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.
The problem is that too many people are "living" on the worker's wages for any wage to be a "living wage"
under socialism. Ditto, for the cost for hiring "real Americans."
However, if we eliminate all socialism and taxation of businesses and laborers, no matter what they're paid or earn, it will no longer be diminished by the hordes of "Takers."
Of course not. They assimilated. That used to be how things worked. You moved to a new country and assimilated into the existing culture. They didn't print government forms and street signs or teach school in other languages. They didn't encourage multiculturalism. They didn't suspend American schoolkids for displaying American flags on the holidays of other countries. They didn't teach American history as the history of the white man's oppression over the rest of the world.
Why not? That's part and parcel of American history.
Quote:
They didn't give other races preferences in government contracts, small business loans, or university entrance.
You're right. Those preferences were reserved for whites only.
Quote:
100 years ago if you moved to America you were expected to learn the language, get a job through merit and skill, and raise your children as Americans.
Merit and skill? The only merit and skill that mattered was lack of melanin.
Yes, enforcing our immigration laws and limiting legal immigration to the numbers we need and diversifying will stop a major demographic change.
I haven't seen the evidence that it would make any real difference.
The fact is that a large portion of our existing population -- white, black, Hispanic, whatever -- has gotten pretty sorry. Seems to me we need some new blood.
This country is a majority minority, and always has been. The Italian side of my family came over in the late 19th century, and they were forced to change the family name to something "American" because of the racism and violence foisted on then due to WWI. I won't even get into my Mexican and African American roots which began in AZ around the Civil War... keep in mind AZ sided with the Confederates.
African Americans, Italian Americans, Chinese Americans, Irish Americans, Mexican Americans, Japanese Americans, French Americans, Russian Americans, Dutch Americans, Slavic Americans, "anyone" Americans all have two things in common, we are Americans, and we are all minorities.
I haven't seen the evidence that it would make any real difference.
The fact is that a large portion of our existing population -- white, black, Hispanic, whatever -- has gotten pretty sorry. Seems to me we need some new blood.
New blood which is predisposed to illegalities isn't a good start. We do need to enforce our immigration system. This is how we keep diseases from spreading, how we keep criminal entities from entering, and tell the world we actually have borders. Yes, we want immigrants, but we want immigrants who come for the right reasons, and want to be here bad enough to jump through the proper hoops. THAT will give us the cream of the crop, because the dregs are the ones who steal their place in line.
Originally Posted by kidkaos2 Of course not. They assimilated. That used to be how things worked. You moved to a new country and assimilated into the existing culture. They didn't print government forms and street signs or teach school in other languages. They didn't encourage multiculturalism. They didn't suspend American schoolkids for displaying American flags on the holidays of other countries. They didn't teach American history as the history of the white man's oppression over the rest of the world.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucario
Why not? That's part and parcel of American history.
Actually, no, that is teaching people to loath themselves and their history. History is supposed to be a vehicle taught to keep from making the same mistakes, not to reinforce hate.
I agree with kidkaos2 on his points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dv1033
They didn't assimilate until multiple generations, nothing has changed. We've had a large immigration these past 3 decades with a lot of first generation.
People who came through Ellis Island absolutely desired to become Americans. They began assimilating long before they got here. My Great Grandfather, the 2nd generation Italian side spoke perfect English, and ZERO Italian. Most immigrants in the 19th and early 20th wouldn't allow their native language to be spoken. THAT is the opposite of the Hispanic influx.
It's utter nonsense that with the exit of millions of illegal aliens that prices would go way up by paying an American a fair wage for the same job. Illegals save the consumer no money anyway as we are taxed to death covering their social cost while their employers just pocket the profits from their cheap labor. Your claim of having to pay an American a hundred bucks for two hours worth of manual labor is ridiculous also.
That is precisely the logic behind UHC. We're going to pay for it anyway, but with the insurance companies adding expense with no benefit to offset it, it is going to continue to be a lot more expensive than it would be if the expenses could be controlled.
I don't know what line of work you are in, but I can tell you from experience that if you have an employee who makes fifteen bucks an hour, by the time you add vacation, 401k, health and dental, and other bennies to the package he will cost you better than double that. If you get a lawn service, you are going to pay them a profit on top of that. They may be cheaper if their employees don't get benefits, but you have just eliminated a lot of their labor with your deportation, and a lot of people have to have benefits because they have families to support.
The independent contractor who you hire instead will also need to be bonded, he will have to buy, maintain, and replace equipment, and he's not going to work a forty hour week. With transportation and setup and breakdown time on a job he will be lucky if his jobs are close enough together to do more than two two-hour jobs per day (two hours being the time actually required to cut the grass), and he may not have but one job some days. or none, but his expenses are still fixed. He will charge what he needs to to make a living, and a hundred bucks is probably close to what he will need to stay in business.
The problem is that too many people are "living" on the worker's wages for any wage to be a "living wage"
under socialism. Ditto, for the cost for hiring "real Americans."
However, if we eliminate all socialism and taxation of businesses and laborers, no matter what they're paid or earn, it will no longer be diminished by the hordes of "Takers."
If you eliminate all taxes you will no longer have a country, which means no infrastructure to support the businesses. That means no fire, water, roads, and police, which means that an armed gang can take over a plant, kidnap the CEO, and hold him for ransom and no one will interfere.
It also means that you will have to be armed heavily and act quickly to fend off highwaymen when you travel. Assuming, of course that you can afford to do so on privately built and owned toll roads.
Eliminating taxes completely would lead to anarchy. Is that what you want? Is there something I missed?
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.
