420chan now has a web-based IRC client available, right here
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
Comment
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich

penis pump

Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
Just a reminder by Hedda Dasslewirk - Tue, 14 Mar 2017 22:14:35 EST ID:FZwyp5B6 No.389297 Report Quick Reply
File: 1489544075607.jpg -(12729B / 12.43KB, 500x355) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 12729
That illegals aren't "stealing" jobs. Employers are willingly hiring them for cheap labor and exploiting these people.

So cannot steal that which was freely and willingly given to you.
>>
Frederick Sockleville - Tue, 14 Mar 2017 22:46:24 EST ID:mtoAMITB No.389304 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389297

Well they dont have the right to work in the country if they are illegal? right? so even if it is given to them they are in the country illegally and perhaps if they were legal citizens there would be a fare chance at non immigrants getting the job because there would be equal pay? equal workplace rights, insurance and tax?

So basically what you're advocating is modern day slavery of brown people? how tolerant of you!
>>
Hedda Dasslewirk - Tue, 14 Mar 2017 22:48:23 EST ID:FZwyp5B6 No.389306 Report Quick Reply
>>389304

I'm saying don't blame immigrants. Blame and prosecute the people who are using them.
>>
Frederick Sockleville - Tue, 14 Mar 2017 23:10:40 EST ID:mtoAMITB No.389307 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389306

Lets just get one thing sorted out, companies/businesses who are found to hire illegal immigrants dont get away scot free, if they are caught.

But its the whole dealer vs user thing isnt it? How do you stop people from using drugs? you block the supply of drugs.

The illegal immigrants presents a "too good to be true" offer of cheap labour with no overheads and no taxes, no union to look out for their safety, where as the legal immigrant worker offers a headache of paperwork and taxes all along with a requirement for a minimum wage and a pesky union to deal with.

People are going to choose the cheaper less headache employee because its too good to be true, sure some people are going to do the right thing, but there will always be a certain sect of society that will want to use the cheap labour.

Which equates to modern day slavery, because what happens when people keep choosing cheaper labor? the conservatives try to rewrite workers rights to say that a minimum wage is wrong and bad and look at what its doing to the economy! people are just hiring illegal immigrants! if there was no minimum wage we could hire legal immigrants. Which of course the really poor people who this would benefit would be mostly black people, with a huge chunk of white people and hispanic people mixed in with it and it basically equates to modern day slavery.

Do you really want a china model where they give you housing and pay you next to nothing for working all day? then when you try to kill yourself they prevent you from doing so?

Is that really what you want?
>>
Nathaniel Brossledock - Tue, 14 Mar 2017 23:26:54 EST ID:sUBj56yv No.389308 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389307
>companies/businesses who are found to hire illegal immigrants dont get away scot free, if they are caught.

Yes they absolutely do.
>>
Frederick Sockleville - Tue, 14 Mar 2017 23:31:33 EST ID:mtoAMITB No.389309 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1489548693577.webm [mp4] -(3771323B / 3.60MB, 360x480) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>389308

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/penalties-for-employers-hiring-illegal-immigrants.html

What Are the Penalties for Hiring an Illegal Immigrant?

Hiring illegal immigrants can lead to many severe penalties, such as:

Criminal and civil fines
Loss of business licenses

Most fines are broken down to the following:

First offenders can be fined $250-$2,000 per illegal employee.
For a second offense, the fine is $2,000-$5,000 per illegal employee.
Three or more offenses can cost an employer $3000-$10,000 per illegal employee. A pattern of knowingly employing illegal immigrants can mean extra fines and up to six months in jail for an employer.

>>
Cyril Fottingford - Wed, 15 Mar 2017 00:37:17 EST ID:0B9qh6RW No.389311 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1489552637532.png -(203874B / 199.10KB, 980x2176) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>389309
A couple thousand dollar fine for an employee who works for several thousand less is not a deterrent, it's just a smaller incentive to hire illegals.

Those who exploit illegals (or H1/2-B who can be deported if jobless) have lower operating costs and out-compete those who do not. Hence why immigrants have come to dominate unskilled labor and are starting to damage skilled positions.

