or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Trump is #2 in GOP Field
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Trump is #2 in GOP Field - Page 164

post #2446 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by wojt View Post


it would work, because the goal would not be to allow literally zero people but to prevent muslim minority from growing, which it would, if couple thounsand per year would enter via Canadian/UK id's it wouldn't matter in big scheme of things. Also they could be denied residency/citizenship later on.

 

So a country founded on religious liberty and flight from religious prosecution should deny people entry based on religion?  This is especially funny coming from people who claim to hold the founding fathers and documents in such high regard.  Seems a bit counter-intuitive to me, but I'm just a man adrift without a political party.

post #2447 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

So a country founded on religious liberty and flight from religious prosecution should deny people entry based on religion?  This is especially funny coming from people who claim to hold the founding fathers and documents in such high regard.  Seems a bit counter-intuitive to me, but I'm just a man adrift without a political party.

was not a problem in the past

"1950 Internal Security Act allows the deportation of any immigrants who were ever members of the Communist Party."

or

"Immigration Act of 1917, also called Asiatic Barred Zone Act, further restricted immigration, particularly of people from a large swath of Asia and the Pacific Islands. The act also bars homosexuals, “idiots,” “feeble-minded persons,” "criminals," “insane persons,” alcoholics, and other categories. In addition, the act sets a literacy standard for immigrants age 16 and older. They must be able to read a 40-word selection in their native language."

But seriously why not? Muslims inside USA have right to practise their religion just like muslims in Japan have atm. No problem. Leaders should look after their own countrymen first and then after outsiders. People should have a right to determine make up of their society,it's basic democratic right of every society. Being US citizen is privillege not a right.
Edited by wojt - 5/5/16 at 12:16pm
post #2448 of 8748
I think as long as we continue to be selective about who we accept, the religion thing largely shakes out. Highly skilled people aren't all that likely to become radicalized and have major incentives to adapt to US norms. There's a middle ground between an outright ban and open borders. It's not exactly trivial to get into the US right now if you're not coming from Central/South America, so we can pick and choose to a much larger extent. Some doctor from Iran isn't the guy who is going to blow up schools. We can reject the peasants from Pakistan without a blanket ban and all the fallout that would entail.


Europe has a different problem because of the ghettos, lack of integration into society in general, geographic proximity to Muslim countries, and open borders. Even high skilled people get radicalized much more frequently over there.
post #2449 of 8748

Happy Cinco de Mayo! The best taco bowls are made in Trump Tower Grill. I love Hispanics! — at Trump Tower New York.

post #2450 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by wojt View Post


was not a problem in the past

"1950 Internal Security Act allows the deportation of any immigrants who were ever members of the Communist Party."

or

"Immigration Act of 1917, also called Asiatic Barred Zone Act, further restricted immigration, particularly of people from a large swath of Asia and the Pacific Islands. The act also bars homosexuals, “idiots,” “feeble-minded persons,” "criminals," “insane persons,” alcoholics, and other categories. In addition, the act sets a literacy standard for immigrants age 16 and older. They must be able to read a 40-word selection in their native language."

But seriously why not? Muslims inside USA have right to practise their religion just like muslims in Japan have atm. No problem. Leaders should look after their own countrymen first and then after outsiders. People should have a right to determine make up of their society,it's basic democratic right of every society. Being US citizen is privillege not a right.

 

As Gib just said, there is some middle ground between open borders and banning everyone. 

 

I would add that we also allowed slaves and had Jim Crow laws that forced segregation.  Should we use those things to justify actions today?

post #2451 of 8748
I tend to agree, I think some sort of cap to assure things stay good would be a better solution than a complete ban. Also I don't think you should compare prefering one type of migrant to another to forced racial segregation :P but ok I think I know what you were trying to say.
post #2452 of 8748
Why I will be voting for Donald Trump

Following Trump’s victory in the Republican primary, there has been a lot of weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth from both Republicans and Democrats over the prospect of a Trump presidency.

Although I voted for Ted Cruz in the primary, I am actually looking forward to the possibility of Trump being President. Assuming he can defeat Hillary Clinton in November, (which would be difficult for any Republican challenger,) I believe that Trump would make a very effective President. Here is why I support him:
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Immigration Policy:

An estimated 60 million people (one fifth of people living in the United States today) are foreign born and minor children of foreign born parents. Numbers for illegal aliens living in the U.S. are more difficult to confirm, but estimates range from 12 to 30 million. The majority of legal and illegal immigrants come from the Third World, particularly Mexico and Central America. They are mostly low skilled, poorly educated, and the majority are welfare dependent.

