Illegal Immigration.

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Malice
Posts: 3894
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Malice » Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:18 am UTC

gtg947h wrote:Basically, the system would work as follows: at 18 or graduation from high school (whichever is later), you may elect to serve a term of service, defined as two years in a "hazardous" occupation (military, firefighter, rescue worker, etc.) or four years in a "non-hazardous" position (relief worker, Americorps, disaster relief, etc). Upon completing your term of service and passing a basic test (similar to the current citizenship test), you gain full citizenship (defined below). Additionally, everyone is given a full first-aid course on entering service, and upon leaving they get a first-aid refresher and have the option of completing a 6-week equivalent of army basic training. Should they elect the training, they are issued a rifle at the end of it, and are listed in the militia (similar to National Guard, but constitutionally prohibited from operating outside the country). It's kinda like Switzerland's system, in a way.

Anyways, if you drop out before your service is up, you may try again later on, from the beginning. Gaining full citizenship provides you with voting rights and other government benefits (including social security, welfare, or whatever may exist at the time). You may not receive these benefits if you have not completed your service (though obviously children, the mentally handicapped, etc are exempt). And as long as you are of sound mind and legal age, you cannot be denied your right to serve--a job will be found for you that is challenging but within your capabilities. (yes, I copied the idea from Heinlein--but I decided to be nice and offer second chances).

I'm not very fond of the idea that anyone can vote as long as he's a warm body that's been breathing for a given stretch of time. You should at least know what it is you're voting on.


That system sounds good on the surface, but there are a lot of problems with it.

1. You're effectively raising the voting age from 18 to 20 or 22. You're also adding a 2 or 4 year period between high school and college, which is definitely going to change the economy (college students skew older, you're older when you actually graduate and find a job, etc.).

2. Limiting voting rights to people who have been through the process essentially ensures the process's immortality, because anyone who seriously disagrees with the process won't do it.

3. Do we really need that many people in those services? We really don't need 300 million firefighters, soldiers, or charity-org paper-pushers. And employing that many people puts a lot of people at the mercy of the government. Alternatively, it puts the government at the mercy of the people--how do you fire someone for incompetence when you're essentially disenfranchising them?

4. Do we really need more guns? It works in Switzerland because people don't just start shooting each other with their officially issued rifles. In the US it would probably be disastrous.

5. There are plenty of people who don't have the time/money to just hold off and do a government job. Who takes care of the family store while they are away? A stay at home mother needs to care for her kids, etc. The poor--the ones who need more than anyone else a voice in government and things like welfare and social security--are the very ones who are going to have the hardest time fulfilling your requirements. It amounts to a poll tax.

6. As an aside, it's a logistical nightmare. Where will the government get the money to employ all these people? How does the government ensure that there are jobs close to home for everyone? Do you really want your government services bloated with people who are both incompetent and resentful of the requirement? I don't want my firemen to be there just because they want to collect Social Security someday; I want them gung-ho and ready to die for me, my dog, and my flaming stuff.
It is, in fact, highly possible that a forced sojourn into public service will act as a counter-incentive, so that no one later in life will choose to go into it of their own accord, which means that almost all public services will be staffed by inexperienced, unhappy 19-year-olds.

7. Continuing with logistical questions: how do you implement it? Does it apply to everyone now, so that nobody is a citizen anymore until they complete the program? I don't need to tell you how disastrous that would be economically and socially. Does it apply only to new kids? That skews the democratic process towards the elderly and away from young voters.

8. Finally, and most damning, not only is the process difficult to implement and theoretically troubling, it won't. bloody. work. There's nothing intrinsic to working a desk or a rifle or a firehose that makes anybody a better voter or a better citizen.
Image

Burn0ut07
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 11:52 am UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Burn0ut07 » Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:44 am UTC

Maybe it is just me but i was under the impression that we have more than just a trade deficit with China. That we have more of a debt in the range of trillions of dollars that we haven't paid back. If it is not just my imagination then i think that it is quite a pressing issue seeing as how if we do something China doesn't like or look at them the wrong way then they just as easily call us on our loans and force our country into bankruptcy.

Economica
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:56 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Economica » Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:46 am UTC

Burn0ut07 wrote:Maybe it is just me but i was under the impression that we have more than just a trade deficit with China. That we have more of a debt in the range of trillions of dollars that we haven't paid back. If it is not just my imagination then i think that it is quite a pressing issue seeing as how if we do something China doesn't like or look at them the wrong way then they just as easily call us on our loans and force our country into bankruptcy.


Not exactly. The Chinese do own a portion of our debt. Here's a breakdown from the US Treasury.

Major Foreign Holders of Treasury Securities:
Japan: $571 billion
Mainland China: $405 billion
United Kingdom: $299 billion
Brazil: $128 billion
Oil exporting nations: $126 billion
Carribean banks: $81 billion
[list goes on]
Total securities owned by foreigners: $2,300 billion. [for reference, total public debt is in the neighborhood of $9,200 billion or around 67% of GDP.]

So China owns a decent chunk of our outstanding debt. However, that's not the end of the story. They also have large stacks of foreign reserve currency denominated in dollars, which would be problematic if they happened to release all of it at once. But that's not going to happen.

