OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 23, 2019 8:40:03 GMT -5
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,388
|
Post by chiver78 on Sept 23, 2019 8:56:43 GMT -5
I feel for those dealing with the school capacity issues, that's very bad planning on someone's part - and that someone likely isn't local. but the tone of the whole thing makes me feel like I need a shower. Don Brink sounds like a sour old white guy that's pissed he's now a minority. brown kids = strange kids, right off the bat.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,781
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 23, 2019 11:18:09 GMT -5
Value buy posted this article on the Politics page, too.
I'll answer here the way I did there - the illegal immigrants came there because a meat packing plant hired >200 illegal immigrants to work there.
When these asylum seeking kids came here, they were placed with relatives living in that area.
The company should be blaming the meat packing plant. Maybe tax them at a higher rate to help pay for the school system upgrade they need. If the meat packing plant closes and moves someplace else, the immigrants will move away.
Easy peasy.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Sept 23, 2019 13:14:53 GMT -5
Well, this is disturbing.....Christians filled with the milk of human kindness.
A Catholic priest who praised immigrants was booed from the pews and has received death threats.
On the Sunday after Thanksgiving, Father Jim Callahan took to the pulpit at St. Mary’s Church to defend the migrants. As he delivered his sermon, boos echoed off the stained glass windows. A parishioner’s son, in town for the holiday, was heckling him.
Another man approached Callahan after a different sermon on immigration and threatened to kill him, the priest recalled. And a stranger at a gas station spit in his face.
|
|
bean29
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 9,887
|
Post by bean29 on Sept 23, 2019 14:13:46 GMT -5
This is a singular instance where problems with schools can be pinned to immigrants or refugees, but the funding of rural schools is a widespread problem.
We have a school district in Wisconsin with similar issues - it is too large and spread out to affordably manage the district.
Republicans would do well to give up the My Way or the Highway Model and start discussing the issues and working with Democrats to find solutions.
www.jsonline.com/story/communities/waukesha/news/eagle/2019/08/13/palmyra-eagle-school-board-member-amy-wilde-who-opposed-dissolution-resigns/1997223001/
This article has a lot of info on the process of dissolving the school district, who makes decisions, and what happens to the students.
www.jsonline.com/story/communities/waukesha/news/eagle/2019/08/21/palmyra-eagle-school-district-could-dissolve-heres-what-know/2020449001/
What's the School District Boundary Appeal Board?
It's a board created within the Department of Public Instruction to address certain issues related to school district reorganization. It consists of 12 school board members appointed by the state superintendent for staggered two-year terms.
So that board will decide the Palmyra-Eagle case?
Sort of. The case will actually be considered by a seven-member panel comprised of six members of the School District Boundary Appeal Board and the state superintendent or her designee. It must contain two members from a small district, two from a medium-sized district and two from a large district. The members of the subgroup are still being being determined, according to the DPI.
Will the state board hold public hearings as part of that process?
Yes. The SDBAB will hold public hearings to take testimony from district residents, school district representatives and members of the public. This testimony, other information requested by SDBAB members, and the factors in law, will be considered by the SDBAB before a decision is made. The state has asked Palmyra-Eagle to reserve space for public hearings and SDBAB meetings in November, December and January. Dates and locations will be announced when the availability of space has been confirmed. The results of an advisory referendum, if one is held, may also be considered.
I am pretty sure they collected enough signatures to do an advisory referendum in fall, but I doubt the outcome will be different. So, I think this will be a contentious discussion, because more school districts are expected to follow.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 4:26:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 26, 2019 12:54:31 GMT -5
People are starting to feel the direct effects of the cost of the endless asylum seekers. I think it would be better for these asylum seekers, to be transported to the big sanctuary cities where they are wanted/accepted with open arms. These big cities will be happy to bear the costs of placement of these refugees. Why make problems for those who don't want them.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,233
|
Post by NastyWoman on Sept 26, 2019 13:09:35 GMT -5
This is a singular instance where problems with schools can be pinned to immigrants or refugees, but the funding of rural schools is a widespread problem.
Yes and no. Don't those immigrants/refugees have to pay property taxes? I would think they do either directly because they bought a house or indirectly through their rent. I believe that a lot of people forget the indirect part of the tax payments and , at least in this case as presented by this rather icky xenophobe, it seems fine for the "original" inhabitants to get money from the "strangers" but it is also ok to really resent the heck out of them.
