View Full Version : Fun with Factoids: Immigration!
Yekhefah
01-20-2007, 09:43 PM
Well, fine, but that is not a cold war. It's a delicate political situation, but not a cold war.
ArmySGT.
01-20-2007, 10:15 PM
Would you prefer Arms Race?
Yekhefah
01-20-2007, 10:21 PM
I don't think it's necessarily that, either. I think it's simply that China is stronger than it used to be, which means we will have to make an effort to peacefully coexist. So far that's what we seem to be doing.
ArmySGT.
01-20-2007, 11:21 PM
Sgt. considering you were, I'm assuming, in the army you should be well aware of this. It is every person's natural right to migrate. If it weren't than anybody legally or illegally would be subject to criminal charges into any country which they set foot in depending on said countries laws. I'm not sure if I missed the point here, maybe I did. As far as the world citizenship is concerned we are all world citizens. Everyone is a citizen of some country and every country is a part of the world so the word association should be apparent. Party line, I'm sorry I really missed what you were trying to say there.
Yep World Wide for fifteen years. NEVER have I seen it as a persons natural right to migrate. As a matter of fact I have seen some rather intimidating Border Guards their to dispute this freedom to migrate idea.
If it weren't than anybody legally or illegally would be subject to criminal charges into any country which they set foot in depending on said countries laws.
This is what People keep telling you. Does this mean you are starting to accept it?
Everyone is a citizen of some country and every country is a part of the world so the word association should be apparent. See I don't understand where you have gotten this concept from. I am taking a stab at it that you get it from Karl Marx and Frederik Engels irresponsible work "the communist manifesto". Since Communist propaganda creeps into your choices in word choices. Yes every person is a citizen of some country and every country is part of the world......... Now how does this evolve World Citizenship? Something not recognized anywhere?
See I don't see the Marxist Nations gushing with this World Citizenship Ideal. Since The Land of the Morning Calm, the Glorious Workers Paradise, the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea will kill its citizens when they attempt to leave.
NinaDaisy
01-21-2007, 08:43 AM
Let me see if I understand you right Al Quaida terrorists killed three thousand people on 11 September 2001 because President Bush ordered US Forces to attack Iraq in February 2003? Well no wonder the terrorists are doing so well. They have a crystal ball!
Disregard we are locked in another Cold War. This time with China. Russia is beginning to come together. Once Europe starts feeding off the resources of Russia besides the Oil and Natural Gas it will be twice the Super power it once was.
The reason I mentioned Iraq in particular is because Al Qaeda wasn't linked to Iraq. We should have invaded Saudi Arabia instead then, but since Bush is locked into such a comfortable 69 with the Saudis... :P Besides, Al Qaeda is a multi-headed hydra with cells all over, so you can't invade a single country over it. You cut off one part and another grows right back in its place.
Also, I'm aware the drug companies are getting a nice tax break for helping out with my mother's organization. Drug companies rarely do anything out of the goodness of their black-shriveled hearts. And you actually accused me of helping criminals? Actually, only a small minority of the people who go the health fairs are illegal, but regardless, would you rather they go to an emergency room for every little thing and then have taxpayers pay for it? Or would you rather they get some preventative screening and treatment first by private organizations and doctors donating their time (no tax break for the docs on that one, bub) in order to try to avoid the emergency room and you paying for it? ::)
And duh, you're right about the Sirona comment not relating to immigration, it was just something incidental earlier in the thread that I commented very briefly on.
Maybe sometimes a little insensitivity is needed, but the fact remains that SC pointed out her mother's dying from smoking. Even though her mother chose to smoke, it doesn't change the fact it's still painful for SC to deal with.
As for the rest of it, I hope your colon is coated with candy, because your head is so far up your own ass that it might was be tasty while it's lodged up there.
NinaDaisy
01-21-2007, 08:46 AM
I don't think it's necessarily that, either. I think it's simply that China is stronger than it used to be, which means we will have to make an effort to peacefully coexist. So far that's what we seem to be doing.
Agreed. I don't see a "Cold War" so far since there's no prospective nuclear stalemate, though their satellite missile testing could potentially be problematic, since so much of our defense relates to satellite technology.
