Political Fart Noise Part II

[CRed05]

"I want people to have health insurance and not to be thrown in jail because they wanted to leave a horrible country" without being accused of being a partisan hack?! I just want to be nice to people and reduce the suffering in the world.

 

Don't we all. Free lunch and Lamborghini's for everyone too!

 

If we let everyone from those "horrible" countries in, how long will it be before the US turns into another one of those horrible countries? My country of birth managed to fuck everything up in 10-15 years, can that record be beaten?

[greg1647545532]

I'm not sure how letting children into the country to stay with relatives rather than being locked in cages robs anyone of their personal freedom and liberty, but I live in a world where Santa is called a socialist and Fox News said that Mr. Rogers was an "evil, evil" man for teaching kids to be nice to each other, so what the fuck do I know? Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown.

[greg1647545532]

Don't we all. Free lunch and Lamborghini's for everyone too!

 

If we let everyone from those "horrible" countries in, how long will it be before the US turns into another one of those horrible countries? My country of birth managed to fuck everything up in 10-15 years, can that record be beaten?

 

Yeah, maybe I think more of the US than you do.

[zeitgeist57]

You guys are going to rip these poor kids apart limb-by-limb as you try to use them for political gain!

"They shouldn't be here illegally!"

"They just want to be with their abuelita!"

[greg1647545532]

Kerry, whatever you're typing right now, just shut up and close your browser, nobody wants to hear it.

[Geeto67]

If we let everyone from those "horrible" countries in, how long will it be before the US turns into another one of those horrible countries?

 

Um...never. People have been immigrating here for over 400 years and it hasn't happened yet. 1882 was the first immigration exclusion act, so historically speaking this is a relatively young issue.

 

Oh and let's not forget that the US was a prison colony for England for roughly 100 years (1607 to 1780). That's 50,000 convicted felons mostly in the mid 1700s.

 

this idea that the US is going to go to shit after 400 years of proving that immigration actually improves the country is literally the nonsense of republican nightmares.

 

My country of birth managed to fuck everything up in 10-15 years, can that record be beaten?

You country of birth was fucked since the first Dutch colonists set foot on it in 1652. Yeah it mishandled the "un-fucking" in the 1980's but give it time - the mishandling of the "un-fucking" of this country happened over 100 years ago and we are still dealing with it's effects. These things take time.

 

Kerry, whatever you're typing right now, just shut up and close your browser, nobody wants to hear it.

 

Oops, missed this greg, sorry. FWIW I thought you pretty much hit the high points.

 

 

 

 

 

 

So...just so I am clear....NOBODY wants to talk about how US foreign policy has made both the US steel industry and the US automotive industry noncompetitive in the world market and that is somehow winning?

[CRed05]

Um...never. People have been immigrating here for over 400 years and it hasn't happened yet. 1882 was the first immigration exclusion act, so historically speaking this is a relatively young issue.

 

Oh and let's not forget that the US was a prison colony for England for roughly 100 years (1607 to 1780). That's 50,000 convicted felons mostly in the mid 1700s.

 

this idea that the US is going to go to shit after 400 years of proving that immigration actually improves the country is literally the nonsense of republican nightmares.

 

It wasn't exactly an immigration free for all, was it? Who immigrated here? Brits, Germans, Irish, Italians...westerners. It also takes a bit of coin to be able to afford a boat ride here, so that separated some of the wheat from the chaff.

 

I'm all for immigration, I'm an immigrant for fucks sake, but there needs to be laws, tough laws. Some of the greatest countries in the world when it comes to healthcare, standards of living and happiness has the strictest immigration laws in the world.

[CRed05]

You country of birth was fucked since the first Dutch colonists set foot on it in 1652. Yeah it mishandled the "un-fucking" in the 1980's but give it time - the mishandling of the "un-fucking" of this country happened over 100 years ago and we are still dealing with it's effects. These things take time.

 

Well SA tried to do it all too quickly. Instead of letting these things heal over time, they wanted to speed it along with things like BEE aka Affirmative Action. So you get unqualified people in high positions that have bankrupted just about all State Owned Entities.

 

Here's the latest gem that went viral. The head of IT at SARS (IRS equivalent).

 

 

Bring these geniuses over, maybe she can be the head of IT at the IRS. She has a very impressive resume. University degree that she probably worked really hard for.

 

 

So...just so I am clear....NOBODY wants to talk about how US foreign policy has made both the US steel industry and the US automotive industry noncompetitive in the world market and that is somehow winning?

 

Nothing to say about that other than, yup, dumb move.

[greg1647545532]

I'm all for immigration, I'm an immigrant for fucks sake, but there needs to be laws, tough laws. Some of the greatest countries in the world when it comes to healthcare, standards of living and happiness has the strictest immigration laws in the world.

