This is the future of the US........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Missy

Ever bothered to read it or does the very idea of politcal discourse make you ill?

---

The ideals of communism and socialism work on the idea that we live in a perfect world. They are good thoughts but dumb ideas because we don't live in a perfect world and we never will.

Capitalism works (especially in America) it's not always fair but it allows for verticle movement FOR EVERYONE the poor can become wealthy and the wealthy can become poor. It's an acheivement based system and I for one love the idea that you earn what you work for. How can you not love working towards a goal and acheiving and recieving due credit for your accomplishments??? If you were communist and you work hard you get the same thing the lazy motherfuckers get.....explain to me why anyone other than lazy people would want that!

Communism and Socialism allow for people to take advantage of the system...welfare has never and will never work for that reason.

Now that being said, I don't agree that every society should be capitalist or communist but I do love my capitalism and places like Cuba, China, North Korea, and Vietnam are communist but people aren't dying to try to break into those countries.

France has the right idea when it comes to borders, language, and culture. I totally disagree with the 30 hour work week but I respect other cultures but it's kind of hard to respect Iran and Iraq and other middle eastern nations when all we friggin hear everyday is "death to America" and "death to the Infidels"....it's been going on since before oil was ever used for anything...Crusades anyone??? Islam is a religion of peace only if you are muslim....if you're christian then you've got trouble.

The thing is the muslims of the west are turning our own laws against us, they are playing the role of victim and praying on our drive to be politically correct. Meanwhile in the Middle East they are anything but tolerant of the west and cut people's heads off and stone people to death and so on....they have a double standard, not the west!

The only anti-Americanism is coming from your posts

....also KL you bash Reagan however you conveniantly forget that in the past 100 years the American people only wanted more than 2 terms for 2 guys.

1. Franklin D. Roosevelt - innovator and very successful President, made Americans proud and drug them out of a deep hole called the Great Depression before leading the US to victory in World War II and he served 4 terms and died in office.....after which there was an amendment to the Constitution limiting serving to 2 terms.

and

2. Ronald Reagan (affected by the 22nd Amendment) - A legend who broke down the Berlin Wall and crippled communism, ended the Cold War, and who made Americans proud of their country and had huge approval ratings.....I mean he carried 44 out of the 50 states vs Carter taking 50.7 % of the vote and then he thumped Mondale!

Reagan's 525 electoral votes (out of 538) is the highest total ever received by a presidential candidate. In the national popular vote, Reagan received 58.8% to Mondale's 40.6%.


GALLUP POLL: Ronald Reagan's Approval Ratings

Date Event                               Approval (%) Disapproval (%)
March 30 1981 Shot by Hinckley               73            19

January 22 1983 High unemployment          42            54

April 26 1986 Libya bombing                     70             26

February 26 1987 Iran-Contra affair           44             51

January 20 1989 End of presidency –
n/a Career Average                                  57           39

July 30, 2001 (Retrospective)[154]              64           27

....he usually ranks in the top 5 but a Gallup Poll in 2001 rated him #1


But that's just us AMERICANS saying who the best is....we're really dying to know what you Brits think of us  ::**

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

....also KL you bash Reagan however you conveniantly forget that in the past 100 years the American people only wanted more than 2 terms for 2 guys.

1. Franklin D. Roosevelt - innovator and very successful President, made Americans proud and drug them out of a deep hole called the Great Depression before leading the US to victory in World War II and he served 4 terms and died in office.....after which there was an amendment to the Constitution limiting serving to 2 terms.

and

2. Ronald Reagan (affected by the 22nd Amendment) - A legend who broke down the Berlin Wall and crippled communism, ended the Cold War, and who made Americans proud of their country and had huge approval ratings.....I mean he carried 44 out of the 50 states vs Carter taking 50.7 % of the vote and then he thumped Mondale!

Reagan's 525 electoral votes (out of 538) is the highest total ever received by a presidential candidate. In the national popular vote, Reagan received 58.8% to Mondale's 40.6%.


GALLUP POLL: Ronald Reagan's Approval Ratings

Date Event Approval (%) Disapproval (%)
March 30 1981 Shot by Hinckley 73 19

January 22 1983 High unemployment 42 54

April 26 1986 Libya bombing 70 26

February 26 1987 Iran-Contra affair 44 51

January 20 1989 End of presidency –
n/a Career Average 57 39

July 30, 2001 (Retrospective)[154] 64 27

....he usually ranks in the top 5 but a Gallup Poll in 2001 rated him #1


But that's just us AMERICANS saying who the best is....we're really dying to know what you Brits think of us ::**

---

http://www.chapellerie-traclet.com/h...eret-black.jpg

You know you are welcome in the US anytime no matter your political views....just so long as you come in legally and don't try to lead some violent coup against our government.

I will respect English laws and culture if I ever go there, I had no issues in France or Belgium when I was there summer before last...very nice people, although everything is smaller over there, it's like fucking munchkin land....but that's ok I understand the buildings I stayed in were well over 100 years old

....and I don't know of anything that I have posted that's "anti-American".


Please explain this to me, I would love to read it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

You know you are welcome in the US anytime no matter your political views....just so long as you come in legally and don't try to lead some violent coup against our government.

I will respect English laws and culture if I ever go there, I had no issues in France or Belgium when I was there summer before last...very nice people, although everything is smaller over there, it's like fucking munchkin land....but that's ok I understand the buildings I stayed in were well over 100 years old

---

http://www.strangeattractor.co.uk/fu...s/bullfrog.jpg

I love how someone who is BRITISH thinks I am anti-American....pretty odd seeing how I vote, pay taxes, and grew up here.

