hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 1379 of 1634 FirstFirst ... 3798791279132913691376137713781379138013811382138914291479 ... LastLast
Results 27,561 to 27,580 of 32673

Thread: Slurp Slurp Slurp [USA Politics Thread]

  1. #27561
    Armyofme's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Hull Breach
    Posts
    1,191
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Armyofme View Post
    "The Budgetary and Economic Costs of Addressing Unauthorized Immigration:

    The federal government would have to spend roughly $400 billion to $600 billion to address the 11.2 million undocumented immigrants and prevent future unlawful entry into the United States.


    In turn, this would shrink the labor force by 11 million workers and reduce real GDP by $1.6 trillion.

    Depending on how the government conducts its apprehensions, it would need to spend $100 billion to $300 billion arresting and removing all undocumented immigrants residing in the country, a process that we estimate would take 20 years. In addition, to prevent any new undocumented immigrants going forward, the government would at a minimum have to maintain current immigration enforcement levels. This results in an additional $315 billion in continuing enforcement costs over that time period.

    Not only would enforcing current law cost taxpayers, it would also burden the economy. Removing all undocumented immigrants would cause the labor force to shrink by 6.4 percent, which translates to a loss of 11 million workers. As a result, 20 years from now the economy would be nearly 6 percent or $1.6 trillion smaller than it would be if the government did not remove all undocumented immigrants. While this impact would be found throughout the economy, the agriculture, construction, retail and hospitality sectors would be especially strongly affected."

    Source:
    https://www.americanactionforum.org/...migration-alt/
    Thats not an argument in my opinion. Its a crime and its illegal, the state either changes the laws or it does something about it, no matter the price. It would hurt our economy, it would cost a lot of money and so on just arent things you can argue if its about a crime. The law has been broken, the law requires to send those people back - hence the state has the responsibility to act on it. Otherwise you might as well get rid of the rule of law in general.
    Considering how much it will actually hurt the country, then they should look into changing those laws then, or accept what will happen if they go through with it.
    Keeping things as they have been tho is retarded. The goverments have always known that they need that workforce, but wont give them the same rights as US citizens.

    phpBB : Critical Error
    Could not connect to the database

  2. #27562
    Keckers's Avatar
    Join Date
    July 31, 2012
    Posts
    11,962
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Thats not an argument in my opinion. Its a crime and its illegal, the state either changes the laws or it does something about it, no matter the price. It would hurt our economy, it would cost a lot of money and so on just arent things you can argue if its about a crime. The law has been broken, the law requires to send those people back - hence the state has the responsibility to act on it. Otherwise you might as well get rid of the rule of law in general.[/QUOTE]

    The biggest laws are being broken by those who employ them. Being an illegal immigrant is a much lesser crime than compensating them for their labour and facilitating their livlihood.
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Mason
    It is absurd that we are capable of witnessing a 40,000 year old system of gender oppression begin to dissolve before our eyes yet still see the abolition of a 200 year old economic system as an unrealistic utopia.

  3. #27563
    metacannibal's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Location
    Actually an '06.
    Posts
    3,211
    This whole funny discussion here is entirely missing the point. President un-elected Bannon clearly stated that the #1 goal, as to which the entire cabinet is being selected for, is the demolishing of the administrative state. They want to turn the USA to capitalist anarchy land with a governmental shell that has the only purpose to maintain a military.

    This is literally taken from 1984, I wonder how long it would take until people in the US recognize Bannon to be an actual terrorist or traitor.

  4. #27564
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    In the Shadows of the Trumpian Empire
    Posts
    10,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Armyofme View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Armyofme View Post
    "The Budgetary and Economic Costs of Addressing Unauthorized Immigration:

    The federal government would have to spend roughly $400 billion to $600 billion to address the 11.2 million undocumented immigrants and prevent future unlawful entry into the United States.


    In turn, this would shrink the labor force by 11 million workers and reduce real GDP by $1.6 trillion.

    Depending on how the government conducts its apprehensions, it would need to spend $100 billion to $300 billion arresting and removing all undocumented immigrants residing in the country, a process that we estimate would take 20 years. In addition, to prevent any new undocumented immigrants going forward, the government would at a minimum have to maintain current immigration enforcement levels. This results in an additional $315 billion in continuing enforcement costs over that time period.

    Not only would enforcing current law cost taxpayers, it would also burden the economy. Removing all undocumented immigrants would cause the labor force to shrink by 6.4 percent, which translates to a loss of 11 million workers. As a result, 20 years from now the economy would be nearly 6 percent or $1.6 trillion smaller than it would be if the government did not remove all undocumented immigrants. While this impact would be found throughout the economy, the agriculture, construction, retail and hospitality sectors would be especially strongly affected."

