Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

Because someone wrote an article taking data, which can manipulated to defend or defeat any argument, told you so? If I post a counterpoint, using the same data, are you now wrong?

Cool

It would certainly be a start.  Any data-based argument certainly would be 1000x better than the quality of argument we get from the pro-Wall crowd now.

  • Like 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, SameSame said:

Your dear leader is a mentally ill pathological liar.   Nothing he says should be trusted.  He is fucked in the head.  

Anything that has ever worked for him is just shit thrown against the wall that happened to stick.   Any argument from him about anything is a non-starter.

I don't support, or like, Trump. I think it's more telling that you deduce that I do based on having the unmitigated gall to agree with him on a singular idea. I suppose that's what politics and society has become. If you ever agree with the enemy, or in any way try to foster ideals, you're wrong and I'm "woke".

 

Posted

The illegal immigration debate is the greatest distraction issue of all time. 

Never mind that the middle class is getting squeezed out of existence by our corporate overlords.

It’s Jose’s fault you’re poor. 

  • Like 3
Posted
1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

I don't support, or like, Trump. I think it's more telling that you deduce that I do based on having the unmitigated gall to agree with him on a singular idea. I suppose that's what politics and society has become. If you ever agree with the enemy, or in any way try to foster ideals, you're wrong and I'm "woke".

 

Singular idea??

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Spankytoes said:

I don't support, or like, Trump. I think it's more telling that you deduce that I do based on having the unmitigated gall to agree with him on a singular idea. I suppose that's what politics and society has become. If you ever agree with the enemy, or in any way try to foster ideals, you're wrong and I'm "woke".

 

What are the primary goals of the wall, and why, specifically, do you think a physical wall is the best solution to tackle that problem?

Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

It's not going to reduce the number of border crossings.

Has the creation of TSA, and airport procedures, decreased the amount of potential terrorist activities taking place on our soil? Maybe, it's impossible to say. Maybe it wasn't a huge problem to begin with. Maybe it's a deterrent for trying. You can make an argument either way.

Posted
Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The illegal immigration debate is the greatest distraction issue of all time. 

Never mind that the middle class is getting squeezed out of existence by our corporate overlords.

It’s Jose’s fault you’re poor. 

The ruling class in the United States has a long history of using race to divide the lower social classes. 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

What are the primary goals of the wall, and why, specifically, do you think a physical wall is the best solution to tackle that problem?

As stated, I see it as a start. The alternative is to continue on with "catch and release" while never attempting to solve the problem. 

Posted
Just now, Spankytoes said:

As stated, I see it as a start. The alternative is to continue on with "catch and release" while never attempting to solve the problem. 

Should we just kill them instead of releasing? I am struggling to understand here.

Posted
28 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

I can rattle off a ton of net positives for defrauding Chase bank. It's still illegal. That's not a valid argument. Is their contribution to the economy greater than or less than the cost of subsidizing their ability to live in our economy tax-free? If I understand you correctly, you are advocating that paying $2 more for a tomato is a greater strain than increased taxes to cover those that pay none?

I'm not embarrassed. Are you?

For someone as passionate as you are about the law I'm confused why you aren't spending more of your time posting about the denials of Trump and his team about his connections to Russia and their attempt to defraud the American people. That seems like a much bigger issue than illegal immigrants that directly pay sales taxes and indirectly pay property taxes.

 

 

Posted
4 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

If you support Wall but not Trump, you are truly unique.

As a free thinker, sadly, I think I am. I also think that Obama was the best and worst President of all time depending on what issue we are discussing.

Posted
1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

As stated, I see it as a start. The alternative is to continue on with "catch and release" while never attempting to solve the problem. 

Donald Trump rejected a plan that would have provided $25 billion for border security. He doesn't want a wall. He wants a political issue.

  • Like 3
Posted
1 minute ago, happyfunball said:

Should we just kill them instead of releasing? I am struggling to understand here.

Of course not. But I also don't think we should fail to address the problem because it's too vast and it's easier to ignore it because it makes some of us cozy on the inside. I'm all for prosecution and deportation of ALL illegals, regardless if they came here through a border or on a visa. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Donald Trump rejected a plan that would have provided $25 billion for border security. He doesn't want a wall. He wants a political issue.

I don't disagree with that at all. 

Posted
Just now, Spankytoes said:

Of course not. But I also don't think we should fail to address the problem because it's too vast and it's easier to ignore it because it makes some of us cozy on the inside. I'm all for prosecution and deportation of ALL illegals, regardless if they came here through a border or on a visa. 

That effectively is "catch and release" in policy execution. 

If you can remove political sound bites, almost all people agree with the above but the debate is what stymies illegal immigration. A wall does not. 

