White Extinction Anxiety

[Inkfingers]

Whites are a minority, globally speaking.

Just sayin'....

 

[TLK Valentine]

Ok...

How about the fact that the welfare system that exists today wasn't even close to being formed in 1900? Disability? Forget it. Workmans comp? Nope. Social security, food stamps, free emergency care, ....even public education. I mean, I'm sure public schools existed by 1900...but I'd be really surprised if more than 10-15% of kids graduated from one by 1900.

Right -- things are a lot better off today than they were 100 years ago.

Remind me again how that killed The American Dream?

What does that mean in practical terms? If those immigrants who came way back when didn't work....they starved....and likely died. If that happened, I doubt many shed a tear for them either.

Not a lot shed tears for them now... some things haven't changed. "If they would rather die, perhaps they should do so, an decrease the surplus population."

 

[TLK Valentine]

Italy in 1900 was a perfectly civilized country.

And a complete ****hole that the US didn't want people from... those people wouldn't learn the language and refused to assimilate... you know, just like the Chinese, the Irish, the Polish...

 

[Ana the Ist]

Right -- things are a lot better off today than they were 100 years ago.

Remind me again how that killed The American Dream?

It's almost as if you expect me to address your points while you ignore mine.

Not a lot shed tears for them now... some things haven't changed. "If they would rather die, perhaps they should do so, an decrease the surplus population."

Well, since you bring it up...

 

[TLK Valentine]

It's almost as if you expect me to address your points while you ignore mine.

All I want to know is what killed the American Dream -- why can't you address that?

 

[Ana the Ist]

All I want to know is what killed the American Dream -- why can't you address that?

You asked specifically what was different between then and now.

I can quote you if you like.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You asked specifically what was different between then and now.

I can quote you if you like.

And we've moved on. Which of those details killed the American Dream?

 

[Ana the Ist]

And we've moved on. Which of those details killed the American Dream?

Lol you've moved on...specifically without addressing a single point I made.

Would you at least be willing to admit we can only absorb a certain amount of uneducated poor people before the vast majority of the population suffers a dramatic decline in quality of life?

 

[Ana the Ist]

And we've moved on. Which of those details killed the American Dream?

Lol you've moved on...specifically without addressing a single point I made.

Would you at least be willing to admit we can only absorb a certain amount of uneducated poor people before the vast majority of the population suffers a dramatic decline in quality of life?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Lol you've moved on...specifically without addressing a single point I made.

My question was the address.

Would you at least be willing to admit we can only absorb a certain amount of uneducated poor people before the vast majority of the population suffers a dramatic decline in quality of life?

That has always been the case, or at the very least, has always been the argument... it was used against admitting the Chinese, the
Italians, the Irish, the Polish, etc... and every time without exception, the fears have proved to be unfounded.

Now it's time to dust off the argument and use it in the Hispanics... the difference, of course, is that you have helpfully pointed out that we have a safety net in place that we didn't have in the past, so even in the absolute worst case scenario of them being completely useless (which we already know is not the case), America will survive

Thanks for pointing out how much more prepared we are for immigrants now than we ever have been... couldn't have done it better myself.

 

[Ana the Ist]

My question was the address.

I see.

That has always been the case, or at the very least, has always been the argument... it was used against admitting the Chinese, the
Italians, the Irish, the Polish, etc... and every time without exception, the fears have proved to be unfounded.

The biggest Irish migration was less than 2 million people...and it took place over 40 years.

The biggest Polish wave was about 1.5 million over 50 years.

The biggest Chinese wave I could find didn't come close to either of those two.

And of course, none of this comes close to the tidal wave of poor uneducated people coming to the US from central America. Sorry, you're comparing apples and oranges here. At least 1 in 32 people are here illegally...and the only reason it isn't higher is because half a million get nationalized every year to offset the half million or so that pour in.

Now it's time to dust off the argument and use it in the Hispanics... the difference, of course, is that you have helpfully pointed out that we have a safety net in place that we didn't have in the past, so even in the absolute worst case scenario of them being completely useless (which we already know is not the case), America will survive.

I'm not sure if you understand the basics of this...the more people drawing from that safety net, the less people put into it, the worse things will get. If things go downhill....that safety net won't be there for everyone.

You don't have to be a Harvard economics professor to figure this out. Things aren't improving in Guatemala, Honduras, and much of central America. At some point we have to say enough is enough....and stop the bleeding...or we go down with them.

This problem won't get better over the years....it'll just get worse unless we make some effort.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I see.




The biggest Irish migration was less than 2 million people...and it took place over 40 years.

The biggest Polish wave was about 1.5 million over 50 years.

The biggest Chinese wave I could find didn't come close to either of those two.

And of course, none of this comes close to the tidal wave of poor uneducated people coming to the US from central America. Sorry, you're comparing apples and oranges here. At least 1 in 32 people are here illegally...and the only reason it isn't higher is because half a million get nationalized every year to offset the half million or so that pour in.

You overlooked an important fact: our nation is much larger now, in terms of both population and infrastructure. These things make a difference.

I'm not sure if you understand the basics of this...the more people drawing from that safety net, the less people put into it, the worse things will get. If things go downhill....that safety net won't be there for everyone.

So who says things are going downhill?

You don't have to be a Harvard economics professor to figure this out. Things aren't improving in Guatemala, Honduras, and much of central America. At some point we have to say enough is enough....and stop the bleeding...or we go down with them.

But that day is not today. No need to cower behind ineffective walls just yet.

