Trump cries when called out for attacking women

[bripat9643]

trump can make his fucking clothing here with American workers. he can start with THAT, but chooses not to. that really is a plain & simple CONcept to understand.

He can make them here if he wants to charge three times more, which means they won't sell. In other words, he can't make them here.

lol, that's right... he's doesn't have enough money.

"He doesn't have enough money?" The point of running a business is to make a profit, not lose money.

Hillary would get more for her money if she didn't hire dumbasses like you.

ya, that penthouse in trump towers = his companies aren't making a profit.

wtf is wrong with you?

What does the profit on Trump Tower have to do with making a profit on men's suits? Those are two entirely separate industries.

 

[playtime]

trump can make his fucking clothing here with American workers. he can start with THAT, but chooses not to. that really is a plain & simple CONcept to understand.

Your point is valid.

But it has been repeatedly addressed.

By ignoring those responses and repeating your original position, as a "Gotcha", you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

Your argument in thus invalid.

my point will be valid as long as he is running for prez. it's not the only valid point either. none of which has been addressed other than 'he's not a fraud'. & i'll add hypocrite to that list of his flaws.

that is just plain fact.

Dishonestly pretending that the argument has not already been repeatedly addressed is the core of the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

You have invalidated your argument with your dishonesty.

only in your delusional world. wanting that to be true does not make it so, grasshoppa. you don't give a god damn that the man you want to put in office has zero substance, but as long as he appeals to yor inner paranoia, then it's all good.

No, my point was based on the definition of The Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Assertion and your actions which matched that definition to a Fucking T.

YOur argument is a Logical Fallacy.

By definition it is thus invalid.


This has nothing to do with me, or my wants or desires. All I did was point it out.


Do you need a link to the definitions I referenced?

I assumed that you knew the terms I was using, or could easily find them, but if not, I will be happy to provide them.

why did you bring up Obama & rev wright in a thread about trump's attitude towards women? lol.

grasping at those straws is kinda funny. I've called out trump as a liar & fraud since getting into this thread. nothings changed. nice try at flipping the script, but it can't fly here.

 

[playtime]

trump can make his fucking clothing here with American workers. he can start with THAT, but chooses not to. that really is a plain & simple CONcept to understand.

He can make them here if he wants to charge three times more, which means they won't sell. In other words, he can't make them here.

lol, that's right... he's doesn't have enough money.

"He doesn't have enough money?" The point of running a business is to make a profit, not lose money.

Hillary would get more for her money if she didn't hire dumbasses like you.

ya, that penthouse in trump towers = his companies aren't making a profit.

wtf is wrong with you?

What does the profit on Trump Tower have to do with making a profit on men's suits? Those are two entirely separate industries.

teacher must have held you back this year little middle finger waving dude.

 

[bripat9643]

He can make them here if he wants to charge three times more, which means they won't sell. In other words, he can't make them here.

lol, that's right... he's doesn't have enough money.

"He doesn't have enough money?" The point of running a business is to make a profit, not lose money.

Hillary would get more for her money if she didn't hire dumbasses like you.

ya, that penthouse in trump towers = his companies aren't making a profit.

wtf is wrong with you?

What does the profit on Trump Tower have to do with making a profit on men's suits? Those are two entirely separate industries.

teacher must have held you back this year little middle finger waving dude.

Obviously you don't understand that a profit in one business has no connection with making a profit in another..

Hillary should invest some money in training her surrogates in business and economics so they don't make if obvious how stupid they are.

 

[playtime]

hmmm.... so, you don't mind that he rails against 'jobs going to mexico & china' but sets up shop in mexico & china?

sounds mighty hypocritical.

so, you have a problem about illegals coming here & taking jobs away from americans?

....

He wants to deport illegals and bring back manufacturing jobs.

He is the only one.

IMO, that is exactly what America needs.

THe rest is unimportant.

