Arizona threatens to pull power plug on LA

LA should have probably done some research before making boycott threats.. i find this amusing.comp_atkins

[QUOTE="comp_atkins"]LA should have probably done some research before making boycott threats.. i find this amusing.FragStains

What I find most amusing of this is all the political posturing against the law. A law many, if not a majority support. You get picked up for something and you aren't here legal...out you go. I don't see why anyone is against that to start with.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

I agree 100% that the results would be terrible at best and catastrophic at worst (if LA lost their major source of power)

But they have no one to blame but themselves if it happens
-they could protest what Arizona is doing without imposing economic sanctions
...don't write a check your ass can't cash

rawsavon

And I'm sure the federal government and the rest of the country won't look down or be pissed at Arizona when discussing the tragedy of 2010 when hundreds/thousands were killed during black outs and several buisnesses went bankrupt due to massive looting, and the government had to send in aide which cost them money.

It's naive to just think if Arziona did this, there'd be no consequences to them. I think cutting the power in LA would be the equivilant of dropping a freaking bomb on it, and if Arizona did it, the federal government should intervene with the whole issue.

I'm just seeing a bigger set of consequences here besides "Don't piss off arizona".

I never said there would not be bigger consequences...I said it could be catastrophic.
But you had be better be ready to accept the consequences when you make a stand against something (as Calif. wants to do)
...they cannot say they weren't warned

Lets enter a theoretical situation. Arizona actively opposses a a bill supported by the president and is trying to thwart it. In turn, would this make it morally right and justified if the government cut off federal funding and assistance toward Arizona for biting the hand that feeds them?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]What I find most amusing of this is all the political posturing against the law. A law many, if not a majority support. You get picked up for something and you aren't here legal...out you go. I don't see why anyone is against that to start with.Phoenix6359

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="psychobrew"] It would be solely LA's fault if people are hurt (and that is a big IF). What happened the last time the state faced rolling blackouts? If LA decides they no longer want to do business with Arizona for purely political reasons, how does Arizona not have the right to return the favor?

psychobrew

This would also have mass effects on the economy of the state of CA, effect resources in the state of CA, etc. And seeing as how LA alone is probably more important than the entirety of AZ, I'd hope the federal government would intervene and stop it. This isn't just "showing LA whose boss!" theres massive consequences if this happened, to both AZ and LA.

Neither should do anything. I don't believe LA has a right to boycott AZ but in turn I do not believe AZ has a right to harm innocent californians because of it.

Lets enter a theoretical situation. Arizona actively opposses a a bill supported by the president and is trying to thwart it. In turn, would this make it morally right and justified if the government cut off federal funding and assistance toward Arizona for biting the hand that feeds them?

Pixel-Pirate

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

I agree 100% that the results would be terrible at best and catastrophic at worst (if LA lost their major source of power)

But they have no one to blame but themselves if it happens
-they could protest what Arizona is doing without imposing economic sanctions
...don't write a check your ass can't cash

psychobrew

And I'm sure the federal government and the rest of the country won't look down or be pissed at Arizona when discussing the tragedy of 2010 when hundreds/thousands were killed during black outs and several buisnesses went bankrupt due to massive looting, and the government had to send in aide which cost them money.

It's naive to just think if Arziona did this, there'd be no consequences to them. I think cutting the power in LA would be the equivilant of dropping a freaking bomb on it, and if Arizona did it, the federal government should intervene with the whole issue.

I'm just seeing a bigger set of consequences here besides "Don't piss off arizona".

1) It's not cutting all power. It's cutting a portion of their power. LA gets their power from a variety of sources. They would just lose access to the power that comes from Arizona.

2) California has dealt with rolling blackouts before. Were hundereds or thousands killed then? Did several businesses go bankrupt due to looting (in which case, insurrance should protect them anyway).

3) Why should LA have no consequences for boycotting Arizona, but Arizona has consequences for boycotting LA? That seems hypocritcal to me.

Some were killed, looting and damage to property cost alot during riots, and some small buisnesses tend to go out of buisness due to it.

As for why LA should recieve no consequences but AZ should? I never said LA should recieve no consequences but the difference I see here is that AZ would be punishing and hurting innocent californians, and thats worse than what LA is doing.

