Jump to content
Tobes

General Politics Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, legendaryshotz said:

Sharecropping for an extended period of time. It's actually interesting because sharecropping essentially was an extension of slavery in a way, because the interest rates were so high, yields of crops unpredictable, and almost made sure you were always indebted to the land owner.

Then came the crop-lien system, then not so long after immigrants came along and did that line of work. Man I feel like im teaching a history class in here sometimes lol

Didn't teens used to do those jobs back in the 50's, 60's, 70's, for summer jobs? Similar to how teens used to work at fast food restaurants to get their foot into the work force. Now it's adult immigrants who work them for a career.

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Brad Pitt said:

Didn't teens used to do those jobs back in the 50's, 60's, 70's, for summer jobs? Similar to how teens used to work at fast food restaurants to get their foot into the work force. Now it's adult immigrants who work them for a career.

Teens still work at mcdonalds, walmart, etc to get their foot into the workforce. An illegal immigrant is going to have a severely hard time ever touching those jobs without a SSN and basic english.

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, legendaryshotz said:

I mean you don't just spend 120B on illegal immigrants and get nothing in return. I'm pretty sure if I looked it up it's a net positive financial gain for americans. However I do think there's a tipping point where it would be a net negative gain. But I don't think we're close there. And again I only think it's potentially undercutting those very hard intensive labor jobs, which not many americans work anyway.

And glad to hear that you enjoyed working on a farm, my grandfather in Poland still has one. It was cool and interesting for a little bit but theres no fucking way I'd ever go into that line of work lol, has the machinery and all and it's still overtime of work everyday.

Even the most left leaning study I could find says that it's between a 3.3-15.6 billion dollar net negative for the US per year https://www.cato.org/blog/fairs-fiscal-burden-illegal-immigration-study-fatally-flawed One of their main gripes is that FAIR based their numbers off of 12.5 million illegals and PEW suggests there's only about 11 million. 

 

New study from Yale-MIT says that there's conservatively around 16 million and probably closer to 22 million illegals in the US. This is twice the number of illegals that Pew came up with. Factor that into the Cato study and the numbers change to 6.6-31.2 billion dollar net negative impact that illegals have on the United States.

 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201193

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, legendaryshotz said:

Teens still work at mcdonalds, walmart, etc to get their foot into the workforce. An illegal immigrant is going to have a severely hard time ever touching those jobs without a SSN and basic english.

I think you'd be surprised at how many illegals have SSN's 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/irs-chief-agency-encourages-illegal-immigrant-theft-of-ssns-to-file-tax-returns

Furthermore, places like McDonalds and Walmart shouldn't even exist in their current model. If you cannot survive without importing cheap labor and relying on these same people to consume your products then you do not deserve to be in business.

Chick fil a 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/on-leadership/wp/2018/05/29/a-chick-fil-a-is-paying-18-an-hour-to-retain-fast-food-workers/ 

and In n Out

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/nation-now/2018/01/25/n-out-mangers-make-160-000-per-year-reports-show/1065434001/ 

both pay well over minimum wage.

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, akaWest said:

Even the most left leaning study I could find says that it's between a 3.3-15.6 billion dollar net negative for the US per year https://www.cato.org/blog/fairs-fiscal-burden-illegal-immigration-study-fatally-flawed One of their main gripes is that FAIR based their numbers off of 12.5 million illegals and PEW suggests there's only about 11 million. 

 

New study from Yale-MIT says that there's conservatively around 16 million and probably closer to 22 million illegals in the US. This is twice the number of illegals that Pew came up with. Factor that into the Cato study and the numbers change to 6.6-31.2 billion dollar net negative impact that illegals have on the United States.

