Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

You forgot that people die too. And birth rates have drastically fallen in the last few years.

At 7/16/03 12:18 AM, Ninja_Scientist wrote:
Right now, if you pull crops for a living as a new immigrant to the US, the businesses who've hired you can pay you absolutely crap and there's nothing you can do about it. Why? Well, if you don't agree to the cost of your labor, there will be a thousand others ready to take your place. Hence, you will never get a raise and will have to continue working at pitiously low wages, increasing US poverty and most likely needing welfare (which is costly to all Americans).

Basically you're saying that you should deny the right of immigration to thousands of individuals so that ONE individual can have a raise in his salary? Furthermore, illegal immigrants are not on welfare nor do they count in America's poverty.

At 7/16/03 12:51 AM, _crossbreed_ wrote: You forgot that people die too. And birth rates have drastically fallen in the last few years.

True. But regardless of that, the majority of US population rates I've read say the exact same thing. That the US population more than doubles with each generation. @_o' This includes birth rates and mortality rates.

So, in the next 60 years, we could have a serious population problem in the US. And, once again, almost half of this is due to the massive waves of immigration. @_o'

------------

Now, no one has to agree with me about decreasing immigration. However, if you lived in California right now, you'd know what it'll be like in the near future if these rates don't drop at least a little. @_o' And, believe me, it's not fun.

I just don't want anyone to think that I'm "against immigrants" or something, because I'm not. I just think that it'd better all of us for the rates to drop (even just a little).

Like I said, this'd be better for the immigrants that do come here. Anyone who's read "The Jungle" (by Upton Sinclair) will know how these high immigration rates affect the quality of lifestyles for all immigrants as a whole. And, in fact, we do have a smaller scale version of "The Jungle" happening in America now, due to the high immigration. Of course, it's not as bad as it was when the book was written. But it's still going on, unfortunately. -_-

(Read my previous posts for that information ^_^)

At 7/16/03 12:56 AM, _crossbreed_ wrote:

At 7/16/03 12:18 AM, Ninja_Scientist wrote:

Basically you're saying that you should deny the right of immigration to thousands of individuals so that ONE individual can have a raise in his salary? Furthermore, illegal immigrants are not on welfare nor do they count in America's poverty.

*sigh* My point is that due to the unexpected heavy immigration numbers, life in the US can very often be WORSE for those immigrating here from other countries. And that's true, unfortunately. @_o'

Many of those who flock to America have a twisted view of what life for immigrants is like here (they did a study on that on CNN a while back). It's rarely ever as glorious as it is rumored in other countries to be, and often, life here is actually harder for them (especially if they don't know the language well----they can't succeed as well).

But, all in all, my point is, it's better to have 1 million well-fed people, than 6 million starving ones. Which is what the American businesses unfortunately take advantage of now.

I'd take quality over quantity any day.

PS. Immigration is a "right" that only applies to a few (not illegal aliens). And, most of those who come to America are, in fact, illegal immigrants. I think we should at least crack down on the illegal immigration problem, and leave the legal immigration as it is. ^_-
------------
Also, while the illegal immigrants often aren't included in the poverty "statistics," they do contribute to povery (and it's not their fault, like I've said----most of them just don't have the chance to be as successful as those native born).

Also, even the illegal immigrants get welfare benefits. At my mother's hospital, for example, (she's a RN), they give free medical treatment to illegal aliens, whereas native born American's must pay. Now, I'm not against this, because many of these people deserve it. However, the massive waves of immigrants now, are starting to make this situation a little expensive.

At 7/16/03 01:03 AM, Ninja_Scientist wrote:

True. But regardless of that, the majority of US population rates I've read say the exact same thing. That the US population more than doubles with each generation. @_o' This includes birth rates and mortality rates.

So, in the next 60 years, we could have a serious population problem in the US. And, once again, almost half of this is due to the massive waves of immigration. @_o'

------------

That's what happened to Native Americans! ^_^

I·ro·ny ( P )
n. pl. i·ro·nies

A literary style employing such contrasts for humorous or rhetorical effect. See Synonyms at wit1.

Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: “Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated” (Richard Kain).
An occurrence, result, or circumstance notable for such incongruity. See Usage Note at ironic.
Dramatic irony.
Socratic irony.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
[French ironie, from Old French, from Latin rna, from Greek eirneia, feigned ignorance, from eirn, dissembler, probably from eirein, to say. See wer-5 in Indo-European Roots.]