Lets enter a theoretical situation. Arizona actively opposses a a bill supported by the president and is trying to thwart it. In turn, would this make it morally right and justified if the government cut off federal funding and assistance toward Arizona for biting the hand that feeds them?

Pixel-Pirate

That is not the same thing at all
-in your scenario all AZ i doing is opposing the bill (something I said Calif. is free to do w/out reprisal)

IF (in your scenario) AZ was able to (in some form) place economic sanctions against the Gov, then the Gov would be justified in removing all funding

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

Lets enter a theoretical situation. Arizona actively opposses a a bill supported by the president and is trying to thwart it. In turn, would this make it morally right and justified if the government cut off federal funding and assistance toward Arizona for biting the hand that feeds them?

LJS9502_basic

Care to explain why?

but the difference I see here is that AZ would be punishing and hurting innocent californians, and thats worse than what LA is doing.

Pixel-Pirate

Calif would also be hurting people in AZ through the boycott
(down rev., lost jobs, etc)

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

Lets enter a theoretical situation. Arizona actively opposses a a bill supported by the president and is trying to thwart it. In turn, would this make it morally right and justified if the government cut off federal funding and assistance toward Arizona for biting the hand that feeds them?

Pixel-Pirate

Care to explain why?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

Lets enter a theoretical situation. Arizona actively opposses a a bill supported by the president and is trying to thwart it. In turn, would this make it morally right and justified if the government cut off federal funding and assistance toward Arizona for biting the hand that feeds them?

Care to explain why?

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]but the difference I see here is that AZ would be punishing and hurting innocent californians, and thats worse than what LA is doing.

rawsavon

Calif would also be hurting people in AZ through the boycott
(down rev., lost jobs, etc)

I am not responsible for what LA does, but I live in california. Why should I, someone who lives in the state but not in LA, be punished for what LA does? Or are we assuming the consequences of the rolling blackouts caused by arizona will not be felt by any neighboring cities?

I'm not justifying what LA propouses. I just don't think AZ's rebuttal is acceptable.

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]but the difference I see here is that AZ would be punishing and hurting innocent californians, and thats worse than what LA is doing.

Pixel-Pirate

Calif would also be hurting people in AZ through the boycott
(down rev., lost jobs, etc)

I am not responsible for what LA does, but I live in california. Why should I, someone who lives in the state but not in LA, be punished for what LA does? Or are we assuming the consequences of the rolling blackouts caused by arizona will not be felt by any neighboring cities?

I'm not justifying what LA propouses. I just don't think AZ's rebuttal is acceptable.

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

Calif would also be hurting people in AZ through the boycott
(down rev., lost jobs, etc)

LJS9502_basic

I am not responsible for what LA does, but I live in california. Why should I, someone who lives in the state but not in LA, be punished for what LA does? Or are we assuming the consequences of the rolling blackouts caused by arizona will not be felt by any neighboring cities?

I'm not justifying what LA propouses. I just don't think AZ's rebuttal is acceptable.

LA is wanting to boycott AZ over a law all of AZ enforces, not one city.

AZ wants to harm LA and it's neighboring cities and the CA economy for what LA does. LA is not defacto representitive of the state. Why, again, should cities next to LA, who have absolutely no control over what LA does, be punished for what they do?

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]but the difference I see here is that AZ would be punishing and hurting innocent californians, and thats worse than what LA is doing.

Pixel-Pirate

Calif would also be hurting people in AZ through the boycott
(down rev., lost jobs, etc)

I am not responsible for what LA does, but I live in california. Why should I, someone who lives in the state but not in LA, be punished for what LA does? Or are we assuming the consequences of the rolling blackouts caused by arizona will not be felt by any neighboring cities?

I'm not justifying what LA propouses. I just don't think AZ's rebuttal is acceptable.

Well at least now I know why you are 'acting' the way you are
-being a part of the situation, it is hard to remove the emotion of the situation and think only based facts and rationality
-I would probably be the same way

That is why I said to think of this on a global level with tariffs and sanctions

LA is wanting to boycott AZ over a law all of AZ enforces, not one city.

AZ wants to harm LA and it's neighboring cities and the CA economy for what LA does. LA is not defacto representitive of the state. Why, again, should cities next to LA, who have absolutely no control over what LA does, be punished for what they do?

