Boehner Says Lack of Immigration Reform Is Obama's Fault

[ClydeR]

House Speaker John Boehner blames President Barack Obama for Congress’s inability to pass an immigration reform bill, saying that it’s a lack of trust in the president that keeps members of the GOP from getting it done.

More... (http://www.politico.com/story/2014/04/john-boehner-obama-immigration-105467.html)

There was a really good article (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/07/us/more-deportations-follow-minor-crimes-data-shows.html) in the New York Times on Sunday about Obama's record of deporting illegal immigrants for small infractions. Certain People act like Obama shouldn't deport illegal aliens who only commit little crimes. But isn't he supposed to deport them even if they don't commit any crimes?

[~Rocktar~]

Being an illegal alien IS a crime.

[waywardgs]

They should have their tongues cut out.

[Thondalar]

We're one of the easiest nations in the world to immigrate to legally. If you're here illegally, it's a crime. I'm really not sure why this is always such a hot-button issue.

[~Rocktar~]

We're one of the easiest nations in the world to immigrate to legally. If you're here illegally, it's a crime. I'm really not sure why this is always such a hot-button issue.

Because someone will want to cry racist when you point out that many illegals are here simply because their biggest tallent is crossing 50 yards of open ground or hiding in a cargo container while pregnant and the ability to wait out our justice system for the kid to be born. Funny, people want to talk about how great the rest of the world is, not nearly as many people risk death and imprisonment to get into other countries as they do here.

[Warriorbird]

We're one of the easiest nations in the world to immigrate to legally. If you're here illegally, it's a crime. I'm really not sure why this is always such a hot-button issue.

South of our border is a corrupt government that demands a larger bribe for you to come here "legally" than the drug lords do to take you across the border. You act like every country has the benefit of American law. I'd assume it made sense to a libertarian.

[cwolff]

We're one of the easiest nations in the world to immigrate to legally. If you're here illegally, it's a crime. I'm really not sure why this is always such a hot-button issue.

Dumb


Because someone will want to cry racist when you point out that many illegals are here simply because their biggest tallent is crossing 50 yards of open ground or hiding in a cargo container while pregnant and the ability to wait out our justice system for the kid to be born. Funny, people want to talk about how great the rest of the world is, not nearly as many people risk death and imprisonment to get into other countries as they do here.

and Dumber

[Jarvan]

Dumb



and Dumber

Yes, because violating the sovereignty of the country you one day hope to become a citizen of is a smart thing.

Name one other country in the world where is is legal to enter without consent, or where HALF the country wants people to enter illegally.

[Jarvan]

South of our border is a corrupt government that demands a larger bribe for you to come here "legally" than the drug lords do to take you across the border. You act like every country has the benefit of American law. I'd assume it made sense to a libertarian.

So that makes them violating our sovereignty ok? Because their country is corrupt?

Hell, our country is corrupt, does that mean I get to violate our laws and not get in trouble?

[Back]

It's in the best interest of our economy to provide paths to citizenship for these people. Cheaper labor, more taxpayers, less money spent on deportation.

[Jarvan]

It's in the best interest of our economy to provide paths to citizenship for these people. Cheaper labor, more taxpayers, less money spent on deportation.

Actually, not really. It's in the best interests of our country to NOT reward people that committed a crime again.

There are Tens of millions of people out there that want to be here. We could easily offer those that didn't break our laws assess to the country, and kick out the people that did break the laws.

Rewarding people just leads to more people breaking the laws. As we have seen from when Reagan gave people amnesty.

But... I do see the need to offer something to these people. So.. offer them the chance to work and live her, pay taxes and such, and allow them to apply for citizenship, in 50 years. Don't like it, fuck off.

[Gelston]

Um, it is only cheaper labor when they are undocumented workers. If they were legally here they'd probably refuse that type of arrangement.

[cwolff]

Just be glad that people still want to come here. We're slipping in most categories that have to do with not being a shithole and we can't even talk about immigration until the border is secured. As if that is even possible without going all USSR on it. "But daddy, that mexican violated my sovereignty! He is ILLEGAL" WAH WAH WAH. Obama's sending them back in record numbers. What more do you want? Death squads?

[Back]

Um, it is only cheaper labor when they are undocumented workers. If they were legally here they'd probably refuse that type of arrangement.

My thought was that there would be more minimum wage labor than skilled higher wage labor.

More benefits to our economy would be these people spending the money they earn here on everything from milk to cars and houses.

[Jarvan]

My thought was that there would be more minimum wage labor than skilled higher wage labor.

More benefits to our economy would be these people spending the money they earn here on everything from milk to cars and houses.

They already spend most of the money they earn here, here. Also.. that's kinda funny... YOU want more minimum wage labor? Why, so you can then give them government handouts along with their "vote Dem" buttons?


Just be glad that people still want to come here. We're slipping in most categories that have to do with not being a shithole and we can't even talk about immigration until the border is secured. As if that is even possible without going all USSR on it. "But daddy, that mexican violated my sovereignty! He is ILLEGAL" WAH WAH WAH. Obama's sending them back in record numbers. What more do you want? Death squads?

Securing the border does not mean it has to look like East Berlin.

At the same time, it shouldn't be possible for 100 people with 50 lbs of pot on their back to just stroll into the US. As for sending them back.. he kicks em out one day.. they are back the next. But bring up securing the border.. and OMG Racists!

[Jeril]

My thought was that there would be more minimum wage labor than skilled higher wage labor.

More benefits to our economy would be these people spending the money they earn here on everything from milk to cars and houses.

Depending on the type of work illegals get paid a lot less then minimum wage.

Our politicians won't lock down the boarder because that would get in the way of their hobbies like gun running, recreational drugs, more then likely slave trafficking, and who knows what else.

[Back]

They already spend most of the money they earn here, here. Also.. that's kinda funny... YOU want more minimum wage labor? Why, so you can then give them government handouts along with their "vote Dem" buttons?



Securing the border does not mean it has to look like East Berlin.

At the same time, it shouldn't be possible for 100 people with 50 lbs of pot on their back to just stroll into the US. As for sending them back.. he kicks em out one day.. they are back the next. But bring up securing the border.. and OMG Racists!