 

But America, which does indeed have some of the least restrictive immigration laws on the planet, has historically done very, very well during a time period where it accepted a lot of immigrants. That seems like a compelling anecdote. I know a lot of people think that it's just a given that we need "laws, tough laws" on immigration, but I reject the premise. There's no evidence that we're anywhere close to a dangerous immigration level as far as I know. And don't we want to make policy based on evidence?

[CRed05]

But America, which does indeed have some of the least restrictive immigration laws on the planet, has historically done very, very well during a time period where it accepted a lot of immigrants. That seems like a compelling anecdote. I know a lot of people think that it's just a given that we need "laws, tough laws" on immigration, but I reject the premise. There's no evidence that we're anywhere close to a dangerous immigration level as far as I know. And don't we want to make policy based on evidence?

 

:dumb::dumb::dumb:

 

I stopped reading after that because the US has probably THE strictest laws out there.

[Geeto67]

It wasn't exactly an immigration free for all, was it? Who immigrated here? Brits, Germans, Irish, Italians...westerners. It also takes a bit of coin to be able to afford a boat ride here, so that separated some of the wheat from the chaff.

 

also the Chinese, Koreans, Indians, Russians (esp Jews escaping persecution of the czar), people escaping the constant warring of eastern europe, And let's not forget those whose boat ride was paid for against their will (yes I mean slaves who were Indonesian, African, pacific islander, etc..), and those who were sent here from other British and Dutch colonies because they were criminals there (1/4 of all immigrants to the US in the mid-late 1700s were transport convicts). I mean, is there a group you think didn't emigrate here? Also there are also those central and south americans who just walked here because, well California was part of their country for a good long while, and even when it wasn't we didn't exactly stop free movement.

 

And it's not a "bit of coin" - the cost of steerage class on ships in the 1800's cost about $670 per person. Most poor people could raise that amount (and did).

 

I'm all for immigration, I'm an immigrant for fucks sake, but there needs to be laws, tough laws. Some of the greatest countries in the world when it comes to healthcare, standards of living and happiness has the strictest immigration laws in the world.

 

We have had serious, non-racist, laws on this starting since around the 1900's and the only thing "tough" enforcement has proven is that it causes the government to do inhumane things in its enforcement.

 

Care to name some of these "greatest" countries? Other countries handle immigration is a completely different way from the US, and far more humanely, but none of them are what I would call "tough". It's hard to make a comparison as to who is tough vs who is not tough, and honestly I wouldn't even know the metric since the approaches are so different. It's like comparing apples to motorcycles. A lot of them recognize and embrace that there is a population that just seeks work and not citizenship, which the US both pretends doesn't happen and also profits highly from (while allowing a form of indentured servitude because fuck them they are immigrants). Here, do some reading:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/16/upshot/comparing-immigration-policies-across-countries.html

 

https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/06/130630-immigration-reform-world-refugees-asylum-canada-japan-australia-sweden-denmark-united-kingdom-undocumented-immigrants/

[CRed05]

Care to name some of these "greatest" countries?

 

Germany, Japan...probably every Scandinavian country. These are countries with low crime rates too.

 

Edit: Yup, your last link talks about it. They are "criticized" for their strict policies, but like I said, these are fantastic places to live. You can criticize me all you want, but I'm not letting everyone drive my 250 GTO.

[CRed05]

also the Chinese, Koreans, Indians, Russians (esp Jews escaping persecution of the czar), people escaping the constant warring of eastern europe, And let's not forget those whose boat ride was paid for against their will (yes I mean slaves who were Indonesian, African, pacific islander, etc..), and those who were sent here from other British and Dutch colonies because they were criminals there (1/4 of all immigrants to the US in the mid-late 1700s were transport convicts). I mean, is there a group you think didn't emigrate here? Also there are also those central and south americans who just walked here because, well California was part of their country for a good long while, and even when it wasn't we didn't exactly stop free movement.

 

Drop in the bucket compared to the other immigrants. With that being said...America isn't exactly the country with the lowest crime rates out there either. The data also exists to see which groups commit most of the crimes. Hint: They either got free rides or they walked here.

 

And it's not a "bit of coin" - the cost of steerage class on ships in the 1800's cost about $670 per person. Most poor people could raise that amount (and did).

 

$670 in today's money or back then? Either way, that's a lot of money for a person that is poor. I stand by my comment, it's another way to separate some of the...less productive.

 

$670 in 1800 would be $13,423.34 today according to a calculator I found online.

[BStowers023]

The data also exists to see which groups commit most of the crimes. Hint: They either got free rides or they walked here

 

Ohhhh you did it now. The king of identity politics is about to go on a rant about racism and oppression now.

