Cliff Winston & "That Other Board"

[mostb1]

(continued from previous post)

Back to "The Beat'. No, David, you obviously have no knowledge of the sale. There are no "terms and conditions" that Clear Channel has allowed on any alleged service mark they claim they may have for the term 'The Beat' for 'The Beat" Los Angeles. Again, you don't have any first hand knowledge of this and you are way out of your league on it. So the only one who is failing to understand and digging a deeper hole is you.

Again, David. The sale of The Beat was technically made to AMFM, NOT Clear Channel. The "surviving" entity was not formed until after the close of the deal for 'The Beat' Los Angeles. Again, you just don't know the details of the deal, do you?

As for the flip of frequencies date, that deal was not made until AFTER Radio One had announced their purchase of the intellectual property of 'The Beat' and the 100.3 transmitter. They later amended the deal to include the lease of the studios on Wilshire (where Mega and The Beat were) which Clear Channel still holds the lease on today. You know 'amend' a deal just like Citidel and ABC are doing now. So, no, all terms and conditions (details) ARE NOT layed out the same at the beginning of a deal as they are when the transaction is completed. Just two examples for you, David. Again, you are wrong.

I don't need to do a service mark search over 6 years after a deal was made for 'The Beat' Los Angeles. What you see today did not pertain to this deal in 2000. If you knew anything about the deal, you'd know that. Again, you just don't have the first hand knowledge of this deal and your posts get sillier each time.

AMFM and Clear Channel may have had a merger agreement on paper (although it was really a sale to Clear Channel) but under the review of the DOJ, Clear Channel was required to do much more than they expected to make the merger "legally" acceptable.

All you end up doing, David, is coming back and covering up another statement that I busted. I'll be happy to continue this forever since it is quite obvious you don't know a damn thing about the deal and many other statements you've made are just downright untruths (lies).

 

[SuperRadioFan]

WOW

Kudos, Glenn.

You know The Emperor Wears No Clothes.
David's credibility continues to be shot down. NO ONE EXCEPT GOD can be in all places at all times, can know even the most intimate details of all radio-related transactions (besides his own company) of other companies with which he is not associated. No one EXCEPT GOD can spend countless hours and post countless words on almost all forums associated with Radio-Info, other radio-related websites.
It's just not credible..... And frankly, even GOD has better things to spend time on. And anyone who claims to spend hours in airports typing responses to every opinion opposed to his own needs to get a life IN MY OPINION. And if that's the pinnacle of his life experience, I do feel sorry for him. Because in this World we all live in, all the problems and opinions addressed here do not amount to more than a hill of beans in the broader scope of this universe.

Regarding radio broadcasters aiding and abetting illegal immigrants --- err - aliens, I'm afraid that a horrible catastrophe will happen before the clamps are applied to such companies, and before the borders of the US are controlled in the manner in which they need to be.

 

[OldGringo]

Illegal alien "squatters" will not be given any form of amnesty including any path to citizenship. Congress will not go Democrat in 2006. Even if the House has a slight majority Democrat, those gains will be short lived. There are enough good Republicans and a few scared Democrats in the House to stop any Nancy Pelosi San Francisco values agenda. The Democrat party is on its way to extinction, anyway. There will be no amnesty bill that will even come up let alone pass with just two years to go before a Presidential election regardless of who is in congress. Now, go and watch the border fence signing on Thursday. Although we don't expect Bush (who is running an illegal parallel government to create a North American Union http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52576
and should be impeached for it) to build it, with the bill signed we can force it to be built through the United States courts. Of course, the fence should be electrified but maybe I'm just asking for too much. I don't know why but I suddenly just have a taste for deep fried Mexican food.

While this is not an immigration forum, the fact still remains that illgals do not participate in Arbitron ratings, so the points you are making are pollitical and not radio related in any form.

When you have significant bipartisan supprt for a moderate immigration reform bill, driven by Kennedy and McCain, we will see that most illegals will be given some status based on emplyment, family in the US, etc. It woud absolutely destroy the economy to remove 11 million illgal immigrants (per FAIR, an immgration reform organization).

The fence will not affect 1) persons already here, 2) family reunification and, 3) radio listening levels.

 

[OldGringo]

Back to "The Beat'. No, David, you obviously have no knowledge of the sale. There are no "terms and conditions" that Clear Channel has allowed on any alleged service mark they claim they may have for the term 'The Beat' for 'The Beat" Los Angeles. Again, you don't have any first hand knowledge of this and you are way out of your league on it. So the only one who is failing to understand and digging a deeper hole is you.

Again, David. The sale of The Beat was technically made to AMFM, NOT Clear Channel. The "surviving" entity was not formed until after the close of the deal for 'The Beat' Los Angeles. Again, you just don't know the details of the deal, do you?

I am not disputing the dates. What I am telling you is that the merger was inplanning waaaaaaaaaaaaaay before the merger, and one of the things planned were the spin-offs. In such a deal, the two parties together plan for the eventual merged company, and that includes what to do with assets that can not be trnsferred. If you look at the 10-k reports on CCU from back then, you can see how the divestitures were planned well in advance by AMFM as licencee and CCU as the merger partner.

BIA lists Clear as the "buyer" at the deal date of 10/99. That was because the deal was for 100% of AMFM to be merged. However, to make the merger doable, nearly 100 stations were spun off, all pre-arranged between the parties and revealed in the public documents relating to DOJ, FCC adn SEC filings.

From Medialife Magazine....

"Clear Channel management and industry analysts agree that approval of the deal, which stands to leave the combined company with 955 stations, will hinge on divestiture of 125 stations. "For Sale" signs will go up on stations in Los Angeles, Dallas, Houston and San Francisco and also in mid-sized markets like Denver, Cleveland, Cincinnati and Raleigh-Durham.
But an easy sell is predicted. "The bigger issue already is who picks up the stations," says one market analyst. "There’s some terrific assets for sale, and if one player bought the package of 125, it could quickly become one of the top players in the industry."
Rumblings about the merger have been heard for a year. Then, during the last week in September, AMFM and Clear Channel stock rose, possibly reflecting a leak about the sale. "

You really can't believe that both Clear and AMFM were not planning for the divestitures right from the beginning, can you?

Look at the 10-Q quarterly for Q1 of 2001 at http://www.clearchannel.com/Investors/Documents/14.pdf to see how they were handling the merger after it went through.