    Source:
    https://www.americanactionforum.org/...migration-alt/
    Thats not an argument in my opinion. Its a crime and its illegal, the state either changes the laws or it does something about it, no matter the price. It would hurt our economy, it would cost a lot of money and so on just arent things you can argue if its about a crime. The law has been broken, the law requires to send those people back - hence the state has the responsibility to act on it. Otherwise you might as well get rid of the rule of law in general.
    Considering how much it will actually hurt the country, then they should look into changing those laws then, or accept what will happen if they go through with it.
    Keeping things as they have been tho is retarded. The goverments have always known that they need that workforce, but wont give them the same rights as US citizens.
    So 11.2 million illegals total.

    And if all were gone, workforce shrinks by 11 million.

    Seems legit.
    Last edited by Alistair; February 26 2017 at 11:46:55 AM.
    "Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong." Jean-Jacques Rousseau



  5. #27565
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    In the Shadows of the Trumpian Empire
    Posts
    10,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Thats not an argument in my opinion. Its a crime and its illegal, the state either changes the laws or it does something about it, no matter the price. It would hurt our economy, it would cost a lot of money and so on just arent things you can argue if its about a crime. The law has been broken, the law requires to send those people back - hence the state has the responsibility to act on it. Otherwise you might as well get rid of the rule of law in general.
    The biggest laws are being broken by those who employ them. Being an illegal immigrant is a much lesser crime than compensating them for their labour and facilitating their livlihood.[/QUOTE]

    Whatabout, whadabout, what about......

    Here is a novel idea, how about the laws be enforced.....wait for it......on both groups?

    Naaaa, feels over reals, law is for suckers, we don't like something, just don't enforce it! Problem solved!

    There is no such thing as borders anyway, and immigration anywhere you want is a human right, right?
    Last edited by Alistair; February 26 2017 at 11:58:45 AM.
    "Insults are the arguments employed by those who are in the wrong." Jean-Jacques Rousseau



  6. #27566

    Join Date
    May 31, 2011
    Posts
    2,890
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    So Trump made a big deal about the rest of Nato spending the agreed upon 2% of the GDP on defense. The German government finally agreed to up the spending. Which tbh is pretty awesome because it had been underfunded for a long time.
    If the Bundeswehr had been underfunded, how comes it gave back unused funds at the end of the year?

    I actually agree that it's underfunded, but that's currently not the main problem. It's a structural problem first, funding problem later. The transition from mandatory draft to professional needs to be completed first. That's also changing the minds first and doing away with such weasel descriptions like "freedom enforcing means" or "robust engagements". The first one is "war" and the second one "battle/combat", ffs.

  7. #27567
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    The United
    Posts
    8,834
    Giving the bundeswehr more money would be alike to just burning it.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    I see you have read nietzsche's little known work "beyond boobs and butts".

  8. #27568

    Join Date
    May 31, 2011
    Posts
    2,890
    Quote Originally Posted by Elriche Oshego View Post
    Unpopular opinion here.

    Trump isn't wrong when he said NATO members should be living up to their commitments. Specifically the 2% GDP spending stipulation.

    I am looking at you primary reserve of Canada.
    But then again the U.S. has lots of ... "interests" covered throughout the world with its military power than most of the other NATO members.

    IMHO, the Russian minisiter of foreign affair (whose name escapes me right now) made a correct comment at the Munich Scecurity Conference earlier this month. He said (paraphrased) that the NATO is a legacy of the cold war. Some took offense from that statement, interpreting it as "no longer necessary, disband it". But thinking about it, it's goals and principles were/are tailored towards a west/east confrontation. That doesn't cover the world's current state of affairs and the present threats.

  9. #27569

    Join Date
    May 31, 2011
    Posts
    2,890
    Quote Originally Posted by metacannibal View Post
    This whole funny discussion here is entirely missing the point. President un-elected Bannon clearly stated that the #1 goal, as to which the entire cabinet is being selected for, is the demolishing of the administrative state. They want to turn the USA to capitalist anarchy land with a governmental shell that has the only purpose to maintain a military.

    This is literally taken from 1984, I wonder how long it would take until people in the US recognize Bannon to be an actual terrorist or traitor.
    I'm completely with you here.

    All - including us here - focus way too much on Trump. Which is quite understandable, given his comedy/drama/popcorn potential. And he keeps on giving.

    But as soon as reports surfaced that Bannon managed to sneak in an executive order that puts him into the National Security Council and Trump happily signed it without reading, the press should have focused on Bannon and his sinister plans.

    He's appearance in Florida was very scary. And although Trump tried to counter some of Bannon's satements the next day, I doubt Trump has the intellectual capability/willigness to see through Bannon's plans.

