Re Jukebox Hero's original comment on my statement:
Wow. Wow. You think there's no way for minority immigrants to positively assimilate themselves into American society, much the same way as the Irish, or the Germans, etc, did however long ago? Based on your reasoning, anyone who leaves one country for another is lazy. So if I decide I want to live in Europe instead of the U.S., I'm lazy? Is (to use a current example) Arnold Schwarzengger lazy because he left Austria to go to the U.S.? Was Ben Franklin in the same boat too?
This culturally static reasoning is absurd. To assume that because a person is Indian means they must support a class-based society is ridiculous. Perhaps they emigrated because they recognized the failings of the entrenched system?
Gotta agree with agent302 on this one, to a point. It takes a lot of guts to move to another country Although that really doesnt apply much to mexicans because it is so easy for them to come here and go back if they so choose. Also, what exactly are they leaving behind?
I dont blame immigrants for wanting to come here, but we have a right to form a policy that suits the US, not them. Our immigration rates are way too high right now and too geared towards uneducated labor. We need a better mix..............
Have you ever been to Mexico? This is one of the most ignorant statements I've ever seen on these boards.
Immigration has nothing to do with the environment. In all of your racist threads, you've ignored one major point: the illegal immigrants in this country add more to the economy than they take away. You pretend this isn't true, but it is.
The real problem is that our country doesn't give a rat's ass about the environment. If we did, we would solve any and all of the problems that you wrongly attribute to illegal immigration. And if we stopped the immigrants, we'd have less money to fix the environment with because we would lose the net gain that the immigrants add to the economy.
So, we should be glad that the immigrants help keep our economy afloat and use that extra cash to fix the problems.
Have you ever been to Mexico? This is one of the most ignorant statements I've ever seen on these boards.
Immigration has nothing to do with the environment. In all of your racist threads, you've ignored one major point: the illegal immigrants in this country add more to the economy than they take away. You pretend this isn't true, but it is.
The real problem is that our country doesn't give a rat's ass about the environment. If we did, we would solve any and all of the problems that you wrongly attribute to illegal immigration. And if we stopped the immigrants, we'd have less money to fix the environment with because we would lose the net gain that the immigrants add to the economy.
So, we should be glad that the immigrants help keep our economy afloat and use that extra cash to fix the problems.
You are so clueless its scary. Mexico is a third world shithole, without a minimum wage, absolutely no labor laws, no public education system, and absolutely no way to improve their lives. Why the hell do you think they are coming over the borders in droves? I thought it was obvious, but you have to have a clue to realize the reason.
As for the environment, how can increasing the population at a rapid rate NOT affect the environment? Tell me how doubling the population in 50 years does NOT have an impact on the environment. Unbelieveable.
As for illegal immigrants adding to the economy? Lets see-they dont pay Federal or State Income taxes, they depress wages, yet they use social services, get free medical care, commit crimes that our police force (that we pay for not them) have to take care of, overcrowd our schools that they dont pay a dime to contribute to, yet that is all a plus for our economy? Get a clue.........................
You are so clueless its scary. Mexico is a third world shithole, without a minimum wage, absolutely no labor laws, no public education system, and absolutely no way to improve their lives. Why the hell do you think they are coming over the borders in droves? I thought it was obvious, but you have to have a clue to realize the reason.
As for the environment, how can increasing the population at a rapid rate NOT affect the environment? Tell me how doubling the population in 50 years does NOT have an impact on the environment. Unbelieveable.
Lower the population and the U.S. will still be destroying the environment. It's not dying because there are too many people, it's dying because too many people don't do anything to fix it.
As for illegal immigrants adding to the economy? Lets see-they dont pay Federal or State Income taxes, they depress wages, yet they use social services, get free medical care, commit crimes that our police force (that we pay for not them) have to take care of, overcrowd our schools that they dont pay a dime to contribute to, yet that is all a plus for our economy? Get a clue.........................
They pay a ton of taxes. Most pay income taxes because they get a SS#. Real or not, taxes are taken. Those that get cash still pay plenty of sales taxes and other fees. If they cost us money the government wouldn't tolerate them. But the government is not as ignorant as you are.
Re Jukebox Hero's original comment on my statement:
Wow. Wow. You think there's no way for minority immigrants to positively assimilate themselves into American society, much the same way as the Irish, or the Germans, etc, did however long ago? Based on your reasoning, anyone who leaves one country for another is lazy. So if I decide I want to live in Europe instead of the U.S., I'm lazy? Is (to use a current example) Arnold Schwarzengger lazy because he left Austria to go to the U.S.? Was Ben Franklin in the same boat too?
This culturally static reasoning is absurd. To assume that because a person is Indian means they must support a class-based society is ridiculous. Perhaps they emigrated because they recognized the failings of the entrenched system?
Anytime one generalizes, they are wrong at a certain percentage. Yeah, people assimilate if you let them immigrate slowly. But when they overwhelm the existing population, they override and supplant it. Thats what I'm witnessing. If you don't see it then maybe you're in a place that isn't as affected. I left my home town (Detroit) to avoid the wrath of angry Muslims that wanted to kill me (Non Jewish Caucasian), to arrive in Tampa. Now I find that my daily interactions rarely involve anybody other than Indians.