A worker who can be arrested/deported if they fight for higher wages and replace workers who demand higher wages is an anti-unionist's dream.
>>
Frederick Sockleville - Wed, 15 Mar 2017 02:28:47 EST ID:mtoAMITB No.389313 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389311

Yeah it certainly isnt a deterrent, but there is a penalty for hiring them, which is the point i was trying to get at. since they were stating that "nothing happens to businesses/companies if they get caught hiring illegal immigrants"
>>
Cyril Fottingford - Wed, 15 Mar 2017 02:35:38 EST ID:0B9qh6RW No.389314 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389313
If the expected penalty is less than the expected gain, it is not an effective deterrent.
If the penalty for stealing is less than what was stolen, then that penalty can not be said to deter theft.
>>
Frederick Sockleville - Wed, 15 Mar 2017 03:15:15 EST ID:mtoAMITB No.389316 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389314

Totally agree. But there is still a penalty. if you steal a chocolate bar and the fine for stealing it is 50c you're still being reprimanded for 50c, it may not be a deterrent, but there is still a consequence for stealing that chocolate bar and if you continue to steal chocolate bars the fine goes up until it makes it pointless to steal them, but not only that, you would be banned from buying from that store.

Just so the analogy doesn't run away too far, you hire illegal immigrant, you get a small fine per, you do it again, you get a bigger fine, if you do it again, then you get a huge fine and your business license will likely be revoked.

But the problem here is, is that there is so much illegal immigration that departments stuggle to keep up, they rely on taxes to get funded and because there a sizeable chunk of the workforce who potentially are illegal immigrants there are less taxes to fund them, which means businesses are more likely to get away without ever getting caught.

So if there are less illegal immigrants then there is a smaller pool of employers enslaving these people which allows the authorities to find these people and fine them appropriately all the while sending these poor slaves back home to their family.
>>
Reuben Facklewit - Wed, 15 Mar 2017 05:14:59 EST ID:OsjB8IHC No.389319 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389316
>hire illegal immigrant, you get a small fine per, you do it again, you get a
>bigger fine, if you do it again, then you get a huge fine and your
>business license will likely be revoked.

Pretty minimal at best. If trump dind't fucus on the wall. Which likely will not happen. Could focus on companies that hire non-legal workforces. But, ouch
ya know, costs of everything will go up and all. A wall thing will change nothing.
It is not going to happen. As well he exlained in minute detail that Mexico would pay for the wall. How could anybody even remotely think has the power to do so.
>>
Polly Trotfoot - Wed, 15 Mar 2017 10:56:45 EST ID:avBKGQ5v No.389323 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389319
>a wall will do nothing
Then why is everyone in Eastern Europe building one?
>>
Frederick Sockleville - Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:17:40 EST ID:mtoAMITB No.389324 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389319

Obviously a wall would do something. What kind of thinking is that?

Its like saying that because you locked your bike up its as equal as to not locking it up. Yeah some very desperate people will come up with a bolt cutter and steal your bike, but others will see the lock and not steal your bike and if the bike had no lock on it at all then even law obiding citizens would be tempted.

Be sensible here yeah? the wall will do its job, the same way the wall works with israel, Not that i agree with the wall so to speak, but this is what it has come too,
>>
Clara Smalllock - Wed, 15 Mar 2017 11:51:37 EST ID:856EflMT No.389326 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389323
Because it is possible for more than one person to have a particular stupid idea at the same time?

Is this a real question?
>>
Shitting Dommlefoot - Wed, 15 Mar 2017 13:36:24 EST ID:xwNrC1vl No.389333 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389324
a wall will waste a lot of tax payer money. i guess the company that wins the contract to build it (one of trump's buddies, i'm sure) will get a big pay day. but it's not going to achieve its intended purpose or help regular joe q american in any way.
>>
Frederick Sockleville - Wed, 15 Mar 2017 19:27:52 EST ID:mtoAMITB No.389357 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389333

I hear this quite often that the wall wont work.
Why not?

It worked for Israel, who wanted to keep the Palestinians out. Waste tax money? oh it sure will, but not as much as that war that the usa has going on over in the middle east.
>>
Oliver Sodgemitch - Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:11:32 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.389376 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Side topic;
does anyone here know what Dumping is, and do any of you have any opinions on how Dumping applies to labor force, like for example, India dumping labor on the USA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumping_(pricing_policy)
>>
Martha Hackleville - Thu, 16 Mar 2017 11:45:28 EST ID:xwNrC1vl No.389379 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389357
Because:
  1. there already is a lot of wall
  2. there are better methods than walls (like border patrols and working with Mexico to secure their borders because most of the people crossing the Mexico-US border are from central America)
  3. the rate of people crossing the border is going down & most people that are here illegally entered the country legally, but have an expired visa
  4. illegal immigrant populations are mostly found in east coast cities, not along the border

And these are just reasons why building a wall is bad idea for trying to keep people out. it doesn't address the question of whether or not is is a bad idea to keep them out in the first place, or what is diplomacy's role in all of this.