Pixel-Pirate

Did the minds in LA who decided to boycott Arizona not see this potential retaliation coming?Danm_999

Calif. (and LA in particular) behave in odd ways when it comes to energy (they have themost ****ed up, backwards design I have ever seen for a populous state + an astounding stubbornness when it comes to change/adapting)

To answer your question, I do not think they thought this through

[QUOTE="Danm_999"]Did the minds in LA who decided to boycott Arizona not see this potential retaliation coming?rawsavon

Calif. (and LA in particular) behave in odd ways when it comes to energy (they have themost ****ed up, backwards design I have ever seen for a populous state + an astounding stubbornness when it comes to change/adapting)

To answer your question, I do not think they thought this through

Did the minds in LA who decided to boycott Arizona not see this potential retaliation coming?Danm_999

Calif. (and LA in particular) behave in odd ways when it comes to energy (they have themost ****ed up, backwards design I have ever seen for a populous state + an astounding stubbornness when it comes to change/adapting)

To answer your question, I do not think they thought this through

Turns out Los Angeles Department of Water and Power are actually part-owners of the two Arizona-based power plants that supply 20-25% of LA's electricity. Guess Arizona wont be able to cut them off so easily after all:Bourbons3

On a related note, Seattle has boycotted Arizona... but the boycott included an exemption for a contract the city has with an Arizona company to operate a series of red-light cameras that generate millions of ticket revenue.

Excerpt from a column:

McGinn answered bluntly when asked why the red-light cameras contract was not part of the boycott. "You may have noticed we have a budget deficit here," he said.

[QUOTE="Bourbons3"]Turns out Los Angeles Department of Water and Power are actually part-owners of the two Arizona-based power plants that supply 20-25% of LA's electricity. Guess Arizona wont be able to cut them off so easily after all:LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Bourbons3"]Turns out Los Angeles Department of Water and Power are actually part-owners of the two Arizona-based power plants that supply 20-25% of LA's electricity. Guess Arizona wont be able to cut them off so easily after all:Bourbons3

On a related note, Seattle has boycotted Arizona... but the boycott included an exemption for a contract the city has with an Arizona company to operate a series of red-light cameras that generate millions of ticket revenue.

Excerpt from a column:

McGinn answered bluntly when asked why the red-light cameras contract was not part of the boycott. "You may have noticed we have a budget deficit here," he said.

Oleg_Huzwog

From the same article:

Not all council members were exactly bursting with pride, either. I ran into new Councilman Mike O'Brien, who voted for the boycott but said he did so grudgingly as it has no teeth and is almost entirely symbolic.

"I'm not trying to claim the moral high ground here," McGinn said. "We know in Seattle we're not perfect. We don't always live up to our ideals.

"But I do think it's OK to make a statement of our values, of what we want our values to be. That's what the boycott does."

I have no problem with people protesting what is going on. But for the sake of all involved, it is best to leave the economics out of it
-and if you do take a stand, be ready for them to make a stand in return

What the hell is with Arizona lately? All the news I hear about the state lately is just so negative. With all the things they've been doing over recent times, threatening another American city is just facepalm worthy.Nerd_Man

When your that close to California it's expected that some of the classic Californian stupidity is going to rub off on surrounding states.:)

Lets enter a theoretical situation. Arizona actively opposses a a bill supported by the president and is trying to thwart it. In turn, would this make it morally right and justified if the government cut off federal funding and assistance toward Arizona for biting the hand that feeds them?

Pixel-Pirate

Happens all the time. If a state does not raise its drinking age to 21..BAM.. uncle sam cuts off the federal highway money

If a state does not conform to the federal education standards/curriculum....BAM.. uncle sam cuts off the federal education money

Keep in mind that the fed govt originally confiscated that money from the citizens of the various states (i.e. what hand is feeding whom?). Then ransoms it back if the state complies with the feds mandates.