Have you ever been to Mexico? This is one of the most ignorant statements I've ever seen on these boards.
Immigration has nothing to do with the environment. In all of your racist threads, you've ignored one major point: the illegal immigrants in this country add more to the economy than they take away. You pretend this isn't true, but it is.
The real problem is that our country doesn't give a rat's ass about the environment. If we did, we would solve any and all of the problems that you wrongly attribute to illegal immigration. And if we stopped the immigrants, we'd have less money to fix the environment with because we would lose the net gain that the immigrants add to the economy.
So, we should be glad that the immigrants help keep our economy afloat and use that extra cash to fix the problems.
I agree with you, to a point. Right now we have a choice to fix the environment. Unfortunately, we CHOOSE not to. But when the population explodes like in China or India, things get desparate.
I agree with you, to a point. Right now we have a choice to fix the environment. Unfortunately, we CHOOSE not to. But when the population explodes like in China or India, things get desparate.
This is the big problem.
I do, however, truly believe that the immigrants add more to the economy than they take away. It's probably true that they could add more if they followed every law, but in all honesty I believe the economy would be worse off without any illegal immigrants than with them paying not as much as they should. Getting them all to pay exactly what they 'should' pay would be even more money, but realistically impossible.
They pay a ton of taxes. Most pay income taxes because they get a SS#. Real or not, taxes are taken. Those that get cash still pay plenty of sales taxes and other fees. If they cost us money the government wouldn't tolerate them. But the government is not as ignorant as you are.
How do they have a SS# if they are illegal? They dont want anyone to know they are here, they work OFF the books, capeesh?
Sales tax does not begin to cover what they cost us in services and schooling.
The Government is incredibly ignorant, and corrupt. If they want swing votes they will be in favor of anything. If Big business wants cheap labor, Republicans will do nothing about it. If the Pro-immigration lobby wants an illegal alien amnesty their Democratic whores will bend over backwards to support it. Take your head out of the sand........................
Anytime one generalizes, they are wrong at a certain percentage. Yeah, people assimilate if you let them immigrate slowly. But when they overwhelm the existing population, they override and supplant it.
You say this as though I was only providing specific examples to your "general" problem. Referencing the mass European immigrations of the 18th and 19th centuries (ie, when I mentioned the Irish and the Germans) is hardly using the specific to refute the general. And minorities today are hardly overwhelming the majority population. That's why they're still minorities.
The other issue that seems to be getting confused here is that you're afraid of degradation from a mass of immigrants. This seems to me like you assume that environmental problems are limited to nation-state borders, which is hardly the case when you consider elements like global climate change, air pollution, overfishing the common seas, and other international environmental issues. These things don't go away without immigration. Sure, you might have a little less trash in the landfill in San Diego, but if the dump in Tijuana is still full, you can still smell it (to use a crappy example). Immigration is not an increase in global population; its merely a shift. And I already know you're views on birth control.
Quote:
Thats what I'm witnessing. If you don't see it then maybe you're in a place that isn't as affected. I left my home town (Detroit) to avoid the wrath of angry Muslims that wanted to kill me (Non Jewish Caucasian), to arrive in Tampa. Now I find that my daily interactions rarely involve anybody other than Indians.
I find it ludicrous to think that Muslims really wanted to kill you. I know lots of Muslims (both in California and in Great Britain) and they are all by and large extremely nice and friendly people. And believe, I have seen the demographic shifts. The county that I grew up in (Alameda County, California) has a higher percentage of Asians (inclusive of "Orientals" [for lack of a better term], South East Asians, and Indians/Pakistanis/Bengalis) than it does Caucasians. Yet the level of affluence in the region has stayed extremely high. My hometown actually has the highest Afghani population in the U.S., but there aren't acts of terrorism occurring anywhere. In fact, with a population of 200,000 people, the average homicide rate over the last 5 years has been about 1 murder per year. So, yeah, there are immigrants, but they aren't having any negative affect on me. Hell, two of my best friends from High School are Indian.
In all honesty, there are a lot of ways to get one illegally. Why get one? Because you have access to more jobs. Sometimes the numbers are real, but of someone else. Sometimes they're unused SS numbers. Whatever the case may be, if an illegal is using the number then they are 'legal' for all practical taxable purposes.
There are plenty that don't use a SS# and get paid cash. But considering the kind of jobs these people have I would guess that home-grown Americans working for cash have a far greater negative impact on the economy than that of the illegal aliens.
You say this as though I was only providing specific examples to your "general" problem. Referencing the mass European immigrations of the 18th and 19th centuries (ie, when I mentioned the Irish and the Germans) is hardly using the specific to refute the general. And minorities today are hardly overwhelming the majority population. That's why they're still minorities.
The key is a controlled immigration.
Quote:
The other issue that seems to be getting confused here is that you're afraid of degradation from a mass of immigrants. This seems to me like you assume that environmental problems are limited to nation-state borders, which is hardly the case when you consider elements like global climate change, air pollution, overfishing the common seas, and other international environmental issues. These things don't go away without immigration. Sure, you might have a little less trash in the landfill in San Diego, but if the dump in Tijuana is still full, you can still smell it (to use a crappy example). Immigration is not an increase in global population; its merely a shift. And I already know you're views on birth control.
