:00 AM

If they are playing soccer, and wearing jerseys of prominent soccer teams from south of the border, they are, according to sesshin "most likely illegal immigrants". So no, they should not be allowed to use public parks.

Daredelvis

Seems like a complicated plan to get David Beckam.

Steven Howard

21st May 2010, 11:01 AM

If you go to any public park in southern California any time of day any day of the week, you will see dozens and dozens of Hispanic men taking up large portions of the park playing soccer in Mexican and other Central American soccer jerseys.

Really? I've lived in Southern California for twenty years now and I don't think I've ever seen that. I'm leaving for lunch in a little bit. I'll be sure to drive by a park and report back with what I see.

ponderingturtle

21st May 2010, 11:01 AM

Keep in mind I'm not saying every Hispanic male in a public park playing soccer is an illegal immigrant, I know that's going to be the next argument, but it's no stretch of the imagination to come to the conclusion that at least a good portion are.

But you want to prevent all of them from using public facilities for some reason.

daredelvis

21st May 2010, 11:02 AM

The law pertains towards illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants are non-citizens. That's the focus of the law, and this thread.

I can tell you don't live in southern California and have never seen any of the public parks in question. If you did you wouldn't be playing devil's advocate. You would understand that 1) there are a whole hell of a lot of illegal immigrants here, and 2) a lot of them like to congregate in public parks, and 3) there are always pick-up soccer games going on when they congregate.

Keep in mind I'm not saying every Hispanic male in a public park playing soccer is an illegal immigrant, I know that's going to be the next argument, but it's no stretch of the imagination to come to the conclusion that at least a good portion are.
San Diego -> Tucson -> Houston, I know the score. I worked as a fry cook with plenty of people with questionable papers back in the 80's before Reagan's amnesty. According to you, being Hispanic, and playing soccer is enough to label one a illegal immigrant, except when it isn't.

If, I accept your model for immigration status, I don't think it is a bad thing. We could use more of these role models showing our kids 1) what park is, 2) how to play a game that does not involve being connected to a TV, and 3) risking life and limb to work to improve their lives.

Salt of the earth. People with the attitude that made this country great.

Daredelvis

daredelvis

21st May 2010, 11:04 AM

sesshin

21st May 2010, 11:16 AM

According to you, being Hispanic, and playing soccer is enough to label one a illegal immigrant, except when it isn't.

Thanks for proving me right.

Keep in mind I'm not saying every Hispanic male in a public park playing soccer is an illegal immigrant, I know that's going to be the next argument

sesshin

21st May 2010, 11:20 AM

But you want to prevent all of them from using public facilities for some reason.

Strawman. I never said that.

I really don't understand why pro-illlegal immigrant people have to resort to misrepresentation so much. It doesn't speak highly of what you are supporting.

Adult sport games in public parks should be regulated, not prevented. This goes for every park and for everyone, not just SoCal parks and illegal immigrants.

For instance me and my friends wanted to get some kickball games going at our local park. We couldn't just set up and start playing whenever and wherever we wanted. We had to get organized through the park facilitators so that everyone had fair use of the park. This is only logical.

sesshin

21st May 2010, 11:25 AM

Really? I've lived in Southern California for twenty years now and I don't think I've ever seen that. I'm leaving for lunch in a little bit. I'll be sure to drive by a park and report back with what I see.

Be sure to drive through a part of town with actual Hispanics in it. I've lived in Long Beach. If you are over by whitebread Belmont Shore you are missing the point. Try the going on the northwest side of town.

daredelvis

21st May 2010, 11:30 AM

When you say...

Keep in mind I'm not saying every Hispanic male in a public park playing soccer is an illegal immigrant, I know that's going to be the next argument,followed by... but it's no stretch of the imagination to come to the conclusion that at least a good portion are.
You are pretty much saying...

being Hispanic, and playing soccer is enough to label one a illegal immigrant, except when it isn't.

Playing soccer is not uncommon among members of the Hispanic community. Being Hispanic, is not evidence of immigration status. You may not know this, but a pretty big percentage of the legal residents in the south west are Hispanic.

Daredelvis

sesshin

21st May 2010, 11:42 AM

When you say...
followed by...
You are pretty much saying...

Playing soccer is not uncommon among members of the Hispanic community. Being Hispanic, is not evidence of immigration status. You may not know this, but a pretty big percentage of the legal residents in the south west are Hispanic.

Daredelvis

Yes, I don't know that, even though my wife is Hispanic, several of my employees are Hispanic, and I interact with legal and illegal Hispanics on a daily basis. You should try to be a bit more of a condescending d*uche next time.

Roadtoad

21st May 2010, 11:45 AM

ANTPogo

21st May 2010, 11:49 AM

Yes, I don't know that, even though my wife is Hispanic, several of my employees are Hispanic, and I interact with legal and illegal Hispanics on a daily basis. You should try to be a bit more of a condescending d*uche next time.

Why, some of your best friends...

pipelineaudio

21st May 2010, 11:55 AM

Its crazy that even on this forum, the pro-criminal side can't have a rational debate without resorting to absolute nonsense

gas chambers?

wow

MikeMangum

21st May 2010, 11:55 AM

Why, some of your best friends...

That's what so awesome about calling someone racist. They have no defense, since they can't prove what they believe, and you don't even have to provide any evidence, just make the accusation.

So cool!

sesshin

21st May 2010, 11:58 AM

Why, some of your best friends...

Again, sarcastic trolling misses the point. Yes, I live in a community with Hispanic people from all walks of life. I have direct experience with both legal and illegal Hispanic immigrants on a daily basis, so my opinion is based on first-hand observations. I'm not going to sit idly by while someone implies I don't know about something when in fact I know it quite intimately.

Dr. Keith

21st May 2010, 12:13 PM

Non-citizen, ergo non-taxpaying, adults shouldn't be allowed to monopolize public parks to the extent that tax-paying citizens aren't able to use them.. no. imo of course.

I've spent more time than most trying to figure out how to avoid paying taxes and I still haven't figured out how being an illegal immigrant would help.

Their wages are too low to owe any wage taxes, whether the wages are reported or not, and some are.

Sales tax is pretty hard to avoid.

Contributions to the property taxes are minimized by living in close quarters, but again, this has nothing to do with their immigration status, just their poverty level.

So, it seems that the main reason they pay less in taxes is that they are poor, not that they are illegal immigrants. Being poor is a pretty tough tax avoidance strategy. And is not limited to the illegal immigrant.

sesshin

21st May 2010, 12:14 PM

That's what so awesome about calling someone racist. They have no defense, since they can't prove what they believe, and you don't even have to provide any evidence, just make the accusation.

So cool!

I find it telling that those in favor of immigration law tend to make well thought out, reasoned, logical, non-confrontational responses in support of their position, while those in favor of illegal immigration seem to have to resort to sarcastic, condescending, childish responses, histrionics and defamation in order to try and support theirs.

Dr. Keith

21st May 2010, 12:16 PM

daredelvis

21st May 2010, 12:17 PM

It is an abusive relationship, and those who abuse the immigrants do so because they know that under current administration, they can get away with it. The immigrants are little more than slaves, and the goal is to keep them enslaved to provide the kind of cheap labor that makes it possible for the fine folks running WalMart and Home Depot to charge as little for their products as they do. It is a cruel business, and its sole purpose is destructive and hateful.

I agree. It's too bad so much time is focused on demonizing the immigrants in this situation. Unfortunately, it has always been a popular stance to go after "the other people".

Daredelvis

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 12:21 PM

I'm still trying to figure out the soccer connection here.

Roadtoad

21st May 2010, 12:21 PM

One other thing: you're pissed your poor people play soccer? Have you seen what poor people are up to in other cities?

If nothing else, you know where to find them if you ever want to round them up. [/sarcasm]

Odd. Most of the poor people I see here in Sacramento are trying to find third and fourth jobs just to keep food on the table. At least that's what I was doing, alongside those here illegally.

I couldn't get hired. They HAD to report my wages, and they HAD to pay me a full scale wage. The illegals got hired but wound up getting less than half the legal wage. Oddly enough, I think I was the one who came out ahead.

The claim that "Illegals will do work whites won't" is a lie. Illegals will take all they can get, simply because what they get is so little. Pay them a living wage, a legal wage, and you discover they are no different from anyone else. That's why making it possible for them to come here legally, to work here legally, is so critical, not merely because it prevents the depression of wages, but because they need the legal protection of the law. Under the current practice, an illegal immigrant here can wind up killed on the job, and his family will get nothing.

What is being lost in tax revenue, what there is of it, is still significant. And what is lost in civil rights by those here illegally is also highly significant. And it is not acceptable.

Roadtoad

21st May 2010, 12:22 PM

I'm still trying to figure out the soccer connection here.

If it smells fishy, it's because it's a red herring.

DavidJames

21st May 2010, 12:23 PM

I find it telling that those in favor of immigration law tend to make well thought out, reasoned, logical, non-confrontational responses in support of their position...Let me know when you make one. because in this thread you haven't even come close. From your first post in this thread. And your subsequent posts are no better.
If you go to any public park in southern California any time of day any day of the week, you will see dozens and dozens of Hispanic men taking up large portions of the park playing soccer in Mexican and other Central American soccer jerseys. They are taking up space and resources that should be allowed for children.Unsourced, unsupported claim.
In addition to this I would guess a good number of them are most likely illegal immigrantsYou're guessing? Where does guessing fit in with "well thought out, reasoned, logical".

Hint, it doesn't.

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 12:28 PM

Sesshin says to visit any public park, at any time of the day, in southern California and you will see dozens of hispanic men playing soccer. And then:
"
Be sure to drive through a part of town with actual Hispanics in it. I've lived in Long Beach. If you are over by whitebread Belmont Shore you are missing the point. Try the going on the northwest side of town."

Hmmm.

Roadtoad

21st May 2010, 12:29 PM

Unsourced, unsupported claim.

Well, maybe.

In all likelihood, there are illegal immigrants playing soccer. It's a popular sport around the world, though not so much in the US.

It's entirely likely that where you have a large group of people playing soccer, you may have a few present who don't have a legal right to be in the US. Same as if you have a large group of people playing baseball, football, basketball, calvinball, what have you...

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 12:45 PM

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 12:47 PM

Are you *********** serious? This is why pro-illegal immigration people don't have a logical foot to stand on. You are nothing but histrionics.

Just pointing out what you sound like, Mein Herr.

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 12:51 PM

To Amplify;

The New Colossus

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,

With conquering limbs astride from land to land;

Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand

A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame

Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name

Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand

Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command

The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.

"Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she

With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

ANTPogo

21st May 2010, 12:52 PM

That's what so awesome about calling someone racist. They have no defense, since they can't prove what they believe, and you don't even have to provide any evidence, just make the accusation.

Hmm, maybe you're right. I mean, now that I think about it, no one could possibly construe anything the slightest bit racist about a desire to see all soccer banned from public parks because Hispanics and only Hispanics play it (in a portion of the country where Hispanics are forty percent of the population) and the Hispanic players are all illegal and so don't pay any taxes and therefore don't deserve to use the parks that non-Hispanics could be using.

And when the proposer of said ban on said sport (that everyone knows only Hispanics play and that all the Hispanics who play it are illegal aliens) says "how can this be racist against Hispanics, when I actually know a bunch of Hispanic people?", that obviously makes the proposal not racist in the least, especially since no one saying something racist has ever tried to claim that they can't really be racist because they're totally bestest pals with some members of the race in question.

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 12:57 PM

quixotecoyote

21st May 2010, 12:59 PM

Does your wife know that you don't like "her kind?"

Yeah. That's the type of strawmanning misrepresentation that makes you look bad.

daredelvis

21st May 2010, 01:04 PM

Hmm, maybe you're right. I mean, now that I think about it, no one could possibly construe anything the slightest bit racist about a desire to see all soccer banned from public parks because Hispanics and only Hispanics play it (in a portion of the country where Hispanics are forty percent of the population) and the Hispanic players are all illegal and so don't pay any taxes and therefore don't deserve to use the parks that non-Hispanics could be using.

