Bitcoin Forum

Lol!  As liberal and biased as NPR is, at least they value facts.  No matter how much the MSM attempts to spin the truth, the facts can't be hidden any longer.  One of their own just outed their lies:

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/27/670807343/fact-check-whats-happening-on-the-u-s-mexico-border

7000 invaders at the Tijuana border.  Thousands attempted to bumrush the border crossing in an attempt to "protest" the slow process of invading our country.

ROFLMFAO!  The double speak is palpable.

Here's a bit more for you. Remember when the Mexican Army encountered the "caravan" and there was a brief tussle, then the Army backed off saying "We can't fight them!"

Translated from Mexican-talk: Army was paid off nicely!

There are photos online of the migrants preparing for photos with journalists and an MSNBC reporter even accidentally said that they were majority men and there for work, not asylum.

But the Children!  The Children!

...snowflake tears...

No fact check is needed for the pictures that show children and mothers being hit with tear gas.  Unthinkable crimes against humanity!

We don't accept your borders to begin with and hardly accept the concept of borders overall but we are willing to play along (for now) just for the sake of a peaceful, functioning society.  As compromise, we demand that the human right of freedom of movement be granted.  You have to allow people to move freely from danger and seek asylum.  This is international law and will not be negotiated down at a time when it is needed the most.  The more Trump tries to restrict the rightful passage of humans seeking asylum, the more we will protest the border and seek to undermine the authority of the occupation.

I hate that it came this far but I will tell you, right now, there are comrades mobilizing and providing these people with the  resources and information necessary to access their right to seek asylum in the US.  I'm afraid they won't succeed. Might is right?

Bah. You're a proven liar and propagandist.

The same border crossing, people were tear gassed when Obama was president.

Your type are the actual ones well versed in real unthinkable crimes against humanity, fucking whack job nut cases that think they are smarter than other people and know better what to do. Authoritarian liberal perverted control freaks.

I'm not really sure why the policy for asylum seekers really changed. It seemed to be pretty effective under Obama in keeping illegal immigration rather small and limited.

I guess it goes along with this joke;

How do you get Trump to change a light bulb?

Tell him Obama put it in!

I see, so you openly admit you plan to subvert the government and rule of law to implement your ideology in spite of the fact that it has no popular mandate? You can't have a functioning society without borders any more than you can have a functional house without doors. It is good to know you are at least being honest about your totalitarian aspirations finally, though I think we all knew this for some time.

Mexico is a safe harbor nation, and has already offered these people asylum. Once you leave your nation, you are mandated to apply to the first safe harbor nation you enter for asylum. The law doesn't say you get to bounce from nation to nation and pick the country you would like best.

Asylum is supposed to be for emergency situations and is being abused in this case as cover for economic immigration. EVEN IF they had a legitimate reason to claim asylum, by those same international laws you evoke, they do not have a right to claim asylum in the US, and they CERTAINLY don't have a right to just rush the border.

It's really just one more engineered "test" for Trump, designed from the start to make him look bad.

You're a fucking retard, the only fucking country that the US has a bilateral agreement with for safe third Country is the frozen wasteland above you...  You can't even get the name of the agreement right.

There is no such thing as a "safe harbour nation" in legal terms, your stupid argument has been tested and rejected by the courts countless times over the decades.  The law is crystal clear a person can enter mexico first and then enter the US and apply for Asylum, you being to retarded to understand it doesn't change the facts LOL.

20k people standing around and they shut down the thing? What the fuck government, are you mad? 20,000 people is insane.

7000 processing of the average 90k / day? What...?


So, they have legal right to seek asylum, cool. That's been a whole talking point from the right for sooo long.


90,000 average crossers per day; most of them NOT seeking asylum; but you can only process 40-100 individuals per day for seeking asylum? What the actual fuck?

90k security checks average a day, but can only handle an additional 40-100 asylum checks?


Yeah, no shit; artificial limits were set obviously.


Hmm, peaceful protest seems fine.


Cool story; now fix it; oh wait, Trump sucks; that's right.


I'm almost willing to bet this wasn't Obama's doing or directives.


That's surprising when there's so many people just standing around (upwards of 25-30k)




I'd certainly hope the US military did NOT use tear gas, considering it's banned by the Geneva Convention.


So, the ball is in the federal government's side. Mind you, this seems like a pretty easy thing to fix; and wasn't an issue under Obama.

Now it's a massive issue under Trump; why? Because he's the SOURCE of the issue.

The policy hasn't changed, only the person who is now president.  When Obummer was POTUS you didn't have George Soros spending millions in attempt to thwart America's sovereignty.

I'm pretty sure the policy changed. I'm pretty sure it states that CLEARLY in the article.

Obama deciding not to enforce the law is not the same thing as the law changing.



Beginning as usual starting off with an insult and a personal attack, always a sign of a rational level headed individual. I didn't intend to even reference the agreement you are referencing, so I am not sure how I got it wrong. The words I used are perfectly logical and clearly deliver the message I intended to deliver. Actually the law is crystal clear, the USA first of all has ultimate authority deciding who may enter the country as a sovereign nation, and the authority of the executive branch over this is also very clear. Your entire argument consists of calling me a retard and claiming I was wrong about things I never even mentioned.

"Under international law, asylum seekers are encouraged to apply for relief or legal status in the first country available to them, but it is not an obligation.

Similarly under U.S. law. Central American migrants technically have no obligation to apply for asylum in Mexico, contrary to the president's tweet. However, it is often a factor considered by immigration judges in deciding whether or not to grant asylum or permanent resettlement. In other words, some immigration judges will reject asylum claims if a person had the practical ability to apply for asylum or another legal status before reaching the United States."

https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/trumps-asylum-restrictions-shift-migration-pressures-to-mexico

In summary, the asylum process was designed as a relief from immediate threats to ones life, most specifically due to government oppression. Living in a poor country with no infrastructure is not a valid claim for asylum. This in mind, judges who see that these people have demonstrated material evidence of applying for asylum in the US for economic reasons, not for reasons of immediate threat as demonstrated by passing through a third nation offering asylum to get here, are perfectly within the law rejecting these claims.

How about you try eating a grande? Seems about the same level of advice. Rofl.

Fuck if I'm going to Mexico; it's a dangerous country. Fuck, even Cuba and Turkey are safer than Mexico.

I'd just like to see you on a subject you actually knew something about. Not going to Mexico, too dangerous....but you are going to tell everyone everything about it?

Tal vez una problema aqui?

"HONDUREÑOS SON TORTURADOS POR DESPRECIAR LOS FRIJOLES Y LAS TORTILLAS"

(FYI, CC English translation works)

https://youtu.be/4BUD7Qqm2aM

I'm pretty sure you have the definition of totalitarianism completely backwards.  Unjust laws need to be broken and challenged constantly until they are moot.  This is called active protest and its been the most effective way for people to overcome totalitarian tendencies. 

You should go on down there and stick your face in that tear gas and shield a couple of them from it. I hear the criminal count in that crowd is up to 600+, but if you are careful you probably won't get knifed in the back. Might lose a wallet, but so what? You can cross back in illegal with them and gain first hand experience with Tijuana.

Please just do it and report back on what they think of your communist schemes. No, maybe you should stay 100% quiet about those crazy ideas. If you want to make it back....

This is an interesting article.

TOP 5 MEDIA LIES ON THE MIGRANT CARAVAN

https://pjmedia.com/trending/top-five-media-lies-on-the-migrant-caravan/

But they don't get to the Big Lie, which is that it's a spontaneous surge of people wanting a better life.

Actually it's a purposeful anti-American, anti-Trump scheme funded and deployed by enemies.

No, the totalitarianism comes after you get control. Enforcing ones borders is one of the oldest recognized rights of a sovereign nation. This is the case because without controlling for this factor nations have the real potential to fall. Purposely attempting to collapse the nation with uncontrolled immigration is treason, not protest. It doesn't matter how ignorant you are of the reality of the results of your actions.

The problem with that is how do we figure out when to start recognizing these old rights of sovereign nations? Today? Last week? 2010? 2003? 2001? 1991? 1989? 1973? 1971? 1967? 1953? 1950? 1492?

Looks like the Fake Caravan hasn't turned out too well.

Manufacture a Caravan Human Rights Crisis, What if it Boomerangs on You?

https://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2018/12/caravan-crisis-boomeranged-latin-american-left/

Ah yes, the ever refreshing argument of the Socialist. We are just too advanced for those old stale ancient ways!

We aren't talking about trading women for goats here. Border controls are just as important as they ever were. The question is when did you stop recognizing these rights?

I've never thought about how borders are recognized because its just another make believe human construct that kills poor people but doesn't affect me at all.  I have border privilege until I try to enter a country where Americans are not automatically allowed.    I am not a government so I am asking this question from the perspective of my government.  I'm simply asking when should we start recognizing borders?  Since borders are old, do we go back to ancient borders?  I am not asking rhetorically, I am literally asking when you think we should have started recognizing borders because apparently if we don't start now, we won't have the same country and if we go back far enough, we won't have the same country either.  

Are you talking about restoring the original borders of this land?
https://native-land.ca/
It seems complicated but I'm not rejecting it because I have an open mind.  I'm just curious about how that would work because so many of them overlap.  

More postmodernist mind mush. You are an enemy of the nation and I wouldn't be surprised if you ended up in a cell. It doesn't really matter how you rationalize irresponsible, criminal, and dangerous activities, they are still irresponsible, criminal, and dangerous.

Its not a valid response to just classify things as "postmodernist" but that is almost all you do.  Even if it was postmodernist, you haven't addressed any of the questions or facts put forward.  You haven't even explained how its postmodernist.  

Perhaps its because you are afraid of your own answers to the questions that have been put forward.  Perhaps answering the questions would force you into a contradiction.  

The irony of someone who is so paranoid about falling under authoritarian rule calling for someone be locked up for asking questions is golden.  I guess you are an authoritarian as long as you get to be the dictator.

Harriet Tubman's underground railroad was illegal, Nicholas Winton's smuggling of Jewish children during the Holocaust was illegal,  Jim crow sit ins were illegal.  Might is not right and sometimes the best thing to do is illegal and the law itself is unjust.  

Additionally, danger is measurable.  You don't just get to say my positions are dangerous when its clear that the most dangerous options would be for these people to stay stranded in northern Mexico or return home.  Even with the teargas and concentration camps, pushing the US is the option that gives them the best opportunity to achieve safety and that is what is driving this entire process. 

