Nation of immigrants

This_person

Well-Known Member
So, CNN is on in the background while I do some work, and I overheard many canards that seem to need to be addressed:

  1. "We are a nation of immigrants." No, we're not. We are a nation of citizens who all came from people who immigrated here recently or a long, long time ago to everything in between. Some of us have ancestors who came here against their will, but they still immigrated here from somewhere else. However, today we are a nation of citizens.
  2. "Very small numbers of legal immigrants use entitlement programs." Great! That means your faux concern about people being punished impacts a very small number of people and the vast, vast majority of legal immigrants are not impacted by the new rules.
  3. "More white people are on entitlement programs than minorities." Again, that kind of flies in the face of your claim that common-sense entitlement control is a racist thing, doesn't it?
What do you guys think?
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
God damn you are stupid.

You should sign up for English class with the rest of the crew.
Please try and grow up and have a discussion on the merits of your position or mine, but the idiotic profanity-spewing drivel does nothing to drive the conversation or assist in either one of us gaining insight.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
I think I wouldn't even give CNN the satisfaction of having my TV on their channel.
I'm happy to listen to what they have to say, taking what they say with the grain of salt it deserves. I like to hear what the left has to say (I rarely disrespect myself enough to watch/listen to MSNBC, but I still give Wolf a modicum of disappointed respect). It makes me better prepared for Tranny and Sappy and Spanker.
 

awpitt

Main Streeter
So, CNN is on in the background while I do some work, and I overheard many canards that seem to need to be addressed:

  1. "We are a nation of immigrants." No, we're not. We are a nation of citizens who all came from people who immigrated here recently or a long, long time ago to everything in between. Some of us have ancestors who came here against their will, but they still immigrated here from somewhere else. However, today we are a nation of citizens.
  2. "Very small numbers of legal immigrants use entitlement programs." Great! That means your faux concern about people being punished impacts a very small number of people and the vast, vast majority of legal immigrants are not impacted by the new rules.
  3. "More white people are on entitlement programs than minorities." Again, that kind of flies in the face of your claim that common-sense entitlement control is a racist thing, doesn't it?
What do you guys think?

I have mixed feeling about the "public charge" changes. On one hand, I do agree that people should demonstrate some sort of ability to be self supporting; however, I don't agree with the rules being changed mid-stream. There are people out there who have been following the rules and may have applied for assistance that they were told they are legally eligible for and now are going to be penalized for following the rules. They should've been warned about this from the beginning so they would've had a chance to make their choices accordingly.

Sort like someone driving Rt. 235 on Monday at the posted speed limit of 55mph. Then on Tuesday, the SHA changes the speed limit to 45mph. And on Wednesday, that same person gets a ticket for exceeding the speed limit by 10mph.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Sort like someone driving Rt. 235 on Monday at the posted speed limit of 55mph. Then on Tuesday, the SHA changes the speed limit to 45mph. And on Wednesday, that same person gets a ticket for exceeding the speed limit by 10mph.
Happens to me a lot - this VERY example, speed limits changing. As long as it is POSTED, I agree. I don't have to like it.
I might object to it if the speeder was being charged on Wednesday for an incident on Monday before the change.
But you can't hope to fix a problem if the laws never change.
 

awpitt

Main Streeter
So then how DO you fix mistakes and problems after they are recognized?...
Set the new rules going forward. Some sort of "grandfathering" would be reasonable. Sort of like when they raised the drinking age. When that happened in MD, I had already turned 18. When it was raised to 21, I was grandfathered in and could still buy alcohol if I chose to.
 

awpitt

Main Streeter
Happens to me a lot - this VERY example, speed limits changing. As long as it is POSTED, I agree. I don't have to like it.
I might object to it if the speeder was being charged on Wednesday for an incident on Monday before the change.
But you can't hope to fix a problem if the laws never change.
I never said that I disagreed with the rule change itself. Or that it should never change.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Set the new rules going forward. Some sort of "grandfathering" would be reasonable. Sort of like when they raised the drinking age. When that happened in MD, I had already turned 18. When it was raised to 21, I was grandfathered in and could still buy alcohol if I chose to.
You raise a good point. I think it should apply after a certain date, like the speed limit example. That is to say, previous use of welfare does not apply, but use after a given day does.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Set the new rules going forward. Some sort of "grandfathering" would be reasonable. Sort of like when they raised the drinking age. When that happened in MD, I had already turned 18. When it was raised to 21, I was grandfathered in and could still buy alcohol if I chose to.
Seems fair..if it does not present huge headaches to implement.

I'm older than you....MD's drinking age didn't change to 21 until some years after I turned 21. ;-) I was not aware they grandfathered anyone until you mentioned it.
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
So, CNN is on in the background while I do some work, and I overheard many canards that seem to need to be addressed:

  1. "We are a nation of immigrants." No, we're not. We are a nation of citizens who all came from people who immigrated here recently or a long, long time ago to everything in between. Some of us have ancestors who came here against their will, but they still immigrated here from somewhere else. However, today we are a nation of citizens.
  2. "Very small numbers of legal immigrants use entitlement programs." Great! That means your faux concern about people being punished impacts a very small number of people and the vast, vast majority of legal immigrants are not impacted by the new rules.
  3. "More white people are on entitlement programs than minorities." Again, that kind of flies in the face of your claim that common-sense entitlement control is a racist thing, doesn't it?
What do you guys think?

1. This might be one of the dumbest things you've ever written. Of course we are a nation of citizens once we arrive here. We are all immigrants from somewhere unless you have Native american blood. All those people who came through Ellis island just showed up and came in. No applying for asylum . Talk about open borders. You would have been peeing yourself

2. This is the false dichotomy you people are always going on and on about how immigrants drain social services which is not the case at all. In fact they add to the economy.

3. You re confusing two seperate ideas here. This falls under the category of your false narrative of the black welfare queen.


Seriously to think you thought you were on to some great epiphany here is laughable.

You should just delete this thread
 
Top