 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0201193

I'll give those a read in the morning to see what parameters they are using to get the numbers that they do, reading the about section of cato leaves me with an odd suspicion that it is right wing based lol

 

edit: lol yeah oh man founded by one of the koch brothers

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, legendaryshotz said:

I'll give those a read in the morning to see what parameters they are using to get the numbers that they do, reading the about section of cato leaves me with an odd suspicion that it is right wing based lol

 

edit: lol yeah oh man founded by one of the koch brothers

Koch brothers are pro illegal immigration. That's one issue they are very left leaning on. 

 https://www.scribd.com/document/395461117/Public-Charge-Comment-Daniel-Garza-The-LIBRE-Initiative#from_embed

http://time.com/5343074/libre-koch-congress-immigration/

At the top there is no left/right. They're all on the same team and they all hate Trump. That's why I support him. So yeah even the Koch brothers putting their "pro" illegal immigration spin on a study still come up with a net negative outcome....should we take it with a grain of salt and assume the number is actually much higher?

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, legendaryshotz said:
  • Persons in poor households at or below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) (39.8 per 1,000) had more than double the rate of violent victimization as persons in high-income households (16.9 per 1,000).
  • Persons in poor households had a higher rate of violence involving a firearm (3.5 per 1,000) compared to persons above the FPL (0.8-2.5 per 1,000).
  • The overall pattern of poor persons having the highest rates of violent victimization was consistent for both whites and blacks. However, the rate of violent victimization for Hispanics did not vary across poverty levels.
  • Poor Hispanics (25.3 per 1,000) had lower rates of violence compared to poor whites (46.4 per 1,000) and poor blacks (43.4 per 1,000).
  • Poor persons living in urban areas (43.9 per 1,000) had violent victimization rates similar to poor persons living in rural areas (38.8 per 1,000).
  • Poor urban blacks (51.3 per 1,000) had rates of violence similar to poor urban whites (56.4 per 1,000).

Makes sense. The family unit is a strong tradition in Latin cultures.  Either way the statistics prove that latins aren't criminals.  At least compared to whites. I wonder what the single mother rate is amongst latins vs. poor whites and blacks.

Also if I'm not mistaken Nigerians have a higher net income than white people in America, i.e. it's not foreigners making America a shithole IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, akaWest said:

Koch brothers are pro illegal immigration. That's one issue they are very left leaning on. 

 https://www.scribd.com/document/395461117/Public-Charge-Comment-Daniel-Garza-The-LIBRE-Initiative#from_embed

http://time.com/5343074/libre-koch-congress-immigration/

At the top there is no left/right. They're all on the same team and they all hate Trump. That's why I support him. So yeah even the Koch brothers putting their "pro" illegal immigration spin on a study still come up with a net negative outcome....should we take it with a grain of salt and assume the number is actually much higher?

Ok, just read the cato report in it's entirity. It's main argument is that looking at the initial analysis of how much illegal immigrants cost is completely wrong, and even states there is more room for error than is listed in said article which was the point they were trying to convey. A 120B cost dropped down to 5-13.1B cost with much more room for error shows you that there are a lot of variables that are just simply not being accounted for.

Personally for me, looking at the data sure it may be a net negative for now but what it seems like is that there is a pretty large +/- room for error, with the more likelyhood that they are overstating the costs of undocumtened workers and underrepresenting the income generated due to them.  Would it make up that 13 billion, or 30 billion, or other number? More likely than not. But again it's hard to say because  quantifying numbers for workers who are undocumented and have no concrete record is difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, pharmassists said:

Makes sense. The family unit is a strong tradition in Latin cultures.  Either way the statistics prove that latins aren't criminals.  At least compared to whites. I wonder what the single mother rate is amongst latins vs. poor whites and blacks.

Also if I'm not mistaken Nigerians have a higher net income than white people in America, i.e. it's not foreigners making America a shithole IMO.

Ultimately at the end of the day if you considered all factors whether you're white, black, mexican, asian, etc. Crime rate across all races would be very identical. Wealth and poverty is just proof of that. And you can break it down even more from there.

As for your 2nd point I absolutely agree. It's not the foreigners that are causing the issues in america. Corporations, and their greed, are crippling the middle class for their record profits year after year. 

Share this post


Link to post

Imagine right-leaning individuals talking about government subsidies and the ills of capitalism. 

It's to shit on brown people? Well now we have the priorities set. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, pharmassists said:

Makes sense. The family unit is a strong tradition in Latin cultures.  Either way the statistics prove that latins aren't criminals.  At least compared to whites. I wonder what the single mother rate is amongst latins vs. poor whites and blacks.