You must have had quite a visit over here to become so opinionated about American politics

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Missy

Ever bothered to read it or does the very idea of politcal discourse make you ill?

---

The ideals of communism and socialism work on the idea that we live in a perfect world. They are good thoughts but dumb ideas because we don't live in a perfect world and we never will.

Capitalism works (especially in America) it's not always fair but it allows for verticle movement FOR EVERYONE the poor can become wealthy and the wealthy can become poor. It's an acheivement based system and I for one love the idea that you earn what you work for. How can you not love working towards a goal and acheiving and recieving due credit for your accomplishments??? If you were communist and you work hard you get the same thing the lazy motherfuckers get.....explain to me why anyone other than lazy people would want that!

Communism and Socialism allow for people to take advantage of the system...welfare has never and will never work for that reason.

Now that being said, I don't agree that every society should be capitalist or communist but I do love my capitalism and places like Cuba, China, North Korea, and Vietnam are communist but people aren't dying to try to break into those countries.

France has the right idea when it comes to borders, language, and culture. I totally disagree with the 30 hour work week but I respect other cultures but it's kind of hard to respect Iran and Iraq and other middle eastern nations when all we friggin hear everyday is "death to America" and "death to the Infidels"....it's been going on since before oil was ever used for anything...Crusades anyone??? Islam is a religion of peace only if you are muslim....if you're christian then you've got trouble.

The thing is the muslims of the west are turning our own laws against us, they are playing the role of victim and praying on our drive to be politically correct. Meanwhile in the Middle East they are anything but tolerant of the west and cut people's heads off and stone people to death and so on....they have a double standard, not the west!

The only anti-Americanism is coming from your posts

---

Lyle, you're a very interesting person. I appreciate your passion for these types of debates, but overall, I tend to disagree with you on these arguments. I do agree that communism and socialism aren't the most effective forms of government and that they have inherent flaws that can be manipulated for personal gain. However, I also put capitalism in the same category. While the system we have does allow for the poor to become rich, and vice versa, and reward people for hard work, there are a few things you've overlooked.

While there is the opportunity for less fortunate citizens to move up the social scale, the sad reality is that it rarely happens. Most American citizens work their asses off with very little significant gain. The truth is that Capitalism creates an environment where greed is the rule of the day. The select wealthy minority essentially feeds off of the much poorer workforce. In my opinion, this is the exact manipulation of the system inherent in both communism and socialism, except backwards. In those systems, the poor can feed off the system - in capitalism, the wealthy manipulate the system for profit. Which is worse? How can we compare the two? You might argue that the manipulation of the system by the wealthy has the effect of bolstering the economy, which is true to some extent. But does that have a significant impact on improving the quality of life for the average citizen? That's a much more difficult question to answer.

My problem with capitalism is that it venerates wealth as the ideal for which to strive. It equates money with goodness, which I wholeheartedly disagree with. My brother in law asks the same types of questions - am I willing to pay more taxes so that the poor can suck on the government tit? Basically, I say yes. While there is the possibility of vertical movement through the social strata, the system in place actually prohibits such movement. Spreading a little of the wealth back around to the poorer citizens is a means of making up for the screwing that the average citizen gets on a daily basis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

I love how someone who is BRITISH thinks I am anti-American....pretty odd seeing how I vote, pay taxes, and grew up here.

You must have had quite a visit over here to become so opinionated about American politics

---

http://cache.boston.com/images/bosto...flag_08_31.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

I love how someone who is BRITISH thinks I am anti-American....pretty odd seeing how I vote, pay taxes, and grew up here.

You must have had quite a visit over here to become so opinionated about American politics

---

http://cache.boston.com/images/bosto...flag_08_31.jpg

---

Want to explain that picture? Or are you just implying Lyle should just give up? Just curious if there is something more to it?

CC, bcollins...I disagree with your views but I understand what you are trying to say.

Capitalism usually rewards hard work and inginuity and like anything else you can put evil motives behind those and you'll get some bad stuff happening.

Let me drop some psychology on you...the goal or reward is not set by the government or the rich or whatever. In work people work and they recieve money for their work....for some people the money is the goal, for some money = power the power to control your retierment, the power to look after your family, for others money = freedom...freedom from debt, freedom to take vacations to where ever, freedom to buy a new car etc. Money is not the main goal of most people, it's a way to achieve a goal whether it's paying of the mortgage or buying a badass new car...hell some people earn money to HELP OTHER PEOPLE. So there are varying outcomes of Capitalism....some people will be CEO's and make billions and hoard it all and other people like Bill Gates or Warren Buffett will be Billionaires but give back to society and hell some people at the poverty line will donate money for good causes....so just because someone has money doesn't make them greedy or

Yes some people need a little help from the government but some people need a little encouragement and you've heard the saying "you can't please everyone" Socialism and Communism try to please everyone Capitalism has some winners and they have some losers but the idea that you have a say in your destiny means a lot to me...it's the AMERICAN DREAM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

CC, bcollins...I disagree with your views but I understand what you are trying to say.

Capitalism usually rewards hard work and inginuity and like anything else you can put evil motives behind those and you'll get some bad stuff happening.