[Geeto67]

Germany, Japan...probably every Scandinavian country. These are countries with low crime rates too.

 

Germany...isn't that the country that conservatives love to talk about as having a uuuugggeeee refugee/migrant problem we don't want? Unless you are saying those are all lies....because well they kind of are.

 

Drop in the bucket compared to the other immigrants.

 

um...no. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was put in place in response to the immigration of 123,000 Chinese immigrants in 1870s. that made up 1/3 of the immigrants coming into the US at that time and spawned all sorts of nasty fearmongering like the "yellow peril".

 

Remember, until 1870 only "free white persons of good moral character" could be citizens - either by birth or naturalization. Do I need to remind you that "white" in the 1790's did not include Italians, Jews, Asians, Native Americans, and other people that were not english protestant descent?

 

German, Irish, English did make up the majority, but it is not a large majority. Hardly "drop in the bucket". the problem with this era is by not considering them citizens, lots of other groups have been mostly erased or downplayed in history. We remember the Chinese and Italians because they had a significant impact on our culture, blacks because we fought a war over slavery, native Americans because we fought several wars with them (and still manage to erase a lot of the horrors), and the irish because every conservative loves to bring up them as the shining counter example of white victimhood.

 

There were plenty of other people that we have pretty much forgotten that were here in significant numbers. Ever eat an Al Pastor taco? yeah that exists because of mass Lebanese immigration into mexico and California in the late 1800's and early 1900s. funny how we don't talk about them. fun fact: until the 1960's most Arab immigrants were marked as Syrian despite the majority actually being from Lebanon.

 

 

$670 in today's money or back then? Either way, that's a lot of money for a person that is poor. I stand by my comment, it's another way to separate some of the...less productive.

 

Today's money, and depending on the location and whether you were actually buying a ticket (price is from england). If you were a slave being brought here, it cost you nothing, and cost your traders very little because they owned the boat (hence why it was a profitable business). Lots of firms in china ran discount passage which accounted for the large influx during the gold rush.

 

With that being said...America isn't exactly the country with the lowest crime rates out there either. The data also exists to see which groups commit most of the crimes. Hint: They either got free rides or they walked here.

 

Are they committing the most crimes though? Seems to me that there is plenty of data to support that immigrants don't commit any more or less crimes than natural citizens.

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/is-illegal-immigration-linked-to-more-or-less-crime/

 

I think what you are doing here is confusing correlation with causation. Ethnic minorities make up a large section of the poor in this country, and poverty tends to be the driver of crime. Saying that crime happens because they are latin immigrants is just straight bullshit.

 

 

 

 

I have to ask, how is it that I run into so many "Libertarian" types that claim to be history buffs, and yet so many of them cannot demonstrate a basic functional knowledge of US history?

I mean, they teach grade schools kids about 1800's immigration and Ellis island and all that stuff, how do people forget that was a thing?

Edited October 23, 2018 by Geeto67

[greg1647545532]

:dumb::dumb::dumb:

 

I stopped reading after that because the US has probably THE strictest laws out there.

 

Is this not correct?

 

I know there's a lot of BS information out there and people think that illegal immigrants are just lazy scoflaws when the reality is that most of them have no way to legally immigrate, but the US does accept an awful lot of immigrants compared to other countries. Can we agree that this is a true fact?

[TTQ B4U]

Pics of the caravan are similar to the pics of the many homeless tent cities that litter California. When faced with which group of people to help the US should focus on our people first and most and all that's needed to get them taken care of. 70k deaths due to drug O.D's last year is pretty shocking thus plenty of areas to spend money on right here with our own citizens. Again, we're not the worlds shelter for any stray cat in need.

 

I agree immigration laws and caps on numbers for all kinds of immigration need to be strictly enforced. No more catch and release bullshit.

 

 

People think that illegal immigrants are just lazy scoflaws when the reality is that most of them have no way to legally immigrate, but the US does accept an awful lot of immigrants compared to other countries.

 

 

I agree.

[BStowers023]

Pics of the caravan are similar to the pics of the many homeless tent cities that litter California. When faced with which group of people to help the US should focus on our people first and most and all that's needed to get them taken care of. 70k deaths due to drug O.D's last year is pretty shocking thus plenty of areas to spend money on right here with our own citizens. Again, we're not the worlds shelter for any stray cat in need.

 

I agree immigration laws and caps on numbers for all kinds of immigration need to be strictly enforced. No more catch and release bullshit.

 

 

 

 

 

I agree.

 

One thing I was curious about is, what does touting your country's flag while marching in a group of 10,000 forcing your way through a country to get to another country typically represent?

