Bringing low skilled immigrants into our workforce will only give the scumbag politicians a larger pot of money to exploit.
The same scumbag Ds and Rs that have bankrupted the Social Security system that we have now are the very same ones that are preaching immigration, attempting to cover their asses by bringing them here.
It's a double win for the dems as they acquire a whole new class of poverty stricken to exploit.
It has to stop sometime.
It may as well be now.
Well, if expat etc. won't offer an idea, here's one for the no-borders crowd:
A Welfare State without Borders: A Modest Proposal
In sum, if egalitarian ethics say it's wrong to have borders that limit who can live in the US and benefit from our prosperity, then the same ethics necessitate opening the redistributive benefits of the welfare state to the poor wherever they live. And a dollar spent for welfare in XYZ third world country will stretch farther than a dollar spent in San Diego.
MM, we send BILLIONS to these countries. Oddly, like the billions sent to Palistine, very little reaches the most needy.
We give Palestine 200 million in economic assistance. and we give Israel 3 billion so it can continue to steal land and keep Palestinians penned up and begging for economic assistance. Funny how that works.
Most of the illegal immigration from the Middle East and Central America taking place today stems from our own military and economic exploits in said regions. The US has gladly supported regimes that make Castro look like mother Theresa. Charitable foreign aid? There may be something to it short term, but it’s merely attempting to clean up a little bit of the mess we’ve made. How about something more like justice?
Ok, define and propose it....
Matt, How can you stand to live in a sh!thole country like the USA?
According to the US Consulate in Jerusalem’s website, the United States has been the largest donor of aid to the Palestinians since the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1994. This aid has totaled around $600 million annually in recent years, and can be roughly divided into three categories.
Washington has been the largest international donor to the PA since the early 90's with over $5 billion in USAID funds alone -- and that's only half the story
How much aid does the US give Palestinians, and what’s it for?
Please assure me I'm not the only one who gets the literary reference, "A Modest Proposal."
Any who do get it will immediately be expecting a satiric proposal.
I'd say Matt has a point, the idea that our military industrial complex has an unlimited supply of printed dollars to continue it's mass genocide against other nations has to stop. Bomb the crap out of nations without any thought as to who you are killing and the unintended consequences of same, RE; the migrant influx of Europe has to stop.
It has been now for decades that America and it's list of vassal countries has been able to rough shod over other nations, the Iraq war, the Libya war, all the Arab spring wars have turned to dust and horror for the EU, from Italy to Sweden.
Any sane man, woman would suggest reducing the money that the assholes use to create Chaos to actually support instead industry and commerce, but the industry of America is War and that is what we have to live with from these assholes we elect in Congress on both sides of the aisle. They get quite good "campaign contributions" to their coffers, but rarely do they think about the coffins...
The Great Satan.. think about it.. who else does this shit.
Thanks to anonymous_coward and Gerald Weinand for intelligent contributions.
Also interesting to note (re: blowback) that Mike G. and Matt seem evenly matched in intelligence and sophistication.
Nice to see Egomike is back.
So wait, people here claim to be in favor of free markets and capitalism... unless it has to do with the labor force?
A free market is only free if anyone can buy or sell in it without restriction.
If you artificially restrict people from entering it, that's no different than requiring complicated and expensive licenses for hairdressers, or requiring people to pay union dues.
Edit: this is similar to how conservatives hate inefficient government... unless it's the police or the military (which, btw, are extremely inefficient).
Not all "people here" are free-market conservatives, nor are conservatives consistently free-market.
But your point is well-taken. Laws restricting free movement of labor are necessarily statist.
The question for me is whether a nation can be overwhelmed by immigration for causes unrelated to potential economic gains. For example, how many middle-east/North African refugees can Europe absorb before reducing quality-of-life for pre-existing residents?
One thing we can be assured is that emike has his money invested in General Dynamics and other war profiteer stock. Just like Silly Susan he knows where the money is.
pre-existing residents? Are we pre-existing residents? Sounds kinda commie and one worldy?
But not unexpected from our resident sex expert, yes we are all expendable, when you become lazy unproductive, old, fat, frenchy, germany, whatever its time you get replaced by a new slave. That is a mindset that old emike has and there is a certain elitist air about him, why he once boasted that people of his stature should have servants. lol A Hamiltonian patriot.
And, Economike, make damn sure you stay off MikeG's lawn, even if the ball goes there.
Obviously, someones' dog wasn't kept off lawn and the results are evident !
Heh. I had thought to write "status quo ante residents" but decided that sounded hifalutin.
In Mike G.'s vivid imagination "Economike" is Oliver Warbucks. In reality, Economike has more hair.
I've read your posts for 12 years, whether you have hair or not is immaterial.
Well put, but notice I don't believe in shooting people on their lawn.
Mike G. -
Well, yes, I don't much care about my wig either. I'm just trying to help you tell me apart from Oliver Warbucks.