In Mexico City they monitor air quality levels. After so many deaths in a given day that are deemed air-quality related, they will forcefully shut down industry for the rest of the day. Super, lets bring that here.
Quote:
I find it ludicrous to think that Muslims really wanted to kill you. I know lots of Muslims (both in California and in Great Britain) and they are all by and large extremely nice and friendly people. And believe, I have seen the demographic shifts. The county that I grew up in (Alameda County, California) has a higher percentage of Asians (inclusive of "Orientals" [for lack of a better term], South East Asians, and Indians/Pakistanis/Bengalis) than it does Caucasians. Yet the level of affluence in the region has stayed extremely high. My hometown actually has the highest Afghani population in the U.S., but there aren't acts of terrorism occurring anywhere. In fact, with a population of 200,000 people, the average homicide rate over the last 5 years has been about 1 murder per year. So, yeah, there are immigrants, but they aren't having any negative affect on me. Hell, two of my best friends from High School are Indian.
Again, different experiences. Being an American mutt, I find it ludicrous as well.
Many of my friends are Indian and other Asian descent. So what? They are my friends because they were placed in an environment that was conducive to that type of friendship. If they had come over now, they might have isolated themselves to a clique of their own as they do here at my place of employment.
Have you ever been to Mexico? This is one of the most ignorant statements I've ever seen on these boards.
Immigration has nothing to do with the environment. In all of your racist threads, you've ignored one major point: the illegal immigrants in this country add more to the economy than they take away. You pretend this isn't true, but it is.
The real problem is that our country doesn't give a rat's ass about the environment. If we did, we would solve any and all of the problems that you wrongly attribute to illegal immigration. And if we stopped the immigrants, we'd have less money to fix the environment with because we would lose the net gain that the immigrants add to the economy.
So, we should be glad that the immigrants help keep our economy afloat and use that extra cash to fix the problems...Lower the population and the U.S. will still be destroying the environment. It's not dying because there are too many people, it's dying because too many people don't do anything to fix it.
Bunge,
After having read several of your rants my advice for you is that: ?Wishing it doesn?t make it so!? You?ve repeatedly expressed unsupported assertions without any evidence, and very little supportive reasoning.
Of course immigration has something to do with our environment ? human population growth and density is a well recognized contributor to increased resource demands and undesirable economic externalities; namely, pollution, traffic, and increased land/housing costs.
As to your assertion that the 1.4 million people that arrive every year in this country are a net ?gain? to the economy, more wishful thinking. In particular:
First, the holy mantra of benefiting ?the economy? is important ONLY if it increases per capita national wealth (i.e. a rise in real, average, wages). An economy that expands only because of a population increase is a net zero addition to our standard of living, and when measured against the social and environmental costs is a significant burden on that economy.
Second, the U.S. does not have a totally free market system wherein the worker (producer) pays the market value of his/her cost to society. In our system 40% of all national wealth is redistributed through politics. Most immigrants are in the lowest tax brackets that pay little or no taxes (the upper half pays 95% of all income tax), EVEN when they are on a regular payroll.
However, benefit costs are distributed politically. The cost of education, welfare, social security, police, fire protection, libraries, recreation facilities, prisons, parks, senior services, medicare, and other public benefits are NOT borne by the immigrant, their children, or the extended families (including the aged parents and grandparents) that they bring with them. It is paid by established, mostly native born, American citizens.
Third, the particular social costs caused by immigration are significant. Our prison population has exploded in the last twenty years, and at least ½ (maybe more) are from the immigrant ethnic groups. First, and sometimes second, generation immigrants also have a high demand for state subsidized medical care, special and remedial education, Section 8 housing, welfare, etc..
Last, there are self-evident quality of life costs associated with population growth (which is mainly due to immigration). Anyone who has lived long enough to see the transformation of California has seen the future of other states. The days of ?easy-rider? biking through bucolic, quaint, rural countryside and towns is over ? as are riding in dune buggies on empty beaches, renting a cheap beach house (which students used to do), enjoying farms and countryside, and affordable housing ? all of that is gone.
You want to live in a ?quaint? town in California ? pay $600,000 for a small house in Marin County; you want to buy a house on the beach, go to Central California (once isolated and beautiful) and pay $385,000 for a two bedroom-one bath shack; want to go camping, go to Yosemite where they?ve had to ban all traffic and will be rationing visitors; want to travel the little two lanes of wine country, then be prepared for very long, jammed, and dense traffic; want to go to a quaint restaurant, then make sure you can pay $25.00 ? $35.00 for a dinner. Want a medical appointment, then go to Kiaser and see immigrant lines out the door and get a good sense of medical rationing. Want to take a trip, then make sure you can pay the highest gas prices in the U.S. (California has ?special? fuel to reduce emissions) ? when you can get lodging in a decent area.
California is the future for the nation (although many are having the same problems). It is a state where ?open spaces? are Disney like dioramas, only for viewing from crowded freeways; where the privileged can purchase their ?rural? acreage in gated communities (e.g. Blackhawk) or live in mainly a very expensive, white town with draconian zoning and growth restrictions; wherein the young cannot afford a house, and businesses cannot afford a state with high taxes and its social costs.
