What sane Republican would welcome more endless immigration? - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Traditional 'common sense' values and duty to the state.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#13953665
Rei Murasame wrote:The reason I'm just moving to different issues all the time, is because all of your responses are lame, and I think you know that they are lame. So I just move to my next point immediately afterwards.

What would not be a lame response to your point of "you supporting immigration means you support bombing other countries"?

Rei Murasame wrote:For instance, my next question to you would be to ask you why you think that having every peasant farmer in Mexico going bankrupt (because of NAFTA), was a 'good thing',

Plz quote where I ever stated an opinion on NAFTA.

Rei Murasame wrote: and why having them all in your country working for a pittance was somehow better than allowing them to work for better wages developing their own country?

Mexico average income is around 6,000
http://www.worldsalaries.org/mexico.shtml
Illegal immigrants 12million of them send 70billion back home. That means they send around 6,000 back home AFTER being able to consume enough goods in order to survive.

So as I said before if they work here they earn and produce more then if they worked in Mexico.

Rei Murasame wrote:Also, you are in a thread where you are defending Republicans, therefore your position is retarded by default, since the Republican party is staffed by retards and their policies are as retarded as their capitalist logic is.

Hm Is that why you support the Republican policies on immigration?

Rei Murasame wrote: Basically, everything that you are trying to do in this thread is completely stupid, and I'm deliberately trying to use you as a punching bag because of it.

Is that why every time you post it is something stupid? Aslo perhaps if you didnt say stupid things such as "Mexicans having better paying jobs is bad for Mexicans" your punching bag goal would go better.
But perhaps your goal shouldn't be to make someone else look bad; perhaps your goal should be to not say stupid things like "supporting immigration equals supporting bombing countries" if you dont say such stupid things then maybe you wont get so pissed and feel the need to make other people look as stupid as you are
#13953668
Rei Murasame wrote:This will be a double-post, since you are taking too long to answer that.
-------See this is the problem you think reality is an argument------
More like you are out of touch with reality. I guess that I'll now actually show a document and graduate this thing to 'hardball':I think I have made my point now.


So your response to the fact that Mexicans moving here results in them having a better live and also sending more money back home resulting in better lives for people in their old country is a big rant about NAFTA.....
Don't you think the fact that I have not said "NAFTA was good" the last three times that I'd respond different this time? Or are you that insane?
Your inability to know the difference between NAFTA and immigration is startling. Take some English classes, they will help
#13953670
Emerald Ocean wrote:Laugh out loud...

Emerald Ocean, It's pretty stunning for sure. And what makes it more amazing, is that when all of that was just getting into high gear in the 90s, William Clinton's entire administration was up and down on every TV channel talking about how great NAFTA is, how wonderful the immigrants are, and how glorious it was that everyone is 'going to benefit'.

Of course not one word of it was true, since Americans have suffered, Mexicans have suffered, and now there is a whole underclass of angry and possibly semi-criminal people forming in the United States, as well as a generally unprecedented demographic shift that no one has planned for.

There should be no defence for any of this, but people like starcraftzzz still consistently are trying to defend the indefensible.

______________________

starcraftzzz wrote:What would not be a lame response to your point of "you supporting immigration means you support bombing other countries"?

Show me where I said that.

starcraftzzz wrote:Plz quote where I ever stated an opinion on NAFTA. [...] Your inability to know the difference between NAFTA and immigration is startling.

How the fucking fuck do you expect to talk about immigration without talking about NAFTA?

Why are you pretending to be a fucking idiot?
#13953894
Rei Murasame wrote:--------What would not be a lame response to your point of "you supporting immigration means you support bombing other countries"?-------
Show me where I said that.

quote="Rei Murasame"=======quote="starcraftzzz"======Oh I see so you think increasing their living standards, making them happier, and making them be more wealthy by allowing them to immigration isn't a favor/helping them.===========
Oh, I see that you think that blowing up half the infrastructure in Vietnam, Iraq, Cambodia, or wherever else, just for example, and then inviting them into your country to work as your servants, is 'increasing their living standards' and 'making them be more wealthy'? :lol:



Rei Murasame wrote:=====Plz quote where I ever stated an opinion on NAFTA. [...] Your inability to know the difference between NAFTA and immigration is startling.=======
How the fucking fuck do you expect to talk about immigration without talking about NAFTA?

Well considering both are different things and have nothing to do with each other Id imagine that we could just talk about one of the topics.
Rei Murasame wrote:Why are you pretending to be a fucking idiot?

You are the one telling us allowing Immigration is bad because of free trade, or that allowing immigration is equal to bombing countries or Mexicans having higher wages is bad for Mexicans.
You are the one whose stated goal is to make me look bad, meaning to you it doesn't matter how stupid you sound or ignorant you post as long as you can make me look bad. Of which it is hard to make me look bad when you are so illiterate that you think NAFTA equals immigration.
Perhaps if you went to dictionary.com and look up the difference between immigration and NAFTA
So I ask you for the 4th time, plz explain why you support policies that make Mexico, and Mexicans poorer
#13953897
Rei Murasame wrote:Emerald Ocean, It's pretty stunning for sure. And what makes it more amazing, is that when all of that was just getting into high gear in the 90s, William Clinton's entire administration was up and down on every TV channel talking about how great NAFTA is, how wonderful the immigrants are, and how glorious it was that everyone is 'going to benefit'.

What is amazing is that everyone reading this thread is laughing and you're to blind to realize it.
#13953966
starcraftzzz wrote:What is amazing is that everyone reading this thread is laughing and you're to blind to realize it.


Oh, I laugh at anybody who can't string together two sentences attempting to go toe-to-toe with Rei. It's like watching Bambi go up against Godzilla, only Bambi in this case is an incoherent liberal who gets their talking points from the (nonexistent) Democratic Underground and their debating skills from the elementary school-yard. :lol:
#13954210
J Oswald wrote:
Oh, I laugh at anybody who can't string together two sentences attempting to go toe-to-toe with Rei. It's like watching Bambi go up against Godzilla, only Bambi in this case is an incoherent liberal who gets their talking points from the (nonexistent) Democratic Underground and their debating skills from the elementary school-yard. :lol:

I see so you think saying that supporting immigration means you support bombing countries is intelligent... what does that make you?

None of what you said implies it is legal to haras[…]

That was weird

No, it won't. Only the Democrats will be hurt by […]

No. There is nothing arbitrary about whether peop[…]