The Trump administration is expected to issue a proposal in coming weeks that would make it harder for legal immigrants to become citizens or get green cards if they have ever used a range of popular public welfare programs, including Obamacare, four sources with knowledge of the plan told NBC News.
The move, which would not need congressional approval, is part of White House senior adviser Stephen Miller's plan to limit the number of migrants who obtain legal status in the U.S. each year.
[...] Though its effects could be far-reaching, the proposal to limit citizenship to immigrants who have not used public assistance does not appear to need congressional approval. As the Clinton administration did in 1999, the Trump administration would be redefining the term "public charge," which first emerged in immigration law in the 1800s in order to shield the U.S. from burdening too many immigrants who could not contribute to society.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @10:25AM (32 children)
Teach them that America is not a welcoming place for immigrants, or even its own citizens.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @11:51AM
No kidding ... we should have applied this level of scrutiny to Trump's criminal grandfather. Keeping him out would have prevented a lot of grief all the way around.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:14PM (30 children)
Dude walks up to some chick. "I want to move in with you." She says "No, I don't need some guy around." "Well, tough shit, lady, I'm moving in." "No, I have defenses, and you can't move in."
So, by your standards, the woman is an unwelcoming bitch?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:42PM (26 children)
That's a very flawed analogy. A conversation that much more closely matches reality:
"Hey, my family was just murdered by the government, and I ran for my life to get here. Do you mind if I stay in that vacant storage shed in your backyard until I can get a crappy job somewhere and find my own place?"
"No, we're going to turn you over to the government that just murdered your family."
Or in more extreme cases:
"Hey, most of my family was just murdered by the government, and I grabbed my kid ran for my life to get here. Do you mind if I stay in that vacant storage shed in your backyard until I can get a crappy job somewhere and find my own place?"
"Gimme that kid. You're never going to see them again. We might rape them. Oh, and we're sending you to the government that just murdered most of your family."
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:49PM (14 children)
How can you be so gullible? Those people at the border, claiming to be fleeing some war torn country? Yeah. They are here for the MONEY!!! Almost all of them. So, back to my guy who wants to move in with the chick:
"But, that's not FAIR!! I'm trying to escape a domestic situation! My wife beats me for no reason!!"
And, her answer, "Well, Buster, if you come near my home, I'll beat you with reason! Now, GTFO!"
Is she an unwelcoming bitch, or not?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:20PM (11 children)
Given that a lot of their countries are in fact war-torn (mostly between the various drug cartels, but in Nicaragua there's been lots of people rounded up and disappeared recently), I think there's some merit to their claims.
As for your most recent analogy, the ex could say "I can't take you in, but stay on the porch while I make some phone calls and see where you can get some help." Your answer condemns the person to death when they may in fact be trying to escape an abuser who will kill them given the opportunity.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:48PM
The problem with this approach is that MOST of the world is a shit hole.
That is not a sustainable policy for letting people in.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:57PM (8 children)
Feuds between drug cartels are DOMESTIC PROBLEMS. They can decide to enforce the rule of law, or live in a lawless land. No sympathy here.
You've reminded me of that retarded commercial on the radio. "I was not born a refugee, I was made a refugee!"
Let me define "refugee" for you. Especially in the case of military age males, a refugee is some candy ass who didn't think his own country was worth fighting for, and expects handouts from some other country. Screw them - send them back home to fight or die. Women and children, I can be more lenient with. I kind of expect the male children to grow up, go home, and fight for their country. We don't need Fuckistan's slackers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:20PM (4 children)
You are so dumb. LEGAL immigrants! You lot have been crowing on and on that as long as they do it legally it is just fine. Now you say fuck em anyways? You piece of bigoted lying shit.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:31PM (3 children)
So - they come here legally. They stay for their alloted welcome time. They are politely reminded that their time is up. If they remain, then they are no longer LEGAL. And, BTW - laws can change. You did understand that? Laws might be changed to make some "immigrants" legal, and laws might be changed to make some of them illegal. I'm in favor of sending anchor babies back to the home of origin of their parents, but that's never going to happen. We CAN send their illegal parents packing though. I don't mind separating illegals from legals, even if I don't like the way the legals became legal.
You may also be confused about naturalization. Unless and until you are naturalized, you're not a citizen. You can be sent packing on little more than a whim, if you're not naturalized. AFTER naturalization, then it takes a good deal more than a whim.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:51PM (2 children)
I think we need the Native Americans to stake their original claims and evict the invaders. I for one would be happy to live the shitty life of a refugee just to see assholes like yourself have an aneurysm.
Immigration assholes, the ultimate in FYGM.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:10PM
Heh. There would be a pretty serious underpopulation problem if the natives kicked everyone else out. They might want to keep some of us around. The Buzzard has a much better chance than I of being kept, but I have a couple traces of native blood in my veins. My wife has an excellent chance of remaining - maybe she can keep me around as her pet white boy. This is one fence I can straddle all day long!
And, you know something else kinda funny? The only "Indian" that I know of who is 100% progressive is Elizabeth Pocahontas Warren. https://www.wnd.com/2018/05/pocahontas-descendent-wants-elizabeth-warren-to-take-dna-test/ [wnd.com]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday August 17 2018, @03:10AM
Fuck that, you gotta stay. I'm not giving up electricity just to have less annoying shits like you around.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:09PM (2 children)
> Women and children, I can be more lenient with. I kind of expect the male children to grow up, go home, and fight for their country.
That's sexist. Women are quite capable.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:11PM
Yes, yes, women are capable. Except when they're not. Then, they are as useless as any other candy ass.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @10:46AM
Depends on the fighting. With modern weapon systems, maybe. If it comes down to hand to hand, women will get pounded into the dirt, and then probably raped.
Men are stronger, faster, and being a warrior is in their DNA. Most women I know who think they are equal fighters have never seen a youngish adult male in real full-on combat mode. It is very fast, fucking scary, and thinking they can match it is laughable.
(The previous is very politically incorrect these days. Doesn't mean it isn't true though.)
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:21PM
Refugees are required to seek asylum in the first safe country that they reach. If they continue to travel, they are no longer refugees. Both Mexico and Canada are considered safe countries.
You might object to calling Mexico safe, but normal crime doesn't count. The standard here is something like the country being run by Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, or similar... and you being part of the targeted group.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:32PM (1 child)
You know you're arguing for abortions, right? If immigrants take away jobs from locals, the economy isn't growing fast enough to accommodate more workers meaning you also need to start controlling your population growth...
Baby killer.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 17 2018, @01:26AM
Uhhhhhh - you're arguing that I need abortion because I'm not willing to give my country away to the first invaders?
(Score: 2) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:17PM (6 children)
The whole point of the discussion is that is not very likely on average, certainly less likely that the rest of your story about government violence.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Thexalon on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:23PM (5 children)
And yet the same folks complaining about immigrants not working are at the same time complaining that immigrants are taking jobs away from hardworking Americans. So which is it? They're unemployed leeches, or they took our jobs? Logically, it can't be both.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:37PM (4 children)
The two are not mutually exclusive, it's possible to work for cash and claim welfare.
(Score: 3, Informative) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:15PM (1 child)
Its possible to work for W-2 and claim massive benefits. Famously, Walmart works hard to sign its associates up for food stamps. Walmart is the biggest welfare queen I'm aware of.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @11:45PM
Can we kick Walmart out too? Send it to China where every piece of crap it sells are from.
Bring back the family owned businesses!
(Score: 4, Interesting) by VanessaE on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:38PM (1 child)
Except that it's not really.
To apply for "welfare" (whether it's SSI, SNAP, or something else), you have to describe all sources of active income (work, friends, family, dividends, etc), all static assets (savings, CDs/bonds, your car and/or house, and any other things of significant value).
If you have no income to speak of, or in this case if you get paid "under the table" and claim to have none, then you have to prove with legal documentation (such as a federal- or state-level disability declaration) why you can't earn more, e.g. by working.
Oh, and you have to describe your expenses (rent, electric, fuel, etc.) and explain how you pay them.
Oh, and they require generally 2 to 3 government-issued IDs, one of which is a federal-issue Social Security card.