From a source unrelated to the companies:

"The Double Merger

In a $56 billion deal announced in October, AMFM intends to merge with San Antonio–based Clear Channel Communications. If approved by the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice--an extremely likely prospect given that a number of similar mergers have received the green light in the past few years--the newly merged company will possess 830 radio stations in 32 countries, 19 television stations affiliated with major U.S. networks, and 425,000 billboards worldwide.

The joint press release Clear Channel and AMFM issued to announce the proposed merger was jubilant and unabashedly monopolistic in tone. Lowry Mays, chairman and CEO of Clear Channel, is quoted as saying: "By combining Clear Channel's broad portfolio of out-of-home assets with AMFM's leading portfolio of well-clustered, well-managed, highly rated, and geographically diversified radio operations, including a significant major-market presence, we will not only be the undisputed industry leader, but will have the financial, programming, management, and distribution resources to best serve the needs of this exciting, growing, global marketplace."

To comply with regulatory guidelines, Clear Channel may be forced to sell off approximately 125 radio stations before approval of the merger is granted. In a wacky episode of double-speak, Mays says in the press release: "We believe the merger and the divestiture of certain stations may create new acquisition opportunities for minority-owned broadcasting entities, a sector that Clear Channel is committed to supporting." If the divested stations are acquired by minority owners, Clear Channel will receive kudos from the FCC without granting any concessions that carry real weight for communities of color. The resulting small stations will be unable to compete with the media monopolies that surround them, and Clear Channel will continue to "deliver" African-American listeners to advertisers that buy time on white-owned networks and stations. In the absence of any legal responsibility to provide public service programming to its listeners, Clear Channel is certain to reject any ethical obligation to do so.

 

[mostb1]

Re: WOW

Kudos, Glenn.

You know The Emperor Wears No Clothes.
David's credibility continues to be shot down. NO ONE EXCEPT GOD can be in all places at all times, can know even the most intimate details of all radio-related transactions (besides his own company) of other companies with which he is not associated. No one EXCEPT GOD can spend countless hours and post countless words on almost all forums associated with Radio-Info, other radio-related websites.
It's just not credible..... And frankly, even GOD has better things to spend time on. And anyone who claims to spend hours in airports typing responses to every opinion opposed to his own needs to get a life IN MY OPINION. And if that's the pinnacle of his life experience, I do feel sorry for him. Because in this World we all live in, all the problems and opinions addressed here do not amount to more than a hill of beans in the broader scope of this universe.

Regarding radio broadcasters aiding and abetting illegal immigrants --- err - aliens, I'm afraid that a horrible catastrophe will happen before the clamps are applied to such companies, and before the borders of the US are controlled in the manner in which they need to be.

I gave him a warning with his first post when he challenged what I knew. If he wants to go toe to toe on this, I'm happy to do it.

I am quite sure that it is going to take an event much worse than 9/11 to finally "close" the gaping holes in our borders. It may be the only thing that will really wake up America and have the politicians scrambling to do what they should have done in the 70's.

Although we all know most illegal aliens come here to work, they bring (diseases, drugs, crime, traffic, pollution) and take a lot more (jobs, depressed wages, taxpayer dollars for services from Hospitals to Schools, money out of our economy) than than they help the United States.

There are plenty of other broadcast companies guilty of aiding and abbeting illegal aliens but none to the extent of Univison.

 

[zumahans]

----> The fence will not affect 1) persons already here, 2) family reunification and, 3) radio listening levels.

What if XETRA connects their ground radials to it?

 

[OldGringo]

(continued from previous post).

Life is going to be hell for Univison and it's illegal alien listeners from now on. And we have Univision to thank for bringing the illegal alien issue to at or near the top of the most important problems in America of all law abiding VOTING Americans (that includes U.S. citizen Hispanic voters - but of course we know they don't vote as a block and vote less than other groups. Just the facts, please.). Thank you.

No Hispanic media company counts on illegals listening or viewing because the ratings companies do not pick them up in their surveys for the reasons I already stated.

What 36 million Hispanics are you speaking of? There will soon be 20 million mostly Hispanic illegal aliens who will be removed from the United States.

There are about 11 million illegal immigrants in total in the US, per all reputable sources, ranging from FAIR to the Pew Center to what was formerly the INS. Of these, about 8 million are Hispanic. With around 43 million Hispanics here now, even if every illegal immigrant were deported, which will not happen, there would still be about 36 million.

I'd hate to be the one buying Univision when the future for much of its current and future target audience is going to be seriously eroded. But of course, Univision, as it is today, is going to broken up after the sale is complete, anyway. Now there is even talk of Tribune's tv stations and Univision's tv stations under the same owner. The radio stations, of course, will be sold off onto the trash heap.

None of the measured audience will be affected, so any changes in immigration legislation will not affect the ratings.

And, in a public statement at the LA Children's Hospital fund raising dinner about 3 weeks ago, it was stated by Haim Saban that radio would not be sold. So much for that disinformation.

What "entire community" perceived the legislation to be anti-Hispanic? Most everyone I know - including many Hispanics and the vast majority of Americans - believed it was to solve the problem of CRIMINALS (Illegal Aliens) who do not belong within our borders. Of course, the laws are already in place to take care of this problem. The feds just need to be forced to enforce those laws. We don't need any new laws to oust illegal aliens from the United States.

Most Hispanics believe that HR 4437 would result in all Hispanics being discriminated against out of fear by employers, merchants, etc., being accused of criminal aid to illgal immigrants under the terms of the bill. This is why there was near 100% rejection by Hispanics of this draconian bill.

Univision, along with many other companies such as Home Depot and Miller Beer, donated much of the money to organize and promote the illegal alien marches.

There is no truth to this. While many personalites in Hispanic media supported the marches in protest against HR 4437, the marches were simple assemblies of people, and there was no "central committee" or organizing board; the movement was made up of millions of individuals and many different community organizations of all kinds.

Many of those marching were illegal. Stop your outright lie. It was easily noticed from the crowd

How is an illegal immigrant different in apearance from a legal one? I have worked in Spanish langauge media for over 40 years, and I can not tell the difference as it is only a matter of a piece of paper, not of any other quality.

1. Now lets get to David's San Antonio vs. Los Angeles nonsense. Easily interpreted. San Antonio has far fewer illegal aliens than Los Angeles and more long term residents. Also, it is cool in San Antonio to claim, even if you are Hispanic, that you are not ethnic and/or that you can't speak Spanish.

San Antonio has about 1/10th the population in its metro as LA. So the answer to this is, "duh."

A huge percentage of SA Hispanics do not speak Spanish... starting with most of the staffs of the top 2 Hispanic stations there, KKBT and KXTN. Nice try, though.