> but not as much as that war that the usa has going on over in the middle east.
this is true, but one has nothing to do with the other.
>>
Clara Wibberseg - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 10:40:47 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.389410 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389379
>These are just reasons why building a wall is a bad idea for trying to keep people out.

Even though just the idea of building a wall has made illegal immigration drop significantly? Meaning the wall's already working and it's not even built yet.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/8/illegal-immigration-plummets-trump-inauguration/
>>
David Derringfure - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 12:37:37 EST ID:xwNrC1vl No.389416 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389410
All that work is being done by our great border control officers, not a wall or the threat of a wall. If Trump wants to keep threatening that he's going to build a wall, but never actually build it, I couldn't care less. I don't want him spending my money on a useless hunk of concrete though.
>>
Clara Wibberseg - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:58:51 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.389418 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389416
>All that work is being done by our great border control officers, not a wall or the threat of a wall.
>(Implied) The drop in illegal immigration attempts (~40% Jan/Feb 2017) is because of our border control. Trump's presidency and his wall has nothing to do with it.
I don't believe that. Obama was hard on illegal immigration; deported like over 4 million illegals, I think, in his presidency.
http://www.snopes.com/obama-deported-more-people/
But Obama came off as very pro-illegal-immigrant.
http://www.wnd.com/2016/11/obama-encourages-illegal-aliens-to-vote/

All in all, this is my educated but imperfect opinion on the matter; Obama championed himself as a man of minorities. He championed himself as a globalist and nationalist at the same time. He was always preaching the protection of illegal immigrants, even though in his early years he made statements like, 'We need to beef up security between the USA and Mexico borders'.
Trump is lauded around the world, especially in Mexico and Canada, as a tyrant who will destroy the lives of illegal immigrants. We've got illegal immigrants and legal immigrants crying all over the news about how afraid they are.
I think Trump's victory as well as his stance on illegal immigration is the biggest factor in the drop in illegal immigration attempts. I think the would-be illegal immigrants are afraid, and many of them have opted out of illegal immigration.
Would you disagree with that?

>I don't want him spending my money on a useless hunk of concrete though.
Well, he seems dead-set on making sure that we don't spend any money on it.
>>
Phyllis Goodman - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 14:12:00 EST ID:DiXMKba0 No.389421 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1489774320694.png -(137191B / 133.98KB, 1080x770) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>389418
>he seems dead-set on making sure that we don't spend any money on it

http://www.times-standard.com/business/20170316/trump-budget-calls-for-border-wall-border-prosecutions
>$2.6 billion dollar down payment

Can we ban X8 already? Reading basic facts out of the news to retards isn't rewarding.
>>
Clara Wibberseg - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 14:28:03 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.389425 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389421
Well, look at that. One of you finally posted an up-to-date source in a rebuttal. Very good. This is interesting news.

I'd be proud of you, if I wasn't so disgusted by you. You stepped to me, and you brought sources with you. That's great. That's exactly what I want. But then you ran away and cried for help like a little fucking faggot. You've got the balls to step to me, but not the balls to face me.
>Can we ban X8 already?
Utterly disgusting. Run on home to Berkeley if that's how you face your opponents of debate.
>>
Phyllis Goodman - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 14:49:07 EST ID:DiXMKba0 No.389428 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1489776547886.png -(65407B / 63.87KB, 300x196) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>389425
Face you? What's that supposed to mean on an anonymous imageboard, tough guy? Ball's in your court, go ahead and say something to back up your original claim. You can't, because you pulled it out of your ass.

Nobody respects you here. Your opinions are dumb, your sources are garbage, your logic is nonsense. People call you out on your errors all the time, and you either melt away or start in with the chest-beating faggotry, like your Daddy. You should just fuck off and die.
>>
Cedric Nacklespear - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 16:54:00 EST ID:sUBj56yv No.389439 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389428
Again, block him. It cannot be overstated how much nicer /pol/ is without his dumb statements.
>>
John Clucklesturk - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 17:06:10 EST ID:Mvm1ZwMD No.389440 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389425
We can do without the trollish bullshit. We have enough of that here already and you're not helping or impressing anyone by acting like a cunt. Keep it up and you really will get banned.
>>
Graham Billinghood - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 19:11:06 EST ID:cBPyNYtq No.389453 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389297
Don't liberals advocate higher wages? What if some non-citizen came up to seatle and took your 15/h + tip waiter part time gig for 7.50/h? Soon employers start hiring illegals so they can get around your mandated 15/h minimum.
>>
Graham Billinghood - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 19:12:25 EST ID:cBPyNYtq No.389455 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389440
>ban any one who opposes me
stick to shitposting on /news/
>>
Phyllis Goodman - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 20:09:20 EST ID:ZMtdga9l No.389459 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389455
X8 shouldn't be censured for his opinions, he should be patiently corrected on those. What he should be censured for is all the pompous and condescending behavior:
>Ha, now you are coming correct with facts and sources. This is good. My formidable intellect craves a worthy adversary. I am the master of the discourse. Cower, ye liberals, before this array of right-wing blog posts I found on the first page of a Google search!
>>
Soviet Psychonaut - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 20:16:59 EST ID:YeZGzDdF No.389460 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Fuck the haters X8

