Tell an Australian what the argument is against building a border wall.

And you are, of course, dead wrong. I've listed several positions that can pay six figures and that companies still have trouble filling. It isn't just a matter of pay.

 

You're AMAZINGLY in favor of employers paying low wages and against American workers asking for what they deserve to be paid.

Steve

 

You are amazing at completely misrepresenting my statements. But hey, if you think six figures is low, congrats on you success.

 

• PETE BROOK PHOTO
  
• DATE OF PUBLICATION: 09.14.10.09.14.10
  
• TIME OF PUBLICATION: 3:10 PM.3:10 PM

PHOTOG GIVES MIGRANT WORKERS THE SUPERHERO TREATMENT

PAULINO CARDOZO FROM the state of Guerrero works for a greengrocer, loading trucks. He sends $300 a week.


Luis Hernandez from the state of Veracruz works in demolition in New York. He sends $200 a week.


Bernabe Mendez from the state of Guerrero works as a professional window cleaner in New York. He sends $500 a month.


Sergio García from Mexico works as a waiter in New York. He sends $350 a week.


Adalberto Lara from Mexico works as a construction worker in New York. He sends $350 a week.


Federico Martinez from the state of Puebla works as a taxi driver in New York. He sends $250 a week.


Minerva Valencia from Puebla works as a nanny in New York. She sends $400 a week.


Maria Luisa Romero from Puebla works in a laundromat in Brooklyn, New York. She sends $150 a week.


Noe Reyes from Puebla works as a delivery person in Brooklyn, New York. He sends $500 a week.


Román Romero from Tlapa, Guerrero, works as a superintendent in New York. He sends $800 a month.


Photo: Dulce Pinzon, new work.


Photo: Dulce Pinzon, new work.


Photo: Dulce Pinzon, new work.


Mexican photographer and a former New York resident Dulce Pinzon casts the Mexican migrant workers of New York City as superheroes -– in costume, at their jobs and within our midst.

Superheroes (2004–ongoing) intends to broaden our collective definition of the term hero, a label often used in American culture, but not always applied to the heroic everyday acts of work and family commitments.

“It is common for a Mexican worker in New York to work extraordinary hours in extreme conditions,” says Pinzon in the project statement. They work “for very low wages which are saved at great cost and sacrifice and sent to families and communities in Mexico who rely on them to survive.”

Each portrait is captioned with the worker’s name, hometown in Mexico and the amount of money they send to Mexico each week.

https://www.wired.com/2010/09/dulce-pinzon/

 

You don't have a history of immigration helping to make you a 1st rate power. In fact, you don't have a history of being a 1st rate power either.

As for turning back immigrants, part of the reason why European countries, and Australia given that's what you are, a European country, did this is for two reasons. It used to be racism, then it was backed by the strong left wing government benefits you get that immigrants, rather too many of them, would put a strain on. The US didn't have such concerns back during it's immigration hey days. Even today, we have far fewer benefits than Australia does on health care alone. So it's not really comparable.

 

Trump won whites with a college degree 49% to 45% from your own source.

So basically Clinton only edged him out by young people with no real world experience, ivory tower academics who don't live in the real world, and overwhelmingly by your uneducated minority base.

But please continue calling us uneducated, we kinda like it really.

 

Yeah I try to use liberal sources as much as possible. Cuts down on the whining from our liberal friends.

The truth is their favorite hobby is judging others and looking down their noses at we deplorables.

"Beyonce majors" is my way of describing the basically worthless liberal arts degrees. There are actually people out there taking classes on Beyonce, gender studies, and other things catered to a less intelligent segment of liberals in order for them to get their participation trophy from a college. For a price, of course.

 

Being a "first rate power" has absolutely nothing to do with immigration and everything to do with a sovereign nation's laws and the ability to keep out those who would otherwise be denied entry. Chris155au is absolutely correct.

 

We had very few restrictions on entry for most of our nation's existence and rise.

 

Yes, and that was before there were many social programs, as is the case today. This is why.

 

Milton Friedman, who also contradicted your point and argued that illegal immigration from Mexico was a good thing for the US.

 

Yes, but it seems you never watched the entire video. There was a proviso. At that time there were no social programs, no real rights, for illegals. When those entering the country could then collect welfare, get driver's licenses, etc. then the advantages were lost.

The long term answer would be to put pressure on Mexico, and Central American countries (with the exception of Costa Rica) to change so that people don't need to leave their homes and cultures.