Also if I'm not mistaken Nigerians have a higher net income than white people in America, i.e. it's not foreigners making America a shithole IMO.

These are reported victimization rates not rates of crime. They give no information on who committed the crime only the race of the victim. There's a reason hispanics and other foreigners do not report being victimized. The main one being that they are afraid of being deported https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5137

These are the statistics overall https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/43tabledatadecoverviewpdf Now factor in population and the gray area classification of Hispanic = White and you'll have a clearer picture.

Or you can just pull up mugshots and see for yourself. Keep in mind that the UCR classifies every Hispanic/Latino as White https://www.mcso.org/Mugshot

Share this post


Link to post

So the liberals are promoting illegal immigration in here again?

Some serious mental gymnastics going on, I'm sure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, legendaryshotz said:

Ultimately at the end of the day if you considered all factors whether you're white, black, mexican, asian, etc. Crime rate across all races would be very identical. Wealth and poverty is just proof of that. And you can break it down even more from there.

No they wouldn't and they aren't. You can't post "reported victimization" stats and pass that off as crime stats. Keep searching, the truth is out there.

Share this post


Link to post
50 minutes ago, akaWest said:

No they wouldn't and they aren't. You can't post "reported victimization" stats and pass that off as crime stats. Keep searching, the truth is out there.

You think melanin levels cause crime? 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, akaWest said:

These are reported victimization rates not rates of crime. They give no information on who committed the crime only the race of the victim. There's a reason hispanics and other foreigners do not report being victimized. The main one being that they are afraid of being deported https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5137

These are the statistics overall https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2012/crime-in-the-u.s.-2012/tables/43tabledatadecoverviewpdf Now factor in population and the gray area classification of Hispanic = White and you'll have a clearer picture.

Or you can just pull up mugshots and see for yourself. Keep in mind that the UCR classifies every Hispanic/Latino as White https://www.mcso.org/Mugshot

I'm surprised white people are 8 times as likely to get a DUI. Damn PBR.

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, legendaryshotz said:

You think melanin levels cause crime? 

I think genetics play a part. But mostly I think culture is the main culprit. If poverty was the answer then professional athletes would be saints but they're not. They have violent crime and murder rates right on par with those in poverty.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, pharmassists said:

I'm surprised white people are 8 times as likely to get a DUI. Damn PBR.

Hispanics are 25% more likely to be arrested for DUI than Whites but UCR puts them both in the same category. 

Also, where I'm from if you're driving in the metro area with a headlight out cops will never pull you over. Head to the edge city/suburbs and you'll get pulled over twice on your way home. 

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, akaWest said:

I think genetics play a part. But mostly I think culture is the main culprit. If poverty was the answer then professional athletes would be saints but they're not. They have violent crime and murder rates right on par with those in poverty.

Genetics? Oh boy here we go. This is going to lead down a race IQ argument which has been debunked so many times. Nope nope nope.

Also I’m 99% positive those athletes who escape poverty have lower rates of crime than those who stayed in poverty. There’s just no way lol

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Buffdaddy Jamal said:

"It's debunked" isn't an argument. Neither is calling someone "racist" or "nazi" or "white supremacist".

Oh but saying something is genetics is the reason why one race is smarter or less violent isn’t an outlet to call someone a white supremacist. Lol. It’s literally the definition you moron.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm pretty sure I pulled out the "don't call me a racist just because I believe in a hierarchy of genetic superiority among races" thing before, but for shits and giggles I'll do it again. 

"Don't call me a racist just because I believe in a hierarchy of genetic superiority among races!"

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, legendaryshotz said:

Oh but saying something is genetics is the reason why one race is smarter or less violent isn’t an outlet to call someone a white supremacist. Lol. It’s literally the definition you moron.

Supremacy and race realism are two different things. Do you think men are more genetically predisposed to violence than women?

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Buffdaddy Jamal said:

No, actually, it isn't. Because the Japanese have lower crime rates across the board than whites.

Asians are smarter too! So we should kick you the fuck out and import millions of Asians right?? Omegayikes to that thought process.

  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.