key lib words......intolerance, racist, stupid, free, privilege instead of Rights..........have I left any out?
Of course, if "delusional righties" had their way, our own women would exhibit those traits currently sought in immigrants from more traditional cultures, so we wouldn't need to import them.
No no no. I am 100% fully in support of "immigration". I am also 100% fully against "ILLEGAL Immigration". I totally support the idea of legal immigration, and I think we should streamline the process. One of my closest, and best friends was an immigrant from Somalia. And some of the nicest people you could ever meet were from there. At the same time, I'm completely against illegal immigration. We are a nation of laws. We should enforce those laws with absolute certainty. Anarchy is what follows when you don't enforce the laws. You breed a contempt for the law, and a contempt for authority. You teach people that they can break the laws, and abuse the public, and nothing will happen... or they will merely be sent to a hotel with all their friends. We actually have people here in our country that intentionally break the law, on purpose, to get back into jail with all their friends. So my problem with illegal immigration, isn't with immigrants at all.... it has to do with my over arching hatred of criminals. We need to shoot these people. Kill them. Kill the criminals, protect the law abiding citizens. When people immigrate here from Asian countries, especially Singapore, Taiwan, and such, they are often shocked at what crimes people can commit, and nothing happens to them. You mean, you can rape someone, and only go to prison for awhile? I had an Asian lady ask me that. Crime should be punished. Laws should be RIGIDLY enforced. That includes all laws. Including immigration laws. It would actually be better if we had no immigration laws at all, than to have laws, and not enforce them. Now if that's really what you want to do, ok, lets repeal all immigration laws. But otherwise, if we are going to have those laws, then you need to enforce them, and jail, beat, deport, or whatever you have to do to every single criminal violator of the law. And you shouldn't be suing states that decide to enforce the laws your pathetic government politicians are too stupid and idiotic to do their job. Stop voting in spineless twits, and vote in a real man that stands up for right and wrong. Of course the left doesn't likely even understand that concept.
Oh! Other than significantly increased economic activity? Food! Dude, the best taco stands in anywhere are in the US Southwest.
Diversity - it cuts down on inbreeding thereby reducing the kind of neuroses seen in modern Doberman Pinschers. I think we're plenty neurotic already.
I agree. I love diversity but this is a thinly veiled bait thread. Look, we go into "illegals" three posts in. This isn't about me living in a building with five other races in the most diverse city in the world. I know if I started talking about the "benefits" of that, how I get to share other world views, learn different ethnicities, cultures, food etc., what its like to live not fearing others, living in a country that has never had a race riot...all that would simply be dismissed and attacked. Too many of these "discussion" questions are really just disguised racism.
Well... look around. I don't see very many happy American women, divorced, split up with their 15th boy friend, children running around from 5 different fathers, stressed out, working a full time job, while their kids are raised by day care people.... filled with guilt, seeing a therapist every other weekend, taking drugs just to dull the pain...... If that works for you, go for it. I have no intention of pushing my views on anyone. But in the words of Dr. Phil...... How's that workin for ya? Arranged marriages even to this day have the highest surveyed rates of marital satisfaction. Perhaps that's a fluke.... but... well. To each his own I suppose.
Are the Japanese, or Chinese, or Norwegians, or Swedes, having huge problems with Neuroses, relative to the US? I'm just wondering, because the US is as much a mix of everyone from everywhere, as any nation can get. Most of those nations I listed, and many others, are far less diverse than we are. If you are right, then Japan should be the most neurotic country in the world.
Yeah, that's what I was saying. If "delusional righties" had their way, then those women wouldn't be like that.
I'm not sure what that means. Are you saying that relationships in America are amazingly awesome? That everyone is deliriously happy? Or that I'm delusion to want something better for people, including women?
I like tacos too. But, now that we've got the recipe, is there really any need for them to stay? [video=youtube;sg-4ATrE8n0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sg-4ATrE8n0[/video]
Inbreeding is not a problem in any Western nation. It's easy to avoid as long as you don't marry your cousin. - - - Updated - - - I saw this as a contemplation/reevaluation thread than a bait thread. It was geared toward supporters of diversity to name benefits to something they support.
Democracy isn't inherently diverse. Nor is totalitarianism inherently uniform. Now it can be.... but there have been dictatorship which didn't have uniformity. Norway is a Democracy, is it not? And yet they are about as culturally uniform as you can get. Same with most of the Nordic Countries. - - - Updated - - - In any country, anywhere in the world, there are always crazy people, and large groups of them. I'm not asking if they exist. I'm asking if there is a noticeable statistical increase in the numbers in racially homogenous societies.
I suppose, I could quibble about the diversity of the electorate as compared to a totalitarian regime.
Some countries that are mostly homogeneous, tend to be on the same page, have the same morals and values, like Japan. The U.S. has a lot of different folks. Look at the history of riots or reactions to crisis or natural disaster in this country. People get crazy and start looting, pillaging, etc. The haves and the have nots. This didn't happen in Japan during their relatively recent crisis.
Since you both took the same misinformed route: Business Week That immigrants are a drag on the economy is nationalistic, protectionist misinformation.
Over a lifetime, the former unlawful immigrants together would receive $9.4 trillion in government benefits and services and pay $3.1 trillion in taxes. They would generate a lifetime fiscal deficit (total benefits minus total taxes) of $6.3 trillion. (All figures are in constant 2010 dollars.) This should be considered a minimum estimate. It probably understates real future costs because it undercounts the number of unlawful immigrants and dependents who will actually receive amnesty and underestimates significantly the future growth in welfare and medical benefits. http://www.heritage.org/research/re...ful-immigrants-and-amnesty to-the-us-taxpayer
What you have here is a blatant case of heritage trying to make a political point. They're smart enough to take opportunity costs into account and they clearly have omitted these here to grind their axe. Pretty typical from Heritage frankly since they're little more than a mouth piece for the GOP.
I'm pretty sure you've done nothing but attack the source. In any event, the author, Jason Richwine, presented a PhD dissertation at Harvard on the costs of granting amnesty to unlawful immigrants in front of three very respected scholars. He's published his dissertation in the off chance others could lampoon his work where three reputed scholars could not.
So never mind when I pointed out my specific issue with this specific article? Gotcha. Appeal to authority, address with my issues with their data or find a source that takes into account all the costs and benefits associated with migration and we can move on.
Read the link that I provide. The author wrote a PhD dissertation for Harvard showing Hispanic immigrants take out more than they put in, and that granting amnesty to unlawful immigrants would cost the US trillions.
