CCTelander
Member

I don't know how to "unconfuse" you about something that never happened.

I don't want to speak out of turn here, but... people form their own opinions/conclusions and believe what they want to believe, whether or not its based on fact or fiction. IOW: everybody has an a$$hole too.

Literally every single thing is "counter productive" (or at least useless) for some purpose or another. It makes no sense to complain about a thing being "counter productive" (or useless) in doing something (such as "winning an election") that it is not even trying to do. (That's like complaining that hammers are "counter productive" for driving screws. Well ... yeah ... but ... so what?) I agree. Let me know if you ever find such a movie, and I'll join you in criticizing it for not helping that (and just generally for being stupid as hell, to boot). (As for "Am I a Racist?", it explicitly acknowledges that racism and racists really do exist.)

:tears: Occam's Banana has a point. Whenever I tell a verified story I usually get the third degree :tears: :up:

Bingo. But, the border is not "open" as many claim. That is msm/government propaganda which is used to make people want the government to "do something". The border is closed. Meaning, when people come from other places, whether it's for work, pleasure, or simply to immigrate, they are checked and processed and given permission by government goons to enter/leave. In the case of immigrants, they are being funneled into check points, at which they are processed, and given paperwork to become "legalized". Once "legalized", they work according to government regulations and taxation, including "minimum wage", and allowed access to government programs and benefits on the tax payer dime. Years ago before government was so entrenched, immigrants were able to cross the border freely as jmdrake noted earlier. For those concerned about "wide-spread catastrophic diseases which would end the worlds population as we know it!!!", a simple medical check would suffice. If we returned to undocumented rather than "illegal", that would ease the burden of the tax-payer, and after work-season is over immigrants could simply return back home freely as they did years ago. But the government considers people as cattle/slaves and would rather keep them "legalized" in order to obtain more tax money, while draining the tax payers who foot the bill. It is a vicious cycle where the left feed the right feed the left. And in order to clamp down tighter to "fix the problem" that they created, more police-state is implemented where government public/private contractors rake it in.

Whether stories are "verified" or "unverified" has little if anything to do with whether they also "bring people together" or "pull people apart". "Verified" stories can "pull people apart" - and "unverified" ones can "bring people together". (And that's not even getting into the questions of what "verified" really even means in the first place, which standards of "verification" ought to be applied to which stories under which circumstances, and so forth.) As for "fun" stories, that is yet a third dimension orthogonal to the other two.

There was an invisible wall. Two invisible walls, actually. One was called the Atlantic, and the other was called the Pacific. Affordable air travel in the 1970's was basically the death knell of any semblance of cultural identity America had left.

Lincoln took 2 (or more) nations and tied them together with duct tape. So yes, while he did make a nation, it was created through aggression and was destined to fail eventually.

Right? And that's just one program. There are dozens of those buried in other spending bills throughout federal and state governments. They spend billions of our dollars making these problems worse! I guess it helps the GOP with fundraising and helps the Dems with power structures. Like always, the answer is less government. If we could shut that stuff down, immigration wouldn't be the issue it is. But to just open the borders while these things are in place will make it even worse!

Things are allowed to have nothing at all to do with elections. In fact, the more things that have nothing at all to do with elections, the better.

Yep. And with the way things are, the last thing I'm worried about are some poor immigrants getting a job mowing lawns or working a factory that Americans don't want. I'm for self-preservation and each and every one of my rights. Which include staying and living as free as I can, or the option to bolt the f&ck out of here without being civil asset forfeitured. Nobody cares about fiscal responsibility anymore with regard to anything/everything under the sun, except for poor immigrant. What's another few billion on top of the debt this nation has and the amount they spend on foreign intervention. It ain't gonna stop. The Fed Hits the Panic Button and Slashes the Fed Funds Rate

Yea I blame that on Lincoln. Most things can be blamed on Lincoln. Even with the Fed, it wasn't until the 1960's that the spending permanently started going crazy.

One caveat... you said "up until about 1960 or so". 1913 was pretty significant and got their ball rolling fast.

