What's banning someone from the country going to do if they already came as an illegal immigrant?
Ah yes, those 5-year old criminals. Have to make sure we get them all.
2024 U.S. Elections | Trump wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) look forward to a new life under Ruben Amorim. What system will we be playing? What players will impress? and how will it all go? We also say goodbye to Ruud Van Nistelrooy and review United's 3-0 win at home against Leicester City.
What's banning someone from the country going to do if they already came as an illegal immigrant?
Ah yes, those 5-year old criminals. Have to make sure we get them all.
First-of-its-kind campaign fundraiser in the works with Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Biden
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/20...resident-bill-clinton-barack-obama-rcna136020
If you had some inkling of what most illegal immigrants had to go through to actually make it into the US, you'd know that "banning" them isn't going to deter anyone because of the conditions they had to escape from combined with the tons of wealthy business owners from farms to hotels/restaurants to construction and average homeowners hiring gardeners provides a massive economic incentive for people to immigrate (legally or illegally). Simplistic ideas like you posted are meaningless because you're completely ignoring the incentives on the ground.
And as pointed out, you don't know what Dreamers refers to.
They’ll cut their nose off to spite their face.
That’ll teach Biden.
That’ll teach Biden.
Turns out there’s many consequences to funding a genocide.
Biden visibly angry.
And even more consequences to helping Trump win Michigan. But that’s something to deal with later.
There was another by the Mayor of Dearborn which I think made better points.
So basically poaching the best of the poorest countries. To not let them develop and have them in miserable conditions that are being forced to immigrate.
The funny thing is that the West wants the best things of the poorest countries but they don't like the negative consequences.
- Poach the best skilled workers. This workers are an expenditure from the primary education to high education. Health care resources from birth to any illness. And they are ready to go to work for your country at the best age on their 20-30s when they will not need in the most cases health care for decades and education expenses
- Cheap oil, cheap minerals and other high value resources y bombing and keep regions unstable. Also give away contracts of reconstruction keeping the benefits of this companies and the military sector and the taxes that we all enjoy
- Out market any poor country with *insert good* because globalization is the best but protect any "strategic sector" is you are going to be priced out
But hey, we don't want the consequences. We don't want the economic migrants that we are causing and definitely not the refugees of the wars that we are causing. feck that
And we ask for tall fences to stop them and only squeeze the best to feck them even more
They're screwed either way. At least in Biden's case, they think he may be amenable to listen to them if they threaten to not vote for him. It won't of course influence anything on the ground in Gaza since that is still fundamentally an Israel/Hamas issue, with the likes of Qatar and the US working as go betweens.
The US politician's main business is to take care of the US, not fix the world. They get the votes from US citizens, not from world's citizens.
Like any country, the US should decide what people they want there in the first place. And then take only those people. If those people are farmers, then so be it.
The current process is not like that. The US has strict laws in migrating there, with very qualified people being in queue for 15 years, but once you make it there illegally, you're (mostly) fine. A lot of people seem to have an issue with that, but the Dems solution is to call those people fascists or something, instead of doing what every country does, fight the illegal migration.
People are free to want to live in any country. Countries are free to choose which people they want in that country. There are usually laws for that. There is no controversy in not wanting illegal immigrants, pretty much no country does. It is only controversial when the US does not want illegal immigrants, for some reason.
That is about as true as what you thought a DREAMer was. Maybe stop.
I really thank you for dumb it down how the real world works, how stupid of me. I guess "is the market my friend" mentality and feck humanity and try to do the things better.
I thought that maybe if the US has an immigration problem maybe they should take the approach of stop fecking around other countries and seek another long term approach that benefit US greater and stops illegal immigration on the numbers they are suffering
The approach of: " we don't want you here but we will feck your origin place" is shortsighted and disgusting and it has no solution as immigration will keep finding the way. Stop fecking around, help developing other countries and will that healthy base, they will lift the tip of the pyramid that currently is the west and will stop the undesiring illegal immigration.
The illegal immigration that US and Europe are experiencing is their own fault to keep causing inequality around the world. Nothing else. And sure, the US is entitle to enforce their immigrant policies and and individual is entitled to risk whatever they want. It seems is clear who is winning
Did the US feck Mexico, China or India in recent decades?
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/15/us/where-immigrants-come-from-cec
In your opinion is there’s any redline with Biden that would justify people not voting for him ?
Not voting Biden = Trump in power isn’t a compelling argument when for some people genocide is a redline.
Can Biden even win without Michigan, realistically?
At this point, feels like it will be a low turnout election like 2016, which does not bode well for dems.
Not directed at me, but I will throw my answer your way.
In short? No. Ultimately a vote comes down to which candidate presents the best (or least abominable) future. Pragmatism, at the end of the day, has to rule. A protest vote (or non-vote) will not help secure reproductive rights for my nieces, or an environment that is not on fire for both my nieces and nephews. It likely will not change the situation in Gaza, at least not positively.