Don Brink needs to feed his family → true statement, but you have to wonder whether he would even have a job as a schoolbus drive if it were not for those "strange" kids he can't even bother to greet in the morning. Stronger yet, would the school even be able to stay in existence without the influx of all these kids or would there be consolidation of schools with the loss of the local school? Young people might move away if there is no school for their kids to go to, and on, and on.
It might be nice if life were simple but it isn't.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,107
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 26, 2019 13:38:12 GMT -5
This is a singular instance where problems with schools can be pinned to immigrants or refugees, but the funding of rural schools is a widespread problem.
Yes and no. Don't those immigrants/refugees have to pay property taxes? I would think they do either directly because they bought a house or indirectly through their rent. I believe that a lot of people forget the indirect part of the tax payments and , at least in this case as presented by this rather icky xenophobe, it seems fine for the "original" inhabitants to get money from the "strangers" but it is also ok to really resent the heck out of them.
Don Brink needs to feed his family → true statement, but you have to wonder whether he would even have a job as a schoolbus drive if it were not for those "strange" kids he can't even bother to greet in the morning. Stronger yet, would the school even be able to stay in existence without the influx of all these kids or would there be consolidation of schools with the loss of the local school? Young people might move away if there is no school for their kids to go to, and on, and on.
It might be nice if life were simple but it isn't.
Life IS simple...for simpletons. And no, there is no real difference between being unable or unwilling to analyze a situation.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,781
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 26, 2019 13:47:05 GMT -5
People are starting to feel the direct effects of the cost of the endless asylum seekers. I think it would be better for these asylum seekers, to be transported to the big sanctuary cities where they are wanted/accepted with open arms. These big cities will be happy to bear the costs of placement of these refugees. Why make problems for those who don't want them. If all the illegals were required to stay in sanctuary cities, who would work for the chicken plants, the meat processing plants, or picking the produce from the fields and orchards?
This article is about the immigrant problem in just that one town. The article mentions that all around, other small towns in that area are not only aren't struggling with immigrants, the towns are dying, with people leaving and shops shutting down. It's just that one town that has the problem.
GOPers like to bitch about the immigrant problem, when the fix for the immigrant problem is right under their noses - but who is going to make the rending plant shut down and move to a sanctuary city, taking the immigrants with it? Or make the rendering plant improve working conditions and pay, so Americans would be willing to work there?
Crickets. So much easier to blame the liberals and brown people, without actually doing anything about the problem.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 4:26:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2019 6:55:59 GMT -5
People are starting to feel the direct effects of the cost of the endless asylum seekers. I think it would be better for these asylum seekers, to be transported to the big sanctuary cities where they are wanted/accepted with open arms. These big cities will be happy to bear the costs of placement of these refugees. Why make problems for those who don't want them. If all the illegals were required to stay in sanctuary cities, who would work for the chicken plants, the meat processing plants, or picking the produce from the fields and orchards?
This article is about the immigrant problem in just that one town. The article mentions that all around, other small towns in that area are not only aren't struggling with immigrants, the towns are dying, with people leaving and shops shutting down. It's just that one town that has the problem.
GOPers like to bitch about the immigrant problem, when the fix for the immigrant problem is right under their noses - but who is going to make the rending plant shut down and move to a sanctuary city, taking the immigrants with it? Or make the rendering plant improve working conditions and pay, so Americans would be willing to work there?
Crickets. So much easier to blame the liberals and brown people, without actually doing anything about the problem.
Trying to put up a wall, liberals and brown people keep trying to stop it. That's the only complaint. It is a problem for small towns, and they respond by voting down the cost of asylum daycare. I still think they should be transported to the big sanctuary cities where it is 'not' a problem. It would be just a slight distribution adjustment, not a big deal.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,781
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 27, 2019 10:20:46 GMT -5
If all the illegals were required to stay in sanctuary cities, who would work for the chicken plants, the meat processing plants, or picking the produce from the fields and orchards?
This article is about the immigrant problem in just that one town. The article mentions that all around, other small towns in that area are not only aren't struggling with immigrants, the towns are dying, with people leaving and shops shutting down. It's just that one town that has the problem.
GOPers like to bitch about the immigrant problem, when the fix for the immigrant problem is right under their noses - but who is going to make the rending plant shut down and move to a sanctuary city, taking the immigrants with it? Or make the rendering plant improve working conditions and pay, so Americans would be willing to work there?
