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.
You could, I'm sure as you are the one advocating for deporting u.s. citizens, not really realizing if a list like that was ever composed, you'd be on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant
I view the United States of America not as a "country" in the proper sense, but a place to do business, to advance one's education, to file patents, to buy real-estate, to seek or to give advice, to advance the scientific frontier, to publish books, to make art. It is impossible to be "American", any more than it is possible to Starbucksian, or Peet's Coffeeian. The US is a sort of coffeehouse to the world, rather than a "home". People come to a coffeehouse to think, to write, to drink coffee - not to be, ahem, citizens.
By this reasoning, there are no US citizens whatsoever. There are only guests, just like there are guests at Starbucks (and not "citizens of Starbucks"). In my scheme, guests get several generations over which to build their family wealth, their business or whatnot. And then they have to leave. Four generations seems to be sufficiently long. Anyone for whom it is the case, that all eight grandparents were US citizens, loses his or her citizenship, and gets some modern form of the Nansen passport. Then, I suppose that after some period of banishment, the person could return, restarting the clock as a fresh guest.
Notice the detail of what I'm saying: people get deported not because they're "too foreign", but on the contrary, because they're not foreign enough. The first to go, would be those who have an ancestor who came over on the Mayflower.
My ethnicity is German. I was adopted at birth and I do not know my birth mother other than she is a German woman, nor the sperm donor ... people who have met me say, I am full blood, and I'm guessing I must look the part, but without knowing the sperm donor, idk ... okay? The town my birth mother lived in is a small German farming community ... that much I do know. I do not know what generation she is, are you following me?
I know George Washington used German mercenaries in his wars and many stayed here making the u.s. their home, could be that is the start, seriously idk and haven't spent much time on it, as there is no real reason to. But here is the deal ...
It could happen one day for me or someone like me wakes up to deportation orders (because the government runs things around here) and I'm a born and raised Texan (Texans don't take no crap, so there's that) so I try to imagine what that would be like, being put into a country I know nothing about. Because of that idea, (it could happen) I looked into it and if I can prove 100% German heritage, I'd be well received on the other end and given full protection from Germany ... and even though I appreciate that ... I do not know the first thing about what it means to be German. So there would be my hell. I'm a smart person, I'm sure I'd figure it out, but why should I have to.
Why should any of us have to ...
Quote:
I view the United States of America not as a "country" in the proper sense, but a place to do business, ...
While I appreciate your prospective, what you purpose if it ever took root would mean this country seriously doesn't care about protecting it's citizens and if that is the case, why are we here? We should all just pack up and move (forgo deportation) to the country of our ancestors origins and I feel really sorry for the mutts as I haven't clue as to how they would choose, (or how the government would choose for them) where to hang their hats.
PS: I can't even move from the south into the north of the u.s. without experiencing culture shock, so I can only imagine what it is like for someone to leave their home country and try to make it in another country, not knowing what to expect when they get there. I hope for the day the u.s. becomes more hospitable to others.
The wall, not cost effective, not effective at all for keeping out the drugs and weapons (where most come in at) from the legal points of entries ... by air, by rail ...
Knowing this as some do, we have to wonder, what is the real purpose of a wall? With eminent domain people living on the boarder with acreage will have parts of their property seized by the government and they need access gates in order to come and go on their land ... that can't be right.
Drones? I'm not sure that any one would have an issue with them, unless they object to being a u.s. citizen caught in surveillance, where as they may have privacy issues, as well as, when they put in their codes at the gate to come and go from home, the government has a log of it.
Yes, all the cool countries have one, we must have one too. I call it u.s. wall envy.
PS: Do you really want to live in a country where your liberties are constantly being compromised by the government making their claims and snow balling you into believing the untruths, and selling you a bill of goods? When I see people buying the government's bull ... my conclusion is, 'I guess they do'.
Who said anything countries being cool? You called the wall stupid as if it's some newfangled idea that's never been tested before, and I gave examples of two countries with very different cultures, topographies, and political climates that have been protected by walls in both modern and historical times. Envy has nothing to do with it--it's called looking at real world examples to find solutions, rather than burying your head in the sand and saying it won't work (because you DON'T WANT it to work.)
A wall is certainly more cost effective than continuing to absorb the least educated, least unskilled members of the third world, who also happen to have the highest birthrates and tend to congregate in our already high cost-of-living, crowded cities with strained infrastructure and resources. The wall will be there hundreds of years from now without ever having had to take a lunch break or a sick day or collect retirement.