nb
>>
Clara Blazzlestone - Fri, 17 Mar 2017 20:36:21 EST ID:ocfgTAf6 No.389462 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389453
You know what's more important than illegals, most of which came here legally and earned their way into the workforce after living here for over a decade and contribute billions in taxes (Sales and Excise), is the danger of automation.

None of this will matter once the tech arrives and employers decide not to hire anyone because they can just get a machine to do it for far cheaper and without threat of unions and strikes.

We really should talk of that issue. Personally, I see no way around it other than a Universal Basic Income. Someone please enlighten me on this.
>>
Nathaniel Dablingfield - Sat, 18 Mar 2017 05:14:01 EST ID:cBPyNYtq No.389476 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1489828441110.jpg -(71678B / 70.00KB, 687x686) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>389462
>most of which came here legally and earned their way into the workforce
WELL THEN THEY AREN'T ILLEGALS ARE THEY! Illegals do not pay tax in the first place. Way to side step my original point to bounce on to UBI, an entirely different issue.
>>
Wesley Drurrypock - Sat, 18 Mar 2017 05:36:12 EST ID:0B9qh6RW No.389477 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389476
A significant portion of illegals are H1/2Bs who weren't able to get permanent residency before their visa expired (or violated requirements such as getting laid off/fired/quitting).

Illegals still pay consumption taxes (gas tax, sales tax, etc) and social security (which comes out of their paycheck).
>>
Reuben Debberstock - Sat, 18 Mar 2017 05:41:08 EST ID:QK8mfsjv No.389478 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389476

He even listed the exact types of taxes that people who aren't legal citizens pay, and you, rather than incorporating new information into a new and improved worldview, chose to insist that they don't, contrary to reality.

As for what you said about wages, stop letting for-profit enterprises exploit people and pay them less than what laws mandate, and ensure that you have laws that give people the necessary level of protection required to ensure a healthy society. There's no good reason anyone should be working for $7.50 an hour. Desperate people will work for less money but with a properly ordered state that actually works for the wellbeing of the people living under it there's no reason for anyone to be that desperate and for such exploitation to occur.
>>
Nathaniel Dablingfield - Sat, 18 Mar 2017 09:20:54 EST ID:cBPyNYtq No.389481 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389477
Over stay your visa and you're illegal. If your visa is valid then you're not illegal. You explain a lot but none of it makes this distinction. because see below.
>>389478
This isn't about people. It's about American people. In the words of Justin Trudeau, citizenship is a privilege.
>>
Reuben Debberstock - Sat, 18 Mar 2017 09:24:22 EST ID:QK8mfsjv No.389482 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389481

I don't see how that makes sense as a response to what I said but okay
>>
Clara Blazzlestone - Sat, 18 Mar 2017 11:50:34 EST ID:ocfgTAf6 No.389485 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389476
I don't see how I side-stepped your point. If we kick out over 10 million illegals, we will only hurt our tax revenue and the economies that built around their work and careers. These people have integrated into their societies and have fostered a bond with their community. It would have large repercussions if we simply used billions and billions to take these people out only to affect local economies and lose all their tax money. We would be is far worse shape without them than with them.

Is it even feasible to take all these people out? Is it even ethical? I understand that Obama deported 3 million illegals that committed serious crimes. In his 8 years, he is estimated to have deported around 400k a year for 8 years. That may be the extent of what we are capable of doing and the wall is estimated to be ineffective. Why spend 20 billion on something that would barely work? Illegals have been entering far less often these days, and its not because of Trump. There are more leaving than entering.

I get that Canada views immigration differently. In order for us to move to Canada, we have to have a college degree. They are far more tough on it than we are. But then again, we have always been a melting pot. We had the same conversations regarding Irish and Italian. What percentage of Italians brought the Mafia with them, for instance? How many are now 3rd, 4th, etc generation Americans, building our American culture and resources.