Crickets. So much easier to blame the liberals and brown people, without actually doing anything about the problem.
Trying to put up a wall, liberals and brown people keep trying to stop it. That's the only complaint. It is a problem for small towns, and they respond by voting down the cost of asylum daycare. I still think they should be transported to the big sanctuary cities where it is 'not' a problem. It would be just a slight distribution adjustment, not a big deal. Big deal to the guy who owns the meat packing plant, isn't it?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 4:26:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2019 11:05:10 GMT -5
Trying to put up a wall, liberals and brown people keep trying to stop it. That's the only complaint. It is a problem for small towns, and they respond by voting down the cost of asylum daycare. I still think they should be transported to the big sanctuary cities where it is 'not' a problem. It would be just a slight distribution adjustment, not a big deal. Big deal to the guy who owns the meat packing plant, isn't it? Don't care about the guy who owns the meat packing plant. He'll get his as this whole situation comes to light. This story wasn't about that anyway, it was about asylum seekers costs being felt right at home, not something that is happening to someone else. Different perspective when you are the one personally writing the check. It takes away from the thought that they disappear into the country, somewhere else.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Sept 27, 2019 14:04:56 GMT -5
If all the illegals were required to stay in sanctuary cities, who would work for the chicken plants, the meat processing plants, or picking the produce from the fields and orchards?
This article is about the immigrant problem in just that one town. The article mentions that all around, other small towns in that area are not only aren't struggling with immigrants, the towns are dying, with people leaving and shops shutting down. It's just that one town that has the problem.
GOPers like to bitch about the immigrant problem, when the fix for the immigrant problem is right under their noses - but who is going to make the rending plant shut down and move to a sanctuary city, taking the immigrants with it? Or make the rendering plant improve working conditions and pay, so Americans would be willing to work there?
Crickets. So much easier to blame the liberals and brown people, without actually doing anything about the problem.
Trying to put up a wall, liberals and brown people keep trying to stop it.
That's the only complaint. It is a problem for small towns, and they respond by voting down the cost of asylum daycare. I still think they should be transported to the big sanctuary cities where it is 'not' a problem. It would be just a slight distribution adjustment, not a big deal. This wall? What a waste of money.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,781
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 27, 2019 15:33:11 GMT -5
Big deal to the guy who owns the meat packing plant, isn't it? Don't care about the guy who owns the meat packing plant. He'll get his as this whole situation comes to light. This story wasn't about that anyway, it was about asylum seekers costs being felt right at home, not something that is happening to someone else. Different perspective when you are the one personally writing the check. It takes away from the thought that they disappear into the country, somewhere else. Of course the story was about the meat packing plant.
The meating packing plant is the whole reason those people are there. The story specifically says that the small towns surrounding this one are shrinking in size as people move away, closing stores and schools, but this one city is expanding - due to the immigrants who work at the meat packing plant. Don't believe me? Go back and read the link again.
I know you really, really want to blame the immigrant crisis on the brown people and the crazy libs who welcome them into the country, but if there are no jobs available here, there will be no illegals here.
I know exactly what I'm talking about, because we had some counties near mine that were heavily Hispanic, with illegal immigrants working at textile and carpet factories. Some schools in that area had >70% Hispanic populations.
Then, the 2008 bust came and almost overnight the Hispanic population almost disappeared. Went back home. Schools closed. Apartments and trailers sat empty. Immigrants, despite what Trumpettes say, don't come here to try to get a free ride. They come to work, and if there is no work, they won't come.
Very, very easy way to fix this problem. Shut down the meat packing plant. Force it to move somewhere else. Why won't they do it?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 4:26:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2019 11:11:33 GMT -5
Don't care about the guy who owns the meat packing plant. He'll get his as this whole situation comes to light. This story wasn't about that anyway, it was about asylum seekers costs being felt right at home, not something that is happening to someone else. Different perspective when you are the one personally writing the check. It takes away from the thought that they disappear into the country, somewhere else. Of course the story was about the meat packing plant.
The meating packing plant is the whole reason those people are there. The story specifically says that the small towns surrounding this one are shrinking in size as people move away, closing stores and schools, but this one city is expanding - due to the immigrants who work at the meat packing plant. Don't believe me? Go back and read the link again.
I know you really, really want to blame the immigrant crisis on the brown people and the crazy libs who welcome them into the country, but if there are no jobs available here, there will be no illegals here.
