Some times it pays to think things through. :yes:
FOXNews.com - Arizona Official Threatens to Cut Off Los Angeles Power as Payback for Boycott
FOXNews.com - Arizona Official Threatens to Cut Off Los Angeles Power as Payback for Boycott
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Power System said:The LADWP currently maintains a generating capacity of 7,200 megawatts, in excess of the peak demand of 6,165 megawatts by the city of Los Angeles.[5] It provides this surplus electricity to other utilities, selling 23 million megawatt-hours in 2003. As of 2005, the LADWP operates four natural gas-fired generators within city boundaries, which account for 26% of capacity.[5] It receives 52% of its electricity from coal-fired plants in Utah, Arizona, and Nevada.[6] A further 11% is generated using nuclear power.[5] It receives about 6% of its electricity from hydropower, most coming from Hoover Dam and the rest coming from the aqueduct system itself as the water descends from its mountain sources.[7]
The LADWP, along with the California Department of Water Resources, also operates the Castaic Pumped Storage Power Station as a pumped storage facility. Water flows from the upper resevoir to the lower during the day, generating power when demand is highest, and is pumped back up at night when excess capacity is available.[8] About 1,600 megawatts, or 22% of the total capacity, is generated at this facility alone [7]. The Los Angeles City Council voted in 2004 to direct the LADWP to generate 20% of its energy (excluding Hoover Dam) from clean sources by 2010 [7]. Current "green power" sources account for 5% of the LADWP's capacity, but there are plans to add a 120 megawatt wind farm in Tehachapi, California, and produce electricity from geothermal sources in the Salton Sea area and photovoltaic sources.[7]
Whether it is or not, Gary Pierce is talking about protesting a boycott by taking more business away from Arizona. What an idiot.Somehow, I think the city of Los Angeles will be just fine
Well if his past decison making is any indication, he's not exactly someone who thinks things through.Whether it is or not, Gary Pierce is talking about protesting a boycott by taking more business away from Arizona. What an idiot.
but by sticking with the new law, the states have the potential to save so much more money in the benefits that are currently being paid out to the illegals that will soon be departing.
SOURCEI'd like you to try to document that claim. I don't think you can.
- $11 billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year by state governments.
- Illegal households only pay about one-third the amount of federal taxes that non-illegal households pay.
- Illegal households create a net fiscal deficit at the federal level of more than $10 billion a year. If given amnesty, this number could grow to more than $29 billion.
- $1.9 billion dollars a year is spent on food-assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC and free school lunches for illegal aliens.
- $1.6 billion is spent on the federal prison and court system for illegal aliens.
- $2.5 billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens.
- About 21 percent of the population of U.S. prisons is classified as noncitizens from Mexico, Colombia, Cuba and the Dominican Republic. About 5 percent is listed as unknown.
Yeah, this "source" is actually a notorious right-wing chain mail circulated in 2007. I was going to debunk it but Smoke already started to kick it in the teeth. Here's a complete debunking of the list and the source. Simply put the #s and the $ and the chain e-mail are a propogandistic lie:SOURCE
[/list]
All these boycotts have the potential to do is hurt the private businesses that are in certain states. Do you think any laws would change if a few companies are feeling a crunch? They may wind up paying less taxes in a boycott year, but by sticking with the new law, the states have the potential to save so much more money in the benefits that are currently being paid out to the illegals that will soon be departing.
A revolting ode to an ill considered embargo.
Will Arizona throw the switch?
Can So Cal take the power glitch?
But if they can't,
they ought recant
lest they be snubbed with "Take that, b....!"
Source?The last claim is false for two reasons. First, states do not pay welfare to illegal immigrants. Second, illegal immigrants pay much more in taxes than they receive in benefits of any kind.
Cool. I'm for the boycott too.I have been due to go on a rant, California should keep their nose out of Arizona's business.
And people who don't live in California should keep their nose out of it's business. California has the right to decide who they want to do business with and who they don't.Reverend Rick said:I have been due to go on a rant, California should keep their nose out of Arizona's business.
Only one way swings more than the other. California won't be the ones hurting.Reverend Rick said:If they want to slug it out in the mud with boycotts, the door swings both ways.
Maybe when the supreme court does decide to do something, people will stop boycotting.Reverend Rick said:Why don't we just let the supreme court rule on the Arizona's new law and leave it at that?