To those who believe in immigration, I've offered a little thought experiement. If it were true, what would be your stance ?
>(Dateline 2005) Washington D.C.
The President has jointly announced with the majority leadership of both houses, that America?s borders will be opened to any and all individuals who wish to visit, pass through, or move to the United States. She made her policy clear in a joint session of Congress:
? In order to stimulate our economy, and to live up the demands of human rights, I am declaring the Unitized States have an unrestricted and open border. Although all immigrants will have to register their names, no restrictions or criteria for admission will be placed on any immigrant ? regardless of age, national origin, job skill, education, health, or political viewpoint. If we believe in immigration, then this will be welcome by all Americans.?
She added that citizenship will be automatically granted to newcomers as most government benefits and affirmative action programs are already mandated by the courts to apply to residents, legal or otherwise.
U.S. Census estimates are that the yearly immigration will increase from 1.4 million a year (legal and illegal) to nearly 5 million per year. At current levels of child-bearing, it is estimated that by the year 2050, there will be slightly more than one billion people in the United States?and rising.
The overwhelming majority of immigrants will be the poor from third world nations, most strongly represented by Latin America and Africa (approximately 80%). By the year 2100, population projections show the United States will have nearly 2.2 billion residents. <
I'm serious, if this were actually the reality, would you have ANY concerns or objections? If so, what and why in light of your current stance?
Of course immigration has something to do with our environment ? human population growth and density is a well recognized contributor to increased resource demands and undesirable economic externalities; namely, pollution, traffic, and increased land/housing costs.
Pollution doesn't increase exponentially with population growth. If you double the population, pollution doesn't triple.
Our quality of life is currently increased and sustained by illegal aliens. Cut that out and we'll have two problems. One, red blooded Americans will take jobs at triple the pay of an illegal and our cost of living will increase dramatically. Two, more jobs will leave the country and along with them the taxes illegals do pay.
The economy needs cheap labor. There will be a point when the scales tip, and they may be nearing in California (I'm not convinced for or against this point,) but for the most part the country relies on illegals more than they care to believe.
I'm not in denial, don't worry. Illegal immigration is less of a burden on the country than Reaganomics in their past or present form. You worry about tax brackets and wealth redistribution through politics, but you ignore that it's politics that's pushing more wealth towards the top 5%. That's the true burden on the economy but I think it might be the conservatives that are in denial on this.
In all honesty, there are a lot of ways to get one illegally. Why get one? Because you have access to more jobs. Sometimes the numbers are real, but of someone else. Sometimes they're unused SS numbers. Whatever the case may be, if an illegal is using the number then they are 'legal' for all practical taxable purposes.
There are plenty that don't use a SS# and get paid cash. But considering the kind of jobs these people have I would guess that home-grown Americans working for cash have a far greater negative impact on the economy than that of the illegal aliens.
They all work off the books, and why would it be worse for an American citizen to do so than an illegal alien? The illegal probably gets more benefits, such as free medical care. Its wrong, period..........................................
Pollution doesn't increase exponentially with population growth. If you double the population, pollution doesn't triple.
Our quality of life is currently increased and sustained by illegal aliens. Cut that out and we'll have two problems. One, red blooded Americans will take jobs at triple the pay of an illegal and our cost of living will increase dramatically. Two, more jobs will leave the country and along with them the taxes illegals do pay.
The economy needs cheap labor. There will be a point when the scales tip, and they may be nearing in California (I'm not convinced for or against this point,) but for the most part the country relies on illegals more than they care to believe.
I'm not in denial, don't worry. Illegal immigration is less of a burden on the country than Reaganomics in their past or present form. You worry about tax brackets and wealth redistribution through politics, but you ignore that it's politics that's pushing more wealth towards the top 5%. That's the true burden on the economy but I think it might be the conservatives that are in denial on this.
How on earth can population increases not increase pollution? Its absolutely impossible for it NOT to!
And why does the economy need cheap labor? I seem to remember the 1960s and 70s where we didnt have masses of illegal labor and we functioned just fine. Am I supposed to freak out because we have fewer leaf blowers? Guess what-there arent any leaves! Ban the ing machines, hire fewer people for landscaping. This country does not NEED illegals-businesses are addicted to cheap labor. Cure them of the addiction and close the damn border..............................
How on earth can population increases not increase pollution? Its absolutely impossible for it NOT to!
And why does the economy need cheap labor? I seem to remember the 1960s and 70s where we didnt have masses of illegal labor and we functioned just fine. Am I supposed to freak out because we have fewer leaf blowers? Guess what-there arent any leaves! Ban the ing machines, hire fewer people for landscaping. This country does not NEED illegals-businesses are addicted to cheap labor. Cure them of the addiction and close the damn border..............................
I did'nt get it either...I never said anything about exponential growth of pollution so I've got no idea where that came from.
You made a good point. Europe (during much better times) used to have a labor shortage and imported foriegn workers (who are still there) - the shortage is gone and unemployment has skyrocketed (what 12% in France?).
The ONLY labor shortage I have ever heard discussed in the U.S. for the past 1/2 century was during the 90's, and that was over a shortage of highly skilled and educated workers.
