That's how I try to approach issues, look at the issue itself rather than look at which party supports which position.

This is a really difficult problem. And we are a nation that has reaped tremendous reward from mass immigration. We have a set of laws and a founding philosophy that all men are created equal.

We are also an aging population. Not quite as bad as what China is facing these days from its forced reproduction policies, but we'd be close to ZPG without immigration.

In theory, we should welcome these children and treat them as our own.

However, I am also a conservative when it comes to the budget. I see tremendous problems down the road with continued deficit spending. And this is an expensive problem.

I think the solution lies in requiring service in return for government aid. We need to find some way to make all Americans (and all immigrants) feel as if they are part of America. Service does this. But how do you do this without invoking the slavery argument? How do you encourage participation without making people feel that they can never get ahead?

Plus, the worries about disease and security and violence are real.

This may seem like a simple issue about borders and refugees, but it's really one of the more complex issues of our time and it goes to the heart of what it means to participate in a democracy.

Disease isn't much of a worry. Central American countries have very high vaccination rates.

They may be more concerned of disease from us ;).

I read somewhere that Honduras has a higher vaccination rate for measles than Texas.

Thanks Jenny McCarthy.

http://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/2...n_Ali_Chil.pdf

I think we need to be realistic about neither panicking about nor ignoring concerns.

Yep.

TB is a real concern, but chicken pox for children isn't that big of a deal. I have no doubt that health standards aren't great, but they aren't coming full of life threatening diseases.

Yes.

Everything else is you (and Jon, for that matter), over-thinking my motivations here.

Solving the immediate problem should be a relatively simple matter of applying more resources where necessary. Solving the long-term systemic problem is considerably more complex, but I wouldn't call that a crisis-level issue.

Solving the immediate problem should be relatively straightforward, but it's not because the politicians are playing politics with it. Which leads me to believe that the politicians, taken as a whole, are more interested in gaining advantage from this situation than actually solving it. And the media & activists have jumped on the bandwagon.

So, it's a "crisis", but not a crisis, if that makes sense.

The history of diaspora suggests this issue is a bit more complex than your Jon Doctrine.

The only real way to protect your border is to have such a shitty country that nobody wants to enter.

And Jon is dedicated to make that happen! ;)

I think Jon would be right at home in a universe that is a hybrid of Daleks and the Necromongers. :D

The issue to me is manufactured. We have plenty of laws on the books to combat illegal immigration. However, they are not enforced.

The problem I have with the immigrants is who pays for it? Who raises them? Who makes sure they become productive members of society? If we let them in, does this mean we have to let the parents in as well? What do they bring to our society?

obama has us on that road...

You really think this is a one-sided political issue? That Democrats wouldn't love to pass a bill with amnesty provisions for people that conveniently vote heavily in their favor?

The disease stories are also just useless fodder in the debate to scare people. The real issue comes down to whether or not we want to spend immense amount of resources (money!) to care for people coming from 3rd world countries who offer nothing in return.

And that's a harsh way of putting it, but that's what this boils down to. Do you want a lot of your tax dollars being spent to support anyone from a 3rd world country who wants to setup shop here? Do you want a larger portion of your country turning into the type of communities these immigrants have created over the last few decades?

Fuck Little Italy.

Little Italy is great. We couldn't possibly support all of Italy though. (...and nobody is making an argument against legal immigration)

Are you talking about Jon or Flere?

I might quibble with "immense" and "nothing vs little" but its a key question to be answered.

The other question we all have to ask ourselves as a check -- if these kids were white, fleeing Europe because of a famine, war or other like causes. Would we reject them? Deep down, I think the answer is no, there would be more sympathy and they would be accepted.

My stance is immigration is definitely needed. We do want to be selective and encourage the highly educated, the rich etc. to come over. We don't want 3rd world orphaned kids coming over but there should be some compassion to resolve and mitigate the issue at the source.

Ahhhh, racism, grinds most discussions to a halt...redirects...and arguing over stupid shit like skin color ensues. Thanks, but no thanks. I'm really not interested in hearing your put words into our politicians mouths that suggest they would say, "I can't act on illegal immigration so long as I *suspect* illegal immigration from Europe would be accepted by myself."

