|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
trueblue wrote: |
Leon wrote: |
trueblue wrote: |
Leon wrote: |
Curious, what is your opinion on visas for families, which must be a major source of legal immigration, and the way in which I have contributed to bringing non-white people to the states? |
Ah, there it is...pivoting and distraction. |
Ah, there it is... drivel and an unearned sense of superiority. |
No, I don't have an "unearned sense of superiority" (but nice attempt to polarize and infuse more distraction). I am not a modern liberal. |
Ah, partisan hackery and a non-sequitur. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
trueblue
Joined: 15 Jun 2014 Location: In between the lines
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Leon wrote: |
trueblue wrote: |
Leon wrote: |
trueblue wrote: |
Leon wrote: |
Curious, what is your opinion on visas for families, which must be a major source of legal immigration, and the way in which I have contributed to bringing non-white people to the states? |
Ah, there it is...pivoting and distraction. |
Ah, there it is... drivel and an unearned sense of superiority. |
No, I don't have an "unearned sense of superiority" (but nice attempt to polarize and infuse more distraction). I am not a modern liberal. |
Ah, partisan hackery and a non-sequitur. |
Awww...I guess that is why you still are posting?
Or perhaps, like PM, you are simply an intellectual cripple, saying something useful once in a while, receiving the sympathetic praise (charity) of those above you (SR).
Anyway, is anything else you would like to add, that takes the attention away from how much of an unnatural noise you are? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Swartz
Joined: 19 Dec 2014
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Leon wrote: |
Curious, what is your opinion on visas for families, which must be a major source of legal immigration, and the way in which I have contributed to bringing non-white people to the states? |
I am against all immigration and forced integration, Leon. People have a right to make their own choices, but they also have a right to protect their own genetic future from dilution and extinction. It’s only in the last ~50 years that people in the West have been brainwashed by a powerful megaphone media narrative that claims “progress” means forced integration with other groups and wiping out your genetic lineage. This is the historical deviation, it’s in need of a correction. What I’m saying is normal and common sense, and kept communities strong and safe for thousands of years. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
trueblue wrote: |
Or perhaps, like PM, you are simply an intellectual cripple |
Can I put this recommendation on my business card?
Leon wrote: |
Curious, what is your opinion on visas for families, which must be a major source of legal immigration, and the way in which I have contributed to bringing non-white people to the states? |
It is sound policy for those with legal work to bring their families over. Uniting families facilitates the cultural acclimation of immigrants. It is also a conservative policy; if the family is really important (and it actually is) then immigration policy should reflect that. Unfortunately, family visa delays are significant. The individual country limits (12.5% of the world) make waiting lists, particularly for Indian, Chinese, Phillipino, Vietnamese, and Mexican family entries last years, and decades for siblings. Comprehensive immigration reform should keep the family visa, but work to reduce the wait times. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
trueblue
Joined: 15 Jun 2014 Location: In between the lines
|
Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2015 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Plain Meaning wrote: |
trueblue wrote: |
Or perhaps, like PM, you are simply an intellectual cripple |
Can I put this recommendation on my business card?