How does a border wall compromise MY liberty? It doesn't. But government that refuses to protect a country's sovereignty DOES.
If you can't respect the law upon entering the country, what makes you think we should trust you to respect the laws once you are in? Adios. When you are ready to play by the rules from square one, try again.
Who said anything countries being cool? You called the wall stupid as if it's some newfangled idea that's never been tested before, and I gave examples of two countries with very different cultures, topographies, and political climates that have been protected by walls in both modern and historical times. Envy has nothing to do with it--it's called looking at real world examples to find solutions, rather than burying your head in the sand and saying it won't work (because you DON'T WANT it to work.)
A wall is certainly more cost effective than continuing to absorb the least educated, least unskilled members of the third world, who also happen to have the highest birthrates and tend to congregate in our already high cost-of-living, crowded cities with strained infrastructure and resources. The wall will be there hundreds of years from now without ever having had to take a lunch break or a sick day or collect retirement.
How does a border wall compromise MY liberty? It doesn't. But government that refuses to protect a country's sovereignty DOES.
The wall does not solve the drugs and/or weapons coming in from the legal points of entries, which is the majority of how they get in to the u.s. to begin with ... So what is the purpose of your wall really ... All in the knowing leaves one to question the real intent. If the real intent is what I think it is, that's just wrong on so many levels, it isn't even funny.
"But an analysis of data from the southern border indicates that the vast majority of narcotics enters through U.S. ports of entry, not the wide swaths of border in between where additional barriers could be erected."
^ So we know that isn't the real reason.
Quote:
How does a border wall compromise MY liberty? It doesn't.
Is the u.s. keeping people in (a wall serves a dual purpose) or keeping people out, not to mention the ones living on the boarder that are u.s. citizens who loose rights to their property ... that is all any one thinks about is themselves, and for others a wall will affect their liberty ... who cares about them, right?
"A law is supposed to protect property owners from low ball offers by the government when it takes land through eminent domain. But a letter shows how simple it is for officials to eviscerate what is already a pretty toothless law."
Quote:
examples of two countries with very different cultures
Cool countries, apparently some one thinks the wall is a cool idea for all the cool countries that have one, because that is what they talk about, is the advantage the countries with walls have and we should have one too. Like I said, wall envy. And yes, it is a stupid idea that you will not understand how stupid until it effects you personally ... that notion too is so wrong on so many levels, it isn't funny.
Take a good look at those countries and tell me that is the model, you'd like the u.s. to portray with a wall? With the depletion of human rights in the u.s. it very well could be we'd like to model the u.s after others and be the same as, rather than exceptional ... if that is the case, the u.s. is on the right track.
Quote:
But government that refuses to protect a country's sovereignty DOES.
Individual sovereignty, how about those rights?
All of this sets a precedent where as they can legal detain (this is practiced today) u.s. citizens from their going or coming back into the u.s. Give 'em an inch, they may decide to take the mile too ... but don't see that now, so not to worry that'll it will ever, in your life time happen, and if it happens in other's life time, let them deal.
... While I appreciate your prospective, what you purpose if it ever took root would mean this country seriously doesn't care about protecting it's citizens and if that is the case, why are we here? We should all just pack up and move (forgo deportation) to the country of our ancestors origins and I feel really sorry for the mutts as I haven't clue as to how they would choose, (or how the government would choose for them) where to hang their hats.
My proposal is of course more whimsical foil that serious policy prescription.
But in all seriousness, we need to start thinking of “These United States” as a fantastic place to do business or to get an education and so forth, but not as an ethno-cultural entity. It’s the place whose magnetism and sheer vigor built the modern world, making it possible, both as material and intellectual construct. But it’s “home” only to the extent that our high-school or college was home… a place that we love and respect, with which perhaps we even identify, but not a place that’s strictly “ours”. It’s more of a public asset than a personal one. It’s not an entity where we advance the insiders and guardedly keep out the outsiders.
Misusing the words of Theresa May, we should cultivate in ourselves a sense of being “citizens of nowhere”. Sure, we pay taxes to the US, and benefit from its services. But we do so as participants in a joint project, rather than as inherent natives or tribesmen.
