Has California's "Sanctuary State" status ruined the state?

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Last year violent crime dropped 19% to 1,200 something on the metro. In the mean time, Baltimore and DC continue to be a war zone. You're not missing much.

Not even talking about crime, I'm talking about the fact that the system is prone to frequent crippling issues.
Violent crime is endemic to public transportation in almost every city in the world.

Not everyone that takes public transportation is poor but public transportation functions as something of a magnet for certain types of violent crime, mostly armed robberies.
Thieves who victimize people on public transportation don't really care if their victims are rich or poor, just if they are easy targets.
Sure they prefer wealthy victims but if you have twenty bucks, you're a target.

 

[Casca XV]

Because, after all, if there are a lot of Hispanics in California, that makes it the "S**t Brown State" even if it is the fifth largest economy in the world, right?

That 40 years ago the "Golden State" was where working people went to prosper. Today because of Leftist Policies the "S**t Brown State" is where working people leave to prosper.

Because of the Left, in places like SF you need maps to avoid the "S**t".

That you attribute race in every way possible makes you the real Racist here. So stop being Hitler.

40 years ago California was the 5th biggest economy today it's the 7th biggest, see the trend?

But even with that: On the day it fell the USSR was the 2nd biggest economy. For economies bigger is not always better.

 

[Dittohead not!]

That 40 years ago the "Golden State" was where working people went to prosper. Today because of Leftist Policies the "S**t Brown State" is where working people leave to prosper.

Because of the Left, in places like SF you need maps to avoid the "S**t".

That you attribute race in every way possible makes you the real Racist here. So stop being Hitler.

40 years ago California was the 5th biggest economy today it's the 7th biggest, see the trend?

But even with that: On the day it fell the USSR was the 2nd biggest economy. For economies bigger is not always better.

LOL! Sure, you're the one decrying California as being brown, and I'm the racist. That's hilarious.

And you follow that up by claiming that having a strong economy is not a good thing.

 

[Casca XV]

LOL! Sure, you're the one decrying California as being brown, and I'm the racist. That's hilarious.

And you follow that up by claiming that having a strong economy is not a good thing.

"S**T Brown" is what the Left has tarnished the "Golden" into. It has nothing to do with race.

Aside from original slavery every racist policy in all US History came from Leftist Democrats just like you. About 60 years ago they realized that traditional racism was no longer a winning tactic so they switched to racial identity politics. But they/you are still the same Nasty Racists, they/you now just exploit race from the opposite direction. The primary tacit of racial identity politics is to slander political opponents as Racists, like you just did.

California has a big economy not a strong economy. It's location and physical features are why anyone does business there anymore. Any company or working person who could leave has left.

 

[lwf]

I was taken aback at the impact illegal aliens have had on Cali. I was stationed at Camp Pendleton in 1974 and Cali was , well, I thought awesome. This is so sad. Here's the question, do you think Brown will ever reverse his position ?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...n-nightmare/&usg=AOvVaw3fHWzfIsy5rrPsqiV3MmmK


While California accounts for 12 percent of America’s population, it accounts for one-third of America’s welfare checks. California leads the country in food stamp use. California has more people on welfare than most countries around the world.
But I thought immigration made us more prosperous?
Homelessness is exploding in California — with tent encampments overrunning schools, businesses and upscale neighborhoods. California is now home to 22 percent of this nation’s homeless population.

New Mexico has one of the highest quality of life ratings in the country and the population of New Mexico is mostly immigrants. How do you account for this?

 

[mrdeltoid]

Not even talking about crime, I'm talking about the fact that the system is prone to frequent crippling issues.
Violent crime is endemic to public transportation in almost every city in the world.

Not everyone that takes public transportation is poor but public transportation functions as something of a magnet for certain types of violent crime, mostly armed robberies.
Thieves who victimize people on public transportation don't really care if their victims are rich or poor, just if they are easy targets.
Sure they prefer wealthy victims but if you have twenty bucks, you're a target.

From an operational standpoint, it's actually pretty efficient.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

From an operational standpoint, it's actually pretty efficient.