I brought up UBI because, it seems to me, the only option we have in the long run. These people that have lived here illegally might as well be citizens. Yes, technically they are illegal, but they contribute to our society and are melded with our economy and culture like I just mentioned. They are practically one of our own. The line blurs. But the real issue that I see is technology taking everyones jobs. That's the only 100% certain issue. It's the enemy of all working class. So what do we do, just let millions live without jobs?

Explain in your own estimation exactly why these illegals are destroying us and how we can realistically deal with them?
>>
Emma Crammerhetch - Sat, 18 Mar 2017 14:50:30 EST ID:Ja8lL575 No.389495 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389485
Irish and Italians are white. This is strictly about keeping brown people out of the country, and no one should pretend otherwise.
>>
Martha Billerkedge - Sun, 19 Mar 2017 15:30:36 EST ID:DLnSfaoh No.389552 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389485
>>Asks people to explain their reasoning, yet explains nothing himself.
>>" These people have integrated into their societies and have fostered a bond with their community. It would have large repercussions if we simply used billions and billions to take these people out only to affect local economies and lose all their tax money. We would be is far worse shape without them than with them."
>>
Martha Billerkedge - Sun, 19 Mar 2017 15:45:04 EST ID:DLnSfaoh No.389555 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389495
Lol, so you see no difference between Italians and Irish coming across the Atlantic and Mexicans jumping across the border?

59% of the illegal immigrants over the last decade have come from Mexico. 74% come from directly south of the American border (Mexico, Central America, South America).

You want to make it about race? Is it racist to prioritize the people who make up 75% of the illegal population and who all gain access to the states via the same path?

Obviously you don't hear as much about white/Asian illegal immigration as its not nearly as large of an issue.

http://immigration.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000845

The Illegal Irish population is estimated at between 30 and 50k. The population of the states is what? 70% white? Catching undocumented Irish workers is probably a lot more difficult than catching undocumented Mexican/Latino workers.

If all you see is race in the prioritization of illegals who come from south of the American border then maybe you should think a bit harder.
>>
Esther Grimwater - Sun, 19 Mar 2017 16:51:09 EST ID:FvS7gpUy No.389558 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389297
>I'M WHITE AND AFRAID OF EVERYTHING
kek
>>
Oliver Crashwatch - Sun, 19 Mar 2017 20:24:01 EST ID:uiCADJpl No.389564 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389555
I honestly don't give a shit, but you're literally making that guy's point.
>>
Graham Senningfoot - Sun, 19 Mar 2017 21:40:07 EST ID:ocfgTAf6 No.389568 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389552
Offer your take on it rather than just meme posting
>>
Martha Babbleridge - Mon, 20 Mar 2017 04:24:07 EST ID:cBPyNYtq No.389573 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389564
It really sounds in confirmation to that point. "This about keeping brown poeple out"
But I think what he is saying is it just so happens to be brown people who are in the spot light and because it is mostly mexicans who make up the illegal population. Not a specific targeting of a people simply to be racist.

What I think is more racist, and largely puts these people down harder is the liberal attitude towards the work these illegals do.
>No one wants to do those shitty jobs so thats why we import mexicans to do it for dirt cheap.
>If we deport all the mexicans then who is going to clean your house?
>If all the mexicans went on strike then you guys wouldn't be able to get your fast food.
As if this is all they can achieve or some thing.
It's like on one side there is the appeal to emotion of " oh they just want to have better life" but on the flip side of that same coin "only a mexican is willing to clean my toilet for half a realistic wage." Is that how little you think of these people? I for one hope they can make Mexico so great that they don't have to sneak north to funnel wages down south for a family to survive, but letting that mistake repeat for decades isn't fixing Mexico. If they want to be American then fill out the form and BE American.
>>
Graham Senningfoot - Mon, 20 Mar 2017 11:25:29 EST ID:ocfgTAf6 No.389585 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389573
Then give them the path to become Americans so they won't do those shitty jobs without proper pay and multi billion dollars companies can no longer abuse them.

No?
>>
Graham Senningfoot - Mon, 20 Mar 2017 11:51:26 EST ID:ocfgTAf6 No.389586 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389573
And no ones suggesting that liberals want them to continue cleaning houses and work for dirt cheap. The exact opposite. No ones advocating that they keep on being mistreated. This country already had a rodeo around rallying against Italian immigrants and others. We all turned out just fine.

I get that Mexicans are the majority by nature right now but this has happened before. I would say the majority of people that want them out don't like them because of their culture. I was raised in an Italian neighborhood in the Bronx. And let me tell you, they were racist old farts. The younger among them weren't off the hook either. Public fairs had to be closed down because the Italians would riot against black people at random.