And when the proposer of said ban on said sport (that everyone knows only Hispanics play and that all the Hispanics who play it are illegal aliens) says "how can this be racist against Hispanics, when I actually know a bunch of Hispanic people?", that obviously makes the proposal not racist in the least, especially since no one saying something racist has ever tried to claim that they can't really be racist because they're totally bestest pals with some members of the race in question.
Here I was trying to get other people to open their eyes about how they view the world and people different from themselves, and you have opened mine. I was blind and now I see! Bravo, and thank you.

Daredelvis

Steven Howard

21st May 2010, 01:04 PM

If you go to any public park in southern California any time of day any day of the week, you will see dozens and dozens of Hispanic men taking up large portions of the park playing soccer in Mexican and other Central American soccer jerseys.
[emphasis mine]

Be sure to drive through a part of town with actual Hispanics in it. I've lived in Long Beach. If you are over by whitebread Belmont Shore you are missing the point. Try the going on the northwest side of town.

So now any doesn't mean any?

Anyway, I'm not home. I'm at work in Garden Grove, which is not that far from Costa Mesa and is if anything less "whitebread" (to use your delightfully non-racist terminology). There are actually two parks not far from my office. The smaller of the two was entirely deserted today at lunch time. It's a nice day, so at the larger one I got out and walked around the duck pond.

I didn't see anybody of any age, sex, or ethnic background, in any kind of clothes, playing soccer or any other team sport. I saw some families having lunch at the picnic tables, some joggers, a couple of people walking their dogs, and two young moms with strollers. I also saw lots of ducks and geese. They might have been Canadian geese, but I didn't ask for their papers.

It's a nice park, and a lot bigger than it looks like just driving by on the street. I think I'll start walking there at lunch time more often. So, thanks for that.

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 01:08 PM

Yeah. That's the type of strawmanning misrepresentation that makes you look bad.

Uh huh:rolleyes:

sesshin

21st May 2010, 01:14 PM

Just pointing out what you sound like, Mein Herr.

I don't think you could validate Godwin's law in harder than you have.

Again, no logical foot to stand on. All you have is histrionics.

sesshin

21st May 2010, 01:16 PM

Hmm, maybe you're right. I mean, now that I think about it, no one could possibly construe anything the slightest bit racist about a desire to see all soccer banned from public parks because Hispanics and only Hispanics play it (in a portion of the country where Hispanics are forty percent of the population) and the Hispanic players are all illegal and so don't pay any taxes and therefore don't deserve to use the parks that non-Hispanics could be using.

And when the proposer of said ban on said sport (that everyone knows only Hispanics play and that all the Hispanics who play it are illegal aliens) says "how can this be racist against Hispanics, when I actually know a bunch of Hispanic people?", that obviously makes the proposal not racist in the least, especially since no one saying something racist has ever tried to claim that they can't really be racist because they're totally bestest pals with some members of the race in question.

It seems you haven't even slightly comprehended anything said in this thread up to this point. No use even trying to respond to this when it's obvious your head is so far up where the sun don't shine.

ANTPogo

21st May 2010, 01:17 PM

Here I was trying to get other people to open their eyes about how they view the world and people different from themselves, and you have opened mine. I was blind and now I see! Bravo, and thank you.

Daredelvis

Well, what really convinced me was sesshin saying that he wasn't claiming all Hispanics were illegal aliens, which is true. He simply wants to ban from public parks a sport that only Hispanics seem to play, and maintain that ban even if all the Hispanics who want to play it are legal and pay taxes (and, really, in a place where 40% of the population is Hispanic, what are the chances of that, right?), they still won't be allowed to play in a public park funded by taxpayers because....um...because...

...well, I'm sure sesshin has a good reason!

quixotecoyote

21st May 2010, 01:17 PM

Uh huh:rolleyes:

See ANTpogo's post 43 for an example of how to deal with the actual racist content.

See BenBurch's post 41 for an example of the kind of thing you did.

ANTPogo

21st May 2010, 01:19 PM

It seems you haven't even slightly comprehended anything said in this thread up to this point. No use even trying to respond to this when it's obvious your head is so far up where the sun don't shine.

I'm glad you responded to me to tell me that you weren't responding to me, otherwise I'd never have known that you weren't responding to me.

sesshin

21st May 2010, 01:19 PM

So now any doesn't mean any?

Okay. Yes, you are right. Hispanics generally won't be playing soccer in cities or parts of town where there are little to no Hispanics. My oversight. I shouldn't have been so broad in my classification.

sesshin

21st May 2010, 01:23 PM

I'm glad you responded to me to tell me that you weren't responding to me, otherwise I'd never have known that you weren't responding to me.

I responded to tell you you haven't comprehended anything I've said in this thread. If you did you would see I have already addressed and invalidated the point your trying to make. I'm not going to waste my time rebutting each of your sentences because it would be pointless.

quixotecoyote

21st May 2010, 01:23 PM

I responded to tell you you haven't comprehended anything I've said in this thread. If you did you would see I have already addressed and invalidated the point your trying to make. I'm still not going to waste my time rebutting each of your sentences because it would be pointless.

Actually, you didn't address how it was fair to eliminate fields for a game Hispanics tend to like like because some of those Hispanics are illegal immigrants.

Roadtoad

21st May 2010, 01:25 PM

sesshin

21st May 2010, 01:26 PM

Actually, you didn't address how it was fair to eliminate fields for a game Hispanics tend to like like because some of those Hispanics are illegal immigrants.

Actually I did. Enough with the strawman, I never said the games should be eliminated.

Adult sport games in public parks should be regulated, not prevented. This goes for every park and for everyone, not just SoCal parks and illegal immigrants.

quixotecoyote

21st May 2010, 01:27 PM

Actually I did. Enough with the strawman, I never said the games should be eliminated.

That statement is unrelated to limiting the number of soccer fields in the city. Unless of course you're actually disagreeing with the city's actions, which you did not appear to be doing.

Roadtoad

21st May 2010, 01:30 PM

Well, what really convinced me was sesshin saying that he wasn't claiming all Hispanics were illegal aliens, which is true. He simply wants to ban from public parks a sport that only Hispanics seem to play, and maintain that ban even if all the Hispanics who want to play it are legal and pay taxes (and, really, in a place where 40% of the population is Hispanic, what are the chances of that, right?), they still won't be allowed to play in a public park funded by taxpayers because....um...because...

...well, I'm sure sesshin has a good reason!

Actually, while I agree in part with what you say, I find it disingenuous of you to throw in the "Some of your best friends..." shtick. I think sesshin's attitudes more or less spoke for him.

I WANT immigrants. They're very good for a nation of immigrants. I DON'T want them coming in illegally and abused for that. Fix the current laws, correct the inequities, and make it possible for someone to show up at the border and enter the nation legally. But don't insist that they be allowed to commit an illegal act, and then turn around and batter them for doing so. That's simply cruel and unjust.

sesshin

21st May 2010, 01:32 PM

That statement is unrelated to limiting the number of soccer fields in the city. Unless of course you're actually disagreeing with the city's actions, which you did not appear to be doing.

Limiting soccer fields is not banning them, as so many keep claiming. That is a strawman.

I am not in favor of banning soccer fields. I am in favor of keeping adult sport activities in public parks regulated so that all citizens have fair use of the park. This comes from my first hand experience of so many public parks in my area being monopolized by soccer games.

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 01:34 PM

How many is "so many" and how often is "often" because you started out with "any park in southern california at any time" and have now changed your assertion.

ANTPogo

21st May 2010, 01:35 PM

Actually I did. Enough with the strawman, I never said the games should be eliminated.

No, you just want legal, taxpaying Hispanic men thrown out of the parks that they help pay for.

If you go to any public park in southern California any time of day any day of the week, you will see dozens and dozens of Hispanic men taking up large portions of the park playing soccer in Mexican and other Central American soccer jerseys. They are taking up space and resources that should be allowed for children. In addition to this I would guess a good number of them are most likely illegal immigrants, and public parks are tax-payer funded, so it is somewhat understandable that city officials wouldn't want them monopolizing it from their actual citizens.

See where you complained about "dozens and dozens of Hispanic men" playing soccer in public parks, before you even got into that whole "they're illegals using up taxpayer resources" complaint?

sesshin

21st May 2010, 01:36 PM

How many is "so many" and how often is "often" because you started out with "any park in southern california at any time" and have now changed your assertion.

I take it you missed post #54?

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 01:39 PM

So, in the hispanic side of town, where soccer is probably very popular, you think they should limit the amount of soccer played?

sesshin

21st May 2010, 01:40 PM

No, you just want legal, taxpaying Hispanic men thrown out of the parks that they help pay for.

See where you complained about "dozens and dozens of Hispanic men" playing soccer in public parks, before you even got into that whole "they're illegals using up taxpayer resources" complaint?

I'll quote myself again since you seem to have a severe lack of reading comprehension

Adult sport games in public parks should be regulated, not prevented. This goes for every park and for everyone, not just SoCal parks and illegal immigrants.

I've never once said or insinuated that all Hispanics should be banned from playing soccer in parks. They should have to abide by the same rules as everyone else does. The fact that you keep misconstruing what I say says more about you than me.

sesshin

21st May 2010, 01:43 PM

So, in the hispanic side of town, where soccer is probably very popular, you think they should limit the amount of soccer played?

In every park everywhere, for everyone, adult sports should be regulated so that adult games aren't monopolizing them from their intended usage. I'm not sure how much more clear I can be about this.

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 01:43 PM

Are they playing soccer in soccer fields?

ANTPogo

21st May 2010, 01:44 PM

Actually, while I agree in part with what you say, I find it disingenuous of you to throw in the "Some of your best friends..." shtick. I think sesshin's attitudes more or less spoke for him.

Yeah, that was extremely unhelpful of me, I admit. But, I think, less because sesshin's attitudes spoke for him, and more because it was just glib, since his attitudes (and his posts) do need to be engaged with.

Steven Howard

21st May 2010, 01:47 PM

In every park everywhere, for everyone, adult sports should be regulated so that adult games aren't monopolizing them from their intended usage. I'm not sure how much more clear I can be about this.

So, in fact, this has nothing to do with immigration or the City of Costa Mesa's plan to limit the number of soccer fields in their parks? If so, then we should all apologize for dragging you into this thread and interrogating you about your ideas, which were completely irrelevant to the point at hand.

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 01:49 PM

See ANTpogo's post 43 for an example of how to deal with the actual racist content.

See BenBurch's post 41 for an example of the kind of thing you did.

You'd have to assume I actually wanted to deal with him...

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 01:49 PM

I guess playing soccer in soccer fields is monopolizing those soccer fields for only people who want to play soccer.

quixotecoyote

21st May 2010, 01:52 PM

ANTPogo

21st May 2010, 01:54 PM

I'll quote myself again since you seem to have a severe lack of reading comprehension

Fortunately, I was able to still post this through the blurry film of tears caused by your imparting of this brutal truth to me.

I've never once said or insinuated that all Hispanics should be banned from playing soccer in parks. They should have to abide by the same rules as everyone else does. The fact that you keep misconstruing what I say says more about you than me.

Perhaps your early, heavy, and repeated emphasis on how "dozens and dozens" of non-illegal Hispanics and their apparently-Hispanic-only game of soccer (and the resource-sucking illegals that are always "a good number of them") was the problem that needed to be solved and how you totally supported the restrictions on soccer (and only soccer) made by Costa Mesa is to blame for that.

daredelvis

21st May 2010, 02:01 PM

Just build more soccer fields.

