Log in

View Full Version : Immigration rant no. 137



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5]

Kellydancer
11-15-2010, 03:01 PM
The Language is not even refered to a "Spanish' it is called" Castellano" as in "Castillian" or from Castilla. This is resented in other Provinces of Spain with their own languages and Customs most notably the Basque.

True and they corrected me on that as well. I speak Spanish but they told me what I spoke was the Mexican dialect. Apparently this is the dialect taught in American schools (I learned from high school and college).

ArmySGT.
11-15-2010, 03:02 PM
Small towns were great places to live back when there was an abundance of quality factory jobs. But with all those factories closing down and going overseas, not so much anymore.


Ah yes the "unintended consequences"of Labor Unions, Entitlement Programs, over reaching Government agencies, and Activist judges.

I am not advocating the we should be Serfs to Capitalist Barons; however there are consequences to the "Costs" and "Entitlements" such Laws and Organizations demand.

Demands keep rising until there is no profit in doing business. When that happens, businesses close up and move. be that another State or another Country.

Elvia
11-15-2010, 03:03 PM
ummm, several million Chinese, Indians, Vietnamese, Africans, illegal immigrants in America who don't have 'anchor babies' or fake ID's etc.


The obvious point here is that the American social welfare system has established a 'minimum acceptable standard of living' that is far in excess of the standard of living available to unskilled workers in most other parts of the world. The costs of maintaining that 'minimum acceptable standard of living' are also far more expensive than the value of the unskilled labor ... even with the US minimum wage. That very same 'minimum acceptable standard of living' is also a powerful magnet for illegal immigrants who know that producing an 'anchor baby' will qualify them !

As to the single mom anecdotes, arguably THE major reason that there are so many low skill single moms is the eligibility rules for social welfare benefits !!! The problem of unsupervised children would be far lower if the children's father were allowed to be in the household without causing a loss of social welfare benefit eligibility ! However, this point is off topic.




The counterpoint is that the American 'lower class' ( as you put it ) refuse to address the issues they are facing ! Instead they feel entitled to a 'minimum acceptable standard of living' which must be paid for by others and they consistently vote for politicians who will continue to provide it at the expense of others ! But staying on the thread's topic, unskilled illegal immigrants know what their 'real world' standard of living is like, which is one major reason they leave their home country and come to the USA !


I'm always perplexed when people seem to be suggesting we should "compete" with the types of earnings low income people in third world countries have to endure. Is that your vision for America? Should we all be living at the level of third world laborers? It just seems apparent to me that if you work a 40 hour week, you should be able to feed yourself and your children, have a roof over your head, be able to heat your home in the winter, see a doctor when you need to. You know, the basic things people need to SURVIVE. But I guess you would say to the janitors and walmart cashiers of the world that it's their own damn fault for getting stuck with the lowly work and it's their own damn fault if they or their children die to lack of access to the very basic necessities. ::)

Elvia
11-15-2010, 03:04 PM
Ah yes the "unintended consequences"of Labor Unions, Entitlement Programs, over reaching Government agencies, and Activist judges.

I am not advocating the we should be Serfs to Capitalist Barons; however there are consequences to the "Costs" and "Entitlements" such Laws and Organizations demand.

Demands keep rising until there is no profit in doing business. When that happens, businesses close up and move. be that another State or another Country.

How do you think we ever could have competed with third world wages?

ArmySGT.
11-15-2010, 03:05 PM
Is this a joke or did you really not understand that? If it's the latter, let me break it down for you. 2 stories. In one the children burned to death. In the other, a teenage child was taken away for being morbidly obese due to an eating disorder.

You wrote it that way. I'll give you a pass English is a bitch.

Elvia
11-15-2010, 03:08 PM
^^^ What I said was that she "LOST her children." "Lost" doesn't just mean "had them forcibly taken into state custody." She "lost" them because they died. Have you never heard anyone say they "recently lost" a family member, etc to mean that they died?