In a time when America is losing our own war on poverty, it is not in the best interests of our citizens to continue to import poor, uneducated, unskilled people into the country. Increasing numbers of Third World immigrants depress wages, strain our schools and other public services, and impose a huge financial burden on our society. It’s true that some industries (particularly agriculture) benefit from the availability of low cost, low skill labor, however the cost to society as a whole far outweighs the benefits to specific industries who employ low cost illegal immigrant labor.

In addition to the economic costs, America is saddled with significant social costs because of its immigration policies. The Federal Government does not keep comprehensive statistics on immigrant crime, but what data there is from individual states with high immigrant populations provides a clue to the size of the problem. Between 2008 and 2014, criminal aliens accounted for 38% of all murder convictions in the five states of California, Texas, Arizona, Florida and New York.

With regards to Trump’s often maligned call for a moratorium on immigration from Muslim countries, one only need look at the experience of Europe to see the consequences of large scale Muslim immigration. Riots, terrorism, violence, rape, massive unemployment, and general hostility toward Western identity and culture are the stark consequences of mass Muslim immigration all across Europe.

The truth is that traditional Islamic beliefs are simply not compatible with liberal Western traditions and rights, particularly our respect for free speech, freedom of religion, equality of women , gay rights, and separation of church and state. Every country in the world with a Muslim majority criminalizes both apostasy (freedom of religion) and blasphemy (freedom of speech.) For those who think that this won’t become a problem in the United States, just look at the attacks in Garland, Texas on artists who drew Mohammed cartoons. Just imagine what would happen if there were a Broadway musical about the Koran rather than the Book of Mormon. Violence would be inevitable. Fear of Islamic violence and terror are already restricting our freedom of expression. Honor killings, terrorism, and violence in the name of Islam are becoming more and more common here in the United States.

Donald Trump’s immigration policies will stem the tide of Third World immigration and preserve our country from the problems inherent in absorbing large numbers of poor, unskilled people into our culture. There are many things about our country which we could change for the better, however, I have never looked at the U.S. and wished that my country was more like Mexico, or Syria, or Somalia, or Guatemala.

Foreign Policy:

Trump’s recent speech on foreign policy was centered on a simple yet powerful principle; America First. In our foreign policy, Trump will act in the best interests of American citizens. This is a long overdue change in the meddlesome and incoherent foreign policy of the last several decades.
For too long, American military has been involved in various nation building and regime change missions across the globe, most of which have had little connection with legitimate national interests. From American intervention in Bosnia and Somalia, to the Second Gulf War, to the take down of the Gaddafi regime in Libya, we have spilt American blood and treasure on adventures with ill-defined or impossible goals.

American military intervention should be limited to those instances where we have a definite strategic interest. Trump has made it clear that he will follow this precept in his foreign policy. He has also made it clear that when military intervention is necessary, he will do what is required to win, and not hobble our soldiers with unnecessary rules of engagement or other limitations.

Trade:

Trump has indicated that he will not support unfettered free trade, and will review our trade policies with countries such as China and Mexico where the U.S. has significant trade deficits. I am generally an advocate of free trade, and am somewhat skeptical of tariffs as a means of reviving U.S. manufacturing, but I will reserve judgment until I have seen the specifics of his proposals. I am not a free trade purist, however, and do believe that there may be instances where limitations on free trade could be beneficial to U.S. interests.

Trump is not a religious conservative:

This may seem strange, coming from a person who is a religious conservative, but I prefer politicians who are not overtly religious. Republican candidates have become too hung up on the issues of abortion and gay marriage, and these are not the issues that I believe that our President should be spending his political capital on. The issue of abortion was decided years ago by Roe v. Wade, and I believe that any consenting adults should be allowed to enter into any sort of marriage arrangement that they believe will make them happy. Trump may identify as a Christian, but he’s no zealot and I think it is clear that he will not make social issues like these a priority.

