May 6 2006, 7:28 pm
In response to Vito Stolidus
|
|
Jp
 |
Come off it. The ACLU is just attempting to enforce your constitutional right to worship or NOT WORSHIP any damned god you please. That is a good thing.
|
It's not a viable point. But the reason we can't 'stay on topic' is because it's all inter-related. You say America has no money? It isn't because of illegal immigrants, it's because your budget sucks. Average people are getting screwed over? It's because you have a crappy welfare/health/education system.
| |
Actually, we spend too much time "fixing" those thins. Government motto: If it ain't broke, fix it 'till it is. Vito, you should study the budgets other countries have for their education systems, and then look at the wealth distribution and average level of education acheivement among its citizens. Pretty much any first-world country you look at will spend more on education then America, percentage wise, and will have a wealth distribution that is far closer to a standard normal curve, and will have a higher average education level. Maybe from your perpective, the Democrats, are too far to the right, but you aren't exactly standing at the center, Jp. They're certainly further right then most Aussie political parties, and we're pretty damned centrist. | |
Vito Stolidus babbled:
Saying that those who came here legally... came here illegally is a blatant, outright lie, and you know it.... no i do not know it, since that was not my point at all. i was trying to point out that all this hub-bub about immigrants (illegal or otherwise was not my point) is silly, since it was (in a way) illegal immigrants who founded the U.S. by stealing/conqueroring/buying the land away from those who were here in the first place - ie: native americans and native central americans (the 'real' mexicans). these immigrants were not invited to the country- they just walked on in and claimed it as theirs. sounds reasonably illegal to me! (yes, yes i know it is stretching things a bit, but i'm having fun with this topic - babbling about it is kinda pointless when you offer no real workable solutions to the perceived problem - you kids are taking this stuff *way* too seriously, and babbling about it in a gaming community will likely get you no-where). wrap it up folks - this conversation may get closed soon for being so long in the tooth with nothing really additional or constructive to add. it's run it's course. | |
That is a great idea. Unfortunately, I doubt anyone would do it. That would solve many problems though, assuming it was combined with other changes that are required to stabilize our economy. If you don't do all the other changes first, or at least at the same time, however, then it wouldn't work out.
| |
I expected this thread to be closed days ago, but I'll admit, there has been considerable restraint by all participants. It has not devolved into a flame war, for the most part. It takes up my whole first page in the forum...
Yes, I'll admit, some of those who founded this country were a little unfair to the original inhabitants of the land. That's not our fault. Illegal immigration actually requires there to be a law against how you're doing it... I doubt the native Americans had a law that said "anyone who comes from across the sea should be sent back" before settlewrs arrived, so it wasn't illegal for those settlers to settle peacfully. I think it was immoral to do some of the things that were done to the native Americans, but it's all in the past now. --Vito | |
Vito Stolidus wrote:
I expected this thread to be closed days ago, but I'll admit, there has been considerable restraint by all participants. It has not devolved into a flame war, for the most part. That's a very good point and I totally agree! *Next time, on JP VS. VITO...* | |
So... the difference is that we wrote down somewhere, "Rule No. 42, this is our place and nobody is allowed to come in here and mess our stuff up and not talk our language and outbreed, outmigrate, or outcompete us... times infinity... so there!"... but the natives didn't?
I'm far from suggesting that we should be held directly responsible for what our ancestors or antecedents did... but we should be aware of it. We have a hefty national debt here, and I'm not talking about the bonds Bush is selling to the Heathen Chinee in order to support his bloatocracy. Yes, we have a right to control our borders, but we have a responsibility to both history and the future to do so humanely and sanely. (And I have to say I'm surprised the anti-minimum wage, pro-free market, small government Republican crowd isn't insisting that the illegals dragging down wages is a -good- thing in that it encourages competition that would otherwise be stifled by the government... at the very least, that argument could let the ones who are tacitly supporting illegals at the behest of big business come out of the closet on their stance.) | |
Hedge I see your point KIND OF with the whole immigrants and pilgrims thing. But that was back in the day of discovery, when people were just coming over here.
We have a decided culture and system going on over here. You can't just walk in anymore, and thats for all sorts of reaons I don't really even care enough about to go into. | |
"Age of discovery" is a point of view. There already was a culture and a society (or rather, multiples of those) here from people who discovered this land about 50,000 years ago. "You can't just walk in here..." You can't? Oh, problem solved. No, wait. People can just walk in here. The debate is what we intend to do about it... the choices are basically: something, nothing, or everything.
We have to do -something-, because we have to keep the people already here safe and secure... but we can't in good conscience do -everything-... because the only difference between us and the natives that were displaced by us is that we've got guns and bombs and the ability to make big walls. The only difference, then, is our might... does might make right? | |
Does it make it right people sneak into our country every day when we do offer the ability to migrate into our country legally?
I don't care if the answer is right or not, as long as we start getting results. Build a wall, blow them up, whatever. | |
You don't care if it's right or not, as long as we get results?
Then I would say you've got less right to be here than the Mexican immigrants... our country was founded with the idea that a law must be right or it's not fit to be followed. Furthermore, if you don't care if it's right, don't ask me if it's right for people to come here illegally. You haven't yet shown that it's wrong... "illegal" doesn't mean "wrong." If somebody breaks your leg, it's wrong because it's wrong, not because there's a law against assault. If somebody comes over here from Mexico and breaks people's legs, charge them with assault. If they come over and work for cheap, then viva la Capitalism! We are a free market economy, right? Oh, but they don't pay taxes? Well, we could fix that by legalizing them. Of course, we'd have to give them an incentive to become legal... but walls, bombs, and guns won't do that. You want results? Forget the border. Police the employers. More oppressive governments (Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia) than ours couldn't stop people from fleeing their borders with tanks, mines, guns, barbed wire, walls, and a full remit to shoot to kill with no concern for the sanctity of life. Could we be more ruthless than Soviet Russia and still be America? No. The only solution is to police the employers... actually enforce the laws we have now that are supposed to force them to verify eligibility to work, and punish them for breaking them. Whether we keep the illegals illegal or not, that's the only solution that would get results... either in forcing them to seek legal status, or go home because there's no more work here. | |
Shades wrote:
Does it make it right people sneak into our country every day when we do offer the ability to migrate into our country legally? To immigrate legally to the US, one must jump through all sorts of hoops, and it takes quite a long time. For what sorts of reasons do you think somebody would decide to immigrate illegally? What if they don't have time for the hoops? Do you still think it's wrong if they're running from a tyrannical dictator? | |
Wizkidd0123 wrote:
Shades wrote: It does not matter, if you wanted it bad enough you should go through the process anyways. You deal with it and get it over and you find time. Stop giving them excuses. | |
I think the violent option would work too. But it sounds like policing the employers is cheaper so Id go with that.
But I wouldn't mind a few bombs.. or like.. starting the entire border on fire for ever in like a 12 foot thick wall of fire. | |
Most people arn't that insane yet. So you say that if you knew that you killed someone you end up dying as well you still do it?
| |
Not neccessarily. But the only people that could be bothered wiping out America are the ones that really don't give a damn. What, you think France is going to suddenly invade if you get rid of your nukes (Like you promised, by signing the NPT, quite a while ago)? Maybe the Queen of England is going to turn up and start pushing you around?
| |
Shades, I hope you were just ignoring his 'What if you were running from a tyrannical dictator' comment, because if someone IS, and they get to America, America has to take them in. It's in an international treaty on human rights, which America has signed - it just ignores it a lot. It's the same one which forbids torture, and other such things.
| |