The irony here is that you honestly can’t see the vicious hatred and bigotry in your attitude towards your own people. It’s bad enough to be blindly prejudiced against racial or ethnic groups not your own, but it’s truly sick and demented to be blindly prejudiced against your own kind.
Liberal: *They aren’t paying for anything. *
Yes they are: they’re paying for other people’s medical care.
You could start a thread rather than hijacking this one to b’jaysus.
I know you’ve talked about hijacking threads you don’t like. Is this one of them?
Since every single one of my posts to Kim are responses to her, I reckon you’re asking that of her.
The truly sick and demented part is where you divvy up humanity according to skin colour or national boundaries, call one of those groups of people yours and feel different standards of decency should apply to them.
Liberal: *Since every single one of my posts to Kim are responses to her, I reckon you’re asking that of her. *
Well, strictly speaking, your first post to me was really about blinx’s use of the phrase “free medical care”. When I said “that’s true, blinx”, I wasn’t saying “it’s true that taxpayer-funded medical care is free”—which is the issue that you then started talking about. I was saying “it’s true that there are issues besides fertility to be taken into account when considering the social-services impact of the immigrant under discussion.”
So the “does taxpayer-funded = free?” hijack actually does belong to you. Not that I personally mind, as I’ve been perfectly willing to continue talking about it, but if other posters are bothered by it I’m also perfectly willing to stop.
No doubt fewer than a Pakistani should, by rights, expect to have in a rich, western, liberal democracy.
No offence, but it really scares me when people try to justify certain regressive positions by pointing out that they still compare favourably with those of third-world countries.
Strictly speaking, my first post to you was a response to your first post. Inasmuch as your post amounted to little more than “me too”, it was far less specific than your subsequent extensions of remarks. Since Blinx himself engaged me on the issue, and he and I had long ago settled our own discussion on the matter with his concession, I do not believe that our discussion could possibly be a hijack unless you are willing to assert that he has hijacked his own thread. I too am willing to stop your and my discussion about our discussion since it is now four meta-levels removed from when you began it.
Besides, it wasn’t really a “hijack;” more like someone donating posts to the thread, while expecting nothing in return.
In the spirit of full disclosure I have to say that we could have probably moved to Denmark when we finally got married, but none wanted to do that. After time living here now we will probably not be permitted to move in DK, which, as I said, has efectively barred my husband from his own country.
Did you wish to take up where Kim left off?
The people of Denmark–or France, or the United States, or Great Britain, or Germany–do not have the resources to provide free food, clothing, housing, medical care, and education to everyone, everywhere on the planet. Please do not imagine that you are somehow nobler or more moral than I am merely because you make stupid and impossible moral demands upon your fellow citizens.
Actually Liberal, since this is my thread, at this point I will politely ask you to butt out. If you want to disuss the meaning of words, open your own thread.
Oh, bullshit. Firstly, **Gaspode ** gave reasons for feeling the way he does about his countrymen so his reasonings are not prejudiced and secondly, your statement is the ironic one with its casual bigotry.
How the fuck does his being Swedish give him more validity in disliking non-Scandinavians as opposed to those of his own kind? 'cause they look different and talk funny? Maybe they’re going to steal his women. Or take his job!
We can’t be having that.
Another enlightened, progressive intellectual heard from. :rolleyes:
Liberal, just for once, would you PLEASE not hijack a thread to spout off about libertarianism? I understand it’s a subject you feel very passionate about, but I for one am tired of every discussion that mentions anything about government services and programs turning into your soapbox. Couldn’t you just start another thread, if it’s that important? Thank you.
Perhaps but the people of Denmark and France and the US (along with those in Bangladesh, Haiti and Sudan) do have the resources. SUVs and ‘all you can eat’ buffets for the entire population of the planet are certainly stupid and impossible goals for my fellow citizens but those things you mentioned are very attainable with what we have. With what we waste even.
And in return, you’ll stop imagining prejudice and racism is more acceptable when it’s directed outside the group you identify with?
Yes, I was discussing the meaning of words while Kimstu was discussing the fucking of Denmark.
I haven’t mentioned the “L” word. Would you PLEASE for once not hijack a thread just to pad your post count?
I can’t believe that I am defending Brutus here, but I’d have to say that he is right. :eek:
He forgot to mention the fact that another factor is of course involved. The desirability of the country. Lets suppose there is a country with no immigration controls that is poor with no social services. It wouldn’t really need to protect its borders, now would it? Nobody would want to go because the idea is to make oneself better off. Take a rich country with no immigration controls and no social welfare. People will still want to come because they’ll have a better life. At that point, immigration controls are only for the cultural issues, and the destabilizing nature that tons of immigrants will have on jobs or unemployment. Sure you aren’t paying for them directly, but you are though poverty and a reduced oveall standard of living.
Take a rich country with high welfare, and you not only have those unemployment problems, but you also have the people directly paying for the immigrant’s welfare.
Look, a nation-state is just simply an evolution of a tribe, which was basically only concerned with taking care of the group. Except now the tribe has just grown to a point where it is a lot larger, but the overall goal is still the same. Any kind of humanitarian measures that you’d like to take is simply optional. Sure other countries may decide to do more than others, but as long as they are abiding by their international treaties that bind them to some kind of assylum system, that is all they have to do. Nowhere does it say that rich nations have to take care of the poor ones by letting them work there.