Actully they tend to send money back to thier families in Mexico. They can't buy new cars or homes because they are illegal.

People who get deported don't just come back the next day. The usually end up in worse conditions. And they aren't all drug runners.

[cwolff]

They already spend most of the money they earn here, here. Also.. that's kinda funny... YOU want more minimum wage labor? Why, so you can then give them government handouts along with their "vote Dem" buttons?

Securing the border does not mean it has to look like East Berlin.

At the same time, it shouldn't be possible for 100 people with 50 lbs of pot on their back to just stroll into the US. As for sending them back.. he kicks em out one day.. they are back the next. But bring up securing the border.. and OMG Racists!

You underestimate the costs and difficulties in stopping the movement of people across borders not to mention the unforseen consequences. Nothing is as simple as putting up a damn fence.

[waywardgs]

You underestimate the costs and difficulties in stopping the movement of people across borders not to mention the unforseen consequences. Nothing is as simple as putting up a damn fence.

Wait, you mean it's a complex problem? Stop calling people racist!

[Tgo01]

It's in the best interest of our economy to provide paths to citizenship for these people. Cheaper labor

Wait, what?

[NinjasLeadTheWay]

Obama's sending them back in record numbers.

That's actually completely untrue.

Also, maybe if we'd do something about the fucking drug cartels, all the people fleeing Mexico would feel safer in their own country. But we're also the Cartels biggest and best customers. And the Cartels also protect our Southern Border from Terrorists crossing the border. It's a giant convoluted mess.

[Back]

That's actually completely untrue.

Also, maybe if we'd do something about the fucking drug cartels, all the people fleeing Mexico would feel safer in their own country. But we're also the Cartels biggest and best customers. And the Cartels also protect our Southern Border from Terrorists crossing the border. It's a giant convoluted mess.

I've also read that deportations have increased significantly under Obama. Where are you seeing the discrepancy?

Actually legalizing weed is one of the best ways to combat the cartels. Though, they have been moving over to avocados and limes now.

[NinjasLeadTheWay]

So if you remove the people basically turned around at the border, which wouldn't be an issue if we do more to secure it, the actual deportation numbers are tiny.

6378

[NinjasLeadTheWay]

I've also read that deportations have increased significantly under Obama. Where are you seeing the discrepancy?

Actually legalizing weed is one of the best ways to combat the cartels. Though, they have been moving over to avocados and limes now.

No and No. And legalizing weed only means that they have better ways to get rid of it, but it won't slow the flow into the country and it's already been shown that crime levels don't change when Marijuana is legalized, we have Washington and Colorado to look at now, you will just have more people trying to sell weed illegally to avoid taxes instead. Now if you were to nationally treat it like alcohol, that could help. But not in this piecemeal bullshit way it's being legalized by state. Once MJ is sold everywhere like beer, then the cartels would take a hit and move back to other drugs.

[Tgo01]

Why do people think legalizing weed is going to solve everything? Even bringing down the cartels in Mexico.

The drug cartels basically run the country of Mexico, like they are going to just close up shop because the US legalizes marijuana.

[cwolff]

That's actually completely untrue.

Also, maybe if we'd do something about the fucking drug cartels, all the people fleeing Mexico would feel safer in their own country. But we're also the Cartels biggest and best customers. And the Cartels also protect our Southern Border from Terrorists crossing the border. It's a giant convoluted mess.

I'm not sure what your point is. Do you have some other information that says Obama is not deporting a lot of people? Do you object to the words Record Numbers or what?


This weekend, groups against the aggressive deportation approach rallied in cities across the United States, calling on Obama to stop them and stop breaking up families.

“The records show the largest increases were in deportations involving illegal immigrants whose most serious offense was listed as a traffic violation, including driving under the influence,” the Times story said. “Those cases more than quadrupled from 43,000 during the last five years of President George W. Bush’s administration to 193,000 during the five years Mr. Obama has been in office.”

Also, people who re-entered illegally were deported at three times the rate – 188,000 – under Obama as they were under Bush.


While this has been going on, the number of people entering America illegally via the south-western border has dropped. There are no official numbers on how many people become illegal immigrants by overstaying their visas. But the data that are collected, combined with estimates to fill the gaps, suggest that in the past couple of years, for the first time since people started to talk about illegal migration, the outflow has been greater than the inflow.

On one measure this is a great success. It is hard to find many areas where the federal government is so effective in implementing laws passed by Congress. Yet it is harmful--not just for the deported, who often have a miserable time once they are expelled (see article), but for the country they leave behind, something which even the deporters have come to recognise. [The Economist, 2/8/14]

[NinjasLeadTheWay]

I'm not sure what your point is. Do you have some other information that says Obama is not deporting a lot of people? Do you object to the words Record Numbers or what?

Yes, I do, but I can't post a damn PDF to this. They're inflated and otherwise completely bullshit numbers, and this is out of the mouth of the head of ICE himself.

[Latrinsorm]

We're one of the easiest nations in the world to immigrate to legally. If you're here illegally, it's a crime. I'm really not sure why this is always such a hot-button issue.You have to read between the lines. If I were to say "of course I'm pro-choice! Americans should have the freedom to choose things!" that superficial interpretation of the term would gloss over what was really going on.
Yes, because violating the sovereignty of the country you one day hope to become a citizen of is a smart thing.Committing a crime is not what violating sovereignty means.
We could easily offer those that didn't break our laws assess to the country, and kick out the people that did break the laws.The only way to do that would be a violation of sovereignty, because we would be telling other countries how to handle their emigration. I hope you appreciate the irony.
That's actually completely untrue.Tell it to ICE (http://americasvoice.org/blog/ice-announces-new-record-number-of-deportations-and-a-better-detainer-policy/). If you don't trust them, here's (http://radgeek.com/gt/2012/08/18/civil-rights-commission-arizona-alabama-immigration-bills/) an independent graph that goes all the way back to 1980.

[waywardgs]

Mexico is basically a narcostate at this point. The cartel thing has gone way beyond the capacity to reign it in.

