Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

castille · Jan 18, 2004, 08:18 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (G. Adams,)
I do want to see the fabric of your nation, and mine, and everyone's torn asunder. <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

So now the Communists want to create a revolution by destroying the world first?

Now we know the REAL agenda of those student protestors....they want to turn the great cities of the world - New York, Shanghai, Paris, Berlin, London - into terrifying World War 2 warzones.

They want to force a revolution by turning the world into a chaotic warzone first.

Except for 1 problem. If that happens - if the leftists win and the industrial world turns into a pot of war and fear and destruction - it'll take another 200 years to repair.

As factories are destroyed and farms are burnt to the ground and people massacred by "Revolutionaries", the damage done will take centuries to repair.

As 700-metre skyscrapers topple to the ground, and entire cities are crushed amongst violence, and Communists vie for power against the Nazis, we could very well end up a world torn between extreme ideologies.

Europe will be ruled by the Communists. America by the Fascists. Asia by the Imperialists. Africa by the anarchists.

G Adams, why don't you stop blowing shit from your ivory tower and go live in Zimbabwe if you desperately want to experience the live of poverty? Or alternatively Tianjin should be good enough for your stuffy Imperial European ass....I have some friends there you'd like to meet. They can introduce you to poverty.

(Of course, I know that you'll never do it. You'll probably continue to protest during the day, while going to a comfortable home at night watching TV while kids starve).

G. Adams · Jan 18, 2004, 11:02 am

As soon as I finish my degree I intend to pack off to South America to work as a journalist. Sadly you need a degree to be taken seriously in academic circles. Just look at Jane Goodall, thought she was just a stupid little girl playing with monkee's because she didn't have an academic background, now her work is the basis for all chimp studies.

I never said I wanted to destroy cities, I never said I wanted violent revolution only. I would prefer peaceful change, but that depends on the reaction of those with power to the mass movement.

do you know what a nation is castille? It's not the cities or towns, or roads or rails etc A nation is group of people who define themselves in opposition to other's. British. American. Chinese. On and on. I want to get rid of that mentality. I want people to see humans instead of nationality.

dalin · Jan 19, 2004, 01:34 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)

Ethnically and racially, this means an America that is no longer a First World country. Third World people of color will be the majority in two decades. Americans whose forefathers came from Europe, 90 percent of the population in 1960, will be a shrinking minority by 2040. For not only are the birth rates of white Americans lower than those of immigrants, the new immigrants will be from the Third World.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Just wanted to touch on this before reading the rest of the thread. Um, I thought the "World" of a country was decided along economic, not ethnic, lines?

white rice · Jan 19, 2004, 09:53 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille,)

So now the Communists want to create a revolution by destroying the world first?

Now we know the REAL agenda of those student protestors....they want to turn the great cities of the world - New York, Shanghai, Paris, Berlin, London - into terrifying World War 2 warzones.

They want to force a revolution by turning the world into a chaotic warzone first.

Except for 1 problem. If that happens - if the leftists win and the industrial world turns into a pot of war and fear and destruction - it'll take another 200 years to repair.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

They have to destroy the old world in order to usher in the new. Whether through politics, revolution, or war. Any means neccessary.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dalin,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)

Ethnically and racially, this means an America that is no longer a First World country. Third World people of color will be the majority in two decades. Americans whose forefathers came from Europe, 90 percent of the population in 1960, will be a shrinking minority by 2040. For not only are the birth rates of white Americans lower than those of immigrants, the new immigrants will be from the Third World.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Just wanted to touch on this before reading the rest of the thread. Um, I thought the "World" of a country was decided along economic, not ethnic, lines?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

"Third World" in the article is Pat Buchannan's shorthand for undermining lesser countries and cultures. His rhetoric has fallen out of popular Conservative circles because immigration has been good to businesses and the economy in general.

Capitalist Pig · Jan 20, 2004, 09:48 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (white rice,)
"Third World" in the article is Pat Buchannan's shorthand for undermining lesser countries and cultures. His rhetoric has fallen out of popular Conservative circles because immigration has been good to businesses and the economy in general.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>I'd reword that as "Republican circles," not all conservatives are big business. Blanket generalizations are generally less offensive when they are more focused on a particular group. I consider myself a conservative, and I still find Buchanan's point on this one to be valid, regardless of whatever benefit it has had to business.

white rice · Jan 21, 2004, 12:57 am

I stand corrected, C. Pig. I have heard Buchannan refered as a Paleo-Conservative in reaction to the NeoConservatives running Iraq. But you're right. It especially irks me when Bush has been successful in pulling both Republican constituencies by either lying with the bait-n-switch or providing big government policies to his faith based constituencies and business buddies while claiming to be fiscally sound. There are objections, but not to the levels that would disrupt his popularity.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (white rice,)
Canadians do it all the time.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>Canadians I would make an exception for, because their society reflects ours in many respects. A high inflow of illegal Canadians would pose no threat to America's integrity. They would integrate with little to no difficulty. However, Mexican culture is radically different from ours and Mexico is a seriously corrupt nation, and so comparing their immigration to a high rate of Canadian immigration is inherently flawed in this regard.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

I missed this reply.

Well you have two different responses. 1. Immigration is okay as long as it's legal and doesn't violate our borders. 2. Our American social identity is threatened by non-speaking foreigners and worse off they're violating condition 1.

It sounds like your objection is to immigrants from another country in general rather than whether that immigration legal or not. What of the Irish, German, and Italian immigrants a hundred years ago who had to learn English and American values as well? Was their culture and food inferior and corrupt or were they integrated into the fabric of American society? The Irish and Italian ethnicities are predominantly Roman Catholic, as are most Latino groups.

The difference no one dares to mention outright is that they were white. They faced the same degree of discrimination from 'native born' Americans but two or more generations later, no one could tell.

So, after all the cultural assimilation from immigrants, the pizza, the pretzels, St. Patrick's Day, etc..., what is this American social identity that you are afraid of losing?

I don't see how Mexico being a corrupt nation relates to how it will endanger our cultural integrity. We're not inheriting a Mexican government. The hardworking low-wage Mexican immigrant is the backbone to our infrastructural services...jobs no other American would take without serious desperation. As long as we don't deny their children the services and opportunities other Americans have enjoyed, they have reason to assimilate.