When you read "Economike" think "lots of hair." That will improve your critical thinking, I'm sure.
Will do Emike, have a good 4th, to all
@Economike: "Not all "people here" are free-market conservatives, nor are conservatives consistently free-market."
This is a fair point - though there was a post a few months ago about how great capitalism was and if I recall correctly, a few people definitely chimed in.
The question for me is whether a nation can be overwhelmed by immigration for causes unrelated to potential economic gains. For example, how many middle-east/North African refugees can Europe absorb before reducing quality-of-life for pre-existing residents?"
Well at the end of the day, we're all some form of democracy (whether it be congressional/presidential or parliamentary in the case of Europe), and voting shapes the final form. If people don't like it, they can vote it one way or the other.
I'm simply arguing that to take the side of free market capitalism when the context is environmental regulation & health care and then to turn around and take the other side when it's brown people is highly hypocritical.
I will agree that *completely* unlimited immigration is probably untenable, if only from a logistics standpoint. (It took how long to tabulate RCV results in a small state?)
But trying to just throw up a wall and boost boots on the ground on the border is just silly - it didn't work when we tried it during the war on drugs and it won't work now.
The range of policy choices a nation faces isn't binary, i. e. "capitalism" or "not capitalism."
Capitalism is not a "system" and a market isn't a "policy." As I'm sure you agree, the emergent order of capitalism is a result of human action, not human design. Capitalism is what happens when a discrete group's (tribe, society, nation, or state) conventions and laws include the property rights and social trust (among other conditions, perhaps) necessary for capitalism to work.
Undoubtedly, environmental regulations or immigration policies can affect the degree to which a nation-state's members are free to truck and barter, but such choices fall outside the realm of "for capitalism" or "against capitalism."
If one's position is that to be in favor of any law that arguably restricts capitalism is to render "highly hypocritical" an advocate for free markets, then one is essentially arguing that any state with borders is "against capitalism." In this light, it's nonsensical to accuse those who favor restrictions on immigration of hypocrisy.
Isn't "no borders" really the same as "no property rights" elevated to a societal level?
Here's a repeat of the post with which I began this thread
Matt, expat, Thomas Carter, and I suppose others, have tossed around incendiary replies to any and all comments on immigration and other hot button issues of the moment under discussion here on AMG. "Racist" seems to be a dominant element of these replies.
Accordingly, it's time for the aforementioned to become proactive rather than reactive on these issues.
I hereby ask that each specifically lay out the basics of their immigration policy proposals, including such matters as whether we should have a border or not, what should be the limits and controls on who comes in and how and why, etc.
Then fill us in on your solutions for the school shootings in recent years.
And while you're at it, how you would restore civility to public discourse in politics, cultural, and social justice matters.
Have at it, you experts. Shame us all with your insights and innovative structural policy proposals.
I don't know what the rest of you think, but from my perspective, the three amigos to whom this was specifically addressed haven't even begun to live up to the low expectations I had for them when I laid down the challenge.
On the other hand, maybe that's exactly what they did. And even more.
Great show, you three. Clarifying your bona fides is always a good move.
It isn't to bad,Smegma II and DPOS,along expat ( who is a internet analyst ) seem to just not gone of the challenge.
Maybe they didn't know they were challenged,
Why in God's name would you expect anything more from these pieces of human excrement?
Polls have shown that the majority of Americans are for regulated borders, the congress and others however through either corporate profit incentives or political party voting incentives continue this fantasy that we are all immigrants, and that is some kind of "right" that we are the world.
Because the congress and political parties want to continue open borders outside the wishes of the "citizens" of America, you have to wonder at what point will the corrupt congress and other branches of government continue to push open borders. A Coward thinks we can just vote them out, how naïve is that?
The one worlders wish to continue to push it, because that will create chaos and totalitarian governments love chaos because that gives them a reason to create "order".
There should be little doubt that what is occurring in Europe with allowed migration, is destruction of Europe into a chaotic environment and will result in who knows what horrors. The idea that A Coward has that the infiltration of migrants into our nation is beneficial and stopping it is racist , can only be spoken by some mushroom in MAINE.
You want to see what unrestrained migrants do to a nation suggest you looks at Sweden or even just the city of angels. The talking points that "the resistance" have is exactly why Trump was elected and god forbid should we have another criminal like Hillary elected.
Question still remains where is the wall or at the very least a thin blue line, will Trump be true?
That is exactly what they want and over the past 100 years they have done quite nicely.
Ugenetoo: "Why in God's name would you expect anything more from these pieces of human excrement?"
You missed the point, panjo. I didn't; I was hoping they would show themselves for what they really are and aren't.
Mission accomplished, as the old saying goes.
I have no interest in wasting time providing a six part thesis to an internet tool who doesn’t actually care what I write anyway.
Imagine that! Mission accomplished indeed!