It is all I do when all you do is post relativist deconstructivist bullshit straight out of Critical Theory. "Postmodernist mind mush" isn't an insult, it is an observation of the fact that you repeatedly use the Hegelian dialectic to argue contradictory views of your ideology in order to create a relativist subjectivity that on a Sophistic level seems to be valid, but upon closer critical examination is nothing but 100% horse shit right out of your imagination.

You CONSTANTLY contradict yourself and you have the nerve to accuse me of being afraid of examining the truth because I might find conflict? Yeah, those loons being afraid of authoritarian rule! Who in their right mind would think active prevention of ideologies that spawn authoritarianism is worth while? Never in history has this ideology lead to genocide! Quite paranoid. Maybe instead we should go out and punch some Nazis?

I didn't call for you to be locked up. I was telling you regardless of how you justify your bullshit in your mind, you are still actively advocating for conditions that would destroy the nation, and as a result I wouldn't be surprised if you ended up in a cage over it if you are taking any actions in that direction.

There is a difference between civil disobedience and ignoring laws that endanger others. You wanna risk jail time to protest that is on you. You don't get to trade OTHER PEOPLE'S security for your cause. Who's safety? At what cost? Who pays that cost? You certainly fucking aren't but you have no problem putting that burden on everyone else right? It is very generous of you to spend other people's money and give away their safety. You are quite a saint. Just like Harriet Tubman.

What's driving this entire process is the Leftist agitators and funding sources that created this entire problem, and now seems to have left these poor people to their own devices at the border's edge. I think you  should go take care of them, and pay their way back home.


Only, I suspect, because Hillary's cell is looking like it might have a full house.



:)

The problem is not with classifying things but classifying things without any reasoning.  You just say everything is postmodernist (maybe it is?) but you give no reasoning for how its postmodernist or what is wrong with it in the particular context.  You say I contradict myself all the time but instead of pointing out the contradictions, you just say its "straight outta critical theory" and leave it at that.

And maybe you don't want to break down my positions.  Thats fine.  You still haven't answered any of my questions about your position in this thread. 
No I am actually arguing for the opposite of what you stated in bold.   Not only am I against funding a wall that would jeopardize the safety of these people, I am actually advocating for the abolishment of ICE which would save a lot of money.  It seems you are the one arguing we spend money to send these people back to very dangerous conditions. 

The violence in Honduras is what is driving this entire process.  Do you think leftist agitators destabilized these countries?  I donate to border angels.  https://www.borderangels.org/

"reasoning", as you define it is EXTREMELY subjective. You call it "reason" I call it "rationalization" and "sophistry". I don't say everything is Postmodernist. If you are tired of hearing me call you Postmodernist, stop spouting the tenets of Critical Theory constantly. I JUST EXPLAINED the meaning of this (AGAIN). I am very sorry your confirmation bias is so dominant you can't even retain words that cause cognitive dissonance, but the fact is I did explain it, why it is bad, and how you are doing it.
Trying to explain contradictions in the though of Communists TO Communists is about as effective as using logic to explain to a child why there is no monster under their bed. The best you can do is tell them there is no monster and move on. In your case if I explained to you every contradiction you made of yourself I would have time for nothing else, and you STILL would use your Postmodernist mind mush to excuse it away anyway. It is a bit like telling an alcoholic why it is bad to drink. Not going to do much.

I however explained all of my positions in detail, and explained why your positions are dangerous. I haven't answered your questions because they are retarded nonsense loaded questions. If you want to rephrase them in a less presumptuous way I would be happy to answer.



It is irrelevant what you are arguing for, this will be the result. I could argue that jumping in a vat of radioactive waste will give you super powers, but if you do it you will likely just get super cancer.

Again, oh how magnanimous and generous you are! How big of you to use other peoples tax dollars to fund entitlement programs for these people! So generous!
What about the safety of the people ALREADY HERE? YOU DON'T GET TO CHOOSE FOR EVERYONE. All you are doing is handing out OTHER PEOPLES RESOURCES AND SAFETY so you can alleviate your own self loathing and guilt and feel like you are contributing. That is not generosity or kindness, that is malignant narcissism.

Getting rid of ICE will not save money because of the flood of people resulting from your retarded ideas that will then be sucking off the tit of the state. Then there is the question of terrorist infiltration using the open border, as well as gang, cartel, and other criminal activity. All of these things cost THIS NATION, not just money but LIVES. Who the fuck are you to decide their lives are more important than ours?

You haven't explained when borders started being recognized.  You said that they are an ancient thing and you said they should always be respected but you won't answer this question because it is retarded.  It is retarded because it paints you into a crossroads of hypocrisy and capitulation.  You don't believe what you actually typed.  You don't think we should recognize the sovereignty of native lands because it would be contrary to your goal.  There is no way you can be consistent on this topic so its better to just not answer questions.

I'm not making any choices about the people already here.  You are the only one trying to make choices for what people should do.  I am making passive choices for the migrants but suggesting they be allowed to go where they need to go.   Once again, you demand the freedom to control other people and that is just not freedom.  Not allowing you to control other people does not mean I am making choices for you.

This topic boils down authority vs liberty once again.  I think people should be free to choose where they feel safe and you think you have a right to make choices for other people and send thousands of people back into a dangerous area where they clearly do not want to be.   I have no idea why you are trying to project your ideals onto me.  

Their lives are not more important than ours and that is a false dichotomy.  Its not "us or them".  We are fine.  I'm not sure why you are so scared of immigrants.  Have you ever met people from these places?

Also, you have the economics wrong.  I think its because you have an idea that we will be building programs and cities from the ground up for these people but the programs already exists.  The space already exists.  They will just be filling it.   "Whatever costs immigrants might present now will be "paid back" by overall economic growth that will lead to more tax revenue on average for the government and less demand for need-based benefit programs. "  

This isn't about the cartels.  The cartels have resources and already been crossing the border back and forth at will.  These people are coming to escape criminal activity.  

Yeah because that was the retarded Postmodernist mind mush loaded question I was talking about. Can't defend getting rid of borders? Hey lets have a philosophical conversation about the concept and history of borders so we can avoid talking about all the resulting rapes, murders, and stress on public resources created by not enforcing it. I said the concept was ancient, not that "ancient borders should always be respected". Good attempt at word salad spin though!

"...paints you into a crossroads of hypocrisy and capitulation."

BWAHAHAHAA. Ok captain Postmodern. Hey here is a question for you. Can you show me a border not created by blood and conquest? Again you completely rely on relativism and some kind of pathetic play on some kind of misplaced guilt people have for displaced the natives, or beating back Mexico in war. They weren't nice people. They didn't live in a nice time.

That was how shit was done everywhere. Frankly you trying to exploit this to create a sense of guilt today is completely nonsensical because it would equally apply to any nation. I guess nations shouldn't exist any more either right? You'd love it if we had just one big Communist global government wouldn't you?



Uh, no. It is a law, a law passed by the representatives voted on by the people of this nation. They decided they wanted a border and wanted it enforced. I am not telling anyone anything except obey this law because it exists for good reason.

You are ABSOLUTELY making choices for the people of the United States. You are not only facilitating theft of their tax resources in the form of all the free healthcare, schooling, food benefits, etc, but putting the people at risk in various physical ways as well. Lets go over some of the risks of not enforcing the border between the US and Mexico.

1. Criminals. It is a fact there is more crime in Mexico, that means more criminals coming over the border and continuing their criminal ways here.

2. Drugs. Drugs like Fentanyl, which is so strong a piece the size of a grain of sand can kill you come across the border all the time in quantities large enough to kill millions.

3. Rape. Rape is much more common in Mexico than it is int he US. So much so to the point that women crossing over illegally in the hands of coyotes just EXPECT to be raped as part of the process. Then those rapists get here and keep raping.

4. Murder. Violence and murder are much more prevalent in Mexico than in the US. The murderers there come here and bring that mentality with them.

5. Disease. Communicable diseases are MUCH more prevalent in Mexico than in the US. Due to poor infrastructure, sanitation, and healthcare, serious diseases are much more rampant. Without proper screening those diseases come here and spread.

6. Theft of resources. In a lot of places school systems are completely over capacity and can barely keep up as property taxes rise to meet this increasing demand all as a direct result of illegal migrant children filling our schools. People are literally being stripped of their homes to pay for their education. This is just one example that can be multiplied across every entitlement program or public service the government offers, even voting!

7. Terrorism. What is the point of having the TSA fondle your balls at the airport if terrorists can just flood in thru Mexico?

There are so many more but these are just some of the basics. I look forward to your accusations of racism and heartlessness as you advocate the victimization of the people of the US in favor of hordes of migrants looking for handouts.

It is absolutely us or them. Much like your ideas of Socialism you imagine that resources are some how magically finite and we can just magically make it work. My economics are in line with reality, your economics are more in line with Huge Chavez, and it will have similar results. What about all the immigrants that worked so hard to get here legally? I guess fuck them too right?

The cartels come and go as they please as a DIRECT RESULT of the border not begin secured. They don't just traffic drugs either, they also traffic women and children for prostitution.

Here are some breakdowns of the economics which I am sure you will promptly ignore or rationalize away, but for everyone else....

https://cis.org/Report/Welfare-Use-Immigrant-Households-Children

https://www.fairus.org/issue/publications-resources/fiscal-burden-illegal-immigration-united-states-taxpayers

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/sorry-but-illegal-aliens-cost-the-u-s-plenty/


In summary your "they are adding to the economy" spiel is a delusion and simply superficial cover for your new Postmodernist Marxist shit hole formerly known as the USA.

Of course any large group of people would have some crime but all evidence suggests this immigrants have a lower crime rate.  Most people are raped by someone close to them.  Where is your outcry about the Catholic church being allowed in this country?  Nowhere, because that would be silly.  Somehow, the same logic is fine when used against poor people from central America.  

Your argument is worse than saying "lets ban childbirth because some of those children will inevitably grow up to rape". The reason the childbirth strawman would make more sense than your actual argument is because it would be safe to assume our children would commit crime at the similar rate as their parents which is much higher than that of the immigrants.  Take that in...Allowing our own citizens to have children results in more rapists than allowing immigrants to enter.  

Forget all that though because we don't convict populations for crimes and we certainly don't convict individuals for crimes that haven't been committed yet.  This sure is a lot of authoritarianism for someone who's entire world view revolves around fear of dictatorship.  We don't take a machete approach to solving problems.  

I cannot name one because it is the same people that carry out blood and conquest who are obsessed with dividing the planet into political borders in the first place.  How would the guilt be misplaced?  We wiped out all of those nations through genocide and replaced their borders.  Many of these indigenous peoples welcomed outsiders as their own.   Thats how we got here.