Capitalist Pig · Jan 21, 2004, 06:47 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (white rice,)
It sounds like your objection is to immigrants from another country in general rather than whether that immigration legal or not.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
No, illegal immigration is, in addition to the two reasons you listed, a serious threat to national security. Regardless if its an epidemic or not. Right now, it's an epidemic and requires special attention by the government.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
What of the Irish, German, and Italian immigrants a hundred years ago who had to learn English and American values as well? Was their culture and food inferior and corrupt or were they integrated into the fabric of American society? The Irish and Italian ethnicities are predominantly Roman Catholic, as are most Latino groups.

The difference no one dares to mention outright is that they were white.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Wrong. While the immigrations from eastern and southern Europe weren't easy to deal with, they integrated just fine within a generation or two. A massive wave in immigration from Mexico will not. This is but another parallel to the Roman Empire that one could make for the United States. When Rome became so overrun with the barbarians, they were made citizens and the Roman Empire suffered a schism. Now, this problem was not just because of the barbarians, the division of the Roman Empire was also due to a lot of the in-fighting going on; separate political entities were constantly vieing for dominance. The comparison here is how the Democrats are constantly assailing the President and his policies. However, the barbarians played no small part. Remember that.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
So, after all the cultural assimilation from immigrants, the pizza, the pretzels, St. Patrick's Day, etc..., what is this American social identity that you are afraid of losing?<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
St. Patrick's Day, which is not a federal holiday like Christmas, has been celebrated in the United States since 1762. And it is considered a Catholic holiday. I don't see how that is connected with the history of immigration in the United States, except that perhaps there were a lot of Irishmen in New York City in the 1700s.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
I don't see how Mexico being a corrupt nation relates to how it will endanger our cultural integrity.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
They're not immigrating "just because," rice. The corruption in the Mexican government is what has given rise to the immigration crisis in the first place.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
We're not inheriting a Mexican government.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
We might as well, California has already become so overrun, non-Hispanics are a minority in Los Angeles. Talk to anybody who lives in southern California, the situation is horrible there. Why do you think the Democrats attempted to push pro-immigration legislation during the gubernatorial election? To defeat Arnold with the Hispanic vote, because they know how bad it is there -- and they welcome it.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
The hardworking low-wage Mexican immigrant is the backbone to our infrastructural services...jobs no other American would take without serious desperation. As long as we don't deny their children the services and opportunities other Americans have enjoyed, they have reason to assimilate.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Give me a break, low-wage just serves corporate interest and gives preference to an illegal over an American citizen.

castille · Jan 23, 2004, 12:06 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (G. Adams,)
do you know what a nation is castille? It's not the cities or towns, or roads or rails etc A nation is group of people who define themselves in opposition to other's. British. American. Chinese. On and on. I want to get rid of that mentality. I want people to see humans instead of nationality.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

You're right - nations are formed by opposition. But isn't every type of faction formed by opposition?

Example: Lets imagine 1 big tribe. Tribal tradition dictates that you have to have sex with your sister to procreate. But what if some people disagree? Then they'll split apart, and form their own tribe. What if the new tribe has differences? Then more tribes will form.

Sure, maybe Communism dictates that everyone must be robots (and share the same opinions), but in real life factions do exist.

Even a family can split to create factions. So the husband divorces, maybe his dad is on his side, his mum on the wife's side.

Think about this: If I did your mum and paid her $5, wouldnt you be annoyed? But why? Simple: factions. You see yourself in a similiar faction as your parents. Family is a form of faction. Unless you hate your family (but then you simply form another faction).

If you really want to make an impact on the world, instead of South America (no matter how hot those Rio chicks are!), why not try Asia? China, Japan, Indonesia hold something of 1/3 of the world's population, and all 3 countries are springing ultranationalist groups faster than you can say Nationalism.

Colleptic · Jan 23, 2004, 01:38 am

[font=Times][/font]<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
castille
[color=blue]Sure, maybe Communism dictates that everyone must be robots (and share the same opinions), but in real life factions do exist.[/color]<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
That is Fascism or a Dictatorship, which uses Communism as an economic system to control the welfare of its state, read up please.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
castille
[color=blue]Even a family can split to create factions. So the husband divorces, maybe his dad is on his side, his mum on the wife's side.

Think about this: If I did your mum and paid her $5, wouldnt you be annoyed? But why? Simple: factions. You see yourself in a similiar faction as your parents. Family is a form of faction. Unless you hate your family (but then you simply form another faction).[/color]<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
What the hell is your point here; you are babbling and insulting someone’s mother…

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
castille
[color=blue]If you really want to make an impact on the world, instead of South America (no matter how hot those Rio chicks are!), why not try Asia? China, Japan, Indonesia hold something of 1/3 of the world's population, and all 3 countries are springing ultranationalist groups faster than you can say Nationalism.[/color] <hr size="1" /></blockquote>
Mexico is right next door. You also answered your own question. Those nations are going to begin trading with each other; all those nations are going to assimilate each other (if they do not kill each other first). If the USA, Canada, Mexico and the rest of South America do not start trading amongst each other, sharing wealth, they will fall behind and that would be more detrimental to the precious USA than a few ethnic people within their boarders.

USA will also gain massive political influence in South America, which means it can begin capitalist imperialism down there, without as much fear of revolt. US will also be able to regulate Mexican laws with strong influence, which will help protect their boarders. Furthermore, not all Mexican workers will stay in the US, some will head home, bringing business, trade and political know-how, which can only help their country build its infrastructure, so there is [color=red]no need for immigration, period[/color]!

There is a dream of a total unified West, what is wrong with One America, which trades and intermingles without fear of boarders? Nationalism was a disease of the twentieth century; the speed of the communication age we live in will cure it. The only countries that are not following suit are the nations that have not latched onto the Global Village created by the World Wide Web. The Americas, North, Central and South will have no choice but to work together. China’s population alone, now that the Iron Curtain has fallen, will destroy the US market alone in 30ish years if US remains a secluded state.

white rice · Jan 23, 2004, 02:57 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (white rice,)
It sounds like your objection is to immigrants from another country in general rather than whether that immigration legal or not.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>
No, illegal immigration is, in addition to the two reasons you listed, a serious threat to national security. Regardless if its an epidemic or not. Right now, it's an epidemic and requires special attention by the government.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Attention Bush is giving by pushing a law you might not agree with. It seems that Bush and I agree on this issue in principle....

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)
Wrong. While the immigrations from eastern and southern Europe weren't easy to deal with, they integrated just fine within a generation or two. A massive wave in immigration from Mexico will not. <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Wrong about what? Irish immigration had two waves. The second wave sparked a public backlash. What was wrong with them was that they lived in slums, accepted low wages, and they were Catholic. The reason they integrated (grudginly accepted) was because they took an active interest in politics and pooled their interests in the form of political power. The discrimination among local businesses was still prevalent.