To the OP. It would be nice to crack down on those at the top of the illegal labor industry, but we as a society don't seem to be willing to do that. It is much easier to demonize the "other" people.
2007 McCain: (http://mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.OpEds&ContentRecord_id=4801985b-7318-46c2-9b13-098bfc32c9cf&Region_id=&Issue_id=1bd7f3a7-a52b-4ad0-a338-646c6a780d65)
# Vastly improve our border surveillance and enforcement capabilities;
# Increase the manpower, infrastructure and capabilities necessary to block, apprehend, detain and return those who try to enter the country illegally;
# Strengthen the laws and penalties against those who hire illegal aliens and violate immigration law;
Post-Teabaggers 2010 McCain: (http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/19/mccain-immigration-laws/)
GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: What about businesses who hire people who are not documented?

MCCAIN: Once we secure the borders we should prosecute employers to the fullest extent of the law that hire someone that’s in this country illegally.

“Why can’t we do those two things at the same time?” Van Susteren asked. “We should get the borders secure so there is not this symptom which is people coming to this country and working illegally,” McCain replied. Watch it:
The jobs people are risking their lives for are just a "symptom"... Riiiight.

Daredelvis

sesshin

21st May 2010, 02:02 PM

So, in fact, this has nothing to do with immigration or the City of Costa Mesa's plan to limit the number of soccer fields in their parks? If so, then we should all apologize for dragging you into this thread and interrogating you about your ideas, which were completely irrelevant to the point at hand.

The lawmakers of Costa Mesa have decided that many of the adult males monopolizing their public parks for soccer games are illegal immigrants. Therefore to them reducing the amount of soccer games being played in public parks would go towards reducing places for illegal immigrants to congregate in public. That's their reasoning. Take it or leave it.

I've stated my position on the usage of public parks in general. Organized adult games should be regulated so that they don't monopolize public grounds. This ties in with Costa Mesa's decision in that if illegal immigrants, or ANYONE, is monopolizing public parks, it needs to be regulated.

People are taking this line of reasoning a step too far in insinuating I think all soccer should be banned from public parks, or all Hispanics, or what have you. Never have I said that or implied it and to say so is a strawman of the highest caliber. Unfortunately strawmen is all some people have to rely on.

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 02:04 PM

You think they should regulate the amount of soccer being played on soccer fields?

WildCat

21st May 2010, 02:07 PM

No U.S. citizen likes soccer (sorry, football).

Daredelvis
None over the age of 10 anyway. :D

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 02:08 PM

None over the age of 10 anyway. :D

I'd hate to think what they would have done to me when I used to play Rugby.

WildCat

21st May 2010, 02:13 PM

Its crazy that even on this forum, the pro-criminal side can't have a rational debate without resorting to absolute nonsense

gas chambers?

wow
Ben's worried he'll have to mow his own lawn some day, or actually pay someone a fair wage to do it.

WildCat

21st May 2010, 02:18 PM

I've spent more time than most trying to figure out how to avoid paying taxes and I still haven't figured out how being an illegal immigrant would help.

Their wages are too low to owe any wage taxes, whether the wages are reported or not, and some are.

Sales tax is pretty hard to avoid.

Contributions to the property taxes are minimized by living in close quarters, but again, this has nothing to do with their immigration status, just their poverty level.

So, it seems that the main reason they pay less in taxes is that they are poor, not that they are illegal immigrants. Being poor is a pretty tough tax avoidance strategy. And is not limited to the illegal immigrant.
Maybe we wouldn't have so many poor people if employers didn't have a steady supply of imported illegal labor to drive down wages and benefits.

Maybe if ag workers, for example, made $20/hr plus benefits the social costs (medical, welfare, etc) to taxpayers wouldn't be so high.

And it befuddles me to no end how liberals are the biggest supporters of importing illegal labor to exploit at below subsistence wages. And at the same time they want to raise the minimum wage... :confused:

pipelineaudio

21st May 2010, 02:18 PM

strawman city

As a soccer coach, we found a way for the city to deal with this better. Let AYSO have the soccer fields and make the baseball fields for kickball and baseball

AYSO requires proof of residence

pipelineaudio

21st May 2010, 02:20 PM

Ben's worried he'll have to mow his own lawn some day, or actually pay someone a fair wage to do it.

Or, FSM forbid, have a kid do it. We all want to complain that kids are all spoiled lately, but they can't get a job no matter how willing they are. No carwash, no lawn service, no paper routes, no mcdonalds

sesshin

21st May 2010, 02:22 PM

You think they should regulate the amount of soccer being played on soccer fields?

Something tells me you really don't care what the answer to that question is.

But to answer anyways, I feel that usage of public parks shouldn't be monopolized by any one group of people on a regular basis to the detriment of other people who would like to use that portion of the park. No matter if it's a soccer field, a baseball diamond, or what have you.

WildCat

21st May 2010, 02:24 PM

All of which can be fixed by open borders in which everybody who does not have a significant criminal record is allowed to cross the border at a border checkpoint and everybody pays the same taxes and earns the legally mandated wages.

I believe in the America of Emma Lazarus.
Minimum wage for everyone!

How about we start with teachers. Fire all those American teachers making $70,000 plus benefits, I'm sure we can find qualified teachers from developing countries who will do it for $15,000 and no benefits. No more budget crisis! They might even work more than 6 hours a day and more than 9 months a year.

It will be awesome for the economy. Stupid American workers demand wages they can actually live on, we can circumvent that by hiring foreigners!

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 02:28 PM

Something tells me you really don't care what the answer to that question is.

But to answer anyways, I feel that usage of public parks shouldn't be monopolized by any one group of people on a regular basis to the detriment of other people who would like to use that portion of the park. No matter if it's a soccer field, a baseball diamond, or what have you.

By "group of people" do you mean soccer players?

sesshin

21st May 2010, 02:36 PM

By "group of people" do you mean soccer players?

By definition anyone playing soccer would be a soccer player.

pipelineaudio

21st May 2010, 02:36 PM

By "group of people" do you mean soccer players?

I think he means "group of people"

Wait till the fru fru dog people take up your whole park, even though you specifically made a dog section just for them that was far more than big enough and fenced in for everyone's safety

Reap the rewards when they decide not to clean up after their dogs, that you don't notice till you put your soccer goals up

shadron

21st May 2010, 02:37 PM

The argument I have against illegal immigration is that much of the time, those who are here illegally are paid substandard wages, many times less than minimum wage, (which I have seen), and in many further cases, when they are injured on the job, or need public services, (and I mean NEED, not WANT), they are told if they go to authorities, they will be reported to Immigration authorities and deported.

It is an abusive relationship, and those who abuse the immigrants do so because they know that under current administration, they can get away with it. The immigrants are little more than slaves, and the goal is to keep them enslaved to provide the kind of cheap labor that makes it possible for the fine folks running WalMart and Home Depot to charge as little for their products as they do. It is a cruel business, and its sole purpose is destructive and hateful.

I have watched as illegal immigrants have come in, taken jobs, and been treated worse than they would have had they come in as citizens. In some cases, daughters are turned out to help support the family, and no, this is not hyperbole. Read the story of Lt. Lucy Duvall in the book, Working Vice. Spend a little time on the street, talking to the women turned out. You'll get an earful. In some cases, the prostitutes are as young as 12, and in some cities, they're even younger. Many have been brought here illegally from the former Soviet Union and its satellite states, and they see nothing of the money they bring in for their pimps. They are literally slaves.

Those who would excuse this are ignorant of the genuine plight of these people, and in many cases, they ignore the realities simply because those who abuse the enslaved are big donors to the political powers that be. Slavery exists, in the United States, whether we like it or not. And it is evil, and it is wrong.

There are reasons we insist that these folks come in legally. This is the primary one for those with a conscience. That Hillary Clinton will not address this issue does not speak well of her. That Costa Mesa is reacting as they are indicates they haven't a clue what they're doing, and how they can help.

The goal is to arrest and shut down the employers that hire those here illegally. Quit supporting the slave trade, and it will dry up.

Just my opinion. YMMV.

I absolutely agree with you, RT. Only two small quibbles:

The first: there is a mighty fine line to draw between these people are getting jobs for below the lawful rates and these people are getting jobs below my rate. We both know that if NAFTA gets fully implemented that the lawful mileage rates for drivers is likely to go way down (not to speak of safety issues, which we all are going to hate to see), but that isn't a case of illegals getting sub-lawful rates; that's legals getting rates which have no legal bottom, at least partially as a result of a lack of a union to cover all drivers. That is not good, but it's legal. Is your argument about illegality or about abysmal wages, and are we talking a universal case here or a special case?

Second: I have no quibble with your angst about Hillary, but where was your angst during the Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter and Nixon years? (EDT: oops, forgot Ford. How could I have done that?) AFAIK, this all started in the Johnson regime when Johnson wanted to get the INS off it's ass for the first time in recent history and get illegal immigration stopped for exactly the reasons we are discussing here, but was politically stymied by the farmers in Texas, and it has only reached the front burner since for very short periods of time. No political side has distinguished himself in this (Tancredo be damned; he could have tried to be sane about other issues), except for those mainly beholden to agricultural concerns. That is where your spleen needs to be vented, it seems to me.

And we, of course, are going to have to pay for it; no griping at that allowed.

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 02:38 PM

By definition anyone playing soccer would be a soccer player.

What "groups of people" do you think are being excluded from these soccer fields?

shadron

21st May 2010, 02:46 PM

And it befuddles me to no end how liberals are the biggest supporters of importing illegal labor to exploit at below subsistence wages. And at the same time they want to raise the minimum wage... :confused:

I don't really detect the fact that the non-libruls in government (28 years at bat since 1968 vs the libruls 14 years) have really shone at suppressing illegals either, do you? So let's just face the fact that we have a national, not a party, problem, eh?

BTW, minimum wage arguments are a red herring here.

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 02:47 PM

Ben's worried he'll have to mow his own lawn some day, or actually pay someone a fair wage to do it.

LOL. No, I *want* to pay someone a fair wage for it. I'm sick of mowing it. And sick of lawn mower repair.

But really I want a couple of goats to tether out on the lawn instead of mowing, but the city won't allow it.

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 02:49 PM

Minimum wage for everyone!

How about we start with teachers. Fire all those American teachers making $70,000 plus benefits, I'm sure we can find qualified teachers from developing countries who will do it for $15,000 and no benefits. No more budget crisis! They might even work more than 6 hours a day and more than 9 months a year.

It will be awesome for the economy. Stupid American workers demand wages they can actually live on, we can circumvent that by hiring foreigners!

We seem to have absorbed the Irish just fine. The more people that are here, the more work there is to do; It is not a zero-sum game.

sesshin

21st May 2010, 02:52 PM

What "groups of people" do you think are being excluded from these soccer fields?

Really? I have to explain what constitutes a group to you? For one, I didn't say "groups of people" were being excluded. I said public grounds should be regulated so that they aren't monopolized by a group of people. If a group of people are doing the monopolizing then the people outside of the group are the ones who are having their access restricted. It's a simple concept.

rwguinn

21st May 2010, 02:59 PM

Minimum wage for everyone!

How about we start with teachers. Fire all those American teachers making $70,000 plus benefits, I'm sure we can find qualified teachers from developing countries who will do it for $15,000 and no benefits. No more budget crisis! They might even work more than 6 hours a day and more than 9 months a year.

It will be awesome for the economy. Stupid American workers demand wages they can actually live on, we can circumvent that by hiring foreigners!
Hey-
It worked for all the major Aerospace companies...
USe Russian and Indian (and even Aussie) Engineers instead of home-grown...

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 03:00 PM

Really? I have to explain what constitutes a group to you? For one, I didn't say "groups of people" were being excluded. I said public grounds should be regulated so that they aren't monopolized by a group of people. If a group of people are doing the monopolizing then the people outside of the group are the ones who are having their access restricted. It's a simple concept.

