[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Ukraine - Beaker - Mar 28, 2024 - 9:41am
 
Breaking News - Steely_D - Mar 28, 2024 - 9:39am
 
The Obituary Page - rgio - Mar 28, 2024 - 9:30am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - Beaker - Mar 28, 2024 - 9:30am
 
March 2024 Photo Theme - Many - Alchemist - Mar 28, 2024 - 9:03am
 
NY Times Strands - geoff_morphini - Mar 28, 2024 - 8:37am
 
NYTimes Connections - geoff_morphini - Mar 28, 2024 - 8:29am
 
Wordle - daily game - geoff_morphini - Mar 28, 2024 - 8:25am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - pilgrim - Mar 28, 2024 - 8:19am
 
Business as Usual - black321 - Mar 28, 2024 - 8:09am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - black321 - Mar 28, 2024 - 7:44am
 
Trump - rgio - Mar 28, 2024 - 7:29am
 
Outstanding Covers - thisbody - Mar 28, 2024 - 5:51am
 
Today in History - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 28, 2024 - 4:28am
 
USA! USA! USA! - R_P - Mar 27, 2024 - 7:40pm
 
Little known information...maybe even facts - haresfur - Mar 27, 2024 - 6:21pm
 
Live Music - oldviolin - Mar 27, 2024 - 5:08pm
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Mar 27, 2024 - 3:48pm
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - miamizsun - Mar 27, 2024 - 2:44pm
 
Please Don't Post Here - Red_Dragon - Mar 27, 2024 - 11:02am
 
Motivational Office Cliches... - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 26, 2024 - 10:20pm
 
(Big) Media Watch - Red_Dragon - Mar 26, 2024 - 6:18pm
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - miamizsun - Mar 26, 2024 - 4:10pm
 
Israel - R_P - Mar 26, 2024 - 12:24pm
 
Photos you have taken of your walks or hikes. - Steely_D - Mar 26, 2024 - 12:04pm
 
Solar / Wind / Geothermal / Efficiency Energy - islander - Mar 26, 2024 - 8:00am
 
Is there any DOG news out there? - Beez - Mar 26, 2024 - 7:24am
 
Food - Steely_D - Mar 26, 2024 - 1:41am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Mar 25, 2024 - 6:56pm
 
Derplahoma! - Red_Dragon - Mar 25, 2024 - 3:48pm
 
Frequent drop outs (The Netherlands) - kingen - Mar 25, 2024 - 2:43pm
 
China - R_P - Mar 25, 2024 - 11:59am
 
Musky Mythology - R_P - Mar 25, 2024 - 11:20am
 
Play history seems to indicate that I"m streaming 24/7, b... - jarro - Mar 25, 2024 - 10:44am
 
April 8th Partial Solar Eclipse - Coaxial - Mar 24, 2024 - 6:22pm
 
New Music - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 24, 2024 - 5:07pm
 
Dental Floss Tycoons, and other Montana Myths, Facts, and... - Red_Dragon - Mar 24, 2024 - 12:32pm
 
Orbiting Earth - oldviolin - Mar 24, 2024 - 9:42am
 
Basketball - oldviolin - Mar 23, 2024 - 2:50pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - ScottFromWyoming - Mar 23, 2024 - 1:54pm
 
Joe Biden - kurtster - Mar 23, 2024 - 11:17am
 
Technical Streaming Note for Nerdy RP DIYers - sjagminas1 - Mar 23, 2024 - 10:16am
 
Museum Of Bad Album Covers - Proclivities - Mar 23, 2024 - 8:56am
 
Other Medical Stuff - Antigone - Mar 22, 2024 - 3:06pm
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - oldviolin - Mar 22, 2024 - 11:06am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - Red_Dragon - Mar 22, 2024 - 9:17am
 
Memorials - Remembering Our Loved Ones - Bill_J - Mar 21, 2024 - 8:54pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Mar 21, 2024 - 2:29pm
 
Can you afford to retire? - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 21, 2024 - 2:15pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 21, 2024 - 11:10am
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Mar 21, 2024 - 7:11am
 
What Did You See Today? - KurtfromLaQuinta - Mar 20, 2024 - 5:13pm
 
Annoying stuff. not things that piss you off, just annoyi... - ScottFromWyoming - Mar 20, 2024 - 4:31pm
 
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see - Antigone - Mar 20, 2024 - 3:10pm
 