Comments
Originally posted by agent302
Re Jukebox Hero's original comment on my statement:
Wow. Wow. You think there's no way for minority immigrants to positively assimilate themselves into American society, much the same way as the Irish, or the Germans, etc, did however long ago? Based on your reasoning, anyone who leaves one country for another is lazy. So if I decide I want to live in Europe instead of the U.S., I'm lazy? Is (to use a current example) Arnold Schwarzengger lazy because he left Austria to go to the U.S.? Was Ben Franklin in the same boat too?
This culturally static reasoning is absurd. To assume that because a person is Indian means they must support a class-based society is ridiculous. Perhaps they emigrated because they recognized the failings of the entrenched system?
Gotta agree with agent302 on this one, to a point. It takes a lot of guts to move to another country Although that really doesnt apply much to mexicans because it is so easy for them to come here and go back if they so choose. Also, what exactly are they leaving behind?
I dont blame immigrants for wanting to come here, but we have a right to form a policy that suits the US, not them. Our immigration rates are way too high right now and too geared towards uneducated labor. We need a better mix..............
Originally posted by steve666
Also, what exactly are they leaving behind?
Have you ever been to Mexico? This is one of the most ignorant statements I've ever seen on these boards.
Immigration has nothing to do with the environment. In all of your racist threads, you've ignored one major point: the illegal immigrants in this country add more to the economy than they take away. You pretend this isn't true, but it is.
The real problem is that our country doesn't give a rat's ass about the environment. If we did, we would solve any and all of the problems that you wrongly attribute to illegal immigration. And if we stopped the immigrants, we'd have less money to fix the environment with because we would lose the net gain that the immigrants add to the economy.
So, we should be glad that the immigrants help keep our economy afloat and use that extra cash to fix the problems.
Originally posted by bunge
Have you ever been to Mexico? This is one of the most ignorant statements I've ever seen on these boards.
Immigration has nothing to do with the environment. In all of your racist threads, you've ignored one major point: the illegal immigrants in this country add more to the economy than they take away. You pretend this isn't true, but it is.
The real problem is that our country doesn't give a rat's ass about the environment. If we did, we would solve any and all of the problems that you wrongly attribute to illegal immigration. And if we stopped the immigrants, we'd have less money to fix the environment with because we would lose the net gain that the immigrants add to the economy.
So, we should be glad that the immigrants help keep our economy afloat and use that extra cash to fix the problems.
You are so clueless its scary. Mexico is a third world shithole, without a minimum wage, absolutely no labor laws, no public education system, and absolutely no way to improve their lives. Why the hell do you think they are coming over the borders in droves? I thought it was obvious, but you have to have a clue to realize the reason.
As for the environment, how can increasing the population at a rapid rate NOT affect the environment? Tell me how doubling the population in 50 years does NOT have an impact on the environment. Unbelieveable.
As for illegal immigrants adding to the economy? Lets see-they dont pay Federal or State Income taxes, they depress wages, yet they use social services, get free medical care, commit crimes that our police force (that we pay for not them) have to take care of, overcrowd our schools that they dont pay a dime to contribute to, yet that is all a plus for our economy? Get a clue.........................
Originally posted by steve666
You are so clueless its scary. Mexico is a third world shithole, without a minimum wage, absolutely no labor laws, no public education system, and absolutely no way to improve their lives. Why the hell do you think they are coming over the borders in droves? I thought it was obvious, but you have to have a clue to realize the reason.
I was right, you are ignorant.
Originally posted by steve666
As for the environment, how can increasing the population at a rapid rate NOT affect the environment? Tell me how doubling the population in 50 years does NOT have an impact on the environment. Unbelieveable.
Lower the population and the U.S. will still be destroying the environment. It's not dying because there are too many people, it's dying because too many people don't do anything to fix it.
Originally posted by steve666
As for illegal immigrants adding to the economy? Lets see-they dont pay Federal or State Income taxes, they depress wages, yet they use social services, get free medical care, commit crimes that our police force (that we pay for not them) have to take care of, overcrowd our schools that they dont pay a dime to contribute to, yet that is all a plus for our economy? Get a clue.........................
They pay a ton of taxes. Most pay income taxes because they get a SS#. Real or not, taxes are taken. Those that get cash still pay plenty of sales taxes and other fees. If they cost us money the government wouldn't tolerate them. But the government is not as ignorant as you are.
Originally posted by agent302
Re Jukebox Hero's original comment on my statement:
Wow. Wow. You think there's no way for minority immigrants to positively assimilate themselves into American society, much the same way as the Irish, or the Germans, etc, did however long ago? Based on your reasoning, anyone who leaves one country for another is lazy. So if I decide I want to live in Europe instead of the U.S., I'm lazy? Is (to use a current example) Arnold Schwarzengger lazy because he left Austria to go to the U.S.? Was Ben Franklin in the same boat too?
This culturally static reasoning is absurd. To assume that because a person is Indian means they must support a class-based society is ridiculous. Perhaps they emigrated because they recognized the failings of the entrenched system?
Anytime one generalizes, they are wrong at a certain percentage. Yeah, people assimilate if you let them immigrate slowly. But when they overwhelm the existing population, they override and supplant it. Thats what I'm witnessing. If you don't see it then maybe you're in a place that isn't as affected. I left my home town (Detroit) to avoid the wrath of angry Muslims that wanted to kill me (Non Jewish Caucasian), to arrive in Tampa. Now I find that my daily interactions rarely involve anybody other than Indians.