With China, I'd be more worried about the trade deficit than anything else. So maybe it's a Cold War with the with your local shopping mall as the virtual battlefield.
datchapin
01-23-2007, 02:35 PM
Look it up in the dictionary? Sure thing!
Illegal - adj.
1. Forbidden by law or structure.
2. Contrary to or forbidden by official rules/regulations.
Illegal Alien - noun
1. A foreigner who has entered or resides in a country unlawfully or without the country's authorization.
2. A foreigner who enters the U.S. without an entry or immigrant visa, esp. a person who crosses the border by avoiding inspection or who overstays the period of time allowed as a visitor, tourist, or businessperson.
As for you suggestion to educate myself, maybe you ought to take some of your own advice.
In closing, it may be every person's right to migrate... within the laws laid out by whatever country it is they wish to migrate to. I find it strange that you can't seem to wrap your mind around that.
Do you carefully read what I say? I mean it seriously, because not once have you made an argument which I haven't already addressed. You even post the definition and still it seems to elude you and maybe everybody else what it is I've been trying to say. I'll break it down according to K.I.S.S principles and hope you can get what I'm saying.
Illegal- Adjective- Describes something. Thank you for posting the definition.
Immigrant- Somebody who has commited the act of migrating
Criminal- Somebody who has commited an illegal act
Illegal immigrant- somebody that immigrated that is not allowed
Illegal criminal- somebody that commited a crime that is not allowed
In essence what you and everyone here keeps implying is that immigrants are criminals. (I'm shocked Yek didn't pick up on this sooner.)
What is the difference between a legal and illegal immigrant? Their status. You described how a legal immigrant can become illegal. You've provided evidence that through no action of their own their status can change. However all the things that you said only apply to their status. So please explain to me what action it is they take that automatically makes every immigrant a criminal when their status changes.
I'll provide an analogy that will demonstrate what I'm trying to say and hopefully you will get where I'm coming from.
Skinny- Adjective- Someone of thin frame
Stripper- I don't think I have to define this.
Whore- Same as above.
Thick- adjective- someone of thicker frame
Now check this out.
thick stripper becomes skinny stripper does that make her a skinny whore? I don't think so. However that is the logic you are applying to your argument. Legal immigrant becomes illegal immigrant yet somehow becomes a criminal as well? That is what you expect me to believe? Fine since you are so insistent on it then convince me, because you're right I can't wrap my mind around that.
datchapin
01-23-2007, 02:52 PM
Army sgt. While my first impulse is to do you up and let my sig apply to you. I will resist and try to be civil about it. I don't appreciate you implying that I am communist or that I am promoting their ideas. I hope it's just a misunderstanding on your part. Now according to the declaration of independence it is the people's rights to alter the government if something they are doing violates the peoples NATURAL rights. These natural rights are which the declaration refer too are the natural rights reserved by everybody on the globe. The fact that these rights are constantly violated or denied to people by corrupt governments does not mean they don't exist. The right to migrate is among these rights.
I don't know why it's so hard to accept the term world citizen. Do you correct everybody when they say they are American citizens? I don't think so yet there isn't any country on the globe that is called America is there. The term is an accepted figure of speech because by extension of being a citizen of the U.S. you are also a citizen of that continent. If you follow that logic and extend it once again word/ global citizen should apply.
Sirona
01-23-2007, 02:54 PM
Do you carefully read what I say? I mean it seriously, because not once have you made an argument which I haven't already addressed. You even post the definition and still it seems to elude you and maybe everybody else what it is I've been trying to say. I'll break it down according to K.I.S.S principles and hope you can get what I'm saying.
Illegal- Adjective- Describes something. Thank you for posting the definition.
Immigrant- Somebody who has commited the act of migrating
Criminal- Somebody who has commited an illegal act
Illegal immigrant- somebody that immigrated that is not allowed
Illegal criminal- somebody that commited a crime that is not allowed
In essence what you and everyone here keeps implying is that immigrants are criminals. (I'm shocked Yek didn't pick up on this sooner.)
What is the difference between a legal and illegal immigrant? Their status. You described how a legal immigrant can become illegal. You've provided evidence that through no action of their own their status can change. However all the things that you said only apply to their status. So please explain to me what action it is they take that automatically makes every immigrant a criminal when their status changes.