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Grade of D as in David said:

For someone as passionate as you are about the law I'm confused why you aren't spending more of your time posting about the denials of Trump and his team about his connections to Russia and their attempt to defraud the American people. That seems like a much bigger issue than illegal immigrants that directly pay sales taxes and indirectly pay property taxes.

 

 

What else is there to say on the subject? One side says it's true, the other says it's a fabrication. If it is true, there should be consequences. If it's not, we'll move on to the next attempt to remove a President people don't like. This was the issue that got traction in the discussion.

Edited by Spankytoes
Posted
7 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

Because someone wrote an article taking data, which can manipulated to defend or defeat any argument, told you so? If I post a counterpoint, using the same data, are you now wrong?

Cool

Again, most non-partisan economists agree that they likely contribute more to our economy and are not a drain. This includes the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office.

Reaffirming its previous findings, the CBO estimates that increasing immigration enforcement would likely reduce tax revenues, by reducing the fiscal benefit of immigration inflows.

Posted
Just now, happyfunball said:

That effectively is "catch and release" in policy execution. 

If you can remove political sound bites, almost all people agree with the above but the debate is what stymies illegal immigration. A wall does not. 

Fair enough. Let me rephrase: I am all for any solution with the potential to curb the rate of illegal immigration in this country. The wall may not be it. But, it's at least an attempt to do something rather than letting the issue fan out like gun control after a shooting.

  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, Spankytoes said:

But, it's at least an attempt to do something rather than letting the issue fan out like gun control after a shooting.

Here's another idea: Change the laws so that what we now consider "illegal" immigration is now legal so we just erase the problem entirely.

How about that?

DO SOMETHING lol

Posted
Just now, DigglerontheHoof said:

A work permit program with a path toward citizenship would have a much bigger impact on reducing illegal immigration than any kind of wall 

Sorry, buddy, not racist enough.

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

Fair enough. Let me rephrase: I am all for any solution with the potential to curb the rate of illegal immigration in this country. The wall may not be it. But, it's at least an attempt to do something rather than letting the issue fan out like gun control after a shooting.

Again, the perpetrator of this government shutdown turned down $25 billion for border security.

 

Edited by David Dennison
Posted
20 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

I don't support, or like, Trump. I think it's more telling that you deduce that I do based on having the unmitigated gall to agree with him on a singular idea. I suppose that's what politics and society has become. If you ever agree with the enemy, or in any way try to foster ideals, you're wrong and I'm "woke".

 

"I don't agree with Hitler, I just think the Jews are ruining Germany!"

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
Just now, bad_teammate said:

Sorry, buddy, not racist enough.

A work permit program for Wetbacks with a path toward citizenship would have a much bigger impact on reducing illegal immigration than any kind of wall 

 

 

Better?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
Just now, DigglerontheHoof said:

A work permit program for Wetbacks with a path toward citizenship would have a much bigger impact on reducing illegal immigration than any kind of wall 

Better?

Can we make them sign documents saying that their home country is garbage and America is much better and that white people should be allowed to use the n-word?

If so, I think we might have a deal.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, happyfunball said:

Should we just kill them instead of releasing? I am struggling to understand here.

There is a group of Muricans who would get off on that very idea

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-militia-groups-head-to-border-stirred-by-trumps-call-to-arms/2018/11/03/ff96826c-decf-11e8-b3f0-62607289efee_story.html?utm_term=.fbb6d3da13dd

Quote

Gun-carrying civilian groups and border vigilantes have heard a call to arms in President Trump’s warnings about threats to American security posed by caravans of Central American migrants moving through Mexico. They’re packing coolers and tents, oiling rifles and tuning up aerial drones, with plans to form caravans of their own and trail American troops to the border.

“We’ll observe and report, and offer aid in any way we can,” said Shannon McGauley, a bail bondsman in the Dallas suburbs who is president of the Texas Minutemen. McGauley said he was preparing to head for the Rio Grande in coming days.

“We’ve proved ourselves before, and we’ll prove ourselves again,” he said.

McGauley and others have been roused by the president’s call to restore order and defend the country against what Trump has called “an invasion,” as thousands of Central American migrants advance slowly through southern Mexico toward the U.S. border. Trump has insisted that “unknown Middle Easterners,” “very tough fighters,” and large numbers of violent criminals are traveling among the women, children and families heading north on foot.

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

There is a group of Muricans who would get off on that very idea

 

Fuck man, don't doxx Icono.

Posted
31 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

As stated, I see it as a start. The alternative is to continue on with "catch and release" while never attempting to solve the problem. 

A start to what?  What is the goal?

Posted
24 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Here's another idea: Change the laws so that what we now consider "illegal" immigration is now legal so we just erase the problem entirely.

How about that?

