RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Mupainurpleasure -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 4:23:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure

that's an amnesty program



Uhh... no... it's not.  They go to the BACK OF THE LINE... in THEIR OWN COUNTRY.





I would suggust you read up on what happened the last time this was done




Iamsemisweet -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 4:27:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


As to crowding arguments. Population density in the US is 84 people per mile^2. In the UK, home to some of the most beautiful countryside anywhere as well as untamed moors and the Scottish highlands, it's 650 people per mile^2. Ireland is 154 per mile^2.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0934666.html


The UK may have some of the most "beautiful countryside anywhere" at 650 per square mile as you say.  However, the biodiversity of the UK is not being sustained, so that beautiful countryside is becoming more and more devoid of wildlife.  The issue is not "space" it is resources, particularly water.  Yes, you probably can squish every American into a space the size of Rhode Island.  Who the hell would want to live like that?  And, the biggest contributor to population growth in this country is immigration. 

From the Guardian:

The government will miss its targets to stop the demise of wildlife in Britain unless it invests money in conservation and looks beyond protecting a few special sites, says a report from the environmental audit committee.The parliamentary watchdog criticised several government departments which it said paid scant regard to wildlife when planning housing or business developments.

The Communities, Local Government, Transport and Business and Enterprise departments were all named for failing to properly consider the environmental impacts of their work. "It is critically important that all levels of government ensure that all policies are reviewed to align them with an ecosystems approach," it said. "We are concerned that a number of policies indicate the continued failure of departments to consider biodiversity impacts."The committee called for a new approach to conservation and backed plans announced by the environment secretary, Hilary Benn, to carry out a nationwide "ecosystems assessment" to inform policy decisions.

Tory MP Tim Yeo, who chairs the committee, said: "England is a much poorer place than it was 50 years ago with the widespread decline of many of our most important, and loved, habitats and species. We have lost some 97% of our flower-rich meadows and there are now half the number of farmland birds that there were 50 years ago. "The continued deterioration of the natural environment has clear economic implications as it directly underpins many things that we take for granted such as pollination, flood protection and clean air. It is no longer enough to rely on protected areas to preserve nature, as increasingly these have become islands in the landscape," he said.

Sir Martin Doughty, chairman of Natural England, the government official advisers on ecology, said: "All the evidence points to the fact that the quality and extent of our natural environment will continue to decline unless current policies and land management practices are changed. Failure to respond will have enormously damaging implications for our wildlife, our landscapes, our health and our quality of life.

"The committee criticised government for not helping protect biodiversity in Britain's far flung overseas territories, which include islands such as Ascension, the Pitcairns, South Georgia and Tristan da Cunha. The MPs said these remote islands were home to 240 globally threatened species, 74 of them critically endangered but there was a "dire lack of funds and information" for conservation in the territories.Previous calls to action had been ignored by the government, the MPs complained, demanding a survey of the state of habitats and a joined-up approach across Whitehall.

"The government has a clear moral and legal duty to help protect the biodiversity of the UK Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies, where it is the eleventh hour for many species. We are extremely concerned that recommendations that we have made in the past that would have helped to protect the environment of the overseas territories have been ignored," the report concluded."With leadership, and a relatively small sum of money, the incredible biodiversity found in our overseas territories can be safeguarded into the future.

James Cooper, head of government affairs at the Woodland Trust urged Defra to look beyond protected sites and do more in the countryside to encourage positive land management for wildlife as well as preventing loss."This means a need to champion biodiversity across government — not just within Defra, encouraging green infrastructure as part of any new developments and ensuring that the planning system is up to the job of protecting and enhancing biodiversity, which at the moment it fails to do."

Friends of the Earth biodiversity campaigner Paul De Zylva said: "MPs acknowledge the economic case for protecting our rich and varied wildlife, but ministers are all too ready to let roads and runways trample over our natural heritage. UK government policies are also threatening the amazing natural diversity of countries around the world."




MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 5:21:55 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure

I would suggust you read up on...



I would suggest you read up on how serious the problem is.

See:  http://www.fairus.org/site/DocServer/USCostStudy_2010.pdf?docID=4921





Master2811 -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 5:38:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

I have a couple of threads that I plan to start, about some of the issues concerning illegal immigration in the United States.

This particular thread is about one of my pet peeves.