ArmySGT.
11-15-2010, 03:09 PM
How do you think we ever could have competed with third world wages?


We shouldn't be.

"Made in the USA" Meant quality. You got what you paid. however business under cut each each other. Then Government go involved with "tarrifs, embargoes, and most preferred Nations"


Then it became build at Third World wage levels or fold.

ArmySGT.
11-15-2010, 03:13 PM
^^^ What I said was that she "LOST her children." "Lost" doesn't just mean "had them forcibly taken into state custody." She "lost" them because they died. Have you never heard anyone say they "recently lost" a family member, etc to mean that they died?

No, As I was raised "Lost" meant the possibility of return, if a family member DIED it was referred to as "passed on" or just "died".

Probably just a regional thing. Like I said English is a bitch.

Melonie
11-15-2010, 03:13 PM
How do you think we ever could have competed with third world wages?

Well, historically speaking, this really only happened twice in recent history, the roaring 20's and the nifty fifties. In both cases, the way that the US successfully competed with lower priced foreign wages was to BLOW UP the production capacity of those foreign competitors ... plus killing off a few million potential workers to create a foreign labor shortage !

jack0177057
11-15-2010, 03:40 PM
It's incredibly difficult to immigrate to Europe unless you do so through marriage. It's extremely difficult to even get a wrok/residency permit. My family used to work all over Western Europe. Those doors all but closed to Americans when the EU formed. It's not realistic to suggest poor people just pack up and move to Spain or France.

I don't know enough about all of Europe, but I do know that Spain has an open border immigration policy (for now). (This was done when the liberals took control of the government shortly after the Taliban terrorist attacks in Spain, when Spaniards ousted the pro-US conservative party in favor of the liberal party that withdrew Spain from Iraq.) Poor people from Latin America (Ecuador, Columbia & Peru) have been immigrating to Spain for years. It's a better option than the US because: immigration is legal, they don't have to learn a new language, they have free healthcare and the social programs are better. However, the political pressure is growing to close the border again.

Once they become naturalized citizens of Spain, I assume they are free to travel and work all over Europe.

Don't get me wrong, Spain is not a paradise for immigrants - there is a lot of racism and they get the shittiest jobs that no proud Spaniard would deign to take. But, the healthcare system and social programs are better than in the US.

If the Latin American poor can immigrate to Spain, I'm sure poor US citizens could as well - and get better jobs, too.

Its not reasonable to expect the US to be the best country for everyone. It is a capitalistic, materialistic, individualistic, hyper-competitive, work-aholic stressed-out country. It has the best opportunities in the world for upward mobility for some people (entrepeneurs, CEOs, investment bankers, doctors, lawyers, etc.), but it is also a cold harsh place for the uneducated poor and "disenfranchised".

tempest666
11-17-2010, 06:55 PM
Alright I want to lighten the mood...Disclaimer: I am not racist, all humans piss me off. So enjoy the vid
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0Vl3VQAar8

Tell you what instead of counting jelly beans whoever guesses right on how many people were in that van gets to fuck me and chris :D

jack0177057
11-18-2010, 09:01 AM
^ Um, I don't like package deals... I'm only interested in fucking you. :D

I'll say 22. I actually counted 21, but I'm adding one I might have missed.

So, do I win the prize?

Autumn Lily
11-18-2010, 09:33 AM
Has anyone heard of the news that California Supreme Court ruled that illegal immigrants in high schools are just as worthy as citizens to receive college scholarships and federal education funding?? >:(

Cost of college is high enough as it is, let alone letting an illegal get the money that could otherwise go to an impoverished citizen!

Melonie
11-19-2010, 04:49 AM
^^^ actually, illegal immigrant students in California ( and 10 other states ) are now receiving PREFERENTIAL treatment versus US citizens of other states. Thanks to the federal court ruling and the 'generosity' of California and federal taxpayers, illegal immigrant California college students will now receive an up to $20,000 per year 'in state' college tuition subsidy that citizen students from Nevada, Oregon etc. who attend California colleges will not !