The Italian backlash began in the 1920s. Congress passed laws on immigration quotas. Local levels were more severe and manipulative. The Ku Klux Klan didn't target only blacks, and had the motto of "America for Americans". They only integrated just fine when World War Two ended because the stereotypes about them were wrong. Stereotypes of being slow learners of English and in general, loyal only to the Pope and distrustful of the US government, being clannish and suspicious of outsiders, etc... Plus they lived in slums, accepted low wages, and they were Catholic. Notice the patern of different American generations here.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)
This is but another parallel to the Roman Empire that one could make for the United States. When Rome became so overrun with the barbarians, they were made citizens and the Roman Empire suffered a schism. <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

You're condensing a few centuries of Roman history here... Emperor Valens accepted the Goths under false pretenses only to put the settling Goths in concentration camps to be conscripted or sold to slavery. Two years laer, the Goths rebeled and eventually killed Valens at Adrianople. Hopefully there won't be a condensed parallel at work....

The truth is that it's the immigrants choice whether to accept the doctrine of Anglo-assimilation or not. The Italians, Jews, Poles, etc... accepted it because it appealed to their personal interests. Whether or not the second or third generation non-whites will accept it is largely determined by their socio-economic status, don't you agree?

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)
Now, this problem was not just because of the barbarians, the division of the Roman Empire was also due to a lot of the in-fighting going on; separate political entities were constantly vieing for dominance. The comparison here is how the Democrats are constantly assailing the President and his policies. However, the barbarians played no small part. Remember that.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Yes, blame the evil Democrats for plaguing a process that has occured since the birth of this nation. How quickly we forget the Clinton impeachment trials and the shutdown of our government.. Both parties are guilty of the same crime, but I've yet to see political assassinations and secret coups, unless you want to count Gore v. Bush...

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)
St. Patrick's Day, which is not a federal holiday like Christmas, has been celebrated in the United States since 1762. And it is considered a Catholic holiday. I don't see how that is connected with the history of immigration in the United States, except that perhaps there were a lot of Irishmen in New York City in the 1700s. <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

Interesting. Do you know anyone who wears green on St. Patty's Day but aren't fully Irish? Do you see people getting pinched? Has Halloween always been celebrated as a candy soliciting festival in the US? Easter Bunny? Those aren't inherited or concieved American traditions?

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)
They're not immigrating "just because," rice. The corruption in the Mexican government is what has given rise to the immigration crisis in the first place. <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

That could be one of many factors. Or maybe they're fed up with living in squalor like any other immigant. Doesn't mean the people are corrupt or won't work hard like you have been implying.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)
We might as well, California has already become so overrun, non-Hispanics are a minority in Los Angeles. Talk to anybody who lives in southern California, the situation is horrible there.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

I live in SoCal. Do you know anyone around here or have you just heard about New MexiCal... Yeah, there's a lotta Mexicans. I don't ride around huddled with my gun suspiciously eyeing Mexicans. Most of them just want to do their own thing and live in America.

So what exactly is so horrible? I don't know what you've heard, but that explosive debt was not caused by illegal immigrants. Not a lot of like minded faces? Aww, you might have to get to know the people... Surprisingly, some of the second or third generationers seem to speak good English like they've integrated just fine or something.

California isn't the only state with Mexican immigrants. All border states have them. Texas rivals California in percentage. California is more metropolitan and more exposed, so it's understandable that it'll be in the spotlight with its highs and lows exagerated. You have no proof that illegal immigration was the primary factor to why people from California are moving to other states. It could be the air quality or standard of living, or because they want a good job in a time where California has a 50 billion dollar debt. Buchannan doesn't live here. He's a demogauge spouting typical rhetoric with no standing proof.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)
Why do you think the Democrats attempted to push pro-immigration legislation during the gubernatorial election? To defeat Arnold with the Hispanic vote, because they know how bad it is there -- and they welcome it.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

So according to the article Bush knows how bad it is/will be and is appealing to the Mexican vote now. Another Democrat conspiracy at work were.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,)
Give me a break, low-wage just serves corporate interest and gives preference to an illegal over an American citizen.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

If you really wanted to mow my lawn, clean my toilets, flip a burger, or wait at my beck and call, all you had to do was just ask.

Again, these jobs are menial that no educated American would tolerate for more than a year. It spills beyond corporate interests to local businesses and startups. Illegal immigration benefits the economy in secondary forms. The employers, retailers, and middlemen all pay taxes based on the increased productivity of these undocumented aliens. Bush's proposal would put these people on record, tax them, and give them humanitarian benefits that people living and working in the US should recieve.

It's a tough thing to swallow for people who believe in national boundaries. I agree, it's a very grey issue. But the reality is here. Condoning it or not will not change the flow of illegal immigration. Spending billions on border patrol hasn't netted us any visible benefits. The people caught just try again and hope to succeed. The thing I believe is that if they're here and get a good opportunity, most likely the majority won't sqander it. Some might be so entrenched they'll become xenophobic as the rest of us. Double plus for America. On the other hand, if they're ignored or to be swept into the cracks of society, then they will become a greater burden on the system with very slim chances of clawing out of their slums.

G. Adams · Jan 23, 2004, 10:59 am

Gah, beaten to the punch by colleptic. Good stuff.

On a personal note, I'm choosing South America to get involved with because

a) I'm learning Spanish already (i am doing japanese too, but they seem to be doing quite well on their own right now)
b) My personal views will be better recieved there
c) And just as you said, ultranationalist movements are springing up all over Asia. I'm going to South America were new left wing movements are springing up all over.

Colleptic · Jan 24, 2004, 05:26 pm

I see no reason why the Americas should not unite, according to my post one page 2. If Canada (my country) could prefect our social health care system (it is almost there, it is just a matter of delegating funding properly, which is more difficult than one would imagine) and promote advanced education systems, then spread it down to South America, it might unite them under tolerance of multiculturalism. Then some how influence the masses of Capitalists in the USA to join in unity; [color=red]that would be power![/color] American citizens who want to see borders remain and follow the disease of nationalism are living in the Rearview Mirror.

Leopard · Jan 24, 2004, 07:59 pm

insane...

everyone has an opinion and only a few have the facts...