How do you know a group of people are monopolizing the soccer fields?

sesshin

21st May 2010, 03:06 PM

okay you're just trolling now

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 03:08 PM

okay you're just trolling now

No, I'm not. You are insinuating that a group of people are monopolizing parks. Who are these people?

sesshin

21st May 2010, 03:29 PM

I have only spoke of my personal opinion about the usage of public parks, in that no one group of people should monopolize it. Doesn't matter who the group is. The lawmakers of Costa Mesa have decided that apparently their public parks are being monopolized by illegal immigrants, and that is part of the reasoning behind why they included the ordinance of public park usage in with illegal immigration enforcement.

quixotecoyote

21st May 2010, 03:31 PM

And do you think illegal immigrants are monopolizing soccer fields?

thaiboxerken

21st May 2010, 03:32 PM

What does that have to do with limiting the number of soccer fields in parks?

Roadtoad

21st May 2010, 03:42 PM

I guess playing soccer in soccer fields is monopolizing those soccer fields for only people who want to play soccer.

[/milkspit] :D

Roadtoad

21st May 2010, 03:49 PM

I absolutely agree with you, RT. Only two small quibbles:

The first: there is a mighty fine line to draw between these people are getting jobs for below the lawful rates and these people are getting jobs below my rate. We both know that if NAFTA gets fully implemented that the lawful mileage rates for drivers is likely to go way down (not to speak of safety issues, which we all are going to hate to see), but that isn't a case of illegals getting sub-lawful rates; that's legals getting rates which have no legal bottom, at least partially as a result of a lack of a union to cover all drivers. That is not good, but it's legal. Is your argument about illegality or about abysmal wages, and are we talking a universal case here or a special case?

Second: I have no quibble with your angst about Hillary, but where was your angst during the Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter and Nixon years? (EDT: oops, forgot Ford. How could I have done that?) AFAIK, this all started in the Johnson regime when Johnson wanted to get the INS off it's ass for the first time in recent history and get illegal immigration stopped for exactly the reasons we are discussing here, but was politically stymied by the farmers in Texas, and it has only reached the front burner since for very short periods of time. No political side has distinguished himself in this (Tancredo be damned; he could have tried to be sane about other issues), except for those mainly beholden to agricultural concerns. That is where your spleen needs to be vented, it seems to me.

And we, of course, are going to have to pay for it; no griping at that allowed.

Hardly small, and entirely valid.

As to the first, I'm still trying to figure that one out. Legal, yes, but not liveable. And in the end, harmful as a whole to the trucking industry, as one example.

On the second, I'm with you on this. The bulk of the problems could easily have been averted had Eisenhower been willing to bring an end to illegal entry into the US, but there were a lot of people who had gotten used to the idea of cheap labor during WWII coming in from Mexico. This problem has deep roots, and I'm not sure how to appropriately proceed in this without creating almost as much chaos as has already been unleashed. Simply packing 12 million people and shipping them across the border will accomplish nothing, except provide a boon to the coyotes bringing illegal immigrants into the US.

And having said that, anyone who prefaces their solution with "All we have to do is..." or "If only we'd..." or "The simple solution is..." has already declared themselves idiots.

WildCat

21st May 2010, 03:50 PM

We seem to have absorbed the Irish just fine. The more people that are here, the more work there is to do; It is not a zero-sum game.
So if a school district fired all of its teachers, and recruited qualified foreigners to teach in their place for, say, 1/4 the salary and no benefits, you'd be cool with that?

Roadtoad

21st May 2010, 03:53 PM

Minimum wage for everyone!

How about we start with teachers. Fire all those American teachers making $70,000 plus benefits, I'm sure we can find qualified teachers from developing countries who will do it for $15,000 and no benefits. No more budget crisis! They might even work more than 6 hours a day and more than 9 months a year.

It will be awesome for the economy. Stupid American workers demand wages they can actually live on, we can circumvent that by hiring foreigners!

Okay, where the hell are the teachers making $70 grand a year? Let me know: my son makes about half that.

quixotecoyote

21st May 2010, 03:53 PM

What does that have to do with limiting the number of soccer fields in parks?

Nothing. I'm just amused by seeing how far he'd go to avoid answering the question. Several posts insisting he's talking about groups in the abstract have changed to pawning off the identification on the city, so I'm curious to see where we're going next.

Obviously, eliminating the fields entirely does not solve the problem of who is monopolizing them, if anyone.

WildCat

21st May 2010, 04:02 PM

Okay, where the hell are the teachers making $70 grand a year? Let me know: my son makes about half that.
Even Chicago Public School teachers start at over $50,000. In some suburban districts they average close to $100,000.

But maybe the cost of living is much less where your son teaches.

quixotecoyote

21st May 2010, 04:16 PM

Even Chicago Public School teachers start at over $50,000.

Sorta. It varies on whether they're considered a 38 or 52 week position and the starting pay varies from around $40k to around $50k

sesshin

21st May 2010, 04:18 PM

Nothing. I'm just amused by seeing how far he'd go to avoid answering the question. Several posts insisting he's talking about groups in the abstract have changed to pawning off the identification on the city, so I'm curious to see where we're going next.

Obviously, eliminating the fields entirely does not solve the problem of who is monopolizing them, if anyone.

Again, proving my point that all you have is trolling. Every question being asked I have already answered at some point in this thread, some more than once. I could just start quoting myself from earlier but there is no point. It seems no one on the pro-illegal immigrant side cares what the answers are anyways. They just want to make snide comments and insinuate everyone who disagrees with them is a racist in order to stifle discussion and enhance their feelings of moral superiority.

quixotecoyote

21st May 2010, 04:20 PM

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 04:42 PM

So if a school district fired all of its teachers, and recruited qualified foreigners to teach in their place for, say, 1/4 the salary and no benefits, you'd be cool with that?

Yeah, except that won't happen. There would have to be qualified people, there aren't many. And they would have no incentive to stay anywhere at low wages - they would want the same as anybody else here. And they would get it.

sesshin

21st May 2010, 04:42 PM

If you spent half as much time answering questions as you did claiming to have answered questions and complaining about how pitifully abused you are ... you might have a chance at being taken seriously. Not putting any money on that happening, though.

I really don't see why I should have to repeat myself incessantly. I've tried to make what I'm saying abundantly clear in several different posts, and if you can't even put forth the bare effort to either read it or understand it, well that's your problem and not mine. After a point asking redundant questions is nothing more than trolling.

WildCat

21st May 2010, 05:10 PM

Yeah, except that won't happen. There would have to be qualified people, there aren't many. And they would have no incentive to stay anywhere at low wages - they would want the same as anybody else here. And they would get it.
So why are we importing ag workers Ben? Won't they demand the same wages as Americans? If so, why are there so many foreigners working in agriculture? In restaurants? In construction?

Maybe... they're not actually demanding the same wages as Americans demand for the same job?

Why would it be different for teachers? I'm pretty sure we could find a few hundred qualified teachers who would be willing to work for low salaries in return for being allowed to immigrate to the US.

ANTPogo

21st May 2010, 05:45 PM

So why are we importing ag workers Ben? Won't they demand the same wages as Americans? If so, why are there so many foreigners working in agriculture? In restaurants? In construction?

Maybe... they're not actually demanding the same wages as Americans demand for the same job?

Or maybe when they demand higher wages, they get fired, and a new bunch of undereducated workers are hired to replace them in these unskilled labor jobs.

You know, just like Wal-Mart does, only with the added bonus of potentially being turned over to the INS by your former employer if you push them too hard.

Why would it be different for teachers? I'm pretty sure we could find a few hundred qualified teachers who would be willing to work for low salaries in return for being allowed to immigrate to the US.

Well, for one thing, teaching requires a whole different set of skills and education than construction, agricultural labor, and restaurant work. Even completely setting aside the illegal immigrant labor issue, that's why schools with shorthanded teaching staffs don't scour IHOPs and lawn care companies and local high schools, but instead look towards the education certification programs at local universities.

And for another thing, US school districts are hiring foreign teachers. (http://blog.al.com/birmingham-news-commentary/2009/08/educaton_why_birmingham_hired.html).

WildCat

21st May 2010, 05:52 PM

Or maybe when they demand higher wages, they get fired, and a new bunch of undereducated workers are hired to replace them in these unskilled labor jobs.
And...?

You're so close to understanding the problem ANTPogo, keep following your train of thought.

Is continually importing workers solely for the purpose of keeping wages and benefits low a good thing or a bad thing?

ANTPogo

21st May 2010, 06:02 PM

And...?

You're so close to understanding the problem ANTPogo, keep following your train of thought.

Is continually importing workers solely for the purpose of keeping wages and benefits low a good thing or a bad thing?

No, I'm all too aware of what the problem really is. And as Wal-Mart (and the whole "tip wages" thing for restaurant waitstaff, and a whole host of other similar things) shows, aggressively cracking down on illegal immigration isn't really going to help with the problem of unskilled wages and benefits being kept at an extremely low level, since that problem exists even in industries and companies that don't "benefit" from cheap unskilled immigrant labor.

So saying that "liberals" only oppose efforts to crack down on illegal immigration because they support the continued exploitation of unskilled workers via low wages and nonexistent benefits is pretty much a red herring (or at the very least, completely tangential), since that's not the issue at the heart of the illegal immigration discussion.

WildCat

21st May 2010, 06:08 PM

No, I'm all too aware of what the problem really is. And as Wal-Mart (and the whole "tip wages" thing for restaurant waitstaff, and a whole host of other similar things) shows, aggressively cracking down on illegal immigration isn't really going to help with the problem of unskilled wages and benefits being kept at an extremely low level, since that problem exists even in industries and companies that don't "benefit" from cheap unskilled immigrant labor.
Who gets better wages and benefits - a Walmart employee or an illegal immigrant washing dishes at your local restaurant?

So saying that "liberals" only oppose efforts to crack down on illegal immigration because they support the continued exploitation of unskilled workers via low wages and nonexistent benefits is pretty much a red herring (or at the very least, completely tangential), since that's not the issue at the heart of the illegal immigration discussion.
Strawman argument ignored.

ANTPogo

21st May 2010, 06:15 PM

Who gets better wages and benefits - a Walmart employee or an illegal immigrant washing dishes at your local restaurant?

Let me put it this way: if through some miraculous event, we developed a special laser fence for the southern border that would prevent any illegal immigrant from crossing into the United States ever again, and gave every illegal currently in the US not just amnesty but naturalized US citizenship (with all the rights and benefits that entails), I fully believe that while there may be some nominal improvements in their situation, the wages and benefits of dishwashers and lettuce pickers and construction labor would remain just as horrifically low and/or nonexistent as they are now.

Strawman argument ignored.

If it's a strawman argument, it's your strawman argument, WildCat.

And it befuddles me to no end how liberals are the biggest supporters of importing illegal labor to exploit at below subsistence wages. And at the same time they want to raise the minimum wage... :confused:

WildCat

21st May 2010, 06:20 PM

Let me put it this way: if through some miraculous event, we developed a special laser fence for the southern border that would prevent any illegal immigrant from crossing into the United States ever again, and gave every illegal currently in the US not just amnesty but naturalized US citizenship (with all the rights and benefits that entails), I fully believe that while there may be some nominal improvements in their situation, the wages and benefits of dishwashers and lettuce pickers and construction labor would remain just as horrifically low and/or nonexistent as they are now.
Then why are illegal immigrants so over-represented in these jobs?

If it's a strawman argument, it's your strawman argument, WildCat.
The word that made it a strawman was "only".

ANTPogo

21st May 2010, 06:26 PM

Then why are illegal immigrants so over-represented in these jobs?

Because those are among the jobs that require the lowest levels of training and education, receive the least amount of oversight, and have the most limits and restrictions on interaction with customers likely to figure out that they're hired illegal labor and thus alert the authorities.

That's why when even Wal-Mart hires illegal immigrant labor, they're things like after-hours cleaning crew and stockers (http://money.cnn.com/2003/10/23/news/companies/walmart_worker_arrests/), and not cashiers.