Saying nations shouldn't exist would be a stretch.  We definitely shouldn't have borders for the sake of saying who is allowed to move around the planet the planet.  Borders have useful applications but violating human rights isn't one of them.   The concept of borders being used to imprison entire populations is relatively new and useful for those who aim to divide and conquer.  I certainly would not like one global government because I don't think centralized power is either necessary or ethical.

This should actually be classified as "premodern" because mass migration is undeniably human nature.  I'm not even sure if you believe in all of these systems that exist today.  Most people follow them just because thats the way they have always known them.  If they were wiped away and you had to remake them, there is no way you would end up with anything similar.  There is nothing natural about them.



What law are you talking about?  Coming to the US to seek asylum is completely legal regardless of how you got here.  You actually have one year to seek asylum after you arrive.  "8 U.S. Code § 1158 - Asylum" is the law that permits it.  Why do you think the ACLU is all over this?  Why do you think organizations like border angels are spending most of their resources on legal consultation and representation for migrants?

1. No evidence of this. The main problem is that racist are not, you are overgeneralizing the population.   The subset of the population desperate to leave are not the people benefiting from the crime and lawlessness.  Thats just logical.   The people benefiting from the lawlessness are not the ones walking thousands of miles to seek a better life with more legitimate opportunities.  Re: "Illegal immigrants are 44 percent less likely to be incarcerated than natives. Legal immigrants are 69 percent less likely to be incarcerated than natives. Legal and illegal immigrants are underrepresented in the incarcerated population while natives are overrepresented."
https://www.politifact.com/california/statements/2017/aug/03/antonio-villaraigosa/mostly-true-undocumented-immigrants-less-likely-co/

2. Are they spiking our drinks or shoving it down our throats?

3. see 1

4. see 1

5.  Not relevant.  Even if you stop immigration, you don't stop the massive amount of routine travel back and forth between the two countries.  No one screens college kids coming back from spring break either.   So lets get everyone here proper screening and make sure we have herd immunity.  That way everyone here will be covered.   If  disease is a problem, you fight disease, not people .  

6.  Its an investment as they will pay back more than they take out.  Even a selfish person should want more educated people in the population.  No one is arguing there isn't a big upfront investment.  You could argue about the opportunity cost of that investment, but I don't see any better spending taking place.  We could always bomb another country or give GM more money to lay people off.  Unlike dropping bombs, this is spending that will actually build productive lives.  Its both beneficial in the long run and the right thing to do.  Paying for schools with property taxes is a horrible system to begin with though.

7. Because terrorists used planes to attack us. TSA is guarding the planes not the border.  Thats why when you go through TSA to get to Detroit, they aren't protecting Detroit from bad people, they are protecting the planes from people.  The southern border isn't going to make it onto any "how terrorist attacks happen" list.  Again, see 1.  If you wanted to disregard ethics in the all-out effort to prevent terror attacks, you'd probably ship out all of the white men first.  

I'm glad you acknowledge most of this came directly out of the racist playbook.

Actually it's been on that list for good reason for a long time.

But on a more important subject, don't you need to get progressive? Get with the latest on being progressive? I know the positions are changing all the time and it's hard to keep up....

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/03/world/europe/denmark-migrants-island.html?fbclid=IwAR2QOJPWlAlV35COzM-dqGUkMXia0D_CuCU8xLZ8hxw0kxFti2hwQ1HaATU

Immigrants? I am talking about ILLEGAL immigrants, but of course you would gloss over some thing like that in an attempt to make the most extremist interpretation as it serves you. Would love to see you source that. I have evidence to the contrary.

What about... what about... what about... we stick to the topic.

Your mental gymnastics here are an impressive display of a combination willful ignorance and Hegelian dialectic. You are just stringing key words together at this point in some desperate attempt to appear like you have an argument.

I am not convicting anyone here. it is a fact there is more crime and therefore more criminals in Mexico. No matter how hard you try to cast it as a racial thing it doesn't change the fact of the state of the nation and those around it.

Tell me, how do you think those nations will get any better with all of its brightest leaving for the US? Perhaps the benevolent Socialist Western dictators will grace them with more hand outs?






So the people that formed borders hundreds if not thousands of years ago are alive still? Interesting. Didn't you just get done saying...

"Forget all that though because we don't convict populations for crimes and we certainly don't convict individuals for crimes that haven't been committed yet."

You don't convict populations, unless it is convenient for your argument. Some how modern people are responsible for the actions of their ancestors, and they are guilty for crimes their ancestors committed.

THAT'S HOW WE ALL GOT HERE. I am not going to cut my throat over the guilt of existing, and fuck you for cutting the throats of others with your malignant narcissism.


"Saying nations shouldn't exist would be a stretch.  We definitely shouldn't have borders for the sake of saying who is allowed to move around the planet the planet."

This is you advocating for the end of all nations. Without borders there are no nations. Without national sovereignty to decide this, having a "nation" is meaningless. of course that is the idea right? You claim you don't want global government but you advocate for the destruction of everything that makes a nation a nation, and inherently create a condition under which global government would form as a result. You are duplicitous.

I see, now you are getting all relativist over your relativism so you can make things relative some more. Do you ever just look at yourself and be like  "wow I go through an awful lot of rationalization over redefining words to fit my predetermined ideas about the world around me?" Now you want to redefine Postmodernism so it doesn't apply to you, and sounds progressive and evolved in a 100% superficial and sophistic way.







1. So they are fleeing crime, but there is no less crime there? https://www.gao.gov/assets/320/316959.pdf

2. It is interesting you use the term "spiked", because that is exactly what is happening. Spiking a drink for example is commonly known as adding one drug to another drug to dose a person with it without their knowledge. You know the epidemic of "heroin overdoses" we have been having? The vast majority of them are as a result of drug dealers cutting heroin with Fentanyl because it is cheaper and more potent. So now when a heroin user used the heroin, thinking they are taking a normal dose, will actually be taking a lethal dose because they don't know it contains Fentanyl. There is a difference between killing yourself and some one dosing you without your kowledge.

3. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/when-rape-culture-meets-impunity-how-the-mexican_us_5907887ae4b084f59b49fb8e
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/12/central-america-migrants-rape_n_5806972.html
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/30/mexico-rape-victim-details-wealth-politics-impunity-corruption

4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#By_country

5. It is absolutely relevant. First of all tourists are vaccinated and have had access to comparably exceptional healthcare. Second of all, they have a right to be here as citizens, as well as travel abroad if the destination nation does so allow. You act as if living with substandard sanitation, healthcare, and vaccinations will have no impact on the number of communicable diseases one has and will carry. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2873746/

6. You have no evidence to support this. Additionally educated compared to where? Their home or here? You are inventing benefits to illegal immigration that don't exist. "big upfront investment" You don't have any idea the scope of what you are talking about. This is national default levels of debt in a time when we are already drowning in debt. What about... what about... what about... we stay on topic.

7. It has already been documented terrorists are entering using the Southern border. Just because that attack they used planes some how makes it impossible for them to enter on foot or by car or boat? Nice logic.

"If you wanted to disregard ethics in the all-out effort to prevent terror attacks, you'd probably ship out all of the white men first."

I thought you said I was the racist one. You are the only one talking about skin color here.

"Undocumented immigrants" is just the humanized version of "illegal immigrants".  The phrases refer to the same people.  Yes there is more crime in Mexico and Honduras and yes the people are coming from those countries but its illogical to say that the people coming are the ones who are committing the crime instead of the ones trying to escape it.  
https://www.cato.org/publications/immigration-reform-bulletin/criminal-immigrants-their-numbers-demographics-countries
https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/restrictionists-are-misleading-you-about-immigrant-crime-rates


You should only hold guilt if you feel entitled to the spoils.  We have no reason to feel any guilt just so long as we don't walk around thinking we deserve to be here more than anyone else.  The guilt directed at people who don't think anyone should be allowed to immigrate to the US is NOT misplaced.  Those are the people who feel entitled to keep the spoils that were stolen long ago.

If I feel entitled to a money bag bank robbers dropped out of the getaway car, I'm guilty by association even though I didn't actually rob the bank.  I should not feel entitled to that money.  

There is a lot more to what makes a border and what makes a nation sovereign.  Believe it or not, Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein, and Switzerland are sovereign nations separate from the EU and anyone can cross into them overland without border checks.   They still have borders and those borders still have all of their meanings.  The nations are still strong, sovereign states.



2a. Drug traffickers are not asylum seekers.  Those are people who go back and forth.  Ending immigration would not end drug trafficking.  Two separate issues being conflated with the hopes of demonizing poor people in search of a better life.
2b. immigrants are not forcing people to buy it from traffickers, the government is
2c. legalize drugs so they can be safely produced and consumed
2d. provide mental healthcare for people suffering from addiction

3. Great articles.  I am glad you posted them and hope they helped you see why these people must come here and cannot "just stay in mexico" . Its not safe for them there.  

4.  Yes.  Mexico is dangerous.  The people coming to the US from Mexico are coming to escape that danger.  The migrants themselves are not the danger they are trying to escape.  19/100,000 doesn't mean everyone from that country is a murderer.  The studies show us that the people coming are not only less murderous than the mexican population, but less murderous than our own.  

5.  It does have an impact.  That is why they want/need to come here so they can have those things.  Thats the whole point.  They are trying to improve their lives.  

6. 2nd generation immigrants are more educated and earn more money than their peers here across the board.  More earnings means more tax revenue.  BTW, national default is impossible.

7.  TSA makes it impossible for them to hijack planes yes.  Other forms of terror have overwhelmingly been committed by white males.  Its not my racism because I said "if you suspend ethics in an attempt to prevent all terror" but I understand that you cannot prevent all terror without restricting rights.  Using things that aren't likely to kill people is the definition of fear mongering.  You are trying to generate an irrational fear of undocumented immigrants by making people think undocumented immigrants entering the country will likely kill them.  The probability of being killed by an undocumented immigrant is very low.  Lets worry about the things at the top of the list.  

You can be racist without intent.  We don't "deserve" to be here and have basic access to things like education or healthcare any more than they do.  We are all humans.

I have spent a lot of time this week helping with water drops along the border in the Arizona/California desert.   There has been a really good showing and pouring in support from all of the country.  The problem is the CBP and DHS are actively destroying water drops because they hate human life.   

Its unimaginable that they killed a 7 year old girl to punish her parents from coming here.  They made an example out of this innocent child just to send an example to anyone else who might want to bring their kid out of imminent danger. 

It is hard to go on with the good work knowing the level of power and evil we are up against.  This country is already systemically predisposed to human rights violations and being controlled by an egotistical figure and the population has no moral compass.  Where can we find hope?