Trump is not Hillary:

Trump can be abrasive and vulgar, and has an unfortunate habit of speaking without actually thinking things through, but I have not seen any evidence that he is a corrupt or amoral person. He is constantly described by his detractors as “racist” but I haven’t seen any instances of racism either. Hillary, on the other hand, has shown no reluctance to take bribes from corporations and foreign governments in return for government influence. Her duplicity in the Benghazi tragedy and the e-mail server cover up, are further proof of her bad character. Trump is not perfect, but he is certainly a better choice than Hillary.
post #2453 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post



Happy Cinco de Mayo! The best taco bowls are made in Trump Tower Grill. I love Hispanics! — at Trump Tower New York.

That's not a good looking taco bowl.
post #2454 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nil View Post

That's not a good looking taco bowl.

Maybe if he was wearing a different tie...
post #2455 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nil View Post


That's not a good looking taco bowl.

 

It is one of the specials of the day at Trump Grill - $13.50 in case you were wondering: http://www.trumptowerny.com/trump-cafe-todays-entrees

post #2456 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

Tell me: how do you do this?  Do we only look at their country of origin?  Are we going to start screening immigrants from Indonesia, and other parts of east Asia?  What about Muslim Canadians?

If it was up to me I think it would be too politically sensitive to ask what immigrants believe. Besides, they would just lie anyway.

I would simply not accept immigrants from countries that produced a lot of terrorists and leave it at that. Of course those countries would include muslim majority countries. It would not be perfect because muslims from the UK for example could come to America, but it would be much better than the status quo. At the end of the day you could say "We're not discriminating against people for their beliefs. We're just not accepting people from countries that have been shown to produce terrorists." And of course, they would just happen to muslim majority countries by some strange coincidence.

Either way, they should not come here. It's not ethical to let them into America.
post #2457 of 8748

@Kai

 

Quote:
An estimated 60 million people (one fifth of people living in the United States today) are foreign born and minor children of foreign born parents. Numbers for illegal aliens living in the U.S. are more difficult to confirm, but estimates range from 12 to 30 million. The majority of legal and illegal immigrants come from the Third World, particularly Mexico and Central America. They are mostly low skilled, poorly educated, and the majority are welfare dependent.

So you're telling me that up to half the immigrants in the US (and up to 10% of the US population) is illegal immigrants?  Also, that is saying that at least half the immigrant population is dependent on welfare?  Let's concede that part for the sake of argument.  If we eliminated welfare for non-citizens (you have to be a legal resident for 7 years to apply for citizenship), you would eliminate the immigration problem you are claiming.  Who would come here for 7 years and work to support themselves just to go on welfare (and that's if they got here legally)?

Quote:
In a time when America is losing our own war on poverty, it is not in the best interests of our citizens to continue to import poor, uneducated, unskilled people into the country. Increasing numbers of Third World immigrants depress wages, strain our schools and other public services, and impose a huge financial burden on our society. It’s true that some industries (particularly agriculture) benefit from the availability of low cost, low skill labor, however the cost to society as a whole far outweighs the benefits to specific industries who employ low cost illegal immigrant labor.

 

Let's assume we magically stop immigration and these "Third World immigrants" really do depress wage.  What do you think happens?  First, low cost manufacturing jobs move to Mexico or other countries.  Second, food prices skyrocket as fields in the US go unworked (or farmers are forced to pay much higher wages).  Third, restaurants, hotels, etc dramatically raise prices to pay for the increase in labor costs, because let's be honest, that part of the economy runs on low paying jobs that are traditionally held by first generation immigrants.

post #2458 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reggs View Post


If it was up to me I think it would be too politically sensitive to ask what immigrants believe. Besides, they would just lie anyway.

I would simply not accept immigrants from countries that produced a lot of terrorists and leave it at that. Of course those countries would include muslim majority countries. It would not be perfect because muslims from the UK for example could come to America, but it would be much better than the status quo. At the end of the day you could say "We're not discriminating against people for their beliefs. We're just not accepting people from countries that have been shown to produce terrorists." And of course, they would just happen to muslim majority countries by some strange coincidence.

Either way, they should not come here. It's not ethical to let them into America.

 

How many immigrants to the US have committed terrorist acts in the US (especially those from "countries that produced a lot of terrorists") ?

If you look at the Wikipedia list of terrorist attack in the US in the 2000s and 2010s, it sure looks like a lot of crazy folks are on it: including members of the US military.

post #2459 of 8748

Holy shit, this thread is starting to make me feel like a bleeding-heart liberal.

post #2460 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post

Holy shit, this thread is starting to make me feel like a bleeding-heart liberal.

Fell the Bern, baby.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Trump is #2 in GOP Field