Jump to content

paxamericana

Member
  • Posts

    953
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by paxamericana

  1. 2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

    "A survey of leading economists shows a consensus behind the view that high-skilled immigration makes the average American better off.[69] A survey of the same economists also shows support behind the notion that low-skilled immigration, while creating winners and losers, makes the average American better off.[70] A survey of European economists shows a consensus that freer movement of people to live and work across borders within Europe makes the average European better off, and strong support behind the notion that it has not made low-skilled Europeans worse off"

    I can't believe that this is news to you.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration

    If course there are trade-offs.  How could there not be?

     

     

    So I've read some of the literature on the net benefit of immigration. To summarize, it is not immigrants that you need it is more child birth. More people means more gdp yes. But immigrants bringing more gdp is a mis-perception amongst academics. The first generation usually take more from the state than give back but it is the second generation that really benefit society. Essentially proving the point that we need more child birth. As for the high skill labor part, it is true that America has historically been a large brain drainer of the world. Talents come here because of the opportunity for a better life, economically, politically, etc...  

    http://time.com/4503313/immigration-wages-employment-economy-study/

    "It’s true that first generation immigrants can take more money from state, local and federal governments than native-born citizens, and that especially on a state and local level, it can be costly to educate the children of immigrants. But the report found that as adults, children of immigrants in the next generation are huge boosters of the economy, contributing more to the government in taxes than either their first-generation parents or native-born citizens."

    • Like 1
  2. 2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

    If provinces and territories can remain as such, and if we can maintain the federal government in Ottawa, and continue to establish all of our own laws, taxation, and public policy, then go for it.  I wonder if it can be wrapped up between the second and third period of Hockey Night in Canada.  If we can also maintain our border and gun control in Canada, but give the citizens of both countries the right to live and work anywhere on either side of the border (paying taxes and respecting the laws of the state or province and national government), then sure.  You do a bit more for health care to prevent health refugees to Canada.  We can do a bit more military spending.   

    Well problem then become states vs federal government. Also your judicial system would have to abide by ours. There's the elephant in the room, quebec... 

  3. 48 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

    But there’s nothing in your proposal that explains how there can be gains in Canadian jobs and incomes rather than losses. We have no trouble finding cheap imports to buy.  Our challenge and the challenge of all modern western countries is maintaining decent incomes for the masses formerly called the middle class. 

    Simple, stop immigration, freemarket forces employer to pay more as there is a labor shortage. Its really not that hard.

    Liberal/progressive are the one responsible for the dissolution of the middle class. How do you think the democrat manage to stay in power after loosing the midwest, they import their votes. As soon as illegal's children turn 18 they vote democrat ushering in a never ending chain migration. That's why its important to end birth right citizen ship as it was meant in the constitution. 

  4. 3 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

    The results of a domestic dispute can be altogether different when there’s a gun around. It makes killing too easy. 

    Yeah? And how many time does this happen to justify public policy on? So if we get one case a year that is too many so lets ban all guns. More people die from blunt force trauma by hammers and fist then getting killed by rifles let alone a subset of rifles called "assault rifles" . So what now, are you going to ban fist too? I suggest pick a different social justice issue to pursue. 

  5. 1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

    1) Taking wealth and giving back a pittance.  Supporting regimes, then invading them and refusing to take the resulting refugees.  Great again.

    2) Who is more likely to upend a democracy of 300M ?  7K poor refugees or an illiterate, retarded moral degenerate president that Republicans refuse to deal with ?  I'll take my answer off the air.

    3) Why don't you save your own money and stop bombing people ?  I'll take my answer off the air.

    4) Your country is massively wealthy but you are brainwashed against actually having an equitable social contract.

     

     

    1) by taking wealth do you mean inventing the most useful invention in human history like internet and various other innovation? 

    2) try over 30 million undocumented and having to pay for their use of public resources without them contributing back.

    3) we've been doing that, but it seems like everytime we try to leave well enough alone some one to stir up trouble, remember the arab spring, and ukraine, everyone was asking for american intervention.  

    4) equal opportunity does not mean equality of outcome. Only a fool believe in equality of outcome.  

     

  6. 4 hours ago, dialamah said:

    You referred to people who care about the world as narcissists.  That isn't criticism, its painting those who disagree with you as evil.

    Don't deny the fact that there are plenty of narcissist on the left running around virtue signaling at every social justice issue under the sun. Your PM is a good example of one. The moment rational people call them out on it we get labeled 'bigot'. Like how naive and/or narcisitic do you have to be to think that you can fix all the problem around the world without fixing your own problem first. Are you going to take a refugee into your own home and if so is there 50 in the living room? 