Your lying really has no boundaries, does it?

http://time.com/5479656/immigrant-girl-dies-dehydration/

There’s a small Border Patrol operating base near where the group was found with food, water and bathrooms, but no medical help. The father completed the intake form, and the agents speak Spanish, but it’s possible that he spoke a Mayan dialect.

The migrants were bused from the area to Lordsburg in two groups, including about 50 minors without parents in the first group, officials said. The girl and her father didn’t start the 90-mile journey until about 4:30 a.m., when the bus returned.

The father said the girl was vomiting on the bus. When they arrived to the Border Patrol station in Lordsburg at about 6:30 a.m. Dec. 7, she was not breathing, officials said. Emergency medical technicians discovered the girl’s fever was 105.7 degrees Fahrenheit (40.9 degrees Celsius), and she was airlifted to a hospital. She died shortly after midnight on Dec. 8.

You are using the general statistics for "immigrants", including legal immigrants, and claiming that represents illegal immigrants. I don't care if you call them basketballs there is still a difference between legal and illegal immigration.




What fucking spoils? The spoils that were had hundreds of years ago by deceased people? We deserve to be here more than any one else because WE ARE CITIZENS AND WE PAY TAXES AND ABIDE BY THE LAW. By definition, if you come here illegally YOU DO NOT RESPECT THE LAW. Not enforcing borders means by DEFAULT THERE IS NO NATION. No nation can withstand open borders combined with a welfare state, it is IMPOSSIBLE.

I didn't rob anyone to get what I have, I fucking worked for it, and so did the vast majority of Americans who don't want you handing out THEIR SHIT so YOU CAN FEEL BETTER ABOUT YOURSELF, and in the end help no one, but harm many.




2. And travelers are not terrorists, but we still check people for bombs before they get on a plane. The FACT is that not just drug smugglers, but HUMAN SMUGGLERS hide among "asylum seekers", and they are usually moving children to be prostituted. Why should you care though right? You got to put water out in the desert and feel good about yourself.

3. Those sites are trash. I just used them so you couldn't dismiss them as being "right wing", and show how your own ideology is in conflict with itself constantly. The fact is most women are raped trying to cross illegally, and that doesn't even count the rape resulting from the sex trafficking.

4. So their society is some how more dangerous, but at the same time they will come here and magically they lave their dangerous and criminal habits behind huh? Amazing. You should just change your name to Hegel and get it over with Captain Postmodern.

5. And fuck everyone who already came here legally that is trying to improve their lives right? The fact is without crossing thru a legal port of entry and being processed correctly they are not medically screened and WILL BRING DEADLY PATHOGENS with them.

6. Most 2nd generation immigrants came here legally. Here you go again trying to lump legal law abiding immigrants with criminal illegal immigrants to try to make your unsupportable ideology look better.

7. Nice whataboutisms. It is a COMPLETELY RATIONAL FEAR and the WHOLE REASON things like the TSA exist. It is a fact terrorists and foreign actors are infiltrating our unsecured southern border. All your horse shit red herrings about white men being terrorists is a meaningless distraction from the fact that YOU HAVE NO ARGUMENTS. All you have is feelings, theories, and moralizing like a modern day puritan.



Yes, what is important is that you can tell yourself you are doing good, regardless of how much pain and destruction it causes. As long as you feel like you are the good guy, that is what is most important, and anyone else who disagrees with you wants to genocide brown people.

Yes, it is not the fault of the psychos bringing children into a fucking desert on foot, no, I.C.E. killed her to "punish them" for crossing. You are fucking out of your mind, really you belong in a padded room.

Some know the desert and how to survive in it. The Tejas Indians 500 years ago, from their hiding spots watched the Spanish explorers one by one fall from thirst and die.

Let's see....maybe an iPad with survival database, and a solar charger would have helped the illegals?

Better....

iPads with terabytes of information to help them change their home countries....

No I'm not doing what you are saying I'm doing.  Look at the links I posted.  Undocumented immigrants are not "legal immigrants".

" The incarceration rate was 1.53 percent for natives, 0.85 percent for illegal immigrants, and 0.47 percent for legal immigrants (see Figure 1). Illegal immigrants are 44 percent less likely to be incarcerated than natives. Legal immigrants are 69 percent less likely to be incarcerated than natives. Legal and illegal immigrants are underrepresented in the incarcerated population while natives are overrepresented (see Figure 2). If native-born Americans were incarcerated at the same rate as illegal immigrants, about 893,000 fewer natives would be incarcerated. If natives were incarcerated at the same rate as legal immigrants, about 1.4 million fewer natives would be incarcerated."
The land is the spoils.  Your citizenship and "right to be here over others" is the spoils.    The country itself is the spoils.  Everyone breaks laws which is why I showed you the stat supporting the idea that citizens break laws at a higher rate.   By that logic, citizens do not respect the law either.  Its not whataboutism its just obvious fact that all populations break laws.   How is the substantial list of european countries I listed not nations despite having open borders?  You can type things in caps but can you explain any of this paragraph?
2. I don't like the status quo.  Smugglers are going to smuggle in the current situation because we have created a market.  I want the assylum seekers to be able to come in legally through a normal border entry.  I don't want them to have to run and hid and sneak like they do now. I don't want them to need to use smugglers. 

3. Again, please tell me where I am in conflict with myself?  I want them to be able to come walk in through a port of entry.  It is the current system that forces them to sneak via coyotes and be subjected to rape. 

4.  You have a total misunderstanding of what a refugee is and perhaps this stems from your generalization of entire countries.  It is very bad logic to say

a. there are a lot of criminals in central america
b. the refugees are coming from central america
c. therefore, the refugees are criminals   

It seems so simple to me that I don't even know how to explain to you how flawed your transition from a+b (facts) to c (fiction) is so I will just explain to you what refugees are. 

 Refugees are the people who FLEE violence and crime.  The people who are benefiting from the crime have no reason to go elsewhere.  Thats not to say that no refugees will ever commit crime because they are obviously just regular people and not perfect. 

5. I am all for screening but we clearly have to let them come through ports.  I don't want illegal immigration.  I want to legalize this immigration so that it can be done in a safe, effective way. 

6. 2nd generation immigrants didn't "come here", they were born here.  Everyone born here is a citizen.  There is no such thing as "illegal 2nd generation immigrants" so there is nothing to lump. 


I'm not a "good guy" because I am unwilling to do anything that isn't easy or convenient but I'm not quite a "bad guy" either.  I am complicit in the murders just like most american citizens.  The only real "good guys" are the ones willing to put their privilege on the line to fight against the oppressors and for the oppressed.  We lack these type of heroes which is why we have such an ugly world. 

The last holocaust happened because well intended people weren't willing to risk their own safety speaking out against/fighting the nazis. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/12/15/year-old-girl-who-died-border-patrol-custody-was-healthy-before-she-arrived-father-says/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.05d249e3b7eb
The girl was healthy when she arrived, and died in custody.  If you have custody of a child and let them dehydrate, you are killing the child through neglect.  Not providing proper training, eyes, and ears is systematic neglect.  These people we have handling children are not trained in childcare.  They don't have social workers or child psychologists on the ground either.  They are basically just cops handling everyone like prisoners.  Its a humanitarian crisis.

Important to notice all the theatre that goes on at these borders. CNN has been seen setting up protestors and victims to look better on camera. Major magazines like TIME are guilty of this as well.

You don't think they had water when in custody but not before? Your chain of causality is backwards, sideways, any way but right.

Really you are posting things that are incredibly wrong, please stop.

Yes, you are repeatedly trying to blur the line between legal and illegal immigrants. Also that is complete horse shit which I had already refuted with documentation from the GAO.

"That same year, the U.S. Sentencing Commission found that 75 percent of all criminal defendants who were convicted and sentenced for federal drug offenses were illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants were also involved in 17 percent of all drug trafficking sentences and one third of all federal prison sentences.

The U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Sentencing Commission reported that as of 2014, illegal immigrants were convicted and sentenced for over 13 percent of all crimes committed in the U.S.

According to the FBI, 67,642 murders were committed in the U.S. from 2005 through 2008, and 115,717 from 2003 through 2009. The General Accounting Office documents that criminal immigrants committed 25,064 of these murders.

Illegal immigrants clearly commit a level of violent and drug related crimes disproportionate to their population."

https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/crime/329589-the-truth-about-crime-illegal-immigrants-and-sanctuary-cities


Illegal immigrants by their very entry into the nation illegally show they have no regard for our laws. Even if what you said were true (it absolutely is not) it still would not make it ok that they illegally flood the country.




I see, so this country will forever be the spoils of war. Not any other country of course, no, just the evil USA. No other country was founded by conquest, only here. Everyone does not break laws, and your "stat" is horse shit. Your "oh white men commit more terror" act is ABSOLUTELY what about-ism, and false at that. We aren't talking about Europe Captain Distraction, we are talking about the USA. Furthermore I don't think you want to use Europe as an example of the successes of open borders.





2. I don't give a fuck what you like or want. Your argument is now having an open border DOESN'T make smuggling easier? Also you are just going to gloss over the fact it makes it easier to traffic children for prostitution?

3. You are CONSTANTLY saying shit that conflicts with everything else you say. It is a consequence of having no principals and the mental gymnastics you do to try to pretend like you have an argument. OH I SEE! The BORDER ITSELF is responsible for the rape and murder! Wow it is all so clear now. I never knew geographic lines were capable of such horrors.

4.  You have a total misunderstanding of ... pretty much everything in life that stems from your generalization of entire populations simply because they disagree with you. Keep your psychoanalysis to yourself Dr. Phil. Unless you want some one with real knowledge in this area to rip apart your frail little belief systems. You don't know shit about me.

"a. there are a lot of criminals in central america" - CHECK
"b. the refugees are coming from central america" - I never said they were all from S.A., but this current wave mostly is, yes.
"c. therefore, the refugees are criminals" - Fuck you. Don't speak for me. I never said all "refugees" are criminals.

Also they aren't "refugees", they aren't fleeing a war, they are economic migrants. Every word you use to describe them is a manipulative lie. It seems so simple to you because you are ignoring vast amounts of information because it conflicts with what you WANT to be true, and with your emotions, not because you are some superior evolved being that has more understanding than us racist plebeians who argue against you. People benefiting from crime have ALL THE REASON TO COME HERE, because this is where the valuable shit to steal is, and the people to sell drugs to and victimize live. This statement contains zero logic on your part (as usual).

5. GREAT NEWS! Legal immigration already exists, so your wish has come true. The fact that you want endless uncontrolled amounts of impoverished low skilled people to flood into the country is irrelevant. What you are advocating for is simply the same as the other bullshit you have said, only with a rubber stamp on top.