He is incapable of doing either. Corporations will continue to offshore because profit is their only goal. As long as they can write off their expenses to move equipment and jobs to foreign jurisdictions, they will.

And if Trump tries to force them to come back, they'll move their operations to a foreign country.

Deporting 11 million people requires a massive amount of resources. Who's paying for it? Extra police, prosecutors, holding facilities lawyers, courtrooms and transportation costs. Estimated cost: $400 - $600 billion.

Trump's Deportation Plan 'Prohibitively Expensive'

And the other stuff matters - a LOT.

Corporations will stop offshoring when it's cheaper for them to keep their operations here. Of course, that won't happen so long as commie douche bags like you insist on treating them like enemies and imposing crushing taxes and regulations on them.

Your cost estimate for deporting 11 million illegals is about 20 times the actual figure, but don't sweat it. No one expects commie douche bags to tell the truth about anything.

that's pure bullshit.

Products Made in the USA Directory

Our directory is sorted by categories of products that are Made in the USA. To view the listings please click on one of the many categories you will find below on this page. If you are not sure of the correct category please use the search box. We have worked for years to put together this extensive listing of products made in the USA.

Some say you pay more for American Made items and maybe you will, however in the long run you will almost certainly have a better made item made in a labor friendly fashion under environmental laws that protect us all. Most foreign factories operate in ways that would be illegal in the United States.


Recent Listings
Support American products by checking out the latest additions to our Made-in-the-USA directory...

Products Made in the USA Directory - Americans Working

happy shopping....

Men's suits were not included in your list of American made products, so you really just shot yourself in the foot.

my god, how weak are you? TONS of products, not just men's suits are available. but you want that exclusive list? jesus H. you are lazy too...

men's suits made in usa - Google Search

 

[playtime]

lol, that's right... he's doesn't have enough money.

"He doesn't have enough money?" The point of running a business is to make a profit, not lose money.

Hillary would get more for her money if she didn't hire dumbasses like you.

ya, that penthouse in trump towers = his companies aren't making a profit.

wtf is wrong with you?

What does the profit on Trump Tower have to do with making a profit on men's suits? Those are two entirely separate industries.

teacher must have held you back this year little middle finger waving dude.

Obviously you don't understand that a profit in one business has no connection with making a profit in another..

Hillary should invest some money in training her surrogates in business and economics so they don't make if obvious how stupid they are.

now you are borderline obsessive with that thought bubble of yours. time for it to go poppity pop.

 

[bripat9643]

"He doesn't have enough money?" The point of running a business is to make a profit, not lose money.

Hillary would get more for her money if she didn't hire dumbasses like you.

ya, that penthouse in trump towers = his companies aren't making a profit.

wtf is wrong with you?

What does the profit on Trump Tower have to do with making a profit on men's suits? Those are two entirely separate industries.

teacher must have held you back this year little middle finger waving dude.

Obviously you don't understand that a profit in one business has no connection with making a profit in another..

Hillary should invest some money in training her surrogates in business and economics so they don't make if obvious how stupid they are.

now you are borderline obsessive with that thought bubble of yours. time for it to go poppity pop.

"Obessive?" Because I ask you to explain the connection you made between an apartment tower and men's suits?

 

[Correll]

Your point is valid.

But it has been repeatedly addressed.

By ignoring those responses and repeating your original position, as a "Gotcha", you are engaging in the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

Your argument in thus invalid.

my point will be valid as long as he is running for prez. it's not the only valid point either. none of which has been addressed other than 'he's not a fraud'. & i'll add hypocrite to that list of his flaws.

that is just plain fact.

Dishonestly pretending that the argument has not already been repeatedly addressed is the core of the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

You have invalidated your argument with your dishonesty.

only in your delusional world. wanting that to be true does not make it so, grasshoppa. you don't give a god damn that the man you want to put in office has zero substance, but as long as he appeals to yor inner paranoia, then it's all good.

No, my point was based on the definition of The Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Assertion and your actions which matched that definition to a Fucking T.

YOur argument is a Logical Fallacy.

By definition it is thus invalid.


This has nothing to do with me, or my wants or desires. All I did was point it out.


Do you need a link to the definitions I referenced?

I assumed that you knew the terms I was using, or could easily find them, but if not, I will be happy to provide them.

why did you bring up Obama & rev wright in a thread about trump's attitude towards women? lol.

grasping at those straws is kinda funny. I've called out trump as a liar & fraud since getting into this thread. nothings changed. nice try at flipping the script, but it can't fly here.

It was something that Tyrone brought up.

Yes, you've been saying the same thing the whole thread.

Despite the fact that a Trump supporter has seriously and honestly addressed it.

YOu have not changed your behavior to respond to those counter points.

Those actions fit the definition of the Logical Fallacy Of Proof by Assertion.

THus your argument is invalid.

THis is not about me "flipping a script" but about me calling you on your propaganda bullshit.

 

[playtime]

ya, that penthouse in trump towers = his companies aren't making a profit.

wtf is wrong with you?

What does the profit on Trump Tower have to do with making a profit on men's suits? Those are two entirely separate industries.

teacher must have held you back this year little middle finger waving dude.

Obviously you don't understand that a profit in one business has no connection with making a profit in another..

Hillary should invest some money in training her surrogates in business and economics so they don't make if obvious how stupid they are.

now you are borderline obsessive with that thought bubble of yours. time for it to go poppity pop.

"Obessive?" Because I ask you to explain the connection you made between an apartment tower and men's suits?

I meant that someone who can afford a penthouse in NYC must be making a comfortable living from his profitable business at making cheap ass suits, sewn by workers making pennies compared to what the ridiculous mark up that happens once they are imported here; by the suckers willing to pay top dollar for sweatshop wares that bear a snakeoil salesman's name who sports a tribble on his head & calls it a hair-do.

duh.

 

[playtime]

my point will be valid as long as he is running for prez. it's not the only valid point either. none of which has been addressed other than 'he's not a fraud'. & i'll add hypocrite to that list of his flaws.

that is just plain fact.

Dishonestly pretending that the argument has not already been repeatedly addressed is the core of the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

You have invalidated your argument with your dishonesty.

only in your delusional world. wanting that to be true does not make it so, grasshoppa. you don't give a god damn that the man you want to put in office has zero substance, but as long as he appeals to yor inner paranoia, then it's all good.

No, my point was based on the definition of The Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Assertion and your actions which matched that definition to a Fucking T.

YOur argument is a Logical Fallacy.

By definition it is thus invalid.


This has nothing to do with me, or my wants or desires. All I did was point it out.


Do you need a link to the definitions I referenced?

I assumed that you knew the terms I was using, or could easily find them, but if not, I will be happy to provide them.

why did you bring up Obama & rev wright in a thread about trump's attitude towards women? lol.

grasping at those straws is kinda funny. I've called out trump as a liar & fraud since getting into this thread. nothings changed. nice try at flipping the script, but it can't fly here.

It was something that Tyrone brought up.

Yes, you've been saying the same thing the whole thread.

Despite the fact that a Trump supporter has seriously and honestly addressed it.

YOu have not changed your behavior to respond to those counter points.

Those actions fit the definition of the Logical Fallacy Of Proof by Assertion.

THus your argument is invalid.

THis is not about me "flipping a script" but about me calling you on your propaganda bullshit.

you deny he's a fraud & I give legit unbiased links proving he is.

another fact.

 

[bripat9643]

What does the profit on Trump Tower have to do with making a profit on men's suits? Those are two entirely separate industries.

teacher must have held you back this year little middle finger waving dude.

Obviously you don't understand that a profit in one business has no connection with making a profit in another..

Hillary should invest some money in training her surrogates in business and economics so they don't make if obvious how stupid they are.

now you are borderline obsessive with that thought bubble of yours. time for it to go poppity pop.

"Obessive?" Because I ask you to explain the connection you made between an apartment tower and men's suits?

I meant that someone who can afford a penthouse in NYC must be making a comfortable living from his profitable business at making cheap ass suits, sewn by workers making pennies compared to what the ridiculous mark up that happens once they are imported here; by the suckers willing to pay top dollar for sweatshop wares that bear a snakeoil salesman's name who sports a tribble on his head & calls it a hair-do.

duh.

Most of the major manufacturers have their cloths lines made overseas? Ever bought Hilfiger? Polo? Fruit of the loom? Nike? Old Navy? Then you've bought foreign made clothes.

Don't claim you never have.

 

[Correll]

Dishonestly pretending that the argument has not already been repeatedly addressed is the core of the Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion.

You have invalidated your argument with your dishonesty.

only in your delusional world. wanting that to be true does not make it so, grasshoppa. you don't give a god damn that the man you want to put in office has zero substance, but as long as he appeals to yor inner paranoia, then it's all good.

No, my point was based on the definition of The Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Assertion and your actions which matched that definition to a Fucking T.

YOur argument is a Logical Fallacy.

By definition it is thus invalid.


This has nothing to do with me, or my wants or desires. All I did was point it out.


Do you need a link to the definitions I referenced?

I assumed that you knew the terms I was using, or could easily find them, but if not, I will be happy to provide them.

why did you bring up Obama & rev wright in a thread about trump's attitude towards women? lol.

grasping at those straws is kinda funny. I've called out trump as a liar & fraud since getting into this thread. nothings changed. nice try at flipping the script, but it can't fly here.

It was something that Tyrone brought up.

Yes, you've been saying the same thing the whole thread.

Despite the fact that a Trump supporter has seriously and honestly addressed it.

YOu have not changed your behavior to respond to those counter points.

Those actions fit the definition of the Logical Fallacy Of Proof by Assertion.

THus your argument is invalid.

THis is not about me "flipping a script" but about me calling you on your propaganda bullshit.

you deny he's a fraud & I give legit unbiased links proving he is.

another fact.

And you repeat yourself again.

Invalid.

Were my arguments really so crushing that you CAN'T respond to them at all?

 

[Faun]

I don't even know who the fuck Brian Fallon is. I posted his quote because I agree with his sentiment.

The idea that deporting illegals will reduce the supply of labor and thus raise price ie wages, is not a lie.

The idea that our "Free Trade" polices such and need to be renegotiated in order to bring back manufacturing jobs is not a lie.

Too fucking retarded and nothing to do with what I posted. Can ya stay focused?

And it flies in the face that we are already deporting record numbers of illegals.

His quote, that you posted, stated that Trump's campaign was based on lies.

I understand that you didn't really read his quote. YOu saw negativity about TRump and that was the end of your thinking on the quote.

Thus, my comment about the central themes of Trump's campaign being TRUE was completely focused on your post. It is kind of retarded that you couldn't make that connection on your own.


And deporting "record numbers" is irrelevant is the population of illegals is ELEVEN FUCKING MILLION.

It remains the same bullshit it was when you first posted it. We already have record deportations. Not irrelevant to the discussion of illegal aliens simply because you wish it to be. We have about as many illegal aliens in this country as we did when Obama became president, which is a decline when factoring in population growth. So here comes another challenge you will run from like you did the last time... prove that contributed to wage increases...

The metric to measure the problem is not number of deportations, but the size of the illegal population.

11 million is a disaster.

What ever we are doing, it is obviously completely insufficient.



??? You think that the tiny "relative" drop in Illegal population, MAYBE, must either show an increase in wages OR the Law of Supply and Demand have been debunked?

YOu are being silly again.

No, I challenged you to show the decrease affected wage increases. The ratio of illegal aliens to the U.S. population has shrunk by about 6% since Obama became president. Prove your claim by proving that 6% increased wages.

Or run from your claim like you did when you claimed a corrupt media is the reason Obama's JAR is higher than Reagan's was at this point.

 

[Correll]

The idea that deporting illegals will reduce the supply of labor and thus raise price ie wages, is not a lie.

The idea that our "Free Trade" polices such and need to be renegotiated in order to bring back manufacturing jobs is not a lie.

Too fucking retarded and nothing to do with what I posted. Can ya stay focused?

And it flies in the face that we are already deporting record numbers of illegals.

His quote, that you posted, stated that Trump's campaign was based on lies.

I understand that you didn't really read his quote. YOu saw negativity about TRump and that was the end of your thinking on the quote.

Thus, my comment about the central themes of Trump's campaign being TRUE was completely focused on your post. It is kind of retarded that you couldn't make that connection on your own.


And deporting "record numbers" is irrelevant is the population of illegals is ELEVEN FUCKING MILLION.

It remains the same bullshit it was when you first posted it. We already have record deportations. Not irrelevant to the discussion of illegal aliens simply because you wish it to be. We have about as many illegal aliens in this country as we did when Obama became president, which is a decline when factoring in population growth. So here comes another challenge you will run from like you did the last time... prove that contributed to wage increases...

The metric to measure the problem is not number of deportations, but the size of the illegal population.

11 million is a disaster.

What ever we are doing, it is obviously completely insufficient.



??? You think that the tiny "relative" drop in Illegal population, MAYBE, must either show an increase in wages OR the Law of Supply and Demand have been debunked?

YOu are being silly again.

No, I challenged you to show the decrease affected wage increases. The ratio of illegal aliens to the U.S. population has shrunk by about 6% since Obama became president. Prove your claim by proving that 6% increased wages.

Or run from your claim like you did when you claimed a corrupt media is the reason Obama's JAR is higher than Reagan's was at this point.

Your question includes the absurd strawman that I or Trump was claiming that illegals are the ONLY factor suppressing wages, which is nonsense on your part.


It also assumes that the count of a population that is illegal and thus purposefully being evasive is counted perfectly.


Which is also absurd.



DO you really believe that the Law of Supply and Demand does NOT apply to labor and wages?

 

[Faun]

Well let's rehash....

You made a claim that Obama's JAR is higher than Reagan's due to a corrupt (read left-leaning) media.

I challenged you to prove it by showing more people are influenced by a left-lean media and you failed to demonstrate it.

Twice.

Instead of showing more people get their news from left-leaning sites, you showed that the media leans left.

Only that doesn't prove your claim.

By failing to prove your claim, there is no reason to believe it's rooted in reality.

Not to mention, the data you rely on spans 30 years. Not very relevant to today's media.

That was at 3½ years earlier against a flawed opponent. At this point, Reagan's JAR dropped to 50%. Just under Obama's at this same point.

Finding the data you are claiming to want, sounds hard.

And I know that you will dismiss it anyway, even if it has been collected.

And at this point, only a dishonest partisan hack would try to pretend that the media is not a tool of the Hard Left.

So, can't be bothered.

I've got some TV viewing to catch up on, sooooooo

Whatever lefty.

Sadly, you reject the proof that your claim is not merely the hallucination you portray it as; in lieu of yet another strawman.

Who could have seen that coming?

Sorry.

Normally with lefties, I can suspend disbelief and pretend that they are rational humans that talking to is not a complete waste of time.

But when you denied that the media is biased, I just, can't do it with you right now.

Maybe one of the other conservatives will do it, maybe I'll feel it more tonight or tomorrow.

Sadly, you're just fucking deranged.

Quote me saying the media isn't biased...

I've stated that the media is biased.

You have strongly attacked and ridiculed me for that position.

If you did not explicitly state that you were disagreeing with me (i can't be bothered to look) you certainly strongly implied it.


You seem to think the point of debate is to set up little gotchas, and that you score a point, when you successfully mislead someone as to what you meant.


IMO, that is fucking stupid, and the act of an asshole.


THe media is biased.

If you disagree, you're a delusional partisan hack.

If you don't then why the fuck are you making such a big deal about me stating the obvious?

I attack you because your being fucking retarded.. Like you are doing here again.

I didn't attack you because you claimed th the media is biased and I disagreed with you. If you could understand English, you would have noticed I never disagreed on that point.

I attacked you for saying the media is biased because I didn't ask you to prove the media is biased. I challenged you to prove most people get their news from what you classified as, "corrupt media." You couldn't meet that challenge so you tried throwing a strawman at me instead about how biased the media is.

Even worse for you -- I pointed out what you had done and you did it again. Both times not addressing my challenge before you finally gave up and confessed such data is hard to find.

You claimed Obama's job approval is higher than Reagan's because of a corrupt media -- but you can't demonstrate most people get their news from left-wing media outlets. Failure to prove your claim reveals it's really a delusion and not a fact,

 

[Faun]

He wants to deport illegals and bring back manufacturing jobs.

He is the only one.

IMO, that is exactly what America needs.

THe rest is unimportant.

he wants to bring back jobs, how about him STARTING WITH HIS OWN?

but instead, he manufactures clothing in foreign countries paying foreigners instead of bringing his own jobs back to America & paying American workers.

his company was found guilty of hiring illegals as well.

Image this scenario.


I am sitting in a bar, 2 years from now.

A poorly dressed man, drunk, starts telling me his tale of woe.


He had it all. He was a HUGE real estate guy, who owned a successful casino.

BUT, he got caught employing hundreds of illegals.

THe fines ruined him.

And he starts railing about how unfair and hypocritical it is that Trump should ruin him, just for breaking the law, and cheating Americans out of jobs, and higher wages, when Trump allegedly hired illegals or outsourced and this and that.

Lets say for argument's sake that the asshole criminal is right, that it is "unfair" and "hypocritical".


BUT that, in this scenario, the illegal labor force is dropping like a fucking rock, employers are being forced to raise wages to get Americans to take fill the jobs they need done, and thanks to tariffs, manufacturing employment is starting to rise.


In this scenario, which do you think would be more important to me?

Fairness for the asshole criminal, or the best interests of the American Working and Middle Classes?

LOL. Imagine facts instead of scenarios.

FACT: Trump rails against companies that left America to set up ops in foreign countries, but has ops in foreign countries.

FACT: Trump rails against illegals taking jobs away from Americans, but has had them work for him in the past.

FACT: Trump imports immigrants with visas instead of hiring Americans.

FACT: There will never be a big beautiful wall built because that would not only mean stealing land from their owners, the cost of building & maintaining it would be astronomical; & Mexico ain't gonna pay for it.

FACT: (for the sake of argument) Even if a wall was built... drug lords can literally dig tunnels miles long under the ground & into the boundaries of the US, the same will be done for illegals.

My post was in RESPONSE TO your previous post on those points.

Please address that.

you can't read English? I've been addressing you from the get go. you fail to see you are being duped in every way possible.

English is not his strong suit.

 

[Faun]

Yurt, respectfully, is, yes (I dare say it), a dupe.

The illegals make up about 3.5% of which maybe half work, so we are talking about 1.7% of our population pulling our civilization into the dregs of hell if they are not zombied out of here.

There are probably 50 million illegals in this country, so they make up more like 15%.

The U.S. population is probably closer to 5 billion so illegals really only make up about 1%. Nothing to worry about.

</mocking>

 

[Correll]

Finding the data you are claiming to want, sounds hard.

And I know that you will dismiss it anyway, even if it has been collected.

And at this point, only a dishonest partisan hack would try to pretend that the media is not a tool of the Hard Left.

So, can't be bothered.

I've got some TV viewing to catch up on, sooooooo

Whatever lefty.

Sadly, you reject the proof that your claim is not merely the hallucination you portray it as; in lieu of yet another strawman.

Who could have seen that coming?

Sorry.

Normally with lefties, I can suspend disbelief and pretend that they are rational humans that talking to is not a complete waste of time.

But when you denied that the media is biased, I just, can't do it with you right now.

Maybe one of the other conservatives will do it, maybe I'll feel it more tonight or tomorrow.

Sadly, you're just fucking deranged.

Quote me saying the media isn't biased...

I've stated that the media is biased.

You have strongly attacked and ridiculed me for that position.

If you did not explicitly state that you were disagreeing with me (i can't be bothered to look) you certainly strongly implied it.


You seem to think the point of debate is to set up little gotchas, and that you score a point, when you successfully mislead someone as to what you meant.


IMO, that is fucking stupid, and the act of an asshole.


THe media is biased.

If you disagree, you're a delusional partisan hack.

If you don't then why the fuck are you making such a big deal about me stating the obvious?

I attack you because your being fucking retarded.. Like you are doing here again.

I didn't attack you because you claimed th the media is biased and I disagreed with you. If you could understand English, you would have noticed I never disagreed on that point.

I attacked you for saying the media is biased because I didn't ask you to prove the media is biased. I challenged you to prove most people get their news from what you classified as, "corrupt media." You couldn't meet that challenge so you tried throwing a strawman at me instead about how biased the media is.

Even worse for you -- I pointed out what you had done and you did it again. Both times not addressing my challenge before you finally gave up and confessed such data is hard to find.

You claimed Obama's job approval is higher than Reagan's because of a corrupt media -- but you can't demonstrate most people get their news from left-wing media outlets. Failure to prove your claim reveals it's really a delusion and not a fact,

My link showed that the vast majority of the media is hard left.

That you can't make the leap from that to the realization that most people get their news filtered though a hard left filter is not credible.

Is this the type of word games that you play in court?

 

[Correll]

Yurt, respectfully, is, yes (I dare say it), a dupe.

The illegals make up about 3.5% of which maybe half work, so we are talking about 1.7% of our population pulling our civilization into the dregs of hell if they are not zombied out of here.

There are probably 50 million illegals in this country, so they make up more like 15%.

The U.S. population is probably closer to 5 billion so illegals really only make up about 1%. Nothing to worry about.

</mocking>

He asked a serious question.

I gave a serious reply.

And he ignored it.

This not only is, IMO, a great point, but I suspect it is the view of a large percentage of Trump supporters on the issue he raised.





Image this scenario.


I am sitting in a bar, 2 years from now.

A poorly dressed man, drunk, starts telling me his tale of woe.


He had it all. He was a HUGE real estate guy, who owned a successful casino.

BUT, he got caught employing hundreds of illegals.

THe fines ruined him.

And he starts railing about how unfair and hypocritical it is that Trump should ruin him, just for breaking the law, and cheating Americans out of jobs, and higher wages, when Trump allegedly hired illegals or outsourced and this and that.

Lets say for argument's sake that the asshole criminal is right, that it is "unfair" and "hypocritical".


BUT that, in this scenario, the illegal labor force is dropping like a fucking rock, employers are being forced to raise wages to get Americans to take fill the jobs they need done, and thanks to tariffs, manufacturing employment is starting to rise.


In this scenario, which do you think would be more important to me?

Fairness for the asshole criminal, or the best interests of the American Working and Middle Classes?

 

[Faun]

Yurt, respectfully, is, yes (I dare say it), a dupe.

The illegals make up about 3.5% of which maybe half work, so we are talking about 1.7% of our population pulling our civilization into the dregs of hell if they are not zombied out of here.

There are probably 50 million illegals in this country, so they make up more like 15%.

You are an incredulous stooge. You must be an anarchist.

Anyone who swallows the 11 million figure is terminally gullible.

So let's see your source for there being 50 million illegal aliens here. C'mon, the forum can always use a good laugh.