Nature of Reality: nice to see someone who understands REAL economics and not just emotional gibberish of the like that Mr. Pat Buchannan spouts...

the point is rather moot anyways, you cannot escape the natural economics of the world situation:

(1) the US has inflated wage rates (see #1 below)
(2) the US population growth (Birth-death rates of Caucasion/English speaking folks) is just about at 0%
(3) the US population total is about 300 million, perhaps 200 million being of european descent
(4) the population of asia (china & india esp) runs about 3 BILLION and their birth rate is much greater

so, you protectionists go ahead and stick your heads in the ground and worry about the sky falling with 'mexicali' et al... make sure you teach your children how 'bad' foreigners' are and how everyone should just speak english... that will really prepare them for the upcoming future...

if you can't see that it is our very own government which is exsasterbating<sp> this 'problem' with tariffs, strict immigration, subsidies, taxes, regulation, minimum wages, etc, and you believe all the political rhetoric thrwon at you from both sides AND the media, then, I guess you get what you deserve... if you are even vaguely interested in finding out 'for yourself': learn about economics and why humans trade in the first place, learn about the free market and its actual effects on all the classes, learn about how ordinairy people - if left unfettered by government - can have tremendous positive influences on everyone in a society and the world. Here's a few good starting points:

Mises Institute
Lew Rockwell

its really all so very simple:
if I have an apple tree and pick an apple, and my neighbor offers me $1 to buy it from me, should the government or ANYONE have any 'right' to 'force' this trade in a direction other than how my neighbor and I agree? Does it matter if 'my neighbor' lives across town, in a different state, or even across the globe? Does it matter if my neighbor is poor and I am rich (or visa-versa)? Does it matter if he has a different religion, skin color, culture, or whatever? Does it matter if I refuse to sell him the apple for what he offers for whatever reason I decide? What if I suggest that rather than $1 money, I would rather have him sweep my garage?

if you can't answer 'no' to every question in the above situation, can you explain the basis for your beliefs?

the ONLY way america is going to compete in the upcoming future is if we are able to teach our children how to be responsible for their own actions and some basic economic principles - we will devolve into some 3rd rate nation if we hold onto this moronic national pride which is used against us to our own detriment<sp>.

Teach them how labor will be moving very fast and to have a back-up skill/occupation in the event that their current employer does not manage to compete. Explain to them that the government does not 'produce' anything - it does not 'add' to our economic well-being and can only negatively impact it by attempting to manipulate/control it. Explain to them that EVERY trade between to people which has no outside coercion/force INCREASES the wealth of BOTH parties. Teach them how to put your religious principles INTO the marketplace, and force businesses to be more 'moral' by not making it profitable to be 'immoral'. Personal responsibility.... it is an awesome power... and it is through this that freedom can be had. (Note: previous sentence works both ways by interchanging 'freedom' and 'responsibility' - they go hand in hand)

just another hick opinion added to the fray,
michael

Xicano82 · Feb 3, 2004, 04:53 am

This nation was built on the blood and backs of those indigenous to this land. Conservatives would like to have us believe that the history of this country is not relevant and that the settlers were actually doing the Indigenous populations a "favor" by colonizing them. I hope for one that Mexicans take over this country raise hell. I say let the chickens come home to roost...

Suburbanite · Feb 3, 2004, 05:12 am

Why is everyone so afraid of Mexicans? The jobs they steal would be paying more if corporate regulations were stronger and enforced, and then Mexican immigrants would be losing all their jobs to someone English speaking and with an American education.

Leopard · Feb 4, 2004, 03:21 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Suburbanite,)
Why is everyone so afraid of Mexicans? The jobs they steal would be paying more if corporate regulations were stronger and enforced, and then Mexican immigrants would be losing all their jobs to someone English speaking and with an American education.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

gotta luv the rhetoric!

'steal' jobs? - How exactly do they 'steal' jobs? Why is it ANY of your business if two people come to an agreement regarding any transaction? If I have a job that is worth me paying someone only $5/hour for, and I find someone willing to do it - did they 'steal' my job offer from the person who demands $7? I say the person would goes about 'demanding' that they are 'worth' $7/hour better be able to prove it - prove to the prospective employer that you would be more dependable, that a higher education would allow you to be twice as efficient as an unskilled $5/hour person... THIS is the true job of each and every one of us - to make ourselves more valuable to others so we can increase our own income to do the other things which are in our self-interest... crying to government is just soooo easy tho, isn't it? Seems we all never really broke free from our mothers, just substituted 'mama State'...

'American Education'?
isn't 2+2=4 kinda universal, no matter what country or language you live in or speak? If our 'american' education is so good, then why are we ranked below 20th in comparison to other nations in the world? why can't high schoolers in america even point to the correct location on a map where washington, DC is? wait a second.... this isn't really fair, I am comparing our 'public school' educated children... my bad, sorry...

michael

Suburbanite · Feb 4, 2004, 03:49 am

Hahaha, I agree and concede to you Michael. I read this book called "Always Running" and later met the Author. The protagonist's father was a principle in a large school in Mexico, comes to America, and the best job he could get with his college degrees, because of his accent was a Lab Janitor at a local school. Just a few weeks ago I was talking with a woman from Guatemala who faced the same things. She was a Doctor with a college degree and now works in a hospital as a nurse, and she speaks perfect English. But I am side tracking.

castille · Feb 4, 2004, 06:25 am

When the early settlers came to America, they weren't complaining about no Mexican immigrants. Hell, they were breaking their backs against the bitter cold, trying to build Jamestown into a livable colony.

Today....gee, I spilt coffee on my hand! Lets go sue Maccas!

Suburbanite · Feb 5, 2004, 04:53 am

Becuase Mexico is no where near Jamestown?

PatC · Feb 9, 2004, 03:29 am

Has anyone realized that by giving work visas or whatever there called, Bush is esencially giving out free citizenship. I dont care about all that economic, job loss, or communist bullshit. Everyone has a right to become a citizen of the USA, but there is legal process that must be followed. Mexicans or whoever, they are here illegaly breaking the law. And because the INS can't keep up they are being rewarded. All are undocumented, which means we cant tell if someone is a rapist, coke fiend, or if its just someone trying to make an honest living,