6. MOST 2ND GENERATION IMMIGRANTS ARE HERE AS A RESULT OF LEGAL IMMIGRATION. The rest of your argument is fucking pointless as a result.




Oh I am aware you are not the good guy. You are the willfully ignorant naive guy who thinks he is helping but ends up destroying everything. Most American citizens are complicit in murder? WHAT? You really are heavily indoctrinated against this nation aren't you?

The Holocaust happened because of knobs like you engaging in a hive mind mentality marching people to their doom with a smile the whole time reassuring them everything will be fine, and their fears are unwarranted, just like you are doing. I might add they were Socialists too...

Nice paywalled article btw, very moving. So your argument is that ICE some how poisoned her in the what 90 minutes she was on the bus? They had signed a form she was healthy 90 minutes prior. Your argument is not that she was actually ill and lied, but that ICE come how secretly killed her on that 90 minute bus ride to punish her father for crossing illegally?

Yes, why should the people who put that child in that situation in the first place be responsible right? Oh a humanitarian crisis is it? Well perhaps if retards like you didn't just put out the welcome mat, they wouldn't have the incorrect impression they could just stroll on in now would they? I submit that YOU AND YOUR IDEOLOGY are the humanitarian crisis causing ALL of this.

It's worth noting that these statistics change depending on location. In some areas, the states along the US/Mexican border, they are horribly worse and constitute a crisis.

That article only talks about federal crimes because, conveniently, all immigration crimes are federal.  This is a genius slight of hand used by thehill to trick people like yourself into thinking the way you do but the fact is, most crime is at the state level so when sorted this way, its very misleading.  Just go to the article and search "federal" and you will see that all of the stats are based on federal crimes, federal persecutors and federal prisons.  Its a weaponized article because anyone who doesn't understand the difference between federal crime and state crime is going to be convinced.



Who said the US was the only country? No one. Please tell me a sub group of the population that does not break laws. We weren't talking about Europe until you made this statement.

"No nation can withstand open borders combined with a welfare state, it is IMPOSSIBLE."

I'll give you a chance to retract that wild statement since it somehow doesn't encompass Europe.

and this
https://www.newamerica.org/in-depth/terrorism-in-america/who-are-terrorists/



2.  Of course it doesn't make smuggling easier.  Smuggling is already easy.  You are the one who talked about all the bad shit being smuggled into the US.  A change to funnel immigrants through actual ports could make smuggling more difficult because you would have the main volume of people walking through ports being checked while the smugglers would be lonely trying to find another way in.  There would be no caravans to "hide amongst" as you suggest is happening now.

4. I think you need to understand the situation in Honduras before we can continue.  That will give you insight into why people are leaving and why the people who are responsible for the crime can only do it there where the political situation allows them to.  Those same people would be powerless to run their schemes in the US.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/07/crisis-of-honduras-democracy-has-roots-in-us-tacit-support-for-2009-coup

5. Human rights are very simple. Freedom of movement.  I'm not going to tell people where they have to go.  You wouldn't like it if someone said you had to go live in Honduras, (the place that YOU ruined) and tried to ship you there and you already think the analogy is ridiculous because you are convinced you earned the right to safety here more than them simply by being born.  



Hahaha the classic "hitler was a socialist" comment BINGO.  I'M CALLING BINGO.  

I have no reason to be biased against the nation that made me richer than most people on the planet simply by being born.  You have every reason to blindly believe might is right.   I'm just indoctrinated in the facts.  Anyone who allows crimes to be committed without doing everything in their power to stop it is complicit.  That means we are not only complicit in deaths at the border, but also complicit in the millions of deaths during unjust wars. We are also complicit in yemen.

Even if we don't support those wars, we allowed our government to do it on our behalf. I don't think we did everything possible to stop them. There was more direct action against the Vietnam war and those individuals I'd say are absolved

I'm saying that the agents neglected the little girl.  They didn't poison her but they didn't keep her healthy.  When you have a child in your custody, you are responsible for whatever happens.  7 year olds cannot care for themselves especially in stressed situations.  You have to talk to a child in a very gentle way and tell them stories and get them to open up to you so you can find out they are thirsty. You have to earn a child's trust before they will even talk to you.  

It has nothing to do with a welcome mat.  They had to leave and have nowhere else to go so there are no good options for them.  I've been pushing for immigration reform for decades and even recently called for more judges and processing at the border.  We have only seen an increase in cops.    Cops are not caretakers.   This is what cops do.

And? Does the fact that they are federal crimes make it any less of an issue? The only sleight of hand is when you tilt your head a bit of that Postmodernist mind mush you call a brain leaks out and you wipe it from your ear. That and the fact you rely on collectivized state level stats to hide the exceptional levels of crime in Southern regional border states. Most crime is state level. You claim it is more accurate while in the same breath use the fact that some states have very low numbers of illegal immigrants as some kind of proof of their law abidingness.

Also most illegal immigrants DON'T CALL THE COPS, but lets pretend that part has no effect on the reported stats shall we? if anything the stats are UNDER reported. Illegal aliens are not more law abiding than citizens here of any sort. Every link you post requires some leftist to massage the stats other people present until they get the result they like. Also once again, even if every illegal immigrant was an angel, it still gives them no right to flood into the country, no matter how Postmodern your views on borders are.




I just wanted to check to see how off your rocker you are, and you confirmed fully thank you. Essentially your view is no nation is valid and no one has rights to their land, borders, or anything because at some point in time it was taken by conquest. A subgroup of the population that doesn't break laws? How about law abiding citizens? Actually you brought up Europe, but far be it from me to expect you to even remember the crap you spew at me mindlessly.

I am not retracting anything. Open borders was fine for Europe when it was limited and the nations sharing those open borders shared a similar culture. That is different from just the open flooding in of immigrants from the 3rd world. As you can see that has been having negative effects on Europe for some time, and this is why you have the yellow vest movement. They aren't protesting gas tax, they are protesting the crushing weight of uncontrolled immigration combined with a welfare state. Those conditions are going to end, either in revolution or horrible failure, or maybe both. Of course people like you will claim you were right even as your own home is over run and burned to the ground, your last breath preaching tolerance and sacrifice, your ego too important to sacrifice, even for your life.





2. So your argument is that having no security or checks on a border does not make moving contraband (including sex slave children) across it easier? You are free to have your own opinions, but not free to have your own reality. Either way under your scenario they still have a group of people to hide among. This is obviously a pretty retarded argument to anyone with any critical thought abilities.

4. You know, it really sucks some people live in bad places. I wish that was not reality, but it is reality, and inviting them all here to join us is not going to make anything better for anyone. In fact the end result will be worse for all parties, including the immigrants. Immigration has always been controlled to allow time for assimilation into the culture, without this the fabric of the USA is eroded, but people like you often think this is a desirable result.

5. Oh I ruined Honduras now? Fuck you and your guilt projection. Just calling it simple doesn't magically make it simple, though I know that concept is one Postmodernists and Socialists struggle with. I am convinced you are a fool, and I have a right to not let fools like you destroy my country with your moronic catastrophe of an ideology.




It is a fact, Hitler helped form the National Socialist German Workers Party. I know it is an embarrassing fact you socialists try to avoid at all costs, because if we started looking into every dictator who came to power using the promises of Socialism, the bodies would pile high and fast. You can't have that now can you? Easier to just make a joke out of it and pretend it is irrelevant and just avoid the whole discussion right?

You are either exceptionally incompetent or exceptionally duplicitous. I am not sure which but it doesn't much matter as the results are the same, just like it doesn't matter if you THINK you are bias against this nation, when you, in fact and action are.

Once again you can go fuck yourself with your projections of guilt. If you want to go self flagellate over it privately have at it, you don't get to pretend it entitles you to have me join you. You don't know what happened to that girl, and previously you were even saying they killed her with intent to punish them. You walking that one back now?

I submit the girl was already seriously ill, and they were trying to come here to get free healthcare. They knew if they checked the box that said she was ill, they would be quarantined and possibly have entry delayed. How is ICE supposed to protect the lives of people if they are actively lying to them about their condition? No what is most logical is they murdered a little girl to show the rest of those bastards what happens if you try to come here right?

It has ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING to do with your welcome mat. Morons like you preach the word that they are all welcome and that it is legal for them to flood in over our border, and that its ok because it is a "human right". Because of this they take huge risks to their lives and the lives of their children for a chance to get in, but then they get here and realize you were full of shit, but only after they made the dangerous expensive journey. Of course you don't give a fuck about any immigrants, you give a fuck that they serve to spread the good word of Postmodernism, and you get to feel good about yourself leaving bottles of water for them from your position of superiority.

You'd be wrong, but that's the norm.

In saying that without any facts to support your insult, you'd be making things up, otherwise known as lying. If you have facts, by all mean bring them forth, otherwise shut the fuck up, because you are insulting good people working in Border Patrol for clearly ideological biased reasons.

Well since existing as an illegal immigrant is a federal crime, then of course they commit more federal crime but the important question is if they commit more violent crime because you are talking about safety.  By the way, we already have a rape culture and 75% of rape goes unreported.  People are much less likely to call the cops on their significant other than they are on some foreigner.

I expect consistency.  You can't claim to be all about borders and rights to land while living on someone else's land.  If the people on this side were simultaneously advocating for the return of native lands, I'd respect them for their consistency.  I have no tolerance for hypocrisy.  You didn't mention Europe specifially but when you say "no nation can withstand...its impossible" that statement should either include European nations or be revised to acknowledge the possibility.  Nice try but yellow vests are protesting capitalism.  Some of the demands are outright socialist btw.  Let me just put an end to conservatives trying to claim Gilet Jaunes right now


I forgot that you only look at the name of the party and stop there.  In your mind, anything with the word "socialist" in its name is the product of Marx.   I categorize events, systems and politicians by their actions in accordance to actual economic theory, and not just by the name of their party.  

There is intent to not take proper care of these kids.  The legal term for that is criminal negligence.  I'm not walking anything back. There is reason why there is so much negligence at the border.  I don't believe its just incompetence at all levels.  Its incompetence by design.   There is a reason the conditions are bad.  They don't want the process of families being to be comfortable.  

You said it yourself you know some of these people may be sick so a real human would have these people received by medical professionals  instead of holding them for 8 hours then putting them on a bus.  

I didn't roll out the welcome mat.  Its been sitting in New York Harbor all this time.