It's not as easy as the GOP would have you believe, to get "welfare", if you're able-bodied and have no kids.
Been there, doing that (and grateful that the help exists).
Those that game the system are surely mostly just using a sob story to get their case worker to bend the rules.
(Score: 2) by VanessaE on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:41PM
* ["Been there, doing that (I'm disabled,* and that the help exists)"]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by darkfeline on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:16PM (3 children)
Serious question, not trolling, what is wrong with that?
As a US citizen, I think the US government's primary responsibility is to US citizens, not to non-US citizens. If the US has spare aid, I would rather that aid go to fellow US citizens, even if they are Republicans (ha ha, only serious), than to some non US citizen.
If you as a FOO citizen are fucked, then quite frankly, that's a problem between you and FOO government. The US may provide aid at our discretion, but I don't see how we have any obligation to help out all of the poor and suffering people in the world.
Also, you are suggesting that all legal and/or illegal immigrants are refugees. I find that hard to believe. There must be some proportion of young male "refugees" come to seek better opportunities, like Europe has experienced. They are not running from violence, they are ditching their country which their ancestors ran into the ground to seek a better life in a country which hasn't been run into the ground (yet). They are welcome to keep their problems in their country.
Also, accepting immigrants has a very real cost in damage to society. I need to find the citation, but the phenomenon is quite simple. When a society accepts immigrants, the immigrants can either integrate into society, or they refuse to integrate, forming their own micro-culture and thus fragmenting and weakening the overall society. There have been a number of cases in history of this happening. Historically, America has been successful precisely because all of our immigrants integrated: they became primarily American and secondarily Italian/British/Chinese/etc. However, increasingly modern immigrants refuse to integrate and demand that they be treated differently than other Americans (cultural identity, etc.). Quite simply, this will destroy US society. In fact, history has shown that it is unstoppable, despite the efforts of the original citizens, so I guess there's no point in us trying either?
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:09PM (2 children)
You just sent somebody to their death, when you had plenty of resources to keep them alive. A lot of people find that morally objectionable.
I think you're operating from a mentality where the basics of living (food, clothing, housing, etc) are scarce and hard to come by in the US, when in fact we have substantial surpluses of all of those, and also the capacity to make more of them (a capacity that is increased by immigrants looking for work to do). And if you're worried about money, don't be: We have about 8 times the GDP necessary to ensure everybody currently in the US lives at at least poverty level. As in, we could probably take in about 10-20 million people before you'd even notice.
Are you obligated to give out food when you have twice as much as you're going to eat and some starving guy comes up to you asking for a bite? No, you aren't. But it sure would seem like the compassionate and reasonable thing to do, rather than throwing your surplus in the trash so the starving guy can maybe dig it out later.
The people that are currently the center of the immigration controversies are mostly folks who have applied for political asylum, a.k.a. claiming to be refugees. That is in no small part because things have gotten substantially worse in Central America over the last couple of decades, which in part is because of US policies in that region.
Or, alternately, the US has been successful precisely because each of the various kinds of people who arrived brought their own ideas and perspectives and culture with them, and historically when different cultures meet there's a bit of a cultural and technological flowering that comes from those ideas being exchanged. For instance, you don't get rock'n'roll without a lot of different cultures mixing together, and for other benefits of immigration all you have to do is visit a grocery store to see what a wide variety of things you can eat that the culture your grandparents belonged to hadn't even considered making.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by darkfeline on Monday August 20 2018, @02:29AM (1 child)
>A lot of people find that morally objectionable.
Here's what I find morally objectionable. I cannot in good conscience go to one of the homeless US citizens in my town/city and tell them that we provided aid to refugees and that (s)he should sleep proud on the sidewalk tonight knowing that we helped a foreigner avoid death in their country.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday August 20 2018, @04:01AM
We have both the space and the cash necessary to house every homeless person in America, and millions of immigrants. The only reason those are competing interests is because of an artificial scarcity imposed to benefit banks and landlords at the expense of everybody else.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:37PM
Yeah. Fuck you, I got mine!
(Score: 4, Insightful) by shortscreen on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:10PM (1 child)
TFS says it's about legal immigrants. So it's more like the guy was already allowed to move in but is now being told not to use the place as his mailing address because she might change her mind and evict him if she feels like it.
Imposing more bureaucratic barriers for legal immigrants is a pointless dick move.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:19PM
Pointless? It seems to be irritating some people - kinda like a burr under a saddle. Maybe it has points?
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @10:36AM (130 children)
So the president can redefine any legal terms as he sees fit? Sounds like an easy way to circumvent any constitutional restrictions …
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @10:47AM (101 children)
Sounds like a really stupid power to allow the office, yep. I do agree with the idea behind it though. If you keep skewing immigration heavily towards people who need financial assistance just to live here, you're doing nothing but placing a heavier tax burden on everyone and ensuring whoever promises the most handouts will get the most votes (which is exactly why politicians under the D banner do so). If you want a more financially sound nation, skew the numbers in such a way as to make the median income rise instead of fall by doing so.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @11:35AM (9 children)
The R's do exactly the same thing but with tax benefits (corporate welfare) for either failing or hyper-affluent businesses.
You're a hypocrite and you know it.
(Score: 3, Informative) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @11:51AM (8 children)
Yes, they do. And it's completely irrelevant to this particular discussion. Would you care to say something on-topic now?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:08PM (7 children)
you thought you were being *on-topic* by asserting that politicians pandering to their constituency receive votes from their constituency ?
It goes without saying.
Now you're a DOUBLE hypocrite.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:19PM (6 children)
No, darlin, that's why it was in parentheses. And you really need to look that word up; you're using it wrong.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:23PM (5 children)
Now you are a hypocrite and you lack self awareness. Guess this topic triggers all the stupid.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:32PM (4 children)
Say it again, it's almost as funny watching you hysterically fling shit as it is watching monkeys do it.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:17PM (3 children)
Aww poor uggy can't come up with anything else. Let us know if you skin your knee and we'll call your mom.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:26PM (2 children)
She's way down in Texas. I'll just slap a SpiderMan Band-Aid on it. Maybe some Bactine.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:53PM (1 child)
Ooooh, so she's fat too! I mean statistics don't lie and 1/3 of Texans are labeled obese. Given that she birthed you I can't imagine she doesn't stress eat.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday August 17 2018, @03:13AM
Did you seriously just "yo momma so fat" me?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @11:50AM (90 children)
Careful with those verb tenses, Buzz, you're spilling them.
Like in: used once, in the past, you can kiss good bye your years of taxes you paid, you not gonna get citizenship.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @12:00PM (89 children)
And? Timing is irrelevant. We have no need of more people who can't carry their own weight. We have plenty of those already who aren't eligible for deportation. If you want to be able to pay for all the handouts you guys keep promising, you need more Other People's Money to do so rather than more hands wanting some of it.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @12:35PM (74 children)
Oh, is it not?
Is it like pray that I don't alter it any further [youtube.com]? 'Cause, mind you, it's retroactive
(do yourself a favour and close that trap of your, Buzz, you authoritarian streak is dangling outside and it stinks)
(verb tenses, Buzz, they do have a role in speech. Even free speech uses them.)
If anyone had, once, in the past, a need for some hundred dollars worth of food stamp, but now is fully established and carries the weight of not only him but maybe (by taxes) some of weight of MDC-in-his-dark-periods as well, I dare you have the gall to tell me with a straight face that you don't need him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @12:52PM (71 children)
MDC is a citizen, need is irrelevant. I absolutely will tell you that anyone taking taxpayer handouts should be immediately ineligible for visa extensions, greencards, or citizenship though. They may be dandy, productive folks after one month of drawing unemployment but they can be dandy, productive folks back in their own country.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @01:05PM (70 children)
Buzz, you are surely the dumbest person I ever encountered, no reserves.
May your wishes come true.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @01:33PM (69 children)
Splain how or your assertion is shit.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @01:59PM (68 children)
You, the Americans, need all the help you can get at home to get out of the shit the multi-nationals sunk you by relocating the capital and tricking you, among other things, into believing in "service economy, let others do the manufacturing"
And you, Buzz, are refusing such help for what? On a matter of principle, right?
