armitank
Banned
i think its fine just the way it is
wait.... i already have free healthcare
wait.... i already have free healthcare
armitank
Banned
back looks like a merc
I think Hyundai's are fawking knockoffs... They should get sued by both Lexus and Mercedes, fawking hacks
Rappers always talkin bout their caddys and the phantom....how gangsta will Hyundai sound in a rap song???????
lolumad over
10+ year member
**** just got serious
BWAHAHAHAHAAAA:laugh:
First step: No free E.R. visits or other health care for illegals. The liberals say they earn it and are entitled because they provide valuable services. Well, there's tons of Americans who do shit jobs nobody else wants to do too. If they don't have care many of them get stuck with medical debt that destroys their finances. When the gf didn't have it and she needed surgery on her ankle she had to sit down with a counselor and discuss payment before she could go ahead with the process.
I say let the illegals rejoice in every aspect of the American way and they too can be saddled with 50 thousand dollars in debt every time they have babies or need emergency surgery. Then they can have a lien placed on their checks so the hospital gets its slice of the pie and then they can send whatever's leftover south.
I say let the illegals rejoice in every aspect of the American way and they too can be saddled with 50 thousand dollars in debt every time they have babies or need emergency surgery. Then they can have a lien placed on their checks so the hospital gets its slice of the pie and then they can send whatever's leftover south.
JayRich
10+ year member
CarAudio.com Elite
So sad...... I guess ignorance is bliss
azimuth
5,000+ posts
funded*by*soros
tearing down the whole house because the kitchen needs re-modeled makes about as much sense as the health care proposal. not that we need to do nothing. tort reform is a good place to start. frivolous lawsuits cost a ton also. it's crazy to me that people would even want an inept government to control this much economy, not to mention entrusting them with our health. once this starts, it will end in single payer eventually. they can say whatever they want, and people can drink the kool-aid also if they choose, but companies who have to make a profit to exist, competing with an entity that isn't driven by profit at all, only ends in one place, which is eventual single payer health care. that is economics 101. it amazes me how easily people will believe BS only because their team says so.
azimuth
5,000+ posts
funded*by*soros
so is believing that the top 2% can pay for health care, cap n tax, and a couple of wars. we will all pay a high price. the math doesn't add up.
- Thread Starter
- #29,950
Juan is an immigrant. He arrives in America and immediately begins looking for employment. Before finding a job, he must secure food, clothing, and shelter. He may do so from funds brought with him from his native country, or he may depend upon the kindness of family, friends, or charitable organizations here in the United States. In either case, because such transfers are voluntary, no American is harmed.
If Juan resorts to theft, however, the story is different. Some Americans are indeed harmed. But criminal law is the appropriate tool for dealing with such thievery. Restricting immigration on the grounds that a handful of immigrants behave criminally would be like denying drivers licenses to everyone just because a small percentage of people drive recklessly. More focused and less ham-fisted means are available in both cases for weeding out the bad apples from the good.
Juan, however, is no thief. He’s a worker. Suppose that Juan has no skills of any value to any American. He can do nothing that any American is willing to pay for. In this case, Juan will eventually return home. No American is harmed. (Actually, Juan would probably not come to America in the first place. People so destitute of skills are unlikely to leave home in search of work in a foreign and highly competitive economy.)
But Juan is extremely unlikely to lack any skill for which Americans are willing to pay some mutually agreeable wage. Readers who doubt this claim should consult that cornerstone of economics called the theory of comparative advantage—a theory, by the way, that exposes the senselessness of identifying people economically as being "above average" or "below average." The theory of comparative advantage makes clear that everyone is above average at some tasks and below average at many others.
When Juan finds employment, not only is Juan made better off, but so, too, is his employer. Consumers are also made better off, for the higher output or lower cost that Juan’s availability makes possible for his employer is shared with consumers through reduced prices or improved product quality. Nothing to complain of so far.
Some people, however, are harmed by Juan’s availability—namely, American workers who compete with Juan. If Juan’s most marketable skill is nearly identical to the most marketable skill possessed by Sam the American, Juan is a potential rival for Sam’s job. Because of Juan, Sam’s income may fall.
Protecting Sam from income loss, though, is inappropriate. To prevent Juan from entering America is to do nothing more virtuous than to protect Sam from competition. But it is also to prevent George and Bill and other Americans from freely dealing with Juan, who is someone they would otherwise choose to deal with! To restrict immigration is to deny to Americans their freedom of association. Sam, then, becomes a monopolist under immigration restrictions. If Sam suffers income loss when these restrictions are lifted, he is no more worthy of our solicitude than is any other monopolist whose monopoly privilege unravels.
Immigration opponents also fear that open immigration means overcrowding. This worry is overblown. First, the United States is sparsely populated. Second, owners of private property have incentives to keep their properties from being overcrowded. The proper solution to overcrowding is privatizing those property holdings not yet privatized, not forcibly stopping productive people from coming to our country.
Manhattan is one of the most densely populated spots on earth. Yet it is also one of the wealthiest. New Yorkers often complain of crowds, but no one is compelled to live in that city. The reason people live there is because economic opportunity in New York is vast. Living in close contact with lots of people is a price that many of us voluntarily pay for the opportunity to take advantage of the wealth-producing capacities of an extensive division of labor.
