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

[El Kabong]

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?

[Kirkland Laing]

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.

[El Kabong]

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

[Kirkland Laing]

....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?

[El Kabong]

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?

[Kirkland Laing]

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.

[El Kabong]

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.

[Kirkland Laing]

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?

[El Kabong]

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

[Kirkland Laing]

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?

[El Kabong]

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

[Scrap]

Really enjoyed reading this thread ccs to the main culprits

[El Kabong]

Really enjoyed reading this thread ccs to the main culprits

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

[Scrap]

[Kirkland Laing]

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?