2. Assimilation. The difference between what you are trying to spin from the past and what is occurring today is those coming to America in the past WANTED to be good American citizens. They came here legally and wanted to become part of American society.

When the Germans and Irish and Italians came, there were no immigration laws... none (except a nasty thing about Asians in the late 1800's) existed until the 1920's. And the immigrants came to escape poverty and opression first, and then became Americans, second. Same thing happens today.

NO DAVID, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT and ILLEGAL ALIEN DO NOT MEAN THE SAME THING.

Yes, they do. I already explained this. Both are illegal, and both are aliens. Simple.

Orlando: No one ever claimed or posted Puerto Ricans are illegal. Why are you even bringing that up? There are plenty of Mexicans and Central Americans now in Orlando (legal and illegal). Of course, it isn't full of illegal aliens like Los Angeles. But illegals do participate with Arbitron including Mexicans.

Orlando Hispanics are 92% Puerto Rican. the next group in size is Cuban, another group that is 100% legal.

No illegal will give out address, name, personal data, etc., to a stranger on the phone. So they do not particpate in TV or radio ratings.

Much of the music initially played on Latino 96.3 was from Puerto Rican artists. And Los Angeles certainly isn't a huge Puerto Rican market. Although they are playing more than 50% hip-hop now, I wouldn't say those in San Antonio with a Mexican background don't like a form of music that Puerto Ricans have been producing (Reggaetón) just like Los Angeles. Cox has tailored Power in San Antonio to the local community just as any other radio station they have. What you got caught on was posting that Cox doesn't target Hispanics - with no distinction of their background - and you were wrong.

Reggaetón is pretty universal. While most of the production is Pueto Rican, the genre is from Panama, and is wildly popular from Chile to Chicago.

The two Spanish FMs in Orlando are based on salsa and bachata... neither form has ever had even a niche appeal in Mexico or among Mexican immigrants to the US. This is why the mentioned stations do not appeal to Mexicans. Some genres, like reggaetón, pop and ballads, are universal in appeal, but regional Mexican is not, nor is Caribbean tropical.

WRONG. Illegal Aliens do participate in Arbitron just as they have in the U.S. Census. In fact, so many illegal aliens have participated in the U.S. Census, which includes one's address just like Arbitron, that it has changed congressional districts.

The 200 Census did not ask address. The forms are online (long and short) and only included ZIP Code... which was the data used for redistricting, not names addresses.

Further, the Census was not taken anonymously by phone. Aribtron calls and asks a lot of data. The Census did a huge campaign to inform the Hispanic public that there was no connection with the INS... illegals do not participate in Arbitron in any signifcant quantity.

So yes, Illegal Aliens undeniably do participate in Arbitron both directly and indirectly (of which David will continue to deny). Illegal Aliens and the jackpot babies they have had count for much of Univison (and former company names) stations' ratings gains over the last nearly three decades . The only thing I may add, which will make David happy I am sure, is illegal aliens are undercounted by the U.S. Census and thus by Arbitron and other ratings services.

They simply don't participate in any significant quantity and definitely do not influence ratings.

 

[OldGringo]

----> The fence will not affect 1) persons already here, 2) family reunification and, 3) radio listening levels.

What if XETRA connects their ground radials to it?

I think the human rights folks would object to electrifying the fence.

 

[mostb1]

Back to "The Beat'. No, David, you obviously have no knowledge of the sale. There are no "terms and conditions" that Clear Channel has allowed on any alleged service mark they claim they may have for the term 'The Beat' for 'The Beat" Los Angeles. Again, you don't have any first hand knowledge of this and you are way out of your league on it. So the only one who is failing to understand and digging a deeper hole is you.

Again, David. The sale of The Beat was technically made to AMFM, NOT Clear Channel. The "surviving" entity was not formed until after the close of the deal for 'The Beat' Los Angeles. Again, you just don't know the details of the deal, do you?

I am not disputing the dates. What I am telling you is that the merger was inplanning waaaaaaaaaaaaaay before the merger, and one of the things planned were the spin-offs. In such a deal, the two parties together plan for the eventual merged company, and that includes what to do with assets that can not be trnsferred. If you look at the 10-k reports on CCU from back then, you can see how the divestitures were planned well in advance by AMFM as licencee and CCU as the merger partner.

BIA lists Clear as the "buyer" at the deal date of 10/99. That was because the deal was for 100% of AMFM to be merged. However, to make the merger doable, nearly 100 stations were spun off, all pre-arranged between the parties and revealed in the public documents relating to DOJ, FCC adn SEC filings.

From Medialife Magazine....

"Clear Channel management and industry analysts agree that approval of the deal, which stands to leave the combined company with 955 stations, will hinge on divestiture of 125 stations. "For Sale" signs will go up on stations in Los Angeles, Dallas, Houston and San Francisco and also in mid-sized markets like Denver, Cleveland, Cincinnati and Raleigh-Durham.
But an easy sell is predicted. "The bigger issue already is who picks up the stations," says one market analyst. "There’s some terrific assets for sale, and if one player bought the package of 125, it could quickly become one of the top players in the industry."
Rumblings about the merger have been heard for a year. Then, during the last week in September, AMFM and Clear Channel stock rose, possibly reflecting a leak about the sale. "

You really can't believe that both Clear and AMFM were not planning for the divestitures right from the beginning, can you?

Look at the 10-Q quarterly for Q1 of 2001 at http://www.clearchannel.com/Investors/Documents/14.pdf to see how they were handling the merger after it went through.

From a source unrelated to the companies:

"The Double Merger

In a $56 billion deal announced in October, AMFM intends to merge with San Antonio–based Clear Channel Communications. If approved by the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice--an extremely likely prospect given that a number of similar mergers have received the green light in the past few years--the newly merged company will possess 830 radio stations in 32 countries, 19 television stations affiliated with major U.S. networks, and 425,000 billboards worldwide.

The joint press release Clear Channel and AMFM issued to announce the proposed merger was jubilant and unabashedly monopolistic in tone. Lowry Mays, chairman and CEO of Clear Channel, is quoted as saying: "By combining Clear Channel's broad portfolio of out-of-home assets with AMFM's leading portfolio of well-clustered, well-managed, highly rated, and geographically diversified radio operations, including a significant major-market presence, we will not only be the undisputed industry leader, but will have the financial, programming, management, and distribution resources to best serve the needs of this exciting, growing, global marketplace."