If you were consistent, you'd be pushing to have this text removed but I don't see anyone with your ideology proposing to remove something that you think is so damaging to the nation.  If there was something that represented an idea the left thought was damaging, like, o i don't know a CONFEDERATE STATUE, I bet you would see leftists pushing to have it taken down.  

TECSHARE also said I don't know what happened to the girl.  The girl died due to dehydration which is easily preventable.  That is fact. 

So now you are the One who will with a keen eye, moralize on the actions of our border officers. But you have shown a consistent pattern of not telling the truth, so why should I believe you?

The border officers, on the other hand generally do tell the truth.

Yes, I am sure the dehydration was during that 90 minute bus ride, not the hike thru the desert that the father exposed her to.

You've made some serious accusations and outright insults about people who I consider going out of their way to help people in their jobs as border agents.

I don't think you know anything about dehydration. Maybe look it up, ya think? because after serious damage to organs and systems occurs, 90 minutes one way or the other and water or saline solution isn't going to help.

You've brushed off the reality of near death with the phrase "Easily preventable?" That's not true, and not supportable. More mis statements of fact won't support it.

the 90 minute figure is just wrong and I had already posted an article with the timeline.  They went into custody at Antelope Falls which was a  bus ride to Lordsburg but they were held for eight hours before being bused. 


How can you mistake 9:15-6:25 as 90 minutes?

You are misrepresenting the facts in your own link and pushing a fabricated story, in alleging misconduct by the Border Patrol.

Do you want to stop, or would you like it pointed out, fact by fact?

Me saying the border patrol "murdered" the girl is hyperbole. An example of a lie would be calling 8 hours "90 minutes".    If you knowingly neglect to provide childcare at a place that has a large influx of families without children, it only a matter of time before something like this happens. 

The misconduct is that they do not have proper staff for handling children at the facilities that receive them.  They knew a lot more people were coming with children and did nothing to add child specialists.  If you show me that they have child psychologists, pediatricians, and family social workers present at these facilities, then I will concede, until then, I will continued to say that they are criminally negligent.

Thank you for the correction.


By way of your reasoning public beaches must have child psychologists, pediatricians, and family social workers present because there is danger of drowning, and death or near death by shark attack.

In the real world there is no misconduct whatsoever. Frankly I'd prefer to have the child psychologists, pediatricians, and family social workers present at the inner city Chicago slum facilities than in random border stations in the desert of the border.

Is this thread about open borders or this girl? This is what you do constantly because you have no original thoughts or arguments of your own. You know you are losing this debate horribly so you decide to focus in on the minutia of this incident to try to make it look like you some how are informed because you discuss details so much. Really it is just so you can avoid the rest. The girl was not complaining of problems until she got on that bus. It was only after on that bus is when her father made it known she was ill. The fact that she sat around for 8 hours is no fault but her fathers for subjecting her to this, then not telling the patrol agents she was ill. Also during those 8 hours she had access to food and water, so your argument is pure horse shit. This is what happens when idiots like you tell these people they have a right to be here, they endanger themselves to cross illegally just to be detained. If anyone is responsible for her death it is YOU and people like you telling them to come.

A bit of enticing water randomly placed in a 100 x 500 miles of desert.

And a promise that they're welcome.....

They naively start into that desert....

Yes, that sounds like murder to me.

ADDED:

It's quite interesting that illegals have been dying, like dozens per year for decades trying to sneak into the USA through dangerous routes like the desert, and the liberals never cared. Now there's some hot issue on the goose stepping liberal platform. Now suddenly they all care about this young girl that died.

Yeah right...

Lying cunts.

The difference is that they are dying in custody now and children are being tortured in detention facilities.  We have video showing the abuse, video showing the destruction of water, and the body count.  The evidence is piling up. 

So what about the 8 year old boy who died last week? 

Oh please do post this "evidence" that is "piling up". Torture now? How quickly are you going to be scaling back that claim and then swearing it was just "hyperbole" when you get called out on it like when you claim ICE killed that little girl to punish people for crossing and send a message? That's not hyperbole btw, that is an accusation of genocide, but not like you give a fuck about an honest analysis of anyone you disagree with.

Ooooo they kicked jugs of water over. You know what they are more humanitarian than you are, because people like you convince these poorly prepared people that they should cross that dangerous desert because they think they can get in. Why would you take culpability for all the lives YOU caused to be lost by encouraging people to make that dangerous and illegal journey.

Also thanks to the freakout over the supposed separation of families (which was not new under Trump) designed to protect crossing children from CHILD ABUSERS, they now see bringing children with them (theirs or some one else's) as an exploit and an easy way to gain entry. So in effect you have now given these people direct incentive to drag children, often not even their own, through the fucking desert. Good job. You keep crying about some water jugs though while you totally ignore your own idiotic crimes.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/migrant-children-detail-experiences-border-patrol-stations-detention-centers_us_5b4d13ffe4b0de86f485ade8
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/un-trump-children-family-torture-separation-border-mexico-border-ice-detention-a8411676.html
https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/12/31/migrant-children-pushed-and-dragged-mh-orig.cnn
Also a private system of detaining children for profit is capitalist nonsense to begin with. No ethic.  Just profit.

The hyperbole was saying that they "murdered" the little girl when they didn't literally murder her but essentially murdered her through a system that was intentionally designed to be inadequate.  Systemic racism doesn't target individuals and doesn't even involve an malintended killer at the point of attack.  Its much more complicated than that.

Even from your point of view that they are violating our rights, it should still be considered murder.  If you know someone is breaking into your property, and place a booby trap for them to fall into and die, it would still be murder.  This of course, is more complicated than that but the same logic.  The border patrol and detainment system is the booby trap. 

These children aren't spending a lot of time in the desert and aren't dying in the desert.  They are dying at the US border or in US custody.   Water in the desert would help prepare them so they aren't already dehyrdated before they are taken into a system that will make them go long times without water by design.  Other countries along their path have not had this issue and governments like Mexico have actually blamed the US for deaths. It shouldn't be that Mexico can do it in a more human way than the US. 

We could keep the awful system without murdering people by making simple changes to acknowledge humanity. 

-Immediately provide detainees with bottled water and hydration tablets
-Immediate medical screening for detainees (you should like this one since you're worried about disease)
-Immediate psychological counseling for detainees.
-Only licensed childcare workers working in child detention centers

A system designed WITHOUT proper care is a system designed to kill or torture. 

Except you said:


So the part about them making an example out of her was hyperbole too? You don't just get to say insane shit like this and just walk it back like it didn't happen. This kind of statement is demonstrative of your hysterical and obsessive mindset over this issue where feelings count more than facts.

Those are some cute links. Don't see any torture there though. I see lots of extremists such as yourself claiming it is torture, I don't see any evidence of torture though. I think you just believe anyone who reaffirms your existing belief systems regardless of how nonsensical it is.

Intentionally designed to be inadequate? Inadequate for what? According to what standards? So you saying we aren't meeting the comfort needs of criminals trying to illegally invade our country? We really should step up our customer service shouldn't we? I suppose you are going to foot the bill for this too right?

First of all, bodies are found in the desert by the dozens all the time, yes including children, so they do in fact spend a lot of time in the desert. Second, learn how dehydration works. The damage is caused, then already injured they show up at the border, and morons like you blame it on the border patrol rather than their own dangerous behavior. Medical screening requires people be admitted in a legal an orderly fashion, illegal entry precludes screening by default unless captured. Only licensed childcare workers? LOL, you think that might create shortages for them for everyone else?

Nothing you are presenting is based in reality, and your feelings take precedence over facts you are presented.

Some of the most desolate places maybe in the whole world, excepting Antarctica, are along the US/Mexican border. Child care workers at those remote outposts?

What a frikking bunch of crazed talk. But its all in line with Alinsky's method of overwhelming social services in the targeted country, so this butt hole of a poster can complain all he wants but it's all in line with his attempts to overthrow existing systems.

I don't think he really cares about these people one bit.

You all gotta remember. If a Hispanic man takes his case to Federal District Court as a man, with the requirement for a jury of his peers, he will get 12 other Hispanics as his jury. How do you think they will vote?

8)

Frankly if they are integrated into American culture it doesn't matter. However if you let immigrants flood in there is no time for that to happen and the native culture is displaced, and the cultural values are lost, and that does matter.

Wasn't it you that said this happened so long ago so what is the point in even trying when native culture cannot be further displaced at this point?  It would be nearly impossible to restore native cultural values. 

I'm saying that our policies and strict border enforcement is the main driving force of death.  If we didn't have such strict policies, these people wouldn't have to take risky paths through the desert because they would just come straight in through less secluded areas.   Having to do so much dodging, hiding, and sneaking is the dangerous behavior.   I blame it on border patrol, because if they weren't doing their job, the people wouldn't have to be out in the desert for so long in the first place. 

I am not arguing for illegal immigration or anything extreme. I am arguing that we allow them enter the country legally and seek asylum after entry. That is orderly and common international law.  Of course this is based on my feelings.  This is a human problem and anyone who tries to detach it from morals is not an ethical thinker.  That doesn't mean it isn't based on facts as well.  What facts am I missing?

We could remove the danger and save money by reducing the amount of force we present at the border.  Instead of putting 5 billion towards a wall, which will only make the situation more dangerous, we could put that money (and a lot of the money currently being used to make it dangerous) into those services you don't know who would foot the bill for.  The money is there, its just a matter of if we want to spend it saving lives or spend it putting lives in danger. 

What the fuck are you talking about?



I love how you always talk to me as if I am too simple to understand your ideas. I have to break it to you, they aren't that complicated to comprehend, they are just naive and counterproductive to even your own stated goals. Let me sum it up...

THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE HERE

All the Postmodernist rationalization about the philosophical nature of who has a right to be here does not mean shit. The rest of us live in reality. The reality where we have to pay for every moronic idea that you crap out of your tiny skull, based not on logic, but on what makes you feel the most warm and fuzzy inside.

You don't give a fuck about the hell on Earth your retarded policies will create, you don't give a fuck about immigrants, you don't give a fuck about ANYONE or anything but satiating your narcissistic need to make your pathetic little empty life feel more full by pretending you are morally superior and preaching to people things that seem so simple, good, warm, and fuzzy, but in reality are a fucking nightmare. None of that matters though, what matters is you feel like you are the hero fighting the evil Nazi ICE.

You don't even know what you are arguing for, and most of the time no one else does either. You  know why? You constantly change the definitions of words to fit your very narrow and naive viewpoint. I don't care if you claim to oppose illegal immigration (we all know you are full of shit on this based on past statements), creating a rubber stamp process that just lets immigrants flood in anyway is equally unacceptable.