Let me drop some psychology on you...the goal or reward is not set by the government or the rich or whatever. In work people work and they recieve money for their work....for some people the money is the goal, for some money = power the power to control your retierment, the power to look after your family, for others money = freedom...freedom from debt, freedom to take vacations to where ever, freedom to buy a new car etc. Money is not the main goal of most people, it's a way to achieve a goal whether it's paying of the mortgage or buying a badass new car...hell some people earn money to HELP OTHER PEOPLE. So there are varying outcomes of Capitalism....some people will be CEO's and make billions and hoard it all and other people like Bill Gates or Warren Buffett will be Billionaires but give back to society and hell some people at the poverty line will donate money for good causes....so just because someone has money doesn't make them greedy or

Yes some people need a little help from the government but some people need a little encouragement and you've heard the saying "you can't please everyone" Socialism and Communism try to please everyone Capitalism has some winners and they have some losers but the idea that you have a say in your destiny means a lot to me...it's the AMERICAN DREAM

---

CC back. Very mature discussion - I love it when we can talk about topics without resorting to insults. I agree with the greatness of a system that allows us the freedom to pursue whatever might make us happy. I agree 100% there. I just think that the uneven distribution of wealth that results from capitalism creates a lot of tension that could be avoided with a little more temperence in the system. I think the powers that be in our country have lost sight of what's important - it's pretty plain that accumulation of wealth is the order of the day, rather than putting what wealth we already have to good use. And I know there are examples of philanthropy both by private citizens and the government, but I feel we could do a lot more in the pursuit of happiness for our citizens as a whole. We're just out of balance a bit. I'd like to see our leaders focus on some of the domestic issues we have more so than worrying about how we can make a buck off of some other country.

Definitely not a simple problem - there are entirely too many variables to be considered.

I think what you listed is more of a problem on a person to person basis. Some people thrive in Capitalism and some people flounder.

I think charity is something to be done out of the goodness of one's heart and having the government redistribute wealth creates resentment and cheapens the actual gift to those who are struggling. Are you going to feel all warm and cuddly watching someone cash a welfare check or are you going to feel better having a community of people rally around people who are less fortunate?

Welfare creates a sense of entitlement IMO and I think there is more power in working and achieving goals than just having stuff handed out to you. This is why something like Habitat For Humanity is great (eventhough Jimmy Carter made it) you work you build and you see a result and the people you help also build with you and they have real ownership in the finished product, it's a great charity.


And it is great to have debates without resulting to name calling and petty bickering, I do enjoy it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LEGION

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

I love how someone who is BRITISH thinks I am anti-American....pretty odd seeing how I vote, pay taxes, and grew up here.

You must have had quite a visit over here to become so opinionated about American politics

---

http://cache.boston.com/images/bosto...flag_08_31.jpg

---

Want to explain that picture? Or are you just implying Lyle should just give up? Just curious if there is something more to it?

---

I'm waiting for him to reply to me instead of ranting, but it looks like Monsieur Lylé has surrendered.

I have answered your posts, you insist on calling me anti-American and I have asked why and you have posted pictures of a beret, a frog, and a white flag thus implying you have poor taste in hats, you like amphibians, and you surrender.

But seriously why do you call me anti-American? I have grown up here in America, I vote, I pay taxes, I care about my country and the citizens that live in this great nation with me. I can disagree and have nice discussions with some people and other people I cannot enjoy such pleasantries with people who berate me and my dedication to my country. I know the United States has an image that isn't good in today's world but our country is conflicted with many issues and it's not easy to be a citizen and watch these things happen. These issues are exacerbated by the partisanship in American politics (which is a reason I like Mike Huckabee for President instead of anyone else)....this nation will correct itself but our image will not change in several people's eyes....we're viewed with contempt in many places because of what we have and the idea that all Americans are pompus dolts who don't care about the world as a whole. Why would we bother to care about what everyone thinks about us when the world has a preconception of how Americans are.

Listen KL you can post all your numbers and whatever and I understand it, I am not pleased that America has a national debt nor that I will be a part of paying back that debt, I understand that and I am not happy about it but my views do not change, they haven't changed, but I have not made the bad decisions that would be the neo-cons who made those decisions and that's very different from what I represent.

And maybe I am ranting again but it's very important you understand that I do not like what George W. Bush has done, I do not appreciate the small force sent to take over and control an entire country, I do not appreciate the fact that the American people have been asked to sacrifice nothing while we're at war.

You can post anything you want to but it does not affect what I feel about my country and nothing you have posted has affected my political views and believe me I have thought about it.

I think we're all guilty of joking about political issues - I know I am - but these really are serious issues and problems that do need to be addressed and discussed. I know I can talk about it them all day and it ends up as so much hot air, but it is important to talk about these things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

I have answered your posts, you insist on calling me anti-American and I have asked why and you have posted pictures of a beret, a frog, and a white flag thus implying you have poor taste in hats, you like amphibians, and you surrender.

But seriously why do you call me anti-American? I have grown up here in America, I vote, I pay taxes, I care about my country and the citizens that live in this great nation with me. I can disagree and have nice discussions with some people and other people I cannot enjoy such pleasantries with people who berate me and my dedication to my country. I know the United States has an image that isn't good in today's world but our country is conflicted with many issues and it's not easy to be a citizen and watch these things happen. These issues are exacerbated by the partisanship in American politics (which is a reason I like Mike Huckabee for President instead of anyone else)....this nation will correct itself but our image will not change in several people's eyes....we're viewed with contempt in many places because of what we have and the idea that all Americans are pompus dolts who don't care about the world as a whole. Why would we bother to care about what everyone thinks about us when the world has a preconception of how Americans are.

Listen KL you can post all your numbers and whatever and I understand it, I am not pleased that America has a national debt nor that I will be a part of paying back that debt, I understand that and I am not happy about it but my views do not change, they haven't changed, but I have not made the bad decisions that would be the neo-cons who made those decisions and that's very different from what I represent.