Russia - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Mar 20, 2024 - 11:44am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - Proclivities - Mar 20, 2024 - 9:33am
 
2024 Elections! - Lazy8 - Mar 20, 2024 - 7:26am
 
Economix - R_P - Mar 19, 2024 - 4:36pm
 
Name My Band - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 19, 2024 - 10:53am
 
RP automation with iOS Shortcuts App - jarro - Mar 19, 2024 - 10:15am
 
Delicacies: a..k.a.. the Gross Food forum - DaveInSaoMiguel - Mar 19, 2024 - 10:12am
 
Irony 101 - Proclivities - Mar 19, 2024 - 6:02am
 
New Forum Member on "What Makes RP Great" - miamizsun - Mar 19, 2024 - 4:38am
 
Cache stopped working on old Android Phone - Eisenwindel - Mar 19, 2024 - 1:50am
 
Cryptic Posts - Leave Them Guessing - Bill_J - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:23pm
 
Damn Dinosaurs! - oldviolin - Mar 18, 2024 - 8:16pm
 
One Partying State - Wyoming News - geoff_morphini - Mar 18, 2024 - 3:58pm
 
Great guitar faces - skyguy - Mar 18, 2024 - 3:33pm
 
Despots, dictators and war criminals - R_P - Mar 18, 2024 - 12:41pm
 
Uploading Music - dischuckin - Mar 18, 2024 - 11:55am
 
Media Matters - thisbody - Mar 18, 2024 - 10:03am
 
NASA & other news from space - miamizsun - Mar 18, 2024 - 4:13am
 
MEALTICKET - drinpt - Mar 17, 2024 - 4:13am
 
What makes you smile? - Steely_D - Mar 16, 2024 - 7:31pm
 
Apple Computer - GeneP59 - Mar 16, 2024 - 12:02pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Immigration Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 27, 28, 29 ... 38, 39, 40  Next
Post to this Topic
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 30, 2017 - 7:50am

 Lazy8 wrote:
kurtster wrote:
1)  from the decision ... 

 Third, our cases have suggested (without significant elaboration) that conditions on federal grants might be illegitimate if they are unrelated "to the federal interest in particular national projects or programs.

In this case, I think that the conditions referenced are directly related to the programs they affect.  No issue or conflict to be found on this particular matter.

Because the feds shouldn't pay for a bridge because an illegal alien might be slightly more likely to cross it? I'm trying to be generous here; your argument seems to be "Yes it is!" and nothing more.
2)  by simply not honoring the detainers in question, it is an effective obstacle to deportation.

What does this mean?
3)  You totally misstate my position, with the exception of the ambulance driver.  Illegals should be addressed at this point in time on a priority basis, only.  The worst of the worst first.  Violent criminals, then lower level criminals.  We can address everyone else once we have a fully operational border policy.  But the everyone else still faces incidental involvement through ordinary activities and the consequences, nothing new there.

You stated that the alleged crime at Rockville High School was "totally preventable"; you didn't go into detail on that, so since we were discussing immigration policy the natural assumption was that the students involved should have been deported before the crime took place.

To deport people for their immigration status you have to discover it. Illegal immigrants don't walk around in bright orange vests that say "ILLEGAL ALIEN" on them, you have to investigate that status.

And under our system of laws the presumption has to be that everyone is here legally. You don't have to prove you're innocent, the government has to prove you're guilty. So how do we do that?

You're pulled over for a broken taillight—you're a lower level criminal. Can you prove you're a citizen on the spot?  Should anyone have to?
4)  No one is asking for anyone to spend time investigating peoples status in this concern.  Its just honor the detainer for someone already in custody.  Your remarks are disingenuous or irrelevant as a justification for doing nothing in this particular example.

You keep using those words. What do they mean?

Explain how someone can refrain from doing nothing without spending time. I'll wait.
5)  Same as always and often stated.  Numero uno, secure the border and enforce it with the laws on the books.  Once that has been done we can look at who is already here.  Similar as back in the 80's.  But not before the border is fully functional and operational as designed.  No rainchecks, we've already done this back in the 80's and got burned.  Fool me once ...

In addition, we need to address visa overstays and promptly return violators to their home country.  Non compliance with the visa terms will not be tolerated and that example will help with voluntary compliance.  Establish a work program for seasonal workers, etc to address the needs of agriculture for example.  Fine, come on in legally for a defined time for a defined purpose and be subject to all the laws that apply to citizens.  No objections on my part to that.