TarsTone
11-19-2010, 08:15 AM
We live in a country that refuses to address the issues that the lower class is facing.
Actually, the real problem is we live in a country too afraid to address the cultural causes behind most problems the lower class is facing. And I say this as an immigrant.

I know doctors, lawyers and other professionals in their 30s who are still waiting for the right time to have their first children, while in most urban areas you'll see throngs of single, uneducated and often unemployed women in their 20s walking around with multiple kids.

This, along with other issues like misplaced priorities and disregard for education, amount to what can only be described as piss poor life planning, and its consequences are clearly reflected in the lives of these people. We can't expect society to shut up and "respect their choices as individuals" when that same society has to pick up the tab for their irresponsibility.

A "good country" addresses these self-defeating cultural habits by acknowledging and confronting them. Not by just throwing money at the inevitable consequences of them.

Just contrast the conditions of Asian immigrants in this country with that of the Black, White and Latino underclass, and you'll easily see that the main culprit is culture- not the system.

Kellydancer
11-19-2010, 11:56 AM
Actually, the real problem is we live in a country too afraid to address the cultural causes behind most problems the lower class is facing. And I say this as an immigrant.

I know doctors, lawyers and other professionals in their 30s who are still waiting for the right time to have their first children, while in most urban areas you'll see throngs of single, uneducated and often unemployed women in their 20s walking around with multiple kids.

This, along with other issues like misplaced priorities and disregard for education, amount to what can only be described as piss poor life planning, and its consequences are clearly reflected in the lives of these people. We can't expect society to shut up and "respect their choices as individuals" when that same society has to pick up the tab for their irresponsibility.

A "good country" addresses these self-defeating cultural habits by acknowledging and confronting them. Not by just throwing money at the inevitable consequences of them.

Just contrast the conditions of Asian immigrants in this country with that of the Black, White and Latino underclass, and you'll easily see that the main culprit is culture- not the system.

Very true and this is part of the welfare class. I once lived in an area that went from upper middle class to ghetto and the changes are noticeable. You'd see many people on welfare with kid after kid and pregnant again. Apparently these people don't know how to use birth control because they keep getting pregnant. Meanwhile like you said professional people can't afford kids. I know so many single professionals even into their 40's who still haven't had kids (and want them) because they can't afford them.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what's going to happen in the next generation or so. The professionals will only have one or two kids (or less if time runs out) while the welfare class will keep breeding. Add in that these uneducated people aren't intelligent and there you have even more stupid people repeating the pattern.

We need to stop this behavior now. We need to not give them additional money for each kid and educate them on this. We all need to stop glamorizing sex in the media.

Elvia
11-19-2010, 05:06 PM
Actually, the real problem is we live in a country too afraid to address the cultural causes behind most problems the lower class is facing. And I say this as an immigrant.

I know doctors, lawyers and other professionals in their 30s who are still waiting for the right time to have their first children, while in most urban areas you'll see throngs of single, uneducated and often unemployed women in their 20s walking around with multiple kids.

This, along with other issues like misplaced priorities and disregard for education, amount to what can only be described as piss poor life planning, and its consequences are clearly reflected in the lives of these people. We can't expect society to shut up and "respect their choices as individuals" when that same society has to pick up the tab for their irresponsibility.

A "good country" addresses these self-defeating cultural habits by acknowledging and confronting them. Not by just throwing money at the inevitable consequences of them.

Just contrast the conditions of Asian immigrants in this country with that of the Black, White and Latino underclass, and you'll easily see that the main culprit is culture- not the system.

That would never be enough. You'd still have to have some solution to helping people who do end up in bad situations. It's all fine and good to say that all children should be born into an ideal financial situation, but that's never going to change the fact that many aren't. Nor does it address the issue of what happens to people when they fall on hard times. Which can very easily happen in this country to anyone.