Why do so many people, automatically assume that because someone is not 100% PRO illegal immigration, and supporting it 100%, that the person is a racist, a bigot, or has some sort of hatred against the Hispanic population?


That is the strategy of the communist, socialist, leftist, progressive, liberal agenda, propaganda and indoctrination. If you don't agree with their political beliefs you must have some disease. And then they invent labels for such diseases like xenophobia, islamophobia, homophobia and the like. It's an attempt to shut you up. They are the 'gutmenschen". They are always right and you are always wrong. That is their pathetic thinking and paradigma. Usually they cannot win a debate on facts or figures, all that is left is to label you in a certain way to make other people think that you are an abberation. Ronald Reagan said: "don't inhale"





thompsonx -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 5:51:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Master2811

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

I have a couple of threads that I plan to start, about some of the issues concerning illegal immigration in the United States.

This particular thread is about one of my pet peeves.

Why do so many people, automatically assume that because someone is not 100% PRO illegal immigration, and supporting it 100%, that the person is a racist, a bigot, or has some sort of hatred against the Hispanic population?


quote:

That is the strategy of the communist, socialist, leftist, progressive, liberal agenda, propaganda and indoctrination.


Any validation for this moronic tripe?



quote:

If you don't agree with their political beliefs you must have some disease. And then they invent labels for such diseases like xenophobia, islamophobia, homophobia and the like.



I assure you that these are real words. If you knew how to use a dictionary you might find other words there also.

quote:

It's an attempt to shut you up. They are the 'gutmenschen". They are always right and you are always wrong.






Has it ever crossed your mind that you might be wrong?

quote:


That is their pathetic thinking and paradigma.


Pathetic thinking....could you please define what the fuck this means?



quote:

Usually they cannot win a debate on facts or figures, all that is left is to label you in a certain way to make other people think that you are an abberation.




Here are the facts and figures. I am more than willing to discuss them with you.
To those non-bigots with a three digit iq and a pulse
It works like this.
Crossing the boarder illegally is a misdomeanor.
Hiring someone who has crossed the boarder illegally is a federal felony punishable by 5 years in the federal slam(no parole from federal custody...a day showing is a day owing...no time off for good behavior) and $250,000 fine for each violaton. When several thousand ceo are doing 100+ years in the federal slam and the fed treasury is trillions of dollars richer (estimated 12 million who have crossed the boarder illegally X $250,000=3,000,000,000,000)who would hire someone who had crossed he boarder illegally?
The above can be accomplished with no cost to the taxpayer and positive cashflow to the treasury. The only reason anyone could have to waste taxpayers money chasing down those brown people you seem to hate so much would be bigotry.
Simply stated since there would be no work here they would go home as has been evidenced by recent developments(more mexicans crossing the boarder south than north.









thompsonx -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 5:59:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure

I would suggust you read up on...



I would suggest you read up on how serious the problem is.

See:  http://www.fairus.org/site/DocServer/USCostStudy_2010.pdf?docID=4921




From your cite.

education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at
an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and
local governments.

Schools are paid for from local property taxes.
Unless you live under a bridge or in a cardboard box you pay property tax.
That would mean that the illegals pay their fair share of that particular burden.
If you want to get rid of all of those who have crossed the boarder illegally I have mentioned at least once how that could be accomplished.
If you somehow missed it here it is once more.
To those non-bigots with a three digit iq and a pulse
It works like this.
Crossing the boarder illegally is a misdomeanor.
Hiring someone who has crossed the boarder illegally is a federal felony punishable by 5 years in the federal slam(no parole from federal custody...a day showing is a day owing...no time off for good behavior) and $250,000 fine for each violaton. When several thousand ceo are doing 100+ years in the federal slam and the fed treasury is trillions of dollars richer (estimated 12 million who have crossed the boarder illegally X $250,000=3,000,000,000,000)who would hire someone who had crossed he boarder illegally?
The above can be accomplished with no cost to the taxpayer and positive cashflow to the treasury. The only reason anyone could have to waste taxpayers money chasing down those brown people you seem to hate so much would be bigotry.
Simply stated since there would be no work here they would go home as has been evidenced by recent developments(more mexicans crossing the boarder south than north.







MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 6:05:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.


 
"California, facing a budget deficit of $14.4 billion in 2010-2011, is hit with an estimated $21.8 billion in annual expenditures on illegal aliens. New York’s $6.8 billion deficit is smaller than its $9.5 billion in yearly illegal alien costs."
 