Oh, I am sure that WHEN it works, it probably functions as efficiently as any subway system. Rail car mfrs and infrastructure builders have been doing this for a while, so it's kind of like buying a Chevy. You know that your Chevy will probably do its job if you maintain it well.
I am suspecting that it's the maintenance that is the culprit of DC Metro's operational woes, which according to local media, are frequent and legendary.

And, I might also add that the District of Columbia and much of the immediate Metro area IS indeed a city that desperately needs a reliable underground metro. Because of its layout and its history, it's well nigh impossible to just go and expand streets and freeways everywhere in DC like they do out here in LA. Thus, as the population booms, DC traffic gets worse and worse.
Traffic in DC was already awful when I left there in the 1970's, and suburban Maryland wasn't all that great either.

And I am not saying that the LA Metro is perfect, far from it, but we're still sort of new at this game, but even our record is a fair bit better than the DC Metro scores. We still have a long way to go before we can claim that our urban rail is as reliable as, say perhaps New York City's systems.

Of course, we are just like DC in that regard, because unfortunately we might be now approaching peak expandability with regard to automobile traffic solutions. We've expanded our freeways almost as far as we can go, and now we're almost at the point where legislators are dithering to and fro between toll road ideas and downtown area congestion surcharges, the kind that they have in downtown London.

So we'd better damn well make our urban rail work properly, and we better damn well pour as much money into expanding it as we can manage, too. Our stupid mistake was in tearing up all our old urban rail infrastructure in the 1950's. Sure, of course a bit of it might have become cumbersome but if we'd kept the Red Car Line functioning in downtown Los Angeles, that area would be mighty different today.
Downtown Los Angeles does not function the way downtown DC does, not even remotely. It is a center but it is not so much a HUB the way downtown DC is.

You see, Los Angeles used to be downtown centric but it isn't so much that way anymore. Sure, downtown LA is still vibrant but it is choking on vehicle traffic, which limits the usefulness of the area. Thankfully our LA Metro has been helping with that to some degree but we still need more stations downtown if we want that area to do better.

Los Angeles Metro in 2040 is likely to do better than it is doing now because by that time we'll most likely have achieved full parity with both urban rail and autonomous vehicle traffic. But only if we fully commit to it.

I'd offer some thoughts on high speed rail but this is the wrong thread for that subject.

 

[mrdeltoid]

New Mexico has one of the highest quality of life ratings in the country and the population of New Mexico is mostly immigrants. How do you account for this?

Immigrants aren't the issue. New Mexico has 85,000/4%, California has 2,350,000/6%. Now when it comes to quality of life disparity, New Mexico is 8th, as you point out, very good. Since both are sanctuary states, where New Mexico is 8th and California is 50th, along with the other wonderful stats Cali boasts these days, How would I account for NM doing much better? Jerry Brown isn't the gov. of New Mexico.

 

[PeteEU]

Immigrants aren't the issue. New Mexico has 85,000/4%, California has 2,350,000/6%. Now when it comes to quality of life disparity, New Mexico is 8th, as you point out, very good. Since both are sanctuary states, where New Mexico is 8th and California is 50th, along with the other wonderful stats Cali boasts these days, How would I account for NM doing much better? Jerry Brown isn't the gov. of New Mexico.

Quality of life statics have a lot to do with population size and density. California has more migrants than New Mexico has population.

Sent from my Honor 8X using Tapatalk

 

[mrdeltoid]

Oh, I am sure that WHEN it works, it probably functions as efficiently as any subway system. Rail car mfrs and infrastructure builders have been doing this for a while, so it's kind of like buying a Chevy. You know that your Chevy will probably do its job if you maintain it well.
I am suspecting that it's the maintenance that is the culprit of DC Metro's operational woes, which according to local media, are frequent and legendary.

And, I might also add that the District of Columbia and much of the immediate Metro area IS indeed a city that desperately needs a reliable underground metro. Because of its layout and its history, it's well nigh impossible to just go and expand streets and freeways everywhere in DC like they do out here in LA. Thus, as the population booms, DC traffic gets worse and worse.
Traffic in DC was already awful when I left there in the 1970's, and suburban Maryland wasn't all that great either.