Again, you pretend you have some kind of moral high ground while you convince these poorly educated people all they need to do is get across that desert and the land of milk, honey, and free government resources awaits just on the other side. Why would you consider that from your position of moral superiority? Why consider all the children that are dangerously used as tickets for entry into this country to exploit polices people like you supported. Why consider that many of them are raped and sold into sex slavery after they are done being used as a free pass across the border? Nope, you are morally superior, and that is all some one else's fault.

A wall creates more danger? A wall is an inanimate stack of steel and concrete... but ok. I am sure you will give me some extremely arbitrary highly extrapolated Postmodernist "logic" to explain how a wall makes things MORE dangerous. The bill for "services you don't know who would foot the bill for?" WHAT? I know who will foot the bill. American citizens. Your lunatic collectivization of debt as if that makes it not exist any more is indicative of your overall naivete and ignorance of reality and endless obsession over what you call "morals" to the exclusion of reality itself. Realities like the reality we still have to pay that bill even if its spread out among us.

Native American culture and values are already gone and cannot be "preserved" by keeping poor immigrants out after hundreds of years of letting them in.  Its a strange reach argument coming from someone who doesn't even support native American reparations. 

It is moral high ground because I am not placing a few extra spending money over these peoples' fucking lives. People use children as tickets? I wonder why?  Could it be because of a policy making it easier for those with children to get here?  Its almost as if my idea of caring for all human life and not just "innocent children" would solve it.

If I am wandering through the desert and there is a wall across my path out of the desert, causing me to walk parallel through the desert for a longer period of time, my exposure and thus danger is increased.  The wall would make it easier for CBP to catch people on the Mexican side.  The more difficult it becomes to get here, the more money people will give to criminals to smuggle them in. The wall will be great business for tunnel building cartels and smuggling coyotes. This will exacerbate all of the border problems you have spoken of. 

Building a wall makes it more difficult for people to get here but if you think it solves any other problems at the border then you ARE simple. 

By his own logic The Wall will prevent the illegals from heading into the dangerous areas, so it must be erected for their own benefit. Then the deaths will stop. And that's a good thing.

Yeah, cool story Captain Postmodern. Very creative how you shoehorned in native Americans even though we both know that wasn't what I was referring too. Whatever allows you to jam in some more victim culture right?

The problem is not uncontrolled immigration, no of course not. The problem is these darned barriers to criminal entry preventing them from illegally leaching off of our welfare systems. That is the true crime! Anyone who disagrees is a nazi that wants to dehydrate children to death.

but even with that point, the barriers do not stop them from getting in.  We have them now and we will have them with a border wall.  The money spent on barriers, security, walls and enforcement only goes towards more danger and deaths so why bother when we have the immigration anyway.  Seems like a waste unless you don't mind the death.  What better way to try and discourage people from coming than a real threat of death on the way?

and i know you are thinking that more security=less migrants even if it doesn't stop all of them but that also corresponds to more spending.  So was the goal of keeping them out truly a financial one?  Perhaps the goal was simply to slow the dilution of our whiteness after all.

less security spending
more migrants
more welfare spending

or

more security spending
less migrants
less welfare spending
more deaths

Seems like an easy choice unless you are completely immoral and don't see the deaths as a factor.  Not to mention welfare spending is an investment with vast asset returns while security spending is a dead end liability.

It's ridiculously easy to use sensors to locate and image tunnels. Ground penetrating radar and acoustic methods come to mind.

Cartels will not get around the wall with tunnels.

No you don't know what I am thinking. You don't even know what you are thinking most of the time, you just open your mouth and tilt your head and let the bullshit drip out of your mouth because you think it sells your ideology.


"welfare spending is an investment with vast asset returns"

HAHAHA I would LOOOOVE to see you try to find the math on that one.


"only goes toward more danger and death"

What the fuck are you even talking about? Any danger faced is SELF IMPOSED. Once it is known the wall is there LESS PEOPLE WILL ATTEMPT THE JOURNEY. If anything the wall being there will fucking SAVE LIVES by your ass backward logic. Its like me breaking into your house and tripping over a crate you left by the door and crying and saying you should pay my hospital bill. I should have never been there to begin with therefore the injury is 100% self imposed.

Also fuck you for insinuating the only possible motivation I could have is being racist and wanting to harm people you self righteous Postmodernist piece of shit. YOU DON'T KNOW A GOD DAMNED THING ABOUT ME, who I am or my racial make up. Even if you did it would not be indicative of anything but your own bigotry.

In fact I argue that you yourself are the racist. Not only are you racist against white people, but you don't give a fuck about minorities either. To you, they are just poor inferior people you get satisfaction from LARPING as if you are helping them, giving you a sense of superiority while you use them as a shield from criticism of your own actions and ideologies. To you they are just convenient tools and pawns to accomplish your goals. They are used and disposed of once they are no longer needed.

This is a pattern of behavior that is endemic to the left and the Democrats have a long and storied history of racist policy that is WELL DOCUMENTED.  You simply run around accusing others of racism as a mask to shield yourself from this justified criticism. You are little more than a naive self righteous child who thinks they know the best way to run the world, and anyone who disagrees must just be an evil Nazi bigot. I reiterate, go fuck yourself.

It's a long standing argument of US Democrats that their spending on social programs is "investment." And they literally have a fifty year history of avoiding accountability on it. It's always "This time it will be different."

One reason they hate Trump so much is he called them on that lie during his campaign, and promised to actually do things to help the inner city ghettos.

Another thing I find interesting is the way their "solutions" always expand the non-productive social service classes of college educated idiots. Notice how this guy's "solution" involved hiring lots of social workers?

So I told you what you are thinking then in bold you tell me I don't know what you are thinking then immediately repeat what I told you you were thinking in the first place.  Instead of derailing, I'll move on and pretend you didn't just do that. 

Its not self imposed danger because they did not choose to be born into a dangerous place.  I guess you could see it that way if you view these events in a vacuum but the result is they are simply coming here to escape even greater dangers.  The desert with a wall will still be a lesser danger than what they are escaping.  The risk will still be worth the reward.  Unless you want to address the motivating factors, people will always flow away from danger towards safety.  I'd respect it if you wanted to devote a lot of attention and resources to reducing the motivating factors but you don't.   If people choose to stay home and die to that violence as opposed to violence caused by the US in the US, those aren't lives saved.  The only lives saved are the refugees who are granted asylum and go on to live awesome lives in the US. 

I know some things about you based on your posts on this board.  I know a lot about your motivations and the way you view the world and those in it.  I know your motivations aren't race based but they are for a lot of people who share you view.  You have made your motivations clear on this issue.  Your motivations are bottom line oriented and grounded in the fear that poor people coming here will make your life more difficult.  You are worried that you will have to pay for their services or that the services you rely on will crumble under the pressure of added people . You don't care about their race.  In fact, you've made it clear that you want people of all races to come here jsut as long as they are wealthy or talented so that they can contribute to your quality of life. 

Its not clear but I am confident that you are a colorblind individual.  You don't care more about poor white people than poor people of color.  You think its all of their own faults that make them poor.  A true capitalist cannot be actively racist because that is not good for the bottom line.

You don't even bother attempting reading comprehension do you? You are either duplicitous or exceptionally ignorant, and your sophist tactics largely make me suspect you are disingenuous and find lying a justifiable means to an end. You aren't even attempting to comprehend my words, you simply project what you already choose to believe upon whatever I say, regardless of its logical validity. I say less people will attempt the journey, you see "GOOD MORE DEAD MEXICANS, LESS TO CROSS!", I was saying a wall is a deterrent to even attempt, making the risk of the journey not a factor.

That point made you then shift the goal post to the dangers of existing in their home nations, as if the USA is the mommy and daddy of the world, and we are responsible for their well being. It has nothing to do with who's fault it is that they are poor, it is simply NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY as a nation. If you privately want to fund immigrants coming here legally with your own money, you go for it. You don't get to mandate the forced collection of funds at gunpoint to fund your narcissism.

If you really believed any of what you just said you would never have bought up any of that racism bullshit. This was nothing but a pathetic, desperate, and shameful attempt to try to smear me by insinuation and association. Just another demonstration how little regard you hold for minorities, you see calling racism as a means to an end of your own, not a means to deter bigotry.

If you knew a damned thing about economics you would know that uncontrolled migration combined with large welfare programs is a GUARANTEED recipe for financial collapse. It is not even a debate, it is a mathematical fact. This is not just my personal quality of life, it is EVERYONE'S here, including yours. Furthermore "quality of life" makes it sound like I will get one less fast food hamburger a month as a sacrifice. No, this is societal collapse, 3rd world dumpster fire quality of life drop. All so you and your narcissistic commie pals can stand around and jerk each other off over how humanitarian and morally superior you are.





I am beginning to think this guy is looking for the final solution.

I am trying to comprehend what you are saying and am smart enough to be open to the idea that I may just be ignorant.  There is not end to be had here. What could my bitcointalk forum agenda possibly be other than to learn?  

The USA has always claimed to be the mommy and the daddy of the world, I was brought up on that idea.  There is a huge statue in new york harbor supporting that idea.  I'm not saying that is wise or best idea in self interest but its something that has been hardwired in culturally.  People like me are the unintended consequence of that propaganda.  You always talk about funds being collected at gunpoint and that is such a lie.  No one is forcing you to pay taxes in the same way no one is forcing them to enter the US illegally at gunpoint.  You chose to earn money in our system to better your life and taxes are the cost of using that system.  The irony is that immigrants pay those same taxes.  In the lifetime, 2nd generation immigrants pay everything back that their parents received many times over.  

I bring up racism because the historical association of your point of view with racism is real regardless of your intentions.   Systemic racism in the US immigration system is real. Systemic racism has nothing to do with your intentions and is something that has to be actively undone.  It cannot be ignored and must be brought up whenever even possibly relevant.  Yes, we will always be suspicious that those who insist racism be ignored and left out of the conversation.    

Your simplistic view of economics views immigration in isolation.  You aren't accounting for the fact that immigrants work and pay taxes and their children grow up to make significant contribution to our economy.  More workers allows for a larger economy and a larger economy allows for more welfare spending.  It only works this way if we legitimize their presence though.  They become a massive burden only when people don't allow them to obtain legal status.  No legal status makes it difficult to work which makes it difficult to pay taxes and forces them into a cycle of dependent poverty.  This status quo may very well be what the democrats want but its not what I want.  US population could swell to 350 million and we wouldn't run out of space.  The economic growth would create more opportunities for everyone. 

Either you are ignorantly parroting Alinksyian views directed towards collapsing American society by overloading social services and government functions, or you are actively intent on it.

Which?