[Parkbandit]

We're one of the easiest nations in the world to immigrate to legally. If you're here illegally, it's a crime. I'm really not sure why this is always such a hot-button issue.

It's a hot button issue because politicians see a way to divide us.

[Parkbandit]

Just be glad that people still want to come here. We're slipping in most categories that have to do with not being a shithole and we can't even talk about immigration until the border is secured. As if that is even possible without going all USSR on it. "But daddy, that mexican violated my sovereignty! He is ILLEGAL" WAH WAH WAH. Obama's sending them back in record numbers. What more do you want? Death squads?

You really do believe anything you read on the Internet.. as long as you agree with it.

Such blind ignorance.. Democrat politicians must love you.

[Parkbandit]

I've also read that deportations have increased significantly under Obama. Where are you seeing the discrepancy?


x100 to my above post.

[Tgo01]

Isn't it funny how Democrats want to tackle tough issues by just making the issues legal?

"Drugs are a problem? Legalize it!"
"Illegal immigration is a problem? Legalize it!"
"Gays turning our straight youth into gays? Legalize it!"
"Death penalty is wrong? Legalize it! No wait...illegalize it!"

[Thondalar]

South of our border is a corrupt government that demands a larger bribe for you to come here "legally" than the drug lords do to take you across the border. You act like every country has the benefit of American law. I'd assume it made sense to a libertarian.

I understand perfectly well how and why they want to come here illegally, what I don't understand is how this could be an issue for US citizens. Why is there an argument? This isn't about helping underprivileged Mexicans find a better life, it's a national security issue.

[waywardgs]

Isn't it funny how every time we declare war on something we get more of it?

War on drugs! More drugs
War on cancer! More cancer.
War on terrorism! More terrorism.

[Thondalar]

Isn't it funny how every time we declare war on something we get more of it?

War on drugs! More drugs
War on cancer! More cancer.
War on terrorism! More terrorism.

When my parents told me I couldn't have something, I tried even harder to get it.

[Tgo01]

War on poverty! More poverty.
War on obesity! More obesity.

Hmm, you may be onto something here. I think we should just go the route Obama did and rename everything so it sounds better.

How about "The ongoing conflict to situate people in better locales."

[Tgo01]

Going off of that the government should get really creative and start the "War on taxes!" then everyone will want to pay more taxes, right?

[Latrinsorm]

How about the war on Nazis, tough guys? Yeah, I went there.

Seriously, though, you're fixated on position. Acceleration is the only thing we can impact.

[Tgo01]

How about the war on Nazis, tough guys? Yeah, I went there.

Don't forget our war on global warming, it led to colder weather this year. That's one war we can call a success!

[Jarvan]

I have the perfect solution. Nuke Mexico. This would get rid of a number of problems.

The cartels would be gone.
The area would be uninhabitable and very hard to cross for a few decades at least.
We could spend less guarding that border.

It's a win win win.


As for the war on drugs..

How many people on these boards admit they smoke pot? It's never the drug dealers that are the issue, it's the users. Frankly I think recent changes are stupid. Don't decriminalize using it, and go after the people selling it.. quadruple down on the people USING it. They are the problem. If no one used it, there would be no drug dealers, duh.

Caught smoking a joint... 50 years picking up trash on the highway should fix that problem.. AND clean up the highways. Hell, CA would be the cleanest area in the world.



Actully they tend to send money back to thier families in Mexico. They can't buy new cars or homes because they are illegal.

People who get deported don't just come back the next day. The usually end up in worse conditions. And they aren't all drug runners.

Back.. people making 7.25 a hour (generally less because they are illegal) don't buy NEW cars or homes anyway. They buy used cars if they even can, and they rent pieces of shit you wouldn't even want to walk into for fear of contaminating your birkenstocks.

People that are here legally do tend to send as much home as possible, because they are trying to get the rest of their family here.

I know it's a cliche.. but there is an Indian family that owned a 7 11 near where I lived. At first, it was just two brothers here. Next year, their wives and kids were here, and they had a second store. Fast forward 5 years.. they have 6 mini shops, and 30 relatives here working them. One of the sons was spending to much of his paycheck from his 2nd job on dvd's and clothes, so they kicked them out of the house and disowned him.

I want those kinds of people here.. I do not want people that sneak across the border and then feel that they are entitled to be able to stay because this feels like "home" to them.

[Atlanteax]

Going off of that the government should get really creative and start the "War on taxes!" then everyone will want to pay more taxes, right?

We are, it's called the Flat Tax.

[Atlanteax]

As for the war on drugs..

How many people on these boards admit they smoke pot? It's never the drug dealers that are the issue, it's the users. Frankly I think recent changes are stupid. Don't decriminalize using it, and go after the people selling it.. quadruple down on the people USING it. They are the problem. If no one used it, there would be no drug dealers, duh.

Caught smoking a joint... 50 years picking up trash on the highway should fix that problem.. AND clean up the highways. Hell, CA would be the cleanest area in the world.

Taxing the $$$ heck out of it will do the job of reducing consumption ... just as taxes on cigarettes has imposed significant costs on those persisting in the 'habit'.

[Jarvan]

Taxing the $$$ heck out of it will do the job of reducing consumption ... just as taxes on cigarettes has imposed significant costs on those persisting in the 'habit'.

I don't know a single smoker that quit over taxes on cigs. Hell, most of them would rather cut back on other things like food then on cigs. Smoking rate has gone down, but I think it has a lot more to do to knowledge of what smoking can and does do to you then cost. Hell, I knew a girl that I worked with, that smoked. She one time complained about having to buy a new bra cause her current bra was falling apart, and that she may have to bum cigs off someone for a week or so.

As for taxing Pot... wouldn't stop the illegal sale of pot. Cut back on it yeah, but not stop it. Cartel's may see their money cut in half or more, but they will still sell it. People will still buy it illegally, because they will know that they can't get in trouble for doing so really.

legalize pot, don't legalize pot. It ultimately doesn't matter to me, as I don't do it anyway. Tho before you legalize it, have a fucking clue how you are going to handle people abusing it. (CO and WA you fucking morons) I just wish people would stop acting like legalizing it will solve so many problems, when it will just make new problems.