Originally posted by bunge
Have you ever been to Mexico? This is one of the most ignorant statements I've ever seen on these boards.
Immigration has nothing to do with the environment. In all of your racist threads, you've ignored one major point: the illegal immigrants in this country add more to the economy than they take away. You pretend this isn't true, but it is.
The real problem is that our country doesn't give a rat's ass about the environment. If we did, we would solve any and all of the problems that you wrongly attribute to illegal immigration. And if we stopped the immigrants, we'd have less money to fix the environment with because we would lose the net gain that the immigrants add to the economy.
So, we should be glad that the immigrants help keep our economy afloat and use that extra cash to fix the problems.
I agree with you, to a point. Right now we have a choice to fix the environment. Unfortunately, we CHOOSE not to. But when the population explodes like in China or India, things get desparate.
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
I agree with you, to a point. Right now we have a choice to fix the environment. Unfortunately, we CHOOSE not to. But when the population explodes like in China or India, things get desparate.
This is the big problem.
I do, however, truly believe that the immigrants add more to the economy than they take away. It's probably true that they could add more if they followed every law, but in all honesty I believe the economy would be worse off without any illegal immigrants than with them paying not as much as they should. Getting them all to pay exactly what they 'should' pay would be even more money, but realistically impossible.
Originally posted by bunge
They pay a ton of taxes. Most pay income taxes because they get a SS#. Real or not, taxes are taken. Those that get cash still pay plenty of sales taxes and other fees. If they cost us money the government wouldn't tolerate them. But the government is not as ignorant as you are.
How do they have a SS# if they are illegal? They dont want anyone to know they are here, they work OFF the books, capeesh?
Sales tax does not begin to cover what they cost us in services and schooling.
The Government is incredibly ignorant, and corrupt. If they want swing votes they will be in favor of anything. If Big business wants cheap labor, Republicans will do nothing about it. If the Pro-immigration lobby wants an illegal alien amnesty their Democratic whores will bend over backwards to support it. Take your head out of the sand........................
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
Anytime one generalizes, they are wrong at a certain percentage. Yeah, people assimilate if you let them immigrate slowly. But when they overwhelm the existing population, they override and supplant it.
You say this as though I was only providing specific examples to your "general" problem. Referencing the mass European immigrations of the 18th and 19th centuries (ie, when I mentioned the Irish and the Germans) is hardly using the specific to refute the general. And minorities today are hardly overwhelming the majority population. That's why they're still minorities.
The other issue that seems to be getting confused here is that you're afraid of degradation from a mass of immigrants. This seems to me like you assume that environmental problems are limited to nation-state borders, which is hardly the case when you consider elements like global climate change, air pollution, overfishing the common seas, and other international environmental issues. These things don't go away without immigration. Sure, you might have a little less trash in the landfill in San Diego, but if the dump in Tijuana is still full, you can still smell it (to use a crappy example). Immigration is not an increase in global population; its merely a shift. And I already know you're views on birth control.
Thats what I'm witnessing. If you don't see it then maybe you're in a place that isn't as affected. I left my home town (Detroit) to avoid the wrath of angry Muslims that wanted to kill me (Non Jewish Caucasian), to arrive in Tampa. Now I find that my daily interactions rarely involve anybody other than Indians.
I find it ludicrous to think that Muslims really wanted to kill you. I know lots of Muslims (both in California and in Great Britain) and they are all by and large extremely nice and friendly people. And believe, I have seen the demographic shifts. The county that I grew up in (Alameda County, California) has a higher percentage of Asians (inclusive of "Orientals" [for lack of a better term], South East Asians, and Indians/Pakistanis/Bengalis) than it does Caucasians. Yet the level of affluence in the region has stayed extremely high. My hometown actually has the highest Afghani population in the U.S., but there aren't acts of terrorism occurring anywhere. In fact, with a population of 200,000 people, the average homicide rate over the last 5 years has been about 1 murder per year. So, yeah, there are immigrants, but they aren't having any negative affect on me. Hell, two of my best friends from High School are Indian.
Originally posted by steve666
How do they have a SS# if they are illegal?
In all honesty, there are a lot of ways to get one illegally. Why get one? Because you have access to more jobs. Sometimes the numbers are real, but of someone else. Sometimes they're unused SS numbers. Whatever the case may be, if an illegal is using the number then they are 'legal' for all practical taxable purposes.
There are plenty that don't use a SS# and get paid cash. But considering the kind of jobs these people have I would guess that home-grown Americans working for cash have a far greater negative impact on the economy than that of the illegal aliens.
Originally posted by agent302
You say this as though I was only providing specific examples to your "general" problem. Referencing the mass European immigrations of the 18th and 19th centuries (ie, when I mentioned the Irish and the Germans) is hardly using the specific to refute the general. And minorities today are hardly overwhelming the majority population. That's why they're still minorities.
The key is a controlled immigration.