I mean, strip it down to the basics and it is simple: There will be 2 candidates for president. One of those 2 will win. Which one gives you and yours the best future?
I wish things were different here. I wish we had viable third parties, or coalition governments, or leaders who were not genocidal curious assholes, but we don't.
I agree with a lot of what you’re saying, particularly in regard to recent US led wars (with Britain following along like a pathetic lemming seeking pats on the head and the reassurance of the ‘special relationship’).
But…I hate it when people refer to Europe as one entity, like it’s a country. The majority of European countries have no involvement with said wars.
I'm reminded of Jeb Bush saying to Trump "you can't insult your way to the presidency".
Cheers for your answer. Understand your reasoning as it’s realistically only a two horse race. But imo the no redlines for Biden argument is one that others can’t be expected to hold.
I understand what you mean and i might agree partially. To start I will say that when I am talking about europe, I mean the EU and at that point, the EU as entity is involved in one way or another in any of the major conflicts, not military as EU entity but politically. Then, individually, and for the sake of genuinely discussion and see what we can find out, tell me which middle to big sized european country has not participated in conflicts in one way or another?
Well, I guess if you left out Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras out is for the reason thst you well know that US contributed well on the feck up situation those countries are in. Right of the bat we already have 3 countries of the top 5 that contributes on the illegal immigration problem in US
As for Mexico at the top of my head, you can find operation condor and the dirty war with indirect involvement of the US when Mexico was starting to get too communist for US likening in certain stages. That means assasination of politicians, killing farmers and local leaders and of course the war on drugs with direct influence from the CIA and DEA in building the networks of the new mexican cartels (thanks "narcos") leaving Mexico with a big problem in the country with hundreds of thousands affected and leave their areas to not get caught in the middle of the shit show.
Another factor is the constant drain of the best professionals of Mexico going to the US, draining the country of the best not staying there lifting the country to a better state. I can't blame either of the parts as you want to improve and the companies wants the best, but results are damaging Mexico as it costs Mexico a lot of money and US ends benefiting of
It is true that a part of the immigration of Mexico is the desire to just simply improve, but if the country would be in a better shape, they will not find the necessity
And example is Spain, in the 60/70s spaniards immigrated to Europe en mass for economic reasons. on the 80s-00s, as the economic situation improved, even if there were other ocuntries better off, as the inequality between them it was not a lot, people preferred to stay in Spain. Due to the economic situation in 2008 and the aftermath, inequality grew and spaniards started to immigrated again. A new sudy shows that in from 2018-2022, 400.000 spaniards immigrated costing 150 billion euros to spain. And spain is doing the same to latinamerican countries.
And again, I understand, everybody wants to do better and also, is not everything or always the US or EU fault but local governments has a big portion of the fault. But paying the price locally because local reasons is your own fault and you have to suck it up. But paying the price, even partially, for external reasons is not fair and is even more unfair is when this external sources cries when the consequences gets them
All in all, I understand why immigration exists, some are nasty consequencies of fecking around. Post colonialism, coup d'etat, wars. Others are economic immigration caused by inequality
What is selfish is that the west wants all the good parts of dealing with these countries (cheap labour, the best qualified of these countries, natural resources, etc...) but none of the negative consequences. And when I express this, I am not insensitive on the people that suffer the negative consequences of mass immigration, but I think is important to know why is happening and try to elevate the discussion to the causes and what it can be done to solve them to find a solution for them and not try to avoid the negative symptons and just speak of these symptoms that are undesired mass immigration
In the end, this is not caused by US, EU or locals. Is caused by capitalism, and the ones on top of capitalism happens to be the west
Last edited:
I honestly don’t expect people to hold the same views. Do I hope they do so it furthers my goal of a least bad future? Absolutely.
And I get it, I get the all consuming emotion that comes when something horrific impacts your life in a personal way. A while back I had a public melt down on here (many thanks to the posters and mods who helped me in the moment and then removed the posts after) after something truly awful happened. For a while all I wanted was the world to burn, and I had to remove myself to sort out my head. During that time I would have voted for the devil himself if he would have promised to fix it so no one else had to go through the same thing. I try to keep this in mind, but selfishly……
I take it you’re referring to wars/conflicts since 9/11 specifically? (i.e. Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and Libya)
Lets say this century, conflicts in general. Lets see what we can find out. And I am not talking only direct involvement. I am talking political approval, UN participation, arms sells, etc...
Again, a country of your choosing to see what we can find out
Edit: lets not do it. Is U.S. elections thread
I expect her to do whatever is necessary to get Trump to endorse and then campaign for her.
It’s her only shot, although she is so dumb and unappealing, even to many Maga voters, that it may not be enough.
Interesting cheers. Also glad to hear your feeling better.
Voting for the well being of the children in your family is a natural thing for a responsible parent, or uncle in your case. Some may try to shame you for that vote because children are dying in the most tumultuous region of the earth and has been for the last 2000 years. It's like how dare you feed your child nutritious food when children in Africa are starving.