Even when the principle you are glad to see applied is about to be applied unfair (that "So what if we had a deal, I'm adjusting it now")
May your wishes come true, Buzz.
Not that the two are mutually exclusive (grin) but there you have it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:24PM (44 children)
Actually, no, we don't need help. All we need to do is to stop giving away free shit. NATO - we discussed that not long ago. All those Euros with their hands out, expecting me, an American, to pay for their defense. China. We keep giving them money, in exchange for "cheap labor" and some other nonsense. Military "aid" all over the frigging world. Interventions in godforsaken fuckistans all over the world. And, immigrants, who all seem to be in need of not a handout, but truckloads of handouts.
I think we should move about halfway (or more) toward isolationism, and just cut everyone off. No more handouts, to anyone who isn't American.
We don't need your help - stop asking us for our help. Thanks for playing though!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:59PM (29 children)
How much did WWII cost us in current dollars vs how much does NATO cost us?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:11PM (28 children)
Dunno. If you can give me some relevance, I may put the effort into finding out. It seems an irrelevant question.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:17PM (27 children)
Adjusted for inflation, the U.S. cost for WWII is over 4 trillion. Nato is a bargain if it helps prevent WWIII.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:28PM (6 children)
I think the world's largest stockpile of nuclear weapons will do that just fine. Or at least keep us from having to deal with it.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:48PM (5 children)
Cost of Nuclear Weapon Stockpile has been put a $5.48 trillion.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:53PM (4 children)
That's an already paid cost. The upkeep is nothing even close to that.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:32PM (3 children)
Well well you slimy bastard, let us compare the upkeep of our nuclear stockpile vs. NATO. So $20 billion average yearly (low ball estimate) vs. $350 million.
Last I checked a million is 1000x less than a billion, so 1/17500th of the budget costs. You lose again! What a maroon, would someone feed this guy to the sea bass?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:55PM (1 child)
So you're saying we should give up near absolute certainty of security for $20 billion in exchange for a bunch of allies that for the most part hate us and refuse to contribute even the pittance they've agreed to for $350 million? You're right, we should definitely do that.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:06PM
Yup you are the dumbest person on here. Dumb dumb dumb. If there was a dumb contest you'd lose cause you're so dumb you'd fuck that up too!
Git smarter, git educated, git world experience, git anything other than what you've been doing cause its made you dumber than https://www.spanglercandy.com/candy-store/dum-dum-pops-bulk-lollipops [spanglercandy.com]
(Score: 2) by deimtee on Friday August 17 2018, @11:09AM
Economics is more complicated than that. If the US gov spends $20B internally on maintaining nukes, that money goes somewhere. Nuke techs get to keep their jobs and pay taxes, companies that contract some of the services stay in business employing people.
I'm pretty sure that looking after their nukes is one of things that the USA won't outsource to China or India, so that $20B goes straight back into the domestic economy, and is probably mostly reclaimed through taxes and an improved economy.
And before you start claiming 'broken window fallacy', I know that maintaining nukes is a net negative, those factors are ameliorative. The true expense would still be much less than $20B.
If you cough while drinking cheap red wine it really cleans out your sinuses.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:42PM (19 children)
Key word: "if". You have no valid evidence that NATO is preventing even a brush war anywhere in the world, let alone WWIII.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:50PM (17 children)
You have no valid evidence it hasn't either.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:00PM (16 children)
Yes, I have a lot of evidence. Pol Pot, Idi Amin a Dada, Khadaffi, Baby Doc - I could do some searches for more.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:39PM (9 children)
Goddamn, I don't think a discussion with you is even merited. You are a typical conservative, can't hold a complex thought in your head and you fall back so easily on beliefs. Nationalist asshole.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:50PM (8 children)
Correction: ASOCIAL nationalist asshole. Try to keep up.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:56PM (7 children)
You realize admitting you're a bad person doesn't magically make you a good person right? Trump sure is trying to sell that idea, but apparently that is the limit where society says "nope, you went over the edge of crazy pal."
Congrats, you are on the level of Trump!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:20PM (6 children)
WTF did I admit to being a "bad person"? Perhaps you are less than literate. An ANTIsocial asshole would probably be a "bad person".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:37PM (5 children)
nationalist asshole == bad person
Except in times of war it correlates strongly with greedy, selfish, uncaring and willing to do "bad things" to "the enemy". You have repeatedly shown this to be an accurate description of yourself.
Most conservatives are actually quite good and nice people, right up until you start finding out about their nationalist / racist sides. Then nice is out the window and "waterboarding isn't torture" becomes an actual statement made by a hum... *person*.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:53PM (2 children)
You are expressing an opinion. Your opinion has little to do with reality. Waterboarding? You might want to search this site for instances of that word, associated with my name. I've never made excuses for waterboarding. At the very most, I will note that maybe waterboarding is less torturous than some other forms of torture. Except, it is still torture.
I strongly suspect that I am someone and something completely outside of your experience. Because you are unable to relate - I become a "bad person".
Let's try a little thought experiment. Would you prefer to be a predator, or prey? You answer that however you see fit, and I'll get back to you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:50PM (1 child)
Your strong suspicions are wrong, I've gotten a very good idea of who you are. You're better than some conservatives but you have blind spots and you fall into some very nasty beliefs. I'm glad you think waterboarding is a form of torture, now go convince the other nationalist creeps who DO think it is ok.
The form of nationalism Trump is spouting, and you are here defending, is pretty nasty and historically has led to quite a few human rights abuses. It boils down to fear and hatred, sometimes more of one than the other.
As to your question, it is stupid. It isn't a thought experiment it is a simple choice. Are all old people this dumb?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 17 2018, @01:22AM
So - you are unable to "think outside the box".
Note that I didn't restrict you to a simple yes/no or true/false or black/white answer. Answer however you see fit.
The most acceptable answer would have been "neither".
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=sheep+dog+defending+flock [youtube.com]
In any of those videos, you can find socialists, and antisocialists. The stars in each of them are the asocial personnas.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:04PM (1 child)
The Democrats in Congress seemed to have no problem with it, or else they would have impeached Bush and Cheney when they got the majority back. They didn't. They also failed to close Guantanamo when Obama held the Whitehouse and they had a majority in the House and Senate.
I wish they had done. I wish they had exhibited some shred of morality or integrity. But they didn't because they are bankrupt and apostate.
Torture is a crime against humanity. Nobody should support it. Anyone who does it deserves summary execution.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Saturday August 18 2018, @01:51AM
When ISIS is doing things that nobody has ever heard of since medieval times. They chop off the citizens' or anybody's heads in the Middle East, because they're Christian or Muslim or anything else. We have that and we’re not allowed to do anything. We’re not playing on an even field. Would I feel strongly about waterboarding. As far as I’m concerned we have to fight fire with fire. Torture works. I feel it works. I asked my intelligence guys, does it work? They said, "oh, we don't call it torture, sir, we call it enhanced --" I said screw the political correctness, give me the answer! The answer was yes, absolutely. Don't tell me it doesn't work, it absolutely works. And don't worry, we're doing the legal on that one. Bush Jr. looked into the legal, we're taking another look. Because he was a VERY FOOLISH President, the worst until Obama came along. We're going to be legal. 100%. And fortunately we don't have Songbird McCain in the way. Because he caught cancer!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:44PM
How many of those were WORLD WARS? Your reading comprehension is lacking.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday August 17 2018, @07:24AM (4 children)
NATO's purpose is not to prevent wars anywhere in the world. The treaty is designed to protect the region bordering the North Atlantic. How many wars have there been in those countries?
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Saturday August 18 2018, @02:30AM (3 children)
Korea, no Atlantic boarder. But Korean War was NATO. That one lasted 70 years. Until I ended it. Bosnia, not on the Atlantic. Yugoslavia, not on Atlantic. But, NATO wars there too. So the answer to your question is ZERO. NATO's been in a bunch of wars. But ZERO on Atlantic. VERY DUMB wars in my opinion. Not on Atlantic, why bring in NATO, right? Iraq, not Atlantic. But NATO went there to teach them how to fight wars. Because they were terrible at it. Well, they learned. And we got ISIS!!! Afghanistan, same thing. Bunch of NATO guys in there teaching them how to fight wars. Which they were doing VERY WELL, trust me. And we just had 3 guys killed over there. 3 very brave soldiers from Czech. Our thoughts & prayers are with their families. But, terrible waste!
France, they did something very smart. They said to the USA, "teach us how to do nuclear." We taught them, they built their nuclear, they left NATO. They saved so much money. And did beautifully for themselves. For many years. UK, they're leaving EU. And they have their own nuclear -- another Country we taught to do nuclear. In exchange for, they taught us Nerve Gas (VX). And they're still doing Nerve Gas, look at the folks getting sick & dieing (RIP!) with Novichok. From Porton Down. Anyway, UK can leave NATO. France can leave. USA can leave. And all join up with Russia and a few others. The Countries that have the biggest & best Nuclear Buttons. When we call the other countries, they'll answer. When we ask for something, they'll give. And no more worries about very aggressive Montenegro getting us into fights!!!!
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday August 18 2018, @04:52AM (2 children)
The Korean War was a United Nations operation - not NATO. You are wrong in your claim.
The war in the Former Republic of Yugoslavia (which includes Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia and Herzogovina) was a UN operation prior to NATO taking joint action for cease-fire violations. I wear both UN and NATO medals having completed 3 tours during that campaign. Go read up on your politics to discover how NATO became involved [wikipedia.org] but I offer this quotation from that source:
Also involved in FRY under the UN, were the Russians and Ukrainians - you might have noticed that they are NOT members of NATO, various Asian and African nations (all non-NATO) and many others. Again you are wrong in your claim that these were NATO operations.
The 'NATO' involvement in the Iraqi wars are a result of of NATO nations providing support to a US-led operation (in addition to many other non-NATO nations) as part of a multi-national force, with reluctant approval from the UN, which included [wikipedia.org] El Salvador, Estonia, Moldova, South Korea, Tonga, Mongolia, and many others. Do tell me when those nations joined NATO please. (I proudly wear those medals too.) You are wrong yet again.
Your attempts at humour would benefit from being based on facts rather than just spouting the first thing that comes into your head. Just sayin...
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Tuesday August 21 2018, @04:34AM (1 child)
I said Bosnia, not Atlantic. Yugoslavia, not Atlantic. You say, wrong. I asked my guys, look that one up. They call it Adriatic. Sounds like Atlantic, connects to Atlantic, it's not Atlantic, easy to get them mixed up. So, not wrong.
I said Bosnia & Yugoslavia, NATO wars there. You say wrong, you say you were in Yugoslavia -- you call it FRY, short for Yugoslavia -- for NATO, it wasn't war. You were there for an operation. For a campaign. And you won many medals for being a great and very brave soldier. For your heroism -- congratulations, by the way, that's a tremendous quality in a person!! And medals don't mean it was a war, we have so many heroes who, they never fought in a war but they were very brave. But look at your quote. At the page the quote came from. They call it the Bosnian War. And in your quote, they call it war, they say NATO came to fight. So, NATO war in Bosnia. Or, you say Yugoslavia. And can we say Kosovo? Maybe you call it something else. Let's say Kosovo, big war there, NATO fighting there. Lots of wars there and NATO was in them very deeply. So, you have different words for it. Different word for Bosnia, different word for Yugoslavia, different word for war. And possibly I didn't use the 100% exact words. But NATO was there fighting in those places. NATO didn't start the wars. But NATO didn't stop them from happening. And NATO jumped in, they call it escalating. Sounds like you're going up the beautiful escalator in Trump Tower. But it means, bigger war. More great, and very brave soldiers getting wounded. Or dieing. More regular folks wounded & dieing. More property damage. Big expenses for our military. And, possibly, yours. America pays so much so our military will be PERFECTO, so many of these other countries don't. They send their soldiers, like you. That's great. But they need to pay much more.
I'll tell you, we spent A LOT of money on our Stealth Fighter. For our Nighthawk, beautiful name. And for a long time it was supposed to be a secret. Where other countries didn't know we had it. Then somebody LEAKED to our News Media, they printed the news about that one. Not totally secret anymore. But, our enemies didn't have it. Iraq, so many flights, that went PERFECTO. Dumb war. But PERFECTO so far as, they didn't shoot down our Stealth Fighter. Yugoslavia shot it down. And showed it to Russia. So Russia could find out so much more than they knew from the leak. They found out our very expensive secrets and we got NOTHING for it. We could have made a great deal with Russia, they got the information from Yugoslavia and we got ZERO in the deal. Because we went into a dumb war. Not great. Not great at all.
I'm very worried about Montenegro. Little country, used to be part of Original Yugoslavia. Which was much much better than the FRY. They had a very strong military guy, Marshal Tito. They needed a dictator, he was a dictator. And he was magnificent at it. But now Montenegro is its own thing. Montenegro, unfortunately, was allowed to join NATO. They get into a war, America is supposed to come and fight for them. Well, we don't have to come and fight for them. The great thing about treaties is, we can break them. And believe me, I'll break ANY treaty that's not in America's interest. That doesn't put America First. I'll tell you about Montenegro, they're very aggressive. It's unbelievable. I was in Brussels at NATO headquarters. And Duško M. from Montenegro was there. And for no reason, he pushed me. The Fake News Media says I pushed him. And I did push him. But, he pushed me first!! And this is the guy that's saying, protect us with your nuclear.
Korea. I said, Korean War was NATO. You say wrong, not NATO. And I asked my guys, they say that one wasn't NATO. OK, not NATO. That's true. I said something "wrong." But not as wrong as you might think. Because Korean War was MUCH WORSE because of NATO. For other reasons, but because of NATO. USA wouldn't have gone to fight that one if we didn't have NATO. Our Generals would have said, "oh, let the Koreans fight it out among themselves, it's none of our business." And now, we wouldn't be saying Korean War, we would say Korean Civil War. And probably, we wouldn't say North Korea, South Korea. We would just say Korea. As I like to say. I'm trying to put Korea back together. And it's not easy.
I'll tell you, they would have stayed out of Korea. They didn't want to be in 2 wars at once. Which at that time was considered a very big problem. But they had the NATO treaty. And they said, let's get NATO ready. Let's get ready for another very big war in Europe. While we join the nice little war in Korea. So, NATO wasn't there, in Korea. And, NATO didn't start that one. But NATO was a reason that one became such a big deal. You're trying to convince us that NATO stopped many wars in a certain part of the world. Around the North Atlantic. Well, it didn't stop the Korean civil war from starting. And so many countries that were in NATO went into that one. They thought they were OK to get into the war in Korea because NATO had their back in Europe. Nobody bombing London -- except the Irish. Nobody bombing Paris. Nobody bombing Brussels. Korea, lots of bombing. Terrible time for Korea. Because all those other Countries came in, they call it escalating. Sounds nice, it's not nice. NATO countries losing so many brave soldiers. So much equipment. To protect London, Paris, Brussels from getting bombed by Korea. Very dumb!!
And by the way, can we say Libya? That one was a Crooked Hillary number. But also NATO. Libya, not on our Atlantic Ocean. They had Colonel Qaddhafi -- who I rented one of my estates to for a little while. He built a very goofy tent that my neighbors hated -- believe me, it's a long story about that one. Great guy, very strong military guy like you. Who won many medals like you. And he did some things that weren't great -- don't we all? He did the Lockerbie thing, terrible bombing. But, he apologized. He paid A LOT of money. And he said, no more terrorism. No more bombings, no nothing. And he made his Country so great. Which Obama and Crooked Hillary hated, they started a civil war. And NATO came in, they said, "oh look, a war, let's go and fight in that one." And killed Colonel Qaddhafi's kids. Bombed everybody around him, the folks that were trying to protect him. And his enemies stabbed him in the ass and he died (RIP!!!). Because of NATO. Not 100% NATO but they were a big part. And then the ISIS flags went up all over Libya. Great job, NATO!
You said, Russia is not a member of NATO. That's so true. And maybe we'll change that. I had a little talk with President Putin of Russia. But many people say, the purpose of NATO is to be an enemy of Russia. To be a very strong enemy to Russia. And Russia used to be very strong. When they were USSR, very strong. And after that, pretty strong, until 1998. Big big financial crisis in 1998. And did you notice, that's when NATO went wild. Kosovo, Bosnia, Yugoslavia -- the FRY as you call it, Libya. All happening after 1998. Maybe what we need is to have Russia VERY STRONG. To prevent dumb wars!!!
Iraq & Afghanistan. You say, NATO was never in Iraq. Ask your Generals, NATO went there. Not to fight, I didn't say they were there to fight. To teach Iraq -- the soldiers of Iraq -- how to fight much harder. Much more killing, much more property damage. And that's a very official NATO thing. Not just, oh, this Country is in NATO, they make porn there, it's NATO porn. No. It's official NATO business. Same in Afghanistan. NATO is in there, 100% officially. Not fighting, I didn't say fighting! Although, those 3 guys from Czech got killed over there. 3 very brave soldiers from Czech came to teach, they ended up dieing. NATO is in there teaching the soldiers to be better. Teaching them, I assume, to "escalate." Believe me, it's not better for the folks on the other side. Or for regular folks.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Tuesday August 21 2018, @04:47AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:25PM
Evidence? There hasn't been a war inside a NATO country since it was founded. (I'd have to look into the specifics of the Cyprus spat between Turkey and Greece, though.)
More evidence: if you were NOT in NATO, Russia can just roll in and take part of your country from you. Example: Ukraine.
NATO was built as a bulwark against Russia, and it has worked MARVELOUSLY. This is why Russia hates it so.
(Score: 2, Informative) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:23PM (13 children)
You're the next dumbest after Buzz - who is dumb-on-a-matter of principle.
Let me demonstrate:
Total contribution of US to NATO=0.05% from total US defence budget.
Me thinks your "But... but.. NATO is robbing us" is a not only a red herring, it's an incandescently bright red herring.
It amounts to about USD1/year/american - don't tell me with that extra dollar per year you will be suddenly sooo much better.
You know what? If NATO isn't the money waster it was sold to be, one may get to ask... ummm... actually who is wasting the rest of 99.95%** of it?
I bet that the ones who have you by the nuts in regards with the defence billions is... you guessed it, the MIC!
The MIC is the only one who has something to gain from a constant waste on munition and technology, year after year.
Cut some money from them and, yeah, you may need much less help at home.
Will you dare to do it? I have my doubts about.
** Well, maybe not all of them, after all there are some soldiers and (maybe) former navy cooks to be paid.
Guess what? Your MIC won't be at all happy with a position of "halfway (or more) toward isolationism".
Who knows, they may even decide to invent some wars.
---
Anyway, may your wishes come true too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:53PM (12 children)
Possibly, using some narrowly defined "contributions", the US may "contribute" less than other member states. But, that $350 million figure? Nonsense. It probably costs that much just to send one destroyer on a STANAVFORLANT mission. In fact - with the cost of fuel, I KNOW it costs that much to run a destroyer for a typical 4 month mission. Ship's fuel economy isn't measured in miles per gallon, after all. It is measured in gallons per minute. If the ship is just sitting, dead in the water, with the boilers burning to produce electricity, the ship is burning 20 gpm, minimum.
I'm not one bit interested in this narrow definition. A more meaningful measure is how much NATO costs the nation. And, "how much" isn't measured strictly in dollars and cents, either. The US supplies as much as any NATO member nation, in just about any category you wish to choose. People, consumables and expendables, hardware and equipment, high tech and low. In second place, you probably have the UK. I wouldn't even want to guess at who follows in third place.
You want to step back and regroup, or do you want to double down on that claim?
BTW - you should have realized by now that I have nothing but contempt for the military industrial complex. Eisenhower warned us, and we ignored him.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:29PM (5 children)
Bitches and moans then moves the goal posts when his argument falls apart. What a little bitch.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:44PM (4 children)
NATO costs the US a helluva lot more than any other member state. I repeat - the UK is probably second place, and third place is a very distant third.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:03PM (3 children)
Gee, country with the 3rd largest population and -
You are like the rich assholes that want a tax break, please google "how to get a brain transplant" because yours is broken.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:17PM (2 children)
You've just reminded me of something. Socialism is the ideology of the envious.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:48PM (1 child)
May your sins have no end and the hell fire burn twice as hot.
Triggered boomer is triggered, news at 11.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:54PM
ROFLMAO - another Christian fundamentalist finding fault? Alas, my sins will cease when my heart stops beating - just as yours will.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:30PM (3 children)
You aware that it wasn't NATO that pushed in Iraq during the time of the chimpotus. With the continuation in Afghanistan.
Nor were the European pushing US to stir the shit in Syria, until ISIS got enough undefended space to cause troubles (with American weapons [wired.com])
(And certainly the Europeans advised his Orangeness to stop shaking the boat with the Iranians.)
All of the above dwarf the budget you "sink" in NATO at least two orders of magnitude.
I'm telling you - trying to improve your finances on the NATO's account is like being worried about the leak in the Titanic captain's toilet after striking that iceberg.
But anyway, if you want your isolationism, you can pedal on this idea all you want - just don't try to justify it ex post facto, it's simply dumb.
The MIC will let you live with the delusion you have nothing but contempt for them, while they know very well they will have 5-10% of your tax money year after year. Contempt vs hard-cold money is a good deal for them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:47PM (2 children)
There, you have made a valid point. Strike that word "delusion", and the point becomes more valid. I have few delusions, and none of them involve the MIC.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:21PM
You do realize that you are uniquely unqualified to determine whether you are deluded, or do we need to bust out the dictionary?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:35PM
s/delusion/impression/g
Fair? Or do you prefer "out-of-mindness about/forgetting about it most of the time"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:08PM (1 child)
One of our white ships is about 20K/day. I assume a destroyer is about the same.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:16PM
I am unfamiliar with your "white ships". But, no, I don't believe that 20k pays for one day of operations of a destroyer.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:26PM (13 children)
Ah, so you're saying we should allow anyone who wants in to come in and only allow them to work for less than enough to live like citizens do? Well, that's one way to get back into being a manufacturing economy while practicing "open" trade policies. Simply flooding the nation with people who suck at the government tit will make us competitive in manufacturing too but it will do so by deflating the dollar and standard of living so badly that our wages become competitive with China or Mexico. Or did you have another suggestion?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:40PM (11 children)
Did I say that?
I was thinking that I said something on the line: careful with the deal you offer, you may hurt those that actually can help you; you'd better make a distinction between those who abuse your welfare system and those that needed a bit of help for a while then repaid the help offered thousand times over. It's not like it's hard to make a distinction between the two, is it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:55PM (10 children)
Sigh, you're trying to set general policy by edge cases and you're not doing it for the sake of the edge cases but so that lazy and/or worthless fuckwads can steal from those who actually produce more than they consume.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:40PM (9 children)
Again you're putting words into my mouth, stop it please.
Have your policy of immigration for the future all you want. When it comes to the past, be fair with those that played by the rules of the times. Then see how they follow the new rules for the future.
Besides, the entire "inflammation" you suffer over all this thread is based on your implicit assumption of "the majority of legal immigrants abused the welfare system". Funny thing is... you're showing no proof for that assumption.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:54PM (8 children)
Retroactivity is irrelevant as well. I have no issue carving exceptions out for edge cases but basing general policy on them is absurd.
I neither stated nor implied any such thing. That's a strawman of your own creation.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:17PM (6 children)
Well, it doesn't build trust if you can't keep your word.
But... tell you what. If you want to get down this path and the retroactive trait is acceptable, I'd suggest another policy: retroactively plug the loopholes in your tax system and make those multi-nationals pay back all the taxes they moved into fiscal paradises. I guarantee you those money would dwarf any welfare expenses for decades. Good luck.
Really? Then how I should understand your "Sigh, you're trying to set general policy by edge cases".
Which I understood as: legal migrants who used but did not abuse welfare are "edge cases", we can discount them in setting the general policy. Because the majority (== !"edge case") of those that used welfare actually abused the welfare.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:37PM (5 children)
Sounds good to me but it'll never get through all the bought-and-paid-for politicians.
As for the rest, I see where you misunderstood. You neglected to consider legal immigrants who do not ever go on welfare at all. Those plus the ones who abuse it make the ones who use it as intended very much an edge case.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:09PM
WOW!
Nice weasel twisting you did there, for someone who always calls for facts when it is convenient you sure do have a lot of unsupported ASSumptions you pretend are facts.
You're a dishonest hypocritical asshole and this site is stained by your presence, even with your code contributions.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:38PM (3 children)
LOL, mate. We have yet chances to make a fine socialist from you.
Half the way there already: you just admitted that "Other-People's-Money is a good thing™" as long as the people are multinational corporations. Only a bit more and we'll call you "comrade" in our attempt to throw those corrupt politicians out.
(very large trollish grin)
Numbers, mate, numbers or it didn't happen.
I'll put down these things:
You sure you want to potentially eject any of them from US, now that China overtook America in the scientific papers [nature.com]?
I can guarantee you the Chinese are very little interested in "social studies" (the party has all the answers in social, no further studies are necessary) and "nutrition/obesity" (not enough HFCS in China, they need corn to feed their stock), most of these papers will be in hard sciences.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday August 17 2018, @03:18AM (2 children)
Nah, I just figure if I'm going to get fucked, everyone else can damned well get fucked right along with me.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Touché) by c0lo on Friday August 17 2018, @10:25AM (1 child)
Huh! You have material to make even a communist out of you!
(yuuuge grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday August 17 2018, @11:16AM
Ha! Noice.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Friday August 17 2018, @02:45AM
However, it happens to be true (51% as of 2015; I vaguely recall it's now 56% but couldn't find newer stats offhand)
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/09/01/immigrant-welfare-use-report/71517072/ [usatoday.com]
And here's a whole bunch of stats:
https://cis.org/Report/Cost-Welfare-Use-Immigrant-and-Native-Households [cis.org]
It's rather worse in Europe, at somewhere around 87% (as high as 99% in some areas).
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-europe-migrants-germany-survey-idUSKBN13A22F [reuters.com]
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:36PM
Hey I'd like you to remember that most legal immigrants are sponsored. So if they come here and end up on welfare within a certain timespan. Their sponsor who has to prove their income in order to sponsor anyone, will get the bill.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:19PM (8 children)
So how does having more people on welfare "help"?
When you're stuck in a hole, first stop digging, so step 1 is halt immigration.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:45PM (7 children)
On permanent welfare? It doesn't.
3 days-worth of welfare per year and the rest of 220 days paying taxes? I'll take this deal any time, thank you, you'd be wise to do the same/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:14PM (6 children)
Seriously? People under 30K or so per year don't pay taxes and the govt programs exceed the revenue until like $40K or so.
Of course that sets a very "starship troopers" precedent that maybe we shouldn't let people immigrate OR vote unless their net benefit/revenue to society exceeds their net expense/programs. I'm down with that. In an era of big data we don't need ridiculous complication in the immigration laws to pretend to poorly implement that. Just a simple individualized personal level, "net profit = you're allowed, heck, encouraged to immigrate and you get to vote" "net loss = not so much".
Now the left sees 99% of the non-english speaking population as somehow being profitable, which is hilarious disconnect from reality, whereas the right figures it'll be more like 1%, but whatevs, thats another battle. I'm on board with the whole "starship troopers" citizenship laws, though.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:30PM (2 children)
What in "220 day paying taxes" was unclear?
Not at all.
In Australia, it's called "skilled migration" and you get points based on how your skill is rated by the demand on the market. The skill rating is certified by industry professional bodies, assessing your application. For some professions (e.g. medicine), you may even be asked to sit exams.
It's fair(ish**), you know from the start if you have chances to earn enough before even starting to fill-in your papers.
"Visa/green card lottery"? To my mind, that stupid, but if you want it this way, who am I to object?
---
** as fair as the "demand on the market" is estimated. Usually lags by 1-2 years.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Interesting) by ElizabethGreene on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:51PM (1 child)
> In Australia, it's called "skilled migration" and you get points based on how your skill is rated by the demand on the market.
This feels like a rational and logical way to do it to me. I'd love to have a reasonable conversation about the merits of it without getting lost in the noise of bashing "them" instead. "Them" can be the prospective immigrants or the other political party, whichever is more effective at derailing the conversation.
:/
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday August 17 2018, @01:20AM
Not perfect, as any matter of policy can and will still be gamed... but yeah, somehow more rational than a lottery.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:12PM (2 children)
Now I know you're a reeetard who wants to twist reality into some horror show, but everyone pays taxes. There is not a single person off of welfare that doesn't pay the government some amount of taxes. You can spout these alt-facts to suit your alt-right agenda but that doesn't make them true.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:13PM (1 child)
Bullshit unless you count sales tax from swiping the EBT card, or the taxes taken out of disability/SSI payments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:16PM
Reading comprehension, learn it, love it, live it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:33PM (1 child)
we have quite the bubble of citizens approaching retirement age. Living off of Social Security (which still gets taxed...), healthcare thru Medicare & maybe Medicaid too, living in subsidized housing...
They would seem to fit soon fit into your world view as well... As would disabled people..
just sayin'
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:50PM
You sure you replied to the post you actually intended to?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @01:15PM (6 children)
OK, so let's say someone comes to USA to work. He already has an offer for work, but before he can start, he gets injured, and having not yet earned any money, and not having had the chance to get insured, he needs some medic aid money to get his injury fixed. After that, he can start his job, makes career big time, is unusually successful, and ten years later, after having paid several hundred million dollars in taxes, he applies for citizenship.
Now according to those rules, he won't be able to get it because ten years ago he got a minor sum from medic aid.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @01:32PM (5 children)
Yup. Exactly. You don't base your general policies on edge conditions.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:26PM (3 children)
More and more it seems that TMB is actually VIM Guy, their style of arguing is exactly the same.
TMB: "STATEMENT #1!!!"
smart people: "reasons you are wrong"
TMB: "STATEMENT. NUMBER. ONE"
smart people: "we understood your simple words and showed you they are wrong"
TMB UNHINGED: "STATEMENT 1 MORON!"
"I see this is going nowhere and will now call you stupid."
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:38PM (2 children)
Let me know when you get to the "reasons you are wrong" part.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:16PM (1 child)
You realize posting to SN doesn't set a reminder on your calendar right? Or perhaps your dementia is kicking up and you can't even comprehend structured writing, or you're a borderline insane dyslexic? I'm trying to figure out just HOW you can be so stupid but the answers are pretty out there. I guess that is a good thing, we wouldn't want other people easily falling into whatever cesspit your brain has fallen into.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday August 17 2018, @03:21AM
Mockery, yo. Since you were never going to manage that bit, I had no worries of needing to remember.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:23PM
Immigration paperwork is filled with "If you ever X, check this box and then please download for I-897-DICKS(b).pdf fill it out and staple it upside down to the left corner of the back of this document"
DICKS(b) is going to be a form where you spell out the details of X and then maybe there is a free form area where you can explain in your own words. They skim the form at the top and if nothing outright disqualifies you then they'll read your explanation, sign off on it and continue processing your application.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:21PM (6 children)
We should just destroy that monument, then, as it means nothing.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:35PM (5 children)
If you can't tell the difference between giving what you can afford and giving away the rent money, you have no place in any serious discussion.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:01PM (4 children)
True.
Total amount of 2018 Federal Budget: $3.654 Trillion (income), $4.094 Trillion (expenditures).
Net fiscal cost of migrant support, not just those who can't support themselves, from Federal coffers: $300 Billion (White House number), and argued could be as low as $44 Billion in discretionary money that could actually be saved. (Source. [politifact.com] I'm inclined to accept the $44 Billion number, as explained the other $256 Billion doesn't go away as expenditures just because there are no migrants it would just be allocated elsewhere.
$44 Billion against $4.094 Trillion, or 1.07%. That's nowhere even close to rent money and is easily affordable as a discretionary item. (Let alone discussing what we could do to reduce that gap if we started treating immigrants as welcome and not automatically as criminal rapists by default the way the current administration wants to.)
