Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I find that people making these arguments about legal v illegal immigration to be selling a pig in a poke.
Let me see if I understand you:
You are "for" legal (sic) immigration. According to the anti-immigration activists "legal immigration" is code for citizenship. So you have no problem with immigrants provided they went through some legal process aimed at requiring people to become citizens.
Now, let us forget the fact that this year alone at least 780,000 people will take the oath and become citizens. Radical Muslims, communists, atheists, murderers, social outcasts and all manner of people you would find to be objectionable under most circumstances are welcome... they did it "legally" as you are so fond of calling it.
These 780,000 people (this year alone) can now be a part of the body politic, having the privilege of voting and then drawing out of Socialist Security, Medicare, Medicaid, AND voting in their version of what they think America ought to be.
Meanwhile, you get your boxers in a bunch because low wage people come here and work jobs that Americans obviously don't want... don't try to "school" me until you've spent a couple of weeks here with me. Here the whites and the "legal" Americans don't apply for the jobs; they don't want the jobs; they won't work them when they get them. ANYBODY who thinks differently is welcome to spend a couple of weeks with me and I will shatter your presupposition all to Hell.
But, I will not give up trying to get the substance of your argument.
Americans do those jobs already. It is only in high immigration areas that they get pushed out of that job market by being undercut.
They do NOT apply for them here. Rather than B.S. the posters, take a little of your time to come here, see for yourself and try to prove me wrong. It will beat the Hell out of you misleading people with something I can easily disprove.
We advertise on Craigslist, with the Dept. of Labor, in churches, in local papers, even with flyers. Where you live may be a different demographic and maybe you live in Heaven where every white dude don't think he's a contractor just because he's got a ten year old truck and some cheap business cards.
I live in a rust belt city.
I've worked many of those jobs, that you say, Americans won't do.
I've worked along side of Americans, white and black and other.
If Americans aren't applying for those jobs where you are, it's because they have been pushed out of the market.
No sir. They were not "pushed" out of the market (you're back to blaming the foreigners.)
The anti-immigrant lobby with their atmosphere of the pee test, blood test, hair sample, MVR check, credit check, criminal background check, driver’s license, National ID Card / E Verify, Socialist Surveillance Number – ooop. “Social Security Number,” birth certificate, occupation license, credit card, firearms license, proof of insurance, DNA sample, fingerprints, and access to your social media accounts forced Americans into a second class citizenship.
Between that and the government / medical community getting the population strung out on legal drugs, most people cannot pass the background checks. A youthful indiscretion keeps many people from being able to function in a normal society and Socialist Security, welfare, unemployment, etc. are enough to keep a sizable number of people addicted to the government dole.
780,000 foreigners will become legal citizens (sic) this year and they will get jobs that Americans could get except for the fact that most foreigners won't have a record... Why? Because not every offense in other countries is a crime. And, even if it were, you cannot depend on foreign governments to always tell you the truth. IF you could depend on them, you would not have gotten the Tsarnev brothers nor that Muslim couple that went on a mass shooting spree in San Bernadino, California.
The insanity started by the anti-immigrant, deport 'em all, build the wall fanaticism is the real culprit. There is a problem; the current "solutions" (if you can call regression) is no solution at all.
Plenty of jobs that don't require drug testing or background checks.
Couple of years ago, when I was making more money, we had a series of cleaning ladies come in, weekly.
We paid 30 bucks an hour, and they were all Americans.
You go to a city that has been flooded by immigrants, legal and.or illegal, and those Americans would be undercut by Third World Labor.
Americans do those jobs already. It is only in high immigration areas that they get pushed out of that job market by being undercut.
They do NOT apply for them here. Rather than B.S. the posters, take a little of your time to come here, see for yourself and try to prove me wrong. It will beat the Hell out of you misleading people with something I can easily disprove.
We advertise on Craigslist, with the Dept. of Labor, in churches, in local papers, even with flyers. Where you live may be a different demographic and maybe you live in Heaven where every white dude don't think he's a contractor just because he's got a ten year old truck and some cheap business cards.
I live in a rust belt city.
I've worked many of those jobs, that you say, Americans won't do.
I've worked along side of Americans, white and black and other.
If Americans aren't applying for those jobs where you are, it's because they have been pushed out of the market.
No sir. They were not "pushed" out of the market (you're back to blaming the foreigners.)
The anti-immigrant lobby with their atmosphere of the pee test, blood test, hair sample, MVR check, credit check, criminal background check, driver’s license, National ID Card / E Verify, Socialist Surveillance Number – ooop. “Social Security Number,” birth certificate, occupation license, credit card, firearms license, proof of insurance, DNA sample, fingerprints, and access to your social media accounts forced Americans into a second class citizenship.