The other issue that seems to be getting confused here is that you're afraid of degradation from a mass of immigrants. This seems to me like you assume that environmental problems are limited to nation-state borders, which is hardly the case when you consider elements like global climate change, air pollution, overfishing the common seas, and other international environmental issues. These things don't go away without immigration. Sure, you might have a little less trash in the landfill in San Diego, but if the dump in Tijuana is still full, you can still smell it (to use a crappy example). Immigration is not an increase in global population; its merely a shift. And I already know you're views on birth control.
In Mexico City they monitor air quality levels. After so many deaths in a given day that are deemed air-quality related, they will forcefully shut down industry for the rest of the day. Super, lets bring that here.
I find it ludicrous to think that Muslims really wanted to kill you. I know lots of Muslims (both in California and in Great Britain) and they are all by and large extremely nice and friendly people. And believe, I have seen the demographic shifts. The county that I grew up in (Alameda County, California) has a higher percentage of Asians (inclusive of "Orientals" [for lack of a better term], South East Asians, and Indians/Pakistanis/Bengalis) than it does Caucasians. Yet the level of affluence in the region has stayed extremely high. My hometown actually has the highest Afghani population in the U.S., but there aren't acts of terrorism occurring anywhere. In fact, with a population of 200,000 people, the average homicide rate over the last 5 years has been about 1 murder per year. So, yeah, there are immigrants, but they aren't having any negative affect on me. Hell, two of my best friends from High School are Indian.
Again, different experiences. Being an American mutt, I find it ludicrous as well.
Many of my friends are Indian and other Asian descent. So what? They are my friends because they were placed in an environment that was conducive to that type of friendship. If they had come over now, they might have isolated themselves to a clique of their own as they do here at my place of employment.
Originally posted by bunge
Have you ever been to Mexico? This is one of the most ignorant statements I've ever seen on these boards.
Immigration has nothing to do with the environment. In all of your racist threads, you've ignored one major point: the illegal immigrants in this country add more to the economy than they take away. You pretend this isn't true, but it is.
The real problem is that our country doesn't give a rat's ass about the environment. If we did, we would solve any and all of the problems that you wrongly attribute to illegal immigration. And if we stopped the immigrants, we'd have less money to fix the environment with because we would lose the net gain that the immigrants add to the economy.
So, we should be glad that the immigrants help keep our economy afloat and use that extra cash to fix the problems...Lower the population and the U.S. will still be destroying the environment. It's not dying because there are too many people, it's dying because too many people don't do anything to fix it.
Bunge,
After having read several of your rants my advice for you is that: ?Wishing it doesn?t make it so!? You?ve repeatedly expressed unsupported assertions without any evidence, and very little supportive reasoning.
Of course immigration has something to do with our environment ? human population growth and density is a well recognized contributor to increased resource demands and undesirable economic externalities; namely, pollution, traffic, and increased land/housing costs.
As to your assertion that the 1.4 million people that arrive every year in this country are a net ?gain? to the economy, more wishful thinking. In particular:
First, the holy mantra of benefiting ?the economy? is important ONLY if it increases per capita national wealth (i.e. a rise in real, average, wages). An economy that expands only because of a population increase is a net zero addition to our standard of living, and when measured against the social and environmental costs is a significant burden on that economy.
Second, the U.S. does not have a totally free market system wherein the worker (producer) pays the market value of his/her cost to society. In our system 40% of all national wealth is redistributed through politics. Most immigrants are in the lowest tax brackets that pay little or no taxes (the upper half pays 95% of all income tax), EVEN when they are on a regular payroll.
However, benefit costs are distributed politically. The cost of education, welfare, social security, police, fire protection, libraries, recreation facilities, prisons, parks, senior services, medicare, and other public benefits are NOT borne by the immigrant, their children, or the extended families (including the aged parents and grandparents) that they bring with them. It is paid by established, mostly native born, American citizens.
Third, the particular social costs caused by immigration are significant. Our prison population has exploded in the last twenty years, and at least ½ (maybe more) are from the immigrant ethnic groups. First, and sometimes second, generation immigrants also have a high demand for state subsidized medical care, special and remedial education, Section 8 housing, welfare, etc..
Last, there are self-evident quality of life costs associated with population growth (which is mainly due to immigration). Anyone who has lived long enough to see the transformation of California has seen the future of other states. The days of ?easy-rider? biking through bucolic, quaint, rural countryside and towns is over ? as are riding in dune buggies on empty beaches, renting a cheap beach house (which students used to do), enjoying farms and countryside, and affordable housing ? all of that is gone.
You want to live in a ?quaint? town in California ? pay $600,000 for a small house in Marin County; you want to buy a house on the beach, go to Central California (once isolated and beautiful) and pay $385,000 for a two bedroom-one bath shack; want to go camping, go to Yosemite where they?ve had to ban all traffic and will be rationing visitors; want to travel the little two lanes of wine country, then be prepared for very long, jammed, and dense traffic; want to go to a quaint restaurant, then make sure you can pay $25.00 ? $35.00 for a dinner. Want a medical appointment, then go to Kiaser and see immigrant lines out the door and get a good sense of medical rationing. Want to take a trip, then make sure you can pay the highest gas prices in the U.S. (California has ?special? fuel to reduce emissions) ? when you can get lodging in a decent area.