 
Now go Google the definition of "deficit". [8|]
 
 
 




thompsonx -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 6:12:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

education for the children of illegal aliens constitutes the single largest cost to taxpayers, at an annual price tag of nearly $52 billion. nearly all of those costs are absorbed by state and local governments.


 
"California, facing a budget deficit of $14.4 billion in 2010-2011, is hit with an estimated $21.8 billion in annual expenditures on illegal aliens. New York’s $6.8 billion deficit is smaller than its $9.5 billion in yearly illegal alien costs."
 
 
Now go Google the definition of "deficit". [8|]
 
 
 




This is a thread on illegal immigration.
If you would like to start a thread on budget dificits then do that and dont try to hijack this thread.
We are discussing how to most cost effectively remove those who have crossed the boarder illegally.
Would you care to discuss that?
I have posted at least once how to do that.
Why don't you respond to that. If perchance you missed it here it is once again.
To those non-bigots with a three digit iq and a pulse
It works like this.
Crossing the boarder illegally is a misdomeanor.
Hiring someone who has crossed the boarder illegally is a federal felony punishable by 5 years in the federal slam(no parole from federal custody...a day showing is a day owing...no time off for good behavior) and $250,000 fine for each violaton. When several thousand ceo are doing 100+ years in the federal slam and the fed treasury is trillions of dollars richer (estimated 12 million who have crossed the boarder illegally X $250,000=3,000,000,000,000)who would hire someone who had crossed he boarder illegally?
The above can be accomplished with no cost to the taxpayer and positive cashflow to the treasury. The only reason anyone could have to waste taxpayers money chasing down those brown people you seem to hate so much would be bigotry.
Simply stated since there would be no work here they would go home as has been evidenced by recent developments(more mexicans crossing the boarder south than north.






MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 6:14:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

...chasing down those brown people you seem to hate so much
 


Keep playing the RACE CARD... didn't work the first 10 times you've tried it, and it isn't working now. [8|]





MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 6:23:15 PM)

 
Uh huh... keep ignoring the FACTS -- you cite "$52 Billion" being "absorbed by state and local governments" -- but then IGNORE that said "state and local governments" are running BILLION DOLLAR DEFICITS, with BILLIONS OF DOLLARS contributing to said "deficits" from ILLEGALS -- $21.8 billion in California, and $6.8 billion in New York, for example, that is a DIRECT RESULT OF EXPENDITURES ON ILLEGALS.

So much for YOUR "tripe". [8|]







Master2811 -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 6:29:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:

ORIGINAL: Master2811
quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

I have a couple of threads that I plan to start, about some of the issues concerning illegal immigration in the United States.

This particular thread is about one of my pet peeves.

Why do so many people, automatically assume that because someone is not 100% PRO illegal immigration, and supporting it 100%, that the person is a racist, a bigot, or has some sort of hatred against the Hispanic population?


That is the strategy of the communist, socialist, leftist, progressive, liberal agenda, propaganda and indoctrination.


Any validation for this moronic tripe?


You just validated my point: That is the strategy of the communist, socialist, leftist, progressive, liberal agenda, propaganda and indoctrination. If you don't agree with their political beliefs you must have some disease. And then they invent labels for such diseases like xenophobia, islamophobia, homophobia and the like. It's an attempt to shut you up. They are the 'gutmenschen". They are always right and you are always wrong. That is their pathetic thinking and paradigma. Usually they cannot win a debate on facts or figures, all that is left is to label you in a certain way to make other people think that you are an abberation. Ronald Reagan said: "don't inhale"





thompsonx -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 6:30:37 PM)


Once again this is a thread about how to most cost effectively remove those who have crossed the boarder illegally.
Would you like to discuss that?




thompsonx -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 6:33:47 PM)


Would you like to discuss the topic of this thread?




MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 6:38:28 PM)

Yeah... I didnt' think you could actually address THE FACTS. [8|]


[image]local://upfiles/687741/64521CDB1724415BB0A077982C4AA428.jpg[/image]




thompsonx -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 6:43:16 PM)

I am waiting




Marini -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/11/2012 9:27:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


Would you like to discuss the topic of this thread?



Sure, I will bite!

The title of THIS thread is: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot.