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

The world is full of stuff like this... its easier if you don't think about it, but then the problems won't ever get fixed. *sigh* I guess I have to worry about this stuff cuz I'm not a "minor" anymore. I just wish I could actually do something about it all.

Sorry cross, ^_- I'm not sure what the US population doubling with each generation these days has to do with the Native Americans.
---------------
Also, you can't say that those particular people who are for decreased immigration are being "hypocritical," because for all you know, if they were living back in the day, they might not have done that to the Native Americans. lol. In fact, if it was them living back in the day, maybe they wouldn't have immigrated at all. It's not their fault that they were born here. They had nothing to do with their own births.

The only way they would be "hypocritical" is if they immigrated to another country and then were for lower immigration.

In fact, perhaps they would have been for the decreased immigration of "white folks" on the Native American's lands in the olden days, too (even if they weren't from the US). ^_-

Again, it's not their fault they were born here in this particular year and now have to suffer the population and heavy immigration problems themselves. So, they're not being "hypocritical."
---------------
Now, the color of your skin and your historical background should have nothing to do with how you're "aloud" to feel about immigration and the US population.

Afterall, now these people are native born Americans. They were born here (which wasn't their fault). And just because they are not born with Native American blood running through their veins doesn't mean that they're "not allowed" to be upset about immigration to where they live, their home.

That's what the Native Americans were upset about for the exact same reasons. They didn't want lower immigration because "they had Native American blood" or were of "a particular race," they wanted lower immigration because they were born there, raised there, and were being affected by the waves of imigration. Same as us now. Just because we don't have the right ancestors or blood, doesn't mean we don't have the ability to feel the same.

In addition, if you are truly for immigration, then wouldn't you not be against the immigrating ancestors of the "white folks" here (excluding of course, what some of them did to the Native Americans).

My point is, you agree that the massive waves of immigration was bad on the Native Americans. However, now the massive waves of immigration is OK on the new native born Americans, because of what their ancestors did, which they had no control over? They have to suffer because their ancestors "made them get born here instead of on their original land?" Bad bad grandchildren. lol.

Heck, if my ancestors didn't immigrate and I was born in France or something (asuming things worked that way, of course ^_-), then I'd probably be for lower immigration there, too. But because my ancestors moved here, forcing me to get born on this land instead, then I'm not allowed to be against it now? Why not? It wouldn't matter where I was born, I'd still be for lower immigration if it needed be. The actions of my ancestors didn't pass over into my genes. So, I shouldn't be judged based on my blood.

I don't want to suffer for what one of my jerky (or not) ancestors did, because, if I was there, then I may not have agreed with he did. I may not have immigrated to America at all.

However, like I said, this is my home. I was born here. And being born in this country, in this year, and not having the genes of Native Americans in me is not my fault.

The "white folks" back in the day didn't belong here, either. And if I was born here, I'd want most of them out too (mostly because of what they were doing). But, I'm born here now, and just because I'm not of the same blood as the natives of the past, then I'm "not allowed" to feel what those of another race felt?

The Natives were upset because immigrants were overpopulating their land (among other things). Land which they were born and raised in. Now, we are upset because immigrants are overpopulating our land. Land which we were born and raised in (making us native). But, why are we not allowed to feel the same things? Just because of blood? Because we just happen to not have the right genes? "Actions" are not inherited through genes or blood.

But, in any case. Even though what happened the Native Americans is really REALLY sad, it doesn't apply to the situation now. We do not want to decrease immigration because we feel that "immigrants are bad." If that was the case, then I would understand your logic. However, we want to decrease immigration because of the population problem. And that's a recent problem. We shouldn't "ignore it" for shame of what some ancestors we don't know about did. This is our issue NOW. And I bet that the Native Americans today would like to see immigration decreased themselves.

This is all our country. The sons of the Native Americans and the sons of the ancient immigrants. Both came from different backgrounds and different histories (some good and some bad), but now their decendents are born on this soil the same, seperate from their fathers, and equal in every way.

A boy with Native American blood can be born in California, go to a particular school, and be against large waves of immigration. A boy with no Native American blood can be born in California, go to the same school, and be against large waves of immigration.

They may have come from different blood, but they are born and raised the same. Therefore, the blood of one boy should not benefit his ability to feel against the large waves of immigration more so than the other boy. Afterall, that boy is now equally as native as he his. And his opinions shouldn't be favored because of the blood of his ancestors. He, like the other boy, had no control over how he was born or of who's blood he was born of. So, he shouldn't be the one to receive more credibility on his believes based on that alone (his ancestors should). Just as the "white boy" should be criticized based on the same thing (his ancenstors should).

