- Joined
- Mar 25, 2003
- Messages
- 26,393
- Reaction score
- 10,979
as fractured as the US is today?I’ve argued with so many over the incredibly basic concept of national identity. It boggles my mind that people believe that there is no such thing.
as fractured as the US is today?I’ve argued with so many over the incredibly basic concept of national identity. It boggles my mind that people believe that there is no such thing.
Brits drive on the correct side of the road, Napoleon being a lefty screwed it all up.don't people wreck in the uk for driving on the wrong side quite commonly, same language and all. People are stupid.
we have an actor who got off for wrecking into someone over there, mathew broderick, ironically, i wnet to school with a cousin of his, same last name.Brits drive on the correct side of the road, Napoleon being a lefty screwed it all up.
It doesn't take me too long to remember which side to drive on, I've definitely made mistakes going back to England, just in tiny culdesac type scenarios. Did fuck up on a roundabout in France but again tiny place with no traffic.
Driving is dangerous in those scenarios. I don't see how thats a language issue tho. That seems more like a, people just can't drive issuenot at 60 mph, people, even natives dont even have time to see a lot of stuff on the road. Even with signs with diagrams and so on, it's not always clear. Even "25mph" isn't always clear, not when everyone else is going 45. Unless you're on the same roads every day you won't know a lot of things. I've been honked at taking 50mph literally. Going too slow for the locals.
Driving is dangerous as fuck, why people don't take it more seriously I guess is it's usually not them having the jaws of live taking them out of a piece of shredded metal. We just had 4 teens drive over an 80ft offramp here, I think we have laws prohibiting the speed as well as teens having a bunch of their moron buddies in the cars to pump them up, doesn't work. That's just ONE demographic that has issues with driving but there are many.
Broderick fucked up driving on the wrong side of the road?we have an actor who got off for wrecking into someone over there, mathew broderick, ironically, i wnet to school with a cousin of his, same last name.
that's what i'm saying, it's all dangerous. no english speaking people would just be one demographic. You have the overconfident drivers, the constant cell phone users,, the drunks and drugged out, the broke asses who are irresponsible about everything, all dangerous. I see them all and I do my best to keep distance and I pray a lot.Driving is dangerous in those scenarios. I don't see how thats a language issue tho. That seems more like a, people just can't drive issue
ya he did, i think he got off with a slap on the wrist with his clout.Broderick fucked up driving on the wrong side of the road?
I did fuck up in Virginia once driving on the English side which considering I'd lived here for a while and drove in Amsterdam for 4 years was a bit daft.
Tickled me. I'm not that way inclined anymore but if ever there was a time it was driving to and from work in The Bay Area. The amount of near misses I had with crazy drivers is pretty much why I haven't in 3 or 4 years. Maybe this week I'll bite the bullet.that's what i'm saying, it's all dangerous. no english speaking people would just be one demographic. You have the overconfident drivers, the constant cell phone users,, the drunks and drugged out, the broke asses who are irresponsible about everything, all dangerous. I see them all and I do my best to keep distance and I pray a lot.
I mean familiarity wise I get it. But you have to be some sort of moron to travel to another country and not know very basic road signs and how to call the emergency services if something goes wrongya he did, i think he got off with a slap on the wrist with his clout.
no end to peoples arrogance and ignorance. lots of people are just in their own bubble where they think nothing can go wrong, that's not real life. Not saying that's what happened there, I don't know but I do know plenty of aggressive, overconfident people.I mean familiarity wise I get it. But you have to be some sort of moron to travel to another country and not know very basic road signs and how to call the emergency services if something goes wrong
dutch isnt a real language anywaysI lived in Amsterdam for 4 years and only knew very very basic Dutch, I knew how to dial 112, I spoke to doctors and would've been fine if I needed a cop. We have apps for this sort of thing now.
Correct, Canada has two official languages, America has zero. You're restating my original point, that a national language has never been as important to America as it is to countries like Canada.
Canada isn't really more diverse, it's more that Canadians are more likely to identity as ___ or smaller subgroups than Americans. Hence the America is much better at integrating immigrants over time.
To that point, America is about 59% white identifying versus almost 70% for Canada. After that, it's Hispanic Latino (19%, but some are also white), Black (13%), and then Asian (13%) for the US and then Asians (20%) and then indigenous (5%) and a bunch of small populations.
TLDR: The only groups where Canada over indexes against the US is Asians and indigenous people.
The goal posts didn't move, you're just terrible at reading.
For someone convinced immigrants are ruining their country, you show little critical thinking.
The first post mentions English proficiency, which rules out Canada since it has two official languages. Then most of the posts on the first page refer to Spanish and Latino immigrants. What countries speak primarily English, but not French, and have a large migrant community of Spanish speakers?
Not to mention, statistically speaking, unless Canadians love Sherdog more than Americans, you're almost 10 times as likely to encounter Americans on Sherdog than Canadians.
So you've never even stepped food in the US or you just haven't spent time in an immigrant enclave here?
1) Under no circumstances have I tried to avoid the topic at hand. They absolutely should be forced to learn the language and you've spent the entirety of the time coming up with excuses as to why it's not necessary. In other words your playing stupid with your intentions.You just can't help but be dishonest on top of being wrong.
1) I've stated several times that I learn other languages because I simply like to. You keep trying to bring up this meaningful connection bs to avoid the actual topic which is "should they be allowed in the country if they can't speak English"
2) Again, I've said over and over that the only reason you should have total learn any language is for full citizenship, a specific job requirement, or because you feel like learning it.