I'll provide an analogy that will demonstrate what I'm trying to say and hopefully you will get where I'm coming from.
Skinny- Adjective- Someone of thin frame
Stripper- I don't think I have to define this.
Whore- Same as above.
Thick- adjective- someone of thicker frame
Now check this out.
thick stripper becomes skinny stripper does that make her a skinny whore? I don't think so. However that is the logic you are applying to your argument. Legal immigrant becomes illegal immigrant yet somehow becomes a criminal as well? That is what you expect me to believe? Fine since you are so insistent on it then convince me, because you're right I can't wrap my mind around that.
Oh you're right all mighty super intelligent supreme being! I am so sorry for not seeing the error in my ways.
Look, no offense guy but you're off your rocker and not nearly as intelligent as you seem to think you are. If you can't figure out why entering the country without going through the proper channels is wrong and against our laws then I can't help you, nor do I wish to try.
Thanks. Have a nice day.
datchapin
01-23-2007, 03:05 PM
Oh you're right all mighty super intelligent supreme being! I am so sorry for not seeing the error in my ways.
Look, no offense guy but you're off your rocker and not nearly as intelligent as you seem to think you are. If you can't figure out why entering the country without going through the proper channels is wrong and against our laws then I can't help you, nor do I wish to try.
Thanks. Have a nice day.
Look you yourself said that if their papers expire they become illegal. You've stated multiple ways of becoming illegal and yet what the fuck you can't wrap your mind around what I'm saying? I guess saying skinny strippers are whores does make sense to you. If your so much damn better than explain it in layman's terms. So that a feeble minded individual such as myself (which you seem to imply.) can understand.
Yekhefah
01-23-2007, 03:11 PM
In essence what you and everyone here keeps implying is that immigrants are criminals.
No one said any such thing. We said that ILLEGAL ALIENS are criminals. An immigrant is someone who migrates to another country, which involves certain paperwork and processes to accomplish legally. An illegal alien is someone who has violated immigration law, hence, a criminal.
An alien is not an "immigrant." He is a criminal. Immigrants are welcome here; aliens are not.
Sirona
01-23-2007, 03:49 PM
I guess saying skinny strippers are whores does make sense to you.
LOL!
Sad, so sad. Gotta stoop to not only using the stripper = whore analogy but you gotta toss it my way and attempt to make it personal.
Classic.
ps - I think I stated in my last post I had no intention of carrying on this conversation with you because I find you to not only be thick headed but far to full of yourself and convinced of your own superiority to make it a remote possibility.
datchapin
01-23-2007, 03:52 PM
No one said any such thing. We said that ILLEGAL ALIENS are criminals. An immigrant is someone who migrates to another country, which involves certain paperwork and processes to accomplish legally. An illegal alien is someone who has violated immigration law, hence, a criminal.
An alien is not an "immigrant." He is a criminal. Immigrants are welcome here; aliens are not.
Definition of an alien. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_(law) I don't really see the difference between this definition and what you say is an immigrant.
Even in the document you presented earlier the second paragraph of the second sub-section deemed them punishable under civil offenses, not criminal. The first paragra.... I'm sorry, I'm growing weary of trying to clarify what it is I'm getting at. It does somewhat disappoint me that a concept which should in my opinion be simple is so hard to grasp.
I'm sorry I really don't see the merit in continuing to participate in this debate. I'll withdraw from here and apologize for any inconvenience.
datchapin
01-23-2007, 03:59 PM
Sirona, I'm sorry if you interpreted that analogy as a personal insult. However that was not my intent. It was my hope that you would recognize it as a stupid analogy (which it is.) and draw the parallel to what I was getting at.
If I seem too full of myself I apologize for that as well. I was just trying add a bit of humor to what I was saying.
Yekhefah
01-23-2007, 04:17 PM
Datchapin, sugar, you are the MASTER of the Chewbacca defense. My hat is off to you.
Sirona
01-23-2007, 04:28 PM
Datchapin, sugar, you are the MASTER of the Chewbacca defense. My hat is off to you.