And I am not saying that the LA Metro is perfect, far from it, but we're still sort of new at this game, but even our record is a fair bit better than the DC Metro scores. We still have a long way to go before we can claim that our urban rail is as reliable as, say perhaps New York City's systems.

Of course, we are just like DC in that regard, because unfortunately we might be now approaching peak expandability with regard to automobile traffic solutions. We've expanded our freeways almost as far as we can go, and now we're almost at the point where legislators are dithering to and fro between toll road ideas and downtown area congestion surcharges, the kind that they have in downtown London.

So we'd better damn well make our urban rail work properly, and we better damn well pour as much money into expanding it as we can manage, too. Our stupid mistake was in tearing up all our old urban rail infrastructure in the 1950's. Sure, of course a bit of it might have become cumbersome but if we'd kept the Red Car Line functioning in downtown Los Angeles, that area would be mighty different today.
Downtown Los Angeles does not function the way downtown DC does, not even remotely. It is a center but it is not so much a HUB the way downtown DC is.

You see, Los Angeles used to be downtown centric but it isn't so much that way anymore. Sure, downtown LA is still vibrant but it is choking on vehicle traffic, which limits the usefulness of the area. Thankfully our LA Metro has been helping with that to some degree but we still need more stations downtown if we want that area to do better.

Los Angeles Metro in 2040 is likely to do better than it is doing now because by that time we'll most likely have achieved full parity with both urban rail and autonomous vehicle traffic. But only if we fully commit to it.

I'd offer some thoughts on high speed rail but this is the wrong thread for that subject.

I live in Baltimore so I don't know DC from an insiders perspective. I'm sure if DCs system was on the fritz when I used it, I may be saying it's a disaster. lol I can tell you that Baltimores infrastructure is in shambles. The try to play catch up, like they are presently widening the approach to the Harbor Tunnel 895. Traffic though a nightmare, is low on the priority list here in charm city. Another year with 300+ murders and the city keeps doing the same old same old and expecting different results.
So back on topic, how does Cali look from your perspective? I haven't been there since 1974. From what I'm seeing on the internet, it's changed quite a bit.

 

[mrdeltoid]

Quality of life statics have a lot to do with population size and density. California has more migrants than New Mexico has population.

Sent from my Honor 8X using Tapatalk

But how many illegal immigrants are there? I don't thing legal immigrants are a problem.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I live in Baltimore so I don't know DC from an insiders perspective. I'm sure if DCs system was on the fritz when I used it, I may be saying it's a disaster. lol I can tell you that Baltimores infrastructure is in shambles. The try to play catch up, like they are presently widening the approach to the Harbor Tunnel 895. Traffic though a nightmare, is low on the priority list here in charm city. Another year with 300+ murders and the city keeps doing the same old same old and expecting different results.
So back on topic, how does Cali look from your perspective? I haven't been there since 1974. From what I'm seeing on the internet, it's changed quite a bit.

You mean Los Angeles, I assume...
It's a mixed bag.

For one thing, it's a helluva lot cleaner than it was in the 70's, when you could barely see a block down the street due to the smog.
We still have the bad "brown haze days" but we have a significantly high number of days where you can clearly see the mountains from any point in the metro region. When I first moved here in 1981, I'd forgotten about the mountains because I never ever saw them until one freak-occurrence clear day in winter after a massive rainstorm. I had totally forgotten that we were ringed by mountains, and so had most people, because THOUSANDS had flocked to spots all over to see them that day.
I made a few hundred bucks getting stock video footage of it.

So, all the high gas taxes and engine restrictions actually have paid off, the air is far from perfect but it is indeed significantly cleaner than it used to be here.

The gangs. Yes, street gangs are still here and gang violence is still a thing here. But when I first moved here and started doing TV news coverage as a freelance stringer, it was all day and all night, and it blanketed the city. I was living in Venice at the time, the HEART of Shoreline Crips territory.