And maybe I am ranting again but it's very important you understand that I do not like what George W. Bush has done, I do not appreciate the small force sent to take over and control an entire country, I do not appreciate the fact that the American people have been asked to sacrifice nothing while we're at war.

You can post anything you want to but it does not affect what I feel about my country and nothing you have posted has affected my political views and believe me I have thought about it.

---

But when we discuss what America is actually doing domestically/internationally you don't want to discuss specifics. When confronted with pesky facts you do everything but answer the question. You do answer, but it's just post after post of the same stuff.

Well how much say over what W has done do I have? How much control over spending do I have? I vote for people who don't want to spend so damn much and that's about all I can do....I don't understand what you want me to respond with other than I don't agree with everything the United States does or has done in the past. I don't know of anyone who does agree with everything the United States does or has done.

So how would you prefer that I answer? Would you like for me to dig up numeric facts to support my political beliefs?

My beliefs are just mine, I won't agree with everyone, and I suppose I am considered wrong by many people including yourself. However, I am sticking by my BELIEFS and sometimes there are not polls and pie charts to support them.


Does that help?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Well how much say over what W has done do I have? How much control over spending do I have? I vote for people who don't want to spend so damn much and that's about all I can do....I don't understand what you want me to respond with other than I don't agree with everything the United States does or has done in the past. I don't know of anyone who does agree with everything the United States does or has done.

So how would you prefer that I answer? Would you like for me to dig up numeric facts to support my political beliefs?

My beliefs are just mine, I won't agree with everyone, and I suppose I am considered wrong by many people including yourself. However, I am sticking by my BELIEFS and sometimes there are not polls and pie charts to support them.


Does that help?

---

That's great, but you should accept that your beliefs can be challenged using facts. The problem then becomes one where one of us is stating facts and the other one is stating his beliefs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Well how much say over what W has done do I have? How much control over spending do I have? I vote for people who don't want to spend so damn much and that's about all I can do....I don't understand what you want me to respond with other than I don't agree with everything the United States does or has done in the past. I don't know of anyone who does agree with everything the United States does or has done.

So how would you prefer that I answer? Would you like for me to dig up numeric facts to support my political beliefs?

My beliefs are just mine, I won't agree with everyone, and I suppose I am considered wrong by many people including yourself. However, I am sticking by my BELIEFS and sometimes there are not polls and pie charts to support them.
Does that help?

---

He can't argue with that,now can he ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by USA LOVES THE KLITSCHKOS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Well how much say over what W has done do I have? How much control over spending do I have? I vote for people who don't want to spend so damn much and that's about all I can do....I don't understand what you want me to respond with other than I don't agree with everything the United States does or has done in the past. I don't know of anyone who does agree with everything the United States does or has done.

So how would you prefer that I answer? Would you like for me to dig up numeric facts to support my political beliefs?

My beliefs are just mine, I won't agree with everyone, and I suppose I am considered wrong by many people including yourself. However, I am sticking by my BELIEFS and sometimes there are not polls and pie charts to support them.
Does that help?

---

He can't argue with that,now can he ?

---

Not without using those pesky facts.

So I am not allowed to have beliefs without having a bunch of stats behind them?


So if someone asks if I am Pro-Life or Pro-Choice I say something regarding how many abortions happened the previous year? OR how many jobs and how much money providing abortions gives the US.....we certainly lose taxes because life is being taken but as you can imagine it's not the crux of the debate.


Besides you really haven't asked questions as much as you have asked for my opinion on certain statistics you have dug up...I gave you my opinion on your stats because anytime I posted any facts you say it's from a baised source.

You can ask for facts all you want to but all you have done is ask for my opinion on your numbers, you never asked me to provide any of my own, however:

http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalfindings.html

If the estimated net fiscal drain of $2,736 a year that each illegal household imposes on the federal treasury is multiplied by the nearly three million illegal households, the total cost comes to $10.4 billion a year.


I wasn't able to post the tables but they are there....so just check those out...but I am sure that it won't matter as you'll find some issue with who provided those facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

So I am not allowed to have beliefs without having a bunch of stats behind them?


So if someone asks if I am Pro-Life or Pro-Choice I say something regarding how many abortions happened the previous year? OR how many jobs and how much money providing abortions gives the US.....we certainly lose taxes because life is being taken but as you can imagine it's not the crux of the debate.


Besides you really haven't asked questions as much as you have asked for my opinion on certain statistics you have dug up...I gave you my opinion on your stats because anytime I posted any facts you say it's from a baised source.

You can ask for facts all you want to but all you have done is ask for my opinion on your numbers, you never asked me to provide any of my own, however:

http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalfindings.html

If the estimated net fiscal drain of $2,736 a year that each illegal household imposes on the federal treasury is multiplied by the nearly three million illegal households, the total cost comes to $10.4 billion a year.


I wasn't able to post the tables but they are there....so just check those out...but I am sure that it won't matter as you'll find some issue with who provided those facts.

---

Even if they cost ten billion a year it's a drop in the bucket, an irrelevancy. It's $33 a year for every existing American versus increased costs of hundreds of dollars a year just on your food bill if we took ten million bodies out of the economy. Ten billion in a thirteen trillion economy is a rounding error. You're spending that every week in Iraq to keep a bunch of Iranian-backed terrorists in power. You'll spend twenty times that in a few years when you set up a legal mass-immigration program to process all those people.

Now who's ranting?

You have offered no solutions to these issues, other than "America runs on cheap labor".....yeah but historically it has been cheap AMERICAN labor and not imported poor people to work for petty wages....well not since the time of slavery.