Bahahahahaha! I love you Yek! ;D
gingerlee
01-24-2007, 04:04 PM
Gingerlee I don't know if you were just trying to be a smartass or if it was a serious question. However I'll treat it as the latter. Most of those immigrants come under the cover of night because of the smugglers who are the ones who run the bigger risk of being caught. There are alot of reason's for this, but I'm not sure what you want me to say. I won't argue about right/wrong, because you know what. I have no idea what goes through their minds that I could speak for them. This would be a question better posed to them as indivuals. Oh, I'm sorry I've never been to Nashville so I haven't had the pleasure of seeing the billboard. Does it have a picture or is it just the words?
Yes, I was 100% being a smartass. I was pretty blunt about it. And the billboard is actually a video billboard, so it flashes at you as you drive by.
ArmySGT.
01-28-2007, 02:36 AM
Army sgt. While my first impulse is to do you up and let my sig apply to you. I will resist and try to be civil about it. I don't appreciate you implying that I am communist or that I am promoting their ideas. I hope it's just a misunderstanding on your part. Now according to the declaration of independence it is the people's rights to alter the government if something they are doing violates the peoples NATURAL rights. These natural rights are which the declaration refer too are the natural rights reserved by everybody on the globe. The fact that these rights are constantly violated or denied to people by corrupt governments does not mean they don't exist. The right to migrate is among these rights.
I don't know why it's so hard to accept the term world citizen. Do you correct everybody when they say they are American citizens? I don't think so yet there isn't any country on the globe that is called America is there. The term is an accepted figure of speech because by extension of being a citizen of the U.S. you are also a citizen of that continent. If you follow that logic and extend it once again word/ global citizen should apply.
Your going to "do me up" errrrrr Okey dokey. Your going to be civil? Well that would be refreshing on your part.
Your a classic troll archetype. you enter, act uncivil, you called on, act surprised, state that your intentions were misunderstood, pout, demand justifications from everyone involved for their reaction to your behaveior, then demand apologies from everyone else.
if I care to look it up I am sure this style of troll behavior is even named.
Ummmmm What? No country called America? Let me check....... let's see there is the United States of America so I would assume if one wanted to abbreviate this it would be America with United States as a descriptor. After all Mexico is fully described as the United States of Mexico. As to the Inalienable rights you allude to: having come from the Old World with its established borders, I am sure the Founding Fathers would have had much to say about illegal immigration as the problem as it is today. It is not an issue in the Constitution because it was not a problem even the Founding Fathers could have foreseen given the Government they were attempting to establish. Immigrants were needed to swell the populations of the new Colonies. However wasn't until FDR and LBJ that the social reforms were put in place that are so abused at this time. We may think nothing of picking up our things and moving hundreds of miles; to the Colonist this was a major undertaking. This is one thing that makes those first Colonist so amazing. There was no government housing, no WIC or food banks, nothing. So they built it, unlike the criminals arriving daily expecting free material possesions.
Ok with this World Citizen concept, well it's bullcrap and not recognized anywhere but, the confines of your own skull. I am in fact accussing you of being a Marxist. I get this from your word choices and the championing of Workers and the Oppressed in struggles against Corporations (I.E. Capitalism). So if this isn't the case what, if at all are you politics?
See I am a Citizen of America, The United States of America. Not North America or the World. Actually I give people crap for hyphenating it with something else. Irish-American, Italian-American, African-American. Bullshit. Unless you are holding dual Citizenship (which occurs). Your Parents were born here or became legal residents then you were born here and you are a Citizen. An American Citizen with all the privileges and all the responsibilities.
Look, I'm sorry I ripped apart every belief that you ever had and dragged them through the mud just to show that I can wield my massive intellect over you... But hey, it's what I do.- BBoy Ringer Inc.
Nice Chutzpah. However your no genius, not the center of the universe, and the Sun does not rise and set from the crack of your ass. You can flaunt your little siggie but, hey it's not your original thought. It's certainly not daunting. I don't care but hey, it's what I do
xBlackBettyx
02-26-2007, 09:30 AM
Another factoid- the acronym "WOP" used to denigrate Italian immigrants came from a stamp used at Ellis Island when authorities ran out of documents to assign to the multitudinous Italians. The "WOP" stamp stood for "With Out Papers."
I always say I never want to hear a peep about immigration unless it's from a Reservation Indian.