New York and Los Angeles are crowded but wealthy. Oklahoma and Mississippi are sparsely populated but much poorer. This fact alone is ample evidence of the great economic benefits of immigration.
If Juan resorts to theft, however, the story is different. Some Americans are indeed harmed. But criminal law is the appropriate tool for dealing with such thievery. Restricting immigration on the grounds that a handful of immigrants behave criminally would be like denying drivers licenses to everyone just because a small percentage of people drive recklessly. More focused and less ham-fisted means are available in both cases for weeding out the bad apples from the good.
Juan, however, is no thief. He’s a worker. Suppose that Juan has no skills of any value to any American. He can do nothing that any American is willing to pay for. In this case, Juan will eventually return home. No American is harmed. (Actually, Juan would probably not come to America in the first place. People so destitute of skills are unlikely to leave home in search of work in a foreign and highly competitive economy.)
But Juan is extremely unlikely to lack any skill for which Americans are willing to pay some mutually agreeable wage. Readers who doubt this claim should consult that cornerstone of economics called the theory of comparative advantage—a theory, by the way, that exposes the senselessness of identifying people economically as being "above average" or "below average." The theory of comparative advantage makes clear that everyone is above average at some tasks and below average at many others.
When Juan finds employment, not only is Juan made better off, but so, too, is his employer. Consumers are also made better off, for the higher output or lower cost that Juan’s availability makes possible for his employer is shared with consumers through reduced prices or improved product quality. Nothing to complain of so far.
Some people, however, are harmed by Juan’s availability—namely, American workers who compete with Juan. If Juan’s most marketable skill is nearly identical to the most marketable skill possessed by Sam the American, Juan is a potential rival for Sam’s job. Because of Juan, Sam’s income may fall.
Protecting Sam from income loss, though, is inappropriate. To prevent Juan from entering America is to do nothing more virtuous than to protect Sam from competition. But it is also to prevent George and Bill and other Americans from freely dealing with Juan, who is someone they would otherwise choose to deal with! To restrict immigration is to deny to Americans their freedom of association. Sam, then, becomes a monopolist under immigration restrictions. If Sam suffers income loss when these restrictions are lifted, he is no more worthy of our solicitude than is any other monopolist whose monopoly privilege unravels.
Immigration opponents also fear that open immigration means overcrowding. This worry is overblown. First, the United States is sparsely populated. Second, owners of private property have incentives to keep their properties from being overcrowded. The proper solution to overcrowding is privatizing those property holdings not yet privatized, not forcibly stopping productive people from coming to our country.
Manhattan is one of the most densely populated spots on earth. Yet it is also one of the wealthiest. New Yorkers often complain of crowds, but no one is compelled to live in that city. The reason people live there is because economic opportunity in New York is vast. Living in close contact with lots of people is a price that many of us voluntarily pay for the opportunity to take advantage of the wealth-producing capacities of an extensive division of labor.
New York and Los Angeles are crowded but wealthy. Oklahoma and Mississippi are sparsely populated but much poorer. This fact alone is ample evidence of the great economic benefits of immigration.
azimuth
5,000+ posts
funded*by*soros
i'm not concerned so much with immigrants working here, or the economic benifits + or -, but when terrorists are putting out statements from training facilities in mexico about killing thousands of people with anthrax, i think it may be time to beef up some border security. neither side wants border security really. one side being concerned about votes, and the other side needs the cheap labor. both of which comes down to money in the end.
How is it fair competition when Juan probably pays no income taxes or social security, has no car insurance or registration, isn't on the hook to pay the bill when he gets sick and goes to the hospital or his wife has a baby, can send that kid to the same public schools Sam does without paying into the system, and lives with 17 friends and family in one 2 bedroom apartment.
They both work the same shitty job and get the same meager amount back but Sam is on the hook to give more back simply because he's American. Juan benefits from support systems and a little-advertised entitlement system that caters specifically to people who jumped the fence. Maybe they are both willing to provide a service or do a job that's needed that nobody wants to do but we want to do whatever we can to help Juan out because he jumped the fence to do it. Sam is just supposed to **** it up and pull himself up by his bootstraps.
They both work the same shitty job and get the same meager amount back but Sam is on the hook to give more back simply because he's American. Juan benefits from support systems and a little-advertised entitlement system that caters specifically to people who jumped the fence. Maybe they are both willing to provide a service or do a job that's needed that nobody wants to do but we want to do whatever we can to help Juan out because he jumped the fence to do it. Sam is just supposed to **** it up and pull himself up by his bootstraps.
i use to work taking finger prints for immigration...some of your facts are wrong...well info is wrong...when they come over here the US gives them and i say them since his name is juan he is hispanic they give them some kind of money or benefits and hook them up with volunteers that will get them a job, food, a place to live and everything they need for the first year. also if youre from cuba you get crazy stuff. i knew a immigrant who has been here 4 years is my age and own 2 houses because of all the help we give them //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif
zues
10+ year member
I need a stoner *****
Make some valid points. I don't really give a shit how many people Juan lives with as long as they pay their rent.
Activity
No one is currently typing a reply...
Similar threads
- Started by paulyman
- General Car Audio
- Started by junkyardjeff
- General Car Audio
- Started by Mitchell Fosgate III
- General Car Audio
About this thread
- Start date
- Participants
- Who Replied
- Replies
- 31,921
- Views
- 608,250
- Last reply date
- Last reply from
- natisfynest