To comply with regulatory guidelines, Clear Channel may be forced to sell off approximately 125 radio stations before approval of the merger is granted. In a wacky episode of double-speak, Mays says in the press release: "We believe the merger and the divestiture of certain stations may create new acquisition opportunities for minority-owned broadcasting entities, a sector that Clear Channel is committed to supporting." If the divested stations are acquired by minority owners, Clear Channel will receive kudos from the FCC without granting any concessions that carry real weight for communities of color. The resulting small stations will be unable to compete with the media monopolies that surround them, and Clear Channel will continue to "deliver" African-American listeners to advertisers that buy time on white-owned networks and stations. In the absence of any legal responsibility to provide public service programming to its listeners, Clear Channel is certain to reject any ethical obligation to do so.

Wrong. The fence will affect people who are here if they try and leave the United States. It will make it that much tougher for them to return. And we do know of plenty that come and go illegally as many of them have been caught over and over. There is no "family" reunification of illegal aliens unless they are sending for the rest of their tan clan to come here illegally. ALL illegal immigration effects the amount of radio listening just as it has affected the population. Your nonsense is ludicrous.

The McCain-Kennedy Amnesty bill is dead. There is no bi-partisan support for it and that is why it did even get presented in the House. Kenney is to the left of the left and McCain is a senile old man RINO. There is and was nothing moderate about that sham amnesty bill that was exposed for what it was. Key word "WAS".

Illegal aliens will be given NO type of status based on employment. They will be asked to leave the United States. Anyone that doesn't leave will be forcibly removed.

Ridding America of illegal aliens will NOT destroy the economy. That's a complete lie. I'd laugh at your statement if it wasn't so ridiculous. We have plenty of willing Americans (students, older Americans, those out of work) who will happily do any job for a fair wage. A fair American wage, not one driven down by illegal aliens who allow themselves to become slaves to employers.

WRONG again, David. It's not 11 Million, it's 20 Million or more. http://michellemalkin.com/archives/001131.htm
I can post MANY more links proving you are wrong for as long as you want to present you b.s. about this subject.
Your also misrepresenting the figure from FAIR. But misrepresenting the facts is your forte, isn't it?

The FACT remains that illegal aliens DO participate in Arbritron surveys. So the points you are making are just plain lies. And yes it does pertain to radio and especially in Los Angeles. PROVE ME WRONG. You can't as you are lying again.

Clear Channel had no intention of having to give up as much as they had to. I never posted that they had no intention of giving up anything. Clean your eyeballs out and read what I wrote. I don't need to see poorly written articles based on nonsense dispensed by radio executives. I don't care about how they handled the merger after it was completed as that is not what we've been discussing here. I know what went on and how DURING the period of time from when it was announced until the control of the last station was seized by Clear Channel. Again, you are backpedaling on your nonsense since you don't know what you are posting about.

 

[mostb1]

----> The fence will not affect 1) persons already here, 2) family reunification and, 3) radio listening levels.

What if XETRA connects their ground radials to it?

I think the human rights folks would object to electrifying the fence.

I object to Human Rights folks aiding and abbeting illegal aliens by giving them any kind of food, water, shelter, directions etc. as they do on our southern border. They should be arrested and tried for crimes against the United States of America.

 

[OldGringo]

ALL illegal immigration effects the amount of radio listening just as it has affected the population. Your nonsense is ludicrous.

I am snipping the immigration stuff that is irrelvant to radio. Our moderators have already been most clear that this is not the place for this.

Illegals do not get proprotionally represented in Arbitron or, worse, Nielsen. So their listening is not reflected in ratings.

Ridding America of illegal aliens will NOT destroy the economy. That's a complete lie. I'd laugh at your statement if it wasn't so ridiculous. We have plenty of willing Americans (students, older Americans, those out of work) who will happily do any job for a fair wage. A fair American wage, not one driven down by illegal aliens who allow themselves to become slaves to employers.

If you have studied economics, you know any society has a residual level of functional unemplyment. The USA is currently near that level, so there are not 10 or 11 million unemplyed to take the jobs illgals may be doing.

The FACT remains that illegal aliens DO participate in Arbritron surveys. So the points you are making are just plain lies. And yes it does pertain to radio and especially in Los Angeles. PROVE ME WRONG. You can't as you are lying again.

I have proven it myself, with an extensive proprietary study based on empirical evidence given me years ago by the supervisor of the Arbitron call center. Very few illegals will give address, name, family size, income, etc. to a blind phone telemarketer.

Clear Channel had no intention of having to give up as much as they had to. I never posted that they had no intention of giving up anything. Clean your eyeballs out and read what I wrote. I don't need to see poorly written articles based on nonsense dispensed by radio executives. I don't care about how they handled the merger after it was completed as that is not what we've been discussing here. I know what went on and how DURING the period of time from when it was announced until the control of the last station was seized by Clear Channel. Again, you are backpedaling on your nonsense since you don't know what you are posting about.

When the sale was announced, it was stated that an extensive number of spinoffs were going to be required to merge, and that such spinoffs were alredy identified. In fac, Lowry Mays stated that this might give an opportunity to minority and smaller broadcasters to buy those stations... with KKBT being a prime example.

 

[BACKnUSSR]

I am snipping the immigration stuff that is irrelvant to radio. Our moderators have already been most clear that this is not the place for this.

Illegals do not get proprotionally represented in Arbitron or, worse, Nielsen. So their listening is not reflected in ratings.

True, for Arbitron, but even you cannot accurately measure how they effect radio, either as consumers, or by influencing "legals" to listen. If a few non-speaking "illegals" inhabite a residence also occupied by a legal Arbitron diary keeping family.....might the listening habits be reflected there?

Also, do you see any coincidence timewise in the ratings success of non-english broadcasting stations and the explosion of illegal immigration in the past several years?

There is certainly a relevant radio discussion here (although, probably not in the Cliff Winston thread).

If you have studied economics, you know any society has a residual level of functional unemplyment. The USA is currently near that level, so there are not 10 or 11 million unemplyed to take the jobs illgals may be doing.

1) I actually have a post graduate degree in economics.
2) You are supposing that all 10 or 11 million illegals are employed. They are not.
So you might want to raise that unemployment number a bit.
3) Employed or not, illegals do not contribute back to the coffers of government, but do enjoy many
of the services provided. So by simply being present in such substantial numbers, they further
impact the economy in a negative way.