I did not know "WOP" stood for that, I just thought it was used as a racial slur...
dlabtot
02-28-2007, 01:55 PM
Two new studies by California researchers counter negative perceptions that immigrants increase crime and job competition, showing that they are incarcerated at far lower rates than native-born citizens and actually help boost their wages. A study released Tuesday by the Public Policy Institute of California found that immigrants who arrived in the state between 1990 and 2004 increased wages for native workers by an average 4%.
UC Davis economist Giovanni Peri, who conducted the study, said the benefits were shared by all native-born workers, from high school dropouts to college graduates, because immigrants generally perform complementary rather than competitive work. As immigrants filled lower-skilled jobs, they pushed natives up the economic ladder into employment that required more English or know-how of the U.S. system, he said.
- snip -
Another study released Monday by the Washington-based Immigration Policy Center showed that immigrant men ages 18 to 39 had an incarceration rate five times lower than native-born citizens in every ethnic group examined. Among men of Mexican descent, for instance, 0.7% of those foreign-born were incarcerated compared to 5.9% of native-born, according to the study, co-written by UC Irvine sociologist Ruben G. Rumbaut.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-me-immigstudy28feb28,1,4004926.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
Interesting....
Melonie
02-28-2007, 04:27 PM
^^^ Actually, I have a feeling that the fact gatherers for those studies forgot to canvass a couple of neighborhoods ...
(snip)"Cudahy resembles a Mexican border town more than it does a Los Angeles suburb. Entrenched gangs and Mexican drug trafficking have trapped working-class legal and illegal immigrants in a cycle of violence and fear, in a city where less than a quarter of the 28,000 residents are eligible to vote. An uneducated city council, a deeply troubled police force imported from Maywood two towns over, and the raw power of the 18th Street Gang — a complex criminal organization with a knack for setting up business fronts and obscuring underground drug activity — make Cudahy residents seem like hostages in their own city.
By most accounts, Cudahy City Council members — two retired union managers, an insurance salesman, a waitress and a grocer — do not run the city as they were elected to do. Rather, they defer to City Manager Perez, a former janitor who is known to favor revenue traps such as DUI and driver’s license checkpoints over aggressive tactics that make gangs and drug dealers less comfortable."(snip)
(snip)"A rough-and-tumble world of small-city politics has come to define the drug- and gang-infested cities clustered around the 710 freeway: Bell Gardens, Cudahy, Huntington Park, Lynwood, Maywood and South Gate, among others.
In recent decades, the demographic shift from white working class to Mexicans and Central Americans resulted in immigrants and their sons and daughters gaining political power. Now, most elected officials reflect the majority Latino population. But high unemployment, illegal immigration and a maze of freeways, truck stops and industrial areas — just a half-day’s drive from Mexico — have contributed to the busy drug-trafficking zones, blight and violence.
Residents, many of them illegal or too young to vote, have it rough. After complaining to authorities or taking too much notice of suspicious activity on their block, some low-income residents have been repaid with retaliation or violent threats. In Cudahy, one persistent complainer got a door-knock from the police — a public no-no that alerts drug dealers to the complainer’s identity and can result in that person’s property being vandalized.
“It gets a lot worse than that,” says a local cop, acknowledging that criminal threats are so common that police are hard-pressed to investigate them.
In contrast to the vulnerability of the average Cudahy resident, business owners who operate questionable businesses get velvet-glove treatment from politicians that would be considered scandalous in the city of Los Angeles. In Cudahy, the Potrero Club is one of several magnets for crime and is frequented by gangsters, but it is nevertheless embraced by Cudahy authorities. A notorious nightspot that parents warn their children to stay away from, the Potrero Club has a long record of being the scene of thefts, assaults and drug activity.
Officials in Cudahy openly promote this crime magnet, however, holding fund-raisers for the Cudahy Youth Foundation there and even using it as an annual gathering spot for a children’s Christmas pageant. Cudahy has sunk so low that each year at Christmastime, Perez and the city council parade around town on the back of a tow truck and toss candy to the children, with the procession ending in a toy giveaway at the Potrero Club, whose owners in the past have displayed photos not of Hollywood movie stars but of famous Mexican drug traffickers."(snip)
As to the incarceration rate statistics carrying any correlation to 'criminal' status, this only counts if A. the crimes are actually reported and prosecuted, B. cops and citizens are willing to testify, and C. the judge and jury have the 'balls' to find the defendent guilty.