DO SOMETHING lol

How does that solve, or attempt to solve, the problem? Why not move the drinking age to 18? Probably a popular idea, but what does it do for anyone other than 18-20 year olds?

Posted
1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

How does that solve, or attempt to solve, the problem? Why not move the drinking age to 18? Probably a popular idea, but what does it do for anyone other than 18-20 year olds?

And it would be a huge hit to Rupert Murdoch's business model. 

Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

A work permit program with a path toward citizenship would have a much bigger impact on reducing illegal immigration than any kind of wall 

So would a law requiring employers to hire applicants with felonies as a protected class. There are consequences for your actions that are plainly stated before the crime is committed. You're suggesting dealing with debt by getting another credit card. No, it doesn't work like that.

Edited by Spankytoes
Posted
2 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

How does that solve, or attempt to solve, the problem? Why not move the drinking age to 18? Probably a popular idea, but what does it do for anyone other than 18-20 year olds?

We could legalize drugs too while we're at it. 

Big pharma would complain tho...

Posted
Just now, Spankytoes said:

So would a law requiring employers to ignore applicants with felonies. There are consequences for your actions that are plainly stated before the crime is committed. You're suggesting dealing with debt by getting another credit card. No, it doesn't work like that.

Oh, so you want to support those felons with taxpayer money when they can't get a job. 

Cool. Cool.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

How does that solve, or attempt to solve, the problem? Why not move the drinking age to 18? Probably a popular idea, but what does it do for anyone other than 18-20 year olds?

What is the problem? I thought the problem was there are too many illegal immigrants? Making them legal would solve that problem immediately.

Or are you saying the problem is actually something else?

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Oh, so you want to support those felons with taxpayer money when they can't get a job. 

Cool. Cool.

Depends. Are they citizens and entitled to those funds or illegals?

Posted
44 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

As a free thinker, sadly, I think I am. I also think that Obama was the best and worst President of all time depending on what issue we are discussing.

Well now this is just dumb, because he was basically one of the most mediocre on everything

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, elguapo said:

Why is this a crisis all of the sudden?  Most illegals are here on overstayed visas, most drugs are coming through ports of entry, and there are more suspected terrorists coming over our border with Canada. 

Really bad sign for our country when Cheeto can gin up hysteria over something that won't solve the problem.

Posted
1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

Depends. Are they citizens and entitled to those funds or illegals?

I guess you were saying felons shouldn't get work permits. 

Undocumented immigrants shouldn't be hired by anyone.

Posted
1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

What is the problem? I thought the problem was there are too many illegal immigrants? Making them legal would solve that problem immediately.

Or are you saying the problem is actually something else?

I'll try not to use big words, but I can't promise anything to you...

The problem is illegal immigration. A wall does NOT solve this issue. A wall does have the potential to curb one mechanism...sorry "way"...that illegal immigrants gain access to our country: Illegal border crossings. 

You are saying that it's something else: Dirty Mexicans and brown people. You seem to think that I too share your viewpoint that this is racial propaganda aimed towards people of color but am refusing to admit that this has any bearing on why the wall is being built. Sure, go with that.

Posted
16 minutes ago, Spankytoes said:

How does that solve, or attempt to solve, the problem? Why not move the drinking age to 18? Probably a popular idea, but what does it do for anyone other than 18-20 year olds?

What's the problem, though, specifically?

Make them all legal, put them all under the same taxation burdens as current citizens... problem solved, right?

- If the problem is "WE HAVE TO ENFORCE THE LAW" then just remove the law.

- If the problem is "THEY DON'T PAY INCOME TAXES" then make them pay income taxes.

bing bong, so simple

Posted
1 minute ago, Spankytoes said:

I'll try not to use big words, but I can't promise anything to you...

The problem is illegal immigration. A wall does NOT solve this issue. A wall does have the potential to curb one mechanism...sorry "way"...that illegal immigrants gain access to our country: Illegal border crossings. 

You are saying that it's something else: Dirty Mexicans and brown people. You seem to think that I too share your viewpoint that this is racial propaganda aimed towards people of color but am refusing to admit that this has any bearing on why the wall is being built. Sure, go with that.

Why is illegal immigrants crossing our Southern border a problem significant enough to spend billions of taxpayer $ on?

Posted
1 hour ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

If Trump came out and said "Look, we've talked to the NSA, CIA, etc., and they say there is a 20% chance of significant terrorist threat across our border in the next 5 years.  We've talked to economists and balanced...

Rep for a great post. I'll rep you again on some other post because you deserve it.

The above is the only flaw. Somebody more credible than Trump would have to tell me these things for me to believe them.

Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Don is calling Nancy's bluff on State of the Union. Says he plans to give it at the Capitol on Tuesday.

What a child. Tell a toddler he can't do something, and he'll act like he's going to do it anyway.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...