Just simply enforce the plenty of laws we already have on the books.  I see no need for new ones.  We have laws for verifying legal employment and penalties for companies who violate them.  

I became directly aware of these verification laws when they were implemented in the late 80's and early 90's because I was doing hiring and firing of employees.  If I did not obtain the proper documents to verify citizenship or legal status,  I , me, myself and I  was subject to fines and jail.  I have paying close attention to this subject ever since. 

It is the non enforcement of these laws that is mostly responsible for the current state of affairs.

And Congress must look at the 14th Amendment as it applies to citizenship by birth from foreign national non citizen parents.  It has never formally been determined and is within Congress' right (and now an obligation) to do so.

So you're not going to answer. OK.

 
Re:
1)  You brought up the matter of DOJ withholding funds for Sanctuary Cities.  Cities that choose to ignore federal immigration laws.  The specific here is withholding funds for law enforcement.  I think that these are directly related.  There are no bridges involved. 

2)  Requests from ICE to continue holding someone in custody until ICE can come in and pick them up and transfer custody.  To refuse to honor a detainer is to effectively interfere with the legal process and block deportation should that be the eventual outcome.

3)  Again you limit your thinking.  If the borders were actually defended and trespassers caught at the border and returned immediately, it would then be preventable.  Catch and release is not the answer.  It is how these suspects were allowed to keep on going until arriving in Rockville.  Catch and return would have prevented this particular crime.  We already know that the oldest suspect was in fact caught and released.  I believe that true of the younger but not sure.  

4)  This is obvious. see 2 above. 

5)  There was much more than just enforce the laws mentioned.  What is your solution ?  Open borders and no rules I bet. 


Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 30, 2017 - 7:16am

kurtster wrote:
1)  from the decision ... 

 Third, our cases have suggested (without significant elaboration) that conditions on federal grants might be illegitimate if they are unrelated "to the federal interest in particular national projects or programs.

In this case, I think that the conditions referenced are directly related to the programs they affect.  No issue or conflict to be found on this particular matter.

Because the feds shouldn't pay for a bridge because an illegal alien might be slightly more likely to cross it? I'm trying to be generous here; your argument seems to be "Yes it is!" and nothing more.
2)  by simply not honoring the detainers in question, it is an effective obstacle to deportation.

What does this mean?
3)  You totally misstate my position, with the exception of the ambulance driver.  Illegals should be addressed at this point in time on a priority basis, only.  The worst of the worst first.  Violent criminals, then lower level criminals.  We can address everyone else once we have a fully operational border policy.  But the everyone else still faces incidental involvement through ordinary activities and the consequences, nothing new there.

You stated that the alleged crime at Rockville High School was "totally preventable"; you didn't go into detail on that, so since we were discussing immigration policy the natural assumption was that the students involved should have been deported before the crime took place.

To deport people for their immigration status you have to discover it. Illegal immigrants don't walk around in bright orange vests that say "ILLEGAL ALIEN" on them, you have to investigate that status.

And under our system of laws the presumption has to be that everyone is here legally. You don't have to prove you're innocent, the government has to prove you're guilty. So how do we do that?

You're pulled over for a broken taillight—you're a lower level criminal. Can you prove you're a citizen on the spot?  Should anyone have to?
4)  No one is asking for anyone to spend time investigating peoples status in this concern.  Its just honor the detainer for someone already in custody.  Your remarks are disingenuous or irrelevant as a justification for doing nothing in this particular example.

You keep using those words. What do they mean?

Explain how someone can refrain from doing nothing without spending time. I'll wait.
5)  Same as always and often stated.  Numero uno, secure the border and enforce it with the laws on the books.  Once that has been done we can look at who is already here.  Similar as back in the 80's.  But not before the border is fully functional and operational as designed.  No rainchecks, we've already done this back in the 80's and got burned.  Fool me once ...

In addition, we need to address visa overstays and promptly return violators to their home country.  Non compliance with the visa terms will not be tolerated and that example will help with voluntary compliance.  Establish a work program for seasonal workers, etc to address the needs of agriculture for example.  Fine, come on in legally for a defined time for a defined purpose and be subject to all the laws that apply to citizens.  No objections on my part to that.

Just simply enforce the plenty of laws we already have on the books.  I see no need for new ones.  We have laws for verifying legal employment and penalties for companies who violate them.  

