1 million immigrants every year

[gipper]

The Ds need more voters and the Rs want the cheap labor to enrich their donors.

I said I'm not looking for the conspiracy nuts reasons why. I agree with you that the R's want cheap labor but I'm not so sure that immigrants vote Democratic. I thought there was a time when Hispanics voted Republican?

Anyways, I want to know what the government's reasons are. If they say we need the bodies ok but I want to hear them explain to us more than just hearing the Unkotard's of the world say,

"you are a racist and we are a country of immigrants and always will be". What the fuck does that mean?

It is not a conspiracy. I think it rather plain to see. The border has been wide open for decades, but now the D party sees them as their life blood. If you research voting patterns of immigrants throughout US history, you will find they vote D nearly exclusively...and now that the nation is a welfare state, they come here for benefits and they know the D party will protect those freebies.

 

[gipper]

Is this true? As baby boomers retire, there won't be enough experienced workers to replace them

Don't know, but employers do not seem to think so. Many boomers are out of the work force because they were sacked by employers. Many can't find decent paying jobs, so they take early social security and hope for the best.

If the economy crashes hard as some portend, boomers are going to be major f**ked.

 

[sealybobo]

The Ds need more voters and the Rs want the cheap labor to enrich their donors.

I said I'm not looking for the conspiracy nuts reasons why. I agree with you that the R's want cheap labor but I'm not so sure that immigrants vote Democratic. I thought there was a time when Hispanics voted Republican?

Anyways, I want to know what the government's reasons are. If they say we need the bodies ok but I want to hear them explain to us more than just hearing the Unkotard's of the world say,

"you are a racist and we are a country of immigrants and always will be". What the fuck does that mean?

It is not a conspiracy. I think it rather plain to see. The border has been wide open for decades, but now the D party sees them as their life blood. If you research voting patterns of immigrants throughout US history, you will find they vote D nearly exclusively...and now that the nation is a welfare state, they come here for benefits and they know the D party will protect those freebies.

The border opened for good under Reagan's watch. They wanted to flood the market with cheap workers. The American workers make too much. And I don't think "historically" that immigrants vote Democratic, do they? I think they are hard working family people and they are also anti abortion and anti gay?

I think the GOP has lost immigrants. And we're talking legal immigrants, right?

Republicans haven't "traditionally" been anti immigration.

Reclaiming the Issues: "It's an Illegal Employer Problem"

This one will explain how the GOP is torn on this issue. Today's Immigration Battle Corporatists vs. Racists (and Labor is Left Behind)

 

[sealybobo]

While there’s no way of knowing if these predictions are accurate, the data provide some insights. In 2012, the Pew Research Center’s National Survey of Latinos found that among Latino immigrants who are not U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents (and therefore likely unauthorized immigrants), some 31% identify as Democrats and just 4% as Republicans. An additional 33% say they are political independents, 16% mention some other political party and 15% say they “don’t know” or refuse to answer the question.

 

[gipper]

The Ds need more voters and the Rs want the cheap labor to enrich their donors.

I said I'm not looking for the conspiracy nuts reasons why. I agree with you that the R's want cheap labor but I'm not so sure that immigrants vote Democratic. I thought there was a time when Hispanics voted Republican?

Anyways, I want to know what the government's reasons are. If they say we need the bodies ok but I want to hear them explain to us more than just hearing the Unkotard's of the world say,

"you are a racist and we are a country of immigrants and always will be". What the fuck does that mean?

It is not a conspiracy. I think it rather plain to see. The border has been wide open for decades, but now the D party sees them as their life blood. If you research voting patterns of immigrants throughout US history, you will find they vote D nearly exclusively...and now that the nation is a welfare state, they come here for benefits and they know the D party will protect those freebies.

The border opened for good under Reagan's watch. They wanted to flood the market with cheap workers. The American workers make too much. And I don't think "historically" that immigrants vote Democratic, do they? I think they are hard working family people and they are also anti abortion and anti gay?