The word that made it a strawman was "only".

No, it was a strawman even without the "only".

WildCat

21st May 2010, 06:46 PM

Because those are among the jobs that require the lowest levels of training and education, receive the least amount of oversight, and have the most limits and restrictions on interaction with customers likely to figure out that they're hired illegal labor and thus alert the authorities.
You didn't answer the question: why do those businesses hire illegal aliens, rather than similarly unskilled Americans?

That's why when even Wal-Mart hires illegal immigrant labor, they're things like after-hours cleaning crew and stockers (http://money.cnn.com/2003/10/23/news/companies/walmart_worker_arrests/), and not cashiers.
Why do you think Walmart's subcontractors hired illegal workers?

No, it was a strawman even without the "only".
So why do you think these businesses hire illegal workers?

shadron

21st May 2010, 06:48 PM

Hardly small, and entirely valid.

As to the first, I'm still trying to figure that one out. Legal, yes, but not liveable. And in the end, harmful as a whole to the trucking industry, as one example.

I agree with that. Karen was scared spitless before Bush decided to put it off a while longer.

On the second, I'm with you on this. The bulk of the problems could easily have been averted had Eisenhower been willing to bring an end to illegal entry into the US, but there were a lot of people who had gotten used to the idea of cheap labor during WWII coming in from Mexico. This problem has deep roots, and I'm not sure how to appropriately proceed in this without creating almost as much chaos as has already been unleashed. Simply packing 12 million people and shipping them across the border will accomplish nothing, except provide a boon to the coyotes bringing illegal immigrants into the US.

And having said that, anyone who prefaces their solution with "All we have to do is..." or "If only we'd..." or "The simple solution is..." has already declared themselves idiots.

Amen. I had a couple of jobs wiped out by cheap incoming foreign labor, but I have tried not to complain about it because, what can I say except I want Uncle Sam to be my sugar daddy? Except for the "foreign", the rest has been a fact of life since graduation, unless one wants to go the usual management track. Just the way it is, huh, rwguinn?

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 07:03 PM

So why are we importing ag workers Ben? Won't they demand the same wages as Americans? If so, why are there so many foreigners working in agriculture? In restaurants? In construction?

Maybe... they're not actually demanding the same wages as Americans demand for the same job?

Why would it be different for teachers? I'm pretty sure we could find a few hundred qualified teachers who would be willing to work for low salaries in return for being allowed to immigrate to the US.

You miss the point. You can only pay them less than legal wages if they are illegals. The minute they are not, wage and hour laws apply.

Now, I have done a minimum wage field work job. Have you? I detassled corn for DeKalb Genetics when I was a kid. Trust me when I say that Americans are not going to queue up in large numbers for those jobs even if you sent every Mexican on the planet to the moon.

I also worked for a sewer contractor swinging a pick and trenching foundation footings. I was the only non-immigrant doing it.

People who come to this country work HARD to get a foothold. It has always been this way. And these people are absolutely essential if America wants to avoid decadence.

WildCat

21st May 2010, 07:16 PM

You miss the point. You can only pay them less than legal wages if they are illegals. The minute they are not, wage and hour laws apply.
I know for a fact that many illegal immigrants make more than minimum wage. Why do you think they're employed?

Now, I have done a minimum wage field work job. Have you? I detassled corn for DeKalb Genetics when I was a kid.
I didn't do that, but had several roomates do that while we were at NIU. Cindy Crawford did it too as a teenager, before she became a model. My first ever job though was picking stalls at a stable. I've also bused tables while in high school.

Trust me when I say that Americans are not going to queue up in large numbers for those jobs at that wage even if you sent every Mexican on the planet to the moon.
FTFY. Raise the wage and Americans will line up to take those jobs. Or are you really going to claim that there is no wage point where Americans would take those jobs? Are higher wages a bad thing Ben?

I also worked for a sewer contractor swinging a pick and trenching foundation footings. I was the only non-immigrant doing it.

People who come to this country work HARD to get a foothold. It has always been this way. And these people are absolutely essential if America wants to avoid decadence.
Quite the opposite. Low-skilled Americans sit at home and collect welfare while the unskilled positions are filled with illegal immigrants working for wages Americans won't work for. It's the artificially low wage scale illegal immigration fosters that results in decadence.

If there were no illegal immigrants to exploit employers would have no choice but to raise wages and benefits high enough to attract workers. Or go out of business. I don't think many would choose to go out of business.

pipelineaudio

21st May 2010, 08:04 PM

Yeah, except that won't happen. There would have to be qualified people, there aren't many. And they would have no incentive to stay anywhere at low wages - they would want the same as anybody else here. And they would get it.

Funny you should say that...Here in AZ we are raising taxes to pay for any teacher we can get our hands on. The teachers had to agree to very low wages and horrid hours and we cant even afford that

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 08:17 PM

Funny you should say that...Here in AZ we are raising taxes to pay for any teacher we can get our hands on. The teachers had to agree to very low wages and horrid hours and we cant even afford that

Exactly. I'd think we'd welcome anybody qualified who DOES migrate here.

pipelineaudio

21st May 2010, 08:19 PM

It seems like many here are still under the impression of 1950's myths like "illegals will only do the jobs americans wont"

As a recording engineer, my customers were either in construction or hospitality. At least, until operation gatekeeper, where the pool dried up.

Are you going to say that americans never worked in construction or restaurants?

For an even more chilling example, there are hordes of illegals working in the secured areas at PHX airport

Ask someone who actually understands and who you trust about the nepotist system that controls the illegal labor forces in the hospitality, transport and airlines industries. Its quite an interesting shadow economy

pipelineaudio

21st May 2010, 08:20 PM

Exactly. I'd think we'd welcome anybody qualified who DOES migrate here.

So you aren't one of those people who think teachers are paid too little?

BenBurch

21st May 2010, 08:33 PM

So you aren't one of those people who think teachers are paid too little?

I think we have to be able to afford to pay them before we can worry about how much.

rwguinn

21st May 2010, 09:37 PM

I agree with that. Karen was scared spitless before Bush decided to put it off a while longer.

Amen. I had a couple of jobs wiped out by cheap incoming foreign labor, but I have tried not to complain about it because, what can I say except I want Uncle Sam to be my sugar daddy? Except for the "foreign", the rest has been a fact of life since graduation, unless one wants to go the usual management track. Just the way it is, huh, rwguinn?
Yep-
Until something breaks catastrophically. Then they bring us in to fix it.
But why hire a US engineering contractor at a total cost of $100/hour, when you can pay a Russian firm 35, Australian 45, or Indian 20? And that's the legal way. When you get into the "no questions asked" bit, you're talking $3-$4 per hour. That's when you get the cleaning crews and guys hanging around Home Depot.

rwguinn

21st May 2010, 09:41 PM

You miss the point. You can only pay them less than legal wages if they are illegals. The minute they are not, wage and hour laws apply.
...
Not necessarily, for salaried people working for foreign companies. Although the people they send over here likely get minimum wages, the off-shore guys don't always get that--but that's off topic for this thread

ponderingturtle

22nd May 2010, 03:49 AM

Strawman. I never said that.

So we need to demand proof of citizenship before entrance into any park?

I really don't understand why pro-illlegal immigrant people have to resort to misrepresentation so much. It doesn't speak highly of what you are supporting.

What you are against letting people play soccer in public parks, that is what you made clear.

ponderingturtle

22nd May 2010, 03:53 AM

I'm still trying to figure out the soccer connection here.

No true american would ever play such a game of course. It Baseball, Football and Basketball for them.

ponderingturtle

22nd May 2010, 04:02 AM

I'd hate to think what they would have done to me when I used to play Rugby.

It could be worse, I have seen games of Cricket in public parks...

ponderingturtle

22nd May 2010, 04:07 AM

I don't really detect the fact that the non-libruls in government (28 years at bat since 1968 vs the libruls 14 years) have really shone at suppressing illegals either, do you? So let's just face the fact that we have a national, not a party, problem, eh?

BTW, minimum wage arguments are a red herring here.

Immigration is not really a party issue because it divides the bases of both parties. Business and farmers have a different view on immigration than ideological conservatives. Liberals and unions also have different takes on this.

So as anyone will alienate large parts of his party with any change in immigration it is very hard for either party to do anything.

eeyore1954

22nd May 2010, 06:23 AM

Minimum wage for everyone!

How about we start with teachers. Fire all those American teachers making $70,000 plus benefits, I'm sure we can find qualified teachers from developing countries who will do it for $15,000 and no benefits. No more budget crisis! They might even work more than 6 hours a day and more than 9 months a year.

It will be awesome for the economy. Stupid American workers demand wages they can actually live on, we can circumvent that by hiring foreigners!

I picture my school districts superintendent going to the 7/11 every morning to pick up the teachers for the day.

varwoche

22nd May 2010, 06:55 AM

Fixed it for ya: Brown-skinned people whom I suspect of being Non-citizens based on no good reason, ergo non-taxpaying, adults shouldn't be allowed to monopolize public parks to the extent that tax-paying citizens aren't able to use them.. no. imo of course.

Roadtoad

22nd May 2010, 09:34 AM

Fixed it for ya:

Painfully accurate fix.

David Wong

22nd May 2010, 09:50 AM

David Wong

22nd May 2010, 09:51 AM

Really? I have to explain what constitutes a group to you? For one, I didn't say "groups of people" were being excluded. I said public grounds should be regulated so that they aren't monopolized by a group of people.

A group of non-white people. This issue has never come to your attention previously, only when "Dozens and dozens of hispanics" were soiling the area with their non-white presence.

David Wong

22nd May 2010, 09:53 AM

I honestly don't think he knows he's a bigot, by the way. Lots of them don't.

elbe

22nd May 2010, 10:01 AM

There are a lot of things I think the government should regulate, but somehow adults playing sports in a park just doesn't seem like one of them.

WildCat

22nd May 2010, 10:08 AM

There are a lot of things I think the government should regulate, but somehow adults playing sports in a park just doesn't seem like one of them.
So I could organize an adult softball league in a park in your town, and wouldn't even have to get a permit?

elbe

22nd May 2010, 10:24 AM

So I could organize an adult softball league in a park in your town, and wouldn't even have to get a permit?

No idea, but it wouldn't bug me. Maybe I'm just too liberal, eh?

WildCat

22nd May 2010, 10:38 AM

No idea, but it wouldn't bug me. Maybe I'm just too liberal, eh?
Would it bug you if you were lying in the park reading a book, when a bunch of guys showed up demanding you leave the field so they could play their softball game?

elbe

22nd May 2010, 10:48 AM

Would it bug you if you were lying in the park reading a book, when a bunch of guys showed up demanding you leave the field so they could play their softball game?

That seems less to do with regulating sports than having rules against bullying.

WildCat

22nd May 2010, 11:05 AM

That seems less to do with regulating sports than having rules against bullying.
That's why sports leagues are regulated, otherwise there are conflicts.

That's why large groups need permits to even have a picnic.

This isn't a conservative/liberal issue.

thaiboxerken

22nd May 2010, 11:38 AM

elbe

22nd May 2010, 12:52 PM

That's why sports leagues are regulated, otherwise there are conflicts.

That's why large groups need permits to even have a picnic.

This isn't a conservative/liberal issue.

I'm sorry, I was being jokey about regulating people wanting to use a park for fun. I really don't see why you're even being this serious about it.

WildCat

22nd May 2010, 03:18 PM

If I was sitting in the middle of a softball field, reading a book, and a bunch of people showed up to play softball, I would move. You seem to be trying to spin this into an issue about the general area of the park when, in the OP, soccer fields are specifically mentioned.

Nice try, though.
It doesn't make any difference what sport it is. If you have organized leagues in a public park it's going to be regulated by whatever city owns the park.

pipelineaudio

22nd May 2010, 04:15 PM

A group of non-white people. This issue has never come to your attention previously, only when "Dozens and dozens of hispanics" were soiling the area with their non-white presence.