 

Not even the Heritage Foundation says that.

This is about the third time you send this. And if the conclusion is "... this is not able to be measured unfortunately" then it's useless. I don't know why you are surprised that I pay little attention to something that "is not able to be measured" Especially since you don't have to "imagine" if you follow the links that I sent you.

It would certainly be a bullshit argument, but you're the only one making it.

The one I sent does.

We're going around in circles . I sent a real study. You sent an "imaginary" study. Plus one that is, at best, a huge streatch as it combines data in a letter that doesn't even explain the source, with a report that has nothing to do with this issue.

This is ridiculous! First you brush off real evidence that illegal immigrants commit less crime, and then you make up this "reducing crime" BS, without even a hint of evidence.

Beyond ridiculous! You get rid of people who produce, the economy shrinks, and crime increases.

Looks like you made me waste my time by making me read it, and you didn't read it yourself.

Because they are owned by Corporatons which have the sole purpose of making money! This is quite obvious.

No! You're just not concentrating. And therefore you incur in a logical fallacy called "Fallacy of Exclusion".

All Corporate Media responds to Corporate Interests
The Corporate interest to which most of (I don't know if there are exceptions) Main Stream Media responds to is Profits
The Corporate interest to which Fox News responds to is a Political Agenda (by excluding this element, you commit a logical fallacy)

It's easy. I don't know why you are having so much problems with an easy concept.

,
What gave you the idea that they barely covered it? As a matter of fact (I think I already told you this) it was the New York Times that kept it alive when it became clear that it was just a ploy by the right to lower her poll numbers. Which were over 65% before the NYT series of articles.

No idea what you're talking about. I watch MSNBC more than CNN. But they have had so many problems convincing right-wing politicians to come in to programs like Rachel Madow's, Last Word, All In, ... etc... that they have had to actually hire a few of them. Right-wing politicians are terrified of pundits like Rachel, Chris Hayes, Chris O'Donnell, etc. They constantly are begging them to come in for an interview. I remember Rachel asking again and again Trey Gowdy for an interview. And she has never put out a story without first asking the opposite side to come in for an interview or, at least, to send a written comment. Once in a while they send a general comment. But their fear of answering her quesitons is astounding.

I know you probably don't see these things in Australia, but you should be more careful not to make wild allegations like this.

Incurring again and again in logical fallacies is definite sign of lack of arguments. This one is called "Wrong Direction Fallacy" Fox has decided that the way they will profit is by having a specific Political Agenda.

So you think that the MSM shouldn't report on it until after the investigation is over? That's ridiculous!

The MSM reporting about Trump Jr.'s meeting is precisely what triggered the investigation into the Collusion. That, plus Junior lying about it. I don't know what the role of the Press is in Australia, but here that's what they're supposed to do. They did it with Hillary, as with Bill Clinton, as with Nixon, ... and now Trump. I don't think you're even following the American MSM at all. I'm sure you don't get MSNBC, and you probably get only the International version of CNN, because it's obvious that you have no idea how it works here.

I mistyped. I mean "Foreign criminals"

None. They just pay for it as if they did. The most current estimate by the SSA is $13 billion per year.

I think the problem is that you have a set of misconceptions about illegal aliens. Illegal aliens pay taxes, they pay social security, they produce, are very good for the economy, increase our GDP.... Most make much more than minimum wage. They are honest people who just want a better life for their family. The majority don't want to live here. Some are escaping from violence and poverty in their country, and they don't want to get involved in illegal activity. If Mexican illegal immigrants were criminals, they would make more money bringing drugs than raping anybody. A few do that. The majority are caught. And if they're not, they don't stay here anyway. So deporting illegal aliens solves nothing.

Weird...

Of course! He zoomed up to first place in the primaries thanks to that comment. They love the condescending tone.

He wants to harm foreigners even if they're not in the country at all! That's his campaign platform, what energizes his base, and what his international policy is veered towards. Trump and his base are absolute Xenophobes. At his campaign events he would say "We're going to build that wall with Mexico..." (people cheer) ".... and Mexico will pay for it!" (four times the cheers). It never was or has been about just building a wall. More than that. It's about hurting people. His first version of the Muslim ban included stopping anybody who had ever so much as passed through a Muslim country from even being in transit in the U.S. He breaks relations with Cuba to hurt people. He pulls out of the Paris Accord because it hurts people. ... and on and on. Everything he has done has the intention of hurting somebody. Especially foreigners, but also Americans who don't venerate him like a god. Do you know of any policy that Trump has implemented or is animatedly pushing that doesn't hurt somebody? Very few....And most of those few he pushes only because they benefit him personally or his businesses.