Thanks for acknowledging you have no place in serious discussion.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:13PM (3 children)
Every bit makes a difference when we're spending more than what we take in per year. When you're already in over your head, at least stop digging as enthusiastically if you absolutely must keep digging.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:45PM
And you prioritise stopping the dig-by-shovel and let the dig-by-excavator continue?
Doesn't seem wise to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:15PM (1 child)
If the anti-American Conservatard terrorists would stop flushing so much money down the toilet with their excessive "defense" spending (10% of which goes directly into the pockets of their shit stain "defense contractor" buddies and provides exactly ZERO benefit to anyone else) they wouldn't have that problem.
I completely agree. Let's slash the defense budget (the biggest thing in the budget) by an order of magnitude. There's absolutely no valid reason why we need to spend more on "defense" than many of our allies combined. Let's completely cut out corporate welfare. No more Foxcon handouts or anything like them. ("Tax incentive" my fat ass.) No more farm handouts. (They're not subsidies, they're welfare handouts.) No more bank handouts. (Those were not bailouts, they were handouts.) No more welfare to Wal-Mart workers. (Working full time? No welfare for you!) I could go on, but I think I've made my point.
You talk a good talk, but when it comes to actually doing things that will actually help it all turns to a bunch of partisan *derp*.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:21PM
Defense isn't the biggest part of the US budget by a good margin https://media.nationalpriorities.org/uploads/budget-graphic.png [nationalpriorities.org] though it does come in 3rd. Also, welfare shouldn't be restricted based on work status, it should be based on actual needs. You can rage all you want about people having too many kids, being irresponsible, whatever, but if you let those kids starve and live in a stressed out household more likely to give them abuse then the net outcome for society is worse than giving those families a helping hand. Not a free ride, I'd hardly call working at Walmart full time a joyous life experience.
(Score: 2, Redundant) by jmorris on Thursday August 16 2018, @11:19AM (26 children)
More like Congress, long ago in saner times, made rules that succeeding Administrations "loosened" in the name of "compassion" until we got to today, where the majority of immigrants are taking more in public assistance than they contribute in taxes. And it is a full failure, median, average and taken as a group, immigrants are now a net drag on U.S. society. What did anyone expect as we shifted to low skilled immigration? The Mexicans mostly work but by the time they send money home (which was what drove most here in the first place) find themselves unable to survive in the Blue Hells they can find employment in. Then add in a recent surge of sub-Saharan Africans with IQ averaging under 75 who will almost certainly NEVER be net taxpayers and it is a perfect storm of fail.
It has to end, it will end. Because in the crunch Congress would be committing political suicide to even attempt to get involved in such a fight where both the taxpaying public AND the welfare clients who are citizens and realize (or quickly would with Trump's ability to such ideas communicate clearly) that the Welfare State has become a zero sum game. There are not endless resources to hand out to the half of the whole world who would migrate here if we allowed it.
Personally I'd like to see an almost zero net immigration policy for several generations, as we did after the flood through Ellis Island ended when we said "Enough!" and closed the door for awhile. Because division is beneficial to the Democratic Party, no attempt at assimilation has been attempted, and mostly forbidden to even be discussed. That now must begin, and those who refuse to make themselves compatible with America must be 'encouraged" to go home.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @11:35AM (4 children)
"quickly would with Trump's ability to such ideas communicate clearly"
I guess you don't have that ability. Sad!
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday August 16 2018, @12:01PM
Not sure if that was intentional or unintentional but it's some quality meta style humor.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:16PM (2 children)
Ya, that was bad. Was banging out a post too quickly... had to meet an electrician. Damned automatic transfer switch smoked yesterday, mass chaos ensued.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:26PM
Hate when that happens.
(Score: 3, Informative) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:23PM
My decades of experience in the telecommunications world is xfer switches alone (not even counting gennys) are vastly less reliable than the power company, but its a resume generating experience to not have one during a power outage, so via weird market forces we're forced to have lower reliability central offices, towers, and datacenters because we "need" backup power.
This is in a civilized part of the country; not a coastal "blue hell" where nothing works and the sidewalks are paved in human shit. I admit in bad locations the power may be less reliable than a transfer switch.
I just thought it was hilarious when I got access to the raw data, that xfer switches are much less reliable than AC power in many locations; crazy but true.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by zocalo on Thursday August 16 2018, @12:16PM (18 children)
For the UK, that situation only seems likely to worsen, given we're already starting to see the impact of a smaller menial labour workforce following Brexit - basically the same thing Trump is proposing to enforce here - with employers in several low-wage sectors are reporting that they are struggling to find labourers due to the sharp decline in EU immigration over the last year or so. Since margins are so thin in many such fields (literally, in some cases like fruit picking) raising wages would require an increase in the price on the street, so it's a game of chicken to see who blinks first - the race to the pricing bottom the milk industry did with the supermarkets in reverse. Going to be interesting to see what happens with the availability/price of UK sourced fruit and veg next year...
Even the hardcore Brexiteers in the Conservative party seem to realise this is a potentially serious post-Brexit issue, especially since the UK relies on EU labour for a lot of skilled labour too, like many of the NHS' front line medical staff. Like Trump they're promising to somehow only allow the "right people" in and to somehow ensure that they leave again once their visas or whatever expire, but - also like much of what Trump says - the publically available details on how they're actually going to achieve what they say they will are either so vague as to be meaningless or entirely non-existant.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:35PM (1 child)
Actually, you've tasted the Kool-Aid, and you've been mildly poisoned.
There is no work that Americans won't do. Need your septic tank flushed? I can point you to a business staffed by Americans - black and white, and on ocassion a Native American - who will be more than happy to provide that service. Need corn picked? I've done it, and I know plenty of people who will do it. Strawberries? Zuchini? Watermelons? I know many people who will PAY THE FARMER to allow them to go out into the field, to pick their own fruits and produce. There is no work that Americans won't do.
The real problem is the welfare system. We actually pay people to do nothing. Now, if able bodied people can learn to play the system, and be paid to sit on their asses, why in hell would they want to work?
End the welfare, or cut it drastically, or at least change how it works.
We've discussed the system on Soylent in the past. The system actually PUNISHES people for doing stupid stuff like taking a part-time job. You make 150 dollar, and hope to spend it on the kids - but welfare reduces your welfare check by 200 dollar, and you can't even feed the kids. The system is broken - no matter your political leaning, no matter your philosophy in life, we can all agree that the system is broken.
We need to fix that system, then all the apparent lazy asses in the projects, who have nothing better to do than trade drugs, will find some kind of meaningful work.
There is no work that a hungry man will not do. None. And, THAT is the difference between welfare bums, and immigrants. The immigrants are hungry - welfare bums are fat and lazy because we've TAUGHT THEM TO BE FAT AND LAZY!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @08:06PM
It's one thing going to a U-pick to pick berries, corn, etc. It is quite another to do it for 8+ hrs/day, 8 days a week, as fast as you can, because the pay is by the pound, no real minimum wage in the fields.
the high school kids get some "charity" work detasseling corn, family & friends, and sometimes even paid a little extra. But if they were older? Or brown? Farmer John is paying as little as possible for it. He probably already does anyways for the "back 40".
While there are some "good" people willing to work (and get paid respectfully) to do things like pump septic tanks, mow lawns, etc., and customers who will pay for them, there are way more people who will only pay as little as they can to get such work done and will only pay out in cash, and have no qualms at all about it. And theres a decent pool of people willing to do said work for cash, too. Maybe they're "illegals". Maybe ex-cons. whatever.
But squeezing that lanor pool is eventually going to make some of your voter base upset. Dogma/ideology be damned, you're fking with their money now.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:39PM (10 children)
So you are asserting that it is economically, politically and socially wise to import a low skilled worker, let some farmer pay them crap wages then give them welfare at public expense to make up the difference between their pay and what it takes to actually live, then pay an American to remain in poverty in some squalid public housing block so they won't take the job either. All so you can pay a few cents less for a salad a Chipotle. Doesn't work that way. Yes the lettuce they buy is cheaper but everybody is paying a crapload more in taxes than the difference.