Whatever happened to the President of the United States being:

A. the President of ALL the people/states

B. a unifying force in the country

Obama has obviously taken sides in this. I was revolted to see him standing next the president of mexico tag teaming Arizona. Mexico has VERY strict immigration laws and enforces them vigorously. Why the hell is our president siding with a foriegn president against one of our states. :evil:

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]

Lets enter a theoretical situation. Arizona actively opposses a a bill supported by the president and is trying to thwart it. In turn, would this make it morally right and justified if the government cut off federal funding and assistance toward Arizona for biting the hand that feeds them?

collegeboy64

Happens all the time. If a state does not raise its drinking age to 21..BAM.. uncle sam cuts off the federal highway money

If a state does not conform to the federal education standards/curriculum....BAM.. uncle sam cuts off the federal education money

Keep in mind that the fed govt originally confiscated that money from the citizens of the various states (i.e. what hand is feeding whom?). Then ransoms it back if the state complies with the feds mandates.

Whatever happened to the President of the United States being:

A. the President of ALL the people/states

B. a unifying force in the country

Obama has obviously taken sides in this. I was revolted to see him standing next the president of mexico tag teaming Arizona. Mexico has VERY strict immigration laws and enforces them vigorously. Why the hell is our president siding with a foriegn president against one of our states. :evil:

[QUOTE="Ultimas_Blade"]

Call their bluff, if AZ turns off the power, ROLL IN THE CALIFORNIA NATIONAL GUARD. We'll see how long this stupid law will hold then.

Don't punish the immigrants, punish the EMPLOYERS, I'll pay $3/tomato. The current cost is artificial anyhow because US citizens aren't working these jobs.

majwill24

So when an entity responds in kind with economic pressure, you want to take it to the next level and use military force.....

Haha Arizona is awesome. I fully support them and their attempts to keep illegal immigrants out of the state.

Haha Arizona is awesome. I fully support them and their attempts to keep illegal immigrants out of the state.

EVOLV3

The AZ Law is Racial Profiling clear as day. Ultimas_Blade

[QUOTE="EVOLV3"]

Haha Arizona is awesome. I fully support them and their attempts to keep illegal immigrants out of the state.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="EVOLV3"]

Haha Arizona is awesome. I fully support them and their attempts to keep illegal immigrants out of the state.

psychobrew

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="Pixel-Pirate"]but the difference I see here is that AZ would be punishing and hurting innocent californians, and thats worse than what LA is doing.

Pixel-Pirate

Calif would also be hurting people in AZ through the boycott
(down rev., lost jobs, etc)

I am not responsible for what LA does, but I live in california. Why should I, someone who lives in the state but not in LA, be punished for what LA does? Or are we assuming the consequences of the rolling blackouts caused by arizona will not be felt by any neighboring cities?

I'm not justifying what LA propouses. I just don't think AZ's rebuttal is acceptable.

As you oppose the AZ immigration law, your concept of what is acceptable is dubious at best.

Hmm. I'm sure the Arizona Power Companies will be perfectly happy to lose the Los Angeles money that is paying for that electricity, in addition to the Arizona citizens who will have to pay extra for their electricity, because their power bills are no longer being subsidized by Los Angeles.

You can disagree with a law but you don't boycott the state. I say Arizona LET EM HAVE IT!

Hmm. I'm sure the Arizona Power Companies will be perfectly happy to lose the Los Angeles money that is paying for that electricity, in addition to the Arizona citizens who will have to pay extra for their electricity, because their power bills are no longer being subsidized by Los Angeles.

swamprat_basic

huh? LA's power company the DWP owns part of the generators in Arizona. LA is getting power from Arizona. not Arizona getting power from LA. i hope AZ pulls the plug on LA ( i myself live in Los Angeles) to teach my stupid city council and my very stupid can speak with out a teleprompter in front of him a lesson

This is pure sabre-rattling...Arizona needs LA money just like LA needs Arizona power

But, in the event it is not just boasting...BRING IT ON!

The New Civil War is here, folks! And it is starting out West!

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEHAAAAAAAAAAAWWW!

mrbojangles25

thats what i was thinking all this time

The tempur tantrum situation.. this shouldnt even be a part of the immigration law. This is a seperate issue. This is the immature nature of the bad politicians , advocated by special interest having too much paid free time

Arizona's threat and LA's boycott are stupid. Look just because people don't like a state's law doesn't mean they should try to undermine its economy. The boycott will hurt ordinary Arizonans and the shut off will hurt ordinary LA residents. Politicians are feuding and hurting innocent people who have nothing to do with the laws or the boycotts. Ridiculous.

I think both sides should back down. The economic war hurts innocent people. Elraptor