Think of it as an airplane, which can take off with approximately 10,000 lbs of weight. The "residual level of functional unemployment" that you reference may be an additional 200 lbs that wasnt accounted for but that
the aircraft can handle okay. It takes off nonetheless.
You dont want to be on that plane to find out there were another 5,000 lbs of folks hiding in the back.
It might at that point be too much for the airplane (economy) to bear.

 

[OldGringo]

True, for Arbitron, but even you cannot accurately measure how they effect radio, either as consumers, or by influencing "legals" to listen. If a few non-speaking "illegals" inhabite a residence also occupied by a legal Arbitron diary keeping family.....might the listening habits be reflected there?

That is a good point. There are many multigenerational households (and Arbitron measures household members, not random individuals) but in most cases, if someone is legal, they have emplyed family reunification laws to legalize all other family members.

Also, do you see any coincidence timewise in the ratings success of non-english broadcasting stations and the explosion of illegal immigration in the past several years?

Most of the growth in the last 10 months has been due to Arbitron adding a stratification variable to achieve proportionality between English Dominant and Spanish dominant Hisapnics. In every one of the markets that did this, the percentage of Spanish dominants increased significantly and, by being sampled and weighted into proportionalty the wobbles have flattened considerably.

The proportion of Spanish dominants has increased about 20% on the average. This increases the shaares of Spanish langauge stations, of course. This was not done before as Arbitron had to get the only available data, which is from Nielsen, and then get the methodology approved by the MRC... it took about 6 years to do.

Outside this change, the very small population adjustments each Fall have not really affected listening levels for those stations.

You can see the percentages of Spanish and English dominant at http://www.arbitron.com/radio_stations/hisplang.asp

1) I actually have a post graduate degree in economics.
2) You are supposing that all 10 or 11 million illegals are employed. They are not.
So you might want to raise that unemployment number a bit.

Yeah, there are children (but most are legal as they were born here. And there are unemplyed working age family members, but in families of recent immigrants all the members that are of working age tend to work. So you are right, the whole 11 million is not in the workforce.... subtracting any young illegal children, stay-at-home wives and such, the figure is likely not identitcal to the total... but closer than taht of the general poulation who do not work at such low paying jobs that everyone works, some at more than one job.

3) Employed or not, illegals do not contribute back to the coffers of government, but do enjoy many
of the services provided. So by simply being present in such substantial numbers, they further
impact the economy in a negative way.

The contributions, given the income level, are fairly comparable to non-immigrants. They pay sales tax, property tax via the landlord's tax liability, they contribute (more than is suspected) FICA and pay income taxes, gas tax, etc. Most low income non-immigrants do not put in what they take out, either... which is why we have a progressive tax rate on income. I understand that immigrants indivusually do not contribute in proportion to the benefits they get like schools, ehalth, etc. But the indirect contribution to the economy via the production of wealth through labor is considerable. Also worth considering is that this group is very young and is going to be paying in to Social Security at the same time that the Baby Boomers are taking out. The native born American birth rate can not sustain Social Security via a younger generation that pays for the older one.

 

[mostb1]

(continued from previous post).

Life is going to be hell for Univison and it's illegal alien listeners from now on. And we have Univision to thank for bringing the illegal alien issue to at or near the top of the most important problems in America of all law abiding VOTING Americans (that includes U.S. citizen Hispanic voters - but of course we know they don't vote as a block and vote less than other groups. Just the facts, please.). Thank you.

No Hispanic media company counts on illegals listening or viewing because the ratings companies do not pick them up in their surveys for the reasons I already stated.

What 36 million Hispanics are you speaking of? There will soon be 20 million mostly Hispanic illegal aliens who will be removed from the United States.

There are about 11 million illegal immigrants in total in the US, per all reputable sources, ranging from FAIR to the Pew Center to what was formerly the INS. Of these, about 8 million are Hispanic. With around 43 million Hispanics here now, even if every illegal immigrant were deported, which will not happen, there would still be about 36 million.

I'd hate to be the one buying Univision when the future for much of its current and future target audience is going to be seriously eroded. But of course, Univision, as it is today, is going to broken up after the sale is complete, anyway. Now there is even talk of Tribune's tv stations and Univision's tv stations under the same owner. The radio stations, of course, will be sold off onto the trash heap.

None of the measured audience will be affected, so any changes in immigration legislation will not affect the ratings.

And, in a public statement at the LA Children's Hospital fund raising dinner about 3 weeks ago, it was stated by Haim Saban that radio would not be sold. So much for that disinformation.

What "entire community" perceived the legislation to be anti-Hispanic? Most everyone I know - including many Hispanics and the vast majority of Americans - believed it was to solve the problem of CRIMINALS (Illegal Aliens) who do not belong within our borders. Of course, the laws are already in place to take care of this problem. The feds just need to be forced to enforce those laws. We don't need any new laws to oust illegal aliens from the United States.

Most Hispanics believe that HR 4437 would result in all Hispanics being discriminated against out of fear by employers, merchants, etc., being accused of criminal aid to illgal immigrants under the terms of the bill. This is why there was near 100% rejection by Hispanics of this draconian bill.

Univision, along with many other companies such as Home Depot and Miller Beer, donated much of the money to organize and promote the illegal alien marches.

There is no truth to this. While many personalites in Hispanic media supported the marches in protest against HR 4437, the marches were simple assemblies of people, and there was no "central committee" or organizing board; the movement was made up of millions of individuals and many different community organizations of all kinds.

Many of those marching were illegal. Stop your outright lie. It was easily noticed from the crowd

How is an illegal immigrant different in apearance from a legal one? I have worked in Spanish langauge media for over 40 years, and I can not tell the difference as it is only a matter of a piece of paper, not of any other quality.

1. Now lets get to David's San Antonio vs. Los Angeles nonsense. Easily interpreted. San Antonio has far fewer illegal aliens than Los Angeles and more long term residents. Also, it is cool in San Antonio to claim, even if you are Hispanic, that you are not ethnic and/or that you can't speak Spanish.

San Antonio has about 1/10th the population in its metro as LA. So the answer to this is, "duh."

A huge percentage of SA Hispanics do not speak Spanish... starting with most of the staffs of the top 2 Hispanic stations there, KKBT and KXTN. Nice try, though.

2. Assimilation. The difference between what you are trying to spin from the past and what is occurring today is those coming to America in the past WANTED to be good American citizens. They came here legally and wanted to become part of American society.

When the Germans and Irish and Italians came, there were no immigration laws... none (except a nasty thing about Asians in the late 1800's) existed until the 1920's. And the immigrants came to escape poverty and opression first, and then became Americans, second. Same thing happens today.