I don't disagree. If you see my edit I will definitely concede that the union was certainly not perfect. And it would have been better off as smaller nations, as the Anti-Fed's had envisioned.

For starters, the Anti-Federalists were right. Not the one on this board, though, he was the outcast black sheep who sided with the central planners :tears:

A nation can have a government, it's not mutually exclusive. It's when you have a government without a nation, that you run into the serious problems. This was still a nation up until about 1960 or so. A flawed nation, in any case, with the major flaw of course being Lincoln's duct tape keeping it together.

You mean before the time when you said: "That utopia did exist back in the 1900's. It was called America." See how bad government really is? It really is bad for ones health!

I would remind you that America was a nation, long before it was a "government". It's when it ceased being a nation, that it started going dramatically downhill.

If you say so lol

And once government got involved, all bets were off. You just proved my and Jacob's point :up:

You're still in that ridiculous left/right paradigm so it's moot to even discuss. Follow the Money, for starters. I think it's best that one starts defending/protecting ones own rights before advocating "solutions" that are designed to enslave one further.

That utopia did exist back in the 1900's. It was called America. It wasn't a perfect Utopia, but compared to the rest of the world, it was.

And that's just the welfare... There are also huge government payouts to support this grift. Here's just one recent announcement: If anyone is under the assumption that we're seeing a natural migration of people just yearning to breathe free, a little research should dispel them of this notion. And what's worse is that the beneficiaries of this spending isn't just the migrants, but a whole industry stood up to profit off them and a democratic party that is encouraging it in order to secure power.

lol that's one Utopia that doesn't exists. That's like me wishing for government to not come to work for the rest of the year lol And even if government did not come to work for a year, it would a vast, vast, very vast improvement over what we have now.

Some points from the OP: - The business lobby pays think tanks that advocate for lower taxes and fewer regulations, while the defense industry gives money to the most hawkish groups who advocate more military spending and more war. - A recent report lays out a shopping list of U.S. weapons that would help the Israeli military, including Excalibur artillery projectiles, JDAM bomb guidance systems, and Javelin missiles. Those weapons are manufactured by Raytheon, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin, respectively, all of whom are among CSIS’ top funders. - European countries, CSIS also*insisted, must “pull their weight” in NATO, transforming their societies into ones every bit as militarized as the U.S., for the sake of “global democracy.” - The Atlantic Council, for instance,*policed*European nations’ NATO spending in an attempt to pressure them to purchase more arms and has*advocated*that the U.S. create a new “Indo-Pacific intelligence coalition” that would ramp up tensions with China.

Thought experiment for you: Imagine there was a hidden village of 1000 people who for 1000 years had no contact with the outside world and for 1000 years they lived in total prosperity. They all shared extremely similar values and as such there was virtually no violence, strife, or crime. It wasn't a perfect utopia, but compared to the rest of the world, it was. They had wealth, safety, land, and happiness. Then imagine that the magical wall that kept them invisible suddenly came down. They make it an open policy to let anyone cross into their lands. News spreads across the world about this small country with immense wealth and opportunity. How do you think this village is gonna fare? Do they 1) prosper further from all the nice immigrants coming in, or 2) get ransacked by Venezuelans and get left for dead in their backyards

Like me, I don't think he cares much about where people want to live. He is against the policies and government intervention which ultimately restrict human beings liberties and freedoms. But, conversely, I do know where obtuse right-wing people stand, and it has nothing to do with liberty/freedom or defunding those orgs. After all, there's big, big money in police-state apparatus these days. But, to each his/her own.

To be clear, I'm a big supporter of natural migration. If people want to move where there is more opportunity to engage in free commerce, then all the best to them! They'll be a net benefit and will enrich us all. It's artificial migration that causes us all the issues. And to open the flood gates without addressing the artificiality of it first, is just dumb. It's two completely different topics and we end up talking past each other. You get 2 completely different types of migrants - those that add to your wealth and those that suck it dry. Jacob thinks that only 1% are of the latter, but provides zero evidence to support his conclusion. I think it's WAY higher and is the reason that a whole industry has been established to feed off the government largesse, while putting real people in servitude.