-------

Few. Well, that's how I feel. If you don't agree with it, that's OK. But at least hear me out. OK, cross? ^_^

All in all. Remember we're discussing "immigration" (the act of moving from country to country) not "being born of an immigrant," an entirely different issue which not we, nor anyone else, should be judged on. Only those who have actually immigrated to America themselves would be "hypocritical" for wanting lower immigration, naturally. But not those who were just born of an immigrant. Afterall, they had not control over their parents' actions (they weren't born yet), they may have acted differently in their parents shoes, and they had no control over how or where they were born.

Equally, while I am for decreasing immigration now, I do think that those born of immigrants here (even recent) diserve the same rights as we do. I only would like to see lower (actual) immigration, itself. I don't care about their kids, because, like us, their kids had no control over where they got born.

Few! GAH! @_o' It's 3 in the morning right now, and I'm really tired. So, if I've repeated myself a bit, I'm sorry. I gotta go to bed. X_X'

The only difference between today's immigrants and the early colonials is that today's immigrants aren't killing those who already live on the land they want to move to.

At 7/16/03 02:12 PM, _crossbreed_ wrote: The only difference between today's immigrants and the early colonials is that today's immigrants aren't killing those who already live on the land they want to move to.

True. But that doesn't mean that the immigrants of today don't provide their own proplems. This time, it's not in who they are or what they do (like I've said), it's just simply in their mass. @_o'

Once again, I'm not against immigration or immigrants. I just think that we should decrease immigration a little. Not only would it help the population problem, but it would be better for the immigrants that do come here. They would have a better chance.

And, it's like I said, I'd rather have 1 million well-fed men, than 6 million starving ones. ^_-

But thanks for hearing me out, cross. ^_^
-----------
Perhaps, for now, we should just start closing a few state borders, like mine. @_o' Make them go somewhere else to even it out a little. lol.

Imagine having to learn to drive your first time in a street filled with 300 honking drivers. Half of them who don't know where they are anyway. *dies*

Let's say California has a ban on immigrants, does that mean New Yorkers can't move to California?

At 7/16/03 11:30 PM, _crossbreed_ wrote: Let's say California has a ban on immigrants, does that mean New Yorkers can't move to California?

It sure would,

You know, If america didn't have a federal government. (dumbass)

Flamer. ^_^

My last post was sarcasm because if people from New York are allowed to move to California, why shouldn't people from Mexico or something have that same right?

At 7/17/03 06:27 PM, _crossbreed_ wrote: Flamer. ^_^

My last post was sarcasm because if people from New York are allowed to move to California, why shouldn't people from Mexico or something have that same right?

Probably because there's a diffrence between State, Federal, and international law.

Ohh quick one

At 7/17/03 08:46 PM, TheAnarchyPenguin wrote: Probably because there's a diffrence between State, Federal, and international law.

So the hypocrisy remains then.

At 7/12/03 11:39 AM, _crossbreed_ wrote: http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr030710.asp

Can you believe these numbers? 47%!! and this is coming from the people whose ancestors came here on boats and stole land from Natives.

Hypocrisy anyone?

Exactly how I feel, if you're not native American, then you are an IMMIGRANT! I don't see many native Americans taking these polls.

At 7/16/03 06:05 AM, Ninja_Scientist wrote: Few! GAH! @_o' It's 3 in the morning right now, and I'm really tired. So, if I've repeated myself a bit, I'm sorry. I gotta go to bed. X_X'

Good GOD lady! You sure do love making those faces.

Ninja loves faces.
I was under the impression she was a PC member, but I don't see her on Snooble, so I guess not....
:S

At 7/18/03 12:31 AM, _crossbreed_ wrote:

At 7/17/03 08:46 PM, TheAnarchyPenguin wrote: Probably because there's a diffrence between State, Federal, and international law.

So the hypocrisy remains then.

Yeah because it's hypocritical to have seperate states rights, and federal rights.

Ohh wait, that's not hypocrisy, that's democracy.

At 7/18/03 09:07 AM, Ted_Easton wrote: Ninja loves faces.
I was under the impression she was a PC member, but I don't see her on Snooble, so I guess not....

S

I could've sworn Ninja was a member of the politics crew. If she's not...quick, hurry up and draft her, El-Teddy.