I know exactly what I'm talking about, because we had some counties near mine that were heavily Hispanic, with illegal immigrants working at textile and carpet factories. Some schools in that area had >70% Hispanic populations.
Then, the 2008 bust came and almost overnight the Hispanic population almost disappeared. Went back home. Schools closed. Apartments and trailers sat empty. Immigrants, despite what Trumpettes say, don't come here to try to get a free ride. They come to work, and if there is no work, they won't come.
Very, very easy way to fix this problem. Shut down the meat packing plant. Force it to move somewhere else. Why won't they do it?
They came over the border seeking asylum, because they knew ahead of time that they would be placed in this town with the meat packing plant ? And the business should have to move because of this ? Wouldn't the illegals go to where it moves ? Because of things that happened by you ? Is the solution to not have low employment ? Then they won't come ? Isn't taxing citizens of small towns, a much higher property tax rate for educating incoming asylum seekers, a free ride for them ? Controlling the influx at the border, to manageable levels, might be too simple of an answer, to communists looking for future votes, from a certain demographic. You're making quite the argument, for building the wall.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,107
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 29, 2019 11:28:26 GMT -5
There is effectively no argument for building a wall. The 2000-mile U.S.-Mexico border sprawls across four states and nine House districts. Only one of those districts is held by a Republican. Congressman Will Hurd of Texas represents 820 miles of the border. He opposes the wall, claiming that Trump's border crisis is a myth and that the wall is a “third-century solution to a 21st-century problem.” “What I always say is building a wall from sea to shining sea is the most expensive and least effective way to do border security,” Hurd says.
Somehow, I think listening to the person who actually represents the area is a better choice than listening to a corrupt liar whose only real interest is inflaming his base. You apparently go the other way.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 29, 2019 14:13:40 GMT -5
walls are fucking stupid.
in any sort of sensible republic, that is how the argument would have ended 2 years ago.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,107
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 29, 2019 14:17:14 GMT -5
walls are fucking stupid.in any sort of sensible republic, that is how the argument would have ended 2 years ago. So are the people in favor of them. That is why the argument did NOT end 2 years ago.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 29, 2019 14:30:11 GMT -5
shore up the system.
it is actually required by international law that we do so.
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Sept 29, 2019 15:02:05 GMT -5
I did not read the article as I know that most of them look at one side or generalize based on one or two cases. Rarely there is an exception from those rules. What I’ll say is that rarely an asylum seeker is a “burden” for lack of a better word, on the system. The same applies for those that entered illegally. Either, have to sleep/stay/ inhabit a place, a dwelling. There is your property taxes that the owner of said dwelling pays that goes to the school district in which the home is. Almost all asylum seekers and illegals work so to do that one needs to travel. Fuel taxes fund roads. Working, legal or under the table, produces income be it on a personal SSN, a bought/borrowed one or just cash. Any currency movement/income is taxed by state, local and federal. All of them need to survive therefore need to eat, drink. Buying things means more taxes paid. So, to recap, all asylum seekers or illegal immigrants are by far and large self sustaining and contribute to whatever extent the law goes. Medical bills can be big, I know that but consider that most that work on SSN that do not belong to them are never getting refunds or returns for the taxes paid to the fed. All in all, accusing asylum seekers or illegals of being a burden on the system is just a big fat lie perpetrated by people that in the depths of their hearts are plain racist and narrow minded. Change scares them! I’ve been through all that since I was at one point one of “those” illegal aliens.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 4:26:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2019 15:41:26 GMT -5
walls are fucking stupid. in any sort of sensible republic, that is how the argument would have ended 2 years ago. Yes they are. (Stupid) But it resonates as some type of effort to curtail uncontrolled border policy. It's 'hey we'll build a wall', after the arguments conclude it becomes, 'we'll limit the asylum requests instead'. Everyone breathe a sigh of relief of getting what they want. Democrats get little/no wall. (Yay, we won) Conservatives get less immigrants. (Yay, we won) Win win. Except for the media clamoring for the next great commercial seller. Psst, did you here there was a whistleblower, tune in on the latest Trump fiasco. We'll have all the details right after these messages.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 4:26:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2019 16:00:41 GMT -5
There is effectively no argument for building a wall. The 2000-mile U.S.-Mexico border sprawls across four states and nine House districts. Only one of those districts is held by a Republican. Congressman Will Hurd of Texas represents 820 miles of the border. He opposes the wall, claiming that Trump's border crisis is a myth and that the wall is a “third-century solution to a 21st-century problem.” “What I always say is building a wall from sea to shining sea is the most expensive and least effective way to do border security,” Hurd says. Somehow, I think listening to the person who actually represents the area is a better choice than listening to a corrupt liar whose only real interest is inflaming his base. You apparently go the other way. I apparently go as my reply #20 You really need to quit with the logical fallacies. (False Dichotomy) Because a person states one thing, doesn't make him a believer of the only other reason that 'you' offer. That's just inane.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,781
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 30, 2019 7:59:35 GMT -5
Of course the story was about the meat packing plant.