No. Stop muddying the waters with the easy, simplistic, overused and overblown, race card. It's 2014. We all get that it exists, but unless there is something specific that leads you to believe our fairly diverse government is up to something, just stop. If we were so racist against "the brown people" the "brown people" wouldn't be trying to flood into our country. It's a non-issue to them because it's a non-issue. However, what is back on point is that this is about American citizens that have a right to our tax dollars (black, brown, white, etc.) and non-US citizens that do not (black, brown, white, etc.).


It's called LEGAL IMMIGRATION. It exists, it's regulated, and it works for us perfectly. Learn about it, embrace it, fight for it, and if necessary, reform it, but please stop supporting the circumvention of it.

Are they entering legally? Or are they behaving like cockroaches?

Our diverse government is not up to something as a collective whole. But there are segments with differing thoughts on this that we can and should question (democrat and republican).

Let's use Rick Perry as an example. Would he be reacting this way if it was white kids coming across the border?

No, illegally.

I don't view the kids behaving as cockroaches.

Then fuck 'em. I'd happily man the same .50 caliber solution if various Scandanavians were invading via the Canadian border.


True. Cockroaches are less of a drain on society & the economy.

You realize ASYLUM for refugees exists as well, right? Where I live in Georgia there is a decent amount of refugees from Central Africa (half the town of Clarkston is made up of refugees, and that isn't hyperbole), people who were fleeing violence and torture in their homelands and the United States offered them asylum. It is not that much different than these children fleeing violence in Central America.

Except, you know, the whole invading across the border en masse thing.

Who cares. Do you want to solve this issue or not? That's all I care about. I do. I care about it now, I cared about it under President Bush, under President Clinton, and Under President Bush Sr.

But you are right to some degree, the whole lot of them ask the same stupid questions like, "How would {Rick Perry} react if it were white people coming in from Siberia?" And my response is the same to all of them, "It doesn't matter because that's a stupid fucking question. Now which one of you pussies is going to do something about it? ".

Drug cartels engaging in warfare against each other within countries has the same effect on people living there. They flee the warfare.

And, of course, we do have refugees who were persecuted for speaking out against their governments, and not due to any invasions by anyone.

Not totally brushed up on Asylum in America. However, there are basic similarities to LEGAL IMMIGRATION that ASYLUM refugees have in common. Such as, their legal status to be in America. Back to you, you realize ASYLUM for refugees and ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION are legally different, right?

Agreed, there's only such much that can be discussed if someone is just asking questions. Refresh my memory? What would you do about it?

But that's not really the topic here, is it? All I'm seeing is another excuse to try to justify the illegal assault on the U.S. by a wave of invaders.

I don't really give a flying fuck whether they're 3 or 33 or 63, there's zero excuse for allowing it, zero excuse for sticking the taxpayers with the dead weight, and zero excuse for not having the courage to defends our fucking borders.

And those who excuse this bullshit are just as big a threat to our sovereignty, our existence, and a way of life worth having as the criminals they support.

Just ones from Prague.

Hell, I'm no expert, but the top level overview would be something like this: Employ people and purchase materials to guard the entire southern border. I would do so until the projections of illegal aliens drops to a trickle.

If the total # of ASYLUM entrants is around 100,000 per year (guessing) and the total number of LEGAL IMMIGRANTS is around 1,000,000 (guessing) per year, then until we get to around 50,000 or less ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS per year, we keep spending until the job is done.

Fair?

I think it's fair to ask for your solution now.

Posted back in 7/25.

Oh yeah, I saw that and liked that response (didn't remember it was you though). You may have seen this one from me earlier as well.

They're already employed, and trained. We can start with the 500 or so majors that are about to be RIF'ed.

Materials? Unless there's a shortage of 5.56x45 or 7.62x51, we've got most of what we need already.

Thanks. This topic needs a laugh or two every now and then. Maybe even a complete transformation.

Are you actually suggesting killing everyone who crosses the border illegally?

I don't want a shooting gallery, although I have thought that very clear boundaries with a tougher level of difficulty to cross would make the attempt more obviously criminal and impossible for kids without adult supervision.

It's Jon - are you actually surprised. He'd probably seriously suggest killing somewhere north of 75% of the legal citizens of this country if given the opportunity to.

Only those who get through the minefields & aren't taking out by the drones patrolling overhead.

Those already in the country illegally should get 30 days notice to be gone before hunting licenses are issued. Every legal resident ought to be paid a bounty for every one of the bastards they bag, tag & bring in.