Italians in the neighborhood would notice some Mexicans moving into the Italian neighborhood and would badmouth them. Yet at the same time, they had less issue with the Albanians slowly moving in. There is definitely an anti-brown sentiment going on here.

What Republicans don't have an answer to is whether or not it's ethical (not an appeal to emotion) or even realistic to kick these people out. Separating an illegal father from their natural born citizen children is rough (something Obama had done but did not make it the focal point like Trump wants).

What's the realistic way, in the Repubs view, to deal with everything? And by the by, sending people back to poor Mexican areas where there is high crime with the adage of "make their own nation better" puts them down pretty bad itself. Many are running away from drug cartel owned towns. If our worse problem is brown people with loud music coming into our country then we should consider ourselves lucky. Easy to say to them to make their country great when we don't have to deal with the same levels of woe (not that there aren't woes under our oligarchial plutocratical system).
>>
Ian Hullerstock - Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:43:08 EST ID:fS4Pk5YU No.389626 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389586
>> responds to states with personal anecdote.

Face it, Mexicans are targeted because they represent the bulk of illegals. Man, it should be this difficult....unless all you care about is race.
>>
Jarvis Wommlehark - Tue, 21 Mar 2017 10:48:15 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.389627 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389626
I work with like ~40 illegals, and I can testify, they are all definitely Mexican and very proud/racist about it.

The vast majority of illegal immigrants are straight from Mexico.
http://immigration.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000845
Why? Well, Mexico is a shit-hole.
Rampant crime, corrupt politicians and police, gangs control a lot of cities and towns, everyone is poor and the standards of living and education are way-down.
Mexicans love the USA. Not all of them, but most, it would seem. The money they make here is egregious compared to similar jobs in Mexico, and it's significantly safer here. Most of the Mexicans I work with plan to never return to Mexico, not even to visit, unless they absolutely have to, like for funerals.
>>
Basil Bunhood - Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:31:17 EST ID:1qezcbq/ No.389646 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389626
Yeah, but they are also the only bordering nation of any size that is mostly non-white, and non Anglo. Canadians could flood our cities in the next year and all we would notice would be more Horton's popping up, and things would in general be a lot more fucking polite and civilized.
Basically, Mexicans stick out. They will always be the go-to boogeymen. Errr...chupacabras? Whatever...Now I want some tacos.
>>
Nicholas Snodbanks - Tue, 21 Mar 2017 21:50:48 EST ID:ocfgTAf6 No.389649 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389626
Fair point. I just don't understand exactly why it's such a major issue. You must admit that many focus on Mexicans not due to their being a majority but because of their race. Let's say that Canada was a shithole and Mexico was a first world nation, and it was Canadians crossing the border. Do you think this would be as big as a deal as it is with Mexicans in comparison?


Even if the focus is because they are the majority, what exactly is it that is harming our nation? I've brought up many other points instead of just anecdotes. If you want me to post facts and figures, I'll post them. I don't get your point in pointing out whether I only care about race? Is this just deflection? My focus here is concerning these ones coming here in hopes of a better life.
>>
Rebecca Banningdale - Wed, 22 Mar 2017 02:54:39 EST ID:yrbS2Uub No.389655 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389649

>> You must admit that many focus on Mexicans not due to their being a majority but because of their race

Why would I have to admit this? I posted the stats above. The vast majority of illegals are Mexican/Latino. The vast majority makes them the priority.

>>Let's say that Canada was a shithole and Mexico was a first world nation, and it was Canadians crossing the border. Do you think this would be as big as a deal as it is with Mexicans in comparison?

But its not. You throw out a hypothetical as a rebuttal? Neither you nor I have any idea how people would react to Canadians illegally crossing the border and living in the states.

>>Even if the focus is because they are the majority

But it is.

>>what exactly is it that is harming our nation

You could make this argument I suppose, but that wasn't the original point. Going from "It's about keeping non-white people out" to "What exactly is it that is harming our nation is doubling down.

Regardless of whether it 'hurts' the nation or not, illegal immigration is currently illegal and thus, is enforced.
>>
Frederick Nurrymitch - Wed, 22 Mar 2017 09:24:23 EST ID:zA8Zcg02 No.389656 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389655
it's not just mexicans. there's also a focus on brown people from the middle east.
>>
Esther Brundlebot - Wed, 22 Mar 2017 09:34:49 EST ID:RT2A1jif No.389657 Ignore Report Quick Reply
In my opinion, skin colour figures into how big of a problem immigration is seen as only because it's immediately visible. Over here, you face a fair bit of prejudice if you're Romanian or from another Balkan country despite being white, but your language still makes you stand out.