Are hispanics non-whites now?

thaiboxerken

22nd May 2010, 05:01 PM

It doesn't make any difference what sport it is. If you have organized leagues in a public park it's going to be regulated by whatever city owns the park.

The sport doesn't matter, the field does. If I was in the general area of the park and asked to leave so people could play soccer, I'd be upset. However, if I was hanging out in a soccer field and asked to leave so people could play soccer, I would see no justification to be upset.

What is up with all of these regulations you conservatives want to impose on parks? I thought you were the party of small government.

Terry

22nd May 2010, 05:04 PM

Non-citizen, ergo non-taxpaying

That does not follow.

WildCat

22nd May 2010, 06:49 PM

The sport doesn't matter, the field does. If I was in the general area of the park and asked to leave so people could play soccer, I'd be upset. However, if I was hanging out in a soccer field and asked to leave so people could play soccer, I would see no justification to be upset.

What is up with all of these regulations you conservatives want to impose on parks? I thought you were the party of small government.
:confused:

So conservatives run Chicago and Cook County now? Because both entities require permits to hold large picnics (25 or more people) and sports leagues are run by the city's Parks Dept.

If you don't regulate it you'd have conflicts, with different groups wanting to use the pavillions/sports fields at the same time.

Only a partisan hack would turn that into a liberal/conservative issue.

quixotecoyote

22nd May 2010, 07:12 PM

I love the bait & switch dance going on where limiting the number of soccer fields turns into "regulating" the soccer fields.

thaiboxerken

23rd May 2010, 01:48 PM

It's pretty obvious to me that they want to limit the number of soccer fields, in order to limit the number of a certain group of people having fun. Who are these people? Illegal immigrants. How do they figure they are illegal immigrants? Racial profiling.

pipelineaudio

23rd May 2010, 01:56 PM

How do they figure they are illegal immigrants? Racial profiling.

What race are illegals?

What race are californians?

tyr_13

23rd May 2010, 03:22 PM

What race are illegals?

What race are californians?

Human and 'ebil libreal'.

rwguinn

23rd May 2010, 04:10 PM

Human and 'ebil libreal'.
Scored a hundred on that test. Well done.

BenBurch

23rd May 2010, 07:46 PM

It could be worse, I have seen games of Cricket in public parks...

Me too, and all the players were from India.

INRM

24th May 2010, 09:03 PM

I think this will be used to argue that all people who are for rule of law are bigots and aren't to be taken seriously.

The reason we are a nation of laws and follow the idea of rule of law is because we don't want a government that is ruled by the whims of some leader who does whatever he wants

eeyore1954

25th May 2010, 03:08 AM

ponderingturtle

25th May 2010, 03:21 AM

Me too, and all the players were from India.

I took these players to be from the west indies.

eeyore1954

25th May 2010, 07:48 AM

Odd. Most of the poor people I see here in Sacramento are trying to find third and fourth jobs just to keep food on the table. At least that's what I was doing, alongside those here illegally.

I couldn't get hired. They HAD to report my wages, and they HAD to pay me a full scale wage. The illegals got hired but wound up getting less than half the legal wage. Oddly enough, I think I was the one who came out ahead.

The claim that "Illegals will do work whites won't" is a lie. Illegals will take all they can get, simply because what they get is so little. Pay them a living wage, a legal wage, and you discover they are no different from anyone else. That's why making it possible for them to come here legally, to work here legally, is so critical, not merely because it prevents the depression of wages, but because they need the legal protection of the law. Under the current practice, an illegal immigrant here can wind up killed on the job, and his family will get nothing.

What is being lost in tax revenue, what there is of it, is still significant. And what is lost in civil rights by those here illegally is also highly significant. And it is not acceptable.

Here on Long Island NY most illegal make at least the minimum wage as laborers. Typically 100 dollars for a 10 hour day.
The place where you did not get hired did not have to have to report your wages. If they are willing to hire illegal aliens they probably would have been willing to pay off the books. Many people hire them as day laborers not because the wage is that much less but because in general they will work that much harder than a comparable American worker (maybe not in your case but in general)

I 100% agree with you there should be a legal way for more of these workers to come and they have no workers rights.

I don't think much tax revenue is lost because of day laborers because they would probably owe no tax and would still recieve a great portion of their pay off the books. They do pay sales tax and rent (a portion of which is property taxes).

ponderingturtle

25th May 2010, 07:58 AM

Here on Long Island NY most illegal make at least the minimum wage as laborers. Typically 100 dollars for a 10 hour day.
The place where you did not get hired did not have to have to report your wages. If they are willing to hire illegal aliens they probably would have been willing to pay off the books. Many people hire them as day laborers not because the wage is that much less but because in general they will work that much harder than a comparable American worker (maybe not in your case but in general)

They also are day laborers. So if you need 15 today but 3 tomorrow it is no big deal, you can get 15 today and 3 tomorrow if that is what say the weather dictates can be done. This gives them flexibility.

WildCat

25th May 2010, 08:07 AM

Many people hire them as day laborers not because the wage is that much less
Haha, good one. If that was true they'd pay them the equivalent.

but because in general they will work that much harder than a comparable American worker (maybe not in your case but in general)
In which case they should be paying them more than the American.

I 100% agree with you there should be a legal way for more of these workers to come and they have no workers rights.
Wouldn't you first have to demonstrate a need? The sole reason you want them here (based on what you wrote above) is that they are cheap labor to exploit.

I don't think much tax revenue is lost because of day laborers because they would probably owe no tax and would still recieve a great portion of their pay off the books. They do pay sales tax and rent (a portion of which is property taxes).
Wouldn't it be better if employers were forced to raise the pay and benefits scale (which would certainly happen if there were no illegal workers to exploit) to attract domestic workers and then those jobs would be filled with net tax payers, and not tax users?

Your "solution" is simply to fill low-skill jobs with cheap foreign workers, who will then add to the already strained social services (health care, schools, food stamps, etc) while low-skilled legal workers sit at home, also collecting welfare. You've only succeeded in lowering the bottom of the pay scale and creating millions more people living in poverty.

I don't see how this is a good idea, from any end of the political spectrum.

rwguinn

25th May 2010, 08:18 AM

Here on Long Island NY most illegal make at least the minimum wage as laborers. Typically 100 dollars for a 10 hour day.
The place where you did not get hired did not have to have to report your wages. If they are willing to hire illegal aliens they probably would have been willing to pay off the books. Many people hire them as day laborers not because the wage is that much less but because in general they will work that much harder than a comparable American worker (maybe not in your case but in general)

I 100% agree with you there should be a legal way for more of these workers to come and they have no workers rights.

I don't think much tax revenue is lost because of day laborers because they would probably owe no tax and would still recieve a great portion of their pay off the books. They do pay sales tax and rent (a portion of which is property taxes).
In your hypothetical case, there is at least $14 lost in Social Security and Medicare taxes...

ponderingturtle

25th May 2010, 08:28 AM

In your hypothetical case, there is at least $14 lost in Social Security and Medicare taxes...

I didn't think you had to worry about that if you did not employ someone for very long. That the person being paid is responsible for that unless they work more than a certain number of hours.

For example say I pay two different people $100 a week. One is a cleaning lady who cleans for say 4 hours, the other is a high school teacher tutoring my son in math for an hour. I though neither of these were illegal.

Also if I needed a lot of help and hired either of they for say a day to help get some large thing cleaned or to help prep for the SAT's it would still count as the same. That there is a threshold at some level that you become responsible as this persons employer instead of hiring them more to do a short specific job.

funk de fino

25th May 2010, 10:28 AM

That's why sports leagues are regulated, otherwise there are conflicts.

That's why large groups need permits to even have a picnic.

This isn't a conservative/liberal issue.

What has sports leagues got to do with anything? A soccer kickabout any time of the day, any day of the week, in any park in Socal, has nothing to do with organised leagues. Red herring time again.

WildCat

25th May 2010, 10:30 AM

ponderingturtle

25th May 2010, 10:32 AM

What has sports leagues got to do with anything? A soccer kickabout any time of the day, any day of the week, in any park in Socal, has nothing to do with organised leagues. Red herring time again.

Look don't you understand, illegal immigrants come for the soccer fields. We get rid of all the soccer fields in public parks, and we will have solved the illegal immigrant problem apparently.

That is what Arizona needed to really do, but they didn't have the guts to go up against Big Soccer.

ponderingturtle

25th May 2010, 10:33 AM

People don't generally wear uniforms for a "soccer kickabout".

People wear uniforms to bars, why should that be so different?

WildCat

25th May 2010, 10:40 AM

People wear uniforms to bars, why should that be so different?
They do? Or you mean the ones on the bar-sponsored sports team after the game?

funk de fino

25th May 2010, 10:42 AM

People don't generally wear uniforms for a "soccer kickabout".

Yes they do. Its part of the soccer culture. Then again I can see why you would be ignorant of that. When it comes to soccer its not a good idea to BS to UK people about it.

ponderingturtle

25th May 2010, 10:46 AM

They do? Or you mean the ones on the bar-sponsored sports team after the game?

No, I am thinking people who for example wear a football jersey to a sports bar to watch their team play. Of course no true American would do that.

ponderingturtle

25th May 2010, 10:47 AM

Yes they do. Its part of the soccer culture. Then again I can see why you would be ignorant of that. When it comes to soccer its not a good idea to BS to UK people about it.

You are a plant from Big Soccer, I know it.

funk de fino

25th May 2010, 10:51 AM

playing soccer in Mexican and other Central American soccer jerseys

This does not mean league games. It does not mean uniform. It is properly called a strip and wearing a "jersey" of your favourite team is what you do. There was nothing better than turning up in the full brand new kit of your team to have a kickabout with your mates.

And its a pitch not a field.

eeyore1954

25th May 2010, 11:05 AM

In your hypothetical case, there is at least $14 lost in Social Security and Medicare taxes...

You are correct I didn't consider payroll taxes.

ponderingturtle

25th May 2010, 11:09 AM

You are correct I didn't consider payroll taxes.

Seems like we need to crack down on piano teachers, how often to the parents send in money for the payroll taxes then?

eeyore1954

25th May 2010, 11:19 AM

I didn't think you had to worry about that if you did not employ someone for very long. That the person being paid is responsible for that unless they work more than a certain number of hours.

For example say I pay two different people $100 a week. One is a cleaning lady who cleans for say 4 hours, the other is a high school teacher tutoring my son in math for an hour. I though neither of these were illegal.

Also if I needed a lot of help and hired either of they for say a day to help get some large thing cleaned or to help prep for the SAT's it would still count as the same. That there is a threshold at some level that you become responsible as this persons employer instead of hiring them more to do a short specific job.

Actually for household employees it is based upon how much they are paid in a year. If you pay 1,700 then you are required to file Schedule H usually with your tax return.
But if the person is self employed then you are not required to do so. If you are wondering if you should have filed Schedule H. Here is some information from the IRS instructions. The piano teacher or a tutor is self employed and they are responsible for paying the social security and medicare taxes themselves.

A worker is self-employed if only he or she can control how the work is done. A self-employed worker usually provides his or her own tools and offers services to the general public in an independent business.

WildCat

25th May 2010, 11:23 AM

Yes they do. Its part of the soccer culture. Then again I can see why you would be ignorant of that. When it comes to soccer its not a good idea to BS to UK people about it.
I've never seen it outside of organized leagues. And we're talking about inside the USA, not the UK.

ponderingturtle

25th May 2010, 11:23 AM

Actually for household employees it is based upon how much they are paid in a year. If you pay 1,700 then you are required to file Schedule H usually with your tax return.
But if the person is self employed then you are not required to do so. If you are wondering if you should have filed Schedule H. Here is some information from the IRS instructions. The tutor is self employed and they are responsible for paying the social security and medicare taxes themselves.