I became directly aware of these verification laws when they were implemented in the late 80's and early 90's because I was doing hiring and firing of employees.  If I did not obtain the proper documents to verify citizenship or legal status,  I , me, myself and I  was subject to fines and jail.  I have paying close attention to this subject ever since. 

It is the non enforcement of these laws that is mostly responsible for the current state of affairs.

And Congress must look at the 14th Amendment as it applies to citizenship by birth from foreign national non citizen parents.  It has never formally been determined and is within Congress' right (and now an obligation) to do so.

So you're not going to answer. OK.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 29, 2017 - 10:23pm

 Lazy8 wrote:
kurtster wrote:
First off there is nothing unconstitutional about withholding grants from those who do meet the conditions needed to be eligible for these grants.

1)  The court has been sort of schizophrenic on this issue—a small reduction in funding is permissible but a complete elimination is not.

To whom it may concern ...

So sanctuary cities are designed to prevent illegal alien victims of crimes being deported just for reporting a crime.  Ok, so how do we make the leap from that to protecting the actual criminal from deportation ?  

I can understand the first part of all of that, but the second part is beyond comprehension and makes me against the whole thing.

2)  No one is protecting any criminals from deportation. Deportation is a federal function, no city or state can deport anyone. Sanctuary cities just refuse to investigate immigration status—at least unconnected from any other crime. In the case that has your knickers a-twist they did investigate the immigration status of the accused rapists—that's how we all found out about it.

3)  You want all illegal aliens deported—little kids, old ladies, the guy who picks your lettuce, the lady who drives the ambulance that picks you up after a car accident. If you want to narc on them just call the feds instead of the local cops. They'll happily kick the door down and haul them (and anyone in the vicinity without papers) off to a detention center. The local cops (depending on local ordinances) might not. The kids' school might not narc on them, the hospital might not, the fire department might not. This has you outraged.

You seem to think that the alleged perps would never have done what they're alleged to have done if only someone had only done...what? Checked citizenship status of.every person in the country? Every student in every high school? Or what? Do the cops go door to door, stop and frisk everyone they see, set up checkpoints—so they can demand "show me your papers!"

4)  Seems like they might be busy with other things—you know, murders and stuff—and this would take up a fairly large portion of their waking hours. Maybe we should cut this task down to a more manageable size; should they just do that for people who look like they might be Hispanic? What about other nationalities, do they get a pass, or do we just get to them later?  

5))  What is it you want done?

Not vague generalities, like "Enforce the law!" but an actual concrete proposal that could actually happen. Explain that.

 

1)  from the decision ... 

 Third, our cases have suggested (without significant elaboration) that conditions on federal grants might be illegitimate if they are unrelated "to the federal interest in particular national projects or programs.

In this case, I think that the conditions referenced are directly related to the programs they affect.  No issue or conflict to be found on this particular matter.
 
2)  by simply not honoring the detainers in question, it is an effective obstacle to deportation.

3)  You totally misstate my position, with the exception of the ambulance driver.  Illegals should be addressed at this point in time on a priority basis, only.  The worst of the worst first.  Violent criminals, then lower level criminals.  We can address everyone else once we have a fully operational border policy.  But the everyone else still faces incidental involvement through ordinary activities and the consequences, nothing new there.

4)  No one is asking for anyone to spend time investigating peoples status in this concern.  Its just honor the detainer for someone already in custody.  Your remarks are disingenuous or irrelevant as a justification for doing nothing in this particular example.

5)  Same as always and often stated.  Numero uno, secure the border and enforce it with the laws on the books.  Once that has been done we can look at who is already here.  Similar as back in the 80's.  But not before the border is fully functional and operational as designed.  No rainchecks, we've already done this back in the 80's and got burned.  Fool me once ...

In addition, we need to address visa overstays and promptly return violators to their home country.  Non compliance with the visa terms will not be tolerated and that example will help with voluntary compliance.  Establish a work program for seasonal workers, etc to address the needs of agriculture for example.  Fine, come on in legally for a defined time for a defined purpose and be subject to all the laws that apply to citizens.  No objections on my part to that.

Just simply enforce the plenty of laws we already have on the books.  I see no need for new ones.  We have laws for verifying legal employment and penalties for companies who violate them.  

I became directly aware of these verification laws when they were implemented in the late 80's and early 90's because I was doing hiring and firing of employees.  If I did not obtain the proper documents to verify citizenship or legal status,  I , me, myself and I  was subject to fines and jail.  I have paying close attention to this subject ever since. 