The meating packing plant is the whole reason those people are there. The story specifically says that the small towns surrounding this one are shrinking in size as people move away, closing stores and schools, but this one city is expanding - due to the immigrants who work at the meat packing plant. Don't believe me? Go back and read the link again.
I know you really, really want to blame the immigrant crisis on the brown people and the crazy libs who welcome them into the country, but if there are no jobs available here, there will be no illegals here.
I know exactly what I'm talking about, because we had some counties near mine that were heavily Hispanic, with illegal immigrants working at textile and carpet factories. Some schools in that area had >70% Hispanic populations.
Then, the 2008 bust came and almost overnight the Hispanic population almost disappeared. Went back home. Schools closed. Apartments and trailers sat empty. Immigrants, despite what Trumpettes say, don't come here to try to get a free ride. They come to work, and if there is no work, they won't come.
Very, very easy way to fix this problem. Shut down the meat packing plant. Force it to move somewhere else. Why won't they do it?
They came over the border seeking asylum, because they knew ahead of time that they would be placed in this town with the meat packing plant ? And the business should have to move because of this ? Wouldn't the illegals go to where it moves ? Because of things that happened by you ? Is the solution to not have low employment ? Then they won't come ? Isn't taxing citizens of small towns, a much higher property tax rate for educating incoming asylum seekers, a free ride for them ? Controlling the influx at the border, to manageable levels, might be too simple of an answer, to communists looking for future votes, from a certain demographic. You're making quite the argument, for building the wall. Go back and read the article. The kids are flooding the school system because they came over the border requesting asylum and got shipped to a family member in that little town to wait for their asylum hearing.
Their family member is living in that town so they can work at the meat packing plan, which illegally hires undocumented workers.
You don't have to make the meat packaging plant leave, you only have to enforce the laws that require the meat packing plant to hire legal workers.
Illegals would no longer come to the town, because they can't get hired at the meat packing plant.
So the asylum kids would no longer come to the town, since their relatives aren't working at the plant. School system is no longer flooded with illegals. Problem solved, very quickly and easily.
Meat packaging plant is forced to hire legal workers, which means they probably have to increase the salaries and benefits for the workers, which raises the cost of their product - they get to decide if they want to remain there, hiring a legal work force, or move someplace where the laws aren't enforced so strongly, and this town becomes like the surrounding small towns - shrinking in population, but at least it would be a mostly white population, so that ought to make them happy, right?
I'm making the exact opposite argument from 'build a wall' - I'm making the argument 'enforce the requirement to only hire legal employees and we won't need a damn wall.'
But that argument isn't nearly as fun as placing all the blame on the 'browns flooding the border' and the liberals who 'let' it happen.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 4:26:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2019 11:25:12 GMT -5
They came over the border seeking asylum, because they knew ahead of time that they would be placed in this town with the meat packing plant ? And the business should have to move because of this ? Wouldn't the illegals go to where it moves ? Because of things that happened by you ? Is the solution to not have low employment ? Then they won't come ? Isn't taxing citizens of small towns, a much higher property tax rate for educating incoming asylum seekers, a free ride for them ? Controlling the influx at the border, to manageable levels, might be too simple of an answer, to communists looking for future votes, from a certain demographic. You're making quite the argument, for building the wall. Go back and read the article. The kids are flooding the school system because they came over the border requesting asylum and got shipped to a family member in that little town to wait for their asylum hearing.
Their family member is living in that town so they can work at the meat packing plan, which illegally hires undocumented workers.
You don't have to make the meat packaging plant leave, you only have to enforce the laws that require the meat packing plant to hire legal workers.
Illegals would no longer come to the town, because they can't get hired at the meat packing plant.