NO DAVID, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT and ILLEGAL ALIEN DO NOT MEAN THE SAME THING.

Yes, they do. I already explained this. Both are illegal, and both are aliens. Simple.

Orlando: No one ever claimed or posted Puerto Ricans are illegal. Why are you even bringing that up? There are plenty of Mexicans and Central Americans now in Orlando (legal and illegal). Of course, it isn't full of illegal aliens like Los Angeles. But illegals do participate with Arbitron including Mexicans.

Orlando Hispanics are 92% Puerto Rican. the next group in size is Cuban, another group that is 100% legal.

No illegal will give out address, name, personal data, etc., to a stranger on the phone. So they do not particpate in TV or radio ratings.

Much of the music initially played on Latino 96.3 was from Puerto Rican artists. And Los Angeles certainly isn't a huge Puerto Rican market. Although they are playing more than 50% hip-hop now, I wouldn't say those in San Antonio with a Mexican background don't like a form of music that Puerto Ricans have been producing (Reggaetón) just like Los Angeles. Cox has tailored Power in San Antonio to the local community just as any other radio station they have. What you got caught on was posting that Cox doesn't target Hispanics - with no distinction of their background - and you were wrong.

Reggaetón is pretty universal. While most of the production is Pueto Rican, the genre is from Panama, and is wildly popular from Chile to Chicago.

The two Spanish FMs in Orlando are based on salsa and bachata... neither form has ever had even a niche appeal in Mexico or among Mexican immigrants to the US. This is why the mentioned stations do not appeal to Mexicans. Some genres, like reggaetón, pop and ballads, are universal in appeal, but regional Mexican is not, nor is Caribbean tropical.

WRONG. Illegal Aliens do participate in Arbitron just as they have in the U.S. Census. In fact, so many illegal aliens have participated in the U.S. Census, which includes one's address just like Arbitron, that it has changed congressional districts.

The 200 Census did not ask address. The forms are online (long and short) and only included ZIP Code... which was the data used for redistricting, not names addresses.

Further, the Census was not taken anonymously by phone. Aribtron calls and asks a lot of data. The Census did a huge campaign to inform the Hispanic public that there was no connection with the INS... illegals do not participate in Arbitron in any signifcant quantity.

So yes, Illegal Aliens undeniably do participate in Arbitron both directly and indirectly (of which David will continue to deny). Illegal Aliens and the jackpot babies they have had count for much of Univison (and former company names) stations' ratings gains over the last nearly three decades . The only thing I may add, which will make David happy I am sure, is illegal aliens are undercounted by the U.S. Census and thus by Arbitron and other ratings services.

They simply don't participate in any significant quantity and definitely do not influence ratings.

Let's see you've gone from they (illegal aliens) don't participate to they don't in any significant quantity. Make up your mind or at least make up a consistent story. Once I am through with you, you will be admitting the truth that there are a number of illegal aliens participating in Arbitron and other ratings services.

And of course illegal aliens do influence ratings - both radio and television. Without illegal aliens Univision would have ratings of just a fraction of what it does today. Anyone who would say otherwise is just downright being a liar.

I know how and what Arbitron calls and asks. I recently participated in a survey and gave a nice bump to my favorite stations. They certainly didn't ask if I was an illegal alien but some "invisible" people in my household may have been Hispanic. It's nice how they liked listening to conservative talkradio just like me
Arbitron what a crock of sh-t.

Hey, David. Shall we pull up your posts slamming the PPM from the past now that Univision has come on board?

I was not posting about the Spanish stations in Orlando. Only about Cox's Power 95.3 - a hip-hop station that has great appeal to Hispanics.

San Antonio. San Antonio does not have as many Spanish speaking dominant households by percentage vs. Los Angeles. So I am correct not you. Nice try but again you lose.

Illegal aliens give out their data all the time including over the phone. Unlawful banking companies, such as Wells Fargo, Citibank, Bank of America, Chase and many others are allowing illegals to open bank accounts with phony identification. Mortgage companies are allowing illegals to buy homes with the i.d.'s of American citizens. They in turn pack those homes with 15-25 people and non-domestic animals such as roosters and are turning places such as South Central Los Angeles into third world communities. Illegals have become much more bold as we've seen them at many protests - which they would be jailed for doing as non-citizens in Mexico. Since Mexico has been giving them out their phony Matricula Consular card they've even tried to legally buy guns here with the sham i.d..

Once again, Illegal Alien and Illegal Immigrant are NOT the same. All we have to do is examine two words. I'll be happy to again define them if you'd like to continue this. No, I don't need a definition from you since you again are posting lies.

 

[mostb1]

(continued from previous post)

You are trying to compare immigration from the 1600's when there wasn't even a United States of America through the early 1920's to today? GET REAL! And yes there was an immigration law enacted in 1875. Obviously you need a history lesson so I'll give it to you. During the 1850's, the America Party demanded laws to reduce immigration and to make it harder for foreigners to become citizens. In 1875, the United States passed its first restrictive immigration law. It prevented convicts and prostitutes from entering the country. During the late 1870's, Californians demanded laws to keep out Chinese immigrants who were accused of lowering wages and unfair business competition. They were also denounced as inassimilable and as racially inferior. DEJA VU from yellow to tan (of course, the ones now are now mostly coming illegally)!

No immigration laws were needed because the United States ENCOURAGED people to settle here. We needed to build a country. We don't need much immigration now. And any immigration that we do need we will control. We tell you when you can come here not you hop the fence as you please.

All of the legal "immigrants" who have EVER entered the United States of America prior to the 1970's EQUALS as many illegal aliens that have entered the United States from the 1970's through today. So how are you going to compare 200 years of immigration to 30 years of illegal aliens invading the United States - most of which has happened since the Clinton and George W. years?

Where many of the illegal aliens come from (Mexico) they are NOT in third world like poverty (all I have to do is see the GORDO illegals here to know that). There is no "oppression" in Mexico so no your statement is a COMPLETE LIE. There is NO correlation between illegal aliens of today and legal immigrants of yesterday and you should be ashamed of even writing such a moronic statement.

"The Guide for the Mexican Migrant," the 32-page book published by Mexico's Foreign Ministry uses simple language to offer information on safety, legal rights and living unobtrusively in America as an illegal alien. It tells how to dress like an American and blend in. So, yes, David, illegals do stand out by their appearance and dress. Even Mexico thinks so. I am so glad I was able to educate you today after your 40 years of disservice to American radio.