Leon wrote: |
Curious, what is your opinion on visas for families, which must be a major source of legal immigration, and the way in which I have contributed to bringing non-white people to the states? |
It is sound policy for those with legal work to bring their families over. Uniting families facilitates the cultural acclimation of immigrants. It is also a conservative policy; if the family is really important (and it actually is) then immigration policy should reflect that. Unfortunately, family visa delays are significant. The individual country limits (12.5% of the world) make waiting lists, particularly for Indian, Chinese, Phillipino, Vietnamese, and Mexican family entries last years, and decades for siblings. Comprehensive immigration reform should keep the family visa, but work to reduce the wait times. |
Sure. If you feel putting that on your business card will improve your chances, I don't see why not. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sirius black
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
|
Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Swartz wrote: |
Leon wrote: |
Curious, what is your opinion on visas for families, which must be a major source of legal immigration, and the way in which I have contributed to bringing non-white people to the states? |
I am against all immigration and forced integration, Leon. |
America became the biggest economic and military power in the world doing the exact opposite. Oh, the sweet irony. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Swartz
Joined: 19 Dec 2014
|
Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
sirius black wrote: |
Swartz wrote: |
Leon wrote: |
Curious, what is your opinion on visas for families, which must be a major source of legal immigration, and the way in which I have contributed to bringing non-white people to the states? |
I am against all immigration and forced integration, Leon. |
America became the biggest economic and military power in the world doing the exact opposite. Oh, the sweet irony. |
Not sure what you mean, friend. America’s economic and military power is directly correlated with European ingenuity and work ethic; its decline is directly correlated with various forms of parasitism and the Bill in question, among other things. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 6:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Swartz wrote: |
sirius black wrote: |
Swartz wrote: |
Leon wrote: |
Curious, what is your opinion on visas for families, which must be a major source of legal immigration, and the way in which I have contributed to bringing non-white people to the states? |
I am against all immigration and forced integration, Leon. |
America became the biggest economic and military power in the world doing the exact opposite. Oh, the sweet irony. |
Not sure what you mean, friend. America’s economic and military power is directly correlated with European ingenuity and work ethic; its decline is directly correlated with various forms of parasitism and the Bill in question, among other things. |
America's economic and military power and subsequent is also directly correlated with financialization, which I believe you call "parasitism." The Immigration Act simply coincided with this period. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Swartz
Joined: 19 Dec 2014
|
Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2015 6:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Plain Meaning wrote: |
Swartz wrote: |
sirius black wrote: |
Swartz wrote: |
Leon wrote: |
Curious, what is your opinion on visas for families, which must be a major source of legal immigration, and the way in which I have contributed to bringing non-white people to the states? |
I am against all immigration and forced integration, Leon. |
America became the biggest economic and military power in the world doing the exact opposite. Oh, the sweet irony. |
Not sure what you mean, friend. America’s economic and military power is directly correlated with European ingenuity and work ethic; its decline is directly correlated with various forms of parasitism and the Bill in question, among other things. |
America's economic and military power and subsequent is also directly correlated with financialization, which I believe you call "parasitism." The Immigration Act simply coincided with this period. |
Subsequent _____ (?). Parasitism or “other things,” yes. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
chellovek
Joined: 29 Feb 2008
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2015 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
That was meant to read "subsequent decline."
It appears immigrants do cause a measurable decline in wages, but this decrease is so small as to be nearly negligible.
Quote: |
Myth 1: Immigrants are pushing down wages.
Sen. Ted Cruz hit this theme hard while arguing for the need to deport the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States. “We’re going to drive down the wages for millions of hardworking men and women,” Cruz said of proposals to offer amnesty to illegals. The result, he said, would be “economic calamity.”
That’s highly doubtful. It might seem intuitive that immigrants—both legal and illegal—push down wages because they’re willing to work for less than native-born Americans. But a large body of mainstream research has found that immigrants of all types generate new economic activity that typically enlarges GDP. The impact on most workers is negligible. One Harvard Business School study, for example, found that a 10% increase in the portion of immigrants in the labor force might push down native wages by 1% or so. (And the portion of immigrants in the U.S. labor force isn't growing by anywhere near 10%.)
If anybody suffers from the presence of immigrants willing to work for a pittance, it’s low-skilled Americans who lack the ability to command higher pay. But even that argument is dubious. Many Americans don’t want the jobs immigrants are willing to do, or they’re able to earn welfare benefits immigrants aren’t entitled to, which keeps them on the sidelines. Americans are also far less likely to move around for work than immigrants are, which means Americans who need jobs often aren’t going where the work is, anyway. Helping the working poor gain better skills and become more mobile would probably help boost their earnings a lot more than vilifying immigrants. |
The problem is that the Republican Party cannot exactly campaign on providing the working poor with benefits that would increase gov't spending; so instead, some in the party bash immigrants. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
trueblue
Joined: 15 Jun 2014 Location: In between the lines
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2015 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Plain Meaning wrote: |
That was meant to read "subsequent decline."