The neighborhood I live in today, West Whittier bordering on Pico Rivera, used to be a NO GO gang territory back in the 80's.
I know, because I would wind up here every couple of weeks to cover a shooting.
Today we live here because the neighborhood is now family friendly some thirty years later.
And I can't even afford to live in Venice. The Venice house I lived in for $750 a month back in the 80's just sold for five million dollars.

It's expensive to live here but you get something for all the hard earned scratch you have to pay and I am not sure that I can explain it adequately to someone who doesn't live here but all I know is, I have lived and worked in eight different parts of the country in my life, including the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
I left Southern California in 1998 and lived in DFW with my wife and kids for ten years, and we moved back here in 2012. (Thirteen years total down South)

The illegals are here, but they've always been here. Illegals were BROUGHT INTO Southern California by the big Ag companies in the 1940's when they sent buses into Mexico to recruit braceros to work the fields! Then suddenly a few years later it's like Casablanca where the captain says he is shocked to find gambling in the casino!
The illegals are here, they've always been here, but to most people who do not live here, anyone with brown skin or a hispanic surname is an illegal, which is nonsense. Los Angeles is chock full of native born hispanics, Chicanos...they are American citizens, and we have tons of resident green card holders. They are LEGAL. The overwhelming majority of illegals today are Honduran, Salvadoran and Nicaraguan. Some have criminal records, but a lot of them are just refugees. It's pretty tough on them in L.A. because the cost of living is so high.
And I do think that the approach is going to change. I think the sanctuary thing will stay but I bet it gets modified so that we can deport criminals more easily. Bank on it.

L.A. is not for everyone. A lot of people would not be happy here. Yes, we DO have homeless and yes, it IS a problem.
But Southern California always had hobos, bums and other homeless as far back as the turn of the century because of the weather.
Add to that the fact that other cities are actually BUSING their homeless here, and then add the economic issues and it has become quite serious.

But it's becoming serious everywhere. It is NOT A SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA problem, it is a NATIONAL problem.
We're not leaving. Karen and I will grow old and die here, most likely in the home we have now.

 

[Dittohead not!]

1 "S**T Brown" is what the Left has tarnished the "Golden" into. It has nothing to do with race.

2 Aside from original slavery every racist policy in all US History came from Leftist Democrats just like you. About 60 years ago they realized that traditional racism was no longer a winning tactic so they switched to racial identity politics. But they/you are still the same Nasty Racists, they/you now just exploit race from the opposite direction. The primary tacit of racial identity politics is to slander political opponents as Racists, like you just did.

3 California has a big economy not a strong economy. It's location and physical features are why anyone does business there anymore. Any company or working person who could leave has left.

1. Nice back step. When you say that "liberals" have made California into a "S**T Brown state" it's painfully obvious that you're not talking about the color of the hills in the summer.

2. That's a pile of malarky and you know it. It wasn't "conservatives" who ended segregation and passed civil rights legislation.

3. California has a stronger economy than any other state of the union: bigger, more diverse, more robust.

And, as an aside, I am neither the subject of the conversation nor am I a "liberal," at least not by any rational definition.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

But how many illegal immigrants are there? I don't thing legal immigrants are a problem.

I mentioned in my earlier post that it is difficult for illegals to live here because it costs so much.
We get quite a few of them but a lot of them keep moving into other parts of California.

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

Funny how so called 'state rights' conservatives are always here bitching about OTHER states run their states.

If they don't live in these states, WTF do they care how California or NY run their own state. Oh that's right, politics and probably Fox or Limbaugh gave them their 'all blue states suck' talking points for the week.

 

[PeteEU]

But how many illegal immigrants are there? I don't thing legal immigrants are a problem.

Depends on who you ask.

 

[mrdeltoid]

Quality of life statics have a lot to do with population size and density. California has more migrants than New Mexico has population.