Isreal is an apartheid state and every member country of the UN should have dealt with this year's ago but haven't. We collectively have allowed this to happen for generations.
So we have come to an oppressed people with nowhere to turn and exploited by a terrorist organization in Hamas, suffer the consequences of a terrorist act committed in their name. The retaliation by a vicious right wing zionist regime in Isreal has been severe with the calls of mercy from the international community ignored because of that heinous terror attack. Globally we have done feck all to help Palestinians because of the Western attitude towards a terrorist nation in itself, Isreal.
Should that influence the vote in your country when the other political party in a two party system has no platform outside of a Christo facist state full of racial prejudice with a disdain for science, law, family planning, environmental protection, renewable energy, affordable health care and basic decency in society? I don't think it should. Not this election cycle anyway.
Last edited:
Yet he can and Nimrata enabled him in 16 and 20 to do just that. Right wing cnuts
Him too
She had her issues, but was still infinitely better than Trump and should have won if any of the following happened:
1) her campaign focusing on the blue wall rather than trying for a landslide win
2) Comey keeping his mouth shut
3) the US not having the ridiculous electoral college system
Gotta say I hard disagree on this line of argument that says the US and the West is responsible for just about every ill the Earth faces. Capitalism in particular has become the de facto cool, progressive answer for all ills. Awful healthcare? Capitalism. Corrupt politicians? Capitalism. Rampant illegal immigration? Capitalism. Or sorry, the hip phrase is 'late-stage capitalism', cause you see what I did there? Made it sound like a malignant cancer! Sooooo deep.
Same thing in geopolitics. Gazan situation? The West's apathy. Iran-fuelled Houthi rebels? The West's 'genocide' in Gaza. Collapsing order in latin American countries? The West's involvement.
You know what's better than Capitalism, for increasing overall standards of living, life-expectancy, education and infant-mortality? Me either.
You know what's better than a broad, liberal-democracy led world order? What's your answer? Putin? The Chinese? Maybe let the Iranians have more sway?
The majority of things that people blame on capitalism are actually perversions of it. It's laws written to deliberately circumvent the 'engine' of capitalism, usually to benefit an interest group.
Similarly, I love to see the constant firehouse of blame on Biden for the Gazan situation, and nothing towards either Hamas or their puppet-masters. Or even f*cking Israel.
I must be getting old, because all I hear in these critiques is whining. Feeling glib about picking apart the very systems that enabled you to receive an education, the system that built and proliferated technology to create communication so you could find out what's even happening across the world.
Are there hundreds of ways that we should improve how capitalism functions? Of course, and there are lessons to be learned from many countries on how to do that. Has the US/European leadership made mistakes over time in complicated geopolitical decisions? Of course.
Is there a better alternative? I don't believe so. So we should be thinking about how to fix it, rather than just blaming what we have.
Same thing in geopolitics. Gazan situation? The West's apathy. Iran-fuelled Houthi rebels? The West's 'genocide' in Gaza. Collapsing order in latin American countries? The West's involvement.
You know what's better than Capitalism, for increasing overall standards of living, life-expectancy, education and infant-mortality? Me either.
You know what's better than a broad, liberal-democracy led world order? What's your answer? Putin? The Chinese? Maybe let the Iranians have more sway?
The majority of things that people blame on capitalism are actually perversions of it. It's laws written to deliberately circumvent the 'engine' of capitalism, usually to benefit an interest group.
Similarly, I love to see the constant firehouse of blame on Biden for the Gazan situation, and nothing towards either Hamas or their puppet-masters. Or even f*cking Israel.
I must be getting old, because all I hear in these critiques is whining. Feeling glib about picking apart the very systems that enabled you to receive an education, the system that built and proliferated technology to create communication so you could find out what's even happening across the world.
Are there hundreds of ways that we should improve how capitalism functions? Of course, and there are lessons to be learned from many countries on how to do that. Has the US/European leadership made mistakes over time in complicated geopolitical decisions? Of course.
Is there a better alternative? I don't believe so. So we should be thinking about how to fix it, rather than just blaming what we have.
The problem is that we do not know the future.
With that logic, you would never vote for anything.
You just vote using a different logic.
I don't really follow your criticism of the capitalism argument, because on one hand you lament that it is being blamed for everything, but on the other hand you acknowledge that it needs major improvements. And the latter is generally what many people want. Pretending that people who complain about late-stage capitalism actually want a different system entirely is mostly just a strawman. There are very few actual communists out there - of course there are some, but they don't dominate the discourse on the left. People want the right frameworks in place around capitalism to ensure safety nets and fairness. That means things like a living wage, the right to organized labour, progressive taxes and wealth taxes, strong environmental policies, etc. These things have been weakened significantly over the last decades (in the US, at least), because capitalism has been allowed to run wild, and people want a reversal of that.