[Geeto67]

Pics of the caravan are similar to the pics of the many homeless tent cities that litter California. When faced with which group of people to help the US should focus on our people first and most and all that's needed to get them taken care of. 70k deaths due to drug O.D's last year is pretty shocking thus plenty of areas to spend money on right here with our own citizens. Again, we're not the worlds shelter for any stray cat in need.

 

This is a bullshit argument from you because you don't believe in social welfare spending. So literally you are saying "we should spend tax money on our own people, except we shouldn't spend it on them either".

 

Seriously dude, pick a lane.

[CRed05]

Is this not correct?

 

I know there's a lot of BS information out there and people think that illegal immigrants are just lazy scoflaws when the reality is that most of them have no way to legally immigrate, but the US does accept an awful lot of immigrants compared to other countries. Can we agree that this is a true fact?

 

So they say in that link how they came to that conclusion:

 

"We looked at the data in two ways for 2013: First, the sheer number of legal immigrants and secondly, the number of new immigrants as a percentage of the population."

 

Everyone and their uncle wants to immigrate to America. I'd like to know the percentage of people who want to come here before they realize they won't be able to. Then the people who actually apply and get denied vs the ones that actually get accepted.

 

So speaking from personal experience, most South Africans you'll see are either in Australia, New Zealand, UK or Canada. Why? Because these countries make it easy for you to do so, they offer incentives and will help you. From what I've heard, Canada is the easiest because they want more people, they are very underpopulated. A quick visit to their website, they'll let you in under "self employment"

 

This website tells you exactly all the way you can immigrate to the US. https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/immigrate.html

 

There are basically 2 ways to get here, through family or work. Work is probably the hardest because you need to get a company to stick their neck out for you...you better be skilled. Family is easier, but unless it's your spouse, it's a lengthy and slow process. I went through the sibling green card process to get my sister here. It takes about 10 years before she will be eligible to apply for a green card, and for countries with more applicants it will take even longer.

[TTQ B4U]

This is a bullshit argument from you because you don't believe in social welfare spending. So literally you are saying "we should spend tax money on our own people, except we shouldn't spend it on them either".

 

 

I realize we as a society are going to have social programs but I'm NOT for spending it on people simply crashing into our borders illegally.

 

True that I'm not a fan of creating more and more and simply pushing hand-outs without some type of re-contribution or earned benefits. Nothing is free. Gov't doesn't need to really be involved in most. Let churches, charities and the public at large fund these programs through self-selection.

[BStowers023]

I realize we as a society are going to have social programs but I'm NOT for spending it on people simply crashing into our borders illegally.

 

True that I'm not a fan of creating more and more and simply pushing hand-outs without some type of re-contribution or earned benefits. Nothing is free. Gov't doesn't need to really be involved in most. Let churches, charities and the public at large fund these programs through self-selection.

 

I wouldn’t argue with Kerry about feeding the ducks. He thinks the ducks are still scraping and clawing trying to earn their bread while simultaneously being handed bread for doing nothing

[TTQ B4U]

I wouldn’t argue with Kerry about feeding the ducks. He thinks the ducks are still scraping and clawing trying to earn their bread while simultaneously being handed bread for doing nothing

 

 

I'm all for feeding ducks but use your own bread or bread donated by like-minds. I have no interest in seeing my tax dollars wasted and in many cases we don't need the Federal Gov't involved at all.

[greg1647545532]

From what I've heard, Canada is the easiest because they want more people, they are very underpopulated. A quick visit to their website, they'll let you in under "self employment"

 

Did you actually click on the self employment link?

 

If you’re interested in this program, you must:

 

-have relevant experience in cultural activities or athletics and

-be willing and able to make a significant contribution to the cultural or athletic life of Canada

 

I'm sure they don't let a lot of people in under that category. In fact, most of the categories are similar to the US's -- you basically need to be sponsored, either by a family member or a company that can verify that your skillset is in demand, or you need to be famous/rich/both.

 

Every election year when everyone's threatening to move to Canada, there are articles like this that point out that you can't just show up and get a green card. And, like America, if you're poor/unskilled/don't have any connections, your chances are pretty much 0 of getting legal residency.

 

But I hope we can agree on these two seemingly disparate but concurrent facts -- a lot of people want to get into America who can't because the rules make it hard for them, and yet America, as a function of it's population and as a total number, nevertheless lets in a lot of immigrants.

[greg1647545532]

I'm all for feeding ducks but use your own bread or bread donated by like-minds. I have no interest in seeing my tax dollars wasted and in many cases we don't need the Federal Gov't involved at all.

 

Brandon disagrees with you, a couple of shitshow threads ago he said that any charity breeds dependence and is bad, no matter where the money comes from.