It is the non enforcement of these laws that is mostly responsible for the current state of affairs.

And Congress must look at the 14th Amendment as it applies to citizenship by birth from foreign national non citizen parents.  It has never formally been determined and is within Congress' right (and now an obligation) to do so.


Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 28, 2017 - 9:59pm

kurtster wrote:
First off there is nothing unconstitutional about withholding grants from those who do meet the conditions needed to be eligible for these grants.

The court has been sort of schizophrenic on this issue—a small reduction in funding is permissible but a complete elimination is not.

To whom it may concern ...

So sanctuary cities are designed to prevent illegal alien victims of crimes being deported just for reporting a crime.  Ok, so how do we make the leap from that to protecting the actual criminal from deportation ?  

I can understand the first part of all of that, but the second part is beyond comprehension and makes me against the whole thing.

No one is protecting any criminals from deportation. Deportation is a federal function, no city or state can deport anyone. Sanctuary cities just refuse to investigate immigration status—at least unconnected from any other crime. In the case that has your knickers a-twist they did investigate the immigration status of the accused rapists—that's how we all found out about it.

You want all illegal aliens deported—little kids, old ladies, the guy who picks your lettuce, the lady who drives the ambulance that picks you up after a car accident. If you want to narc on them just call the feds instead of the local cops. They'll happily kick the door down and haul them (and anyone in the vicinity without papers) off to a detention center. The local cops (depending on local ordinances) might not. The kids' school might not narc on them, the hospital might not, the fire department might not. This has you outraged.

You seem to think that the alleged perps would never have done what they're alleged to have done if only someone had only done...what? Checked citizenship status of.every person in the country? Every student in every high school? Or what? Do the cops go door to door, stop and frisk everyone they see, set up checkpoints—so they can demand "show me your papers!"

Seems like they might be busy with other things—you know, murders and stuff—and this would take up a fairly large portion of their waking hours. Maybe we should cut this task down to a more manageable size; should they just do that for people who look like they might be Hispanic? What about other nationalities, do they get a pass, or do we just get to them later? What is it you want done?

Not vague generalities, like "Enforce the law!" but an actual concrete proposal that could actually happen. Explain that.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 28, 2017 - 7:41pm

First off there is nothing unconstitutional about withholding grants from those who do meet the conditions needed to be eligible for these grants. 

To whom it may concern ...

So sanctuary cities are designed to prevent illegal alien victims of crimes being deported just for reporting a crime.  Ok, so how do we make the leap from that to protecting the actual criminal from deportation ?  

I can understand the first part of all of that, but the second part is beyond comprehension and makes me against the whole thing.

 
Lazy8

Lazy8 Avatar

Location: The Gallatin Valley of Montana
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 28, 2017 - 12:22pm

Jeff Sessions Threatens Unconstitutional Action Against Sanctuary Cities

The Attorney General aims to dragoon state and local officials and leave them "no real option but to acquiesce."

Yesterday Attorney General Jeff Sessions threatened to withhold, terminate, and "claw-back" federal funding for so-called sanctuary cities and states, which are those jurisdictions that either won't help the federal government round up and deport undocumented immigrants or otherwise refuse to participate in the enforcement of federal immigration laws. "I urge our nation's states and cities to consider carefully the harm they are doing to their citizens by refusing to enforce our immigration laws, and to re-think these policies," Sessions said. "Such policies make their cities and states less safe, and put them at risk of losing valuable federal dollars."

Sessions may not like the idea of sanctuary cities, but sanctuary cites are protected by both the Constitution and by Supreme Court precedent. As Justice Antonin Scalia observed in his 2007 majority opinion in Printz v. United States, "the Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the States' officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program." In other words, thanks to the 10th Amendment and to the constitutional principles of federalism, the federal government may not commandeer the states for federal purposes. What that means here is that state and local officials have every right to refuse to enforce federal immigration laws.


Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Mar 25, 2017 - 7:12am

Blame game: Trump casts immigrants as dangerous criminals, but the evidence shows otherwise
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 7:53pm

 Kaw wrote:
 Mmmyeah. Now you solved it. Problems are over. Discussion is closed.
 
I wasn't trying to solve anything; simply pointing out that we - as a species - need to think and act outside our selfish, tribal boxes if we want to continue existing.


Kaw

Kaw Avatar

Location: Just above sea level
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 2:26pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:

There's a bigger picture...