You're adorable

Said Jesus.

My point is that today's immigrant communities are assimilating at roughly the same rate as past immigrant communities. The first generation is largely unassimilated, the second is half/half and by the third generation they are basically completely assimilated. For the bulk of immigrants that's how it has always worked.

You sir, are a fucking asshole.

The scary part is, he's already reproduced.

Is it because of their skin color though? Or the culture? I think if there was a famine or war and many Koreans came over to this country, there wouldn't be a ton of backlash.

I'd argue that the culture plays a much larger role in whether we are accepting of immigrants or not. Unfortunately, hispanics in this country commit crimes at a higher rate, have lower levels of education, and reproduce at a higher frequency.

I think there is a big difference in not wanting a race to enter the country as opposed to not wanting a culture.

{shrug}

Better an asshole with a country than one that surrenders without putting up a fight.

You honestly haven't the foggiest how readily I'd depopulate the planet to a fraction of its current occupancy, that I'd bat nary an eyelash to defend my home against invasion (as well as an occupying force) should be absolutely no surprise whatsoever.

It that bothers you somehow, well, I'll make a note to add that info its proper slot on the grand list of stuff in my life. Fair warning though, might be a while before I get around to addressing it. Priorities, you understand.

The world must be such a scary scary place to you in order to engender this level of fear, defensiveness, hostility, and anger.

I'm sorry - I actually pity you (although I'm sure you don't care and will view that as a sign of my weakness, etc.). I wish it wasn't that way for you.

Eh, is what it is.

I probably suffer more from the sheer ... let's go with "sadness" of seeing a once great nation sink into a sad cesspool than I suffer from the other stuff. Just trying to hold on to what little good is left for whatever time I'm stuck with being here. Not necessarily an optimist about the outcome so it's not as though I have much in the way of hopes to be dashed or anything. And I first quoted Job 14:1* a looooooong time ago.


*screw it, I'll save the unfamiliar the Google
Man that is born of a woman is of few days, and full of trouble.

You vastly overstate your own significance in this world.

If we ever got a world up to Jon's standards he would have to be put down like a rabid dog. I doubt he could survive without his hatred.

So far the solutions I see:
Shotgun to the face. Take the kids to the nearest border at gunpoint and make them someone else's problem. Stupid hippie Bush and his lack of immigration reform has put legal barriers in place to slow this down, but it could be expedited.

Foreign protection. Set up camps outside the US with expensive funding and make it a humanitarian effort. Either force treaties with home countries of the kids to provide land and some funding, or start shotgun to the face on anyone unwilling to go to camp and ship them home at regular intervals.

General amnesty. Everyone is a citizen, will guarantee a flood of more coming. If we had a robust economy, strong social support, and incentives for a good work ethic this would be a boon, but in our failure oriented society and bungling leadership this will accelerate many other problems.

New Liberdonia. Create an island purely for illegal immigrants with is own legal system and an economy purely based around humanitarian efforts and self support. Massively expensive but arguably provides a path to a better life for the kids with mandatory education and workforce participation to maintain the island. The penalty is immediate exile to wherever we decide to dump you. Could also be used as a graduated path to amnesty, you graduate high school and complete a few years of service you get citizenship and a ticket off the island.

The last is more the plot of a science fiction book, but I wanted something a little sillier but not as silly as Jon's Great American Massacre Adventure.

No - you like to paint it as some sadness or whatever you want to think of it as to try to make it more noble, but I'm pretty certain that the reality is what I said in my post originally, and your "noble" vision is just what your mind tells you to cope with it so you can get through everyday.

I'm not a psychiatrist, but I have very little doubt that if you went and saw one that's the conclusion they'd come to.

Not going to presume to play armchair psychiatrist since we have one here on the board and I don't want to draw him into this, but I'm thinking there's something medically not-right with you.

I prefer Ecc 9:9:

Enjoy life with your wife, whom you love, all the days of this meaningless life that God has given you under the sun--all your meaningless days. For this is your lot in life and in your toilsome labor under the sun.

Like I said, there isn't much left here to salvage. We've reached the point where someone can actually suggest that there's something wrong with wanting to defend your nation from invaders who serve as expensive human locusts moreso than anything else ... sigh.

Damn man, the French would put up more resistance than we're managing anymore.