If you have a number of (possibly illegal) immigrants in your country that you can't immediately tell apart from the native population and make them the Other, statements like 'we have X million illegals here' become just a number without a corresponding concept in reality, so nobody would think of immigration as a problem. Being overly concerned about illegal immigration into the US is a kind of racism that doesn't necessarily express itself in overt hate against a group of people, e.g. Mexicans, but as a vague fear of the future; I have to agree it wouldn't be there if it was Canadians instead of Mexicans, but only because they speak English in Canada.
>>
Barnaby Hishson - Wed, 22 Mar 2017 09:57:41 EST ID:X8esPtoC No.389659 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389655
>Regardless of whether it 'hurts' the nation or not, illegal immigration is currently illegal and thus, is enforced.
It does hurt our country. That's why it's a problem. This isn't about taking back manual labor and giving it to white people, it's about taxes, it's about money being sent from the USA to Mexico, it's about criminals hopping the border and securing a new name and a clean slate and a job in the USA, it's about illegal immigrant gangsters committing heinous crimes only to jump the border if the cops take interest in them. I've first-hand witnessed all of these things. I once came to work to find the cops and 3 dead Mexicans at my job, stabbed to death.

Do I think we're having any sort of crisis with illegal immigrants working in the USA? No. I just know that the alternative, boosting legal immigration while hindering illegal immigration, would give us all the same benefits as illegal immigration with essentially none of the downsides. I'm not trying to rip on Mexicans; I want them to come here to work, I just want them doing it legally, and I want the criminals, some of which I work with and plenty of which live in my town, kept in Mexico. I've heard multiple rumors that one of my guys is a child molester from Mexico and that's why everyone hates him. Yet it's illegal for my employer to do any sort of background check on any of these Mexicans. If they present fake documents, we HAVE TO accept the documents, by law, and only the government can question the legitimacy of their credentials. What kind of illegal immigrant protection bullshit is that?

>>389656
>there's also a focus on brown people from the middle east.
See, that's an entirely different issue, though. Nobody cares about Middle Eastern immigrants working here, and nobody cares about the fact that ME'ers are brown (sure, some do, but they're the smallest voice in the anti-illegal-immigration movement; Republicans don't champion racism anymore, no matter how much the Dems say otherwise)

The issue with ME immigration is Islam and Sharia law. The issue with ME immigration is the fact that the Dems proposed we take millions of ME'ers, most of whom probably hate us, and most of whom are shitty theocratic adult males, some of which (definitely between 25-50%) believe violence is justifiable in the name of Islam.

We don't want that at all. Why? Because of Germany. Because of Sweden. There is a constant stream of videos from Germany and Sweden and France showing off the wanton violence of Muslims in those countries, and there are also now constant videos emerging of Muslims fighting the police. I just watched a new video yesterday of Muslims in France throwing molotov cocktails at the police. And in the wake of all of this, there are countless cases of violent and sexual assault perpetrated by Muslims, and these Muslims do not meet with justice but are instead given great leniency. They should be hanging by their necks in the streets for all to see, yet instead they're given a 1-year sentence and rehabilitation where they're taught why sexual violence is a no-no in the West, as opposed to in the ME where it is legal in half the countries.

The laws of the ME are incredibly un-Western. I mean, for christ's sake women in Saudi Arabia literally just got the right to vote, yet still don't have the right to walk alone or drive a car.

This wouldn't be a problem if Muslims would adhere to Western ways. But they won't.
As they put it, so many times, in so many interviews in the West, 'your constitution was written by a man. Sharia is written by Allah. Therefore Sharia is the true law, not your constitution.'
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/27/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/

I'm not going to talk idealisms with you. Muslims are a problem. That's a world-wide fact. Their leaders tell them to kill infidels and convert the world, to spread Islam to the West, to defeat us from the inside. The Quran states that the whole world must be Muslim, and Muslims take this to heart more than they do with constitutional laws. Muslims aren't secular, unlike the rest of the popular religions in the world.