To answer your question, "why are we here?"... we're here to the extent that it's a mutually beneficial relationship. I go to Starbucks because I like their coffee and am willing to pay for it. They admit me as a paying customer, or sometimes not even as one who pays anything, but as one who just sponges off of their wifi, in the hope that perhaps later or my friends will actually buy something. If I don't like the coffee, or regard it as being exorbitantly expensive, I won't go there. And if Starbucks thinks that I'm an incorrigible moocher of their wifi who never buys anything, presumably they won't admit me. We have a symbiosis. If that symbiosis breaks, we part company.
My proposal is of course more whimsical foil that serious policy prescription.
But in all seriousness, we need to start thinking of “These United States” as a fantastic place to do business or to get an education and so forth, but not as an ethno-cultural entity. It’s the place whose magnetism and sheer vigor built the modern world, making it possible, both as material and intellectual construct. But it’s “home” only to the extent that our high-school or college was home… a place that we love and respect, with which perhaps we even identify, but not a place that’s strictly “ours”. It’s more of a public asset than a personal one. It’s not an entity where we advance the insiders and guardedly keep out the outsiders.
Misusing the words of Theresa May, we should cultivate in ourselves a sense of being “citizens of nowhere”. Sure, we pay taxes to the US, and benefit from its services. But we do so as participants in a joint project, rather than as inherent natives or tribesmen.
To answer your question, "why are we here?"... we're here to the extent that it's a mutually beneficial relationship. I go to Starbucks because I like their coffee and am willing to pay for it. They admit me as a paying customer, or sometimes not even as one who pays anything, but as one who just sponges off of their wifi, in the hope that perhaps later or my friends will actually buy something. If I don't like the coffee, or regard it as being exorbitantly expensive, I won't go there. And if Starbucks thinks that I'm an incorrigible moocher of their wifi who never buys anything, presumably they won't admit me. We have a symbiosis. If that symbiosis breaks, we part company.
What proposal? That's what America has been increasingly made into, a fake country, with fake citizens and not much more than an economic zone becoming increasingly stratified into the rich and poor.
As a 1st generation American. America should immigration limited at this very moment. Immigration should be needed due to the demands of the jobs that are needed.
You have three types of immigrants. You have the expats who will stay and than go back to their 1st world or upper income lifestyles in developing nations. Than you have skilled labor from developing nations, and than you have unskilled labor from developing nations. If the united states limits immigration, developing nations would get better due to skilled labor not leaving thier native countries and thus create jobs for unskilled folks in such countries.
While I appreciate your prospective, what you purpose if it ever took root would mean this country seriously doesn't care about protecting it's citizens and if that is the case, why are we here? We should all just pack up and move (forgo deportation) to the country of our ancestors origins and I feel really sorry for the mutts as I haven't clue as to how they would choose, (or how the government would choose for them) where to hang their hats.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant
My proposal is of course more whimsical foil that serious policy prescription.
But in all seriousness, we need to start thinking of “These United States” as a fantastic place to do business or to get an education and so forth, but not as an ethno-cultural entity. It’s the place whose magnetism and sheer vigor built the modern world, making it possible, both as material and intellectual construct. But it’s “home” only to the extent that our high-school or college was home… a place that we love and respect, with which perhaps we even identify, but not a place that’s strictly “ours”. It’s more of a public asset than a personal one. It’s not an entity where we advance the insiders and guardedly keep out the outsiders.
Misusing the words of Theresa May, we should cultivate in ourselves a sense of being “citizens of nowhere”. Sure, we pay taxes to the US, and benefit from its services. But we do so as participants in a joint project, rather than as inherent natives or tribesmen.
To answer your question, "why are we here?"... we're here to the extent that it's a mutually beneficial relationship. I go to Starbucks because I like their coffee and am willing to pay for it. They admit me as a paying customer, or sometimes not even as one who pays anything, but as one who just sponges off of their wifi, in the hope that perhaps later or my friends will actually buy something. If I don't like the coffee, or regard it as being exorbitantly expensive, I won't go there. And if Starbucks thinks that I'm an incorrigible moocher of their wifi who never buys anything, presumably they won't admit me. We have a symbiosis. If that symbiosis breaks, we part company.
Quote:
My proposal is of course more whimsical foil that serious policy prescription.
I knew that ... but where as you have thought of this, others have as well. If we are to think in terms of political marketing ... 1,000 (add exponential) others have had at one time the same idea as you. I saw right off where a few more dots needed connecting in the area of deportation of people who may not have another country to go to, for obvious reasons.