Thanks, but all those examples were hypothetical

WildCat

25th May 2010, 11:24 AM

No, I am thinking people who for example wear a football jersey to a sports bar to watch their team play. Of course no true American would do that.
A jersey is not a uniform.

funk de fino

25th May 2010, 11:29 AM

I've never seen it outside of organized leagues. And we're talking about inside the USA, not the UK.

I have seen it many times in the US. I work for an american company and travekl there a lot. I am there next week. Especially with Hispanics who are proud of their heritage and actually know soccer.

When I see people playing ball with a NY Yankees gear on does not mean i am watching a league game.

You are floundering here. Get back to the OP instead of the made up crap you are posting.

funk de fino

25th May 2010, 11:30 AM

A jersey is not a uniform.

Why did you bring up uniforms then?

WildCat

25th May 2010, 12:36 PM

I have seen it many times in the US. I work for an american company and travekl there a lot. I am there next week. Especially with Hispanics who are proud of their heritage and actually know soccer.

When I see people playing ball with a NY Yankees gear on does not mean i am watching a league game.

You are floundering here. Get back to the OP instead of the made up crap you are posting.
I really, really doubt that when you see 2 teams playing on a public soccer field, and each team wears distinct uniforms, that it's a pickup game between "Hispanics who are proud of their heritage".

If that was the case you'd see many different jerseys/uniforms represented.

You'll be there next week you say? I live in the US, and in a gateway community at that.

WildCat

25th May 2010, 12:38 PM

Why did you bring up uniforms then?
Hey, this started with the claim that there was no need to regulate the sports fields in public parks unless you were racist or something.

quixotecoyote

25th May 2010, 01:41 PM

funk de fino

26th May 2010, 02:25 AM

I really, really doubt that when you see 2 teams playing on a public soccer field, and each team wears distinct uniforms, that it's a pickup game between "Hispanics who are proud of their heritage".

You are the only one that has imagined this fantasy to be part of this thread or discussion. No-one else. Keep on keeping on.

If that was the case you'd see many different jerseys/uniforms represented.

Which is what sesshin mentioned. Only you have decided it had to be teams with distinct uniforms (strips)

You'll be there next week you say? I live in the US, and in a gateway community at that.

So what, you seem to know nothing about soccer and lots about moving goalposts.

funk de fino

26th May 2010, 02:27 AM

Hey, this started with the claim that there was no need to regulate the sports fields in public parks unless you were racist or something.

That's untrue.

Yet you brought uniforms (strips) into it. Why? The only thing that was mentioned was various jerseys. You were the one that brought leagues into it when people were talking about soccer dudes having kick abouts anytime of the day, any day of the week, in any park in SoCal, not organised matches.

WildCat

26th May 2010, 05:21 AM

Yes, if of course by "regulate" you mean limit the number of fields that exist because Hispanics (and thus illegal immigrants) tend to play on them.
No.

WildCat

26th May 2010, 05:25 AM

You are the only one that has imagined this fantasy to be part of this thread or discussion. No-one else. Keep on keeping on.
It was a response to this post:
There are a lot of things I think the government should regulate, but somehow adults playing sports in a park just doesn't seem like one of them.
OK?

Which is what sesshin mentioned. Only you have decided it had to be teams with distinct uniforms (strips)
I was talkling about organized sports leagues, soccer or otherwise.

So what, you seem to know nothing about soccer and lots about moving goalposts.
What does any of this have to do with the game of soccer?

quixotecoyote

26th May 2010, 05:31 AM

No.

Ahh well. When you want to discuss the actual actions taken by the city which form the topic of the OP, do let us know.

WildCat

26th May 2010, 05:43 AM

Ahh well. When you want to discuss the actual actions taken by the city which form the topic of the OP, do let us know.
So now the OP is exclusively about limiting the number of soccer fields?

funk de fino

26th May 2010, 08:10 AM

It was a response to this post:

OK?

What has that got to do with league games or uniforms? Nothing, thats what. Stop with the made up crap OK?

I was talking about organized sports leagues, soccer or otherwise.

Who cares? Its got nothing to do with the OP or the subsequent mention of soccer jerseys.

What does any of this have to do with the game of soccer?

Now you have really lost it.

WildCat

26th May 2010, 08:17 AM

What has that got to do with league games or uniforms? Nothing, thats what. Stop with the made up crap OK?
So now I made up the quote I was responding to and I linked to?

Who cares? Its got nothing to do with the OP or the subsequent mention of soccer jerseys.
Hey, I was pointing out that if they're wearing uniforms they're likely in a organized league, and thus regulated by the city.

Now you have really lost it.
Oh, do tell me how knowing all about soccer makes you an expert on this subject.

And somebody sure is losing it.

WildCat

26th May 2010, 08:21 AM

Haha, good one. If that was true they'd pay them the equivalent.

In which case they should be paying them more than the American.

Wouldn't you first have to demonstrate a need? The sole reason you want them here (based on what you wrote above) is that they are cheap labor to exploit.

Wouldn't it be better if employers were forced to raise the pay and benefits scale (which would certainly happen if there were no illegal workers to exploit) to attract domestic workers and then those jobs would be filled with net tax payers, and not tax users?

Your "solution" is simply to fill low-skill jobs with cheap foreign workers, who will then add to the already strained social services (health care, schools, food stamps, etc) while low-skilled legal workers sit at home, also collecting welfare. You've only succeeded in lowering the bottom of the pay scale and creating millions more people living in poverty.

I don't see how this is a good idea, from any end of the political spectrum.
I notice nobody responded to this post.

I guess we'll talk about soccer uniforms for the next 25 pages. Funk is an expert on them you know.

funk de fino

26th May 2010, 08:21 AM

So now the OP is exclusively about limiting the number of soccer fields?

How about you tell us what the OP means in your world?

And how soccer leagues or uniforms have anything to do with limiting soccer fields. I thought you lot were all about personal freedoms but now you try and regulate guys going for a game of footie at a public park? And the only reason from the OP seems to be that some of them could be illegal Hispanics?

funk de fino

26th May 2010, 08:34 AM

So now I made up the quote I was responding to and I linked to?

Explain how that is in anyway connected to the OP or anything else you have posted about uniforms.

Read this first.

Hey, this started with the claim that there was no need to regulate the sports fields in public parks unless you were racist or something.

I really, really doubt that when you see 2 teams playing on a public soccer field, and each team wears distinct uniforms, that it's a pickup game between "Hispanics who are proud of their heritage".

There are a lot of things I think the government should regulate, but somehow adults playing sports in a park just doesn't seem like one of them.

Try and connect them for me.

Hey, I was pointing out that if they're wearing uniforms they're likely in a organized league, and thus regulated by the city.

And that would be BS. Made up crap like I mentioned earlier. You are the one with the bee in the bonnet about uniforms. No-one else. And you cannot even see why you are wrong.

Oh, do tell me how knowing all about soccer makes you an expert on this subject.

And somebody sure is losing it.

You have yet to explain this train of thought. How about you step through this slowly?

You'll be there next week you say? I live in the US, and in a gateway community at that.

So what, you seem to know nothing about soccer and lots about moving goalposts.

What does any of this have to do with the game of soccer?

Now you have really lost it.

Oh, do tell me how knowing all about soccer makes you an expert on this subject.

And somebody sure is losing it.

Try the "gated community" part first. Where I replied "So what?

WildCat

26th May 2010, 08:36 AM

Try and connect them for me.
Interesting how you changed the orders around. It's almost like you feel you have to decieve in order to make some sort of point.

WildCat

26th May 2010, 08:38 AM

How about you tell us what the OP means in your world?
It means some cities don't think the benefits of illegal aliens outweigh the costs.

Any comments on post #166 funk? Or is soccer all you want to talk about? :rolleyes:

quixotecoyote

26th May 2010, 12:13 PM

Hey, this started with the claim that there was no need to regulate the sports fields in public parks unless you were racist or something.

Yes, if of course by "regulate" you mean limit the number of fields that exist because Hispanics (and thus illegal immigrants) tend to play on them.

No.

Ahh well. When you want to discuss the actual actions taken by the city which form the topic of the OP, do let us know.

So now the OP is exclusively about limiting the number of soccer fields?

What a silly thing to say.

Just because the only mention of sports/sports fields is the plan to limit the number of soccer fields that exist because Hispanics (and thus illegal immigrants) tend to play on them, and just because you insist on referring to that as "regulating" sports fields, doesn't mean there aren't other parts of the OP that have nothing to do with sports or sports fields.

funk de fino

26th May 2010, 12:24 PM

Interesting how you changed the orders around. It's almost like you feel you have to decieve in order to make some sort of point.

Rearrange them in any order you like and try again. I'm all ears.

I'll be back after going for a game of footie at the public park with my Sunderland "uniform" on with all my mates who will have all their "jerseys" on but lo and behold we will not be playing in any of your imaginary league games that are played at all times of the day, on any day in any public park by Hispanics in SoCal.

In fact thats a lie, my knee is screwed from too much football played in real league games on Saturday and Sunday mornings with the odd Wednesday evening game. Never ever played in Scotland "uniforms" or other UK teams "uniforms" in our organised league games though. Funny that eh?

funk de fino

26th May 2010, 12:29 PM

It means some cities don't think the benefits of illegal aliens outweigh the costs.

Any comments on post #166 funk? Or is soccer all you want to talk about? :rolleyes:

It means to me that some morons think closing soccer fields will affect illegals and help that situation.

I am not interested in your whiny crap about the poor undertrodden suffering because of cheap labour. Theres lots of cheap labour in Scotland this very minute doing the same. I dont cry like a girl about it.

Darth Rotor

26th May 2010, 12:33 PM

It means to me that some morons think closing soccer fields will affect illegals and help that situation.
Seems rather inane to me as well.
I am not interested in your whiny crap about the poor undertrodden suffering because of cheap labour. Theres lots of cheap labour in Scotland this very minute doing the same. I dont cry like a girl about it.
You shall be reported to skeptifem if you aren't careful about such talk, sir. :jaw-dropp

funk de fino

26th May 2010, 12:38 PM

You shall be reported to skeptifem if you aren't careful about such talk, sir. :jaw-dropp

Well, we do wear skirts, so I feel I should get a free pass on it this time.........

CORed

26th May 2010, 01:25 PM

The argument I have against illegal immigration is that much of the time, those who are here illegally are paid substandard wages, many times less than minimum wage, (which I have seen), and in many further cases, when they are injured on the job, or need public services, (and I mean NEED, not WANT), they are told if they go to authorities, they will be reported to Immigration authorities and deported.

It is an abusive relationship, and those who abuse the immigrants do so because they know that under current administration, they can get away with it. The immigrants are little more than slaves, and the goal is to keep them enslaved to provide the kind of cheap labor that makes it possible for the fine folks running WalMart and Home Depot to charge as little for their products as they do. It is a cruel business, and its sole purpose is destructive and hateful.

I have watched as illegal immigrants have come in, taken jobs, and been treated worse than they would have had they come in as citizens. In some cases, daughters are turned out to help support the family, and no, this is not hyperbole. Read the story of Lt. Lucy Duvall in the book, Working Vice. Spend a little time on the street, talking to the women turned out. You'll get an earful. In some cases, the prostitutes are as young as 12, and in some cities, they're even younger. Many have been brought here illegally from the former Soviet Union and its satellite states, and they see nothing of the money they bring in for their pimps. They are literally slaves.

Those who would excuse this are ignorant of the genuine plight of these people, and in many cases, they ignore the realities simply because those who abuse the enslaved are big donors to the political powers that be. Slavery exists, in the United States, whether we like it or not. And it is evil, and it is wrong.

There are reasons we insist that these folks come in legally. This is the primary one for those with a conscience. That Hillary Clinton will not address this issue does not speak well of her. That Costa Mesa is reacting as they are indicates they haven't a clue what they're doing, and how they can help.