California is the future for the nation (although many are having the same problems). It is a state where ?open spaces? are Disney like dioramas, only for viewing from crowded freeways; where the privileged can purchase their ?rural? acreage in gated communities (e.g. Blackhawk) or live in mainly a very expensive, white town with draconian zoning and growth restrictions; wherein the young cannot afford a house, and businesses cannot afford a state with high taxes and its social costs.
Bunge, you are in denial, open your mind.
>(Dateline 2005) Washington D.C.
The President has jointly announced with the majority leadership of both houses, that America?s borders will be opened to any and all individuals who wish to visit, pass through, or move to the United States. She made her policy clear in a joint session of Congress:
? In order to stimulate our economy, and to live up the demands of human rights, I am declaring the Unitized States have an unrestricted and open border. Although all immigrants will have to register their names, no restrictions or criteria for admission will be placed on any immigrant ? regardless of age, national origin, job skill, education, health, or political viewpoint. If we believe in immigration, then this will be welcome by all Americans.?
She added that citizenship will be automatically granted to newcomers as most government benefits and affirmative action programs are already mandated by the courts to apply to residents, legal or otherwise.
U.S. Census estimates are that the yearly immigration will increase from 1.4 million a year (legal and illegal) to nearly 5 million per year. At current levels of child-bearing, it is estimated that by the year 2050, there will be slightly more than one billion people in the United States?and rising.
The overwhelming majority of immigrants will be the poor from third world nations, most strongly represented by Latin America and Africa (approximately 80%). By the year 2100, population projections show the United States will have nearly 2.2 billion residents. <
I'm serious, if this were actually the reality, would you have ANY concerns or objections? If so, what and why in light of your current stance?
Originally posted by MaxParrish
Of course immigration has something to do with our environment ? human population growth and density is a well recognized contributor to increased resource demands and undesirable economic externalities; namely, pollution, traffic, and increased land/housing costs.
Pollution doesn't increase exponentially with population growth. If you double the population, pollution doesn't triple.
Our quality of life is currently increased and sustained by illegal aliens. Cut that out and we'll have two problems. One, red blooded Americans will take jobs at triple the pay of an illegal and our cost of living will increase dramatically. Two, more jobs will leave the country and along with them the taxes illegals do pay.
The economy needs cheap labor. There will be a point when the scales tip, and they may be nearing in California (I'm not convinced for or against this point,) but for the most part the country relies on illegals more than they care to believe.
I'm not in denial, don't worry. Illegal immigration is less of a burden on the country than Reaganomics in their past or present form. You worry about tax brackets and wealth redistribution through politics, but you ignore that it's politics that's pushing more wealth towards the top 5%. That's the true burden on the economy but I think it might be the conservatives that are in denial on this.
Originally posted by bunge
In all honesty, there are a lot of ways to get one illegally. Why get one? Because you have access to more jobs. Sometimes the numbers are real, but of someone else. Sometimes they're unused SS numbers. Whatever the case may be, if an illegal is using the number then they are 'legal' for all practical taxable purposes.
There are plenty that don't use a SS# and get paid cash. But considering the kind of jobs these people have I would guess that home-grown Americans working for cash have a far greater negative impact on the economy than that of the illegal aliens.
They all work off the books, and why would it be worse for an American citizen to do so than an illegal alien? The illegal probably gets more benefits, such as free medical care. Its wrong, period..........................................
Originally posted by bunge
Pollution doesn't increase exponentially with population growth. If you double the population, pollution doesn't triple.
Our quality of life is currently increased and sustained by illegal aliens. Cut that out and we'll have two problems. One, red blooded Americans will take jobs at triple the pay of an illegal and our cost of living will increase dramatically. Two, more jobs will leave the country and along with them the taxes illegals do pay.
The economy needs cheap labor. There will be a point when the scales tip, and they may be nearing in California (I'm not convinced for or against this point,) but for the most part the country relies on illegals more than they care to believe.
I'm not in denial, don't worry. Illegal immigration is less of a burden on the country than Reaganomics in their past or present form. You worry about tax brackets and wealth redistribution through politics, but you ignore that it's politics that's pushing more wealth towards the top 5%. That's the true burden on the economy but I think it might be the conservatives that are in denial on this.
How on earth can population increases not increase pollution? Its absolutely impossible for it NOT to!
And why does the economy need cheap labor? I seem to remember the 1960s and 70s where we didnt have masses of illegal labor and we functioned just fine. Am I supposed to freak out because we have fewer leaf blowers? Guess what-there arent any leaves! Ban the
Originally posted by steve666
How on earth can population increases not increase pollution? Its absolutely impossible for it NOT to!
And why does the economy need cheap labor? I seem to remember the 1960s and 70s where we didnt have masses of illegal labor and we functioned just fine. Am I supposed to freak out because we have fewer leaf blowers? Guess what-there arent any leaves! Ban the
I did'nt get it either...I never said anything about exponential growth of pollution so I've got no idea where that came from.
You made a good point. Europe (during much better times) used to have a labor shortage and imported foriegn workers (who are still there) - the shortage is gone and unemployment has skyrocketed (what 12% in France?).
The ONLY labor shortage I have ever heard discussed in the U.S. for the past 1/2 century was during the 90's, and that was over a shortage of highly skilled and educated workers.
This "cheap" labor arguement is a red herring.