Between that and the government / medical community getting the population strung out on legal drugs, most people cannot pass the background checks. A youthful indiscretion keeps many people from being able to function in a normal society and Socialist Security, welfare, unemployment, etc. are enough to keep a sizable number of people addicted to the government dole.
780,000 foreigners will become legal citizens (sic) this year and they will get jobs that Americans could get except for the fact that most foreigners won't have a record... Why? Because not every offense in other countries is a crime. And, even if it were, you cannot depend on foreign governments to always tell you the truth. IF you could depend on them, you would not have gotten the Tsarnev brothers nor that Muslim couple that went on a mass shooting spree in San Bernadino, California.
The insanity started by the anti-immigrant, deport 'em all, build the wall fanaticism is the real culprit. There is a problem; the current "solutions" (if you can call regression) is no solution at all.
Plenty of jobs that don't require drug testing or background checks.
Couple of years ago, when I was making more money, we had a series of cleaning ladies come in, weekly.
We paid 30 bucks an hour, and they were all Americans.
You go to a city that has been flooded by immigrants, legal and.or illegal, and those Americans would be undercut by Third World Labor.
I don't know what land you live in, but where I'm at even day laborers are drug tested and background checked. Again, rather than to have this back and forth B.S. you should spend a couple of weeks with me and I can put a rest to what you're slinging on this site.
There are NOT plenty of jobs where one can skirt background checks. Everybody from temporary agencies to fast food places and from construction sites to Walmart all do it in Georgia.
They do NOT apply for them here. Rather than B.S. the posters, take a little of your time to come here, see for yourself and try to prove me wrong. It will beat the Hell out of you misleading people with something I can easily disprove.
We advertise on Craigslist, with the Dept. of Labor, in churches, in local papers, even with flyers. Where you live may be a different demographic and maybe you live in Heaven where every white dude don't think he's a contractor just because he's got a ten year old truck and some cheap business cards.
I live in a rust belt city.
I've worked many of those jobs, that you say, Americans won't do.
I've worked along side of Americans, white and black and other.
If Americans aren't applying for those jobs where you are, it's because they have been pushed out of the market.
No sir. They were not "pushed" out of the market (you're back to blaming the foreigners.)
The anti-immigrant lobby with their atmosphere of the pee test, blood test, hair sample, MVR check, credit check, criminal background check, driver’s license, National ID Card / E Verify, Socialist Surveillance Number – ooop. “Social Security Number,” birth certificate, occupation license, credit card, firearms license, proof of insurance, DNA sample, fingerprints, and access to your social media accounts forced Americans into a second class citizenship.
Between that and the government / medical community getting the population strung out on legal drugs, most people cannot pass the background checks. A youthful indiscretion keeps many people from being able to function in a normal society and Socialist Security, welfare, unemployment, etc. are enough to keep a sizable number of people addicted to the government dole.
780,000 foreigners will become legal citizens (sic) this year and they will get jobs that Americans could get except for the fact that most foreigners won't have a record... Why? Because not every offense in other countries is a crime. And, even if it were, you cannot depend on foreign governments to always tell you the truth. IF you could depend on them, you would not have gotten the Tsarnev brothers nor that Muslim couple that went on a mass shooting spree in San Bernadino, California.
The insanity started by the anti-immigrant, deport 'em all, build the wall fanaticism is the real culprit. There is a problem; the current "solutions" (if you can call regression) is no solution at all.
Plenty of jobs that don't require drug testing or background checks.
Couple of years ago, when I was making more money, we had a series of cleaning ladies come in, weekly.
We paid 30 bucks an hour, and they were all Americans.
You go to a city that has been flooded by immigrants, legal and.or illegal, and those Americans would be undercut by Third World Labor.
I don't know what land you live in, but where I'm at even day laborers are drug tested and background checked. Again, rather than to have this back and forth B.S. you should spend a couple of weeks with me and I can put a rest to what you're slinging on this site.
There are NOT plenty of jobs where one can skirt background checks. Everybody from temporary agencies to fast food places and from construction sites to Walmart all do it in Georgia.
Then maybe you need to retreat from the immigration wave to where employers are less able to be complete dicks.
I have a State Job, was not drug tested and was told that felony convictions would only be a problem is I lied about it and they found out later.
AND here we see the difference that a pool of Third World labor makes.
Still loving those outsiders?
if they would've stopped this crap way back when, there wouldn't be a problem with any of the aspects you claimThe story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
if they would've stopped this crap way back when, there wouldn't be a problem with any of the aspects you claimThe story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
'''This report estimates the annual costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level to be about $113 billion'''--Billion
The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers | Federation for American Immigration Reform
more workers = wages down--prices up ..basic business facts
SSN based ID? SSN's have been used to verify ID for years prior to 2005. The Patriot Act does nothing but amend the 1952 INA granting more enforcement (adding more BP agents) and investigative powers to the AG and INS regarding both foreign and domestic terrorists (wanna-be soldiers - Private Militia Groups and there idiotic commanders) in the US. E-verify has been around since 1997.First off, the "third worlders" didn't have a damn thing to do with it. YOUR SIDE DID IT. It was a Tea Party anti immigrant Republican, Rep. James Sensenbrenner that introduced the so called "Patriot Act" and the National ID / REAL ID Act which led to SSN based ID and E-Verify. "Third Worlders" didn't have squat to do with it.
The 16th Amendment was never on its way out the door. LMFAOIn doing so, the anti-immigrant lobby propped up the 16th Amendment and the income tax at a time when it is was on its way out the door. Now, let me decipher all of this for you so that you don't get lost.
The money illegals receive comes from the states and the state welfare programs. Some of the programs are block granted by the Federal Govt, yet not all are. The employer can already hire who ever the hell he wants, he simply has to abide by the rules in which he is allowed to own the business and hire legal workers. Even Hong Kong is putting rules and regulations in place after realizing a completely free market requires them.HAD the constitutionalists prevailed on repealing the income tax, the federal government would not have access to money your side claims the federal gives to so - called "illegal" aliens. So, IF government benefits were a factor in foreigners coming here, that would have been off the table. Additionally, if people who think like you were not involved and we did not have quotas and so forth, the employer could hire whomever in the Hell they wanted.
I have an all white work force now. :SHRUG:What that means is that if some employers wanted to hire an all white work force, you'd be in luck. But, that's not what the issue is about. Foreigners cannot "steal" jobs that the public never owned in the first place. The underlying issue is about making America into the greatest POLICE STATE in human history and using the weakest people as scapegoats to get the job done.
Day laborers hanging out in the Home Depot parking lot that you pick up to build your decks doesn't require a background check or a piss test, unless you choose to stand their and watch him/her pee as some sort of weird fetish. Background checks, even in Georgia, via a private owned business is not a mandated requirement. It is up to the individual business to request or not. The employee must choose to give his consent or not, and the employer can not hold it against the prospective employee.BTW, there are 159 counties in Georgia. Every city, every county and the state government require the whole background check thing... so those jobs are pretty much dominated by people from foreign countries. Thanks to you.
you've never read of illegals/etc using fake SSNsif they would've stopped this crap way back when, there wouldn't be a problem with any of the aspects you claimThe story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
'''This report estimates the annual costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level to be about $113 billion'''--Billion
The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers | Federation for American Immigration Reform
more workers = wages down--prices up ..basic business facts
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but FAIR is anything but fair. It is a non-profit corporation financed by John Tanton whose main interest is in eugenics. It's not a very good study.
There have been studies from non-partisan organizations and all of them conclude that undocumented immigrants pay as much in taxes as they receive in benefits. One such study was done by the Congressional Budget Office. One of their conclusions:
"Although it is difficult to obtain precise estimates of the net impact of the unauthorized population on state and local budgets (see Box 1), that impact is most likely modest."
https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/110th-congress-2007-2008/reports/12-6-immigration.pdf
Most of that data was compiled in 2006. Since that time the REAL ID Act was implemented (having been passed in 2005.) That was supposed to put teeth into E-Verify, and E-Verify is a precursor to biometric identification (which is one of the reasons the one worlders are using the people who obsess over immigration.)
5 Things You Should Know About E-Verify
It does no good to have biometric ID for immigrants unless the citizenry has the chip as well.
FAIR has to fudge figures in order to keep beating the drums. But, not only is the cost of undocumented immigrants modest at the local level, the undocumented community puts $12 BILLION DOLLARS annually into Socialist Security.
IF you think the immigration debacle is about jobs, I can solve that for you without another government program, wall, new taxes, deportation, or any so - called "solution" the NWO has floated.
You claim FAIR isn't a very good study, yet you link to the CBO that pretty much backs up what FAIR's study stated. fuknhilariusif they would've stopped this crap way back when, there wouldn't be a problem with any of the aspects you claimThe story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
'''This report estimates the annual costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level to be about $113 billion'''--Billion
The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers | Federation for American Immigration Reform
more workers = wages down--prices up ..basic business facts
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but FAIR is anything but fair. It is a non-profit corporation financed by John Tanton whose main interest is in eugenics. It's not a very good study.
There have been studies from non-partisan organizations and all of them conclude that undocumented immigrants pay as much in taxes as they receive in benefits. One such study was done by the Congressional Budget Office. One of their conclusions:
"Although it is difficult to obtain precise estimates of the net impact of the unauthorized population on state and local budgets (see Box 1), that impact is most likely modest."
https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/110th-congress-2007-2008/reports/12-6-immigration.pdf
Most of that data was compiled in 2006. Since that time the REAL ID Act was implemented (having been passed in 2005.) That was supposed to put teeth into E-Verify, and E-Verify is a precursor to biometric identification (which is one of the reasons the one worlders are using the people who obsess over immigration.)
5 Things You Should Know About E-Verify
It does no good to have biometric ID for immigrants unless the citizenry has the chip as well.
FAIR has to fudge figures in order to keep beating the drums. But, not only is the cost of undocumented immigrants modest at the local level, the undocumented community puts $12 BILLION DOLLARS annually into Socialist Security.
IF you think the immigration debacle is about jobs, I can solve that for you without another government program, wall, new taxes, deportation, or any so - called "solution" the NWO has floated.
you've never read of illegals/etc using fake SSNsif they would've stopped this crap way back when, there wouldn't be a problem with any of the aspects you claimThe story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
'''This report estimates the annual costs of illegal immigration at the federal, state and local level to be about $113 billion'''--Billion
The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers | Federation for American Immigration Reform
more workers = wages down--prices up ..basic business facts
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but FAIR is anything but fair. It is a non-profit corporation financed by John Tanton whose main interest is in eugenics. It's not a very good study.
There have been studies from non-partisan organizations and all of them conclude that undocumented immigrants pay as much in taxes as they receive in benefits. One such study was done by the Congressional Budget Office. One of their conclusions:
"Although it is difficult to obtain precise estimates of the net impact of the unauthorized population on state and local budgets (see Box 1), that impact is most likely modest."
https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/110th-congress-2007-2008/reports/12-6-immigration.pdf
Most of that data was compiled in 2006. Since that time the REAL ID Act was implemented (having been passed in 2005.) That was supposed to put teeth into E-Verify, and E-Verify is a precursor to biometric identification (which is one of the reasons the one worlders are using the people who obsess over immigration.)
5 Things You Should Know About E-Verify
It does no good to have biometric ID for immigrants unless the citizenry has the chip as well.
FAIR has to fudge figures in order to keep beating the drums. But, not only is the cost of undocumented immigrants modest at the local level, the undocumented community puts $12 BILLION DOLLARS annually into Socialist Security.
IF you think the immigration debacle is about jobs, I can solve that for you without another government program, wall, new taxes, deportation, or any so - called "solution" the NWO has floated.
at my relative's work they told 2 foreigners they had to let them go because their SSNs were bad
do you know what the foreigners said?? we can get different SSNs !!!
and it's a security issue
Horse shit.Foreigners cannot "steal" jobs that the public never owned in the first place.
I live in a rust belt city.
I've worked many of those jobs, that you say, Americans won't do.
I've worked along side of Americans, white and black and other.
If Americans aren't applying for those jobs where you are, it's because they have been pushed out of the market.
No sir. They were not "pushed" out of the market (you're back to blaming the foreigners.)
The anti-immigrant lobby with their atmosphere of the pee test, blood test, hair sample, MVR check, credit check, criminal background check, driver’s license, National ID Card / E Verify, Socialist Surveillance Number – ooop. “Social Security Number,” birth certificate, occupation license, credit card, firearms license, proof of insurance, DNA sample, fingerprints, and access to your social media accounts forced Americans into a second class citizenship.
Between that and the government / medical community getting the population strung out on legal drugs, most people cannot pass the background checks. A youthful indiscretion keeps many people from being able to function in a normal society and Socialist Security, welfare, unemployment, etc. are enough to keep a sizable number of people addicted to the government dole.
780,000 foreigners will become legal citizens (sic) this year and they will get jobs that Americans could get except for the fact that most foreigners won't have a record... Why? Because not every offense in other countries is a crime. And, even if it were, you cannot depend on foreign governments to always tell you the truth. IF you could depend on them, you would not have gotten the Tsarnev brothers nor that Muslim couple that went on a mass shooting spree in San Bernadino, California.
The insanity started by the anti-immigrant, deport 'em all, build the wall fanaticism is the real culprit. There is a problem; the current "solutions" (if you can call regression) is no solution at all.
Plenty of jobs that don't require drug testing or background checks.
Couple of years ago, when I was making more money, we had a series of cleaning ladies come in, weekly.
We paid 30 bucks an hour, and they were all Americans.
You go to a city that has been flooded by immigrants, legal and.or illegal, and those Americans would be undercut by Third World Labor.
I don't know what land you live in, but where I'm at even day laborers are drug tested and background checked. Again, rather than to have this back and forth B.S. you should spend a couple of weeks with me and I can put a rest to what you're slinging on this site.
There are NOT plenty of jobs where one can skirt background checks. Everybody from temporary agencies to fast food places and from construction sites to Walmart all do it in Georgia.
Then maybe you need to retreat from the immigration wave to where employers are less able to be complete dicks.
I have a State Job, was not drug tested and was told that felony convictions would only be a problem is I lied about it and they found out later.
AND here we see the difference that a pool of Third World labor makes.
Still loving those outsiders?
First off, the "third worlders" didn't have a damn thing to do with it. YOUR SIDE DID IT. It was a Tea Party anti immigrant Republican, Rep. James Sensenbrenner that introduced the so called "Patriot Act" and the National ID / REAL ID Act which led to SSN based ID and E-Verify. "Third Worlders" didn't have squat to do with it.
In doing so, the anti-immigrant lobby propped up the 16th Amendment and the income tax at a time when it is was on its way out the door. Now, let me decipher all of this for you so that you don't get lost.
HAD the constitutionalists prevailed on repealing the income tax, the federal government would not have access to money your side claims the federal gives to so - called "illegal" aliens. So, IF government benefits were a factor in foreigners coming here, that would have been off the table. Additionally, if people who think like you were not involved and we did not have quotas and so forth, the employer could hire whomever in the Hell they wanted.
What that means is that if some employers wanted to hire an all white work force, you'd be in luck. But, that's not what the issue is about. Foreigners cannot "steal" jobs that the public never owned in the first place. The underlying issue is about making America into the greatest POLICE STATE in human history and using the weakest people as scapegoats to get the job done.
BTW, there are 159 counties in Georgia. Every city, every county and the state government require the whole background check thing... so those jobs are pretty much dominated by people from foreign countries. Thanks to you.
An illegal having with holdings taken out gets back more when they file their end of year tax forms than they had with held. So what taxes are they paying exactly besides consumption taxes on fuel or local sales tax and property tax (that doesn't cover their use of local services)?And hence my point. Either you made it for me or didn't understand it.
IF undocumented foreigners use fake SSNs to pay taxes, the taxes still get paid. Smart people allow enough taxes to be withheld in order to avoid audits. Those who don't risk getting caught and then put in prison for tax evasion.
It is mentioned in Marx 1848 writings as being recognized already in most advanced countries, what it is not is Marx's idea of what communism is. SMFHAGAIN, most of the reason the powers that be drop so much money publicizing the immigration debacle is to prop up the 16th Amendment which, BTW, is a plank from the Communist Manifesto!
Your idea has the rich paying less and the poor paying more, you simply make it easier for the rich. Introducing legislation doesn't mean the 16th was about to be repealed or that it was even on the ropes, hell it never made it to committee in Congress. The "groups" you belong to are ignorant of history.If you repeal the 16th Amendment and everybody pays into federal taxes equally, your complaint goes away. But, those who fret over immigration do not want the 16th Amendment repealed. My own U.S. Congressman introduced legislation to repeal the 16th Amendment (after much pressure from groups I belong to.) It was the most researched piece of legislation in U.S. history. But, after 9 / 11 the power brokers needed the SSN to stay in place to enforce the National ID / REAL ID Act - E Verify, which will ultimately usher in the presupposed need to have microchip technology implanted in human beings.
What makes you think they could afford to fly to Canada? What makes you think they could get a visa to enter Canada? Trekking from Canada to the US is harder and has a very short window of opportunity.I have no doubt that foreigners can always get ID. I also have no doubts that if they ever built a wall around the southern border, Hispanics would legally fly to Canada (that readily accepts foreigners) and then walk back to the United States to be with their families and / or work jobs willingly offered.
Congress could still tax you on your income just as they are now even without the 16th Amendment. All the 16th did was allow the feds to not apportion the taxes among the states or base taxation on the census.The objective of the globalists is to have you support anti-immigrant laws so that they can keep placing tyrannical measures into place until you wake up in the absolute POLICE STATE, wondering how it happened. So to Hell with the SSN and the 16th Amendment. Repeal it and let's go back to constitutional taxation. You tell me what symptom you want addressed and I will give you the right solution.
The story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
The story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
I live in a city without a lot of illegals. I pay a white American to cut my grass. It is not ruinously expensive.
>>I live in a city without a lot of illegals. I pay a white American to cut my grass. It is not ruinously expensive.<<
My OP isn't about race so much as immigration or in today's world illegal immigration. My personal beliefs are that there should be a clear established line. I rather have legal immigration, but the liberals allowed illegal immigration and we're stuck with it. It doesn't make sense to deport all the illegals and maybe some can get legal status. Thus, we have the sanctuary cities and their policies. If you want to make it about race, in this case, whites, then it's about smart whites vs not so smart whites who run these cities. It's not just whites who run these cities, but I'm just making it simple.
Maybe having a white American cut your grass is a sign of quality in your city. However, I don't think it will last.