[Wrathbringer]

We should just conquer Mexico. Problem solved. I mean, hey, while we're nation building abroad and all.

Edit: And yes, Obummer is to blame. He's the pres, and the buck stops there. At least it used to until he came along. This guy passes it like no one's business.

[Wrathbringer]

As for the war on drugs..

How many people on these boards admit they smoke pot? It's never the drug dealers that are the issue, it's the users. Frankly I think recent changes are stupid. Don't decriminalize using it, and go after the people selling it.. quadruple down on the people USING it. They are the problem. If no one used it, there would be no drug dealers, duh.

Caught smoking a joint... 50 years picking up trash on the highway should fix that problem.. AND clean up the highways. Hell, CA would be the cleanest area in the world.

Dumbest thing I've seen on here in a long time. Well, except for Back's racist comment that amnesty for the fine Mexican invaders would lead to more minimum wage labor. Because they're an unskilled, unintelligent people on the whole, right Back? I'm offended.

[cwolff]

I don't know a single smoker that quit over taxes on cigs. Hell, most of them would rather cut back on other things like food then on cigs. Smoking rate has gone down, but I think it has a lot more to do to knowledge of what smoking can and does do to you then cost. Hell, I knew a girl that I worked with, that smoked. She one time complained about having to buy a new bra cause her current bra was falling apart, and that she may have to bum cigs off someone for a week or so.

As for taxing Pot... wouldn't stop the illegal sale of pot. Cut back on it yeah, but not stop it. Cartel's may see their money cut in half or more, but they will still sell it. People will still buy it illegally, because they will know that they can't get in trouble for doing so really.

legalize pot, don't legalize pot. It ultimately doesn't matter to me, as I don't do it anyway. Tho before you legalize it, have a fucking clue how you are going to handle people abusing it. (CO and WA you fucking morons) I just wish people would stop acting like legalizing it will solve so many problems, when it will just make new problems.


As for the war on drugs..

How many people on these boards admit they smoke pot? It's never the drug dealers that are the issue, it's the users. Frankly I think recent changes are stupid. Don't decriminalize using it, and go after the people selling it.. quadruple down on the people USING it. They are the problem. If no one used it, there would be no drug dealers, duh.

Caught smoking a joint... 50 years picking up trash on the highway should fix that problem.. AND clean up the highways. Hell, CA would be the cleanest area in the world.

This is the truth. Why should we go down to Bolivia and Colombia to fuck with their coca production just because Americans have an insatiable appetite for drugs. The problems in Mexico are our problem. We created this monster because we want to get high then we hold other countries accountable. Now the whole thing an irreversible mess. Even if we shut it down today the cartels have already started to diversify and are taking control of legitimate business.

They put a 25% tax on recreational weed in CO. The black market is thriving. Not only has the recreational market had trouble keeping up with demand which is raising the cost, but also complying with regulations and the 25% tax has made the street cost almost 1/2 of the legal cost.

[Thondalar]

I just wish people would stop acting like legalizing it will solve so many problems, when it will just make new problems.

It worked for Prohibition.

[Latrinsorm]

Caught smoking a joint... 50 years picking up trash on the highway should fix that problem.. AND clean up the highways. Hell, CA would be the cleanest area in the world.The problem with this is that humans don't believe they'll be caught, so the magnitude of the punishment can't function as a deterrent. Why else do you think death penalty states don't see lower murder rates than non-death penalty states? Why do you think the Roman program of public crucifixion, torture, and mass execution was absolutely useless at preventing rebellion? If you really want to stop a crime, there's only one solution: you have to catch everyone who commits it.

[Tgo01]

If you really want to stop a crime, there's only one solution: legalize it.

Fixed.

[Latrinsorm]

I respect your choice to be a Democrat, Terrence, but as you know I am not one and therefore do not believe in legalization as a general rule.

[Warriorbird]

Fixed.

I'm glad you want to make all immigration legal.

[Ashliana]

Isn't it funny how Democrats want to tackle tough issues by just making the issues legal?

"Drugs are a problem? Legalize it!"
"Illegal immigration is a problem? Legalize it!"
"Gays turning our straight youth into gays? Legalize it!"
"Death penalty is wrong? Legalize it! No wait...illegalize it!"

Translation: "Isn't it funny how Democrats want pragmatic solutions to existing problems, rather than maintaining the ineffective status quo, or doubling down on ineffective policies? Pfft! I hate trying new approaches!"

And FYI, your third one isn't a "problem Democrats want to tackle," because that isn't a thing.

[AnticorRifling]

Translation: "Isn't it funny how Democrats want pragmatic solutions to existing problems, rather than maintaining the ineffective status quo, or doubling down on ineffective policies? Pfft! I hate trying new approaches!"

And FYI, your third one isn't a "problem Democrats want to tackle," because that isn't a thing.



No "solution" is going to work if it's paused a quarter of the way through. Why couldn't trying something new be following through with a plan that would work even if the bad guys suggested it?

[Jarvan]

Translation: "Isn't it funny how Democrats want pragmatic solutions to existing problems, rather than maintaining the ineffective status quo, or doubling down on ineffective policies? Pfft! I hate trying new approaches!"

And FYI, your third one isn't a "problem Democrats want to tackle," because that isn't a thing.

Yes, cause legalizing it is a pragmatic solution.


No "solution" is going to work if it's paused a quarter of the way through. Why couldn't trying something new be following through with a plan that would work even if the bad guys suggested it?

Because to him, there is nothing the other side could do that would be considered good.

Securing our borders is "bad" because it prevents all those poor innocent people from willfully violating our borders and laws. We are such evil assholes for even wanting secure borders.

[Ashliana]

No "solution" is going to work if it's paused a quarter of the way through. Why couldn't trying something new be following through with a plan that would work even if the bad guys suggested it?