I have no idea what you are talking about.  I don't  know who alinsky is and looked him up but the description on wikipedia wasn't anything like what you are saying. 

Regardless,  you have it backwards.  Its Trumpism that would actually collapse society.   A country's government functions and social services actually become overloaded when there is high education and no immigration.  The population demographic shifts to an aging population and there aren't enough workers to support it.  This is what is happening in Japan and was happening in much of Europe.  Mass immigration is the only way to maintain age balance.

You might be smart enough, but you aren't honest enough to admit it if it ever does even happen. You are never "wrong" you are simply viewing things from a different perspective in your view, therefore there is never an incorrect answer right Captain Postmodern? That is not how reality works.

Your agenda is that you have a pathological need for narcissistic supply, and to have others reaffirm and enable your ideology of collectivized malignant narcissism. Either that or you are on the job, I am not sure which. Maybe both.

TAXES ARE COLLECTED AT GUNPOINT. If you don't pay taxes, men with guns come and either kill you or put you in a cage until you do. This is how the resources for the programs you propose are collected. It is as simple as that.




https://i.imgur.com/uSrdAi2.jpg

WAT?



Nope. In fact data shows illegal immigrants are a net drain on tax resources. Here you are again purposely trying to confuse illegal immigrants with legal immigrants in order to claim they have some benefit for our nation, and also try to subtly try to entrap me into making generalizations so you can later claim I am against all immigration, or insinuate I am racist.


So guilt by association? That is your argument? Great I am glad we agree the only reason you brought up racism was a pathetic attempt to slander me by guilt by association. The ONLY reason you need to inject racism into this is because you are supporting a LOSING argument and you have nothing to back your premise up with, so you must rely on racism as a crutch to try to elicit emotional response as a substitute for logic.

I see, you think we can have massive immigration and huge entitlement programs and a functional economy, but MY VIEWS of economics are simplistic.

You don't have sources for any of your claims, this is all just garbage Postmodernist mantras that become "true" through repetition through enough dimwits such as yourself in an attempt to appear valid via sheer numbers. You all say it, but none of you can ever back any of it up.

You have an idea what I am talking about because I have properly defined your behavior and told you what it was. At least, now you do.

The relation of immigration / aging population you mention works under certain controlled conditions. That is not what you propose, you proposed total chaos. And what you get from that is total chaos, duh.

Controlled immigration SUCH AS LEGAL IMMIGRATION CAN AND DOES take such economic theory into account.

No one is forcing you to owe taxes.  Almost half of americans owe no federal income tax.  If you want to use our public property to do business, then you have to pay a fee.  You could always move to a tax haven or burn your passport and go out into international waters.  See how much income you earn without taking advantage of public use.   You conduct business to try and better your life but you don't have to.  They cross borders to try and better their life but they don't have to. Its the same thing except they often literally have guns to their heads and you don't.

I confuse legal with illegal immigrants because I am advocating for making the illegal immigrants legal immigrants.  I don't think there should be illegal immigrants because it forces them into hiding. Immigrants are a benefit to our nation but people being forced into hiding is a benefit to no one.

No they are not hiding.

Again, taxes are collected by force. You can pretend it is a choice but it is not. You feel like you are entitled the the fruits of the labor of others, and some how that is returning the means of production back to the workers?

If you don't like it well you can just get out... that argument sounds familiar.

It is not the same thing. At all. Your skull is full of pudding. Your brain has no substance or form, and your ideology flows like water to fill any space it is poured into. You have no principles, you don't even have reliable definitions for words. Your Postmodernist mind mush has rotted your brain, and now you are attempting to infect others with your mental disease.

How convenient your confusion of legal and illegal immigration allows you to make spurious claims about the contributions that illegal immigrants do not actually make to our economy. I am sure that was just an honest mistake and not a disingenuous attempt at trying to lie to support your argument.

To any who may have found it unable to watch Trump's short talk, because Youtube search engine does not get you to it, but only to the Democratic response, here is a direct link. However long the link works, who knows. The POTUS speech begins at 20:00.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1Bw3YYj-bA

Expect much more of this sort of blatant censorship in pursuit of ideological and anti-American goals.

So you think you should just be able to use our public resources for free?  Our roads, security, money, and lands make it easier to do the work you speak of and those things come with a fee.  Tax on earnings is that fee.  If you don't want tax, then live a modest life and you won't owe taxes.    Its not "if you don't like it, leave" its just a rebuttal to you thinking someone is holding a gun to your head making you do it.    This isn't North Korea.  No one will shoot you on your way out.  You have plenty of options that don't require you to owe tax.    You choose to owe taxes because you want to better your life.

I agree with you that illegal immigrants are a problem and that is precisely why I want to legalize most of the types of immigration that is done illegally now.  Then they will actually be legal immigrants.  That is what we are debating this whole time so of course I am going to talk about the benefits of the legal immigration I am trying to expand.  

But who will build the roads?!

This is a stale argument that can be more than addressed with responsible fiscal policy not infested with gigantic entitlement programs. This country didn't even have income tax until WW2, and it was supposed to be a temporary measure. Tariffs and sales taxes would be MORE THAN ENOUGH if the money was managed properly and not just promptly put into a dumpster and set on fire as is the current modus operandi.

Of course once again, this is all just a red herring argument for you to endlessly take this discussion off into 1000 side topics so you can avoid the painful fact that your favored policies are naive, ignorant, destructive for everyone involved, and most importantly unsustainable. Actually if you owe taxes now the IRS can have your passport revoked, so your argument about leaving when you want is not exactly valid either.

Oh I see! So simple! All we have to do is call them some thing else and the problem is solved! THANK YOU CAPTAIN POSTMODERN! You saved the day again by redefining words!

Micropayments, using square codes, RFID, visual scanners, and crypto payments would conceivably enable every road to be operated and built by commercial companies.

This is an example of an activity that governments are no longer needed for. There are many others.

Here is a talk by Sargon of Akkad, who I believe have a very firm grasp on this situation. He is talking in reference to the UK as well as the US, but his arguments are equally as valid. It is almost like he is speaking to our Postmodernist friends here...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycEeDXusv7s

Give me one example where commercial companies are more efficient than public funded companies.

Cause when I look at USA healthcare and French healthcare, all I see is US healthcare costs 50% more without bein more efficient or fair...

How about all examples? As it is in the US we still have massive entitlement programs from the government for healthcare, regardless of how inefficient they are, and you ignore completely the governments role and pretend as if private industry is solely responsible. You don't get it. The pinnacle of corruption is having the private industry, then controlling the government to preserve your monopoly over it and make sure no competition arises. The government is nothing but a convenient tool for private industry anyway. Lets stop giving them the pretense of the benevolent government overlords to hide behind.

I like how every time you point out a capitalist that private companies aren't more efficient than public companies in such huge areas as healthcare they still say it's because of governments and regulations...

Anyway, private can't be more effective than public as to anything private and public can do, private has to add the profit costs. It's obvious and even a 5 year old could understand this but well...

It's supposed to be balanced by "competition" but you don't need a big brain to understand that competition disappears as soon as market has reached a monopoly point which always happens. You can't keep a tensed and competitive market forever it just isn't sustainable (like the whole capitalist system btw).

Oh really? Tell me. What does government produce? Whats that? Nothing? Oh right private industry does 100% of the production. Monopolies are illegal. If the government was doing its job it would be busting them and not supporting them. You are telling me about what is sustainable when you think the government produces when literally all it does is spend, regulate, and consume.

xD

Again you're the best at making quotes mate.
Cheers.

Yes, lets pretend again like it is obvious that you are right and I am wrong, then conveniently walk away without replying. I am sure it has nothing to do with a lack of an argument. No, you are just feeling casual I am sure.

Not casual at all.
This is self preservation. You're dangerous for the mental health of anyone with a brain so I don't argue with you. But that doesn't mean I can't pinpoint when you say really ridiculous things. :)

I could give you many such examples. The question is really ridiculous isn't it?

You've made a gigantic leap there from "roads" to "healthcare" and then to "all".

The US healthcare system is a mess BECAUSE of the lock that insurance companies and big providers have on the government. That's a Kapitalist-Socialist system illustrative of the evil that socialistic policy engenders, not the evil of capitalism.

If you want to ignore the institutional changes made possible by crypto coins and micropayments, go ahead.

I'm not.

I'm just finding funny how you point out the evil of socialism while capitalism leads to the same thing...

Capitalism -> Capital gets rewarded -> Wealth gets concentrated at least temporary -> Individuals have the power to influence government and social rules -> your "Kapitalist-Socialist system"

Socialism -> More power to government -> At a point some individuals get most of the power with having selfish interests -> your "Kapitalist-Socialist system"

It's just that you put the blame on some kind of "socialism" while capitalism does the same thing just by another road.

Saying private companies would do better is stupid because the end result is the same.

It's not the same at all, but neither does this have anything to do with my comment about road funding and operation.

"Some individuals get most of the power (blah blah blah)" yeah some people are more skilled and capable that others.

Try to stick to the subject instead of meaningless generalities. Consider creating a village from scratch. Enterprising individuals go and build roads, and collect fees via crypto micropayments automatically. Never been possible before. Now it is.

Those "enterprising individuals" are now your government, but they answer to no one.  Those fees collected via microtransactions are your taxes except they aren't doing this for free.  They are going to charge as much as people are willing to pay in order to turn a profit. Your anarchocapitalist dreamworld is really just dictatorship by capital. 

I have not envisioned a utopia. Just noted that various possibilities exist currently, which have not in the prior history of civilization. In the past, many such things were "done by government," paid for by taxes collected. Now everything is changed.

In the past, this in part led to political theories such as communism and capitalism, and various gradations and nuances of them. Now there is for many of society's needs a third option.

I agree.

We had "all done by state" or "all done by private corp". Most systems going in between in a complicate equilibrium, always a bit shitty.

Now we have the "all done by ourselves cause we can be our own government".

I don't see downsides to this. I'm ultra left, I think it's the best possible thing. It's like communism, but actually working  ;D

I am interested in the ways that crypto currency can change society and our lives. Not really sure about which ways will prove with time to be superior, but am certain big changes are coming.

It's impossible for these not to have an impact on the traditional dichotomy of communism/capitalism and as you note, their interplay in any particular societal construct.

450 apprehended yesterday trying to cross the border, 25% are not from Mexico or Central America.

No, I know you aren't. You try way too hard and pretty reliably fall on your face almost every time. Interesting, why would any ideas be dangerous to your mental health if you already weren't unstable and basing your belief systems on lies?  Sounds an awful lot like you need to make personal attacks because you have zero factual arguments to reply with.