    Trump's full of self-confidance and thinks he knows it all. He therefore doesn't ask for advice/suggestions and seems to outright refrain reading facts and doing a bit of background research himself. That makes him a prime target for clever manipulation. Something I suspect that Bannon's not only capable of, but even willing to do.

  10. #27570
    jimmychrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 31, 2011
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    But thinking about it, it's goals and principles were/are tailored towards a west/east confrontation. That doesn't cover the world's current state of affairs and the present threats.
    Tell that to Ukraine

  11. #27571
    metacannibal's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Location
    Actually an '06.
    Posts
    3,211
    Quote Originally Posted by Hel OWeen View Post
    He's appearance in Florida was very scary. And although Trump tried to counter some of Bannon's satements the next day, I doubt Trump has the intellectual capability/willigness to see through Bannon's plans.
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...a-sea-no-doubt

  12. #27572
    Movember '12 Best Facial Hair Movember 2012Donor Lallante's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    15,815
    Quote Originally Posted by mewninn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by erichkknaar View Post
    DNC fails to learn. Trump gets 8 years. News at 11.
    I think the Democrats are pretty incompetent either way, but people seem to be drinking some kind of spiked koolaid to make them think that going further left will mean they start winning. Just look at Jeremy Corbyn to show how this is not always the case. Even though a pro-workers message should be a winner in Britain's shitty gig economy, its tied to other dumb leftwing bullshit that turns off people in the middle in order to appease the lentil-eaters

    What do I think could win elections? A short and sweet pro-workers message that promises to leash the corporations. Tell the lefties to get on board with that and ignore all their dumb and insane views on the economy, nuclear energy, environment, etc.
    Actually Jeremy Corbyn's problem isnt he is "too far left". Most of his most lefty policies are actually very popular with the UK electorate (ring fenced NHS, nationalise the trains, free education).

    The problem is he is a terrible, autocratic and incompetent leader, an ineffective opposition to the government, and has an extremely outdated approach to politics. Plus he is an old white dude.

    If someone with his exact same policies, who was a mixed race woman aged 40 with a consensus-building style came along I'm pretty confident they could smash up the tories.

    It's his style and lack of competence thats the problem. No-one trusts him, and rightly so

  13. #27573
    Shaikar's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Kador
    Posts
    1,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    So Trump made a big deal about the rest of Nato spending the agreed upon 2% of the GDP on defense. The German government finally agreed to up the spending. Which tbh is pretty awesome because it had been underfunded for a long time.

    However there is one small problem I have.

    2% of Germany's GDP is $67b.

    That's about as much as Russia spends on it's military, just behind Saudi Arabia, China and the US.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...y_expenditures

    With the current budget we are just short of 200.000 soldiers. What are we going to spend double the money on? New equipment won't cover a $30b gap. I mean unless we start building nukes but who would want that? (France would, they repeatedly offered Germany shared access and control over the French nukes. I shit you not.)
    Bit in bold. Never underestimate the ability of a military to spaff cash up the wall.

  14. #27574
    Movember '12 Best Facial Hair Movember 2012Donor Lallante's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    15,815
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    Governments ignore the enforcement of laws all of the time.

    Figure 1: 12M Illegal Immigrants in the US
    Exactly, and someone wanting to do something about it is a good thing. That blatant ignoring the law by the government has to end.
    Why?

  15. #27575
    Donor Tellenta's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    15,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Lallante View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    Governments ignore the enforcement of laws all of the time.

    Figure 1: 12M Illegal Immigrants in the US
    Exactly, and someone wanting to do something about it is a good thing. That blatant ignoring the law by the government has to end.
    Why?
    1) It's lazy.
    2) They can change the laws if they don't want to use them.
    3) If they were legal foreign workers they have more protections and would receive better pay.
    4) Oh you just want near slavery where the workers are afraid to contact police about abuses but are hiding this fact behind feels before reals argumentation.

  16. #27576
    W0lf Crendraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    January 26, 2012
    Location
    The United
    Posts
    8,834
    Quote Originally Posted by Lallante View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    Governments ignore the enforcement of laws all of the time.

    Figure 1: 12M Illegal Immigrants in the US
    Exactly, and someone wanting to do something about it is a good thing. That blatant ignoring the law by the government has to end.
    Why?
    Because it's the law.
    Quote Originally Posted by QuackBot View Post
    I see you have read nietzsche's little known work "beyond boobs and butts".