Elvia
11-19-2010, 05:13 PM
Very true and this is part of the welfare class. I once lived in an area that went from upper middle class to ghetto and the changes are noticeable. You'd see many people on welfare with kid after kid and pregnant again. Apparently these people don't know how to use birth control because they keep getting pregnant. Meanwhile like you said professional people can't afford kids. I know so many single professionals even into their 40's who still haven't had kids (and want them) because they can't afford them.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what's going to happen in the next generation or so. The professionals will only have one or two kids (or less if time runs out) while the welfare class will keep breeding. Add in that these uneducated people aren't intelligent and there you have even more stupid people repeating the pattern.

We need to stop this behavior now. We need to not give them additional money for each kid and educate them on this. We all need to stop glamorizing sex in the media.

And yet Kelly, you also support (both ethically and financially) a religion that teaches people that using birth control is a sin and that it is their duty to marry and procreate (in abundance) regardless of their economic status. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it's rather hypocritical and self defeating to complain about people not using birth control while giving your support to an organization that teaches people they must not use birth control ::) Seems to me if you're going to align yourself with an organization that demands people be fruitful and multiply and never use birth control, you can't really complain when you have to deal with the result of that type of thinking.

Kellydancer
11-19-2010, 05:56 PM
And yet Kelly, you also support (both ethically and financially) a religion that teaches people that using birth control is a sin and that it is their duty to marry and procreate (in abundance) regardless of their economic status. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it's rather hypocritical and self defeating to complain about people not using birth control while giving your support to an organization that teaches people they must not use birth control ::) Seems to me if you're going to align yourself with an organization that demands people be fruitful and multiply and never use birth control, you can't really complain when you have to deal with the result of that type of thinking.

But the difference is the welfare class isn't generally Catholic. Many are no religion at all because their morals (what morals? I would stress) don't fit with religion. I know Catholics who have lots of kids, but not all do. These people don't all use birth control. I do not support the church in this regard. Actually haven't been giving them money because I have none now. When I get some money I will buy food for the pantry and things like that.

Btw there is a choice and it's called abstinence. This is what welfare people need to do to have some self respect. However they don't use birth control because that's more money we pay. I bet if we cut welfare for additional kids they would quit having babies.

TarsTone
11-20-2010, 01:59 AM
That would never be enough. You'd still have to have some solution to helping people who do end up in bad situations. It's all fine and good to say that all children should be born into an ideal financial situation, but that's never going to change the fact that many aren't. Nor does it address the issue of what happens to people when they fall on hard times. Which can very easily happen in this country to anyone.
Between food stamps, medicaid, unemployment benefits, social security, etc., we already have enough government programs to help people in times of emergency.

What we DON’T have is a will to confront the mindset that causes the generational poverty in this country. People who don't acknowledge this fact either don't understand the problem or simply aren't serious about solving it.

The reason our current welfare programs don’t seem enough is because unlike most other industrial countries we have a culture that has institutionalized poverty and turned laziness and crime into a profession.

If you’re serious about helping these poor communities, the first priority should be to help them acknowledge and improve their self-destructive outlook. To make them understand that you can't laugh off education and expect to enjoy the same quality of life as the rest of society....That having multiple babies you can't afford doesn't make you a martyr; it just makes you irresponsible.

Putting this in the background and focusing on government hand-outs is like putting a band-aid on a shotgun wound.

You cure a disease first and foremost by treating its cause, not just its symptoms, which is all welfare does.

Melonie
11-21-2010, 06:34 AM
What we DON’T have is a will to confront the mindset that causes the generational poverty in this country. People who don't acknowledge this fact either don't understand the problem or simply aren't serious about solving it.

Circling back on topic, this is actually a fundamental point about illegal immigrants working 'under the table' in the USA. In order to provide ( partial ) funding for all of America's safety net programs ( i.e. medicaid, food stamps, etc.) it's necessary to establish high tax rates on employers and employees. Combined with other safety net programs such as the US minimum wage, America has created a situation where the minimum costs involved to employ an unskilled worker virtually guarantees that an American company cannot survive economically versus foreign companies that do not face similar taxes and minimum costs.

At the same time, the 'generosity' of American safety net programs also result in essentially no difference in actual standard of living between working at a minimum wage job ( or in some states a $10 - $12 an hour job ) and NOT working while collecting the full monte of social welfare benefits. This has created a 'willing' unskilled labor shortage i.e. unskilled Americans receiving social welfare benefits have zero economic motivation to work because their standard of living will not improve ( and may actually decline due to loss of benefit eligibility) if they do so. There is ample proof of this phenomenon ... with the data showing that unskilled workers will turn down promotions and/or outright quit their jobs if they are in danger of earning 'too much money' and thus losing benefit eligibility.

However, this creates a strong incentive for certain US employers to operate 'under the table' utilizing illegal immigrant 'employees' ... and it also creates a strong incentive for Mexicans etc. to become illegal immigrants and accept said 'under the table' work. In this way the US employers can avoid the high tax rate and minimum wage issue to remain economially competitive, and the illegal immigrants can earn enough US dollars to support a standard of living that is better than they could have achieved in their home country - albeit a standard of living that is still below that achievable via US social welfare benefits. Of course, the illegal immigrants can also 'cash in' on US social welfare benefits as soon as they can produce and register a US born 'anchor baby' - which also de-facto guarantees that they won't be deported for the next 18 years.

The TRUE problem here is the 'vicious circle' that has been created by generous US social welfare benefits and the unrealistically high 'minimum acceptable US standard of living' they provide ... a standard of living that is well above that achievable by unskilled workers in Asia, Mexico and most of the world. Maintaining those generous US social welfare benefits and the unrealistically high 'minimum acceptable US standard of living' requires placing heavy burdens on US businesses and higher skilled US workers ... burdens which decrease the global competitiveness of those US businesses and threaten the future job security of those higher skilled US workers. At the same time, those 'enjoying' generous US social welfare benefits, as well as illegal immigrants, are encouraged to pump out children in order to secure / increase their US social welfare benefits. As the number of 'payers' declines, and as the number of 'recipients' increases, the 'vicious circle' only intensifies i.e. additional tax increases needed to fund higher social welfare benefit costs makes US businesses even less globally competitive and makes higher skilled US jobs even less secure !!!

jack0177057
11-22-2010, 12:14 PM
Meanwhile like you said professional people can't afford kids. I know so many single professionals even into their 40's who still haven't had kids (and want them) because they can't afford them.

That's going to get me started on another rant... The Myth of the Elite & Overpriced Education and the Million Dollar Child.

Okay, I can understand a couple making $50,000 or less being concerned about the cost of children, but why can't a couple making more than $150k a year afford kids?

Because the "right" elite pre-K / elementary school costs about $27,000 per year per child (plus another $5,000 - $10,000 for books, supplies, fees and to appease the school's fund-raising mafia) While you're paying this, you better also be saving money for your kids' elite college education. The "right" college costs about $40,000 per year per child, right now, but will probably cost three times that, by the time a newborn goes to college. And don't forget about their medical school or law school, after college.

Also, don't forget you need to start saving money early for their $150k wedding. (Also multiply this number by three, for a child born today.)

Ofcourse, you'll be working all the time to pay for all this, so you need an overpriced live-in nanny (preferable with a Brittish or French accent) to take care of and love your children.

Not to mention, you have to live in the "right" over-priced neighborhood; in an ostentious house with a huge media room that looks like a mini-threatre, because you want your kids can feel "special" and not "deprived".

There are also the little things, like the riding lessons (and a pony for that extra special little girl), piano lessons, dance lessons, "cultural" vacations to Europe, etc.

If you can bypass the "elitisim" bullshit myth and the competitiveness of parenting (and overindulging our children), a child doesn't have to cost a million dollars.

Kellydancer
11-22-2010, 12:26 PM
That's going to get me started on another rant... The Myth of the Elite & Overpriced Education and the Million Dollar Child.

Okay, I can understand a couple making $50,000 or less being concerned about the cost of children, but why can't a couple making more than $150k a year afford kids?

Because the "right" elite pre-K / elementary school costs about $27,000 per year per child (plus another $5,000 - $10,000 for books, supplies, fees and to appease the school's fund-raising mafia) While you're paying this, you better also be saving money for your kids' elite college education. The "right" college costs about $40,000 per year per child, right now, but will probably cost three times that, by the time a newborn goes to college. And don't forget about their medical school or law school, after college.

Also, don't forget you need to start saving money early for their $150k wedding. (Also multiply this number by three, for a child born today.)

Ofcourse, you'll be working all the time to pay for all this, so you need an overpriced live-in nanny (preferable with a Brittish or French accent) to take care of and love your children.

Not to mention, you have to live in the "right" over-priced neighborhood; in an ostentious house with a huge media room that looks like a mini-threatre, because you want your kids can feel "special" and not "deprived".

There are also the little things, like the riding lessons (and a pony for that extra special little girl), piano lessons, dance lessons, "cultural" vacations to Europe, etc.

I'm on another forum and people are claiming an education at Harvard and an iPod is a "need". I strongly disagree and think that's silly when people think that. If I have kids they will be provided for but if they want to go to Harvard they will need to pay for it. Then again I am not one of these materialistic women who have the have the best things. I would even be content raising kids in an apartment. I'd love to send my kids to private school but likely couldn't afford that either. Actually if I waited until I could afford these items I would be too old for kids.

jack0177057
11-22-2010, 12:35 PM
And yet Kelly, you also support (both ethically and financially) a religion that teaches people that using birth control is a sin and that it is their duty to marry and procreate (in abundance) regardless of their economic status. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it's rather hypocritical and self defeating to complain about people not using birth control while giving your support to an organization that teaches people they must not use birth control ::)

Yes, it is our duty to marry and procreate abundantly, but that doesn't mean we must be financially irresponsible. (It is also our duty to invest our God-given talents wisely - which includes getting a proper education, working hard, and being financially strong.) We have a natural birth control methods that, if followed correctly and with some discipline (i.e., there are about four days in a month that you should abstain from intercourse), these birth control methods are very reliable and have no side effects. (The older versions were about 80% effective, but new advances have made it more effective than any other form of birth control.)

jack0177057
11-22-2010, 04:49 PM
I'm on another forum and people are claiming an education at Harvard and an iPod is a "need". I strongly disagree and think that's silly when people think that. If I have kids they will be provided for but if they want to go to Harvard they will need to pay for it. Then again I am not one of these materialistic women who have the have the best things. I would even be content raising kids in an apartment. I'd love to send my kids to private school but likely couldn't afford that either. Actually if I waited until I could afford these items I would be too old for kids.

I used to have my kids in private school, and, even with a six-digit income, it was a challenge to pay for that.

They are now in exemplary public schools getting a comparable education - my daughter is in several Advanced Placement courses. (Granted, that most exemplary public schools are in affluent middle class suburban neighborhood, except for inner-city selective admissions-based charter schools.)

Even in public school, my 13 year-old is asking for a Mac laptop because that is what all her friends have. (She got the I-pod 2 years ago.)

Kids are too damn spoiled, but it does create a dilemma for parents - will she be "left behind" or feel deprived and develop self-esteem issues, if she doesn't have the same technology/resources that other kids her age have?

If you do sufficient research, you can find outstanding private and public colleges that are almost affordable.