But like I said earlier, it's not exactly new. Most of my lifetime has been spent watching "useful idiots' do their damndest to destroy the country, I hardly know anything else existed aside from the history books.

Our newest World Heritage Site (there are 22 in the United States) is Poverty Point, Louisiana. Got the designation a couple of months ago. Essentially a series of grass mounds. Excavations indicate signs of some sort of society, though the people were still in the hunter-gatherer stage at the time.

The oldest of these areas dates back about 3,600 years ago. Yet, I'd be willing to bet there were plenty of people back then who looked at the group building these constructions and said, "damn foreigners, messing up our forests for who knows what."

The Mayflower was about 400 years ago - or a little more like 11% of the history of settlements of some sort in our country.

I read enough to know that if I were around a century ago, I'd probably read negative stuff about the Italians or the Irish. Before that, the Jews. And let's not get started on the poor people forced here to work on the land before that.

One thing's a constant in any country, anywhere. People hate newcomers, meaning anyone who immigrated anytime after they did.

Our planet's up to seven billion people. That means if everyone in the world wanted to watch a Michigan home football game, it would take about 1,000 years to get them all in once (which, until Rich Rodriguez, was about the length of the wait list for season tickets).

We happen to live in a country that can handle a lot more population, though there are questions about the water supply, just like everywhere.

But we are a nation of laws. Civilization requires a good set of laws. If people won't follow them, it harms our quality of life and limits how many people our country can handle.

Like anything, there's a balance of what should and should not be enforced. This is a real crisis for people who live near the border. Their children are growing up in a difficult area in a difficult time. This situation is not being handled well - we're turning an opportunity into something that does seem to be causing real harm.

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

And to talk about the other key issue facing America, I'm going to have to veer a bit here. A lot of my friends are posting a lot how Israel is being "evil" and crushing the Palestinians, yadda yadda yadda.

Bullpuckey.

Hamas-led fighters have launched somewhere in the neighborhood of 3,000 rockets (it was 2600 four days ago) into Israel. Even with the vaunted Iron Dome technology, it's either massive financial loss (some of which the US absorbs) from continually firing counter missiles.. to property loss and the loss of lives from the ones that get through.

The ceasefire that was so ballyhooed? Broke down 30 minutes into scheduled 72 hours because of Hamas, not because of Israel

The major spur of the ground forces in Gaza isn't house to house fighting, it's to destroy saboteur tunnels built in Gaza and extending into Israel proper.

At some point, Hamas and crew have to stop if there's ever going to be peace. But the reason Hamas is in power in Gaza is because of the hatred of Israel. Honestly? I don't think that they would survive in power if they could enforce a cease fire.

Do I think Israel is blameless? No. I think they believe (and possibly rightly so) that no peace is possible right now, so their actions with settlements etcetera is designed to inflame the situations, figuring at some point, after they've been kicked enough times, that someone on the Palestinian will realize that armed struggle against Israel has not, and CANNOT work out well, then things will move forward.

Damned if I feel even the least bit beholden to a century-old poetess who likely never came close to envisioning the sort of assault on a nation that we've endured in recent decades.

There are millions in Africa, millions in Central and South America, millions in Asia who would love to come to this country. Millions who would love to move from 3rd world countries to a place like the United States.

If you speak about the issue in absolutes, you have to accept that everyone has a right from all across the world to come here and be supported.

I'm sure that they felt the same way when they posted signs in the early 20th century saying "No Dagos and WOPs".

There are always going to be reactionary dinosaurs who think that allowing "X group" of people into america is a crisis and is going to change america forever for the worse. Hasn't happened yet."

The thing about dinosaurs? Dinosaurs go extinct. (Humans may too, if we can't figure a way to avoid blowing up the earth :P)

Agreed. And at that point, I'm choosing sides with one extreme or another and I get my hunting license and go hunting with Jon.

SirFozzie, please feel free to review our current legal immigration procedures and laws and tell us what's wrong with those and what needs to be reformed.

I hate what the GOP is doing right now with the lawsuit. Impeach him, or leave him be. Suing a sitting president is absurd and unintentionally ironic(abusing power to punish another branch for abuse of power ... )

Having said that, there's nothing inherently hypocritical here because this is exactly the kind of situation the president has executive authority for.

On the immigration front, I think it's simply beyond understanding to call it an 'invasion' or label them 'cockroaches', terminology which lacks basic humanity. The problem has to be attacked on both sides of the border. Border security itself needs more effort and investment, but even far more important in my view is regulation and investigation of businesses. Any found hiring illegals without proper documentation should be subject to punitive measures severe enough to make ignoring the laws prohibitively foolish, not a minor footnote in the cost of doing business. Revoking of licenses to operate for repeat offenders would not be at all out of line.

None of this will happen of course, because we have shamefully allowed our economy to depend too much in certain areas on cheap, illegal labor.

On 'give me your tired, your poor' -- there are legal channels. I'm one who is against the very idea of patriotism/nationalism but a sovereign nation still has to control its borders. If it refuses to, or can't, nothing good will come of it.

For as much as I disagreed with you in the other thread - this is actually a sensible post - particularly when it comes to the economic argument and making it prohibitively expensive to employ illegal immigrants (which is the real key as you note) instead of just a slap-on-the-wrist cost of doing business).

Not sure what Obama will ultimately do with executive orders and I did not find any definite articles. Here's a couple articles on what he could do ...

What steps can Obama take on immigration without Congress? - CBS News

Obama's Executive Actions on Immigration Reform Likely Expand DACA | New Republic

There's where we disagree on a fundamental point: this nation has been in severe decline for decades, and the cultural erosion caused by obscenely excessive immigration is part of that.

These are common criminals whose very presence proves their unwillingness to be a law-abiding component of society. And claiming that's "okay" -- as part of a larger "everything is okay ... except maybe respect for law or anything in the nation's history worth retaining" attitude -- is unpardonable afaic.

It's to our own detriment -- and perhaps our well-deserved demise -- that it hasn't been treated as a capital offense of the highest order. Truly, a legion of useful idiots has done more to destroy the country than all our external enemies combined.

Sooooo...are you Native American, did your family come over on the mayflower, or what?

See Also: Ku Klux Klan.

FWIW while I obviously don't agree with Jon's extreme views on this issue, I would definitely like to see much tighter restrictions on foreign nationals in STEM graduate programs. As it stands right now, the Chinese in particular are going to STEM graduate programs in the US, learning everything they can, and taking the technology and knowledge they've learned back to China with them. I've had numerous Chinese nationals tell me the Chinese government laughs at how stupid the US is in this regard - they're often given assistantships and scholarships, so in essence they're paid to come here and acquire our knowledge and technology, then take it back home.

Note that I'm only talking about STEM fields here. Humanities and Social Sciences, no problem... come on over. Cultural exchange is quite valuable in that regard. But we need to do a much better job of protecting our scientific and technological knowledge, particularly against those countries who could well rival us in power.

I'd argue that this has to go hand-in-hand with encouraging STEM scholarship and jobs here in the US though.

I think that's already starting to happen. Hell, look at English departments... the emphasis has changed to composition and rhetoric to the point where literature is banned from being taught in freshman English classes, and I believe there's been a decline in the number of schools that require a literature course as a Gen Ed requirement. I know for certain at one school they nearly lost World Literature and had to go through one hell of a political fight to keep it a Gen Ed requirement. Another school used to teach Literature as the second half of their two semester composition program, and now that's been dropped entirely.

Sounds good, but the reality is that there will never be peace until Israel is destroyed.

Won by conquest.

I'd prefer not following their example.

You are mostly wrong, but only because I may chair admissions for a very highly ranked STEM graduate program.

I believe a key reason why so many are going back is because US immigration laws are tough -- have to find a job with a company willing to sponsor you and then you are locked down for 5+ years while the process goes through (or it used to be). Sure some will still go back but think majority will stay.

I do think this is a problem and we should counter it somehow.

Are you saying there is a trend where literature classes are replaced by STEM classes? or is it that literature is now optional vs required?

I know that I'm going to get hell for this from some members of this board but honestly I can't think of how literature has helped me in my adult life. I'm from the STEM background so naturally biased.

I'm saying it's a trend where literature is being phased out of the college curriculum in favor of non-fiction reading about contemporary real world issues, and an emphasis on composition and rhetoric, or, to put it more bluntly, technical writing.

That's what happens when the focus switches to STEM - just get to a level of technical competency and communication in writing and argumentation, and forget the literature because it doesn't matter. I think that's probably the biggest reason why rhet/comp is winning the war in English departments over the literature old guard - everything is all about the utilitarian and the practical these days, particularly with a still very weak job market. So going along with the trend is in essence a matter of survival and adaptation.

Of course, people should have seen this coming (including me). Poetry was reduced to the margins decades ago, and it's precisely where literature is headed if there isn't a strong enough effort to preserve it.

I think a lot of people don't realize what they learn from literature because they approach things in a very literal sense (if you'll pardon the slight pun), and from the strictly literal "What did I learn from this?", it's not immediately apparent. But what it subconsciously teaches you is empathy, a broad cultural and global viewpoint, emotion, imagination, and the exploration of what it means to be human. It opens your mind to possibilities and makes you consider things in ways that you hadn't before.

And from a writing standpoint, reading only non-fiction can teach you be to a competent writer. It will never teach you to be a great one. You can't learn the tenor, cadence, and power of language very well from non-fiction. For that, you need literature.

I also remember reading somewhere that the experience of reading literature activates different parts of the brain than reading non-fiction or watching a TV show or film, but I can't remember where that article is.

Well this doesn't sound good. Haven't heard much from Obama lately on this.

Iraq's biggest dam seized by Islamic State fighters

Im just trying to figure out when it stopped being ok to come over. Was it when the white people came over with diseases and weapons to kill everyone? Was it when they came over and organized crime started to run rampant? Was it when they fled Europe because the Jews started to not be welcome there? Or was it when it became brown people coming over?

Dola- Dont get me wrong, each of those times also brought a heck of a lot of good immigrants over too including my family.

I think I'm getting you wrong. Are you unhappy with our current immigration policy? Are you blaming America for possibly one day enforcing our immigration rules and borders?

And I can't think of many ways STEM classed have helped me in my adult life, aside from basic math, but that was over in high school, so it goes both ways ;).

Heh, well played.

I think you're trying too hard. It became an issue the day Jon was born and #1 became all that mattered.

I just want to know when this golden age was, because as far as I can tell from Jon it's been in decline for decades. I guess Apomatox Courthouse was a long time ago.

Jon is the disillusioned nationalist in Germany in the 1930s. Jon is the "Real American" sharpening his blade. Jon is the Serb commander cleansing his territory from the invaders. Jon is the consequence of ignorance.

Godwins law ftw!

I am sorry, but where has Jon said "no one else should ever be allowed into this country?"

Jon is railing on illegal immigration, have I missed the post where he has railed on any legal immigrants?

Um....



Our entire agriculture industry and restaurant business relies on cheap immigrant (often illegal) labor. Just to name two examples, off the bat.


You may not be an expert, given that probably around 40% of illegal immigrants don't use our southern border, I'd say it's not an effective solution. In fact, given how much money it would cost, and how little it would solve the "problem", it looks like you're proposing another government boondoggle. I thought you were against those?




Given the difference in overall population, it's likely that immigration levels in the decades before WWI were much higher as a percentage of overall population.

I'm going to assume you don't have a problem with the ethnicities of this "first immigration wave" who, after all, survived the Great Depression, likely fought in WWII, and formed part of the "Greatest Generation", I think it's same to assume that your issue is with the ethnicities of those in the later waves, correct?


There will be no peace in Israel, Gaza & the West Bank until those areas are no longer populated. This will either happen through forcible relocation of both sides, or as the result of a catastrophic nuclear or biologic event. That's the reality of the situation. I'm not advocating for this to happen, btw. I just think that's the reality.


Two demerits to Pilotman!

Well, here's what he said:


Jon does differentiate between legal and illegal immigration, but make no mistake that he has issues with both.

There's a report out today that the second country that spied on Kerry phone calls was Russia and that Israel and Russia share this intelligence. I'm skeptical now, but if that proves true it should be a huge deal. I'm fine with Israel spying, hell I'm sure we do it right back, but sharing intelligence with Putin is a hostile act that shouldn't go unnoticed.

I've never been a big Israel sympathizer and think we've gone out of our way on countless occasions in a way that we wouldn't for any other ally with them. Heck, I still don't understand a lot of why we do what we do with regards to them and why they are so damned special as an ally.

However, this almost smells like a classic smear campaign: we get little snippets like this and the narrative about the recent Gaza violence hasn't been a 180 from where it normally is but it's like, I dunno, does the metaphor break down if I say the coverage is about 120 degrees away from normal despite the acts not being that much different than in the past?

It makes me ask "who stands to gain from weaker Israel-US ties?" and I'm not talking about players in the Middle East but in the rest of the world or in business.

SI

I'm pretty sure if any of us lived the life of an Israeli or Palestinian, we'd probably hate the other side with a passion of a thousand suns and be sincerely bewildered about why people thought we were in the wrong at all.

Exactly. Which is why it isn't going to change any time soon.

One minor quibble with that statement from my own perspective, and that's the word cheap. I've said so much that as an employer running a dairy farm I fit into this category. Only one of my employees is not from south of the border and while all my foreign employees have provided the proper documentation to work here, I can bet that not a single one holds valid documentation.

With that out of the way, I'd say my employees are doing just as well in terms of compensation that our local factories. For me, it's not a matter of hiring these people cheap. But a lot of these people come from their own farms and ranches in their native country. Or at least a rural area. They've handled and been around animals their whole life. It was different even a generation ago when a good chunk of people at least had some connection to farming/animals.

With immigrants, you still get what you pay for. The total yearly compensation for my lowest employee with no experience will still be $30K+ which may not sound like a ton but when you consider that we provide free housing, utilities, satellite, internet, it doesn't necessarily come out that bad for them when you consider cost of living in our area. Put it this way, I wouldn't blink at all at a minimum wage increase, even though farmers tend to get exemptions to that.

Of course there are people that will pay their immigrants slave wages (restaurants are probably much more guilty of this than farms IMO). And there is the balance of people demanding cheap food and producing said food as cheap as possible.

Anyway, I totally got the point you are trying to make I just wanted to expand on it some :)

Maybe it's the Monday talking but what does that have to do with what I posted (other than that it involved Israel)? :confused:

SI

I didn't quote your post in my response, I was more responding to the general moral judgments being thrown out at both sides. It's OK for us to have a opinions on who's more wrong of whatever, I just had this thought that it was so easy for us to chime in when when our security isn't constantly threatened and we haven't lived their lives. Both sides are only in the position to have to make these decisions because of all the shit that's happened to them. There's this idea that "both sides are wrong", but if we were living those lives, we'd probably make the same decisions.

My chart is a tad dated (goes through 2006) but I believe you'll see roughly where I mentioned the excessive immigration occurring.



The doubling occurred between 1970 - 1990, effectively doubled again between 1990-2010. That's a 400 percent increased in 40 years. And does not include at least 9 million undocumented immigrants, over half of which were believed to be from Mexico specifically.

Total population rate of growth between 1970-1990 was between 20-25 percent. Rate of growth between 1990-2010 was right at 25 percent. Rate of growth between 1970-2010 was right around 50 percent.




Ethnicity (or simple nationality) is largely irrelevant, except that it plays a role in assimilation.

via http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_53.htm

Ethnicity/nation of origin also factors into ILLEGAL immigration numbers. 7 out of 10 are from just three countries. If Canadians were leading the pack then you can bet your last dollar I'd be aiming cannons at the northern border too ... but they aren't.

via Frequently Requested Statistics on Immigrants and Immigration in the United States | migrationpolicy.org

Like I said earlier, I don't think it's about ethnicity as much about culture. Many of those early immigration waves assimilated and also added positively to the country. Many had specialized skills that were valuable.

I think you'd find that to be the case with any group these days, not just Hispanic people. The world culture doesn't demand assimilation the way it did in the not-too-distant past.

There are good things and bad things about this trend. Good in that we are more accepting of diversity and take away fewer freedoms in supporting the status quo. Bad in that we're encouraging more insular experiences and segregation within the country.

There needs to be a balance. Without a balance of assimilation and freedom, we don't get the benefit of expanding our cultural horizons.

I guarantee you, though, if you look at any group that has immigrated in large quantities during our country's history, you would see the same worries about ruining our country. A lot has been written about the post-Civil-War mass immigration from Ireland. Some really nasty stuff went on. And, really, the primary objections to Irish immigration sound so much like your objections today. Those types of objections are what caused the enaction of immigration quotas back in the 1920s.

We disagree on the good/bad of that. On it's best days I consider diversity as an annoyance. I am, after all, an authoritarian (and given the chance I'd be an enlightened despot in a nanosecond).