In this case, it means you have an issue with unbridled illegal immigration, and has nothing to do with who or what the person's race IS.
[sm=discipline.gif]





Fightdirecto -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/12/2012 2:46:11 AM)

If you call the police to turn in the illegal immigrant from Mexico or Panama who is living or working in your neighborhood BUT you do not call the police to turn in the illegal immigrant from the country that your parents came from (say, Italy or Ireland) who is living or working in your neighborhood - then you're a bigot. Simple.

A perfect example: a few years ago a local factory was raided by Immigration and the many illegal immigrant workers from Central America were deported. A local newspaper columnist wrote several editorials attacking illegal immigrants and praising Immigration for deporting them. A month later, Immigration arrested and deported two illegal immigrants from Ireland who had been living here illegally for 15 years - and the same newspaper columnist wrote several editorials attacking Immigration for deporting "these wonderful people who were only trying to find a better life" back to Ireland. Would you call that newspaper columnist a bigot? I would.




Mupainurpleasure -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/12/2012 5:00:57 AM)

The problems with repatriation
1. What about the millions of children who are US citizens? What happens when they return at legal age? You think the experience of being removed from their homeland and sent to meixico is going to create good citizens?

2. I suppose you bothered to look up the california repatriation in the 30s and if you did you know the issues and if you didn'ty well you really have no business talking about public policy as if you have a clue if you are to lazy to even see if wwhat you wish to happoen has been tried




DomKen -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/12/2012 6:39:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


As to crowding arguments. Population density in the US is 84 people per mile^2. In the UK, home to some of the most beautiful countryside anywhere as well as untamed moors and the Scottish highlands, it's 650 people per mile^2. Ireland is 154 per mile^2.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0934666.html


The UK may have some of the most "beautiful countryside anywhere" at 650 per square mile as you say.  However, the biodiversity of the UK is not being sustained, so that beautiful countryside is becoming more and more devoid of wildlife.  The issue is not "space" it is resources, particularly water.  Yes, you probably can squish every American into a space the size of Rhode Island.  Who the hell would want to live like that?  And, the biggest contributor to population growth in this country is immigration. 

So 8 times our population density makes it hard to maintain the environment. That still means the US could easily absorb pretty much every immigrant that wants to come here. Mexico's entire population is 110 million which is less than 1/3r our present population. If they all moved here tomorrow our pop density would only increase to 112 per mile ^2.




fucktoyprincess -> RE: Not supporting UNBRIDLED illegal immigration does not make you a bigot! (5/12/2012 7:33:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fightdirecto

If you call the police to turn in the illegal immigrant from Mexico or Panama who is living or working in your neighborhood BUT you do not call the police to turn in the illegal immigrant from the country that your parents came from (say, Italy or Ireland) who is living or working in your neighborhood - then you're a bigot. Simple.

A perfect example: a few years ago a local factory was raided by Immigration and the many illegal immigrant workers from Central America were deported. A local newspaper columnist wrote several editorials attacking illegal immigrants and praising Immigration for deporting them. A month later, Immigration arrested and deported two illegal immigrants from Ireland who had been living here illegally for 15 years - and the same newspaper columnist wrote several editorials attacking Immigration for deporting "these wonderful people who were only trying to find a better life" back to Ireland. Would you call that newspaper columnist a bigot? I would.


Most current efforts to curb illegal immigration are absolutely biased in their approach and targets. Anyone who thinks immigration policy in the U.S. has ever been free of bigotry ought to think again. And of course the bigotry has changed slightly over time as the country has evolved.

Let's just take a couple of examples:

In 1921, the Congress passed the Emergency Quota Act, followed by the Immigration Act of 1924. The 1924 Act was aimed at further restricting the Southern and Eastern Europeans, especially Jews, Italians, and Slavs, who had begun to enter the country in large numbers beginning in the 1890s. Most of the European refugees fleeing the Nazis and World War II were barred from coming to the United States.

The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 vastly changed immigration patterns. The 1965 act marked a radical break from the immigration policies of the past. The law as it stood then excluded Asians and Africans and preferred northern and western Europeans over southern and eastern ones. The 1965 law opened up immigration for Asians and Africans by establishing a preference system that focused on immigrants' skills and family relationships with citizens or U.S. residents. The law was passed, in part, because many felt the existing immigration laws were openly racist. They established the preference system in hopes that there would not be many immigrants from Asia and Africa who would actually qualify, so that on its face the polices seemed more "open" but they were still designed to restrict immigration from certain parts of the world.




Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875