This problem won't get better over the years....it'll just get worse unless we make some effort.

Effort to do what, exactly?

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

That has always been the case, or at the very least, has always been the argument... it was used against admitting the Chinese, the
Italians, the Irish, the Polish, etc... and every time without exception, the fears have proved to be unfounded.

What proved them unfounded? Historically, the US took action regarding these types of immigration. Congress passed laws in the 1920's strictly limiting Southern and Eastern European immigration. Chinese immigration was outright banned as early as 1882. These immigration laws designed to preserve the historic ethnic composition of the United States stayed on the books until 1965. We started moving into uncharted territory after that.

 

[TLK Valentine]

What proved them unfounded? Historically, the US took action regarding these types of immigration. Congress passed laws in the 1920's strictly limiting Southern and Eastern European immigration. Chinese immigration was outright banned as early as 1882. These immigration laws designed to preserve the historic ethnic composition of the United States stayed on the books until 1965. We started moving into uncharted territory after that.

Are you suggesting that taking those laws off the books was a bad idea?

 

[mama2one]

Our economy is struggling...barely treading water. The gap between rich and poor just grows greater...and the amount of debt that each individual holds, and we hold as a nation, grows larger.

why do individuals have greater debt?
living beyond their means?

 

[Ana the Ist]

You overlooked an important fact: our nation is much larger now, in terms of both population and infrastructure. These things make a difference.

And? Where's the part where you explain how that makes us capable of taking on an endless stream of poor?

So who says things are going downhill?

Every conventional indicator. Global climate change isn't slowing down...increased disparities between rich and poor....increased humanitarian crises caused by overpopulation.

But that day is not today. No need to cower behind ineffective walls just yet.

Let's say I believe you....when is the time?

Why should we wait until this reaches crisis level to act? Would it kill us to think ahead for once?

Effort to do what, exactly?

Hold onto what we have, culturally, institutionally, nationally, etc.

I don't know how optimistic you are, but I think if this continues to go the direction it's going now...

Then possibly 15-20 years from now we'll see a guy elected on a "shoot them as they try to get in" border policy. It's kind of inevitable at this point...both sides refuse to act.

I don't see Trump's election as a good thing. It's not a sign of less corporate control over politics, its an increase. Corporations have no interest in healthcare, education, clean environments, etc...but they do have an interest in a readily available crop of poor uneducated to mop floors and pick crops.

The idea that this is about race is leftist nonsense...they could be as white as the driven snow, its the same problem.

 

[Ana the Ist]

why do individuals have greater debt?
living beyond their means?

That and increasing costs of living and stagnant wages.

 

[Redac]

Are you suggesting that taking those laws off the books was a bad idea?

Do you believe having such laws is an inherently bad or immoral thing?

 

[TLK Valentine]

And? Where's the part where you explain how that makes us capable of taking on an endless stream of poor?

"We can't take in all these Irish and Italians! They won't assimilate and they'll drag this great nation down!"

That's nice -- who wants a slice of pizza and a pint of Guinness?

Every conventional indicator. Global climate change isn't slowing down...increased disparities between rich and poor....increased humanitarian crises caused by overpopulation.

Are you saying that all of these are caused by letting Hispanics into the US? Because it sounds more like free-roaming hysteria to me.

Let's say I believe you....when is the time?

When there's a real problem, not panic generated by the government that you dutifully believe.

Why should we wait until this reaches crisis level to act? Would it kill us to think ahead for once?

Ok, calm down, deep breaths, count to ten:

There is no crisis.

You're panicking over nothing.

Get it?

Illegal immigration was steadily dropping over the years. The DACA kids do not take one cent of welfare or government assistance. Refugees actually bring in money to the economy, according to a report the administration buried because it didn't fit the Narrative.

So, one more time: There is no crisis. You've been lied to.

Hold onto what we have, culturally, institutionally, nationally, etc.

That's nice... here, have a slice of pizza and a pint of Guinness...

I don't know how optimistic you are, but I think if this continues to go the direction it's going now...

The direction you're being told it's going in now...

Then possibly 15-20 years from now we'll see a guy elected on a "shoot them as they try to get in" border policy. It's kind of inevitable at this point...both sides refuse to act.

I'll bet dollars to pesos that Donald would have tried it if enough of his base would have supported it... and the guy who does will need a base even more panicked than you are now.

I don't see Trump's election as a good thing. It's not a sign of less corporate control over politics, its an increase. Corporations have no interest in healthcare, education, clean environments, etc...but they do have an interest in a readily available crop of poor uneducated to mop floors and pick crops.

The idea that this is about race is leftist nonsense...they could be as white as the driven snow, its the same problem.

Right -- its about rich people getting poor people to blame poorer people so that they don't rise up and hang the rich people...

But if you notice that, you're an evil Socialist.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Right -- its about rich people getting poor people to blame poorer people so that they don't rise up and hang the rich people...

But if you notice that, you're an evil Socialist.

Rich people generally favor immigrants over working class Americans, especially white working class Americans. Trump is very much an exception, not the rule. He's a billionaire with a sense of patriotism, whereas most men of his wealth prefer to think of themselves as "citizens of the world". Which is why the GOP didn't take action on immigration until Trump came along. Which is why so many of the GOP's wealthy donors, not least the Koch brothers, wouldn't support Trump in the general election. Which is why Trump was out spent by Hillary Clinton 2 to 1. The idea that the rich in the United States are anti-immigrant is absurd. They're solidly on the side of open borders.