Immigration reform, ostensibly the topic of this thread, is a horrible issue for conservatives. I'm sorry, but you don't have the support for deporting the 12,000,000 illegal immigrants here. Those people have ties to legal citizens--children, extended family, etc., and those people have political clout. Conservatives have lost the moral argument for the political center when it comes to immigration. 63% (in this Nov. '13 poll) support immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship for illegals. A pathway doesn't necessarily imply "FREE IMMIGRATION ON DEMAND" as Republicans seem to make the case.

What solution, Anticor, do you think has only been tried "a quarter of the way"? Deportation isn't going to work. A fence isn't going to work. There are certainly ways to accomplish it, albeit not without huge sacrifices in terms of our free society. Lethal drones constantly patrolling the border might be one such way... again, you'll find no support for that whatsoever.

Bottom line--the Republicans will absolutely not win the presidency again until they get immigration reform passed. The onus is on them to pass it if they want the presidency back, and that's a political reality. No matter what Republicans fanatically, ideologically believe is "right."

[Back]

Isn't it funny how Democrats want to tackle tough issues by just making the issues legal?

"Drugs are a problem? Legalize it!"
"Illegal immigration is a problem? Legalize it!"
"Gays turning our straight youth into gays? Legalize it!"
"Death penalty is wrong? Legalize it! No wait...illegalize it!"

Equal pay for women? Legalize it!
Healthcare for everyone? Legalize it!
Student loan reform? Legalize it!
Home loan reform? Legalize it!

Thats kind of how it works.

[AnticorRifling]

Equal pay for women? Legalize it!
Healthcare for everyone? Legalize it!
Student loan reform? Legalize it!
Home loan reform? Legalize it!

Thats kind of how it works.

Equal when it's convenient but special when it's too tough? Legalize it!
No credit checks for anyone buying a home? Legalize it!
Everyone should go to college/degree mills because you deserve to? Legalize it!

I like this game.
Healthcare that someone else pays for? Legalize it!

[AnticorRifling]

Immigration reform, ostensibly the topic of this thread, is a horrible issue for conservatives. I'm sorry, but you don't have the support for deporting the 12,000,000 illegal immigrants here. Those people have ties to legal citizens--children, extended family, etc., and those people have political clout. Conservatives have lost the moral argument for the political center when it comes to immigration. 63% (in this Nov. '13 poll) support immigration reform with a pathway to citizenship for illegals. A pathway doesn't necessarily imply "FREE IMMIGRATION ON DEMAND" as Republicans seem to make the case.

What solution, Anticor, do you think has only been tried "a quarter of the way"? Deportation isn't going to work. A fence isn't going to work. There are certainly ways to accomplish it, albeit not without huge sacrifices in terms of our free society. Lethal drones constantly patrolling the border might be one such way... again, you'll find no support for that whatsoever.

Bottom line--the Republicans will absolutely not win the presidency again until they get immigration reform passed. The onus is on them to pass it if they want the presidency back, and that's a political reality. No matter what Republicans fanatically, ideologically believe is "right."

There was a topic in this thread?! Son of a bitch.

You shouldn't be sorry, I don't want to deport 12,000,000 people. They have ties to legal citizens--- (I added a dash ONE UP) like anchor babies and they took our jerbs and they married for green cards. There already is a pathway isn't there? Or did all my friends that became citizens have a magic path and mythical powers?

Personally I'm all for a faster process for naturalization as long as the background check is thorough (like the guy that wrote Walden) and those persons becoming citizens are doing so to become productive, hell we've got enough non productive citizens that need to go before the productive illegals go. I'm all for the tax revenue.

What solution, me, do you think has only been tried a quarter of the way? Any and all by both parties in the last 20 years. Both cock block so hard shit has stagnated; bad ideas are stopped, sure, but so are the good ones. Now I know that's not how I should speak in a political thread, I should be BLANKET RABBLE RABBLE DEMOCRATS LOVE PENIS AND SOCIALISM AND ILLEGALS and then you can be all RABBLE RABBLE BLANKET RABBLE REPUBLICANS JESUS AND SAVINGS ACCOUNTS

Botom line --- (again that's one more dash IN YOUR FACE) the republicans won't win because they won't promise any free shit.

[Ashliana]

Only part of that was specifically directed at you, Anticor (RE: which solutions have been tried half-heartedly).

The point is that the GOP's proposed solutions to our immigration problems make no sense, and aren't popular. Romney was eviscerated for his "self-deportation" response--an idea especially popular with the GOP base, and one completely unfounded in reality, rejected by the middle.

The GOP constantly argues that we have to "secure our border first," with zero explanation as to why that should be the case, or by what metric we should judge when the border is finally "secure," and we can then proceed on to address our systemic issues with immigration.

The GOP's in an awkward spot where they seem to legitimately believe that legalizing the 12,000,000 immigrants automatically results in 12,000,000 more Democratic voters (without attempting to prove such a thing) while simultaneously--albeit reluctantly--acknowledging that Hispanics are exploding in population growth and definitely see GOP opposition to immigration reform as evidence of anti-Hispanic bias.

If they want to doom their party to extinction or permanent minority status, by all means, Republicans should continue to oppose immigration reform.

[cwolff]

Having people that are fighting to get here is a great problem. When it changes we'll be in a world of hurt and we're already seeing it change. Illegal immigrations are down and we've put laws in place to penalize people who want to renounce their citizenship. I never would have thought that we'd have to legislate what happens to people voluntarily leaving the USA. That this is even a thing is rather startling.

[Tgo01]

or by what metric we should judge when the border is finally "secure,"

I'd say when we no longer have a million people a year just walking right into our country illegally. Makes sense to me.

[Tgo01]

Translation: "Isn't it funny how Democrats want pragmatic solutions to existing problems

I'm not sure you know what "pragmatic" means.

A few years ago my neighbor would constantly blast his radio at all hours of the night and I was always calling the police to report him. Finally one day after calling the police on him an officer showed up and told me the city decided the best way to deal with the problem was to legalize playing your radio as loud as your want at all hours of the night.

No, that never really happened but it sounds stupid huh? Oh wait, it sounds "pragmatic."

[waywardgs]

Tossing someone in jail for 50 years cause he was caught with a joint doesn't sound very pragmatic. Or humane. Or in any way reasonable to the vast majority of the population.