I think the GOP has lost immigrants. And we're talking legal immigrants, right?

Republicans haven't "traditionally" been anti immigration.

Reclaiming the Issues: "It's an Illegal Employer Problem"

This one will explain how the GOP is torn on this issue. Today's Immigration Battle Corporatists vs. Racists (and Labor is Left Behind)

You can see the GOP's traitorous actions, but refuse to see the Ds equally traitorous actions. Why?

Poor immigrants vote overwhelmingly D...I forgot to add the word POOR...and the poor of Latin America are the ones coming here and both parties love them.

Illegal immigration is a perfect example of how the elites ignore the will of the people without consequence...it is why Trump is doing so well.

 

[sealybobo]

Political analysts are still scratching their heads over what share of the crucial Hispanic vote President Bush won last month. The National Annenberg Election Survey does not claim to have solved the mystery, but it is pretty sure about this much: Bush did significantly better with this bloc in 2004 than he did in 2000, and men are the reason.

News media exit polls on election night reported Bush winning 44 percent of Hispanics this year, a startling nine percentage-point jump from 2000.

2004

Bush's Hispanic Vote Dissected (washingtonpost.com)

 

[gipper]

Political analysts are still scratching their heads over what share of the crucial Hispanic vote President Bush won last month. The National Annenberg Election Survey does not claim to have solved the mystery, but it is pretty sure about this much: Bush did significantly better with this bloc in 2004 than he did in 2000, and men are the reason.

News media exit polls on election night reported Bush winning 44 percent of Hispanics this year, a startling nine percentage-point jump from 2000.

2004

Bush's Hispanic Vote Dissected (washingtonpost.com)

Legal immigrants may vote for Trump.

Illegals from poor latin American countries, without education, will ALWAYS vote D if allowed to vote.

 

[RodISHI]

Too funny y'all now want to capitalize on a lame claim of being against immigration when their major leaders both Clinton's, Pelosi and Reid have all helped fund and bring more shit into the country to displace American workers.

 

[sealybobo]

Too funny y'all now want to capitalize on a lame claim of being against immigration when their major leaders both Clinton's, Pelosi and Reid have all helped fund and bring more shit into the country to displace American workers.

So have the Republicans silly. Read those links I posted in post #23.

Immigration always has been controversial in the United States. More than two centuries ago, Benjamin Franklin worried that too many German immigrants would swamp America’s predominantly British culture. In the mid-1800s, Irish immigrants were scorned as lazy drunks, not to mention Roman Catholics. At the turn of the century a wave of “new immigrants” — Poles, Italians, Russian Jews — were believed to be too different ever to assimilate into American life. Today the same fears are raised about immigrants from Latin America and Asia, but current critics of immigration are as wrong as their counterparts were in previous eras.

Immigrants have enriched American culture and enhanced our influence in the world

 

[Unkotare]

...

I don't see why we couldn't have 1% unemployment.......

That's because you are pretty stupid.

And you can't explain why we take in 1 million immigrants a year every year either.

Because we are a nation of immigrants, and we always will be. The people being naturalized didn't show up here last week, Dimwit.

Why must we "always be"?

I knew you weren't really an American.

 

[Unkotare]

...

I don't see why we couldn't have 1% unemployment.......

That's because you are pretty stupid.

...mud people like you

What the hell are you talking about, fish?

 

[sealybobo]

...

I don't see why we couldn't have 1% unemployment.......

That's because you are pretty stupid.

And you can't explain why we take in 1 million immigrants a year every year either.

Because we are a nation of immigrants, and we always will be. The people being naturalized didn't show up here last week, Dimwit.

Why must we "always be"?

I knew you weren't really an American.

Im not talking about sending people back. Just stop importing more.

If America needs more bodies just say so.

 

[RodISHI]

Too funny y'all now want to capitalize on a lame claim of being against immigration when their major leaders both Clinton's, Pelosi and Reid have all helped fund and bring more shit into the country to displace American workers.

So have the Republicans silly. Read those links I posted in post #23.