Instead leave the Mexican at home to make Mexico Great, put some "pressure" on the multi-generation welfare cases to get the hell out of the Blue Shithole public housing and get in the fields and do a day's labor. This will reduce public expenditures on welfare for both the illegal (yes they get welfare) and the American, drive the American and their children to improve themselves so as to escape such labor and generally help Make America Great Again. Everybody wins except the Democratic Party but I can bear their misfortune with great fortitude.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by G-forze on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:44PM (6 children)
And then you can use the difference to buy more bombs for brown people! Halliburton is ever grateful.
If I run into the term "SJW", I stop reading.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:15PM (5 children)
Brown people. Why is it always brown people? We have demonstrated our willingness to kill red people, white people, yellow people, brown people, or black people. But, all you can remember are the brown people. Find us some green people, and we'll kill 'em. Polka-dotted people. Orange people. Paisley people. We don't give a small damn what color, or pattern, or whatever. Lizard people, zombie people, mutant people - they all bleed if you hurt them.
Oh wait. You're a racist? Ahhhhh - so the color of the dead guy matters to you? Got it.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:18PM (2 children)
Of the 7 military interventions we're currently involved in I'm sure it's just a coincidence that all 7 of them are primarily inhabited by brown people.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:22PM
Yes, it is a coincidence. What is NOT coincidental is, the presence of black GOLD!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @07:31PM
Syrians and other mediterranean people are more white or olive than brown. Show me some real brown people we're bombing. The common connection is oil, religion, and politics rather than skin color... You're simplifying things and obfuscating the real problem of the MIC militarying to get funds to pay for more industrying, and the pet politicians that take their money and spin agendas at home.
(Score: 3, Funny) by tangomargarine on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:23PM (1 child)
Well, there's one guy, but I wouldn't hold my breath...
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:35PM
You're talking about the orangutan? Why you wanna call him "people"? Sometimes, it's hard to remember that those privileged ones born with a silver spoon in their ass are really people.
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:15PM (2 children)
At the end of that first paragraph I was almost expecting you to conclude that companies should pay their employees better.
I was blinded by a sudden burst of optimism. Back to business as Republican usual.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jmorris on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:21PM (1 child)
Without the government subsidizing them, pay would have to rise. Farm labor is currently priced below the actual market price, remove the government and that would have to seek a price where labor could be attracted. Removing some of the welfare State would push some but prices would have to also pull to rebalance the economy. But that is ok since it it would lower the deficit spending and free up the capital markets and eventually even permit another round of tax cuts. The net economic impact would be positive.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:12PM
The quality of life would also be higher; being a sort of indentured servant / sorta slave / sorta migrant refugee must suck, and using the government to prop up corporate profits to perpetuate that is pretty evil.
We kinda fought something aroun 1860-1865 over the same issue; sure the easiest thing to do with slaves is to keep them pickin cotton, but at some point no matter how much of a PITA it is for everyone, you gotta upgrade that lifestyle.
I would not be sad to see the human misery of the migrant farm worker lifestyle go away. Much like the end of slavery in 1865 wasn't a whole lot of fun for anyone, it still kinda needed to be done, and that was the time to do it. We're well past the due date to end migrant farm worker as a job title.
The memes about the evilness of the "Democratic Party Plantation" go deeper than would first appear. "Suffer forever, so we can lead you"
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:32PM
You know, we used to say that without slaves, our country would fall apart economically.
We used to say that production would halt without children laboring in the mines. There is no end to the desire for the cheapest labor possible. Yet, somehow we have survived--better than survived, even.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @04:29PM (3 children)
There has never in the history of employment in any field from Java Android App Development to Cabbage Picker been an employer who is NOT crying himself into dehydration in public over there being "no applications" (at his shitty pay rate and shitty supervisory policies and shitty benefits if there are any and shitty pension again if any).
Its always "there's no one applying at the wage we'd LIKE to pay". Always and forever and everywhere. Of course its everywhere in propaganda and of course it means nothing.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by zocalo on Thursday August 16 2018, @05:24PM (2 children)
I mentioned the UK's milk trade in my OP, which is a pretty good example of why some of these the menial labour wages are so low, and it's not entirely down to the employers - the consumers have to carry some of the blame too. If you're shopping for the cheapest deal at the discount store - regardless of what quality corners they're cutting to get that price point - rather than supporting the farmer directly at farmer's markets etc. then you're part of the problem, like it or not. For their part, consumers (understandably) don't want to more pay for stuff than they have to - especially after several years of inflation outpacing wage increases - so it's beneficial for stores to put pressure on their suppliers to lower costs, and if a given supplier won't cut costs, well, maybe one of their competitor's will. There's *always* someone willing to shave off a few more pence when they're desperate rather than risk produce going off, so the price went into a downward spiral into unsustianable levels for many farmers. When you're faced with selling at a loss and at least putting some food on the table as your debt accumulates, or pouring your milk down the drain and having nothing, what are you going to do?
What the UK is starting to see now is many more industries getting into that level of cut-throat competition - they've *got* to start increasing wages to get the workers, but whoever does so first will be at a financial disadvantage compared to their competitors who have held out. Ultimately the wages, and the prices for produce on the shelf, are going to go have up but that just fuels inflation and we're back to the start of the circle again. What remains to be seen is whether those wage increases are going to outpace the resulting inflation or not, and if not (which seems more likely based on previous examples) then ultimately everyone ends up worse off.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:07PM (1 child)
Economics, especially at the end of a cycle, like now, is a "press your luck" game. The more you play god with peoples lives and force immigration and otherwise F with them, the longer it will be until the next phase of the natural cycle AND the longer and deeper the eventual recession will be, so some folks want the reboot now to minimize human suffering, whereas some folks have outstanding bets on the financial markets etc and F the people we're gonna run this into the ground so I can 'win'. Typical human fight over whats better for all of humanity vs whats better for one's own pocketbook.
So... the specific strategy being discussed is you can goose the economy along a little longer into a much deeper and longer depression IF you weaponize immigrants to keep the wheels turning that little bit slower during a cycle. But its no long term solution, obviously.
The real outcome of permanently lower standard of living is eventually the milk marketplace (from your example) absolutely inevitably stops. Its a market that is running now but is inherently not immortal and the end is coming up. To some extent its desecration of the dead to keep messing with the world to prop it up a little longer. Just shut it down now with some dignity rather than crashing the whole thing to keep it running a little longer. In a world of shrinking opportunity for all, no amount of scrambling will prevent the end of the milk market, but there are people trying to profit off it by turning human misery into revenue, which is the immigration game.
Two interesting aspects of the immigration game never discussed in public; if these people are so profitable, why is their home country such an economic disaster? Surely you'd think if they're an endless pot of gold, they'd want to stay home. So surely they're a massive economic drain. And the second aspect is supposedly immigration boosts an economy, but in the future why would it be any better in the sense that OK take the fairy tale that "new where-evers" will be more profitable than the natives, well, why is that assumed to be permanent; surely if they assimilate their productivity would drop to that of the natives and you'd be back to where you started, the natives aren't profitable enough we need ever more immigrants?
In that way immigrants are economic heroin; if its supposedly so great why don't all the dealers keep it and use it for themselves, and there's no rational argument why a long term ever increasing addiction would improve quality of life in the long term. A little pain killer under reasonable scientific control is often quite valuable, but uncontrolled addiction is another.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @04:04AM
Presumably because the nation states they are coming from lack sufficient physical and social infrastructure to allow them to value-add. Hard to be productive when you are ducking bullets or laid up in bed from poorly treated water.
And in almost all the cases that are relevant to at least the USA's interests, it was their foreign policy failures and frankly war crimes that created the problems in the first place. Supporting brutal dictators, training death squads and arming insurgencies doesn't do wonders for stability, and its rather unfair to expect people to build a prosperous nation when a Superpower rolls over in its sleep and crushes their democratic government and installs a nightmare fashioned from their own paranoia.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @03:03PM
You're right. Immigration has been downhill since 1492.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:39PM
You're absolutely right. Enjoy your strawberry, avocado, apple, cherry, and lettuce prices, as well as restaurant prices, as you end it.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 16 2018, @02:16PM
Precedent by presidents.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0 [youtube.com]