Muslims are like Nazis; they're not all bad, but their leadership and their mission is VERY BAD.
Except, you know, Muslims have killed significantly more people in the name of Islam than the Nazis killed. How many kills did the Nazis get? 8 million?
Muslims have at least 100 million kills, some speculating that they lean toward 1 billion. That old adage, 'religion has caused more wars than anything else' Yeah, it's bullshit. Replace the word 'religion' with 'Islam' and it's correct.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/05/the_greatest_murder_machine_in_history.html

I studied Islam heavily. To me, from an objective standpoint, it appears as though Islam is nothing but a strategy created by the eventual warlord Muhammed to create the perfect army. And he clearly succeeded, because his army, the Muslims, are still active, and are extremely numerous, and still extremely violent.
But then people come in with that bullshit, 'You're more likely to die at the hands of a white man in the USA than a muslim!'
Yeah, and I'd absolutely like to keep it that way. We've got a Muslim populace of 1%? Good. We can go lower.
>>
Shit Nickleforth - Wed, 22 Mar 2017 10:58:26 EST ID:Ta8rvEqQ No.389662 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389659
>islam
> to create the perfect army
no that's just abrahamic religion in general. the original name of god literally meant "he who musters armies".

also you're right about older males not adapting, but every year the younger middle easterners get more secular and westernized. the retard fundies will go on screaming and have increasingly less power, and their grandchildren will be eating from a tub of bacon watching reruns of seinfeld. today you see a woman shamed by the entire muslim community for twerking on video, in twenty years hijab use will be seen as prudish bullshit.

and for the record, mexicans in america are largely americanized. so many of my friends aren't planning to teach spanish to their children, or don't feel confident enough to teach them. it happened to the irish and italians, it'll happen to YOU.
>>
Frederick Nurrymitch - Wed, 22 Mar 2017 12:34:47 EST ID:zA8Zcg02 No.389664 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389662
fundamentalist christians are demonstrably more of a threat to our freedom than fundamentalist muslims anyway.

christians fought & won the right to deny women certain legal health treatments & procedures & some couples the right to get married.

no one has, nor is it possible to "enact sharia law" in the US.
>>
Nicholas Snodbanks - Wed, 22 Mar 2017 14:37:07 EST ID:ocfgTAf6 No.389665 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389655
>Regardless of whether it 'hurts' the nation or not, illegal immigration is currently illegal and thus, is enforced.

Then why don't we see ICE going after the other 30% of illegals? That's still a sizable chunk of illegal immigrants.

Why should you admit the obvious? Because you have to be dishonest to think that this isn't born from racist motives from a portion of those that want Mexicans out. This anger generated through a demagogue going after the lowest denominators, while ignoring the real issues in our government. We worry about Mexicans and Muslims as Republicans redistribute wealth from the poor to the rich among other things such as dismantling the federal government.

And to be clear, I am not suggesting all dissenters have racist motives, only that it is definitely framed this way. We know this because of how Trump framed Mexicans as wild animals destroying our culture. In reality, we have been deporting illegals that commit serious crimes (I don't consider being illegal a serious crime) for years. Obama deported 3 million of them.

There are more Mexicans leaving than coming in.

> Neither you nor I have any idea how people would react to Canadians illegally crossing the border and living in the states.

I am 100% certain that it would be framed far differently and stick less seriously among the population, especially the racist citizens. I can take that to the bank.

>But it is.

You say so, doesn't mean it's true.

>Doubling down

I understand that it's illegal. That says nothing as to how it should be enforced and what happens when it is. Weed is also illegal, doesn't mean it's justified for a low-time weed dealer selling to 70 year old grannies should be in jail for 20 years with a felony.

You misunderstand me if you think it's doubling down. I was exploring the angles. We have a disagreement about whether it's largely racially motivated, but you know that I think that it is. I am stating that either way the extreme efforts taking place is unwarranted.
>>
Jarvis Cusslehall - Wed, 22 Mar 2017 16:02:16 EST ID:wCbmVqz0 No.389666 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389655
>>Regardless of whether it 'hurts' the nation or not, illegal immigration is currently illegal and thus, is enforced.
>>Argument from legalism
While I won't question that it IS enforced, I would question whether it ought to be enforced along this line of reasoning: was it morally justified to oppose the laws maintaining slavery while they were still on the books? If a law is unethical or unconstitutional, the citizens have a responsibility to protest it and urge their representatives about it, the enforcement branch has a responsibility to minimize enforcement and agitate for change within their command structure, the courts have the responsibility to challenge and overturn aspects of the supporting law, and the lawmakers have the responsibility to change the law. If any part of that mechanism doesn't play ball, the rest have to push on it.

That something is a law is not a sufficient justification for its existence in a constitutional republic.
>>
Nicholas Snodbanks - Wed, 22 Mar 2017 16:15:13 EST ID:ocfgTAf6 No.389668 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389666
Better articulation than my reply.
>>
Polly Honeywater - Thu, 23 Mar 2017 17:01:52 EST ID:N+M5jlMw No.389732 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>389297
this point is moot


Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.