Sure we're a nation of immigrants but people assimilated, Germans, Russians, Italians, Chinese, Japanese, etc....they didn't totally forget their cultures but they came to America to become Americans and they took pride in that.

I guess we're past all the formalities now and we need to just be overrun with idiots from other countries...people who don't get educated, people who live in poverty, people who have brought the worst gang violence into this country since the Mafia!

San Diego just put up a border fence and it's crime rate dropped around 50% due to less illegal immigrants crossing from Tiajuana to San Diego....but as long as YOU (who don't even live remotely close to the United States right now) don't see an issue with increased crime then I guess we're ok.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Now who's ranting?

You have offered no solutions to these issues, other than "America runs on cheap labor".....yeah but historically it has been cheap AMERICAN labor and not imported poor people to work for petty wages....well not since the time of slavery.

Sure we're a nation of immigrants but people assimilated, Germans, Russians, Italians, Chinese, Japanese, etc....they didn't totally forget their cultures but they came to America to become Americans and they took pride in that.

I guess we're past all the formalities now and we need to just be overrun with idiots from other countries...people who don't get educated, people who live in poverty, people who have brought the worst gang violence into this country since the Mafia!

San Diego just put up a border fence and it's crime rate dropped around 50% due to less illegal immigrants crossing from Tiajuana to San Diego....but as long as YOU (who don't even live remotely close to the United States right now) don't see an issue with increased crime then I guess we're ok.

---

Five sentences is not a rant. Five paragraphs of empty blather (at least) every time you reply, however, is.

Where to start with this one? America hasn't imported people to work for slave wages? How about all the actual slaves you imported? Are we both talking about the same America here? Hispanic people assimilate just as fast as your ancestors assimilated when they pitched up. And whenever that was, the racist assholes among the people there already used the same racist tropes on your ancestors. Italians, Irish, even Germans got exactly the same bs as Mexicans are now getting. It was bs now and it's bs then. You can't seriously be affected by $33 a year so you must be worried about your employment prospects. So be an American, stop whining and better yourself. You can be damn sure all these Undocumenteds are doing that. Who's going to be better off in 40 years, you or them?

If you READ my post I said "Not since the time of slavery"

The hispanic people just coming here and working doesn't make them good Americans, it doesn't even make them Americans. Being naturalized is assimilating, becoming an American citizen is a great thing and it creates great Americans...the people who work through those classes and pass the test are the best most dedicated citizens you could ask for....and that is what I want of the illegals....is that evil? is that so wrong of me?

Being a US citizen is a privilege and it's one that no one should take for granted.

I don't want to find some inhumane solution to this issue, I think the issue itself is inhumane....no one should work for $1/hour in America....this is a land of dreams and opportunity. I do believe the naturalization process needs to be reformed but I still believe that it is important that the people who are in this country be here legally.

Why is the legality of people in the United States such a huge issue with you? Why do you seemingly want more illegals in America? Wouldn't you rather have more people becoming naturalized and making this nation better instead of just providing an influx of impoverished people with no educations whatsoever?

If you support this great migration of illegals to the United States and don't care about them being naturalized citizens then it is YOU who are anti-American and not me.

I will take the poorest of the poor in my country so long as they become citizens through the proper ways, that is all, is it wrong to want the best for the people coming to my country?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

If you READ my post I said "Not since the time of slavery"

The hispanic people just coming here and working doesn't make them good Americans, it doesn't even make them Americans. Being naturalized is assimilating, becoming an American citizen is a great thing and it creates great Americans...the people who work through those classes and pass the test are the best most dedicated citizens you could ask for....and that is what I want of the illegals....is that evil? is that so wrong of me?

Being a US citizen is a privilege and it's one that no one should take for granted.

I don't want to find some inhumane solution to this issue, I think the issue itself is inhumane....no one should work for $1/hour in America....this is a land of dreams and opportunity. I do believe the naturalization process needs to be reformed but I still believe that it is important that the people who are in this country be here legally.

Why is the legality of people in the United States such a huge issue with you? Why do you seemingly want more illegals in America? Wouldn't you rather have more people becoming naturalized and making this nation better instead of just providing an influx of impoverished people with no educations whatsoever?

If you support this great migration of illegals to the United States and don't care about them being naturalized citizens then it is YOU who are anti-American and not me.

I will take the poorest of the poor in my country so long as they become citizens through the proper ways, that is all, is it wrong to want the best for the people coming to my country?

---

The reason that illegals are illegal is because it's much cheaper than setting up a legal immigration programme. That's the whole point. That's how America rolls dude.

Here's things in the real world :

Published: November 29, 2007

THE migrant farm workers who harvest tomatoes in South Florida have one of the nation’s most backbreaking jobs. For 10 to 12 hours a day, they pick tomatoes by hand, earning a piece-rate of about 45 cents for every 32-pound bucket. During a typical day each migrant picks, carries and unloads two tons of tomatoes. For their efforts, this holiday season many of them are about to get a 40 percent pay cut.

Florida’s tomato growers have long faced pressure to reduce operating costs; one way to do that is to keep migrant wages as low as possible. Although some of the pressure has come from increased competition with Mexican growers, most of it has been forcefully applied by the largest purchaser of Florida tomatoes: American fast food chains that want millions of pounds of cheap tomatoes as a garnish for their hamburgers, tacos and salads.

