406 wrote:I should apologize to Gusto for steering your thread "off topic," on the plus side you have more post and views than most tr's!
No worries, there. It's always interesting when people get passionate about something, but like I heard in the movie, "Opinions are like a**holes, everyone's got one, and they all stink."
That said, my stinky opinion goes like this. First off, anytime you put large amounts a people into a "group," whether it be by ethnicity or whatever, the individual is always sacrificed. To simply say, "Hispanics are the problem" or "illegals are the problem," is a pretty broad and somewhat rediculous statement.
Obviously most of the people who are seen at the areas closest to the foothills are going to be Hispanic because that reflects the local population. I don't know what percent of Azusa is Hispanic, but it has to be around or over 50%, so just by shear numbers you're more likely to see Hispanics there than anyone else. And what percent of Los Angeles is Hispanic? The numbers have to be pretty high.
As for illegal or legal, this is just another oversimplification. There are plenty of illegals here who are hard working. Some who even have sons and daughters in the military, I might add. Up until recently there was never and government push for these people to be legalized. It was always an "accepted" thing in areas like Los Angeles and California. Then, ever since 9/11 and the "terrorists within our borders" mentality," it seems like every illegal alien has been a scapegoat for all of America's problems.
I read somewhere back in the 70's there was actually a push BY our government to get folks from Mexico to come here and work in the fields of California, so I guess a lot of whether it's beneficial to have illegals or not depends on America's economic standpoint at the time - not that I"m agreeing with that mentality, by the way. Even if they did - and I don't even think it's possible by the way - round up every single illegal in this country and sent them back to their native land, then people would start complaining about how much more expensive things would become. Farmers, store and restaurant owners, etc. would have to hire people at higher rates, which in turn would cost the consumer more $$$. Then people could start complaining about that too.
On a final note, I would have to agree with a previous poster about teaching people that putting trash on the ground is wrong and just how destructive it is. This type of behavior is a LEARNED activity, and people need to be educated about it. ALL PEOPLE. Kids see their parents do it, so they don't see anything wrong with it.
I would say it's a safe conjecture that there's always going to be that 10% that try to screw things up. Everyone knows who I'm talking about... The guy that swerves in and out of traffic, the person that talks during the movie, the person that throws trash on the ground. It doesn't matter what ethnicity, I've met people of all races who fit each one of those descriptions. Obviously the goal of the forest service has its work cut out for them...
Ultimately, I believe, the public doesn't care enough about these areas. Look at the budgets for the forest service, national parks, and state parks system compared to other areas of government spending.... Heck, even California's new budget proposal for education places it somewhere around 49th in the country.
http://www.federalbudget.com/
http://home.nps.gov/applications/releas ... cfm?ID=721
Change has to start somewhere...
Gusto