  17. #27577

    Join Date
    July 14, 2013
    Posts
    1,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Alistair View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Keckers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Thats not an argument in my opinion. Its a crime and its illegal, the state either changes the laws or it does something about it, no matter the price. It would hurt our economy, it would cost a lot of money and so on just arent things you can argue if its about a crime. The law has been broken, the law requires to send those people back - hence the state has the responsibility to act on it. Otherwise you might as well get rid of the rule of law in general.
    The biggest laws are being broken by those who employ them. Being an illegal immigrant is a much lesser crime than compensating them for their labour and facilitating their livlihood.
    Whatabout, whadabout, what about......

    Here is a novel idea, how about the laws be enforced.....wait for it......on both groups?

    Naaaa, feels over reals, law is for suckers, we don't like something, just don't enforce it! Problem solved!

    There is no such thing as borders anyway, and immigration anywhere you want is a human right, right?
    Someone points out the significant economic damage that mass deportations will do to the US, particularly in the agriculture industry where an estimated 30% of the workers are undocumented.

    Alistair whines about "feels before reels."

    Laws go unenforced all the time. As someone who tends to hit 75 on the beltway when traffic is light, I appreciate this.

    Should the law be changed? Yes, immigration reform is vital at this point. The fact that it hasn't be been fixed yet doesn't mean we should do something self-destructive in the meantime, just because the law calls for it.
    Totally not Victoria Stecker forgetting his password and not having access to his work email.

  18. #27578
    Movember '12 Best Facial Hair Movember 2012Donor Lallante's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    15,815
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lallante View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by W0lf Crendraven View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    Governments ignore the enforcement of laws all of the time.

    Figure 1: 12M Illegal Immigrants in the US
    Exactly, and someone wanting to do something about it is a good thing. That blatant ignoring the law by the government has to end.
    Why?
    Because it's the law.
    Federal law also prohibits the sale and consumption of MJ in all states. PResume you are in favour a crackdown on that too right?

    Law does not in and of itself have moral force.

  19. #27579
    Straight Hustlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 14, 2011
    Posts
    9,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Armyofme View Post
    "The Budgetary and Economic Costs of Addressing Unauthorized Immigration:

    The federal government would have to spend roughly $400 billion to $600 billion to address the 11.2 million undocumented immigrants and prevent future unlawful entry into the United States.


    In turn, this would shrink the labor force by 11 million workers and reduce real GDP by $1.6 trillion.

    Depending on how the government conducts its apprehensions, it would need to spend $100 billion to $300 billion arresting and removing all undocumented immigrants residing in the country, a process that we estimate would take 20 years. In addition, to prevent any new undocumented immigrants going forward, the government would at a minimum have to maintain current immigration enforcement levels. This results in an additional $315 billion in continuing enforcement costs over that time period.

    Not only would enforcing current law cost taxpayers, it would also burden the economy. Removing all undocumented immigrants would cause the labor force to shrink by 6.4 percent, which translates to a loss of 11 million workers. As a result, 20 years from now the economy would be nearly 6 percent or $1.6 trillion smaller than it would be if the government did not remove all undocumented immigrants. While this impact would be found throughout the economy, the agriculture, construction, retail and hospitality sectors would be especially strongly affected."

    Source:
    https://www.americanactionforum.org/...migration-alt/
    I'm not sure I buy those numbers, or they are simply misrepresenting them to make the impact look extraordinary.

    Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk

  20. #27580
    The Pube Whisperer Maximillian's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 10, 2011
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,315
    Whether it is by immigration law reforms or whether it is by deportation something needs to be done about illegal immigration. Because it is fueling the rise of the right, depressing wages and working conditions, and in many cases is akin to slavery in what are supposed to be liberal democratic states.

    Probably the worst aspect is the close to slave labour that exists using illegals in farming, domestic service and construction. And it isn't just in the USA - if you eat strawberries grown in Greece then most likely they were picked by African illegals held by criminals in slave camps.

    Like many things the adjustment would be painful but maybe people would be forced to pay people a legal wage with conditions rather than underpay with no conditions.

    And the people employing them should be hammered by the law financially and criminally. Why should fuckers dodging taxes and work conditions get a slap on the wrist while the illegals get deported. Fine them millions, throw the organisers in jail, and maybe they'll think twice about exploiting illegals to save a few bucks.

    But won't that mean that food costs more. Yes, so it's a trade off between accepting human misery on a grand scale or paying a bit more for food.

    But locals won't do the work. Yes, but in part that is because the work is so poorly paid with such shit conditions. If the pay and conditions improved then maybe locals would be more interested.

    And there is no reason why you can't have work visa schemes although they also seem to get exploited by fuckers to underpay foreigners while keeping locals out of jobs.

    This is part of globalization that people hate, in particular people without education who have to work menial jobs, is the fact that they are competing with the black economy.

    There are many ways forward to reform this issue but the status quo is not acceptable.
    Last edited by Maximillian; February 26 2017 at 03:05:35 PM.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •