Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="audioholic" data-source="post: 6861203" data-attributes="member: 549629">And again, we aren't discussing anything every other country in the world doesn't do too. Sure, we could break this down to ultimately this is a govt plan to control the economy, just like we could say the police force is to keep criminals out of the work force, roads are built to control where businesses can locate, and the national education system is designed to control what work fields receive the best public training. This is a discussion on illegal immigration and you are turning it into a discussion on U.S. tariff policies.Canada can afford to relax its borders, it does not border a near-3rd-world country which openly encourages illegal immigration. Like I said in the previous thread, dig a tunnel from Mexico City to Canada, open it up to public access with no restrictions, then come tell the US how we should handle the situation. Until then, its easy to sit thousands of miles away from the issue and claim you'd open your borders too if you could. No offense Neil, like I said before and I think you already know, I generally hold your opinion in high respect, but you simply dont have a dog in this hunt.If Ive misunderstood your political history, I apologize. but I must admit Im confused how you can claim to be a traditional liberal, one who believes in a welfare system, universal (socialized) health care, and 'action' on climate change, and still throw in the middle of that that you are also for less taxes and smaller govt. Id say Im for less taxes and smaller govt, and also in favor of everyone getting a job and new house from the fed, if I thought I could have it both ways.If you were in favor of socialized medicine, how can you also be in favor of not forcing everyone to pay for it?You keep trying to make this sound like the U.S. govt is trying to control the labor markets in this country by simply securing its border. Name one other country in the entire world that has an open border and anonymous residency. Name one country that even has one of those two things. None of them. So I dont really even have to argue against your point beyond saying if controlling your border and immigration is a form of socialized control of the job market, its no more so than every other place in the world.And as Ive said previously, this country is already famous for being hospitable to immigrants, so a guilt trip over wanting to follow our laws is not going to work on me.No, again I want it to secure the border and yes control immigration (albeit with a reformed system). Has our govt mandated a language for the past 200 years? Yet it has allowed an enormous flow of immigrants into this country in those 200 years. Why is this different? The location. Its easier for a Mexican to get to the US than it is for a german (for example) so its less likely they are here temporarily. IOW, other immigrants are more likely coming here with every intention of staying the rest of their lives, automatic reason to work towards assimilating into our society. Second reason, attitude. Its not uncommon for a Mexican to feel the US stole the southern states from Mexico, and they have a right to 'come back' and reap whatever benefits they can. No other group of immigrants historically has felt this way.Im not arguing for the govt to take away a businesses right to offer a menu in spanish, Im arguing that our govt has let a wide open border and their propensity to ignore their own laws create a situation in which it makes financial sense for a business to offer spanish menus because we are letting our country be over run by illegal squatters who have very little desire to conform to our society.As for the nanny state comment, again Im confused why you call it a nanny state when I want our borders secured and our laws followed, but its not a nanny state when we discussed the topic of if the govt should force us to own health insurance.</blockquote>

Verification

Top

What's new

Forum list