Sent from my Honor 8X using Tapatalk

I don't thinks migrants are a problem. I do think that illegal immigrants has a negative effect on a state though. In a microcosm, the recent tragedy where that police officer was killed is a prime example. The officer, was an immigrant from Fiji, who worked very hard and came here the correct way, even taking extra classes so as to help him be better understood on the police radio. The killer was an illegal, and was stopped because he had no license plates on his car, and gunned down the cop in cold blood. One of many preventable deaths and crimes committed by illegals that shouldn't be here in the first place. Why do you think the democrat party want to keep this kind of thing going? Isn't legally migrating to our country good enough?

 

[PeteEU]

I don't thinks migrants are a problem. I do think that illegal immigrants has a negative effect on a state though. In a microcosm, the recent tragedy where that police officer was killed is a prime example. The officer, was an immigrant from Fiji, who worked very hard and came here the correct way, even taking extra classes so as to help him be better understood on the police radio. The killer was an illegal, and was stopped because he had no license plates on his car, and gunned down the cop in cold blood. One of many preventable deaths and crimes committed by illegals that shouldn't be here in the first place. Why do you think the democrat party want to keep this kind of thing going? Isn't legally migrating to our country good enough?

And this is the problem. For every "illegal" that kills someone, there are far far far far far far more "Americans" who kill someone. The focus should not be on his legal status but the fact that guns are so easy to get and that society as a whole is violent. Your argument is that if he was not in the country then the policeman would be alive. The policeman and many other cops and people would also be alive if there was not so many guns in the US.

It is called the blame game. We see it in Europe all the time. Blame the migrant for crime, but ignore locals crime. We hear a lot about "Asians grooming gangs" in the UK, but statistically wise white British men abuse children far far far far more than Asians. Or in my own home country. We have just had several cases of incest and abuse.. all with "white Danes", but I will bet you that just one case of an immigrant doing occurs the media and the usual suspects on the right will go on and on and on about this case and no other ones. Oh and who else used this tactic.. a guy in Germany in the 1920s and 30s.

 

[TheParser]

I was taken aback at the impact illegal aliens have had on Cali.

I have lived in the (tarnished) Golden State for 81 years.

So you can take my word to the bank.

Crime is widespread now. You know about the cop who has just been shot dead by a non-citizen. The sheriff has just announced that the suspect had a criminal record, but the sanctuary laws prevented law enforcement from notifying ICE. (FOX carried the sheriff's news conference; of course, CNN and MSNBC did not.)

I cannot comment further, for I am constrained by strict forum posting rules. I hope that I am allowed to opine that sanctuary law advocates care more for the welfare of non-citizens than they do for American citizens.

 

[mrdeltoid]

And this is the problem. For every "illegal" that kills someone, there are far far far far far far more "Americans" who kill someone. The focus should not be on his legal status but the fact that guns are so easy to get and that society as a whole is violent. Your argument is that if he was not in the country then the policeman would be alive. The policeman and many other cops and people would also be alive if there was not so many guns in the US.

It is called the blame game. We see it in Europe all the time. Blame the migrant for crime, but ignore locals crime. We hear a lot about "Asians grooming gangs" in the UK, but statistically wise white British men abuse children far far far far more than Asians. Or in my own home country. We have just had several cases of incest and abuse.. all with "white Danes", but I will bet you that just one case of an immigrant doing occurs the media and the usual suspects on the right will go on and on and on about this case and no other ones. Oh and who else used this tactic.. a guy in Germany in the 1920s and 30s.

So, you support open borders? You see it in Europe all the time. Yeah, how's that open borders thing working for you guys? You can't dispute, if this guy wasn't here, the cop would not have been shot by him. How do you think the victims of illegals feel about it? This guys wife, the parents of the girl hacked to death by those MS13 members. Would you tell them "American citizens kill more people than illegals do"? Did you ever think that there are a lot more citizens in the first place? And Hitler? Seriously? lol

 

[mrdeltoid]

I have lived in the (tarnished) Golden State for 81 years.

So you can take my word to the bank.

Crime is widespread now. You know about the cop who has just been shot dead by a non-citizen. The sheriff has just announced that the suspect had a criminal record, but the sanctuary laws prevented law enforcement from notifying ICE. (FOX carried the sheriff's news conference; of course, CNN and MSNBC did not.)

