I have a hard time getting upset about a state law that is essentially the same as a federal law - sure, the federal law is retarded, but what reason is there to make a 'federal case' about a state law that mirrors a federal law? In most cases, the furror is more about advancing one party's goals rather than any real outrage. The libertarians are the only ones whom I would put in a separate category - at least they are consistent in opposing both levels of state intervention into the freely chosen actions of what should be free business men and women, and the workers who choose to be employed by them.
I like this excerpt:
"Immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs and laborers bring innovation, dedication and good old-fashioned hard work to bear on improving their own lives and the lives of others around them. Removing restrictions on the movement of labor—which primarily serve to protect labor unions and assuage nativists—would be an enormous boon to the national economy.
Arizona's law is popular partly because Arizonans fear an illegal immigrant crime wave. But crime rates in Arizona are at historic lows. According to the state Bureau of Justice, violent crime rates in 2008 (the latest year for which data are available) were lower than any point since 1976. Property crime rates have declined even more steeply, with 2008 figures lower than at any point since 1966. It is a myth, then, that illegal immigrants bring a wave of crime in their wake."
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052748704684604575381561053396180-lMyQjAxMTAwMDIwNzEyNDcyWj.html
No comments:
Post a Comment