Immigration always has been controversial in the United States. More than two centuries ago, Benjamin Franklin worried that too many German immigrants would swamp America’s predominantly British culture. In the mid-1800s, Irish immigrants were scorned as lazy drunks, not to mention Roman Catholics. At the turn of the century a wave of “new immigrants” — Poles, Italians, Russian Jews — were believed to be too different ever to assimilate into American life. Today the same fears are raised about immigrants from Latin America and Asia, but current critics of immigration are as wrong as their counterparts were in previous eras.

Immigrants have enriched American culture and enhanced our influence in the world

Letting foreigners in even if they have an appearance of wealth is also a mistake. I started looking into the H1b visas and these have been not only displacing American workers and college students but some have also been using and abusing the grant system for small businesses. Best thing to do is start shipping them all out and do a restart with common sense in place.

 

[sealybobo]

Too funny y'all now want to capitalize on a lame claim of being against immigration when their major leaders both Clinton's, Pelosi and Reid have all helped fund and bring more shit into the country to displace American workers.

So have the Republicans silly. Read those links I posted in post #23.

Immigration always has been controversial in the United States. More than two centuries ago, Benjamin Franklin worried that too many German immigrants would swamp America’s predominantly British culture. In the mid-1800s, Irish immigrants were scorned as lazy drunks, not to mention Roman Catholics. At the turn of the century a wave of “new immigrants” — Poles, Italians, Russian Jews — were believed to be too different ever to assimilate into American life. Today the same fears are raised about immigrants from Latin America and Asia, but current critics of immigration are as wrong as their counterparts were in previous eras.

Immigrants have enriched American culture and enhanced our influence in the world

Letting foreigners in even if they have an appearance of wealth is also a mistake. I started looking into the H1b visas and these have been not only displacing American workers and college students but some have also been using and abusing the grant system for small businesses. Best thing to do is start shipping them all out and do a restart with common sense in place.

Or let the ones here stay and stop doing what we were doing.

It is clear why we import 1 million immigrants a year. The beast needs bodies. Feed the beast. Especially when baby boomers are all retiring. But I say we should downsize and immigration should be based on unemployment. If we need something we get it. If we don't we don't let anyone in.

Is it mean we don't let everyone who wants to come in? Then why would it be mean if next year we only let half a million in? That wouldn't be half as bad as now, right?

 

[RodISHI]

Too funny y'all now want to capitalize on a lame claim of being against immigration when their major leaders both Clinton's, Pelosi and Reid have all helped fund and bring more shit into the country to displace American workers.

So have the Republicans silly. Read those links I posted in post #23.

Immigration always has been controversial in the United States. More than two centuries ago, Benjamin Franklin worried that too many German immigrants would swamp America’s predominantly British culture. In the mid-1800s, Irish immigrants were scorned as lazy drunks, not to mention Roman Catholics. At the turn of the century a wave of “new immigrants” — Poles, Italians, Russian Jews — were believed to be too different ever to assimilate into American life. Today the same fears are raised about immigrants from Latin America and Asia, but current critics of immigration are as wrong as their counterparts were in previous eras.

Immigrants have enriched American culture and enhanced our influence in the world

Letting foreigners in even if they have an appearance of wealth is also a mistake. I started looking into the H1b visas and these have been not only displacing American workers and college students but some have also been using and abusing the grant system for small businesses. Best thing to do is start shipping them all out and do a restart with common sense in place.

Or let the ones here stay and stop doing what we were doing.

It is clear why we import 1 million immigrants a year. The beast needs bodies. Feed the beast. Especially when baby boomers are all retiring. But I say we should downsize and immigration should be based on unemployment. If we need something we get it. If we don't we don't let anyone in.

Is it mean we don't let everyone who wants to come in? Then why would it be mean if next year we only let half a million in? That wouldn't be half as bad as now, right?

No they need to go.

They can restart immigration if needed after cleanup.

 

[bripat9643]

...

I don't see why we couldn't have 1% unemployment.......