Quote:
“These United States” as a fantastic place to do business
I highlighted this on your other post too, because ... the u.s. is a business, where as it negotiates with other countries and acquires loans based on (citizens; potential collection of tax) its assets.
Quote:
But it’s “home” only to the extent that our high-school or college was home… a place that we love and respect, with which perhaps we even identify, but not a place that’s strictly “ours”.
There are those who have done just that ... left the u.s. after college for s-hole countries, for the same reasons people come here.
Quote:
but not as an ethno-cultural entity
How could it not be, as we are already here, who have ethnicity (blood heritage) of our ancestors who came here eons ago; who fought wars so as they could stay and be beholding (owing no monies or allegiance) to no other government.
Quote:
To answer your question, "why are we here?"... we're here to the extent that it's a mutually beneficial relationship.
That is established already ... as there are willing participants (tax payers) who are okay with the over all scheme of things their government does seemingly on their behalf and part of that service package is protection and safety from harm from those that would just as soon chop off a person's head, as to look at 'em.
Quote:
cultivate in ourselves a sense of being “citizens of nowhere”
However, your whimsical proposal is that of a "stateless society" and in that comes with it a whole set of issues ... which I may (imo, we live in a slave state, less individual soverignty) or may not be happy with, but guaranteed ... there are many that would not be happy in the least.
Quote:
I go to Starbucks because I like their coffee and am willing to pay for it. They admit me as a paying customer, or sometimes not even as one who pays anything, but as one who just sponges off of their wifi, in the hope that perhaps later or my friends will actually buy something. If I don't like the coffee, or regard it as being exorbitantly expensive, I won't go there. And if Starbucks thinks that I'm an incorrigible moocher of their wifi who never buys anything, presumably they won't admit me.
The u.s was established on an idea (liberty from oppression) not a national blood line. It became home for people leaving other governments, because they thought that a government that was established 'by the people' would be less oppressive, than the one in their countries ... today, the people say, (on behalf of their government/collective statism) if you can not prove yourself to be more than a moocher, you can not come to the u.s. That is the idea behind, 'how smart/educated are these immigrants'? Where as before, the u.s. welcomed the poor/uneducated, so as to teach them to become, prosperous tax payers. (the business model of the u.s.)
There are two ways in which a government can acquire (growth) assets, give birth to them or migrate them in ... if people never went (it isn't personal, just business) to Starbucks, it would cease to exist; even the moocher,
Quote:
perhaps later or my friends will actually buy something
serves a purpose.
And if enough people (not personal, just business) boycott Starbucks, because its customer service sucks ... Starbucks would cease to exist.
Last edited by Ellis Bell; 08-22-2019 at 10:43 PM..
What's wrong with a wall AND drones? And what will the drones be used for--to watch on camera as they scamper across the unguarded border? For something so stupid, a wall prevented China from falling to the Mongol hordes and Israel from being blown to bits from suicide bombers on the north or swamped by illegals from the south.
Offering citizenship to those here illegally now just encourages more to come; they just need to forge the documents proving they were here from the cut-off date. And each new citizen will sponsor their entire family. It's not sustainable.
The wall in Israel is only 2/3 built and there is no evidence that the Great China wall kept anyone out. Invaders went around the wall or just overrun the Chinese guards.
... The u.s was established on an idea (liberty from oppression) not a national blood line. It became home for people leaving other governments, because they thought that a government that was established 'by the people' would be less oppressive, than the one in their countries ...
...And if enough people (not personal, just business) boycott Starbucks, because its customer service sucks ... Starbucks would cease to exist.
It may indeed happen, that eventually the US will cease to exist… not via tragic collapse, but gradual enervation into obsolescence.
I am the consummate globalist. Star Trek’s “United Federation of Planets” is my avowed ideal. Certainly, I wish the land and the denizens of what’s presently the USA, the best of fortune, happiness, tranquility, progress, safety and prosperity. But I regard none of these things as being specific to one or another nation, one or another national identity… and further, regard it to be quaint – nay, facile! – to identify any of these boons with ethno-cultural sense of “nationhood’.
That the US was established on an idea, rather than on millennia of tribes migrating, fighting and settling, is further reason, to regard it today as a guesthouse/coffeehouse to the world, rather than as proper nation.
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.
I call it u.s. wall envy.
So what is the purpose of your wall really ... 
All in the knowing leaves one to question the real intent. If the real intent is what I think it is, that's just wrong on so many levels, it isn't even funny. 