In 2005, Florida tomato pickers gained their first significant pay raise since the late 1970s when Taco Bell ended a consumer boycott by agreeing to pay an extra penny per pound for its tomatoes, with the extra cent going directly to the farm workers. Last April, McDonald’s agreed to a similar arrangement, increasing the wages of its tomato pickers to about 77 cents per bucket. But Burger King, whose headquarters are in Florida, has adamantly refused to pay the extra penny — and its refusal has encouraged tomato growers to cancel the deals already struck with Taco Bell and McDonald’s.

This month the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange, representing 90 percent of the state’s growers, announced that it will not allow any of its members to collect the extra penny for farm workers. Reggie Brown, the executive vice president of the group, described the surcharge for poor migrants as “pretty much near un-American.”

Migrant farm laborers have long been among America’s most impoverished workers. Perhaps 80 percent of the migrants in Florida are illegal immigrants and thus especially vulnerable to abuse. During the past decade, the United States Justice Department has prosecuted half a dozen cases of slavery among farm workers in Florida. Migrants have been driven into debt, forced to work for nothing and kept in chained trailers at night. The Coalition of Immokalee Workers — a farm worker alliance based in Immokalee, Fla. — has done a heroic job improving the lives of migrants in the state, investigating slavery cases and negotiating the penny-per-pound surcharge with fast food chains.

Now the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange has threatened a fine of $100,000 for any grower who accepts an extra penny per pound for migrant wages. The organization claims that such a surcharge would violate “federal and state laws related to antitrust, labor and racketeering.” It has not explained how that extra penny would break those laws; nor has it explained why other surcharges routinely imposed by the growers (for things like higher fuel costs) are perfectly legal.

The prominent role that Burger King has played in rescinding the pay raise offers a spectacle of yuletide greed worthy of Charles Dickens. Burger King has justified its behavior by claiming that it has no control over the labor practices of its suppliers. “Florida growers have a right to run their businesses how they see fit,” a Burger King spokesman told The St. Petersburg Times.

Yet the company has adopted a far more activist approach when the issue is the well-being of livestock. In March, Burger King announced strict new rules on how its meatpacking suppliers should treat chickens and hogs. As for human rights abuses, Burger King has suggested that if the poor farm workers of southern Florida need more money, they should apply for jobs at its restaurants.

Three private equity firms — Bain Capital, the Texas Pacific Group and Goldman Sachs Capital Partners — control most of Burger King’s stock. Last year, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs, Lloyd C. Blankfein, earned the largest annual bonus in Wall Street history, and this year he stands to receive an even larger one. Goldman Sachs has served its investors well lately, avoiding the subprime mortgage meltdown and, according to Business Week, doubling the value of its Burger King investment within three years.

Telling Burger King to pay an extra penny for tomatoes and provide a decent wage to migrant workers would hardly bankrupt the company. Indeed, it would cost Burger King only $250,000 a year. At Goldman Sachs, that sort of money shouldn’t be too hard to find. In 2006, the bonuses of the top 12 Goldman Sachs executives exceeded $200 million — more than twice as much money as all of the roughly 10,000 tomato pickers in southern Florida earned that year. Now Mr. Blankfein should find a way to share some of his company’s good fortune with the workers at the bottom of the food chain.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/29/op...losser.html?hp

Now that the GOP need the Hispanic vote to stay competitive you're going to get a legal mass immigration programme sooner rather than later. Maybe they won't get chained up then.

....That's from the NEW YORK TIMES.....and it's also an OPINION

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

....That's from the NEW YORK TIMES.....and it's also an OPINION

---

It's full of pesky facts, isn't it?

If you're disputing the authenticity of the article as your argument you clearly don't have much of an argument, do you?

Would you say the New York Times or Fox News was more biased?

Do you honestly think the American media is liberal?

Fox and the New York Times are both shit.

I will not say the American media is liberal but I will say that the 24/7 news has changed journalism into just stating opinions. No one asks the tough questions and no one answers the tough questions. Also where ever there is a real story it's glossed over for some fluff piece.

....heard much about Iraq lately? I haven't and it's amazing because the number of deaths and attacks are down right around this same time...curious isn't it?

There is less NEWS and more OPINION in the media now than ever before and I don't care for the partisanship it has created...right now people are getting rich off of splitting America into Red States and Blue States.

I try to take the facts from the stories....I liked the media in Europe it seemed less sensationalized but then again I watched less of it and cared less about it.


Hey if you're a fan of ILLEGAL immigration then you are in the minority buddy....it's WRONG for people to come here ILLEGALLY and work for less money than any US citizen would...it create an EXTREMELY poor class of Americans and that creates drag on the economy as well....profits aside what about education, health care, and other government programs....how will they be paid for and why would people want to pay for NON-US CITIZENS with US CITIZEN TAX MONEY?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Fox and the New York Times are both shit.

I will not say the American media is liberal but I will say that the 24/7 news has changed journalism into just stating opinions. No one asks the tough questions and no one answers the tough questions. Also where ever there is a real story it's glossed over for some fluff piece.

....heard much about Iraq lately? I haven't and it's amazing because the number of deaths and attacks are down right around this same time...curious isn't it?

There is less NEWS and more OPINION in the media now than ever before and I don't care for the partisanship it has created...right now people are getting rich off of splitting America into Red States and Blue States.

I try to take the facts from the stories....I liked the media in Europe it seemed less sensationalized but then again I watched less of it and cared less about it.


Hey if you're a fan of ILLEGAL immigration then you are in the minority buddy....it's WRONG for people to come here ILLEGALLY and work for less money than any US citizen would...it create an EXTREMELY poor class of Americans and that creates drag on the economy as well....profits aside what about education, health care, and other government programs....how will they be paid for and why would people want to pay for NON-US CITIZENS with US CITIZEN TAX MONEY?