3) you're desperately trying to distract from the numerous times you've been caught not reading, misreading, or generally just being dumb.
A desire to learn a Language and a need to learn a language are 2 entirely different things. Immigrants don't need to learn English if they dont want to unless it's for a job or full citizenship. If you just come here to work a job that doesn't require you to learn English, then it doesn't matter.
Take the L, dude.
Sort of, but more broadly it's that there was no advantage to declaring a national language and plenty of downsides, the same as today. Americans learn English because it's advantageous, that wouldn't be boosted if we voted and made it a national language.Ugh, no.
The way America deals with language is how it deals with religion. The idea of linguistic toleration, in the United States is closely linked to John Locke's philosophy on religious toleration, which sprang out of the centuries of constant feuding between Protestants and Catholics in Europe. I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on the exact history of all those conflicts, but the idea was that, after killing each other and then finding some resolution, they were ultimately expected to live side by side. To Locke, it made a lot more sense for the government not to declare an official religion, as enforcing one would inevitably alienate a significant portion of the population. America borrows heavily from this thought process when it comes to language.
The term Hispanic was created as a response to the Chicano movement because the gubmint and some folks thought it was closer to white and/or American, as opposed to Mexican American and Latino. That's the TLDR.Also, Canada really is more diverse. We happen to count everyone who identifies as white......as white, whereas for some weird reason you guys don't quantify millions of Hispanics who do identify as white in that pie chart, for reasons unknown to me. The proportion of white between Canada and America is virtually the same when you don't deflate your numbers the way you do.
Canada's percentage is higher, but it isn't particularly illuminating given that's how percentages work when your denominator is so tiny. And to be exact, the US isn't consistently diverse, it's concentrated mostly on the Coasts. Places like California are about as diverse as Canada on paper and more similar in size.As a percentage we have more foreign born residents at 23% to your 15%. Higher immigration rate relative to our population. You guys have more black, Hispanic non whites, but we have more of basically everything else, and once again we have the most multicultural city in the world.
Also, I can read just fine, you're just retarded.
How the fuck are you so bad at reading, do you not understand what the contraction "or" means? Not to mention the post I linked was literally the first post I made to you on this topic.Ugh, no.
Also, I can read just fine, you're just retarded.
Sort of, but more broadly it's that there was no advantage to declaring a national language and plenty of downsides, the same as today. Americans learn English because it's advantageous, that wouldn't be boosted if we voted and made it a national language.
The term Hispanic was created as a response to the Chicano movement because the gubmint and some folks thought it was closer to white and/or American, as opposed to Mexican American and Latino. That's the TLDR.
If you add in Hispanic and Latinos who identify as white, it's still less than an additional 5 percent of Americans. So by any reasonable metric America is less "white" than Canada.
Canada's percentage is higher, but it isn't particularly illuminating given that's how percentages work when your denominator is so tiny. And to be exact, the US isn't consistently diverse, it's concentrated mostly on the Coasts. Places like California are about as diverse as Canada on paper and more similar in size.
I don't think there's much appreciable difference in diversity in Canada, even if some numbers on paper would suggest that.
How the fuck are you so bad at reading, do you not understand what the contraction "or" means? Not to mention the post I linked was literally the first post I made to you on this topic.
Spare me the bullshit, it's the same song and dance with you in every thread where you don't have an actual argument, like last time where you took issue with me saying the war room was balanced and you insisting on the validity of that claim hinging on the board being demographically consistent with America's demographics.How the fuck are you so bad at reading, do you not understand what the contraction "or" means? Not to mention the post I linked was literally the first post I made to you on this topic.
I didn't say it wasn't important, I said it wasn't as important Americans as Canadians. You keep trying to back up tenuous points by hammering in questionable evidence.Right, so you understand why suggesting language wasn't important to the Americans based on the idea that they didn't officially designate an official language is incredibly stupid right? Like all those "downsides" would suggest people sort of find language to be important.
Because America much more deliberately incorporates immigrants socioeconomically, and much more successfully does it. Hence American second generation immigrants often outperform natives in income and not doing crimes.Oh, so the data that suggests Canada is more diverse, suggests it's more diverse? Color me shocked. Either way, that's neither here nor there. What does this circus have to do with explaining how the American landscape is so wildly unique that no one else can opine on immigration policy or multiculturalism unless they've visited these places? Like what part of the American experience do you feel is so misunderstood for this conversation to happen?
Brain fart, conjunction.Spare me the bullshit, it's the same song and dance with you in every thread where you don't have an actual argument, like last time where you took issue with me saying the war room was balanced and you insisting on the validity of that claim hinging on the board being demographically consistent with America's demographics.
And I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, but I'm not so sure "or" is a contraction. Am I wrong?
Completely dishonest but keep moving that goalpost.1) Under no circumstances have I tried to avoid the topic at hand. They absolutely should be forced to learn the language and you've spent the entirety of the time coming up with excuses as to why it's not necessary. In other words your playing stupid with your intentions.
"In other words, I can't actually address what you said so I'm just gonna keep making up shit"2) In other words the majority of the time a person comes here it would be pragmatic to learn the primary language of the host nation?
You need to admit that either you legitimately struggle with reading or you're just completely dishonest. You think you're twisting my words in a clever way but you're just proving everything I've been saying about you this thread.3) You need to admit you're not an effective communicator. One moment your trying to convince us no one needs to learn the language and that everyone can get by but then you swear up and down they should get it if they are trying to become full citizens.