Economic theory, not “my thoughts”, says that economic growth is correlated with population growth. Population statistics show white people are dying faster than birthing.
If you want economic growth in this country, you need population growth. This means you need immigrants, this means you largely need “brown” people, because white people are not emigrating to America (or having babies in America) in the numbers needed to ensure economic growth.
How did you not understand this?
Did you not read my cites? I’ll be glad to link to more economic papers for you.
It would be interesting to know how well they might have done if the US (white people in your example) didn’t work diligently to fuck up these countries.
If you get rid of the poor and working class who do you think will be buying enough iPods to make Apple rich?
If you want to go further back who is building the railroads across the country? Do you think Vanderbilt and Crocker were swinging sledgehammers out there?
As it turns out, I come from one of those countries. I’m an educator now in the USA.
I have to agree with JohnT, that response you made is beneath you and this board.
You can only make that sorry point by grossly ignoring that war and USA intervention is favor of oligarchs was the reason why people like me left El Salvador.
Thanks to that, countries like El Salvador are getting a lot of aid from remittances from people like me and it would had increased the economy there, but then a lot of people that were indeed the bad hombres were deported for gang activity. Unfortunately a lot of those were deported with no warning whatsoever to the local authorities and started a new cycle of violence.
Before you forget, I have to remind you that the USA was also part of that, although they have less blame now as it had in the civil war of the 80’s.
And now, thanks in big part of having to deal with more deported people (not all of them gangsters) coming to a place with less jobs thanks to violence and corruption I see a chronic ignorance of the factors that got us here and now Trump and minions just want to make the situation worse. **While the result also leads to having more people later coming to America. **
As I can see from your replies, you do seem to agree that people from those countries will “infest” the USA. I will have to tell you however that Trump is actually making sure that more will come to the USA while lying his ass off telling guys like you that he is fixing the issue.
I’ll try to get a response to the rest of what you said sooner rather than later, but I’m surprised by this. It seems so obviously true that I would have thought it is beyond dispute that El Salvador is neither a “white country” nor “one that is economically robust”. What about that response caused you distress? (ETA: and JohnT feel free to chime in here with any clarification you have as well)
I don’t need to guy. You have the cites, read them.
And you can stop this purposeful misdirection that I was speaking of El Salvador. Piketty specifically referenced the ecoomic growth of the developing West, this thread is about America.
You first use of “alternative facts” is aimed at the administration and gets a pass.
Your second use of “alternative facts” is directed toward a poster and violates the “Do not accuse another poster of lying” prohibition.
Knock it off. Since using it one way tends to lead on to use it the prohibited way, it would be better to just refrain from using the phrase.
And how many military bases have been closed that are still sitting there complete with housing, barracks, chow halls and fences? Plunk the families in housing, fill the commisairy with raw materials to be drawn by ‘rations in kind’ to be cooked at home, or the families can eat in the chow hall. Most of them also have buildings that can be purposed into classsrooms and babysitting areas, and have medical facilities to cre for the health needs.
Not rocket science, people.
It seems that we are making progress and arguing about the wrong thing. You concede that you would not support this policy even without the situation with the children. So why are we wasting time arguing about the children? Shouldn’t we be arguing about whether there should be detentions at all?
Further, I think it is abhorrent to suggest that someone can cross our border illegally and we do not detain them. If I did that in Canada, I would certainly be detained. Why is the United States the only country on earth not permitted to secure its own border?
The problem was first the clear underfunding that took place when dealing with the asylum seekers. Now a second factor was added with a change in policy that it is also underfunded. Instead of a wall more funding to identify the ones that do deserve asylum is what is needed.
Of course you would be detained, at least briefly.
The issue that we are addressing is that persons arriving on our southern border, whether they’re arriving 100% legally, or whether they’ve crossed into the U.S. in between ports of entry and then turned themselves in (a misdemeanor, but hardly a big deal), or whether they’re trying to get into the interior unnoticed - all of these people are being detained indefinitely.
Do you have a cite to the effect that Canada carries out similar policies, or are you trying to equate two very different things in the hope that it’ll slip by?