[Wrathbringer]

There was a topic in this thread?! Son of a bitch.

You shouldn't be sorry, I don't want to deport 12,000,000 people. They have ties to legal citizens--- (I added a dash ONE UP) like anchor babies and they took our jerbs and they married for green cards. There already is a pathway isn't there? Or did all my friends that became citizens have a magic path and mythical powers?

Personally I'm all for a faster process for naturalization as long as the background check is thorough (like the guy that wrote Walden) and those persons becoming citizens are doing so to become productive, hell we've got enough non productive citizens that need to go before the productive illegals go. I'm all for the tax revenue.

What solution, me, do you think has only been tried a quarter of the way? Any and all by both parties in the last 20 years. Both cock block so hard shit has stagnated; bad ideas are stopped, sure, but so are the good ones. Now I know that's not how I should speak in a political thread, I should be BLANKET RABBLE RABBLE DEMOCRATS LOVE PENIS AND SOCIALISM AND ILLEGALS and then you can be all RABBLE RABBLE BLANKET RABBLE REPUBLICANS JESUS AND SAVINGS ACCOUNTS

Botom line --- (again that's one more dash IN YOUR FACE) the republicans won't win because they won't promise any free shit.

you forgot LOCK BOX and THOUSAND POINTS OF LIGHT.

[Parkbandit]

Having people that are fighting to get here is a great problem. When it changes we'll be in a world of hurt and we're already seeing it change. Illegal immigrations are down and we've put laws in place to penalize people who want to renounce their citizenship. I never would have thought that we'd have to legislate what happens to people voluntarily leaving the USA. That this is even a thing is rather startling.

Why are these people renouncing their citizenship?

How do they penalize people for renouncing their citizenship?

[NinjasLeadTheWay]

War on poverty! More poverty.
War on obesity! More obesity.

Hmm, you may be onto something here. I think we should just go the route Obama did and rename everything so it sounds better.

How about "The ongoing conflict to situate people in better locales."

Wait...does that mean the war on women will lead to more women?!

[Tgo01]

Wait...does that mean the war on women will lead to more women?!

I am hereby declaring a war on naked large breasted women wrestling one another in jello!

[cwolff]

Taxes mostly. Either being rich and trying to get out of paying taxes or being not rich and unable to afford the accountants bill while living abroad. I'm sure there are other reasons but these are two that have been in the news lately.

[waywardgs]

I am hereby declaring a war on naked large breasted women wrestling one another in jello!

It has to be a presidential declaration. You had a better chance with Clinton.

[cwolff]

I am hereby declaring a war on naked large breasted women wrestling one another in jello!

Latrinsorm: Are you sure you're ok with this, Terry?
Tgo01: Just ring the fucking bell, you pansy.

[Parkbandit]

Taxes mostly. Either being rich and trying to get out of paying taxes or being not rich and unable to afford the accountants bill while living abroad. I'm sure there are other reasons but these are two that have been in the news lately.

So, people are renouncing their citizenship for tax evasion.. and you have a problem with the government attempting to limit this practice?

[cwolff]

So, people are renouncing their citizenship for tax evasion.. and you have a problem with the government attempting to limit this practice?

If you want to pick a fight at least get real with your "counter" arguments. I haven't qualified this topic either way. What I did point out is that illegal immigration is down and renunciations are up. This is not a good trend.

[Wrathbringer]

If you want to pick a fight at least get real with your "counter" arguments. I haven't qualified this topic either way. What I did point out is that illegal immigration is down and renunciations are up. This is not a good trend.

Obummer and the liberal agenda have more to do with renunciations than anything else. People don't want to give all their money to government, and the liberal agenda demands it. FOR THE POOR! I know, I hate poor people. And I'm racist. Like Back.

[cwolff]

Obummer and the liberal agenda have more to do with renunciations than anything else. People don't want to give all their money to government, and the liberal agenda demands it. FOR THE POOR! I know, I hate poor people. And I'm racist. Like Back.

Considering that Presidents of both parties have had much higher tax rates I'd not say it's the liberal agenda to raise. Probably more accurate to say that the right wing agenda is to lower taxes while the left is fighting to maintain or restore the tax rates.

[Parkbandit]

If you want to pick a fight at least get real with your "counter" arguments. I haven't qualified this topic either way. What I did point out is that illegal immigration is down and renunciations are up. This is not a good trend.

Picking a fight?

Easy cupcake, I'm asking a question. Let's go back to what you posted:


Illegal immigrations are down and we've put laws in place to penalize people who want to renounce their citizenship. I never would have thought that we'd have to legislate what happens to people voluntarily leaving the USA. That this is even a thing is rather startling.

I asked why people are renouncing and how are they being penalized. You said this:


Taxes mostly. Either being rich and trying to get out of paying taxes or being not rich and unable to afford the accountants bill while living abroad. I'm sure there are other reasons but these are two that have been in the news lately.

You qualified this by saying it's rather startling and that you never would have thought that our government would do this. You doubled down on this by saying it's not a good trend. This leads the reader to believe you are against it.

[Back]

So if you remove the people basically turned around at the border, which wouldn't be an issue if we do more to secure it, the actual deportation numbers are tiny.

6378

That little clip of yours comes from one source. Everywhere else you see that also comes from the same one source. Now... that same article also mentions that there is a higher rate of deportation of people with criminal records. So that one source did their own calculations and every other source is wrong? Or is it just what you WANT to believe.

http://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/assets/4262611/Screen_Shot_2014-04-08_at_12.51.33_PM.png

[Thondalar]

Homeland Security was created in 2003, right?

According to all sources, deportations (regardless of what sort of math you want to do to calculate them) overall have gone up since 2003.

Why are we even talking about presidents here?

Government agencies have all the power now. BLM, ICE, IRS, FDA...these are the people who make the rules now. The president is more superfluous than ever, and now Congress can go sit at the kiddy table with him.

[Latrinsorm]

Homeland Security was created in 2003, right?

According to all sources, deportations (regardless of what sort of math you want to do to calculate them) overall have gone up since 2003.

Why are we even talking about presidents here?