The American and Chinese economies are so tightly linked that if anything happened to either one, the other would collapse. We don't really need to be worried about China as an enemy. We do need to realise, however, that the US is losing its economic hegemony and the world is moving into a four-power situation consisting of the US, EU, China, and India. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's certainly not cause to be scared of China. They need America just as much as America needs them.
Travel well, we'll see you on the other side.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Vaniver » Wed Feb 20, 2008 1:14 pm UTC

Malice wrote:4. Do we really need more guns? It works in Switzerland because people don't just start shooting each other with their officially issued rifles. In the US it would probably be disastrous.
I find it hard to believe that the Swiss are a different sort of human than Americans.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
ekzrated
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:42 pm UTC
Location: Material plane. Sometimes.
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby ekzrated » Wed Feb 20, 2008 5:10 pm UTC

Bergwerk wrote:I know this is an oldish post, and I already reevaluated my economic argument due to the data presented here, but this just kind of irked me. First, you put a (unrelated) point forward and then claimed it was not a point. Talking about other economic problems are not the topic of this thread. Pointing at something else doesn't make what's in front of you change. While one can argue that money spent of defense is 'wasted' because it produces no tangible benefits, war definitely stimulates the economy. It's one of the oldest tricks in the book. (That is, unless it's an unpopular war that eventually depresses consumers and leads to a recession...) In fact, many technologies that were developed in wartime are now central to the American economy.


*Frankly, some jobs just don't *deserve* a living wage. But then people can't support themselves on their pay, and need handouts, so again, it might balance out.


So, I'm confused. Do you agree with me that this is a morality issue and not an economic/legal/political/etc issue?

And what does your wage comment have to do with illegal immigration?
I'M MY OWN CASE-STUDY!!!!!!

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Vaniver » Thu Feb 21, 2008 12:11 am UTC

ekzrated wrote:And what does your wage comment have to do with illegal immigration?
Comments preceded by an asterisk tend to be footnotes for some term that is followed by an asterisk (in this case, his comments about the living wage, which was a response to my statement on nationality not mattering when it came to menial labor). Does that help?
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
ekzrated
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:42 pm UTC
Location: Material plane. Sometimes.
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby ekzrated » Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:03 pm UTC

The reason I started this thread was to discuss the immigration debaucle without resorting to the comments made in this article. I can't believe that most people in Utah really feel this way, but judging by the amount of disinformation, and by the average news about violent crimes reported, I can't easily dispute that there is no racist motives behind some of the mentalities I've encountered here.
I'M MY OWN CASE-STUDY!!!!!!

User avatar
TheStranger
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 9:39 pm UTC
Location: The Void which Binds

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby TheStranger » Wed Feb 27, 2008 12:30 am UTC

ekzrated wrote:The reason I started this thread was to discuss the immigration debaucle without resorting to the comments made in this article. I can't believe that most people in Utah really feel this way, but judging by the amount of disinformation, and by the average news about violent crimes reported, I can't easily dispute that there is no racist motives behind some of the mentalities I've encountered here.


I'm not sure where you are getting racism from. So far no-one has said anything about a particular race, just talking about people who have chosen to break US law (specifically immigration law).
"To bow before the pressure of the ignorant is weakness."
Azalin Rex, Wizard-King of Darkon

User avatar
ekzrated
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:42 pm UTC
Location: Material plane. Sometimes.
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby ekzrated » Wed Feb 27, 2008 2:36 am UTC

That wasn't meant to be an example of racism. To see that, you'd have to live around here to see it.

The article was only a small example of the general ideology here. Again, I fail at explaining myself right off the bat. Oops and what-not.
I'M MY OWN CASE-STUDY!!!!!!

Bergwerk
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:48 am UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Bergwerk » Wed Feb 27, 2008 5:11 pm UTC

/Thanks Vaniver for clearing up asterisk confusion/

ekzrated wrote:So, I'm confused. Do you agree with me that this is a morality issue and not an economic/legal/political/etc issue?

I agree that the economic argument, when analyzed, is faulty and not legitimate. However, it's obvious that it is a legal and political issue. Law and the practice of law has no obligation to be moral. For example, arguing for the exoneration of a guilty person in court is 'morally' wrong but legally correct. Many laws are arbitrary and have no moral reason for existing. However, since there is a law against illegal immigration, and people break it, it is a legal issue. As for politics, anything can be a political issue. If something evokes emotion in people, politicians will take advantage. Immigrants evoke fear, and politicians use it to their advantage.

From a moral perspective, the situation can be seen from multiple perspectives. Do immigrants see it as primarily a moral problem, or are they more concerned with earning money? I would say the latter. Are people opposed to immigration worried about morals, or whether they have to see people that look different than them? Again, the latter. We must remember that we don't exist on a giant white Cartesian plane populated with totally independent individuals that evaluate each other on a purely moral basis. The two opposing groups see the other through a distorted lens of their own creation. The only times that morals are brought up is when the big rhetoricians on both sides try to appeal to a 'higher authority' and prove their side correct. While one can try to see it from one fixed moral platform, I think the actual situation is composed of many smaller (non-moral) issues. For example: Immigrants, like anyone, want to make money to provide for their families and to buy stuff. Therefore, any law that makes this more difficult will be challenged. Natives (that's the term I will use whether or not it is completely semantically correct) don't like seeing foreign language advertisements and labels because they feel it is like an 'invasion'. Immigrants would rather not learn a new language. Again, the same decision that anyone would make. Learning new stuff is hard. Natives don't like groups with different and possibly 'offensive' customs. Immigrants don't like dealing with the different customs in their new land. Natives don't like crime. Every new immigration wave inevitably brings good and bad potential citizens. Therefore, any time a group of immigrants come, some crime will come with. This isn't to say that all immigrants commit crimes, just that every group has a crime potential. Adding a new group to the existing group will add more crime potential. Basically, I hold that the real issue is all of these issues added together, along with the racial and nationalistic biases that humans can have. While morals are often brought up, I don't think they have much to do with the actual mechanics of the situation.