Basically what I'm saying is the sanctuary cities will thrive more and your city won't be thriving as much. People die daily. You can't just get 100,000K increase in population in a few years through birth.
I find that people making these arguments about legal v illegal immigration to be selling a pig in a poke.
Let me see if I understand you:
You are "for" legal (sic) immigration. According to the anti-immigration activists "legal immigration" is code for citizenship. So you have no problem with immigrants provided they went through some legal process aimed at requiring people to become citizens.
Now, let us forget the fact that this year alone at least 780,000 people will take the oath and become citizens. Radical Muslims, communists, atheists, murderers, social outcasts and all manner of people you would find to be objectionable under most circumstances are welcome... they did it "legally" as you are so fond of calling it.
These 780,000 people (this year alone) can now be a part of the body politic, having the privilege of voting and then drawing out of Socialist Security, Medicare, Medicaid, AND voting in their version of what they think America ought to be.
Meanwhile, you get your boxers in a bunch because low wage people come here and work jobs that Americans obviously don't want... don't try to "school" me until you've spent a couple of weeks here with me. Here the whites and the "legal" Americans don't apply for the jobs; they don't want the jobs; they won't work them when they get them. ANYBODY who thinks differently is welcome to spend a couple of weeks with me and I will shatter your presupposition all to Hell.
But, I will not give up trying to get the substance of your argument.
The story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
I live in a city without a lot of illegals. I pay a white American to cut my grass. It is not ruinously expensive.
>>I live in a city without a lot of illegals. I pay a white American to cut my grass. It is not ruinously expensive.<<
My OP isn't about race so much as immigration or in today's world illegal immigration. My personal beliefs are that there should be a clear established line. I rather have legal immigration, but the liberals allowed illegal immigration and we're stuck with it. It doesn't make sense to deport all the illegals and maybe some can get legal status. Thus, we have the sanctuary cities and their policies. If you want to make it about race, in this case, whites, then it's about smart whites vs not so smart whites who run these cities. It's not just whites who run these cities, but I'm just making it simple.
Maybe having a white American cut your grass is a sign of quality in your city. However, I don't think it will last.
Basically what I'm saying is the sanctuary cities will thrive more and your city won't be thriving as much. People die daily. You can't just get 100,000K increase in population in a few years through birth.
I was not making it about race. I made it about having an American cut the grass, ie a job that "no one else will take".
A growing population of Third Worlders that bring their Third World Problems is not a thriving city.
Give me a city full of Americans with their First World Problems, and I'll live with fewer traffic jams and lower crime.
Quality of life is not defined by macro economic growth, but by per capital growth.
A flood of poor is not the answer.
The story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
Prolly"?
Anytime I read that abomination, my ability to read shuts down because my brain instantly realizes that the post is likely BS if a person cannot write using the English language. I automatically subtract about 30 IQ points from my expectations.
Please check yourself, before you wreck yourself.
The story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
Are you talking about "immigrant", or illegals ?
The story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
I live in a city without a lot of illegals. I pay a white American to cut my grass. It is not ruinously expensive.
>>I live in a city without a lot of illegals. I pay a white American to cut my grass. It is not ruinously expensive.<<
My OP isn't about race so much as immigration or in today's world illegal immigration. My personal beliefs are that there should be a clear established line. I rather have legal immigration, but the liberals allowed illegal immigration and we're stuck with it. It doesn't make sense to deport all the illegals and maybe some can get legal status. Thus, we have the sanctuary cities and their policies. If you want to make it about race, in this case, whites, then it's about smart whites vs not so smart whites who run these cities. It's not just whites who run these cities, but I'm just making it simple.
Maybe having a white American cut your grass is a sign of quality in your city. However, I don't think it will last.
Basically what I'm saying is the sanctuary cities will thrive more and your city won't be thriving as much. People die daily. You can't just get 100,000K increase in population in a few years through birth.
I find that people making these arguments about legal v illegal immigration to be selling a pig in a poke.
Let me see if I understand you:
You are "for" legal (sic) immigration. According to the anti-immigration activists "legal immigration" is code for citizenship. So you have no problem with immigrants provided they went through some legal process aimed at requiring people to become citizens.
Now, let us forget the fact that this year alone at least 780,000 people will take the oath and become citizens. Radical Muslims, communists, atheists, murderers, social outcasts and all manner of people you would find to be objectionable under most circumstances are welcome... they did it "legally" as you are so fond of calling it.
These 780,000 people (this year alone) can now be a part of the body politic, having the privilege of voting and then drawing out of Socialist Security, Medicare, Medicaid, AND voting in their version of what they think America ought to be.
Meanwhile, you get your boxers in a bunch because low wage people come here and work jobs that Americans obviously don't want... don't try to "school" me until you've spent a couple of weeks here with me. Here the whites and the "legal" Americans don't apply for the jobs; they don't want the jobs; they won't work them when they get them. ANYBODY who thinks differently is welcome to spend a couple of weeks with me and I will shatter your presupposition all to Hell.
But, I will not give up trying to get the substance of your argument.
>>You are "for" legal (sic) immigration. According to the anti-immigration activists "legal immigration" is code for citizenship. So you have no problem with immigrants provided they went through some legal process aimed at requiring people to become citizens.<<
Somebody will take these people. The USA has always been a nation of immigrants and this is why the US has been thriving and became #1 in the world if you ask me. Other countries are generally homogeneous. Of course, legal immigration leads to citizenship. That is the idea. I'm not sure you get this.
>>Now, let us forget the fact that this year alone at least 780,000 people will take the oath and become citizens. Radical Muslims, communists, atheists, murderers, social outcasts and all manner of people you would find to be objectionable under most circumstances are welcome... they did it "legally" as you are so fond of calling it.<<
This is utter BS. It isn't about Saddam releasing all the prisoners and sending them to his neighboring countries. The terrorists, criminals and commies are few and far between. Most are working poor. Legal or not, these people help fill the bottom level of our economy. As for the baddies, we hire police and use new technology to monitor and arrest them.
>>Meanwhile, you get your boxers in a bunch because low wage people come here and work jobs that Americans obviously don't want... don't try to "school" me until you've spent a couple of weeks here with me. Here the whites and the "legal" Americans don't apply for the jobs; they don't want the jobs; they won't work them when they get them. ANYBODY who thinks differently is welcome to spend a couple of weeks with me and I will shatter your presupposition all to Hell.<<
I want people here who will take jobs Americans don't want. Prolly any job that makes their skin darker or ruins their mani-pedis are jobs they don't want. The other guy said if you pay them enough, then Americans will take the jobs, but this isn't true. Besides, what businessperson in their right minds wants to pay $15 or more minimum wage for people to do these unskilled jobs?
>>But, I will not give up trying to get the substance of your argument.<<
My argument is about my city thriving and having a sanctuary city in today's environment guarantees that my city will thrive. You can be a redneck and disallow immigrants, but your city will end up stagnating as its population will go down. People die daily. It doesn't matter if you build out suburbs in these metro centers when its population goes down. The whole area's economy will suffer. People will move to where there are jobs and when the population of a city goes up, then that's where the big companies will want to take advantage of. Companies who build out in towns and cities that aren't growing and thriving will go downhill.
The story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
I live in a city without a lot of illegals. I pay a white American to cut my grass. It is not ruinously expensive.
>>I live in a city without a lot of illegals. I pay a white American to cut my grass. It is not ruinously expensive.<<
My OP isn't about race so much as immigration or in today's world illegal immigration. My personal beliefs are that there should be a clear established line. I rather have legal immigration, but the liberals allowed illegal immigration and we're stuck with it. It doesn't make sense to deport all the illegals and maybe some can get legal status. Thus, we have the sanctuary cities and their policies. If you want to make it about race, in this case, whites, then it's about smart whites vs not so smart whites who run these cities. It's not just whites who run these cities, but I'm just making it simple.
Maybe having a white American cut your grass is a sign of quality in your city. However, I don't think it will last.
Basically what I'm saying is the sanctuary cities will thrive more and your city won't be thriving as much. People die daily. You can't just get 100,000K increase in population in a few years through birth.
I find that people making these arguments about legal v illegal immigration to be selling a pig in a poke.
Let me see if I understand you:
You are "for" legal (sic) immigration. According to the anti-immigration activists "legal immigration" is code for citizenship. So you have no problem with immigrants provided they went through some legal process aimed at requiring people to become citizens.
Now, let us forget the fact that this year alone at least 780,000 people will take the oath and become citizens. Radical Muslims, communists, atheists, murderers, social outcasts and all manner of people you would find to be objectionable under most circumstances are welcome... they did it "legally" as you are so fond of calling it.
These 780,000 people (this year alone) can now be a part of the body politic, having the privilege of voting and then drawing out of Socialist Security, Medicare, Medicaid, AND voting in their version of what they think America ought to be.
Meanwhile, you get your boxers in a bunch because low wage people come here and work jobs that Americans obviously don't want... don't try to "school" me until you've spent a couple of weeks here with me. Here the whites and the "legal" Americans don't apply for the jobs; they don't want the jobs; they won't work them when they get them. ANYBODY who thinks differently is welcome to spend a couple of weeks with me and I will shatter your presupposition all to Hell.
But, I will not give up trying to get the substance of your argument.
>>You are "for" legal (sic) immigration. According to the anti-immigration activists "legal immigration" is code for citizenship. So you have no problem with immigrants provided they went through some legal process aimed at requiring people to become citizens.<<
Somebody will take these people. The USA has always been a nation of immigrants and this is why the US has been thriving and became #1 in the world if you ask me. Other countries are generally homogeneous. Of course, legal immigration leads to citizenship. That is the idea. I'm not sure you get this.
>>Now, let us forget the fact that this year alone at least 780,000 people will take the oath and become citizens. Radical Muslims, communists, atheists, murderers, social outcasts and all manner of people you would find to be objectionable under most circumstances are welcome... they did it "legally" as you are so fond of calling it.<<
This is utter BS. It isn't about Saddam releasing all the prisoners and sending them to his neighboring countries. The terrorists, criminals and commies are few and far between. Most are working poor. Legal or not, these people help fill the bottom level of our economy. As for the baddies, we hire police and use new technology to monitor and arrest them.
>>Meanwhile, you get your boxers in a bunch because low wage people come here and work jobs that Americans obviously don't want... don't try to "school" me until you've spent a couple of weeks here with me. Here the whites and the "legal" Americans don't apply for the jobs; they don't want the jobs; they won't work them when they get them. ANYBODY who thinks differently is welcome to spend a couple of weeks with me and I will shatter your presupposition all to Hell.<<
I want people here who will take jobs Americans don't want. Prolly any job that makes their skin darker or ruins their mani-pedis are jobs they don't want. The other guy said if you pay them enough, then Americans will take the jobs, but this isn't true. Besides, what businessperson in their right minds wants to pay $15 or more minimum wage for people to do these unskilled jobs?
>>But, I will not give up trying to get the substance of your argument.<<
My argument is about my city thriving and having a sanctuary city in today's environment guarantees that my city will thrive. You can be a redneck and disallow immigrants, but your city will end up stagnating as its population will go down. People die daily. It doesn't matter if you build out suburbs in these metro centers when its population goes down. The whole area's economy will suffer. People will move to where there are jobs and when the population of a city goes up, then that's where the big companies will want to take advantage of. Companies who build out in towns and cities that aren't growing and thriving will go downhill.
Dude, for real. You need to learn how to quote people so that the rest of us can tell when one poster's comments begin and end and where yours starts and ends.
Having done extensive work in immigration law, I can tell you, for a fact, that most people who come here and either enter or remain after their visa expires do not want to become citizens. So, you obviously do not get it.
Between 1986 and 2001 America offered SEVEN amnesties for those without papers. Fewer than half applied! That should tell you something. Not everybody who comes here wants to become a citizen NOR do they need to become a citizen.
The very first Naturalization Act in the United States was in 1790. It limited citizenship to whites. Still people came here by the millions to take advantage of opportunities willingly offered.
And while you're stomping your feet yelling bullshit, the fact is more violent crimes in the past decade have been committed by "legal" immigrants and their immediate offspring than by American citizens and undocumented immigrants combined!!!
America has an immigration problem, but it cannot be resolved with the build the wall, deport 'em all mantra. I'm against mass deportations, the nutty wall idea, and it's inevitable outcome - the ultimate POLICE STATE.
The story of immigrants is a two-way street. We all know about the extremists whose only mission is wreak terror among our population (Just look at London and its mayor Sadiq Khan who is prolly a terrorist himself). These are the immigrants we don't want.
The other side of the coin is non-terror immigrants take jobs that no one else will take. They pile into rental units where others won't rent in order to make things work for themselves. They make money and they spend money. They bring in new types of foods and services. They add to a city's dying population and the cities end up thriving.
Today, we have over 80 sanctuary cities in the US. Most are liberal urban centers. Where I live, it isn't a sanctuary city. The city is modernizing, but its restaurants, businesses, stores and such aren't full. A few places still attract a crowd. Yet, the city isn't thriving even though it's a lead city in a large metropolitan area. An example a big city not thriving would be St. Louis, MO. It has the population and the metropolitan area, but once the workday is over, people go home to their suburban homes.
"More than 80 cities in the United States,[69] including Washington D.C., New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, San Diego, San Jose, Salt Lake City, Phoenix, Dallas, Fort Worth, Houston, Detroit, Jersey City, Minneapolis, Miami, Denver, Baltimore, Seattle, Portland, Oregon and Portland, Maine, have sanctuary policies, which vary locally.[70] "
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia
Prolly"?
Anytime I read that abomination, my ability to read shuts down because my brain instantly realizes that the post is likely BS if a person cannot write using the English language. I automatically subtract about 30 IQ points from my expectations.
Please check yourself, before you wreck yourself.
Prolly is just today's shorthand for probably. If enough people use it, then it becomes part of the English language. Prolly will probably become part of the language.
