Trump Alarms Lawmakers With Disparaging Words for Haiti and Africa

  • Thread starter Thread starter lmachine
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Zzyzx_Road said:
I’ll just leave this link here
Click to expand...
Again the deflection.
This is not simply a matter of vulgarity but of the capacity to be a party to a discussion of reasonable criteria for immigration standards.
 
Last edited:
The funny thing is you know most of these “lawmakers” have described Alabama or Mississippi in similar terms.
 
You seem to be ignorant of immigration law. Limits on immigrants from particular countries is nothing new.
 
ucfengr said:
You seem to be ignorant of immigration law. Limits on immigrants from particular countries is nothing new.
Click to expand...
The question is, what useful information does the economic status of a country tell us about whether we should let someone immigrate from that country? I know several people from countries that could be described by the term in question, yet they are productive, tax paying Americans now. Why should these people not be admitted to the US?
 
That shole as a description of Haiti and most of Africa is not far off the mark. Just compare and contrast Haiti with the Dominican Republic via Google Earth. But living in a shole does not grant one an automatic right to come here. Are these the kind of people we should be prioritizing over our native born citizens of all races?
 
Zzyzx_Road said:
But living in a s***hole does not grant one an automatic right to come here.
Click to expand...
AFAIK, no one has made such a claim.
Zzyzx_Road said:
Are these the kind of people
Click to expand...
What is this “kind”? What are the salient characteristics of people who come from countries that you feel it not far off the mark to call a $h!thole?
Zzyzx_Road said:
prioritizing over our native born citizens of all races?
Click to expand...
What is the priority that “these people” are getting over native born citizens?
 
Last edited:
Zzyzx_Road said:
That shole as a description of Haiti and most of Africa is not far off the mark. Just compare and contrast Haiti with the Dominican Republic via Google Earth. But living in a shole does not grant one an automatic right to come here. Are these the kind of people we should be prioritizing over our native born citizens of all races?
Click to expand...
First of all, nobody has claimed that the type of country that one comes from gives one a right to come here. So stop with that silly strawman argument. Second, nobody has been able to answer why we should consider the country of origin when determining who gets here.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
The question is, what useful information does the economic status of a country tell us about whether we should let someone immigrate from that country? I know several people from countries that could be described by the term in question, yet they are productive, tax paying Americans now. Why should these people not be admitted to the US?
Click to expand...
It tells us tons of information. Most people don’t plan their vacations to impoverished countries. When they do they typically stay in an wealthy area well protected from the rest of the inhabitants. Most people when deciding where to live chose the nicest neighborhood they can afford. If economic status was meaningless then people wouldn’t act like this. And by people I mean all the people suggesting economic status is completely irrelevant.
 
exnihilo said:
It tells us tons of information. Most people don’t plan their vacations to impoverished countries.
Click to expand...
Perhaps that is too bad. I frequently travel for work to an African country that might be described by the adjective in question. It is a God fearing nation where 76% of Christians attend church each week. I would go there in a heartbeat for vacation.
exnihilo said:
When they do they typically stay in an wealthy area well protected from the rest of the inhabitants.
Click to expand...
That is their loss. I have met many fine and hardworking people by venturing off the beaten path. Many of them would make fine Americans.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
First of all, nobody has claimed that the type of country that one comes from gives one a right to come here.
Click to expand...
Nope, I’m pretty sure the Dems were pushing exactly for that.
They want to give a large group of Haitians front of the queue admission because they are Haitian.
 
Last edited:
Through Google Earth??
Is that as close as you have been with persons from Haiti,Africa…" this kind of people ".?
Have video games affected the brain or what?
 
dvdjs said:
AFAIK, no one has made such a claim.
Click to expand...
stinkcat_14 said:
First of all, nobody has claimed that the type of country that one comes from gives one a right to come here. So stop with that silly strawman argument.
Click to expand...
Retracted. But pray tell, how should we be considering people who want to come here if the right is not automatic?
dvdjs said:
What is this “kind”? What are the salient characteristics of people who come from countries that you feel it not far off the mark to call a $h!thole?

What is the priority that “these people” are getting over native born citizens?
Click to expand...
stinkcat_14 said:
Second, nobody has been able to answer why we should consider the country of origin when determining who gets here.
Click to expand...
Nobody has been able to answer the question to your satisfaction because you are so opposed to such considerations that it is not possible to get you to reconsider your position.

There are many different foreign cultures. Some of those cultures are closer to American culture than others. If you cannot agree with that much, there is nothing further to discuss.

Hence a cultural background is essential to deciding who to admit. For instance, Somalians have no history whatsoever of any kind of stable political culture, let alone democracy. They are Muslims which is in inherent conflict with the secular nature of our culture. That conflict can be seen daily on the streets of Minneapolis. We have been admitting Somalians since the early 90’s and they are still not assimilating very well. I’ve done work in their neighborhoods so I know what I’m talking about. That is an example of people we should never have admitted in the numbers we did.

The “priority” that these people get over our “native born citizens” is this: there are approximately 4 million native born citizens who enter the work force every year. At the same time we’re talking about legalizing 800k Dreamers, at the same time we’re admitting well over 1 million legal immigrants per year, at the same time we have large numbers of illegals. In what universe does it make sense to admit so much competition for jobs? Only in the universe of big business and the Chamber of Commerce who will brook no interference in their desire for cheap labor. I consider you guys to be pretty much one with them, with no sympathy for the working class natives like myself who have seen or experienced the negative impacts along those lines.

This is a major reason real wages haven’t risen in inflation adjusted terms in a long time, hence the benefits of increased labor productivity in the last several decades have flowed almost exclusively to the upper 1% and is a major factor in the increasing income inequality we’re seeing between the rich and the poor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top