Mexico's illegal immigration...

[TheMason]

Has anyone else heard about this?

I heard a Democratic Congressman on the radio talking about this. However, I could only find this article on the web. Anyone else have a better link on this?

[SenorPresidente]

irony

[Empanado]

Just in case anybody in here doesn't know: Guatemala has always been a bigger shithole than Mexico. Mexicans live more or less au par within Latin American standards, but the Guatemalan quality of living is way, way below average.

[Empanado]

ZOMG DOUBLE POST

Here's the list of countries by HDI (Human Development Index). Even though it's not a perfect measurement tool, it gives a basic overview of the difference between the two countries.
Mexico's HDI is 0.821 (53th worldwide)
Guatemala's HDI is 0.673 (118th worldwide)

US's HDI is 0.948 (8th worldwide), by the way.

[Dash-Underscore-Dash]

So the negative aspects of Gutamala make the positive aspects of Mexico attractive, much like the U.S.? How ionic.

[UndeadTemplar88]

How the hell is that ironic in any way? It is not like Mexico promotes illegal immigration into the US from happening. They also have their own border patrols and an immigration department. Mexico might have some support to some undocumented aliens in the US that have citizenship in Mexico, but they do try to stop further illegal immigration coming from other countries and into other countries. Actually, Mexico promotes legal immigration into their country because they know more immigrants = better economy.

Go do some research before you blurt out incoherent words that do not really apply to this topic. In fact, you are part of an irony. It is ironic that some high school kid with at least some degree of US History is able to say such ignorant things about another country because you are a prejudist, TechnicalProblem.

[TheMason]

At 11/15/06 11:24 PM, UndeadTemplar88 wrote: Go do some research before you blurt out incoherent words that do not really apply to this topic. In fact, you are part of an irony. It is ironic that some high school kid with at least some degree of US History is able to say such ignorant things about another country because you are a prejudist, TechnicalProblem.

It is ironic in that President Fox has been very outspoken when it comes to US attempts to stymie illegal immigration from his country into ours. But you know, now that I think about it you're right "ironic" is not the correct term. The correct way to phrase it would be: "President Vicente Fox is a hypocrite."

Also the word you are looking for is "bigot" not "prejudist" (correct spelling: prejudice).

[Camarohusky]

At 11/15/06 09:16 PM, Empanado wrote: Here's the list of countries by HDI (Human Development Index).
US's HDI is 0.948 (8th worldwide), by the way.

I'm not sure if you whould take that list too seriously. The way you orginally used is very adequate, but the way of ranking could be changed to easily add .02 or subtract.02 ish from a countries score depending on political views. The term 'Standard of Living" is extremely subjective. The difference between the high medium and low is good, but when you get to countries who are less than .01 apart, that means nothing. A left-leaning person would no doubt put the Scanadavian countries on top because of what they determine to be part of SOL, whereas a right leaning person would have The UK and the US be on top because of other views on SOL.

[UndeadTemplar88]

At 11/15/06 11:41 PM, TheMason wrote:

At 11/15/06 11:24 PM, UndeadTemplar88 wrote: Go do some research before you blurt out incoherent words that do not really apply to this topic. In fact, you are part of an irony. It is ironic that some high school kid with at least some degree of US History is able to say such ignorant things about another country because you are a prejudist, TechnicalProblem.

It is ironic in that President Fox has been very outspoken when it comes to US attempts to stymie illegal immigration from his country into ours. But you know, now that I think about it you're right "ironic" is not the correct term. The correct way to phrase it would be: "President Vicente Fox is a hypocrite."

Also the word you are looking for is "bigot" not "prejudist" (correct spelling: prejudice).

Actually, prejudist is the adjective; prejudice is a verb; you don't use verbs to describe people.

Correct spelling: Prejudiced
Oh, and I think you are looking for the word STEM, not STYMIE
And you are treating the topic as if Fox actually supported illegal immigration, and if he has said anything about it, then it has een because he does not support mass deportations, because one way or another, that is what this whole "wall" affair will lead to, and deporting people also costs both taxpayer's money and Mexico's (and any other country's) funds to get them back.

[TheMason]

At 11/16/06 07:17 AM, UndeadTemplar88 wrote:

At 11/15/06 11:41 PM, TheMason wrote:

At 11/15/06 11:24 PM, UndeadTemplar88 wrote: Go do some research before you blurt out incoherent words that do not really apply to this topic. In fact, you are part of an irony. It is ironic that some high school kid with at least some degree of US History is able to say such ignorant things about another country because you are a prejudist, TechnicalProblem.

It is ironic in that President Fox has been very outspoken when it comes to US attempts to stymie illegal immigration from his country into ours. But you know, now that I think about it you're right "ironic" is not the correct term. The correct way to phrase it would be: "President Vicente Fox is a hypocrite."

Also the word you are looking for is "bigot" not "prejudist" (correct spelling: prejudice).

Actually, prejudist is the adjective; prejudice is a verb; you don't use verbs to describe people.

Funny, when I looked it up "prejudist" does not appear to be a word. In any case the word you were looking for is "bigot".

Correct spelling: Prejudiced

Prejudiced is the inflected form of prejudice. I was using the normative form of the word demonstrate that you had incorrectly spelled the word.

Oh, and I think you are looking for the word STEM, not STYMIE

No I meant to use STYMIE, which means to obstruct as in: "Congress should stymie illegal immigration".

And you are treating the topic as if Fox actually supported illegal immigration, and if he has said anything about it, then it has een because he does not support mass deportations, because one way or another, that is what this whole "wall" affair will lead to, and deporting people also costs both taxpayer's money and Mexico's (and any other country's) funds to get them back.

Of course Fox supports illegal immigration, or rather Northern illegal immigration. The flow of money that comes into Mexico is nothing to sneeze at; and guess what? Mexico City does not need to take any potentially unpopular economic reforms to acheive this! Furthermore, he talks about how he is the President of millions of Mexicans outside his border. That does not sit will many Americans, nor should it. Finally, he has involved himself with the internal affairs of our country when this debate was in front of the Congress.

Furthermore, if the Mexican government incurs a cost in the deportation of illegal immigrants maybe this would be an incentive for them to actually do something other than lobby the US Congress.

I'm sorry, but like your hero (or at least debate mentor) Bill O'Reily, you oversimplify the situation to make your point sound better than it is.

[Empanado]

At 11/16/06 04:47 AM, Camarohusky wrote: I'm not sure if you whould take that list too seriously.

I'm aware of that, that's why I first pointed out that "it's not a perfect measurement tool". :)
I was just giving an example to show that the difference betweeen those countries was very large, but I could have used GDP per capita as well, or something else.

[RedSkunk]

It's probably important to acknowledge this, because it lessens the idea that some might have of American exceptionalism in this case. The reason Mexicans come to the states is for better living conditions. The fact that other countries have worse conditions than Mexico shouldn't surprise anyone. And the fact that some flee to Mexico shouldn't either.

[TheMason]

At 11/16/06 11:47 AM, RedSkunk wrote: It's probably important to acknowledge this, because it lessens the idea that some might have of American exceptionalism in this case. The reason Mexicans come to the states is for better living conditions. The fact that other countries have worse conditions than Mexico shouldn't surprise anyone. And the fact that some flee to Mexico shouldn't either.

Very good point RS.

I actually hope that with this on Fox's plate; he'll take a less hard-nosed approach to US efforts to stop the flow of illegal immigration North.