User avatar
ekzrated
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:42 pm UTC
Location: Material plane. Sometimes.
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby ekzrated » Wed Feb 27, 2008 7:50 pm UTC

Bergwerk wrote:However, since there is a law against illegal immigration, and people break it, it is a legal issue.


My argument is that laws need to be revised constantly, in most cases on an ethical basis. Which is why women can vote, blacks can marry whites, etc. I never argued it's legality.

Therefore, any time a group of immigrants come, some crime will come with. This isn't to say that all immigrants commit crimes, just that every group has a crime potential. Adding a new group to the existing group will add more crime potential. Basically, I hold that the real issue is all of these issues added together, along with the racial and nationalistic biases that humans can have. While morals are often brought up, I don't think they have much to do with the actual mechanics of the situation.


Yes, there will always be increases. However, that's true of any population growth. People are people, no matter their ethnicity. I know crooks of every skin color.
I'M MY OWN CASE-STUDY!!!!!!

User avatar
chaosspawn
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 6:38 pm UTC
Location: Waltham, MA

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby chaosspawn » Wed Feb 27, 2008 8:57 pm UTC

Regarding the ethics of immigration laws. I think it is acceptable for a country to restrict immigration into the country. If not only for practical considerations (e.g. the infrastructure would be unable to cope with massive influxes of people) but on the idea of the sovereignty of a country. Thus I feel that it is perfectly acceptable to place the immigration rate at one that is good for the country rather than any of the emigrating countries.

I agree that the implementation and enforcement of such laws can be a much more complicated system. However, I feel then that the laws should be revised, not abolished altogether. I'd favor at the very least partial amnesty especially for those who've had children that are legal citizens here. Though on the other side, I feel that the issue cannot be fully resolved without much better enforcement practices to discourage illegal immigration.
This space intentionally left blank.

Bergwerk
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2008 2:48 am UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Bergwerk » Thu Feb 28, 2008 4:45 pm UTC

ekzrated wrote:Yes, there will always be increases. However, that's true of any population growth. People are people, no matter their ethnicity. I know crooks of every skin color.
That is exactly my point. It is independent of ethnicity. More people make more crime. Immigration brings in more people. Much of the time, it is poor people (that is why they are immigrating), so crime rates are higher than other 'demographics', on average. Therefore, people that are already living somewhere can logically object to more people coming in, it's just convenient to also not like their skin color.

User avatar
ekzrated
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:42 pm UTC
Location: Material plane. Sometimes.
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby ekzrated » Fri Feb 29, 2008 1:10 am UTC

chaosspawn wrote: I think it is acceptable for a country to restrict immigration into the country. If not only for practical considerations (e.g. the infrastructure would be unable to cope with massive influxes of people) but on the idea of the sovereignty of a country. Thus I feel that it is perfectly acceptable to place the immigration rate at one that is good for the country rather than any of the emigrating countries.


I agree with you here. My argument is against the way the current immigration state has been portrayed. It's worked effectively at distracting people from more important issues like the war, while at the same time posing the blame for education/healthcare/economic strains. I can't believe this was accidental.
I'M MY OWN CASE-STUDY!!!!!!

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Lucrece » Fri Feb 29, 2008 2:48 am UTC

I'm pretty sure the Brown Scare wouldn't be so successful if the immigrants were: a) Our white, not brown, neighbors from the north, and b)spoke English.

Sadly, xenophobia has become just another form of fashionable patriotism.

On the other hand, I'm not arguing we should have strict sanctions against illegal aliens. What I'm against is the rhetoric used when addressing the issue of immigration.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
ekzrated
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:42 pm UTC
Location: Material plane. Sometimes.
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby ekzrated » Fri Feb 29, 2008 11:48 pm UTC

I must admit, this problem would likely affect me less if I lived anywhere other that in Utah, but it bothers me, really. And to see people in other places reacting the same way as people here have is very troubling.

Just for fun, I replaced all the names of countries with the word "Earth" and any citizens of these countries with the word "Humans". Whole different feel to it.
Maybe I will take over the world after all and decree that all humans are just that.
I'M MY OWN CASE-STUDY!!!!!!

AvalonXQ
Posts: 747
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 5:45 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby AvalonXQ » Sat Mar 01, 2008 5:50 am UTC

Lucrece wrote:I'm pretty sure the Brown Scare wouldn't be so successful if the immigrants were: a) Our white, not brown, neighbors from the north, and b)spoke English.


Yeah, because you know, everyone is just so NICE to the homeless people in the major cities any time they're white. And people NEVER had any issues with the English-speaking, white Irish when they were immigrating to our country by the millions; people never had anything nasty to say about them, right?
No? No. Because it's not about the fact that they're brown; it's about the fact that they're POOR. It's not racism; it's classism. It's always been there; it's nothing new. But the irony is that because race and class are correlated, now, people are confusing the two -- with disastrous results.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Lucrece » Sat Mar 01, 2008 9:37 pm UTC

AvalonXQ wrote:
Lucrece wrote:I'm pretty sure the Brown Scare wouldn't be so successful if the immigrants were: a) Our white, not brown, neighbors from the north, and b)spoke English.


Yeah, because you know, everyone is just so NICE to the homeless people in the major cities any time they're white. And people NEVER had any issues with the English-speaking, white Irish when they were immigrating to our country by the millions; people never had anything nasty to say about them, right?
No? No. Because it's not about the fact that they're brown; it's about the fact that they're POOR. It's not racism; it's classism. It's always been there; it's nothing new. But the irony is that because race and class are correlated, now, people are confusing the two -- with disastrous results.


Here's a suggestion: Perhaps you can't reconcile both racism and classism as additive factors in the treatment of immigrants. Are you trying to say that people at lower socioeconomic levels all suffer with the same degree?