---

Iraq is far, far worse than the media are portraying.

Fox News carry less reporting about Iraq than any other major outlet even though most of it is propaganda claiming we're doing well over there.

I'm no fan of illegal immigration at all. The current system is unfair on Undocumenteds. I look forward to the new legal mass immigration programme that's on its way.

Iraq is far better than it has been (don't want to be misunderstood, it's still a war zone) and slowly but surely things will get to where we want them.


I don't like Fox News....I watch MSNBC more than anything else and yeah they have some big FLAAAAAMING liberals on there but diversity can be a good thing and anytime an arguement is presented reasonably and rationally it's easier to agree with.

I am anti-illegal immigration not only because the people don't become naturalized citizens but because it's unfair for people to risk life and limb to get here to work for horrible wages.....when people say "Americans won't do those jobs" it's a half truth "AMERICANS WON'T DO THOSE JOBS FOR THOSE WAGES" and I think that it's wrong for businesses to provide for one type of citizen while creating a different citizen with it's horrible pay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

Iraq is far better than it has been (don't want to be misunderstood, it's still a war zone) and slowly but surely things will get to where we want them.


I don't like Fox News....I watch MSNBC more than anything else and yeah they have some big FLAAAAAMING liberals on there but diversity can be a good thing and anytime an arguement is presented reasonably and rationally it's easier to agree with.

I am anti-illegal immigration not only because the people don't become naturalized citizens but because it's unfair for people to risk life and limb to get here to work for horrible wages.....when people say "Americans won't do those jobs" it's a half truth "AMERICANS WON'T DO THOSE JOBS FOR THOSE WAGES" and I think that it's wrong for businesses to provide for one type of citizen while creating a different citizen with it's horrible pay.

---

How do you think "we want things to be" in Iraq compared to how they are now?

If you think the current immigration system is wrong, would you support a legal mass immigration programme?

I think honestly we could have a government with both Shi'ia and Sunni's together, however right now it looks like that is in peril.....that's what we WANT. I figure what we'll get is an Iraqi government that is a country with SOME ties to Iran but is not a puppet state like Syria. The Iraqis don't want Al-Queda there anymore than we do.


I think the immigration system is PART of the problem, I think greedy businesses and businesses that have sold the US out for "greener pastures" and "Free Trade" Agreements are mainly at fault. I honestly think the Fair tax would really help in solving these issues.

#1 Anyone who bought anything in the United States would pay the sales taxes thus increasing our tax base.

#2 By removing hidden taxes in business it would make America the #1 place to be for business

But everything else would depend on Free Trade Agreements and enforcement of SOME kind of immigration law....I am not sure building a fence is the best policy but something has to be done about it and it's not an easy problem to solve which is obviously why no one has done it.


In the end America still needs to accept people with open arms but people also need to accept America when they come here and I think a more simple and cheaper naturalization process is in order

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

I think honestly we could have a government with both Shi'ia and Sunni's together, however right now it looks like that is in peril.....that's what we WANT. I figure what we'll get is an Iraqi government that is a country with SOME ties to Iran but is not a puppet state like Syria. The Iraqis don't want Al-Queda there anymore than we do.


I think the immigration system is PART of the problem, I think greedy businesses and businesses that have sold the US out for "greener pastures" and "Free Trade" Agreements are mainly at fault. I honestly think the Fair tax would really help in solving these issues.

#1 Anyone who bought anything in the United States would pay the sales taxes thus increasing our tax base.

#2 By removing hidden taxes in business it would make America the #1 place to be for business

But everything else would depend on Free Trade Agreements and enforcement of SOME kind of immigration law....I am not sure building a fence is the best policy but something has to be done about it and it's not an easy problem to solve which is obviously why no one has done it.


In the end America still needs to accept people with open arms but people also need to accept America when they come here and I think a more simple and cheaper naturalization process is in order

---

There's no danger of Al Quaeda ever running Iraq, and there never was. What Iraq has now is a Shiite majority government who control everything (Shiites are 60% of the Iraqi population, so they now control 60% of the Iraqi parliament and all the government. ) The Shiites in control in Iraq thus can't be voted out. In 2003 we were calling the guys now running the government of Iraq "terrorists" and "enemy combatants" and telling them to stay in Iran or we'd capture and kill them. But since the Iranian Ayatollah forced Bush to hold elections they now run the country and we're fighting and dying to keep them in power. Now we're having to deal with them, but they're not dealing with the Sunnis and are splitting off the Iraqi oilfields (all in Shiite territory) into a Shiite confederation aligned with (Shiite) Iran. They're going to hold a referendum in the Shiite region in a year or two, and it's a certainty that they're going to vote to split away from Iraq. So effectively Bush has spent trillions of taxpayer dollars and thousands of American lives to hand the world's second-largest oil reserve over to Iranian control.

In what way is Syria a puppet state?


It doesn't surprise me you want a fair tax. The "fair tax" is the brainchild of the very same people who've been f*cking you up the arse on your taxes for the last twenty odd years. You realise that it's just a consumption tax, so the people who spend most of their wages (low/middle incomes) pay a higher proportion of their salaries in taxes than people who only spend a small proportion of their income and invest the rest? You'd be even worse off under a "fair tax" than you are now, and the top 1% of Americans even more wealthy. After a century of progressive taxation, we'd return under a fair tax to the robber barron days. "Fair Tax" is just a trick to let investors cycle money over and over without paying taxes on the multiplying gains and get the masses to pay even more than they do now.