Jan 18, 2004, 08:18 am	#21 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (G. Adams,) I do want to see the fabric of your nation, and mine, and everyone's torn asunder. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> So now the Communists want to create a revolution by destroying the world first? Now we know the REAL agenda of those student protestors....they want to turn the great cities of the world - New York, Shanghai, Paris, Berlin, London - into terrifying World War 2 warzones. They want to force a revolution by turning the world into a chaotic warzone first. Except for 1 problem. If that happens - if the leftists win and the industrial world turns into a pot of war and fear and destruction - it'll take another 200 years to repair. As factories are destroyed and farms are burnt to the ground and people massacred by "Revolutionaries", the damage done will take centuries to repair. As 700-metre skyscrapers topple to the ground, and entire cities are crushed amongst violence, and Communists vie for power against the Nazis, we could very well end up a world torn between extreme ideologies. Europe will be ruled by the Communists. America by the Fascists. Asia by the Imperialists. Africa by the anarchists. G Adams, why don't you stop blowing shit from your ivory tower and go live in Zimbabwe if you desperately want to experience the live of poverty? Or alternatively Tianjin should be good enough for your stuffy Imperial European ass....I have some friends there you'd like to meet. They can introduce you to poverty. (Of course, I know that you'll never do it. You'll probably continue to protest during the day, while going to a comfortable home at night watching TV while kids starve). Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Jan 18, 2004, 11:02 am	#22 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,161	As soon as I finish my degree I intend to pack off to South America to work as a journalist. Sadly you need a degree to be taken seriously in academic circles. Just look at Jane Goodall, thought she was just a stupid little girl playing with monkee's because she didn't have an academic background, now her work is the basis for all chimp studies. I never said I wanted to destroy cities, I never said I wanted violent revolution only. I would prefer peaceful change, but that depends on the reaction of those with power to the mass movement. do you know what a nation is castille? It's not the cities or towns, or roads or rails etc A nation is group of people who define themselves in opposition to other's. British. American. Chinese. On and on. I want to get rid of that mentality. I want people to see humans instead of nationality. Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Jan 19, 2004, 01:34 pm	#23 (permalink) (top)
dalin Molten Ash Posts: 118	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) Ethnically and racially, this means an America that is no longer a First World country. Third World people of color will be the majority in two decades. Americans whose forefathers came from Europe, 90 percent of the population in 1960, will be a shrinking minority by 2040. For not only are the birth rates of white Americans lower than those of immigrants, the new immigrants will be from the Third World. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Just wanted to touch on this before reading the rest of the thread. Um, I thought the "World" of a country was decided along economic, not ethnic, lines?

Jan 19, 2004, 09:53 pm	#24 (permalink) (top)
white rice Igneous Magma Posts: 372	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (castille,) So now the Communists want to create a revolution by destroying the world first? Now we know the REAL agenda of those student protestors....they want to turn the great cities of the world - New York, Shanghai, Paris, Berlin, London - into terrifying World War 2 warzones. They want to force a revolution by turning the world into a chaotic warzone first. Except for 1 problem. If that happens - if the leftists win and the industrial world turns into a pot of war and fear and destruction - it'll take another 200 years to repair. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> They have to destroy the old world in order to usher in the new. Whether through politics, revolution, or war. Any means neccessary. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dalin,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) Ethnically and racially, this means an America that is no longer a First World country. Third World people of color will be the majority in two decades. Americans whose forefathers came from Europe, 90 percent of the population in 1960, will be a shrinking minority by 2040. For not only are the birth rates of white Americans lower than those of immigrants, the new immigrants will be from the Third World. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Just wanted to touch on this before reading the rest of the thread. Um, I thought the "World" of a country was decided along economic, not ethnic, lines?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> "Third World" in the article is Pat Buchannan's shorthand for undermining lesser countries and cultures. His rhetoric has fallen out of popular Conservative circles because immigration has been good to businesses and the economy in general. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups

Jan 20, 2004, 09:48 pm	#25 (permalink) (top)
Capitalist Pig Market Anarchist Location: United States Posts: 652	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (white rice,) "Third World" in the article is Pat Buchannan's shorthand for undermining lesser countries and cultures. His rhetoric has fallen out of popular Conservative circles because immigration has been good to businesses and the economy in general.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>I'd reword that as "Republican circles," not all conservatives are big business. Blanket generalizations are generally less offensive when they are more focused on a particular group. I consider myself a conservative, and I still find Buchanan's point on this one to be valid, regardless of whatever benefit it has had to business. Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito.

Jan 21, 2004, 12:57 am	#26 (permalink) (top)
white rice Igneous Magma Posts: 372	I stand corrected, C. Pig. I have heard Buchannan refered as a Paleo-Conservative in reaction to the NeoConservatives running Iraq. But you're right. It especially irks me when Bush has been successful in pulling both Republican constituencies by either lying with the bait-n-switch or providing big government policies to his faith based constituencies and business buddies while claiming to be fiscally sound. There are objections, but not to the levels that would disrupt his popularity. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (white rice,) Canadians do it all the time.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>Canadians I would make an exception for, because their society reflects ours in many respects. A high inflow of illegal Canadians would pose no threat to America's integrity. They would integrate with little to no difficulty. However, Mexican culture is radically different from ours and Mexico is a seriously corrupt nation, and so comparing their immigration to a high rate of Canadian immigration is inherently flawed in this regard.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I missed this reply. Well you have two different responses. 1. Immigration is okay as long as it's legal and doesn't violate our borders. 2. Our American social identity is threatened by non-speaking foreigners and worse off they're violating condition 1. It sounds like your objection is to immigrants from another country in general rather than whether that immigration legal or not. What of the Irish, German, and Italian immigrants a hundred years ago who had to learn English and American values as well? Was their culture and food inferior and corrupt or were they integrated into the fabric of American society? The Irish and Italian ethnicities are predominantly Roman Catholic, as are most Latino groups. The difference no one dares to mention outright is that they were white. They faced the same degree of discrimination from 'native born' Americans but two or more generations later, no one could tell. So, after all the cultural assimilation from immigrants, the pizza, the pretzels, St. Patrick's Day, etc..., what is this American social identity that you are afraid of losing? I don't see how Mexico being a corrupt nation relates to how it will endanger our cultural integrity. We're not inheriting a Mexican government. The hardworking low-wage Mexican immigrant is the backbone to our infrastructural services...jobs no other American would take without serious desperation. As long as we don't deny their children the services and opportunities other Americans have enjoyed, they have reason to assimilate. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups

Jan 21, 2004, 06:47 pm	#27 (permalink) (top)
Capitalist Pig Market Anarchist Location: United States Posts: 652	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (white rice,) It sounds like your objection is to immigrants from another country in general rather than whether that immigration legal or not.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> No, illegal immigration is, in addition to the two reasons you listed, a serious threat to national security. Regardless if its an epidemic or not. Right now, it's an epidemic and requires special attention by the government. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by What of the Irish, German, and Italian immigrants a hundred years ago who had to learn English and American values as well? Was their culture and food inferior and corrupt or were they integrated into the fabric of American society? The Irish and Italian ethnicities are predominantly Roman Catholic, as are most Latino groups. The difference no one dares to mention outright is that they were white.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Wrong. While the immigrations from eastern and southern Europe weren't easy to deal with, they integrated just fine within a generation or two. A massive wave in immigration from Mexico will not. This is but another parallel to the Roman Empire that one could make for the United States. When Rome became so overrun with the barbarians, they were made citizens and the Roman Empire suffered a schism. Now, this problem was not just because of the barbarians, the division of the Roman Empire was also due to a lot of the in-fighting going on; separate political entities were constantly vieing for dominance. The comparison here is how the Democrats are constantly assailing the President and his policies. However, the barbarians played no small part. Remember that. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by So, after all the cultural assimilation from immigrants, the pizza, the pretzels, St. Patrick's Day, etc..., what is this American social identity that you are afraid of losing?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> St. Patrick's Day, which is not a federal holiday like Christmas, has been celebrated in the United States since 1762. And it is considered a Catholic holiday. I don't see how that is connected with the history of immigration in the United States, except that perhaps there were a lot of Irishmen in New York City in the 1700s. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by I don't see how Mexico being a corrupt nation relates to how it will endanger our cultural integrity.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> They're not immigrating "just because," rice. The corruption in the Mexican government is what has given rise to the immigration crisis in the first place. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by We're not inheriting a Mexican government.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> We might as well, California has already become so overrun, non-Hispanics are a minority in Los Angeles. Talk to anybody who lives in southern California, the situation is horrible there. Why do you think the Democrats attempted to push pro-immigration legislation during the gubernatorial election? To defeat Arnold with the Hispanic vote, because they know how bad it is there -- and they welcome it. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by The hardworking low-wage Mexican immigrant is the backbone to our infrastructural services...jobs no other American would take without serious desperation. As long as we don't deny their children the services and opportunities other Americans have enjoyed, they have reason to assimilate.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Give me a break, low-wage just serves corporate interest and gives preference to an illegal over an American citizen. Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito.

Jan 23, 2004, 12:06 am	#28 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (G. Adams,) do you know what a nation is castille? It's not the cities or towns, or roads or rails etc A nation is group of people who define themselves in opposition to other's. British. American. Chinese. On and on. I want to get rid of that mentality. I want people to see humans instead of nationality.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> You're right - nations are formed by opposition. But isn't every type of faction formed by opposition? Example: Lets imagine 1 big tribe. Tribal tradition dictates that you have to have sex with your sister to procreate. But what if some people disagree? Then they'll split apart, and form their own tribe. What if the new tribe has differences? Then more tribes will form. Sure, maybe Communism dictates that everyone must be robots (and share the same opinions), but in real life factions do exist. Even a family can split to create factions. So the husband divorces, maybe his dad is on his side, his mum on the wife's side. Think about this: If I did your mum and paid her $5, wouldnt you be annoyed? But why? Simple: factions. You see yourself in a similiar faction as your parents. Family is a form of faction. Unless you hate your family (but then you simply form another faction). If you really want to make an impact on the world, instead of South America (no matter how hot those Rio chicks are!), why not try Asia? China, Japan, Indonesia hold something of 1/3 of the world's population, and all 3 countries are springing ultranationalist groups faster than you can say Nationalism. Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Jan 23, 2004, 01:38 am	#29 (permalink) (top)
Colleptic Charlatan Society Location: Kelowna BC Canada Posts: 59	[font=Times][/font]<blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by castille [color=blue]Sure, maybe Communism dictates that everyone must be robots (and share the same opinions), but in real life factions do exist.[/color]<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> That is Fascism or a Dictatorship, which uses Communism as an economic system to control the welfare of its state, read up please. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by castille [color=blue]Even a family can split to create factions. So the husband divorces, maybe his dad is on his side, his mum on the wife's side. Think about this: If I did your mum and paid her $5, wouldnt you be annoyed? But why? Simple: factions. You see yourself in a similiar faction as your parents. Family is a form of faction. Unless you hate your family (but then you simply form another faction).[/color]<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> What the hell is your point here; you are babbling and insulting someone’s mother… </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by castille [color=blue]If you really want to make an impact on the world, instead of South America (no matter how hot those Rio chicks are!), why not try Asia? China, Japan, Indonesia hold something of 1/3 of the world's population, and all 3 countries are springing ultranationalist groups faster than you can say Nationalism.[/color] <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Mexico is right next door. You also answered your own question. Those nations are going to begin trading with each other; all those nations are going to assimilate each other (if they do not kill each other first). If the USA, Canada, Mexico and the rest of South America do not start trading amongst each other, sharing wealth, they will fall behind and that would be more detrimental to the precious USA than a few ethnic people within their boarders. USA will also gain massive political influence in South America, which means it can begin capitalist imperialism down there, without as much fear of revolt. US will also be able to regulate Mexican laws with strong influence, which will help protect their boarders. Furthermore, not all Mexican workers will stay in the US, some will head home, bringing business, trade and political know-how, which can only help their country build its infrastructure, so there is [color=red]no need for immigration, period[/color]! There is a dream of a total unified West, what is wrong with One America, which trades and intermingles without fear of boarders? Nationalism was a disease of the twentieth century; the speed of the communication age we live in will cure it. The only countries that are not following suit are the nations that have not latched onto the Global Village created by the World Wide Web. The Americas, North, Central and South will have no choice but to work together. China’s population alone, now that the Iron Curtain has fallen, will destroy the US market alone in 30ish years if US remains a secluded state. </span>