Seriously, though, which is most likely to be treated with less anxiety: Someone who you can at least aesthetically and culturally relate to, if only remotely; or some Spanish-speaking, equally poor, dark-skinned, intelligible stranger?

Now, let's go back to my post: You post about the Irish, whereas I mentioned xenophobia directly. Check. You happened to find another reason why people are treated badly, but not referred to as "The homeless are invading our country, taking our jobs, raping our women, and transfiguring our entire culture; let's make places like hospitals and any other public settings speak English only with some new legislation!" Good for you. However, trying to say that there's no inkling of racism and xenophobia involved in the rhetoric being used is outright intellectually dishonest.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

prncs_procrastinator
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 4:16 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby prncs_procrastinator » Tue Mar 04, 2008 7:45 pm UTC

Hi there. I'm a noob here, but couldn't resist joining in this conversation as it has been something I've been discussing amongst my circle of friends lately.

I can't help but to agree that the rhetoric being used in this controversy is inherently racial/economic. Part of the claim is that this proposed Mexican-American wall is to prevent terrorists from entering the country, which is total malarky. When we take a look at the 9/11 terrorists point of entry we find that the blame lies within our northern borders. I don't hear any proposals to build a wall up there. While I understand we don't have an incredible flux of illegal immigration from this area I wonder why there isn't a discussion about helping to alleviate the actual immigration process on both sides of the borders. The reason why people come over here illegally, especially from Mexico, is because of the corupt state of affairs in the immigration policies over there. People who try to apply through legal veins find themselves on waiting lists for years. A family will starve waiting on these lists. Our country spends so much money trying to throw their weight around all over the world, why can't they start here, if they feel there is such a problem? I wonder if there would be more discussion around these issues (policy amending) if the immigrants weren't so easily identified by skin color, accent, etc.

User avatar
ekzrated
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:42 pm UTC
Location: Material plane. Sometimes.
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby ekzrated » Tue Mar 04, 2008 8:49 pm UTC

You touched on a very important point I had neglected to mention. It is too easy for people to say "send them back and if they want to come back in, they need to do it legally" without having the faintest idea what they're talking about. I wish things were different, so I always discuss these and other issues openly, even when the topic is highly controversial. I must be insane for thinking that topics like politics, religion, social class, and education should be discussed openly, not just in closed meetings. Immigration, illegal or not brings many benefits, as well as many risks. There is no denying this.
The bottom line is, as a nation, are we really an ethically-ruled nation or do we just jump at the latest media-inspired crusade?
I'M MY OWN CASE-STUDY!!!!!!

prncs_procrastinator
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 4:16 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby prncs_procrastinator » Tue Mar 04, 2008 9:41 pm UTC

To be honest with you, I'm not even concerned necessarily with ethics. Pragmatically I think that in order to think about an issue you have to apply the theory of universality (if it works it has to work for everything) at least in part. We can't just point fingers and say "this is a problem", we have to think of the possible solutions. I don't think anyone has come up with one yet. So here's mine, instead of spending all of this money building a wall let's hire more people to help with legal immigrants. Let's come up with some way where we can cut down the waiting lists on for entry on our end, thereby reducing the effect of corruption on the other side of these borders. I agree that illegal immigration is a problem, but just closing down our borders is distinctly un-American.

User avatar
ekzrated
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:42 pm UTC
Location: Material plane. Sometimes.
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby ekzrated » Tue Mar 04, 2008 9:51 pm UTC

prncs_procrastinator wrote:To be honest with you, I'm not even concerned necessarily with ethics. Pragmatically I think that in order to think about an issue you have to apply the theory of universality (if it works it has to work for everything) at least in part.


I'm aware that by my saying we should be ruled by ethics I open up a floodgate of irrationality based on ethical arguments and multi-cultural clashes when it comes to ethical behavior. You're right, the solution that works best for all parties involved is what we should strive to enact. However, we will always have the same problem of accountability until the current systems evolve beyond what religious organizations dictate as "ethical behavour". Individuality and open-mindedness are concepts that are discouraged.

How does this tie in to immigration? Think about xenophobias and the sudden social awareness of the "immigration threat", and how media has overblown this issue. Exxon/Mobil continues making ridiculosly high profits, while the "War on Terror" is still raging on, but there is less attention on these issues from the media currently than immigration. Again, immigration is a problem, and if we approach this issue ethically, I believe reaching a resolution will be much easier (unless you profit from explotation of minorities).
Last edited by ekzrated on Thu Mar 06, 2008 6:34 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
I'M MY OWN CASE-STUDY!!!!!!

zenten
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:42 am UTC
Location: Ottawa, Canada

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby zenten » Tue Mar 04, 2008 9:57 pm UTC

prncs_procrastinator wrote:Hi there. I'm a noob here, but couldn't resist joining in this conversation as it has been something I've been discussing amongst my circle of friends lately.

I can't help but to agree that the rhetoric being used in this controversy is inherently racial/economic. Part of the claim is that this proposed Mexican-American wall is to prevent terrorists from entering the country, which is total malarky. When we take a look at the 9/11 terrorists point of entry we find that the blame lies within our northern borders. I don't hear any proposals to build a wall up there. While I understand we don't have an incredible flux of illegal immigration from this area I wonder why there isn't a discussion about helping to alleviate the actual immigration process on both sides of the borders. The reason why people come over here illegally, especially from Mexico, is because of the corupt state of affairs in the immigration policies over there. People who try to apply through legal veins find themselves on waiting lists for years. A family will starve waiting on these lists. Our country spends so much money trying to throw their weight around all over the world, why can't they start here, if they feel there is such a problem? I wonder if there would be more discussion around these issues (policy amending) if the immigrants weren't so easily identified by skin color, accent, etc.