Here's a tax suggestion that is as simple as a fair tax but progressive instead of regressive like the "fair tax" : make taxes a flat rate on net worth rather than consumption. The top 1% own 41% of the wealth, so they should pay 41% of the taxes. The top 10% own 71% of the wealth, so should pay 71% of the taxes. The bottom 40% own 0.2% of the wealth, and so should pay only 0.2% of the taxes.


Why don't the GOP candidates go for something really fair like that, hmmm? Can you say?

I understand your concern over the Fair Tax but it is NOT a regressive tax. You say the poor spend a larger percentage of their money and I find that not to be true.....if a wealthy person wants to add on to their house or buy a new car they will pay substantially more into the tax structure than a poor person.

The Fair Tax operates on the FACT that wealthy people spend more than poor people and therefore will pay more taxes....sure they save more but they have more money to move. If you buy a $15,000 car you would pay a good amount of taxes HOWEVER if you buy a $50,000 car you pay substantially more than the person buying the cheaper car. So basically the Fair Tax rewards people being cheap asses OR only buying what they NEED....yes consumption tax is a good way to look at it, with the whole GREEN/ pro-environment deal going on I would figure liberals would be 100% in favor of such a tax which taxes the people who buy the most not the people who percentage wise would pay more....at least that's how I look at it but you are entitled to your opinion, I just figure it's better to do something about taxes now rather than wait until we're fucked.

And you aren't paid all of your paycheck right now, when the fair tax is inacted you WILL be paid 100% of your paycheck.....if you want to save then save, if you want to purchase then purchase.....it's a PERSONAL ISSUE IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE TAX CODE IF THIS IS INACTED!!!!!

Syria is a puppet state in that whatever Iran says do they do.....when Iran says "let terrorists pass through your country to Iraq" they say "sure thing".....you cannot argue against the FACT that Syria is basically controlled by Iran.

As for the population of Iraq I can only tell you what I assume the US wants to do with them....I ASSUME that the US wishes that the majority rules BUT the minority is protected under the rights of their constitution....that's the way it is in America and that's a rational way to approach the situation (but the Muslims there are irrational which is the bigger issue)

I think what I agree with are rational solutions to difficult issues....if you have better ideas please share them with us because I would love for a better answer to arrise if there is one

Really enjoyed reading this thread ccs to the main culprits :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scrap

Really enjoyed reading this thread ccs to the main culprits :D

---

You deserve a CC if you read all the crap we've been posting

;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

I understand your concern over the Fair Tax but it is NOT a regressive tax. You say the poor spend a larger percentage of their money and I find that not to be true.....if a wealthy person wants to add on to their house or buy a new car they will pay substantially more into the tax structure than a poor person.

The Fair Tax operates on the FACT that wealthy people spend more than poor people and therefore will pay more taxes....sure they save more but they have more money to move. If you buy a $15,000 car you would pay a good amount of taxes HOWEVER if you buy a $50,000 car you pay substantially more than the person buying the cheaper car. So basically the Fair Tax rewards people being cheap asses OR only buying what they NEED....yes consumption tax is a good way to look at it, with the whole GREEN/ pro-environment deal going on I would figure liberals would be 100% in favor of such a tax which taxes the people who buy the most not the people who percentage wise would pay more....at least that's how I look at it but you are entitled to your opinion, I just figure it's better to do something about taxes now rather than wait until we're fucked.

And you aren't paid all of your paycheck right now, when the fair tax is inacted you WILL be paid 100% of your paycheck.....if you want to save then save, if you want to purchase then purchase.....it's a PERSONAL ISSUE IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE TAX CODE IF THIS IS INACTED!!!!!

Syria is a puppet state in that whatever Iran says do they do.....when Iran says "let terrorists pass through your country to Iraq" they say "sure thing".....you cannot argue against the FACT that Syria is basically controlled by Iran.

As for the population of Iraq I can only tell you what I assume the US wants to do with them....I ASSUME that the US wishes that the majority rules BUT the minority is protected under the rights of their constitution....that's the way it is in America and that's a rational way to approach the situation (but the Muslims there are irrational which is the bigger issue)

I think what I agree with are rational solutions to difficult issues....if you have better ideas please share them with us because I would love for a better answer to arrise if there is one

---

I was under the impression that you knew what regressive and progressive taxes are.

Yes, wealthy people will pay more in taxes but they'll pay a smaller proportion of their total income in taxes than low/middle income earners. Currently they pay let's say 35% of their income in taxes. Under a consumption tax, they'll pay 35% on purchases. But they only spend a small proportion of their yearly income on consumption! The rest is invested and not subject to tax under a fair tax. So if somebody makes $100 million a year and spends a million a year on living expenses, they pay $350 000 tax instead of $35 million, an effective tax rate of 0.35%.

Meanwhile people who live from paycheck to paycheck spend 100% of their income, so they're paying taxes on 100% of their income, an effective tax rate of 35%, or 100 times the rate of the wealthiest. The burden of taxation shifts from high earners to low/middle income earners. So they're paying a much higher proportion of their income in taxes than wealthy people. Economists call this a regressive tax. We haven't had regressive taxation since the robber barron era.

How can the GOP keep fooling you with taxes? How come no matter how much they raise your taxes you're still willing to back new schemes which would give them even more of your income? Even the Moonies needed to be brainwashed, you have no excuse.

In what way is Syria controlled by Iran? Why don't they hand over all the senior Saddam-era officials living there then? Iran would love to get their hands on those guys. How does Syria's attendance at Annapolis last week equate with being a puppet of Iran? Why would they let men and guns over the border to fight for Sunni Iraq against Iran's co-religionists?

In what way are Iraqi Muslims irrational?