The great thing about America is you can lie all you want. Fortunately, with me around, you can't get away with it, David.
Miller Beer Sponsors Illegal Alien March w/ $30,000 http://www.boycottmillerbeer.com http://michellemalkin.com/archives/005845.htm
Of course there was collusion and organization between Spanish language radio and tv on-air people and the marches and their Aztlan-Mecha organizers http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004848.htm http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20060410-094710-4817r.htm
Tell us then why there was a press conference of varying hosts from Los Angels radio and tv? And why 10 Spanish language tv news personalities taped a promo aired on ALL Los Angeles Spanish tv stations? I'll be happy to post links to these as well.

Most of the people who went to the marches thought it was a big fiesta. They didn't have a clue about what they were protesting. Just a day to have some Corona's and piss on America.

Sorry, David, again you lie about HR4437. 53% of Hispanics in a Zogby poll are in favor of it. So where is your nearly 100% against it? Again, stop making up lies as I have the resources to bust them. http://www.mnforsustain.org/cis new_immigration_poll_may_3_2006.htm

May 1st was a great day. It showed that a "Day Without (Illegal) Immigrants" is EXACTLY what America wants (although we want much more than a day). America had no problems without them working. In fact, Los Angeles functioned much better without them. It was a day without traffic and business went much smother than normal. All I wish is that they'd protest daily so I could get to work on time.

Get over it David, much of those who watch and listen to Univision stations are ILLEGALS. And yes when we remove ALL illegals who are mostly Hispanic from the United States it will greatly affect Univision. Do you think that radio stations in places like Idaho, Nebraska or Georgia would be popping up if it wasn't for illegals. That's what is mostly there and many here. Again, we don't believe your nonsense. And though those Arbitron numbers are pumped up by many Illegal Aliens, we know you don't need ratings as the only tool to sell to advertisers. Especially when you are the aiding and abetting illegal alien broadcasting company.

The ulta-liberal San Francisco Chronicle says 10% of Mexico citizens are illegally living in the United States. That's about 11 million by their estimate. The true estimate of Mexicans alone is 13-15 million. Plus throw in another 2 to 4 million more Hispanics from other counties. That makes, lets see, as many as 19 million Hispanics. So your estimate, crushed by a liberal newspaper, again is wrong. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/05/21/MNGFQIVNAF1.DTL

If you think the Univision radio division isn't going to be sold, I've got some bridges to sell you real cheap. Two have a magnificent views of San Francisco, then I've got some in New York with a breathtaking view of the New York skyline and then...We'll reference this post again once the division is sold off.

BTW, here is part of the law that Univision constantly is violating. Their licenses should be returned to the American public for their crimes. http://www.americanpatrol.com/REFERENCE/AidAbetUnlawfulSec8USC1324.html

Hey, and your salavating for that Amnesty. Put the Petron away. Congress - both the House and Senate - are looking much better for staying Republican. Dick Morris says so. What did you say, David? You don't know Dick? Funny, that's one thing I will agree with you. http://www.vote.com/magazine/columns/dickmorris/column60420992.phtml

 

[mostb1]

True, for Arbitron, but even you cannot accurately measure how they effect radio, either as consumers, or by influencing "legals" to listen. If a few non-speaking "illegals" inhabite a residence also occupied by a legal Arbitron diary keeping family.....might the listening habits be reflected there?

That is a good point. There are many multigenerational households (and Arbitron measures household members, not random individuals) but in most cases, if someone is legal, they have emplyed family reunification laws to legalize all other family members.

Also, do you see any coincidence timewise in the ratings success of non-english broadcasting stations and the explosion of illegal immigration in the past several years?

Most of the growth in the last 10 months has been due to Arbitron adding a stratification variable to achieve proportionality between English Dominant and Spanish dominant Hisapnics. In every one of the markets that did this, the percentage of Spanish dominants increased significantly and, by being sampled and weighted into proportionalty the wobbles have flattened considerably.

The proportion of Spanish dominants has increased about 20% on the average. This increases the shaares of Spanish langauge stations, of course. This was not done before as Arbitron had to get the only available data, which is from Nielsen, and then get the methodology approved by the MRC... it took about 6 years to do.

Outside this change, the very small population adjustments each Fall have not really affected listening levels for those stations.

You can see the percentages of Spanish and English dominant at http://www.arbitron.com/radio_stations/hisplang.asp

1) I actually have a post graduate degree in economics.
2) You are supposing that all 10 or 11 million illegals are employed. They are not.
So you might want to raise that unemployment number a bit.

Yeah, there are children (but most are legal as they were born here. And there are unemplyed working age family members, but in families of recent immigrants all the members that are of working age tend to work. So you are right, the whole 11 million is not in the workforce.... subtracting any young illegal children, stay-at-home wives and such, the figure is likely not identitcal to the total... but closer than taht of the general poulation who do not work at such low paying jobs that everyone works, some at more than one job.

3) Employed or not, illegals do not contribute back to the coffers of government, but do enjoy many
of the services provided. So by simply being present in such substantial numbers, they further
impact the economy in a negative way.

The contributions, given the income level, are fairly comparable to non-immigrants. They pay sales tax, property tax via the landlord's tax liability, they contribute (more than is suspected) FICA and pay income taxes, gas tax, etc. Most low income non-immigrants do not put in what they take out, either... which is why we have a progressive tax rate on income. I understand that immigrants indivusually do not contribute in proportion to the benefits they get like schools, ehalth, etc. But the indirect contribution to the economy via the production of wealth through labor is considerable. Also worth considering is that this group is very young and is going to be paying in to Social Security at the same time that the Baby Boomers are taking out. The native born American birth rate can not sustain Social Security via a younger generation that pays for the older one.

Wrong, again, David. Illegal Alien households STEAL on a low average more than $3,000 each from U.S. taxpayers more than they give. That's a low estimate of $27 Billion each year and I've seen estimates twice this. And that doesn't count for the depressed wages they create for legal U.S.
residents.

The only wealth being created due to illegal alien slave wages is to the 1/4 of 1% richest in the United States of America. Middle class American wages are being screwed by Illegal Aliens.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22275

If Illegal Aliens were given amnesty, they and their families the first year would cost America more than $100 billion in services plus welfare and social security. That would grow to $200 billion in less than 10 years. These are low estimates. The system will go bankrupt in 11 years if this happens. We're much better off under the current system which can be sustained.

The amount of children born to illegal aliens is straining the economy of California. These children should not be educated in the United States and should be removed from this country along with their illegal alien parents.