Just a small point, but we get a fair number of illegal immigrants from the US up here. It just isn't reported as much, as people here seem to care more about silly things like healthcare, a balanced budget, and slush funds.

User avatar
Arancaytar
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:54 am UTC
Location: 52.44°N, 13.55°E
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Arancaytar » Thu Mar 06, 2008 4:29 pm UTC

creativename wrote:
Malice wrote:...

You don't like it that non-citizens are cared for by taxpayers. I understand that. But you similarly don't like it that taxpayers are cared for by taxpayers?

The answer to the free rider problem is not to drive the bus off a cliff.

It's less like driving the bus off the cliff and more like stopping and letting everyone find their own transportation. Government hand-outs are generally counter-productive.


Letting people live past their retirement age is likewise counter-productive. Yet you will find little support for mandatory euthanasia at age 60, and for good reason. This is the human race. We do some things that are irrational or inefficient. That is called ethics.
"You cannot dual-wield the sharks. One is enough." -Our DM.
Image

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5403
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby mosc » Fri Mar 07, 2008 6:09 pm UTC

Arancaytar wrote:Letting people live past their retirement age is likewise counter-productive. Yet you will find little support for mandatory euthanasia at age 60, and for good reason. This is the human race. We do some things that are irrational or inefficient. That is called ethics.

This is a great example of human selfishness being branded as something positive. In this case ethics. The more utilitarian answer of euthanasia of the non-productive citizens is not used I would argue strictly out of selfish reasons. We call it empathy specifically but it's straight self preservation. If people empathize, they relate. They can see themselves in that situation and predicament and thus they give a shit. It's the selfish nature of them to look out for things they see in their future that could harm them. Sort of a 'Don't kill old people, I will be old one day!'. We also can note here that the possibility can be very small. Empathy is based on many other factors outside of logic but they all tie back to 'that could happen to me'. I don't think there's anything particularly ethical about not euthanizing old people. I think it's just a question of people worrying about it happening to them than some kind of deeper ethical reasoning.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

daydalus
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:05 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby daydalus » Fri Mar 07, 2008 6:31 pm UTC

mosc wrote:
Arancaytar wrote:Letting people live past their retirement age is likewise counter-productive. Yet you will find little support for mandatory euthanasia at age 60, and for good reason. This is the human race. We do some things that are irrational or inefficient. That is called ethics.

This is a great example of human selfishness being branded as something positive. In this case ethics. The more utilitarian answer of euthanasia of the non-productive citizens is not used I would argue strictly out of selfish reasons. We call it empathy specifically but it's straight self preservation. If people empathize, they relate. They can see themselves in that situation and predicament and thus they give a shit. It's the selfish nature of them to look out for things they see in their future that could harm them. Sort of a 'Don't kill old people, I will be old one day!'. We also can note here that the possibility can be very small. Empathy is based on many other factors outside of logic but they all tie back to 'that could happen to me'. I don't think there's anything particularly ethical about not euthanizing old people. I think it's just a question of people worrying about it happening to them than some kind of deeper ethical reasoning.


What code of ethics do you subscribe to? Most common systems start with the sanctity of human life as an axiom...

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby The Reaper » Fri Mar 07, 2008 6:51 pm UTC

I was born and raised in McAllen, Tx. For those of you who don't know where that is, look it up. My only problem with immigrants happens to be the exact same problems I have with most americans. If you break the law, GTFO. We don't want your kind here.

And, Learn2English. I speak other languages, why can't they? Certainly the language of the country of which you moved to is a language worth learning? As much fun as living in a cultural melting pot is, I don't expect most people to be fluent in more than one language, and have general knowledge of more than two. Having to learn 6 or 7 different languages just to run a small local business is bloody insane.

As far as racism goes, we aren't the only ones with it. Alot of Canadians and Mexicans hate americans. I seem to recall a news thing awhile back where mexico was taking back land owned by rich white non-mexicans down there, so don't come crying to me when America goes and does the same thing to other people.

I think we should annex the both of them, it would make the border alot smaller. :) As for the whole drug issue, legalize it, and get rid of mandated rehabilitation clinics, let the idiots kill themselves off, and the smarter ones just keep using when they feel like it. It would single handedly destroy the economies of various areas, and give America one more thing to make a profit off of, thus driving up the economy. Win!

And for the record, Ebonics will never be anything more than the raping of a language. GTFO.

User avatar
Gunfingers
Posts: 2401
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:15 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Gunfingers » Fri Mar 07, 2008 6:55 pm UTC

The Reaper wrote:And, Learn2English. I speak other languages, why can't they? Certainly the language of the country of which you moved to is a language worth learning?


English is the most common language in the US, but it's not the language of the US.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby The Reaper » Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:22 pm UTC

Gunfingers wrote:
The Reaper wrote:And, Learn2English. I speak other languages, why can't they? Certainly the language of the country of which you moved to is a language worth learning?


English is the most common language in the US, but it's not the language of the US.

It doesn't have a set language. BUT, if everyone else speaks it, wouldn't it be a whole lot easier to use it, since that's what all the policy and such is written in?

User avatar
Gunfingers
Posts: 2401
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 7:15 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Gunfingers » Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:23 pm UTC

It would indeed be easier, but that doesn't mean you get to force it on them.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5403
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby mosc » Fri Mar 07, 2008 8:29 pm UTC

daydalus wrote:What code of ethics do you subscribe to? Most common systems start with the sanctity of human life as an axiom...

