Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is becoming sheer comedy that you cannot answer how less Mexicans immigrating enables other nationalities to qualify for immigration to the United States. Do you not understand that "Immediate Relatives" of U.S. citizens aren't under quotas of any sort? You keep framing this up as a difference between ethnicities, when the discussion is on nations and regions (Mexico is in North America, the same as the United States).
By what "gunlover" commented earlier about making accusations of racism (calling other members "ethnocentric"), you're showing how you are going to argue what you feel is your point. Deflection and calling other members "hypocrites" is avoiding the true focus on this topic, where no one can answer the question of how less Mexicans immigrating will enable other nationalities to qualify to immigrate to the United States. If you continue to use the labels against other members, as well as terminology like "quotas" that you don't understand, your argument will keep within that humor value.
Calling an ethnocentric a ethnocentric is like calling a liar a liar, you would only be offended if you are are one.
Calling an ethnocentric a ethnocentric is like calling a liar a liar, you would only be offended if you are are one.
Our legal immigration quotas (not family based migration) still favor Mexicans. I have provided a link to prove it many times and Mexicans do have the highest family sponsored/based numbers coming to this country also. Yet the spin continues. Obviously in the first category if their numbers were reduced then other nationalities/ethnic groups could enjoy a larger share of the pie. What happened to diversity? I am for reducing the numbers under family based migration also. Job skills and our ability to provide jobs and resources to them without it negatively impacting our own citizens in either category makes sound immigration policy while keeping population growth in mind also. But there are those who don't care about sound immigration policy just increasing or maintaining migration from a certain country or ethnic group even though there is no balance or diversity in doing so.
Our legal immigration quotas (not family based migration) still favor Mexicans. I have provided a link to prove it many times and Mexicans do have the highest family sponsored/based numbers coming to this country also. Yet the spin continues. Obviously in the first category if their numbers were reduced then other nationalities/ethnic groups could enjoy a larger share of the pie. What happened to diversity? I am for reducing the numbers under family based migration also. Job skills and our ability to provide jobs and resources to them without it negatively impacting our own citizens in either category makes sound immigration policy while keeping population growth in mind also. But there are those who don't care about sound immigration policy just increasing or maintaining migration from a certain country or ethnic group even though there is no balance or diversity in doing so.
Calling an ethnocentric a ethnocentric is like calling a liar a liar, you would only be offended if you are are one.
Did you correlate that with the proffered definition from earlier?:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory
...An ethnocentric can only be someone who is from the same ethnic group of the majority of immigrants both legal and illegal here and wants the favoritism towards their group to continue and amnesty for the illegal ones so why would I call a non-Hispanic white an ethnocentric? However, there are people who have ties to the Mexican/Hispanic community through marriage, etc. that have become defenders of Mexican/Hispanic illegals and want continued favoritism in our legal immigration quotas for their group and unlimited family connection migration from their group. I have seen this over and over and over.
It's a pretty lame response anyway, after you have alluded to members being called "racists", but it doesn't matter for others to be called "ethnocentric"...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory
Our legal immigration quotas (not family based migration) still favor Mexicans. I have provided a link to prove it many times and Mexicans do have the highest family sponsored/based numbers coming to this country also. Yet the spin continues...
As I've said before, family-based immigration favors relatives of a single nationality: U.S. citizens. Employment-based immigration doesn't necessarily favor North Americans (including Mexican Nationals), even though there are a couple specific categories exist for them, but I am game to see any sources you have.
Start looking through if you want that level of detail...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory
...Obviously in the first category if their numbers were reduced then other nationalities/ethnic groups could enjoy a larger share of the pie...
And you had the gall to call others hypocrites on this thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory
...However, I am not for excluding certain nationalities either....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory
...What happened to diversity? I am for reducing the numbers under family based migration also. Job skills and our ability to provide jobs and resources to them without it negatively impacting our own citizens in either category makes sound immigration policy while keeping population growth in mind also. But there are those who don't care about sound immigration policy just increasing or maintaining migration from a certain country or ethnic group even though there is no balance or diversity in doing so.
You say "skills", but when your comments return to your view of "diversity" being the primary determining factor time after time, that is going to be the way it is marked. Mexicans legally immigrate the same way as other nationalities. For you to constantly frame it as "negatively impacting" U.S. citizens, and that "unfortunately Mexicans are marrying Americans", it is seen what you mean by the term "diversity".
This is becoming sheer comedy that you cannot answer how less Mexicans immigrating enables other nationalities to qualify for immigration to the United States. Do you not understand that "Immediate Relatives" of U.S. citizens aren't under quotas of any sort? You keep framing this up as a difference between ethnicities, when the discussion is on nations and regions (Mexico is in North America, the same as the United States).
By what "gunlover" commented earlier about making accusations of racism (calling other members "ethnocentric"), you're showing how you are going to argue what you feel is your point. Deflection and calling other members "hypocrites" is avoiding the true focus on this topic, where no one can answer the question of how less Mexicans immigrating will enable other nationalities to qualify to immigrate to the United States. If you continue to use the labels against other members, as well as terminology like "quotas" that you don't understand, your argument will keep within that humor value.
Face it --- you want unlimited immigration and nothing less than that for all people in Mexico and maybe for all of hispanics.
You're no different than Ann Coulter -- only the reverse. You don't want types that can speak English given preference, you want all the preference given to hispanics.
I seriously don't think you are foolish enough to believe that your open borders and unlimited immigration should be for the entire world -- all of the people of China, India, African nations given unlimited rights to move on in and be supported on Medicaid and food stamps. You're an enthnocentrist for sure. Anyone who supports no immigration laws for only one ethnicity is that.
In an opinion piece published this week titled “When Did We Vote To Become Mexico?” Coulter laments the demographic changes of the last few decades, saying she wished more immigrants came from the “mother country” of Great Britain rather than Latin America.
“Why can’t the country be more or less the ethnic composition it always was?” Coulter writes in the column, which appeared in WND Commentary under the heading “Invasion USA.”
Face it --- you want unlimited immigration and nothing less than that for all people in Mexico and maybe for all of hispanics...
And you really need to source that wild claim to be able to prove it valid...
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
...You're no different than Ann Coulter -- only the reverse. You don't want types that can speak English given preference, you want all the preference given to hispanics...
Again you need to source how as a mono-lingual "white" that I would support that stance...
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
...I seriously don't think you are foolish enough to believe that your open borders and unlimited immigration should be for the entire world -- all of the people of China, India, African nations given unlimited rights to move on in and be supported on Medicaid and food stamps. You're an enthnocentrist for sure. Anyone who supports no immigration laws for only one ethnicity is that.
You've compared me to Ann Coulter - which proxies her as an "ethnocentric". But I expect your label applying to me either needs to be proven, or redacted. That includes any alluding straw man claim that I am for "open borders" or would want any unqualified legal immigrant to be on federal aid.
You're besmirching a career U.S. servicemember that was proud to work with every possible ethnicity out there, and follow all immigration law to bring his wife and stepchildren to the United States. One cannot make unfounded racial labels on other members in this forum. I'll provide some time for you either to prove the claim or redact it, before following it up to seek the appropriate moderator action.
Merely you biased, leftist opinion. No one is wrong all the time. As I said, even a broken clock is right twice a day.
I thought there wasn't anyone wrong all the time until heard Ann Coulter speak. A small puppy has a higher IQ than her...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
