- Joined
- Oct 30, 2004
- Messages
- 95,963
- Reaction score
- 35,164
Satisfy your own curiosities. Im not sure the relevance.
How can you not? The question relates to the materiality of your disagreement with the Constitution here.
Satisfy your own curiosities. Im not sure the relevance.
When building the wall came up the guy said, in essence, "Whether or not the wall gets built isn't what's important. What's important is that Trump had the guts to say what no one else would!"
That reminds me of the question I proposed to people arguing about this stuff and it’s “why don’t people on the right who are so mad about immigrants taking their jobs want equal or harsher punishment for employers of illegals”. The answer is obviously resentment of brown people trying to come into this country and not the actual issue of wages or jobs.And fuck that. Any company that knowingly hire illegals should be fined so heavy that no company would take that chance.
Absolutely. As long as they can work for a good price.

None of them really care about illegal immigration, and, in fact, it's an insignificant issue in America today. The real issue is people freaking out about demographic changes to the country and feeling that maybe they're on the outside and not liking that (essentially the same concern "SJWs" have, but in reverse--both worried about "otherization" but one from the perspective of declining hegemony and the other from the perspective of currently being otherized). I actually agree with nationalism for this reason, but what's called "nationalism" is anti-American, trans-national ethno-nationalism. We should have English as a national language and make more of an effort to promote "American" as an identity. I've linked to this before, but I'll do it again because I think it's exactly right:
Satisfy your own curiosities. Im not sure the relevance.
Ok, but the question is what do you now do with the out of work illegal population.If they aren't able to get a job here so easily they would be less likely to come here.
I'm sorry you don't understand simple realities.
This video should have a thread.
A company should be able to hire whomever they want for an agreed upon compensation package.
That reminds me of the question I proposed to people arguing about this stuff and it’s “why don’t people on the right who are so mad about immigrants taking their jobs want equal or harsher punishment for employers of illegals”. The answer is obviously resentment of brown people trying to come into this country and not the actual issue of wages or jobs.
What you say here is what someone would say if they’re actually consistent on these issues.
Only if they are in this country legally.
Nope. As long as they agree to work for a set price it shouldn't matter where they come from. Cutting labor costs >>>.
Fuck that they have no right to work in this country and employers are breaking the law in hiring them.
Unless you are a open borders person and that a whole different sickness.
Or this could be just a troll post.
I think it's obvious I disagree with the law? Companies should have the right to bring over "illegals" who are willing to work for less than the native population. Not seeing an issue with this on any level. I don't believe in babying the native population of a country with artificially pumped up wages in an attempt to placate your proletarian sensibilities. Again - cutting costs >>>.
Yep troll posting.
Translation: "I have no counter argument."
I'd say thanks for trying but it seems like you don't have a leg to stand on. And you wonder why you will never be a decision maker on any level. Pathetic and laughable to say the least.
How can you not? The question relates to the materiality of your disagreement with the Constitution here.
Translation I have no argument so I'm going to troll and try and fuck up the thread.
Then what was the "relevance" in specifically citing increases in representational apportionment in Texas and Arizona?