I'm not talking about my own views here, I'm talking about the core of that ethic and most others being self serving. For instance the sanctity of human life is important because YOUR life is the most important thing to you. Lets look at this idea of empathy governing ethical decisions in a case study of The Reaper.

The Reaper wrote:My only problem with immigrants happens to be the exact same problems I have with most americans. If you break the law, GTFO. We don't want your kind here.

He clearly does not associate himself with people who break laws. I find it hard to believe the guy's never driven a car over the speed limit or J-walked but that's beside the point. He does not empathize with those people. He even says "your kind" implying they are not "his kind". He does not empathize and thus doesn't give a shit about these people.

My counter argument is that all people break laws both voluntarily and involuntarily. They do so for a variety of reasons many of which are completely justified. Separating people into different "kinds" based only on a irrationally strict interpretation of the law is a mistake. I think however that The Reaper will change his beliefs unless he finds something to empathize with a law breaker. Perhaps when he breaks a law himself?

The Reaper wrote:And, Learn2English. I speak other languages, why can't they?

Again note the "they" as he distances himself from a hypothetical group that he does not empathize with. In this case: those who do not speak English.

I find this totally absurd and always have. The question of efficiency is ridiculous. Free societies are not efficient. They are based on the premise that variety is helpful. Our founding fathers spoke a variety of languages. What really gets me here is the ignorance of the statement though. Studies show that illegal immigrants DO learn English (links earlier in this thread). Just like every other group that ever immigrated here. Within a few generations, the "mother country" culture fades including the original language. There is no factual evidence to support today's immigrants as purposely refusing to learn English. It just takes time.

The Reaper wrote:As far as racism goes, we aren't the only ones with it. Alot of Canadians and Mexicans hate americans. I seem to recall a news thing awhile back where mexico was taking back land owned by rich white non-mexicans down there, so don't come crying to me when America goes and does the same thing to other people.

Note the association with himself. Racism is OK because he empathizes with those who do it. He is racist and thus associates that with normalcy and it is thus acceptable. This is the same self centered interpretation of ethics but in reverse this time defending instead of attacking. Defending yourself based on other people's empathy so to speak.

...

I'm saying that humans are comparative learners and our understanding of the world is in describing things as like or not like ourselves. We find acceptable what we can empathize with. We find ethical only how we would want to be treated. We attack that which we could not see ourselves doing. It is not logical, but instead just selfish. This is the ultimate irony of Illegal Immigration. The Reaper is condemning others actions as selfish while using only selfish reasoning himself. The immigrant is not supposed to look at this selfishly as well? They are not supposed to see the advantages to breaking the law? It is foolish to think they would act contrary to their best interests. After all, that's not what we see from attitudes like the one from The Reaper.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
ekzrated
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:42 pm UTC
Location: Material plane. Sometimes.
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby ekzrated » Fri Mar 07, 2008 9:13 pm UTC

I understand what you're trying to say, but The Reaper's comments are not based on being ethical. I could be wrong, but the reason to follow ethical behaviour is more than just being selfish. If I have no children, and I see laws passing that could hinder progress in education systems in order to profit others, I see those actions as unethical. Racism, and racist behavior cares little for ethical code. A lot of the current immigration laws are unethical.
I'M MY OWN CASE-STUDY!!!!!!

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5403
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby mosc » Fri Mar 07, 2008 9:23 pm UTC

but you are not that distant from a child or a parent. You of course were once a child yourself so you can obviously empathize there. Also, you may have some underlying feeling that someday you MIGHT have a kid. Clearly you went through an education process yourself so you have personal feelings on it. I'm not trying to insult you or call you selfish. I'm saying that human beings are designed to be selfish and we should be more understanding of it in others (IE, immigrants). The complete dehumanization these folks get the moment they cross over that arbitrary line is amazing.

To analyze similarly on myself, it's clear that I empathize with the immigrant. I do not feel that distant from one myself. I am a Jew in a Christian land who understands what it is like to be different and often unwanted. Similarly, I do not empathize with the racist as instead of associating myself with other racists, I have associated myself with other victims of racism.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby The Reaper » Sat Mar 08, 2008 8:06 am UTC

mosc wrote:
The Reaper wrote:My only problem with immigrants happens to be the exact same problems I have with most americans. If you break the law, GTFO. We don't want your kind here.

He clearly does not associate himself with people who break laws. I find it hard to believe the guy's never driven a car over the speed limit or J-walked but that's beside the point. He does not empathize with those people. He even says "your kind" implying they are not "his kind". He does not empathize and thus doesn't give a shit about these people.


I'll be perfectly happy to go back to where I came from. :P I never claimed to empathize with lawbreakers. I generally tend to follow the laws, otherwise there would probably be a trail of death behind me :P Good job taking things the exact wrong way. One can be specific. Screw society, put them in people farms to be raised for slaughter, just like delicious cows.

mosc wrote:
The Reaper wrote:And, Learn2English. I speak other languages, why can't they?

Again note the "they" as he distances himself from a hypothetical group that he does not empathize with. In this case: those who do not speak English.


Actually, those who don't speak more than 1 language. But hey, good job at fail.

mosc wrote:I find this totally absurd and always have. The question of efficiency is ridiculous. Free societies are not efficient. They are based on the premise that variety is helpful. Our founding fathers spoke a variety of languages.
And they all spoke English, too.

mosc wrote:What really gets me here is the ignorance of the statement though. Studies show that illegal immigrants DO learn English (links earlier in this thread). Just like every other group that ever immigrated here. Within a few generations, the "mother country" culture fades including the original language. There is no factual evidence to support today's immigrants as purposely refusing to learn English. It just takes time.