Ninja? Thoughts?

I was SURE she was a member.
Isn't she?

At 7/18/03 02:51 PM, Ted_Easton wrote: Ninja? Thoughts?

I was SURE she was a member.
Isn't she?

Ted and Judge, this was brought up earlier, remember? Check page two of the PSCM forum, about halfway down the page, if you can't remember.

At 7/18/03 11:29 PM, Commander-K25 wrote:

At 7/18/03 02:51 PM, Ted_Easton wrote: Ninja? Thoughts?

I was SURE she was a member.
Isn't she?

Ted and Judge, this was brought up earlier, remember? Check page two of the PSCM forum, about halfway down the page, if you can't remember.

You're the intelligent one, Commander. Thanks for that -- I'll get right on it.

At 7/16/03 11:30 PM, _crossbreed_ wrote: Let's say California has a ban on immigrants, does that mean New Yorkers can't move to California?

lol. Well, yeah. But I'm not talking about "a ban." I mean just decreasing it massively for a while.

At 7/18/03 09:07 AM, Ted_Easton wrote: Ninja loves faces.
I was under the impression she was a PC member, but I don't see her on Snooble, so I guess not....

S

Actually, I am. But, believe it or not, I don't come here that much. lol.

And, yes, I like "faces." You gonna cry masculine tears over that, 70?

^_^ ^_^ ^_^ ^_^

At 7/16/03 11:30 PM, _crossbreed_ wrote: Let's say California has a ban on immigrants, does that mean New Yorkers can't move to California?

Oh, I see what you mean. If you think I'm saying we just should have foreign immigrants come to California, "bad bad foreign people," you're wrong. lol. I was refering to other US states as well.

When I said that more people move to California a year than are born here, I was also refering to out of staters. In fact, out of staters make up about half of that number. And it stinks because there's not enough room.

Right now about half of the folks taking up space on our roads are from other states or countries. @_o' Fewer people are born native Californians. In fact, I'm a third generation Californian and that is soooo rare. They even offer some scholorships to 3rd generation Calis, cause there's not that many of them. lol. Though I don't get why they do that. @_o' Seems sorta weird.

Anway, we have nothing against immigrants here, including those from other states (in fact, most of LA folks are foreigners---we have Little Tokyo, a mexican city, Korea Town, a middle eastern city, etc. etc. that are there especially for foreigners). However, right now we're litteraly running out of room. @_o' They've been bulldozing mountains by my house every month now just to make more houses for the new people that come each year (as well, of course, for the next generation). Soon, they're might not be any more mountains by my house. @_o' And housing still isn't what it's supposed to be. And our resources are being used up to make room for the waves of new people.

And again, you have to realize that more people move to California than are born here each year. That's insane. Not even NY has that much immigration as of now. It's getting really really bad.

So, a lot of Californians are hoping to close off immigration right now (not completely, although I will admit that there are some who hate the traffic so much that they would like that). And that implies those from other states, as well. Nothing against them, of course, we just need a break. Our state can hold only so many people. lol.

In fact, most of the even recent immigrants I was talking to were for closing the state borders completely. One man who just moved from the middle east told me that "he wants them to halt the immigration, too." He said that when he came here about a year ago, the traffic was only half as bad and doubled in just a year (and, again, most of this was from immigrants). He joked and said, "It's like, now that I'm here, don't let anyone else in." lol.
--------------
But, all in all, I just think that it's inappropriate to base the present needs of America on incidents that people did here in the past (who we had no relations with).

At 7/19/03 02:15 AM, Ninja_Scientist wrote:
Oh, I see what you mean. If you think I'm saying we just should have foreign immigrants come to California, "bad bad foreign people," you're wrong. lol. I was refering to other US states as well.

Ooops. I meant to say "not come to California." lol. Sorry.

At 7/19/03 01:57 AM, Ninja_Scientist wrote:

At 7/18/03 09:07 AM, Ted_Easton wrote: Ninja loves faces.
I was under the impression she was a PC member, but I don't see her on Snooble, so I guess not....

S

Actually, I am. But, believe it or not, I don't come here that much. lol.

And, yes, I like "faces." You gonna cry masculine tears over that, 70?

^_^ ^_^ ^_^ ^_^

Since when are you in the PC? Ive never seen you post there, and Ive looked, youre not a member.

Ninja_Scientist,
Just a question. Im not trying to be a smartass, but is their another PC crew that youre talkin' about? Just curious.