The goal is to arrest and shut down the employers that hire those here illegally. Quit supporting the slave trade, and it will dry up.

Just my opinion. YMMV.

I actually think unlimited legal immigration would be better than the current situation, largely for the reasons you mention. As it stands now, we are doing nothing that is the least bit effective to limit illegal immigration, while putting tight limits on legal immigration with the result that we now have a large group of second class inhabitants available for all kinds of exploitation.

If we do wish to limit immigration, I think the only way that has any hope of succeeding is to tackle it from the employment side. Employers have to have the tools to verify legal status, laws against employing illegal immigrants have to be enforced, and penalties for employing illegal immigrants have to be severe enough to make employing them not worth the risk. If employment opportunities for illegal immigrants dry up, illegal immigrants will self-deport and fewer will try to enter illegally. This, of course, is much easier said than done.

I also think that we will probably have to accept more legal immigration than perhaps we would like. I don't really think it should be unlimited, but as long as opportunities in Mexico and points south remain so limited, and legal avenues for unskilled and semi-skilled workers to enter nearly non-existent, the influx is going to continue.

Without doing something to limit the demand for illegal immigrant labor, and possibly increase opportunities for legal immigration. I think things like border walls or fences, more border guards, or domestic efforts to identify and deport more illegal immigrants will be about as effective as adding a second screen door to a submarine.

While I'm not a big fan of conspiracy theories, it would not greatly surprise me if some of anti-immigrant fervor and support for useless measures like border fences and "show us your papers" laws is being pushed by people who benefit from employing illegal immigrants. As long as they can keep the anger directed at the illegal immigrants themselves, rather than the people hiring them, they can continue to exploit them.

CORed

26th May 2010, 01:31 PM

Not limiting the amount of soccer fields, but limiting the amount of organized games of soccer by grown men in public parks.

If you go to any public park in southern California any time of day any day of the week, you will see dozens and dozens of Hispanic men taking up large portions of the park playing soccer in Mexican and other Central American soccer jerseys. They are taking up space and resources that should be allowed for children. In addition to this I would guess a good number of them are most likely illegal immigrants, and public parks are tax-payer funded, so it is somewhat understandable that city officials wouldn't want them monopolizing it from their actual citizens.

You know, on the list of problems caused by illegal immigrants, I think parks being overrun by pickup soccer games belongs at about number 87,158.

CORed

26th May 2010, 01:53 PM

Just build more soccer fields.

To the OP. It would be nice to crack down on those at the top of the illegal labor industry, but we as a society don't seem to be willing to do that. It is much easier to demonize the "other" people.
2007 McCain: (http://mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.OpEds&ContentRecord_id=4801985b-7318-46c2-9b13-098bfc32c9cf&Region_id=&Issue_id=1bd7f3a7-a52b-4ad0-a338-646c6a780d65)

Post-Teabaggers 2010 McCain: (http://thinkprogress.org/2010/05/19/mccain-immigration-laws/)

The jobs people are risking their lives for are just a "symptom"... Riiiight.

Daredelvis

Does McCain have Alzheimers, or has he become completely willing to sacrifice is integrity to stay in office? I used to think he was one of the more sensible Republicans around, but lately, he seems to be doing everything possible to make sure that I never vote for him again. This is completely backwards. Control the demand for illegal immigrant labor, and give the people who want to enter a legal avenue to do so, and you don't need to "secure the border". Fail to do either and you will never be able to secure it.

Darth Rotor

26th May 2010, 01:55 PM

I actually think unlimited legal immigration
I don't think you've thought that through.

DR

WildCat

26th May 2010, 02:03 PM

What a silly thing to say.

Just because the only mention of sports/sports fields is the plan to limit the number of soccer fields that exist because Hispanics (and thus illegal immigrants) tend to play on them, and just because you insist on referring to that as "regulating" sports fields, doesn't mean there aren't other parts of the OP that have nothing to do with sports or sports fields.
Actually, I did not refer to that as "regulating use of sports fields".

quixotecoyote

26th May 2010, 02:17 PM

Actually, I did not refer to that as "regulating use of sports fields".

Well, as I said, whenever you want to get back on topic and discuss what the city is actually proposing, let me know.

WildCat

26th May 2010, 02:32 PM

It means to me that some morons think closing soccer fields will affect illegals and help that situation.
Aside from the LA Times story which cites no source, is there any evidence that any soccer fields were closed? I haven't found any info that any were closed, let alone because of illegal immigrants.

I am not interested in your whiny crap about the poor undertrodden suffering because of cheap labour. Theres lots of cheap labour in Scotland this very minute doing the same. I dont cry like a girl about it.
If you can't think of any rational rebuttal why say anything at all?

DDWW

26th May 2010, 02:35 PM

It means to me that some morons think closing soccer fields will affect illegals and help that situation.

I am not interested in your whiny crap about the poor undertrodden suffering because of cheap labour. Theres lots of cheap labour in Scotland this very minute doing the same. I dont cry like a girl about it.

Sure, but just wait until illegals start taking over your curling rinks!:)

How do you say "Sweeeeeeep" in Spanish?

DD(and yes I use to curl)WW

WildCat

26th May 2010, 02:38 PM

Well, as I said, whenever you want to get back on topic and discuss what the city is actually proposing, let me know.
What is the city actually proposing wrt soccer fields? Here's a Costa Mesa Parks agendas, no mention of closing soccer fields to deter illegal immigrants: http://www.ci.costa-mesa.ca.us/council/parks/2010-03-24/032410_FUAP.pdf

Here's an older news story detailing a lighting controversy: http://www.ocregister.com/news/fields-25443-city-lights.html

Again, nothing about illegal immigrants.

So what is the actual evidence that soccer fields were "limited" because of illegal immigrants?

funk de fino

27th May 2010, 08:21 AM

Aside from the LA Times story which cites no source, is there any evidence that any soccer fields were closed? I haven't found any info that any were closed, let alone because of illegal immigrants.

Ask the OP.

If you can't think of any rational rebuttal why say anything at all?

You cannot handle rational. It seems to make you make things up.

WildCat

27th May 2010, 08:38 AM

Ask the OP.
Why would he/she know?

You cannot handle rational. It seems to make you make things up.
I haven't made up anything.

And your continued lack of a substantive response is noted.

Steven Howard

27th May 2010, 09:47 AM

Let's be clear about what the article does and doesn't say. Here's the sentence under discussion:

Costa Mesa has sought for several years to reduce the number of illegal immigrants within its borders by regulating day laborers, asking police to check the immigration status of people they stop and limiting the number of soccer fields in parks.

Note that it does not say that the recently passed "Rule of Law" resolution has anything to do with soccer fields, nor that the city is planning to close or has closed any existing soccer fields. It's describing the city's action over "several years."

Most of this is easily confirmed by looking at the published city council minutes at http://www.ci.costa-mesa.ca.us/ or by doing a Google search using the "site" keyword. The topics of day laborers, illegal immigration, and soccer fields come up quite often. There's a great deal of comment from members of the public (and sometimes from the council) linking the first two, but I haven't seen anything linking soccer fields and immigration.

It's possible that the reporter is thinking of the 2008 hubbub over designating parks as "active" or "passive" (i.e. "you can play soccer, baseball, and such there" or "you can't play team sports there"), which didn't actually limit the number of "official" soccer fields, but did reduce the number of places where playing soccer was allowed. There was a lot of comment at that time about unruly soccer players, but again, I don't find evidence that anyone ever actually stood up in a council meeting and said, "We need to stop all these illegal immigrants playing soccer in our neighborhood parks."

Now I'm not up on Costa Mesa politics, but if it's like any other city a lot of stuff goes on that doesn't show up in the official minutes. So it's possible that the passive parks thing was intended to be part of the city's general anti-illegal-immigration stance. But it's more likely that a lot of the same people were on the same sides in the two debates, which led to the two issues being conflated.

CORed

27th May 2010, 10:59 AM

I don't think you've thought that through.

DR

I believe I have thought it through. I may well have reached a different conclusion than you would have. What we have now is effectively unlimited illegal immigration. I am suggesting that unlimited legal immigration would be preferable. I'm not by any means suggesting that it is the best solution.

funk de fino

30th May 2010, 02:45 PM

Why would he/she know?

It's in the OP. They brought it here.

I haven't made up anything.

Yes, you did. You started making up crap about team sports and uniforms to try and support something you are now saying possibly hasn't happened. Why didnt you look at whether it had or not before you tried to defend it? You would have looked slightly less silly.

And your continued lack of a substantive response is noted.

It's hard to be substansive with the material you give us to work with.

theprestige

30th May 2010, 07:32 PM

I believe I have thought it through. I may well have reached a different conclusion than you would have. What we have now is effectively unlimited illegal immigration. I am suggesting that unlimited legal immigration would be preferable. I'm not by any means suggesting that it is the best solution.
I'm pretty sure illegal immigration is limited by all sorts of factors.

Jekyll's Guest

30th May 2010, 08:37 PM

"limiting the number of soccer fields in parks." :boggled:

It's nonsense anyway, no-one from south of the border knows what 'soccer' is anyway, it's a made up American word.

Just put up a sign with "Futbol stadium this way!", and arrest everyone who turns down that road.

Jekyll's Guest

30th May 2010, 08:38 PM

I'll be back after going for a game of footie at the public park with my Sunderland "uniform" on with all my mates who will have all their "jerseys" on but lo and behold we will not be playing in any of your imaginary league games that are played at all times of the day, on any day in any public park by Hispanics in SoCal.

Personally I'd arrest anyone wearing a Sunderland shirt and let the Mexicans go, but that's more of a personal preference ;)

Steven Howard

31st May 2010, 09:40 AM

It's nonsense anyway, no-one from south of the border knows what 'soccer' is anyway, it's a made up American word.

Oh Jesus Christ not this **** again.

Jekyll's Guest

31st May 2010, 10:19 AM

Oh Jesus Christ not this **** again.

You hate asterisks?

WildCat

31st May 2010, 10:38 AM

It's in the OP. They brought it here.
It's up to the person making the claim to provide the evidence of said claim. I have seen no evidence that soccer fields was ever a consideration of Costa Mesa wrt illegal immigration. Neither have you.

Yes, you did. You started making up crap about team sports and uniforms to try and support something you are now saying possibly hasn't happened. Why didnt you look at whether it had or not before you tried to defend it? You would have looked slightly less silly.
I'm not the one lying my ass off like you are.

That whole derail was in regard to a statement that municipal governments hads no business regulating sports fields, it really had nothing to do with the OP no matter how many times you stamp your feet and cry that it does.

It's hard to be substansive with the material you give us to work with.
It's even harder when you either suffer from poor reading comprehension skills or blatant dishonesty.

Either way, your problem not mine.

funk de fino

31st May 2010, 11:44 AM

Personally I'd arrest anyone wearing a Sunderland shirt and let the Mexicans go, but that's more of a personal preference ;)

The same Sunderland that finished quite well in the EPL after a ropey middle run, while the other NE teams were in the LOWER league?

That Sunderland? Thank god we get a chance to batter the Geordies in the derbies again this year.

funk de fino

31st May 2010, 11:49 AM

It's up to the person making the claim to provide the evidence of said claim. I have seen no evidence that soccer fields was ever a consideration of Costa Mesa wrt illegal immigration. Neither have you.

I never said I did. I also never tried to support these actions that you now think did not even happen. It would have been better if you looked at the veracity of the claims prior to making silly remarks about uniforms and the such.

I'm not the one lying my ass off like you are.

BS.

That whole derail was in regard to a statement that municipal governments hads no business regulating sports fields, it really had nothing to do with the OP no matter how many times you stamp your feet and cry that it does.

So now you admit derailing? Nice one.

It's even harder when you either suffer from poor reading comprehension skills or blatant dishonesty.

Either way, your problem not mine.

Of course it is. Keep on trucking. You could have avoided the silliness a long time ago by attending to the OP to start with eh?