You and I, sir, must have met different illegals over the course of our lives. Would you like to know how cheap cocaine is where I am? Rest assured, people that got their citizenship the hard way aren't going to risk it on something that stupid, so you come down to illegals, most of which do anything for some cash, and criminals, of which I don't associate with. Alot of them, from my experience, refuse to speak English, and raza this and raza that.

mosc wrote:
The Reaper wrote:As far as racism goes, we aren't the only ones with it. Alot of Canadians and Mexicans hate americans. I seem to recall a news thing awhile back where mexico was taking back land owned by rich white non-mexicans down there, so don't come crying to me when America goes and does the same thing to other people.

Note the association with himself. Racism is OK because he empathizes with those who do it. He is racist and thus associates that with normalcy and it is thus acceptable. This is the same self centered interpretation of ethics but in reverse this time defending instead of attacking. Defending yourself based on other people's empathy so to speak.
Bwah? Apathy and Empathy are different things, last I checked. Thanks, though. Next, you'll call me violent and a herder, too. It's been about 2.5 years since I've been called a violent racist herder.


mosc wrote:I'm saying that humans are comparative learners and our understanding of the world is in describing things as like or not like ourselves. We find acceptable what we can empathize with. We find ethical only how we would want to be treated. We attack that which we could not see ourselves doing. It is not logical, but instead just selfish. This is the ultimate irony of Illegal Immigration. The Reaper is condemning others actions as selfish while using only selfish reasoning himself. The immigrant is not supposed to look at this selfishly as well? They are not supposed to see the advantages to breaking the law? It is foolish to think they would act contrary to their best interests. After all, that's not what we see from attitudes like the one from The Reaper.


I admit, wanting them to speak the same language as a majority of the country is selfish. Gods forbid I want to actually understand what my fellow countryman is saying. As it is, though, I never said the word selfish. :\ The immigrant can come in legally, or GTFO. Pretty simple, there. If everyone broke the law just because they felt it was in their best interests, we wouldn't have a government at all, we would have simple anarchy.

And who ever accused me of acting out of anything other than my own interests? As it is, my current self interests are not breaking the laws of any country of which I am residing. On another note, Peoples is sheeps. Lamb steak is good with lemon and pepper.

mosc wrote:To analyze similarly on myself, it's clear that I empathize with the immigrant. I do not feel that distant from one myself. I am a Jew in a Christian land who understands what it is like to be different and often unwanted. Similarly, I do not empathize with the racist as instead of associating myself with other racists, I have associated myself with other victims of racism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission%2C_TX
As of the census[1] of 2000, there were 45,408 people, 13,766 households, and 11,384 families residing in the city. The population density was 1,881.9 people per square mile (726.6/km²). There were 17,723 housing units at an average density of 734.5/sq mi (283.6/km²). The racial makeup of the city was 17.63% White, 0.37% African American, 0.38% Native American, 0.63% Asian, 0.01% Pacific Islander, 18.64% from other races, and 2.34% from two or more races. Hispanic or Latino of any race were 81.03% of the population.

Moi? Associate myself with other racists, instead of the victims of racism? Have you ever had a teacher give you shit for your religion? I've gotten shit for my race. Get over yourself.

User avatar
ekzrated
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:42 pm UTC
Location: Material plane. Sometimes.
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby ekzrated » Mon Mar 10, 2008 6:32 pm UTC

The Reaper wrote: I generally tend to follow the laws, otherwise there would probably be a trail of death behind me


I'm not sure what you consider "generally". Basically what you said is that it's ok for you to "generally" follow some laws, but "illegals" must follow all laws. Interesting.
The Reaper wrote:Actually, those who don't speak more than 1 language.

Actually, I think it's more those who aren't the right nationality, but that's a moot point. You can't say that it's only their inability to communicate with you that seems to be the problem. You're already put off by "them" since they are "illegals".

The Reaper wrote:I'll be perfectly happy to go back to where I came from.
That's not the point. They are all here, wether you like it or not. Regardless of your desire for them to "GTFO", unless there's some MAJOR civil uprising to kick all "illegals" out, you're "SOL".

The Reaper wrote:You and I, sir, must have met different illegals over the course of our lives. Would you like to know how cheap cocaine is where I am? Rest assured, people that got their citizenship the hard way aren't going to risk it on something that stupid, so you come down to illegals, most of which do anything for some cash, and criminals, of which I don't associate with. Alot of them, from my experience, refuse to speak English, and raza this and raza that.


I'm assuming that you know that all of them are in the country illegally. And since all "illegals" are obviously raza, I'm going to assume you're the authority. And still, you're wrong. Despite your tragic personall experiences, you can't group them all as "illegal". In contrast, a vast majority of the people living where I live who potentially might be in the country illegally work very hard both at learning English, and at following the laws. I'm going to make yet another assumption, since you're in a predominantly hispanic community, and say that there's a high poverty , and crime rates. Despite what you might want to believe, it has less to do with their ethnicity or their immigration status, and more with their economic class.

The Reaper wrote:It's been about 2.5 years since I've been called a violent racist herder.

I'm confused. Do you consider being called this a good or a bad thing? Because any way I look at it, you're not gaining any sympathy from me so far.

The Reaper wrote:I admit, wanting them to speak the same language as a majority of the country is selfish. Gods forbid I want to actually understand what my fellow countryman is saying. As it is, though, I never said the word selfish. :\ The immigrant can come in legally, or GTFO. Pretty simple, there. If everyone broke the law just because they felt it was in their best interests, we wouldn't have a government at all, we would have simple anarchy.

And who ever accused me of acting out of anything other than my own interests? As it is, my current self interests are not breaking the laws of any country of which I am residing.