In regard to an increase in wages, A. the comparison was for pre-tax wages with tax rates increasing just about as fast as the supposed increase in wages cancelling out any real gain, and B. the 'zero' incomes of an increasing number of long term unemployed low skill Americans are not averaged in (if they're unemployed / collecting social welfare benefits, the statistics ignore their existance)
~
dlabtot
02-28-2007, 04:42 PM
^^^ Actually, I have a feeling that the fact gatherers for those studies forgot to canvass a couple of neighborhoods ...
It's based on the US Census - as you'd know if you bothered to click on the link and read the article.
dlabtot
02-28-2007, 05:35 PM
^^^ Of course not.
And where ever did you get the idea that I 'agree' or 'disagree' with any particular statistic?
I'm willing to be held accountable for the things I say - not for the conclusions you draw from what I say.
Melonie
03-01-2007, 01:56 AM
It's based on the US Census - as you'd know if you bothered to click on the link and read the article.
^^^ actually, this is one more reason that prompts me to question the supposed accuracy and conclusions of this study. I'm not altogether confident in the prospect that the illegal aliens residing in this California city, or other California cities, or other cities throughout the USA for that matter, voluntarily and accurately provided their personal information to the census bureau.
The bottom line here is that the College prof's methodology attempts to measure the level of 'criminality' of particular groups based on an official incarceration rate. All I am trying to point out is that, if this California city is any example, if New Orleans was any example, etc. then any validity in correlating incarceration rate to the actual crime rate is only as effective as the police and court system are in arresting and convicting 'criminals'.
Put another way, based on this College prof's methodology, if a particular hispanic immigrant drug trafficker shoots somebody, but no neighbors report the shooting to the police, the police make no arrest, and the courts make no conviction, then this hispanic immigrant drug trafficker must not be a 'criminal'. The actual problem here is that the College prof isn't living in the real world !
dlabtot
03-01-2007, 09:22 AM
For the record, I didn't say you disagreed with any statistics, but rather with the person presenting them, e.g. your tendency to call things posted here by Melonie recently lies.
If you drew that conclusion about her comments from what I said, fine, but it's still your characterization of what I said, not actually what I said.
Again, I'll be happy to defend any specific comment I make - if you quote me, I will be willing to be held accountable for my words - not for your interpretation of them.
dlabtot
03-01-2007, 10:45 AM
Yes I posted all those things. It certainly is indisputable that Melonie did repeat the lie about Obama a month after it was debunked - as I demonstrated (http://www.stripperweb.com/forum/showthread.php?p=983640#post983640).
So, yes, I have used the word 'lie' - when appropriate.
I stand by every one of those comments and if you'd care to dispute any of the underlying facts, go ahead, although why you think Melonie needs you to spring to her defense is beyond me.
dlabtot
03-01-2007, 12:56 PM
OK, if you aren't actually disputing the merits of what I've said, fine.
Melonie
03-01-2007, 03:57 PM
why you think Melonie needs you to spring to her defense is beyond me
If you had read my post in context you would see that no defense is needed. For the second or third time I'll ask why media 'lies' about Obama should be treated any differently than media 'lies' about GWB ? Much depends on how much air time such 'lies' are allocated by mainstream media editors, versus how much is allocated to factual news reports dispelling those 'lies'. Thus the only logical conclusion is that in Obama's case the mainstream media wanted to clear his name, whereas in GWB's case the mainstream media wanted the 'lie' to be believed.
Back to the topic of Immigration factoids, I have been arguing that your college professor's study which was based on incarceration rate statistics and attempts to paint an impression that immigrants are model citizens isn't necessarily a factual 'lie', only that the facts being cited bear little if any correlation to the actual 'criminal' activity level of said immigrants thus invalidating the impression the author attempted to paint. IMHO that qualifies you as posting material that is 'misleading' ... 'half truths' etc. in exactly the same manner that you have accused me of doing. In fairness, I'll freely admit that all sorts of studies and statistical analysis is conducted where the selected facts, methodology etc. are less than objective. Sometimes this is a simple oversight, but often there is predisposition that the conclusion drawn from the study should yield a particular result.
~