Ok, Jimmy Joe, I know I’ve traded my share of barbs in this thread, but you’re saying absolutely nothing of substance or value. You’re literally just trying to insult and/or provoke me and frankly it’s kinda weird, so welcome to ignore.
I can’t find the ignore button so just stop talking to me please thanks.
I can’t help but point out that ignoring someone doesn’t include telling them you’re ignoring them. By definition, if you do, you aren’t.
You’re right Cisco, this thread is over and we’re just slapping each other. As for the “substance or value” standard, you failed that one on your very first post here.
I’ll bet anyone $10 that **Cisco **can’t actually ignore this reply.
Actually, you and the Sicilian-descent (or half Sicilian) are sorta on the same side on this one. (Yes, I’ve seen the movie too, even read the book first.)
To ignore someone:
Click on his/her username.
Click on view public profile.
Click on user lists.
Click on add to ignore list.
I don’t know if there are further actions needed, as I am not allowed to ignore people.
You cannot ignore a moderator or administrator. However, those same people cannot ignore posters, so it sort of balances out.
I thought you were not talking to me anymore, what happened, got lonely?
I have no idea what an average American is, I’ve only been around Americans for a few of years, and most of the ones I’ve been around are ones that you’d probably not consider American enough.
Well… yeah. Compared to **Cisco **you’re a breath of fresh air.
But here’s the thing… you’re willing to ascribe attributes to me which are not true – e.g. “ones that you’d probably not consider American enough” – but you’re not willing to actually talk / debate about what it means to be an American, and then whether or not (or how fast) immigrants are assimilating into it. If you are then let’s get it on, but if you’re not that’s OK too. We don’t have to.
So are you up for it? Why don’t you start by defining what you think it means to be an American, and then show some examples of how immigrants (illegal immigrants specifically, in the spirit of this thread) are or are not assimilating into it, and at what rate, and then we’ll have an actual discussion on our hands (instead of false accusations, assumptions, etc.). Because that’s where this particular sub-thread started – how well, whether or not, and at what rate (illegal) immigrants are assimilating to American culture.
So… do you want to actually discuss that?
I have mixed views on illegal immigration; it’s probably the major issue that I’m most split about. But I’m not that split on the OP: If I, a tax-paying and law abiding citizen with a great GPA, applied to Rutgers or some other public university in NJ, I wouldn’t get in-state tuition. There’s a reason: I’m not a citizen of NJ. The same would be true if I lived abroad for several years on a visa- I wouldn’t qualify for the equivalent of in-state tuition.
These people are here *illegally *. I’m not saying they should be deported (I don’t even know if that’s possible), or that they should be treated inhumanely, and I’m guessing that they’re here for many different reasons and range the gamut in ability and morality and what they’ve contributed, but if they want to benefit from the state then they need to apply for citizenship. I’d even be in favor of a bill that gave minors amnesty in doing so, but it’s ridiculous to put them on par with citizens in attributing state benefits when the states are broke. To me this isn’t unfair.
So what’s the deal here? Everyone seems to be all over the place. Do we have a problem because these newfangled immigrants don’t bother to assimilate properly the way good illegal immigrants did back in the old days? Are we upset because people come here and crowd your lifeboat, which makes it harder for American citizens to work, feed their families and enjoy their lives? Is it plainly annoying or ethically wrong that these people didn’t come here legally, which is as simple as going down to the post office and filling out a few forms? Is it that breaking the law is always wrong, and we shouldn’t accommodate criminals? What if we changed the law? Is there principal rejection to idea of people immigrating here without proper documentation? Is there anything wrong with the “Path to Citizenship” plan, which has somewhat successfully been rebranded Amnesty? Is this really a tax payer thing? And most importantly, does it bother you that when you call your bank, you have to press “1” for English?
But you don’t pay taxes in NJ. They do.
You’re really barking up the wrong tree here. I am not a citizen of the US, I am a Canadian citizen and that for only a few years, as such I am no expert on what Americans look or don’t look like.
However, I do recall somewhere back up on the thread you saying something like “immigrants will tend to marry between themselves, and consequently don’t look like the average American.” Clearly you seem to think that the average American has a look about him, one that say a descendant of Chinese, or Mexican, or African immigrants would not have.
