2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

The debate around this issue is disengenuous - the only reason to publish the names of either group is to identify, personally, who makes up those groups. With the technology available today that knowledge will be used. Commercially - what better way to identify a target market than to find out who does something so personal? Politically - find out who your friends and foes are. Economically - don't like working with "those people?" Check the list before you hire. (Without fear of reprisal if you just keep your mouth shut.) Personally - just another piece of data that will be available when doing a net 'background check'.

Welcome to the fish bowl, fishies!

posted 2 years, 11 months ago
view in context

There are only two possible results of an illegal immigrant taking a job in the US. 1) It takes a job from someone not here illegally, or 2) it takes a job that would go unfilled, either a) from lack of willingness of non-illegals to take it or b) from lack of willingness to create the job in the first place by someone with capital, knowing they won't have a worker to fill it.

 

All jobs held by illegal immigrants fall into one of the above categories. While obvious it needs to be said, because unless these unarguable premises are acknowledged arguments that follow are just noise.

 

If #1 is true then, well, that's why people are upset.

 

If either case of #2 is true then examination of the “why” is in order. The truth is easy: if no one is willing to take a job then by definition that job is not worth doing. The variable in that is the “wage” – take that as shorthand for everything that makes up the benefits of a job, including such things as safety, prestige, fulfillment, etc. Willingness to take a job, the determination of whether or not it is worth doing is, of course, directly linked to the wage one draws for doing it. The idea that “there are jobs American's won't take” is hogwash – there are employers that do not pay the wage required to get non-illegals to take them, nothing else.

 

And that's that. All the “complexity” around the subject of illegal immigrants and jobs is merely obfuscation of the truth.

 

Note that the truth doesn't care about the morality of open or closed borders, of criteria used to be here in the states, the impacts on families, the quality of life of the beneficiaries of cheap labor, the vitality the US has experienced as a direct result of having a history of easy immigration, or anything else. All of these and more are real issues to be addressed. But lying about the fundamental truth about jobs and illegal immigrants poisons all that follows, and makes it impossible to have an honest discussion.

posted 2 years, 12 months ago
view in context

To those who want to make my name public as a CHL holder,

You want to know if I have a Concealed Handgun License, a CHL. You want to know so you can make decisions:

Not knowing me, personally.

Not knowing what I do for a living.

Not knowing any of my personal circumstances.

Not knowing my involvement in the community.

What you will know is that I trained for, applied for, paid for and passed a check by the authorities for the privilege of holding a CHL. Basically the only thing you will know is that I?m quite possibly a better citizen than the run-of-the-mill person on the street. Willing to train, verify who I am in all details, open my life for inspection, make a commitment and take responsibility. (Reads like a checklist for being a good citizen, actually.) That?s it ? you will know nothing else.

From the responses to the show I find that you want to make decisions about whether to be around me, where your children play, where I should work, where I should shop, where I should walk or ride my bike based only on knowing that I have a CHL.

That?s not all. You?re not only equipped to make all those decisions by knowing I have a CHL, it?s your right to know! You have a right to know that I?m a good citizen so you can restrict what I do, where I go and who is around me. You have a right to know so that businesses can plug that info into their databases for commercial gain. You have a right to know so that political action groups can use me as a whipping boy or poster child for their side of the argument. You have a right to know in the name of ?public safety,? though you can?t point to any objective data showing that knowing this makes the public any safer. Or makes you, individually, any safer. You have the right to know even though it puts me in the public eye through no fault of my own (unless, of course, you think that conscientiously following the law is a fault), and possibly will endanger my life, livelihood or both. Never mind all that, you have the right to know!

What more to say? Oh, well, one thing I can see coming from this if CHL are made public ? it?ll give impetus to changing Oregon law to match Vermont. Then everyone will know that everyone may be legally carrying a gun at any time! Problem solved, your right to know is secure! Yipee!

Best regards,

An Oregon CHL Holder

posted 4 years, 6 months ago
view in context