So the asylum kids would no longer come to the town, since their relatives aren't working at the plant. School system is no longer flooded with illegals. Problem solved, very quickly and easily.
Meat packaging plant is forced to hire legal workers, which means they probably have to increase the salaries and benefits for the workers, which raises the cost of their product - they get to decide if they want to remain there, hiring a legal work force, or move someplace where the laws aren't enforced so strongly, and this town becomes like the surrounding small towns - shrinking in population, but at least it would be a mostly white population, so that ought to make them happy, right?
I'm making the exact opposite argument from 'build a wall' - I'm making the argument 'enforce the requirement to only hire legal employees and we won't need a damn wall.'
But that argument isn't nearly as fun as placing all the blame on the 'browns flooding the border' and the liberals who 'let' it happen.
OR, you don't have uncontrolled asylum in the first place, which created the problem. Far more efficient than 'after the fact' adjustments. It's like letting 50 strangers live in your house, and then making all kinds of adjustments to the fact that they are in there. Why let them in there in the first place ? It's starting to hit a little closer to the checkbook, with giving these newcomers a free ride. It's showing in the votes on this. I think you want that wall.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Sept 30, 2019 21:19:57 GMT -5
walls are fucking stupid. in any sort of sensible republic, that is how the argument would have ended 2 years ago. Keeping some one out, how many people made it into Area 51?? Amazing what a fence and armed guards can do!
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Sept 30, 2019 22:32:34 GMT -5
It's like letting 50 strangers live in your house, and then making all kinds of adjustments to the fact that they are in there. Why let them in there in the first place ? It's starting to hit a little closer to the checkbook, with giving these newcomers a free ride. It's showing in the votes on this. I think you want that wall. First, I don’t believe that there are about 3 billion asylum seekers in the US. That’s about the number necessary to compare with your 50 strangers in your home so adjustments necessary would be of a different scale. Why let them in? Simple: because that’s what you do towards your fellow man-show kindnesses! If by free ride you mean put them in jail, yeah I’d have to agree, we don’t make them pay for sitting in jail. And lastly, as DJ already mentioned, walls are stupid!
|
|
mroped
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 17, 2014 17:36:56 GMT -5
Posts: 3,453
|
Post by mroped on Sept 30, 2019 22:39:21 GMT -5
walls are fucking stupid. in any sort of sensible republic, that is how the argument would have ended 2 years ago. Keeping some one out, how many people made it into Area 51?? Amazing what a fence and armed guards can do!
So what you have in the shed in your backyard is some National Security secret? Or maybe your neighbor has the Golden Wool in his. Yeah, that stuff needs to be protected! I have heard someone say once that God or whatever greater power blessed these lands with many wonderful things. However when it came to people, corners were cut! Obviously, the take f an outsider. For some reason I tend to agree with that statement!
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,875
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 1, 2019 1:12:32 GMT -5
walls are fucking stupid. in any sort of sensible republic, that is how the argument would have ended 2 years ago. Keeping some one out, how many people made it into Area 51?? Amazing what a fence and armed guards can do!
only lunatics want to get into Area 51.
are you making the same claim about the US?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 29, 2024 4:26:00 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2019 11:33:36 GMT -5
It's like letting 50 strangers live in your house, and then making all kinds of adjustments to the fact that they are in there. Why let them in there in the first place ? It's starting to hit a little closer to the checkbook, with giving these newcomers a free ride. It's showing in the votes on this. I think you want that wall. First, I don’t believe that there are about 3 billion asylum seekers in the US. That’s about the number necessary to compare with your 50 strangers in your home so adjustments necessary would be of a different scale. Why let them in? Simple: because that’s what you do towards your fellow man-show kindnesses! If by free ride you mean put them in jail, yeah I’d have to agree, we don’t make them pay for sitting in jail. And lastly, as DJ already mentioned, walls are stupid! Yeah, whatever. Those on the receiving end are always all about the handout. Happy has her preferred process of stopping the illegal hiring, to keep them from coming here and overwhelming the system. I believe in more control and limits to the number of those seeking asylum, for overwhelming the system. Either way the result is the same. Less freeloaders.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,233
|
Post by NastyWoman on Oct 1, 2019 15:13:23 GMT -5
Keeping some one out, how many people made it into Area 51?? Amazing what a fence and armed guards can do!
only lunatics want to get into Area 51.
are you making the same claim about the US?
The way things are going that question may in the not too far off future require a "yes" answer.
|
|