So what does the average American look like to you?
If you did not say that I apologize, but I am not going to search through seven pages of postings.
Do illegal immigrants pay enough in taxes to cover their costs? The fact is, we really do not know what the net cost / benefit is of illegal immigrants in our communities. There are so many numbers, that if you have an agenda you can sway the data your way. For example, if illegal immigrants work for less - then your goods and services will cost less. However, others will not be able to work at a livable wage (not being able to compete with illegals immigrants on the wage scale). How do we calculate the cost of depressed wages and unemployment?
Good column from the LA Times on this calculation: Illegal immigrants are a factor in the budget gap math
Regardless - I still believe that subsidizing the education of illegal immigrants is a poor use of taxpayer resources, and I would vote against it in a referendum. They will not be able to legally use that education to vote or in employment.
However, I would vote for a referendum to simplify and streamline the work visa, student visa and immigration path. I welcome anyone who wants to work in, study in or just visit America. We would need to have a few things in place (such as a government health insurance plan that workers would be required to buy into, a photo ID issued at the border, etc.).
We know for sure that poor people who are born here don’t, so - at worst - immigrants are unknown/unknowable (I think it’s pretty obvious that they’re a benefit but I’ll play.) Score one for the “illegals”! But seriously, again we come back to the only difference being the imaginary line that was drawn around the spot where you came out of your mother’s vagina. Basically it all boils down to: if you weren’t born here, too bad. Maybe you’ll think about that next time you decide to be born. Isn’t the American dream the ability to make yourself? Kind of hard to do that when you’re ruled out by something you had no control over. People came here back in the early days to get away from the shit end of the birthright stick.
OK. Canada is as much of a “melting pot”, in my opinion, as America. Lots of people from lots of different places immigrate to Canada, just like here in the U.S. I think there are enough similarities that the same exercise can be performed on the Canadian population and it will yield similar results. So… let’s start with your definition of “Canadian”. What does it mean to be a Canadian? What is Canadian culture?
Quite alright. I didn’t say that. What I said was that *some *immigrants tend to marry among themselves (their community). It’s a very key distinction, “some” but not “all”, and I’m not playing semantics. It really does make a huge difference in meaning.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 2005-2007 American Community Survey, of the almost 300,000,000 people accounted for, approximately 221,000,000 were identified as “white alone”. Other racial categories include “Asian alone” and “Black or African American alone”. (Interestingly, “Hispanic” isn’t included in this particular data set. However, elsewhere on the census site there are breakdowns of the hispanic population in America. I’ll reference that if necessary. For now this data supports the point I’m trying to make.) (Cite: (http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DTTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=01000US&-ds_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G00_&-mt_name=ACS_2007_3YR_G2000_B02001))
lalenin, how would you characterize this data? It appears to say that the *large majority of Americans are white. **(1) **Do you agree? If not, why not?
Given this data, consider this statement – “the *average *American is white”? **(2) **Do you agree with that statement? If not, why not?
I’ll phrase that same question a different way – I believe that the average American is “white alone” (as defined by the census data). **(3) **Do you agree or disagree with me? Why or why not?
*Caveat – yes, of course these categories are not absolute, there is margin of error, and there are subtle distinctions. For example, I consider myself “white alone” and not “two or more races” even though I do have a distant ancestor who was Native American, which is also a separate and distinct racial class accounted for in the data. Likewise there are “black or African-American alone” people who have a distant ancestor who was Native American (or white, Mr. Jefferson I’m looking at you) but who consider themselves “black alone”.
“Interestingly”? It’s because hispanic isn’t a race you ignorant fool.
So, majority rules, and we should all be average, right? Fucking brilliant :rolleyes:.
And to preemptively stop you from busting my balls about responding to you: I quit talking to you because you weren’t saying anything of substance. Now you’ve said something of substance. Incredibly stupid and racist, but of substance.
And you haven’t. I busting your ball.
Well… you’re *half *right. The correct term is “Hispanic or Latino”.
But you’re still *all *idiot.
Did you notice that the article points that many illegal kids are born here and are American citizens? And he is talking mostly about California. He also argues that the law needs to be changed anyhow:
I agree with that conclusion, but I have the felling that he is inflating the cost, but to be fair he does include caveats like “it is toughest to calculate”