That's because you are pretty stupid.

And you can't explain why we take in 1 million immigrants a year every year either.

Because we are a nation of immigrants, and we always will be. The people being naturalized didn't show up here last week, Dimwit.

That has to be the dumbest reason ever posted.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

 

[bripat9643]

...

I don't see why we couldn't have 1% unemployment.......

That's because you are pretty stupid.

And you can't explain why we take in 1 million immigrants a year every year either.

Because we are a nation of immigrants, and we always will be. The people being naturalized didn't show up here last week, Dimwit.

Why must we "always be"?

I knew you weren't really an American.

Insults, not logic or facts. That's all you've got.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

 

[sealybobo]

...

I don't see why we couldn't have 1% unemployment.......

That's because you are pretty stupid.

And you can't explain why we take in 1 million immigrants a year every year either.

Because we are a nation of immigrants, and we always will be. The people being naturalized didn't show up here last week, Dimwit.

That has to be the dumbest reason ever posted.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

This must be your first time reading a Unkotard post.

 

[sealybobo]

That's because you are pretty stupid.

And you can't explain why we take in 1 million immigrants a year every year either.

Because we are a nation of immigrants, and we always will be. The people being naturalized didn't show up here last week, Dimwit.

Why must we "always be"?

I knew you weren't really an American.

Insults, not logic or facts. That's all you've got.

Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk

I've been trying to engage him in an honest thoughtful discussion but it is impossible. Jroc was actually able to get me to realize I am a racist. No I don't want to live with black people. Not the black people I've had experience with anyways. I'm not talking about a rich black neighbor in a nice suburb where they keep their lawn nice like white people do and they don't ghetto up the neighborhood and they don't bring their criminal friends in to visit and those friends rob steal and vandalize when they come out to visit.

But this isn't about black people. That's another discussion. I'm just wondering who decides that we should be importing 1 million a year and why isn't unemployment a factor?

But now I see why we are taking in Muslims. We don't take in as many Germans as we used to because now Germany is the number one country in the world. Europeans don't want to come to America. So if we want/need bodies, we have to now go to shitholes because they want to get out. We don't take in as many Irish anymore or Italians because they don't want to come.

Maybe we should take in more Greeks? They have to want to escape that mess.

 

[sealybobo]

Too funny y'all now want to capitalize on a lame claim of being against immigration when their major leaders both Clinton's, Pelosi and Reid have all helped fund and bring more shit into the country to displace American workers.

So have the Republicans silly. Read those links I posted in post #23.

Immigration always has been controversial in the United States. More than two centuries ago, Benjamin Franklin worried that too many German immigrants would swamp America’s predominantly British culture. In the mid-1800s, Irish immigrants were scorned as lazy drunks, not to mention Roman Catholics. At the turn of the century a wave of “new immigrants” — Poles, Italians, Russian Jews — were believed to be too different ever to assimilate into American life. Today the same fears are raised about immigrants from Latin America and Asia, but current critics of immigration are as wrong as their counterparts were in previous eras.

Immigrants have enriched American culture and enhanced our influence in the world

Letting foreigners in even if they have an appearance of wealth is also a mistake. I started looking into the H1b visas and these have been not only displacing American workers and college students but some have also been using and abusing the grant system for small businesses. Best thing to do is start shipping them all out and do a restart with common sense in place.

Or let the ones here stay and stop doing what we were doing.

It is clear why we import 1 million immigrants a year. The beast needs bodies. Feed the beast. Especially when baby boomers are all retiring. But I say we should downsize and immigration should be based on unemployment. If we need something we get it. If we don't we don't let anyone in.

Is it mean we don't let everyone who wants to come in? Then why would it be mean if next year we only let half a million in? That wouldn't be half as bad as now, right?

No they need to go.

They can restart immigration if needed after cleanup.

Clearly if they are here and unemployment is 4% we need them to stay. I'm talking about moving forward.

But we may need more workers because of all the baby boomers retiring. We need workers paying in more to the ss fund.