Spanish "dominant". For most people, you don't need to be "dominant" in any language except English if you are here legally. And if don't speak English, learn it. We aren't a country of a 1000 tongues (or at least we won't be soon).
Good to see Maricopa County's Sheriff is making his illegal alien prisoners learn english so they can speak to the judge in the correct language of this land. And it isn't even on the taxpayers dime as it's payed by collect phone call fees.

 

[mostb1]

ALL illegal immigration effects the amount of radio listening just as it has affected the population. Your nonsense is ludicrous.

I am snipping the immigration stuff that is irrelvant to radio. Our moderators have already been most clear that this is not the place for this.

Illegals do not get proprotionally represented in Arbitron or, worse, Nielsen. So their listening is not reflected in ratings.

Ridding America of illegal aliens will NOT destroy the economy. That's a complete lie. I'd laugh at your statement if it wasn't so ridiculous. We have plenty of willing Americans (students, older Americans, those out of work) who will happily do any job for a fair wage. A fair American wage, not one driven down by illegal aliens who allow themselves to become slaves to employers.

If you have studied economics, you know any society has a residual level of functional unemplyment. The USA is currently near that level, so there are not 10 or 11 million unemplyed to take the jobs illgals may be doing.

The FACT remains that illegal aliens DO participate in Arbritron surveys. So the points you are making are just plain lies. And yes it does pertain to radio and especially in Los Angeles. PROVE ME WRONG. You can't as you are lying again.

I have proven it myself, with an extensive proprietary study based on empirical evidence given me years ago by the supervisor of the Arbitron call center. Very few illegals will give address, name, family size, income, etc. to a blind phone telemarketer.

Clear Channel had no intention of having to give up as much as they had to. I never posted that they had no intention of giving up anything. Clean your eyeballs out and read what I wrote. I don't need to see poorly written articles based on nonsense dispensed by radio executives. I don't care about how they handled the merger after it was completed as that is not what we've been discussing here. I know what went on and how DURING the period of time from when it was announced until the control of the last station was seized by Clear Channel. Again, you are backpedaling on your nonsense since you don't know what you are posting about.

When the sale was announced, it was stated that an extensive number of spinoffs were going to be required to merge, and that such spinoffs were alredy identified. In fac, Lowry Mays stated that this might give an opportunity to minority and smaller broadcasters to buy those stations... with KKBT being a prime example.

Get off the KKBT thing, David. I've proved you know nothing about the deal. It's just pathetic now that you are even posting in this thread.

You are also wrong again about the United States not being able to fill the jobs of ALL illegal aliens. Who the hell do you think did those jobs before they invaded the United States and drove down wages to steal the jobs from U.S. legal residents and citizens. And I can mention many a city that has nonexistant illegal alien population and survives just fine without them ruining their city.

But here is a PRIME example of how illegal aliens drive down wages and steal jobs from Americans. Of course the owners of these companies must be arrested, jailed and convicted for their crimes against U.S. citizens
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060410-123506-1297r.htm

 

[Radiogeek500]

I am sorry I ever particapted in this thread, look at what has become of it.

I will state these three things.

1. I do not know if any name changes will happen and it doesn't matter.

2. Cliff Winston never did much for KJLH in it's 30 years, so why should that be expected at 100.3?

3. Secondly, remember who owns 100.3, Radio One. RO has already trashed this station and lost a HUGE hispanic core, the Hispanics do not want to come back to a station that doesn't care about them, and further more, they're in debt. A HUGE debt in fact, and they already had to sell off a Boston outlet, and I won't be suprised to see LA go either, and here's where it won't make Glenn happy, a Spanish broadcaster acquires 100.3 and flips it to something serving that community. Certainly won't be Emmis or Citadel, eh? Emmis as you stated don't pay that kind of money and if you think Citadel does, you are a ......., in fact they're trying to get the ABC asking price lowered right now, so I know for a fact they won't shell 300 million, but the Spanish guys will, why? Because they have the audience, look at the amazing successes of KSCA, KLAX, KBUE, and KXOL, all of these stations were acquired at then recording breaking prices and have returned their investments time and time again.

So in short, Mabye Mojo, Winston won't do Jack squat, and 100.3 en esponal in 2007. And you B1 will probably be still protesting at Home Depot, but they don't listen to you unless you have money and you found God. And from the sound of things, I don't think you have either.

Have a nice brown day.

 

[OldGringo]

Get off the KKBT thing, David. I've proved you know nothing about the deal. It's just pathetic now that you are even posting in this thread.

Nope. Wrong-o. Your assumption that the sping offs, format retention or sale, use of registered marks, assignment of employent contracts, transfers of leases, etc., were all decided well in advance of the announcement of the merger with the full agreement of the parties to the merger, AMFM and CCU.

It is a pretty standard condition during a sale or merger that the buyer (in a sale) or the parties (in a merger) will be consuted on any change that materially affects the value and nature of the transaction: signing a new lease would be agreed on by the buyer, but ordering office supplies would not.

In other words, the frequency swap and assignment of the intellectual property formerly on 92.3 were discussed and agreed upon by both CCU and AMFM during the negotiations leading up to the sale and prior to regulatory approval. Much of the framework is described in the 10-K and 10-Q SEC filings.

Your insistence that Clear had no oversight on material transactions by the company they were merging with is absurd beyond the ability to believe.

 

[OldGringo]

Spanish "dominant". For most people, you don't need to be "dominant" in any language except English if you are here legally.

This statement goes against every significant study of language learning ever done.

Almost every person on the planet will remain dominant in the birth tongue unless they learn another language (or two or three) before early adolesence. Once a child approaches adolesence, their ability to learn languages is vastly diminished, and pretty much eradicated by adulthood.

An imigrant who comes... or came... to the US in adulthood can certainly learn something of English, but it is generally just enough to get by. Most persons who learn another language in adulthood are doing back and forth mental translation to and from the native tongue, and are not bilingual (the ability to think in either langauge).

The year, or decade or century does not change this, nor does the country of origin.

And if don't speak English, learn it. We aren't a country of a 1000 tongues (or at least we won't be soon).

How many languages do you speak fluently. I see. Preaching morals in your underwear again, eh? The US has always had communities of immigrants based on national origin and language, ranging from the "Little Italy" and "Chinatowns" to the Polish communities in places like Chicago and Cleveland to the Cajun regions of Louisiana.

Good to see Maricopa County's Sheriff is making his illegal alien prisoners learn english so they can speak to the judge in the correct language of this land. And it isn't even on the taxpayers dime as it's payed by collect phone call fees.

This is another example of ignorance of the way language is learned.