Jan 23, 2004, 02:57 am	#30 (permalink) (top)
white rice Igneous Magma Posts: 372	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (white rice,) It sounds like your objection is to immigrants from another country in general rather than whether that immigration legal or not.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> No, illegal immigration is, in addition to the two reasons you listed, a serious threat to national security. Regardless if its an epidemic or not. Right now, it's an epidemic and requires special attention by the government. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Attention Bush is giving by pushing a law you might not agree with. It seems that Bush and I agree on this issue in principle.... </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) Wrong. While the immigrations from eastern and southern Europe weren't easy to deal with, they integrated just fine within a generation or two. A massive wave in immigration from Mexico will not. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Wrong about what? Irish immigration had two waves. The second wave sparked a public backlash. What was wrong with them was that they lived in slums, accepted low wages, and they were Catholic. The reason they integrated (grudginly accepted) was because they took an active interest in politics and pooled their interests in the form of political power. The discrimination among local businesses was still prevalent. The Italian backlash began in the 1920s. Congress passed laws on immigration quotas. Local levels were more severe and manipulative. The Ku Klux Klan didn't target only blacks, and had the motto of "America for Americans". They only integrated just fine when World War Two ended because the stereotypes about them were wrong. Stereotypes of being slow learners of English and in general, loyal only to the Pope and distrustful of the US government, being clannish and suspicious of outsiders, etc... Plus they lived in slums, accepted low wages, and they were Catholic. Notice the patern of different American generations here. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) This is but another parallel to the Roman Empire that one could make for the United States. When Rome became so overrun with the barbarians, they were made citizens and the Roman Empire suffered a schism. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> You're condensing a few centuries of Roman history here... Emperor Valens accepted the Goths under false pretenses only to put the settling Goths in concentration camps to be conscripted or sold to slavery. Two years laer, the Goths rebeled and eventually killed Valens at Adrianople. Hopefully there won't be a condensed parallel at work.... The truth is that it's the immigrants choice whether to accept the doctrine of Anglo-assimilation or not. The Italians, Jews, Poles, etc... accepted it because it appealed to their personal interests. Whether or not the second or third generation non-whites will accept it is largely determined by their socio-economic status, don't you agree? </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) Now, this problem was not just because of the barbarians, the division of the Roman Empire was also due to a lot of the in-fighting going on; separate political entities were constantly vieing for dominance. The comparison here is how the Democrats are constantly assailing the President and his policies. However, the barbarians played no small part. Remember that.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Yes, blame the evil Democrats for plaguing a process that has occured since the birth of this nation. How quickly we forget the Clinton impeachment trials and the shutdown of our government.. Both parties are guilty of the same crime, but I've yet to see political assassinations and secret coups, unless you want to count Gore v. Bush... </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) St. Patrick's Day, which is not a federal holiday like Christmas, has been celebrated in the United States since 1762. And it is considered a Catholic holiday. I don't see how that is connected with the history of immigration in the United States, except that perhaps there were a lot of Irishmen in New York City in the 1700s. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> Interesting. Do you know anyone who wears green on St. Patty's Day but aren't fully Irish? Do you see people getting pinched? Has Halloween always been celebrated as a candy soliciting festival in the US? Easter Bunny? Those aren't inherited or concieved American traditions? </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) They're not immigrating "just because," rice. The corruption in the Mexican government is what has given rise to the immigration crisis in the first place. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> That could be one of many factors. Or maybe they're fed up with living in squalor like any other immigant. Doesn't mean the people are corrupt or won't work hard like you have been implying. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) We might as well, California has already become so overrun, non-Hispanics are a minority in Los Angeles. Talk to anybody who lives in southern California, the situation is horrible* there.* <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I live in SoCal. Do you know anyone around here or have you just heard about New MexiCal... Yeah, there's a lotta Mexicans. I don't ride around huddled with my gun suspiciously eyeing Mexicans. Most of them just want to do their own thing and live in America. So what exactly is so horrible? I don't know what you've heard, but that explosive debt was not caused by illegal immigrants. Not a lot of like minded faces? Aww, you might have to get to know the people... Surprisingly, some of the second or third generationers seem to speak good English like they've integrated just fine or something. California isn't the only state with Mexican immigrants. All border states have them. Texas rivals California in percentage. California is more metropolitan and more exposed, so it's understandable that it'll be in the spotlight with its highs and lows exagerated. You have no proof that illegal immigration was the primary factor to why people from California are moving to other states. It could be the air quality or standard of living, or because they want a good job in a time where California has a 50 billion dollar debt. Buchannan doesn't live here. He's a demogauge spouting typical rhetoric with no standing proof. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) Why do you think the Democrats attempted to push pro-immigration legislation during the gubernatorial election? To defeat Arnold with the Hispanic vote, because they know how bad it is there -- and they welcome it.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> So according to the article Bush knows how bad it is/will be and is appealing to the Mexican vote now. Another Democrat conspiracy at work were. </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Capitalist Pig,) Give me a break, low-wage just serves corporate interest and gives preference to an illegal over an American citizen.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> If you really wanted to mow my lawn, clean my toilets, flip a burger, or wait at my beck and call, all you had to do was just ask. Again, these jobs are menial that no educated American would tolerate for more than a year. It spills beyond corporate interests to local businesses and startups. Illegal immigration benefits the economy in secondary forms. The employers, retailers, and middlemen all pay taxes based on the increased productivity of these undocumented aliens. Bush's proposal would put these people on record, tax them, and give them humanitarian benefits that people living and working in the US should recieve. It's a tough thing to swallow for people who believe in national boundaries. I agree, it's a very grey issue. But the reality is here. Condoning it or not will not change the flow of illegal immigration. Spending billions on border patrol hasn't netted us any visible benefits. The people caught just try again and hope to succeed. The thing I believe is that if they're here and get a good opportunity, most likely the majority won't sqander it. Some might be so entrenched they'll become xenophobic as the rest of us. Double plus for America. On the other hand, if they're ignored or to be swept into the cracks of society, then they will become a greater burden on the system with very slim chances of clawing out of their slums. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups

Jan 23, 2004, 10:59 am	#31 (permalink) (top)
G. Adams Fyrdman Location: Middlesbrough UK Posts: 4,161	Gah, beaten to the punch by colleptic. Good stuff. On a personal note, I'm choosing South America to get involved with because a) I'm learning Spanish already (i am doing japanese too, but they seem to be doing quite well on their own right now) b) My personal views will be better recieved there c) And just as you said, ultranationalist movements are springing up all over Asia. I'm going to South America were new left wing movements are springing up all over. Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. Winston Churchill

Jan 24, 2004, 05:26 pm	#32 (permalink) (top)
Colleptic Charlatan Society Location: Kelowna BC Canada Posts: 59	I see no reason why the Americas should not unite, according to my post one page 2. If Canada (my country) could prefect our social health care system (it is almost there, it is just a matter of delegating funding properly, which is more difficult than one would imagine) and promote advanced education systems, then spread it down to South America, it might unite them under tolerance of multiculturalism. Then some how influence the masses of Capitalists in the USA to join in unity; [color=red]that would be power![/color] American citizens who want to see borders remain and follow the disease of nationalism are living in the Rearview Mirror.