 

Mmmyeah. Now you solved it. Problems are over. Discussion is closed.
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 2:10pm

 Kaw wrote:

In a sense I really like not to care about things like locking my car. But if I give others the chance of stealing stuff from me it will happen. It already happend because I wasn't careful enough. Would I steal stuff if I could do it? No. But others do.
The same is about borders. My country would not abuse the freedom. But other countries will. Russia will invade east Europe if nobody is caring about the borders. Turkey will invade Greece. Muslims will invade Israel. India will invade Pakistan and also Pakistan will invade India. China will invade a lot of small countries around it. And so on, and so on.
Generally spoken the country with the worst human rights and economy will try to conquer the country with a better situation.
You can choose to stop caring about borders, but it will not help you. It will help people that care about things we consider as not very good. 

 
There's a bigger picture...

 
Kaw

Kaw Avatar

Location: Just above sea level
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 2:08pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:

I'd like to think it wouldn't matter where I live. The principle is the same: we learn to live together or we die.

 
In a sense I really like not to care about things like locking my car. But if I give others the chance of stealing stuff from me it will happen. It already happend because I wasn't careful enough. Would I steal stuff if I could do it? No. But others do.
The same is about borders. My country would not abuse the freedom. But other countries will. Russia will invade east Europe if nobody is caring about the borders. Turkey will invade Greece. Muslims will invade Israel. India will invade Pakistan and also Pakistan will invade India. China will invade a lot of small countries around it. And so on, and so on.
Generally spoken the country with the worst human rights and economy will try to conquer the country with a better situation.
You can choose to stop caring about borders, but it will not help you. It will help people that care about things we consider as not very good. 
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 2:07pm

 pigtail wrote:

We are gonna die.....lol  Let's face it with cuts to the EPA and a basic snubbing to our allies when it comes to global warming, climate change or whatever they are calling it now, at such a critical point in our geological history, we are doomed.

 
You are probably correct, but I still have to live the change I'd like to see the best I can. *shrug*
pigtail

pigtail Avatar

Location: Southern California
Gender: Female


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 2:04pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:

I'd like to think it wouldn't matter where I live. The principle is the same: we learn to live together or we die.

 
We are gonna die.....lol  Let's face it with cuts to the EPA and a basic snubbing to our allies when it comes to global warming, climate change or whatever they are calling it now, at such a critical point in our geological history, we are doomed.
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 1:53pm

 Kaw wrote:

That's easy to say if you live in a place between Canada and Mexico.
Move to Israël or even Greece and you get other ideas.

 
I'd like to think it wouldn't matter where I live. The principle is the same: we learn to live together or we die.
Kaw

Kaw Avatar

Location: Just above sea level
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 1:50pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:
As long as humanity insists on the selfish, self-destructive idea that we need borders and nation-states etc., this will be a problem. We need to grow tf up and behave as we actually are - one species living on one planet.

 
That's easy to say if you live in a place between Canada and Mexico.
Move to Israël or even Greece and you get other ideas.
pigtail

pigtail Avatar

Location: Southern California
Gender: Female


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 1:21pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:

thanks!

 

Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 1:15pm

 pigtail wrote:

You freakin hippie!!!

 
thanks!
pigtail

pigtail Avatar

Location: Southern California
Gender: Female


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 12:49pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:
As long as humanity insists on the selfish, self-destructive idea that we need borders and nation-states etc., this will be a problem. We need to grow tf up and behave as we actually are - one species living on one planet.

 
You freakin hippie!!!
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 12:37pm

As long as humanity insists on the selfish, self-destructive idea that we need borders and nation-states etc., this will be a problem. We need to grow tf up and behave as we actually are - one species living on one planet.
pigtail

pigtail Avatar

Location: Southern California
Gender: Female


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 12:33pm

 sirdroseph wrote:
 R_P wrote:
Wages rise on California farms. Americans still don’t want the job
Trump’s immigration crackdown is supposed to help U.S. citizens. For California farmers, it’s worsening a desperate labor shortage.

 

All we have to do is to give California back (at least from say San Francisco south, Emerald Triangle needs to remain with us) to its rightful owners, Mexico. Boom! Everyone is a legal citizen and Californian residents no longer have to put up with the United States. See? I am solutions oriented.

 
Um no.....That is just not going to work for me :)
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 27, 28, 29 ... 38, 39, 40  Next