Government agencies have all the power now. BLM, ICE, IRS, FDA...these are the people who make the rules now. The president is more superfluous than ever, and now Congress can go sit at the kiddy table with him.Yeah, I remember that scene from the X-Files movie too. 15 years later, where's my totalitarian state? It's become our generation's "flying car": an inevitable outcome that nevertheless continues to be evaded.

[cwolff]

Picking a fight?

Easy cupcake, I'm asking a question. Let's go back to what you posted:



I asked why people are renouncing and how are they being penalized. You said this:



You qualified this by saying it's rather startling and that you never would have thought that our government would do this. You doubled down on this by saying it's not a good trend. This leads the reader to believe you are against it.

You're reading too much into it and you also misrepresented what I wrote.

This
I never would have thought that we'd have to legislate what happens to people voluntarily leaving the USA. That this is even a thing is rather startling. Does not equal this
You qualified this by saying it's rather startling and that you never would have thought that our government would do this.

[cwolff]

Homeland Security was created in 2003, right?

According to all sources, deportations (regardless of what sort of math you want to do to calculate them) overall have gone up since 2003.

Why are we even talking about presidents here?

Government agencies have all the power now. BLM, ICE, IRS, FDA...these are the people who make the rules now. The president is more superfluous than ever, and now Congress can go sit at the kiddy table with him.

The underlying issue here, at least as it relates to the PC forum, is that we still haven't agreed on Presidential power. Centrist to right policies and outcomes = no credit for Obama because he doesn't even have a say in that. Left leaning policies and outcomes = Obama's fault. You can't have it both ways. Either the President gets credit or not, blame or not.

I bet it was the same way when Bush was President but that's before my PC time.


Yeah, I remember that scene from the X-Files movie too. 15 years later, where's my totalitarian state? It's become our generation's "flying car": an inevitable outcome that nevertheless continues to be evaded.

We're getting wrist watch phones so that's something. Even Dick Tracy wants a samsung now.

[Parkbandit]

You're reading too much into it and you also misrepresented what I wrote.

This Does not equal this

Lulwut?

Feel free to elaborate your position on tax evaders renouncing their citizenship and the government attempting to collect on the taxes they believe are owed... because you either don't understand the issue you thought you did or you are just confused with the English language.

[cwolff]

Lulwut?

Feel free to elaborate your position on tax evaders renouncing their citizenship and the government attempting to collect on the taxes they believe are owed... because you either don't understand the issue you thought you did or you are just confused with the English language.

I've not staked a position on tax evaders and government collection of said taxes. This is apparently what you want to talk about though so do it. Write out all your thoughts and ideas. I might respond if you say something interesting.

[waywardgs]

Yeah, I remember that scene from the X-Files movie too. 15 years later, where's my totalitarian state? It's become our generation's "flying car": an inevitable outcome that nevertheless continues to be evaded.

The flying cars are being oppressed by that evil FAA.

[Back]

Equal when it's convenient but special when it's too tough? Legalize it!

No one said that. Women should get equal pay for equal work. Right now, they don't.


No credit checks for anyone buying a home? Legalize it!

Actually thats what lead to the housing bubble. Banks were actually getting paid even when people went default.


Everyone should go to college/degree mills because you deserve to? Legalize it!

America has one of the highest education costs in the world. Guess who makes the money? If a student wants to then they should be able to without getting strapped with a crippling loans at the beginning of their lives.


I like this game.
Healthcare that someone else pays for? Legalize it!

Everyone pays so everyone can have.

[Parkbandit]

I've not staked a position on tax evaders and government collection of said taxes. This is apparently what you want to talk about though so do it. Write out all your thoughts and ideas. I might respond if you say something interesting.

Sooo... you didn't understand it when you thought you did.

No surprise.

[Jarvan]

Considering that Presidents of both parties have had much higher tax rates I'd not say it's the liberal agenda to raise. Probably more accurate to say that the right wing agenda is to lower taxes while the left is fighting to maintain or restore the tax rates.

Considering tax rates have been in the mid 90's in the past, you could use that line up until the government takes 100% of your pay. So that line is bullshit. It would be like the Republican's claiming they just want to lower tax rates back to what personal income tax was in the 19th century... Zero. Left wing agenda is higher taxes on the wealthy, then higher on the middle class to pay for more entitlements for the "poor". Then rinse and repeat.

Of course these are the same people that tend to say that the deficit and the debt is meaningless.. which begs to question.. why want higher taxes if it doesn't mater how much we overspend by?

[Wrathbringer]

Considering tax rates have been in the mid 90's in the past, you could use that line up until the government takes 100% of your pay. So that line is bullshit. It would be like the Republican's claiming they just want to lower tax rates back to what personal income tax was in the 19th century... Zero. Left wing agenda is higher taxes on the wealthy, then higher on the middle class to pay for more entitlements for the "poor". Then rinse and repeat.

Of course these are the same people that tend to say that the deficit and the debt is meaningless.. which begs to question.. why want higher taxes if it doesn't mater how much we overspend by?

Why do you hate poor people?

[Jarvan]

That little clip of yours comes from one source. Everywhere else you see that also comes from the same one source. Now... that same article also mentions that there is a higher rate of deportation of people with criminal records. So that one source did their own calculations and every other source is wrong? Or is it just what you WANT to believe.

http://cdn2.vox-cdn.com/assets/4262611/Screen_Shot_2014-04-08_at_12.51.33_PM.png

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2011/12/28/appendix-a-deportations-reported-by-ice/

There is an interesting one... it confirms that in 2007 they changed the way that ICE reports the numbers. Likely why you saw a significant jump in 2007. So I would say that all data from 2007 on is basically bullshit.


"Since 2007, the total number of removals reported by ICE has included not only deportations carried out by ICE, but also returns carried out by the agency. Returns differ from removals in that they are carried out without an “order of removal” and do not have administrative or criminal consequences on subsequent reentry. Generally, most returns are performed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shortly after apprehension of an immigrant by the Border Patrol. However, a few are reported by ICE. Removal totals reported by ICE include returns carried out by ICE."