I cannot comment further, for I am constrained by strict forum posting rules. I hope that I am allowed to opine that sanctuary law advocates care more for the welfare of non-citizens than they do for American citizens.

You may get busted for chronic truth telling. lol

 

[PeteEU]

So, you support open borders?

Yes I do.. for legal immigration.

You see it in Europe all the time. Yeah, how's that open borders thing working for you guys?

Stop mixing up refugees and economic migrants. Not all "illegals" are the same and should not be treated the same.

You can't dispute, if this guy wasn't here, the cop would not have been shot by him.

Nope, and if he did not have a gun then he would not have been able to kill him. Illegals come to the US because there is work.. in this case drug dealing and people smuggling. No work, and people wont come. How about massive fines for businesses that are first time offenders and nationalization on second time offences? That would surely stop people for hiring illegals no?

How do you think the victims of illegals feel about it? This guys wife, the parents of the girl hacked to death by those MS13 members. Would you tell them "American citizens kill more people than illegals do"? Did you ever think that there are a lot more citizens in the first place? And Hitler? Seriously? lol

Ahh the victim card. Funny how that is only used by the right when it does not involve banning guns. Sandy Hook victims families are routinely attacked by the right. So much for compassion eh?

I have full sympathy for the family and other victims. But I do know, that many of these victims would be alive today if the killer did not so easily have access to weapons.

lf

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Funny how so called 'state rights' conservatives are always here bitching about OTHER states run their states.

If they don't live in these states, WTF do they care how California or NY run their own state. Oh that's right, politics and probably Fox or Limbaugh gave them their 'all blue states suck' talking points for the week.

I guess states rights only applies to former Confederate states. Oh wait, did I say "former"? Forget that, they ARE Confederate states.
Every other state is supposed to ignore states rights and just run THEIR states the Confederate way.

I AGREE! We SHOULD do exactly that, starting by cutting off ALL money to Confederate states immediately.
That's OUR state's "states rights", we should not be under any obligation whatsoever to pay for their food stamps, welfare, tornadoes, hurricanes, floods and sinkholes.

I think that all blue states should cut off the folks in Jesusland starting with the new year.

 

[mrdeltoid]

Yes I do.. for legal immigration.



Stop mixing up refugees and economic migrants. Not all "illegals" are the same and should not be treated the same.



Nope, and if he did not have a gun then he would not have been able to kill him. Illegals come to the US because there is work.. in this case drug dealing and people smuggling. No work, and people wont come. How about massive fines for businesses that are first time offenders and nationalization on second time offences? That would surely stop people for hiring illegals no?



Ahh the victim card. Funny how that is only used by the right when it does not involve banning guns. Sandy Hook victims families are routinely attacked by the right. So much for compassion eh?

I have full sympathy for the family and other victims. But I do know, that many of these victims would be alive today if the killer did not so easily have access to weapons.

lf

California has the most restrictive gun laws in the country. You can't rank any higher than #1. BUT, they are a "sanctuary state". There are many illegals who commit no more crime that the average citizen. There are also many that come here for criminal reasons. So, California is using every tool beside gun confiscation in the "Gun Control" tool box. Give them an "A" for effort on that issue. On the issue of Illegal aliens, that commit crimes from ID theft to murder, that have been deported multiple times, they have open arms. Do the math. If you wanted to cross the border to rape and murder, which state would you choose?

BTW, I live in Baltimore, Maryland. Another hot bed for gun hating democrats. Guess where we rank in gun violence?

 

[Mr Person]

Isn't California regularly cited as the 5th largest economy in the world. As in, stacked up against whole countries?



"ruined?" Well, if it is ruined - if you anti-immigration people are correct - then why don't you just sit back and wait to enjoy the shadenfreude when those Hated Liberals in CA turn hard right on immigration.

Don't hold your breath, since I don't think you will end up celebrating. Or maybe hold your breath. Whatever. Your choice. But do stop squawking about doom and gloom in CA.