    Empathy alone is not a untrammeled moral virtue. I despise people who have a unquestioned assumption that just because they have more pitty for someone they are morally superior to everyone else.

    Just because I feel sorry for you doesn't make me a good person. Plenty of example in history where people who cared about the world did a great deal of evil. Hitler, mao and stalin would fit the description. 

  7. 6 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

    The USA has been having an identity crisis for a couple decades now.  I always point to 'African-American' as an example of that. What's wrong with being an American who just happens to be black?

    Because that label is self segregating people in to tribalistic group identity. We are a country of individuals, not a collective, as the post modern Marxist keep telling everyone. 

  8. 53 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

    A stat was just released that this past year there were 40000 deaths by shooting in the US. 

    Yeah and 2/3  of those deaths are suicide so I'm guessing us evil republicans are responsible for that too?  Stop buying what the fake news is trying to tell you.

    And second, just because someone is capable of doing evil through the misuse of a tool doesn't mean I'm responsible for it nor does it trump might right to own said tool.

    Telling people to give up their gun because someone is misusing it is like saying since some men are capable of raping people lets remove all male appendages capable of said use.

    • Like 2
  9. 3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

    If you have 1 cent in your pocket, use it to buy a pack of matches before helping to save people displaced by our allies bombing people out of their homes.

     

    GOT IT.

    It ain't one cent and last I check..er erm. America was the most generous country on planet earth...by a wide margin... look we don't need to get into a debate about who is better at virtue signaling cause america is definitely number one. My criticism is we don't need to take in more refugees, america has been doing that since the beginning of its founding. Too many influx of  immigrant/refugee can overwhelm a stable democracy. Look at what happened to the uk and europe. Remember what happened to the roman empire when it took in too many barbarians?

    If you want to help those refugee then do so at the expense of your own money. Don't expect all of us to contribute because some of us are struggling just as much for that 1 cent. 

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/america-new-zealand-and-canada-top-list-of-world-s-most-generous-nations-a6849221.html

    • Like 1
  10. 2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

    Oh and if China doesn’t care about Canada, they don’t need to take our money, which means a lot more to them.  

    Canada is where the corrupt rich chinese who benefited from their position deposit their money. So in fact they don't care about Canada's money. Its the reverse, Canada cares about chinese money.

    2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

    You and BC always talk about how only the US matters and no one cares about Canada.  Then you don’t understand anti-American sentiment worldwide.  Be thankful that Canada has been an ally, because we’ve taken off some of your rough edge.  The US has caused enough shit on its own.  

    Look, its not like we hate Canada, we just find it amusing to provoke the sort of anti-american sentiment you are referring to because Canada (and the rest of western Europe for that matter) won't admit to its utter dependence on us while simultaneously loathing its own powerless position in the world.  Its more like hazing a little brother. What ever resentment that comes from that goes into a positive feedback loop feeding even more hate amusing us further. As BC put it "it's a gift that keep on giving" 

  11. 3 hours ago, dialamah said:

    Such a sin to care about others.  Who knew?

    What do you mean care about others. My criticism is take care of your self before helping others. Our own country have plenty of problem to fix yet we insist on taking on more responsibility of other country at the expense of our own? How many refugee do you think your universal health care system can take on before it collapses. Every refugee we let in who aren't skilled or educated can't contribute to our economy and is a burden to the state and everyone else . Calling this out doesn't make me any less heartless than the social justice warrior who engage in virtue signaling like JT.  

  12. 1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

    If you’re saying Canada doesn’t have an identity, you have to say the same for the US.

    Not true, America has a very unique identity, one of the most profound identity in history I would argue. Alot of it is enshrined in the constitution. It's no accident the freedom of speech is the first amendment and the right to bear arms is second. Think about that for a minute.  

    1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

    The purpose of the UN is to find common ground between nations for the betterment of humankind.  It’s hardly the sinister organization that many on here want to believe it is.

    Um, have you seen their human rights council?

     https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/06/us-un-human-rights/563276/

    1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

    Now the people who supported those decisions are complaining about the surge in refugees caused by those decisions.  I’m so sick of the stupidity.

    Which country refugee are you referring to? Are you talking about the south american one looking for better paying jobs and free welfare from our progressive tax system? If they were truely refugee why go to canada and america why not stay in mexico? Or are you talking about syria in which their own country rebelled against tyrannical goverance. Or lybia? Remember the arab spring? The US started every single one of those? 