So basically what you're saying is that as long as your desires are met, you don't care about how they're met. I'm going out on a limb here, but just from the comments you've made on this thread alone, I'd say you have a pretty high sense of entitlement. "Basically" you do break the laws of the country of which you are residing, by your own admission.
The Reaper wrote:Moi? Associate myself with other racists, instead of the victims of racism? Have you ever had a teacher give you shit for your religion? I've gotten shit for my race. Get over yourself.


So your response is to act exactly the same way? Great going there, buddy. The point is, regardless of your personal experiences, that there is more going on than your personal views on this issue, and it wasn't as big of an issue 8 years ago. Ever wonder why so many people are concerned now?
Last edited by ekzrated on Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:37 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
I'M MY OWN CASE-STUDY!!!!!!

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5403
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby mosc » Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:07 pm UTC

what a horrendous show of vindictive writing and uncalled for aggression. Why the hell would I want to reply to you The Reaper?
Last edited by mosc on Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:31 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
ekzrated
Posts: 458
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 10:42 pm UTC
Location: Material plane. Sometimes.
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby ekzrated » Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:08 pm UTC

Are you talking about me or The Reaper? Just curious.
I'M MY OWN CASE-STUDY!!!!!!

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5403
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby mosc » Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:31 pm UTC

I thought it was blatantly obvious but I edited it in anyway.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Mon Mar 10, 2008 8:00 pm UTC

Did he illegally immigrate to this forum?

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Illegal Immigration.

Postby The Reaper » Mon Mar 10, 2008 8:09 pm UTC

Spoiler:
ekzrated wrote:
The Reaper wrote: I generally tend to follow the laws, otherwise there would probably be a trail of death behind me


I'm not sure what you consider "generally". Basically what you said is that it's ok for you to "generally" follow some laws, but "illegals" must follow all laws. Interesting.
The Reaper wrote:Actually, those who don't speak more than 1 language.

Actually, I think it's more those who aren't the right nationality, but that's a moot point. You can't say that it's only their inability to communicate with you that seems to be the problem. You're already put off by "them" since they are "illegals".

The Reaper wrote:I'll be perfectly happy to go back to where I came from.
That's not the point. They are all here, wether you like it or not. Regardless of your desire for them to "GTFO", unless there's some MAJOR civil uprising to kick all "illegals" out, you're "SOL".

The Reaper wrote:You and I, sir, must have met different illegals over the course of our lives. Would you like to know how cheap cocaine is where I am? Rest assured, people that got their citizenship the hard way aren't going to risk it on something that stupid, so you come down to illegals, most of which do anything for some cash, and criminals, of which I don't associate with. Alot of them, from my experience, refuse to speak English, and raza this and raza that.


I'm assuming that you know that all of them are in the country illegally. And since all "illegals" are obviously raza, I'm going to assume you're the authority. And still, you're wrong. Despite your tragic personall experiences, you can't group them all as "illegal". In contrast, a vast majority of the people living where I live who potentially might be in the country illegally work very hard both at learning English, and at following the laws. I'm going to make yet another assumption, since you're in a predominantly hispanic community, and say that there's a high poverty , and crime rates. Despite what you might want to believe, it has less to do with their ethnicity or their immigration status, and more with their economic class.

The Reaper wrote:It's been about 2.5 years since I've been called a violent racist herder.

I'm confused. Do you consider being called this a good or a bad thing? Because any way I look at it, you're not gaining any sympathy from me so far.

The Reaper wrote:I admit, wanting them to speak the same language as a majority of the country is selfish. Gods forbid I want to actually understand what my fellow countryman is saying. As it is, though, I never said the word selfish. :\ The immigrant can come in legally, or GTFO. Pretty simple, there. If everyone broke the law just because they felt it was in their best interests, we wouldn't have a government at all, we would have simple anarchy.

And who ever accused me of acting out of anything other than my own interests? As it is, my current self interests are not breaking the laws of any country of which I am residing.


So basically what you're saying is that as long as your desires are met, you don't care about how they're met. I'm going out on a limb here, but just from the comments you've made on this thread alone, I'd say you have a pretty high sense of entitlement. "Basically" you do break the laws of the country of which you are residing, by your own admission.
The Reaper wrote:Moi? Associate myself with other racists, instead of the victims of racism? Have you ever had a teacher give you shit for your religion? I've gotten shit for my race. Get over yourself.


So your response is to act exactly the same way? Great going there, buddy. The point is, regardless of your personal experiences, that there is more going on than your personal views on this issue, and it wasn't as big of an issue 8 years ago. Ever wonder why so many people are concerned now?
Spoiler to save space :\

Yes, predominantly hispanic area, about average as far as poverty and such goes. You can't tell whos an illegal and whos not down here, till they break some major law, and get themselves exported. Like murder.

As for the civil uprising thing, I never said it was going to happen. I understand that I'm SOL :P

Gee, of course I know every illegal in the country on a personal level. :roll: As for the ones from MY experience, my statement remains true. As for peoples decisions to do blatantly wrong things, I'm pretty damn poor, you don't see me smuggling shittons of narcotics across a border.

Me getting called a violent racist herder was a good thing, it left me laughing for days. Some crazy chick, because I didn't support her view on some subject. 3 hours of conversation later, I'm a violent racist herder. Funny. I'd show it to you, but alas, myspace deleted it :\ stupid myspace.

And no, you took my statement about my interests the exact opposite direction, probably for the purpose of argument.

And for the last statement, the response is mainly to show that he's not the only one going thru shit, and I never bring shit like that up unless someone else starts complaining about it.

Oh, and where I live, its been an issue my entire life, this whole illegal immigration thing. Just because the rest of the country finally realized what a border was, doesn't mean that the border areas didn't already know.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests