LOL @ ur LOL
Raspberriel wrote:
I love how no one ever says a thing about the people hiring these illegals and actually defending them from deportation. This isn't even a new thing either, it's been happening since the 40s. Not to mention, if everyone saying "nuh-uh, we're only taking about the illegal Mexicans so we're not racist" was true to their intentions, why is "wetback" still being used against all Hispanics?
Also, if you ignore the Willis Tower, Millennium Park, the museum that has this painting and plenty of others, the other countless museums, a prestigious university, literally everything on the Magnificent Mile, etc. then sure, Chicago is a shithole. But if you only judge a major city by its bad neighborhoods, there aren't any "not shitty" cities left in America.
THEYRE TAKING ERR JERBSMahogany wrote:
Holy shit you have a serious victim complex if you think you're being invaded by anything
They're immigrants, not a foreign army. Christ.
As they say, ignorance (in the most innocent sense of the word) is bliss. Honestly, if I didn't use Twitter so much I'd probably be a lot less pessimistic about everything. I don't know why, but reading most news articles nowadays only makes me go "lmao we're so screwed, haha" (one of the few that's actually disgusted me recently was one about a Pakistani honor killing), but actually seeing ordinary people defend any and all of Trump's actions as if he was the second fucking coming of Jesus (and not in the "Here's an argument with data backing it up" kind, the "LOL GOOD RIDDANCE OBUMMER #TCOT #MAGA" kind) legitimately irks me. I quit Facebook years ago because of that. And then I thought it would be a good idea to join Twitter.Kisses wrote:
Because I don't I live in America nor am I mexican (or really associate with mexicans, be it friend or family), I can easily read Jordan's post without being phased in the slightest. Looking at both Mahogany's and Raspberriel's response, it kind of feels good to be me.
It sounds like you need a bit more than a dose of 'pls enjoy game'Raspberriel wrote:
As they say, ignorance (in the most innocent sense of the word) is bliss. Honestly, if I didn't use Twitter so much I'd probably be a lot less pessimistic about everything. I don't know why, but reading most news articles nowadays only makes me go "lmao we're so screwed, haha" (one of the few that's actually disgusted me recently was one about a Pakistani honor killing), but actually seeing ordinary people defend any and all of Trump's actions as if he was the second fucking coming of Jesus (and not in the "Here's an argument with data backing it up" kind, the "LOL GOOD RIDDANCE OBUMMER #TCOT #MAGA" kind) legitimately irks me. I quit Facebook years ago because of that. And then I thought it would be a good idea to join Twitter.Kisses wrote:
Because I don't I live in America nor am I mexican (or really associate with mexicans, be it friend or family), I can easily read Jordan's post without being phased in the slightest. Looking at both Mahogany's and Raspberriel's response, it kind of feels good to be me.
first off you haven't even been to Chicago yet you say you know everything abt itJordan wrote:
Raspberriel wrote:
I love how no one ever says a thing about the people hiring these illegals and actually defending them from deportation. This isn't even a new thing either, it's been happening since the 40s. Not to mention, if everyone saying "nuh-uh, we're only taking about the illegal Mexicans so we're not racist" was true to their intentions, why is "wetback" still being used against all Hispanics?
Also, if you ignore the Willis Tower, Millennium Park, the museum that has this painting and plenty of others, the other countless museums, a prestigious university, literally everything on the Magnificent Mile, etc. then sure, Chicago is a shithole. But if you only judge a major city by its bad neighborhoods, there aren't any "not shitty" cities left in America.
Even the safest parts of the place still have high levels of violent crime. By your logic you're judging that city only by its good (few) neighbourhoods. And whether a place is a shithole or not doesn't rely on how many museums and universities it has, it relies on how well one can live and stay there. If we counted that, Calcutta would stop being a shithole lol. And sure hiring illegal immigrants goes against the law. But most illegal immigrants are not angels who come to America to work and integrate within the culture, they are people who break the law and for sure don't want to contribute to the country that is hosting them. Illegal immigrants account for nearly 75 percent of federal drug sentences in the USA. You're defending the same people who contribute to ruin your country.
Sad that we live in a period of history where invaders not only are considered a non-issue, but are also defended.
where does "fingering someone's legs off" figure into this equationKisses wrote:
ahsoka08 wrote:
I don't understand straight people
Well, fuck, I haven't been to the windy city but I know for sure that I'll be trying the stuffed sandwiches.ahsoka08 wrote:
first off illegal mexican immigrants are actually benefiting our country economically rn, the vast majority of them are not criminalsJordan wrote:
Stating that a significant part of illegal mexican immigrants are harmful for your country and stating that Chicago is a huge shithole is not racism, it's a factAlso the only reason Chicago is shit rn is because of the police brutality
Chicago is great bc their pizza is heavenly
Edit: Your daddy trump is going to get our nation anywhere, he's only going to make things worse
I know how you feel, I too am afraid of people trying to talk to me or somethingHika wrote:
This fuckin weird ass guy walked into my job and looked so intently at my flat ass while I was helping customers. When he was directed upstairs, he stared at me a million times and peered over the wall before he went up. He then bought the shoes he wanted and sat down in my area, continuing to stare at my flat ass. It was just really creepy. I was almost afraid he'd wait for me to get off work to talk to me or something.
THEYRE TAKING ERR JERBSDon't tell me I don't put effort into my posts. I put the most effort into my posts out of everyone. And mostly, I just get derision in return. You're the one being disingenuous if you can't even see a recent example where I have gone out of my way to explain my viewpoint concerning government-forced vaccination.
Kudos to Jordan for actually putting in effort into his post (the main reason why I've never went after B1rd). I'll let up on my point re: Chicago, but do you really think the Mexicans are out to get us by sending in an army of drug runners? Sure, there are drug dealers in that crowd, but to paint even the migrant workers or people who overstay their visas into this crowd is just disingenuous.
but whenever someone disagrees with you you just ignore them because your safe space can't handle intrusionB1rd wrote:
Don't tell me I don't put effort into my posts. I put the most effort into my posts out of everyone.
You care more about illegal immigrants than your own countrymen and ridicule those people who can't find jobs and are having a hard time economically, and you do this whilst carrying the air of moral superiority and condescension.It's called caring about 'human rights', and the care is equal for both immigrants and countrymen. People who can't find jobs is simply a fact of how economics works. Economically, a country needs low-paid workers to do menial jobs that won't be taken by countrymen.
This is exactly why your side lost the election. And yes, we all know that stating generalities about any group doesn't mean it applies to 100% of them, but it's irrelevant. On the whole, illegal immigrants are very bad for America.America is a country built on immigrants. Irish people were the Mexicans of that time. Now look at the place, they fucking love Irish people.
Immigration is pretty much always a net gain economically, though, unless they were costing the country MASSIVELY by abusing welfare. Considering that America's welfare system is well known for being inadequate, I find it hard to believe that they're an overall cost to the country they're coming into.B1rd wrote:
THEYRE TAKING ERR JERBSDon't tell me I don't put effort into my posts. I put the most effort into my posts out of everyone. And mostly, I just get derision in return. You're the one being disingenuous if you can't even see a recent example where I have gone out of my way to explain my viewpoint concerning government-forced vaccination.
Kudos to Jordan for actually putting in effort into his post (the main reason why I've never went after B1rd). I'll let up on my point re: Chicago, but do you really think the Mexicans are out to get us by sending in an army of drug runners? Sure, there are drug dealers in that crowd, but to paint even the migrant workers or people who overstay their visas into this crowd is just disingenuous.
You care more about illegal immigrants than your own countrymen and ridicule those people who can't find jobs and are having a hard time economically, and you do this whilst carrying the air of moral superiority and condescension. This is exactly why your side lost the election. And yes, we all know that stating generalities about any group doesn't mean it applies to 100% of them, but it's irrelevant. On the whole, illegal immigrants are very bad for America.
I don't hate races, just gendersN0thingSpecial wrote:
What the actual fuck can't we just be equally racist to each other?
is okaywinber1 wrote:
nothing
I don't know what your reasoning is behind claiming that immigrants are a net gain economically. This is veritably untrue and can be seen simply by looking at Europe; immigrants have cost many countries millions of dollars in housing costs and various welfare schemes. Many can't even speak English and they are the furthest thing you could be from being economically adapted to be a benefit to their country. What's more, they commit much more crime and generate lots of social unrest. They have lots of babies and their children continue to be a burden economically and contribute to crime rates.DaddyCoolVipper wrote:
Immigration is pretty much always a net gain economically, though, unless they were costing the country MASSIVELY by abusing welfare. Considering that America's welfare system is well known for being inadequate, I find it hard to believe that they're an overall cost to the country they're coming into.
Could you detail why you don't like immigrants if you're a big proponent of an unrestricted, free market capitalist economy?
yeah, I'm like the number one cause of thatFoxtrot wrote:
ITT:
It's shitty af, tangerine nightmare is gonna be our presBlitzfrog wrote:
TLDR
New topic
How was your day
tbh asians are pretty much stealing jobs in places like tech companies and bio research, but at the same time they also probably work a lot harder for it as well in their own way.ahsoka08 wrote:
I hate when ppl are like "they're stealing our jobs" like bitch if want a job go to a McDonalds and pick up an application, that's what the immigrants are doing, they're not stealing jobs, your dusty ass is just to lazy to get up and get one
"A report released by the German Federal Office of Criminal Investigation in November 2015 found that over the period January–September 2015, the crime rate of refugees was the same as that of native Germans."B1rd wrote:
I don't know what your reasoning is behind claiming that immigrants are a net gain economically. This is veritably untrue and can be seen simply by looking at Europe; immigrants have cost many countries millions of dollars in housing costs and various welfare schemes. Many can't even speak English and they are the furthest thing you could be from being economically adapted to be a benefit to their country. What's more, they commit much more crime and generate lots of social unrest. They have lots of babies and their children continue to be a burden economically and contribute to crime rates.
"Incarceration rate for foreign born: 0.86%, i.e. about a quarter of that for the US born. (non-Hispanic whites 0.57%, non-Hispanic blacks 2.47%, Hispanics ranges from 0.2% to 2.2% based on country of origin, if we exclude Puerto Ricans, who are US citizens, Asians ranges from 0.1% to 0.9%)"B1rd wrote:
Now that's talking about 'refugees' from the Middle East. Illegal immigrants from Mexico aren't the same but they still share lots of characteristics. As Jordan mentioned, they are responsible for lots of crime and drugs.
Not necessarily, actually. Waiting lists for legal immigrants can be incredibly fucked up, so some people are willing to pay a lot of money to legally get across the border. That's not including the fact that a significant amount of people (40% being an acceptable estimate) immigrate by overstaying their visa after legally entering America, which doesn't really suggest much about how much money they have.B1rd wrote:
They also consume welfare at a lot higher rate than the natives, and I can't say for certain but this would indicate that they are not an economic benefit for a country. Obviously they can only work low-skilled jobs at best, otherwise they would be able to immigrate legally.
Holy fucking tinfoil hat, this is why you don't read too much Breitbart, that site kills braincellsB1rd wrote:
What's more concerning than this however, is their ability to shift demographics in their favour and influence a country's politics. You see, back in the Cold War when the faults of Communism were being exposed, left wing parties were understandably unpopular. Since they couldn't influence public opinion though facts, they actually resorted to importing voters from third-world countries. Statistically, people from third world and poor countries vote for left-wing, big-government policies and a much higher rate than white people. So it doesn't take much deductive ability to understand why the Democrats would want more immigration. They don't do so out of a desire to help other people, but to buy votes through a cycle or welfare dependence, which actually entrenches certain groups into inter-generational poverty.
I just feel like the main problem with your argument is that you say they're a net cost on the economy because of how much they use the welfare system, but you don't actually even know if they are or not. You're just using the "feels" argument pretty much, in that you ASSUME immigrants are a net cost just because they use more welfare than natives. It's easy to get emotionally attached to it, but try not to make that kind of argument if you don't actually have a clue about the statistics. There's a reason why I'm not saying anything myself about the subject- because I don't actually know the numbers myself. My assumption, based on supply-side economics, would be that all kinds of immigrants would be a boon to any economy since you're straight up increasing the supply (and therefore the economic power/potential) of labour for that particular economy.B1rd wrote:
Now, I am actually in favour of unrestricted immigration if we're talking about a proper libertarian society. There, there is no forced redistribution of resources to people, and they can't vote themselves money. So people are free to immigrate, but they will have to have valuable skills than can benefit the economy of their destination country. Otherwise there will be no point for them to immigrate if they can't make a living there. Also, there would be no state holding a gun to people's head forcing them to serve and hire people they don't want to. If say, a certain group immigrated to a country and caused a lot of trouble there, then likely they would be economically ostracised, by means of people not hiring them, or buying or selling to them.
So basically, immigration in itself is a good thing for economies, just not in our current society. The welfare states that we live in necessitate strong border control.