Understood.

But you still seem to sometimes echo misconceptions that only exist because of some Trump tweet.

His International policy is also to hurt people. He didn't withdraw from TPP. He stopped negotiations. BTW, here Free Trade agreements are typically supported by Republicans and opposed by Democrats. I happen to disagree with Democrats on this issue. Republicans have convincingly demonstrated that Trade Agreements are beneficial. There is no questioning facts, when they are presented correctly. Despite some errors in the first big one (NAFTA), we have learned to do them better.

Re-read.

I wouldn't say that's the reason, but if you believe it, I'll take it! Fact is that, for whatever reason, locals don't want the jobs.

Deporting all illegal aliens is not only bad for the economy (both local and federal), and not only heartless (in many cases), but it's also a physical impossibility. So I believe we should listen to the governors and legislators of the boarder states, and adopt what they recommended. It was sensible immigration reform and, as it relates to illegal aliens, I already explained what it implies: grant a one-year visa to all who come forward who have a job and have no criminal record. They pay a fine and all their taxes. That way they get to stay for 1 year. They can renew so long as all of the above is met. If they keep this up for 10 consecutive years, they can request an Immigrant Visa. That way: 1- the economy is not hurt, 2- the states and federal government get paid for expenses (education of their children, any increased policing, etc) 3- They are registered. So we know were they can be found and 4- Given that it's physical impossibility to remove 11 million people, those who don't register become a much more manageable number. 5- We are solve legal issues related to their being here.

It was the perfect solution. But even the Republican Legislators who helped write it and co-sponsored filibustered it. Because they feared it would be seen as an accomplishment by the Obama Administration. And, unfortunately, during the whole Obama administration the Republicans' stated goal was not to benefit the country, but to make Obama fail.

 

First of all, you admitted that the majority wouldn't have been immigrants. But what are you talking about when you say "immigrants?"
Do you mean illegal? What does this video that you posted say? Legal or illegal? Does it include the colony migration?

 

@yardmeat said "tech jobs" as in 'Technology Jobs.' You obviously thought that they were saying 'technician jobs', which is not an industry. Surely you what they were saying after they correct you though.

 

>
Tell an Australian what the argument is against building a border wall.

It will cost a lot of money best spent elsewhere, will not work as intended, and is meant to solve a problem that really does not even exist. Other than that it is little more than an overblown campaign slogan designed to motivate an undereducated populace.

 

Except this poll was conduced two weeks before the CNN one, meaning the CNN one was based on more recent data.

 

Why are illegal aliens not a problem?

 

Where's the info-graphic from?

 

Primarily because there are more leaving than arriving. Though there is also the economic situation concerning those who do stay. Here in the U.S. certain industries are actually dependent on these inexpensive labor pools, even before we had the increased need for cheap construction workers we were watching entire crops of food go unharvested because of the lack of people to gather. The recent deportation increase has badly effected many aspects of a system designed around these people and ejecting the "Dreamers" will do the same but with more cruelty and even less farsighted vision.
Basically the whole "Build A Wall" concept became popular because Donald Trump used it to excite his base and they have no idea what is will actually cost or do. Believe it or not...Mexicans know how to tunnel and most simply take a plane anyway.

 

Wait, people are being paid illegal wages in the IT industry?

 

That's not an argument though. It doesn't matter if there was a hundred leaving every day and only a hundred entering every week. Its still a problem that needs dealt with.

You mean illegal labor pools. If industries have made themselves dependent on the federal crime of illegally employing an exploiting aliens, essentially turning them into slaves, then they deserve to die.

Of course there was a lack of people to gather. There's been no work in the industry for so long because its been taken by aliens, no one even thinks to do it anymore. Everyone has been pushed out of the job market! Did no citizens want these jobs hundreds of years ago either?

That's whats called collateral damage.

Dreamers should stay.

 

A question was asked and I answered with logic and useful information devoid of the emotional diatribe.

 

Yeah, and I responded to your answer with logic and you didn't have an argument to respond with.

 

The idea that there was any logic in your response is absurd