    They spontaneous erupted because the power structure ruling those countries was no longer sustainable. Any society based on tyrannical power can not last. So don't blame america for its failing. America is the one who took on the greatest burden to clean up the mess while trying to maintain the peace. Last time america stood back and did nothing world war 1 and 2 started.

  13. 11 hours ago, turningrite said:

     If so, I believe you're agreeing with the emerging far-right, which is becoming more influential in much of the democratic West.

    Yaaassss, look its not some tin foil hat theory that globalist elites  want us to care about the rest of the world at the expense of our own. That is one reason why the UN was created. To bring about a global governance.

    Canada  for all intent and purpose is a prooving ground. Canada doesn't even have a canadian identity. The closest thing to an identity Canada have is vermont. 

    One of the easiest way to tell if someone is a globalist is ask if they believe in the concept of a sovereign national border? If no then they are 100 percent globalist. They're not like big foot, they exist.

    • Thanks 1
  14. 1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

     

    I think conservatives are like Muslims.  Some of them are bad.  Most of them are just like me. 

     

    You've no idea what fundamental Islam is do you? The majority of Muslim practice Islam as it is spelled out in the Koran. Any deviation from the holy book is considered sacrilegious. Good luck with reconciling those philosophy with the enlightenment Judaeo Christian West. The humanities and social sciences have been hi-jacked by post modern marxist, they could care less about your individual identity. All they preach is rights while dispensing with thousand of years worth of wisdom borne out of the Judaeo Christian West call logos aka responsibility of self and meaning derived from stoicism. 

    Justice warrior prof...

     

  15. 1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

    You don't understand how conservatives work.  If you object to their reality you are a 'snowflake'.  If they object to something it's because they have monopoly on what is 'normal'.  

    A sex-assaulting lying president is 'normal'.
    A corrupt drug-dealer premier is 'normal'.
    Race baiting, immigrant baiting, and gay baiting people into committing violence is very normal and acceptable as you are attacking non-normal, as they define it.

    And they shriek and jump on the table if you say 'happy holidays' or offer them a Starbucks cup that doesn't have baby Jesus and a donkey on it.  
    They are quite sensitive.

    You don't understand how conservatives liberals work.  If you object to their reality you are a 'bigot-racist'.  If they object to something it's because they have monopoly on what is 'virtuous'.  

    A  elitist lying president is 'normal'.
    A corrupt drone striking own citizens premier is 'normal'.
    Virtue signaling, open borders, and identity politics legislating people into compelled speech is very normal and acceptable as you are attacking non-normal, as they define it.

    And they shriek and jump on the table if you say 'merry Christmas' or offer them a Starbucks cup that have baby Jesus and a donkey on it.  
    They are quite sensitive.

    I've edited for you, thanks. 

  16. 8 minutes ago, Goddess said:

    Here are the people we COULD have in our country, contributing members of society who entered through the proper channels.......but Noooooooo, we are sending them back because we have 10's of 1000's of illegals flooding the country, living in hotels on the taxpayer's dime.

     

    https://globalnews.ca/news/4751451/family-canada-deported-christmas-eve/

    So the math is 10 good one and 1000 bad one....If you say so. Personal anecdote is not good for public policy. You don't make legislation around an outlier. 

  17. 1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

    There may be naivety on the left about the risks of immigration, but there's xenophobia and sometimes blatant racism among the right when it comes to discussing any form of immigration.  

    Well definitely was not expecting a common sense response after chumming the water with canadian bait.... 

    Yes I agree identity politics exist on both left and right but it is the left that dominates universities and academia. Identity politics has been institutionalized by the left. Much of what happens at a university happens everywhere else 5 years later. Even if people tend to lean more conservative as they get older they are still around long enough to do plenty of damage. Racism is not institutionalized, it's much deeper than that, xenophobia and racism has much to do with fear of the unknown. There is a biological mechanism for this not a rational one. The left's intersectionality is purely ideological/rational, it's just a really dumb idea plain and simple, can only lead to tribalism and war. 

  18. 2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

    Riiight.  It's just more alarmism.  Even with Trump in office they have a strategy to claim liberals are about to destroy the world through insidious means.  If it's not vaccines it's transgender athletes.

    Don't forget the Canadian plot to micro-agress americans while simultaneously feeling surrey abut it. 

    But don't take an American word on it... 

    Here's a canadian explanation of what you progressive/post modern marxist are doing... 

     

×
×
  • Create New...