Jan 24, 2004, 07:59 pm	#33 (permalink) (top)
Leopard Propertarian Posts: 568	insane... everyone has an opinion and only a few have the facts... Nature of Reality: nice to see someone who understands REAL economics and not just emotional gibberish of the like that Mr. Pat Buchannan spouts... the point is rather moot anyways, you cannot escape the natural economics of the world situation: (1) the US has inflated wage rates (see #1 below) (2) the US population growth (Birth-death rates of Caucasion/English speaking folks) is just about at 0% (3) the US population total is about 300 million, perhaps 200 million being of european descent (4) the population of asia (china & india esp) runs about 3 BILLION and their birth rate is much greater so, you protectionists go ahead and stick your heads in the ground and worry about the sky falling with 'mexicali' et al... make sure you teach your children how 'bad' foreigners' are and how everyone should just speak english... that will really prepare them for the upcoming future... if you can't see that it is our very own government which is exsasterbating<sp> this 'problem' with tariffs, strict immigration, subsidies, taxes, regulation, minimum wages, etc, and you believe all the political rhetoric thrwon at you from both sides AND the media, then, I guess you get what you deserve... if you are even vaguely interested in finding out 'for yourself': learn about economics and why humans trade in the first place, learn about the free market and its actual effects on all the classes, learn about how ordinairy people - if left unfettered by government - can have tremendous positive influences on everyone in a society and the world. Here's a few good starting points: Mises Institute Lew Rockwell its really all so very simple: if I have an apple tree and pick an apple, and my neighbor offers me $1 to buy it from me, should the government or ANYONE have any 'right' to 'force' this trade in a direction other than how my neighbor and I agree? Does it matter if 'my neighbor' lives across town, in a different state, or even across the globe? Does it matter if my neighbor is poor and I am rich (or visa-versa)? Does it matter if he has a different religion, skin color, culture, or whatever? Does it matter if I refuse to sell him the apple for what he offers for whatever reason I decide? What if I suggest that rather than $1 money, I would rather have him sweep my garage? if you can't answer 'no' to every question in the above situation, can you explain the basis for your beliefs? the ONLY way america is going to compete in the upcoming future is if we are able to teach our children how to be responsible for their own actions and some basic economic principles - we will devolve into some 3rd rate nation if we hold onto this moronic national pride which is used against us to our own detriment<sp>. Teach them how labor will be moving very fast and to have a back-up skill/occupation in the event that their current employer does not manage to compete. Explain to them that the government does not 'produce' anything - it does not 'add' to our economic well-being and can only negatively impact it by attempting to manipulate/control it. Explain to them that EVERY trade between to people which has no outside coercion/force INCREASES the wealth of BOTH parties. Teach them how to put your religious principles INTO the marketplace, and force businesses to be more 'moral' by not making it profitable to be 'immoral'. Personal responsibility.... it is an awesome power... and it is through this that freedom can be had. (Note: previous sentence works both ways by interchanging 'freedom' and 'responsibility' - they go hand in hand) just another hick opinion added to the fray, michael Take on the responsibility to be free

Feb 3, 2004, 04:53 am	#34 (permalink) (top)
Xicano82 Sedimentary Rock Posts: 12	This nation was built on the blood and backs of those indigenous to this land. Conservatives would like to have us believe that the history of this country is not relevant and that the settlers were actually doing the Indigenous populations a "favor" by colonizing them. I hope for one that Mexicans take over this country raise hell. I say let the chickens come home to roost...

Feb 3, 2004, 05:12 am	#35 (permalink) (top)
Suburbanite BANNED Location: Los Angeles Posts: 3,203	Why is everyone so afraid of Mexicans? The jobs they steal would be paying more if corporate regulations were stronger and enforced, and then Mexican immigrants would be losing all their jobs to someone English speaking and with an American education.

Feb 4, 2004, 03:21 am	#36 (permalink) (top)
Leopard Propertarian Posts: 568	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Suburbanite,) Why is everyone so afraid of Mexicans? The jobs they steal would be paying more if corporate regulations were stronger and enforced, and then Mexican immigrants would be losing all their jobs to someone English speaking and with an American education.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> gotta luv the rhetoric! 'steal' jobs? - How exactly do they 'steal' jobs? Why is it ANY of your business if two people come to an agreement regarding any transaction? If I have a job that is worth me paying someone only $5/hour for, and I find someone willing to do it - did they 'steal' my job offer from the person who demands $7? I say the person would goes about 'demanding' that they are 'worth' $7/hour better be able to prove it - prove to the prospective employer that you would be more dependable, that a higher education would allow you to be twice as efficient as an unskilled $5/hour person... THIS is the true job of each and every one of us - to make ourselves more valuable to others so we can increase our own income to do the other things which are in our self-interest... crying to government is just soooo easy tho, isn't it? Seems we all never really broke free from our mothers, just substituted 'mama State'... 'American Education'? isn't 2+2=4 kinda universal, no matter what country or language you live in or speak? If our 'american' education is so good, then why are we ranked below 20th in comparison to other nations in the world? why can't high schoolers in america even point to the correct location on a map where washington, DC is? wait a second.... this isn't really fair, I am comparing our 'public school' educated children... my bad, sorry... michael Take on the responsibility to be free

Feb 4, 2004, 03:49 am	#37 (permalink) (top)
Suburbanite BANNED Location: Los Angeles Posts: 3,203	Hahaha, I agree and concede to you Michael. I read this book called "Always Running" and later met the Author. The protagonist's father was a principle in a large school in Mexico, comes to America, and the best job he could get with his college degrees, because of his accent was a Lab Janitor at a local school. Just a few weeks ago I was talking with a woman from Guatemala who faced the same things. She was a Doctor with a college degree and now works in a hospital as a nurse, and she speaks perfect English. But I am side tracking.

Feb 4, 2004, 06:25 am	#38 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	When the early settlers came to America, they weren't complaining about no Mexican immigrants. Hell, they were breaking their backs against the bitter cold, trying to build Jamestown into a livable colony. Today....gee, I spilt coffee on my hand! Lets go sue Maccas! Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Feb 5, 2004, 04:53 am	#39 (permalink) (top)
Suburbanite BANNED Location: Los Angeles Posts: 3,203	Becuase Mexico is no where near Jamestown?

Feb 9, 2004, 03:29 am	#40 (permalink) (top)
PatC Molten Ash Location: Boston Posts: 109	Has anyone realized that by giving work visas or whatever there called, Bush is esencially giving out free citizenship. I dont care about all that economic, job loss, or communist bullshit. Everyone has a right to become a citizen of the USA, but there is legal process that must be followed. Mexicans or whoever, they are here illegaly breaking the law. And because the INS can't keep up they are being rewarded. All are undocumented, which means we cant tell if someone is a rapist, coke fiend, or if its just someone trying to make an honest living, We're looking at the world through the barrel of a gun, are we ready?