It appears immigrants do cause a measurable decline in wages, but this decrease is so small as to be nearly negligible.
Quote: |
Myth 1: Immigrants are pushing down wages.
Sen. Ted Cruz hit this theme hard while arguing for the need to deport the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States. “We’re going to drive down the wages for millions of hardworking men and women,” Cruz said of proposals to offer amnesty to illegals. The result, he said, would be “economic calamity.”
That’s highly doubtful. It might seem intuitive that immigrants—both legal and illegal—push down wages because they’re willing to work for less than native-born Americans. But a large body of mainstream research has found that immigrants of all types generate new economic activity that typically enlarges GDP. The impact on most workers is negligible. One Harvard Business School study, for example, found that a 10% increase in the portion of immigrants in the labor force might push down native wages by 1% or so. (And the portion of immigrants in the U.S. labor force isn't growing by anywhere near 10%.)
If anybody suffers from the presence of immigrants willing to work for a pittance, it’s low-skilled Americans who lack the ability to command higher pay. But even that argument is dubious. Many Americans don’t want the jobs immigrants are willing to do, or they’re able to earn welfare benefits immigrants aren’t entitled to, which keeps them on the sidelines. Americans are also far less likely to move around for work than immigrants are, which means Americans who need jobs often aren’t going where the work is, anyway. Helping the working poor gain better skills and become more mobile would probably help boost their earnings a lot more than vilifying immigrants. |
The problem is that the Republican Party cannot exactly campaign on providing the working poor with benefits that would increase gov't spending; so instead, some in the party bash immigrants. |
☝️😏...notice how PM failed to add the word, "illegal"? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2015 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You probably won't ever find me typing the word 'illegal' before the word 'immigrant(s).' Why? Well, for one, people aren't 'illegal.' People may be 'undocumented' or 'without lawful status,' but people have a right to live, breathe, work, play, love without reference to lawful approval. I understand that people who use the term 'illegal immigrant' do so with emphasis with respect to the immigrant aspect, and indeed, there are many many people who have come into this country unlawfully, or remained unlawfully.
In any case, to address the substance of your criticism, such as there may be any, I do favor a pathway to citizenship, just as does 65% of the U.S. population.
Quote: |
August 12, 2015 - Two in three U.S. adults favor a plan to allow immigrants who are living illegally in the U.S. to remain in the country and become citizens if they meet certain requirements over time. Far fewer support allowing those immigrants to remain in the U.S. to work for a limited period of time (14%), or to deport all of these immigrants back to their home countries (19%). U.S. adults' views have been largely stable over the past decade. |
I do not understand unlawful status as unlawful presence, unless the undocumented immigrant has been convicted of a crime, in which case no citizenship, of course. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
sirius black
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
|
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
America's economic emergence was done on the backs of cheap European later in the north and enslaved African labor in the south whose economy drove everything else. From 1803 to 1937 the number one export of America was cotton.
Third on land stolen from native peoples and conjured up wars against Mexico.
It takes ingenuity alright. It takes it to oppress others for so long and call it great.
Europe is no different.
Post WW2 using its economic and military power which is really the main reason it has political power to bully other countries for its resources via unequal trade deals. Control of apparatus like the IMF and World Bank to keep developing countries colonized even after supposedly getting independence.
Rome called itself great doing the same thing in its empire. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kepler
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
|
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think it could be argued that slavery held the US back economically. The end of slavery was an incentive to develop automated farming equipment. At the time of slavery, about 70% of the American workforce made their living from farming. Now about 2% of the US population does thanks to technological advances. Slavery drove down wages for the working class just as cheap immigrant labor does now. In addition, many people resented paying taxes to enforce laws related to slavery (such as capturing and returning slaves to their masters). Now many people resent the massive tax burden imposed by illegal immigration. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|