So there you go, inflated numbers. Have a good day.

[Back]

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2011/12/28/appendix-a-deportations-reported-by-ice/

There is an interesting one... it confirms that in 2007 they changed the way that ICE reports the numbers. Likely why you saw a significant jump in 2007. So I would say that all data from 2007 on is basically bullshit.



So there you go, inflated numbers. Have a good day.

Heheh. Do you even look at this stuff? A chart at your link still shows a decent increase in "removals".

http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/2011/12/2011-deporations-and-latinos-06b.png

[Jarvan]

No one said that. Women should get equal pay for equal work. Right now, they don't.

I think this only happens in professional jobs. I have never worked anywhere where starting salary was lower for a woman. Joe starting at Costco doesn't get 25 cents more an hour then Jane doing the same job.

This is an issue when it comes to professional jobs.. BUT... if jobs pay differently based on experience and credentials.. you will never have "equal" pay. If Joe went to Harvard law, and Jane went to community college.. guess which one will get paid more. If they both went to Harvard law, which one interned for a chief justice, which one for a senator.. etc etc etc.


Actually thats what lead to the housing bubble. Banks were actually getting paid even when people went default.

And people were buying homes they couldn't afford because the government was telling the banks.. LEND LEND LEND!! Then guaranteeing the loan if the person defaulted.



America has one of the highest education costs in the world. Guess who makes the money? If a student wants to then they should be able to without getting strapped with a crippling loans at the beginning of their lives.

This is the fault of the people that say "95% of all kids should go to college". Face it, America is getting stupider. Yet we want to send all our kids to college..... remember when college costs were down. It's back when generally only the brightest went to college. Now if you want to answer phones for a car dealership you need a 4 year degree. College is still a limited access item. When you have 10,000 people applying for 2500 spots.. guess what.. you can charge more. When you have the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT guaranteeing low rate loans to go to college... guess what.. you can charge more.

The best way to lower costs is NOT to make it easier to get money to go... it's to make it harder. Frankly we don't need 95% of our population getting a degree.. (guy a work with has a daughter that graduates in may with a degree in 19th century french poetry... and she can't find a job in her field).

Japan always makes me laugh tho...


Educational Reform & Other Current Issues

More than 90% of all students graduate from high school and 40% from university or junior college. 100 % of all students complete elementary school and Japan is repeatedly said to have achieved 100% literacy and to have the highest literacy rate in the world since the Edo period.

http://www.education-in-japan.info/sub1.html

40% of their kids graduate from college or uni... but we want 95%+??

College should be available to anyone that wants to go, but that doesn't mean everyone should feel that they have to go, nor does it mean it should be practically free. (costs have gone sky high, but then again.. colleges spend MILLIONS on building stupid ass buildings now a days as well).



Everyone pays so everyone can have.

Actually.. not everyone pays for it, but keep thinking that. I know it lets you sleep at night.

[Latrinsorm]

America has one of the highest education costs in the world. Guess who makes the money?Obama!!!
There is an interesting one... it confirms that in 2007 they changed the way that ICE reports the numbers. Likely why you saw a significant jump in 2007. So I would say that all data from 2007 on is basically bullshit.The numbers in the past receive the same adjustment in reporting.
Frankly we don't need 95% of our population getting a degree.. (guy a work with has a daughter that graduates in may with a degree in 19th century french poetry... and she can't find a job in her field). That's what they said about cetology but we'll see who's laughing when the aliens come looking for extinct whales.

[Candor]

If we're not removing at least a million illegal immigrants a year, we're not doing something right. Two million removals is preferable given the number we already have.

Illegal means illegal. That means you arrest, punish, and deport. If you don't like that, change the laws. Until then, we must enforce the laws we have on the books.

It's not rocket science folks. Illegal means ILLEGAL. Sorry liberals, you can't just pick and choose the laws you want to enforce.

I'm sure someone is going to accuse me of being a troll, but before you do consider this little fact: This post reflects my honest views on the subject.

[Thondalar]

Yeah, I remember that scene from the X-Files movie too. 15 years later, where's my totalitarian state? It's become our generation's "flying car": an inevitable outcome that nevertheless continues to be evaded.

How unsurprisingly arrogant of you.

Just because it isn't happening to you personally doesn't mean it isn't happening at all.

[Jarvan]

Heheh. Do you even look at this stuff? A chart at your link still shows a decent increase in "removals".

http://www.pewhispanic.org/files/2011/12/2011-deporations-and-latinos-06b.png

Right from ICE itself... can't make this stuff up...

https://www.ice.gov/doclib/about/offices/ero/pdf/2013-ice-immigration-removals.pdf


"In FY 2013:
•
ICE conducted a total of 368,644 removals.
•
ICE conducted 133,551 removals of individuals apprehended in the interior of the U.S.

ICE conducted 235,093 removals of individuals apprehended along our borders while attempting
to unlawfully enter the U.S.

Kinda reminds you of jobs "created or saved".

Here is an interesting graph from the one I quoted, then you quoted in response...

http://i58.tinypic.com/4ilpqp.png


"Besides greater enforcement by ICE, it is possible that some of the statistical increase in deportations in recent years is the result of administrative changes in the way that unauthorized immigrants apprehended at the border are processed. After being caught by the Border Patrol, an unauthorized immigrant can be processed either as a “voluntary return” or a “removal.” For many years, most illegal border crossers were quickly processed and returned to Mexico—and thus never counted as deportees. However, in recent years a growing share of persons apprehended at the border have been issued an official order of removal and thus been counted as deportees in official statistics."

Now.. if ICE ALWAYS reported people stopped at the border or close to the border as "removals" 2006 numbers would be close to 1.4 million, and Obama would be seriously slacking. Not definitive proof, but taken with everything else, including the info below, sure looks like Obama found a way to inflate his numbers as always.

below is the link to the 2011 testimony before congress by the Chief of the US Border Patrol.

http://www.dhs.gov/news/2011/10/04/written-testimony-cbp-house-homeland-security-subcommittee-border-and-maritime

of particular note is..


"Expedited removal proceedings are initiated against aliens who are present without admission and encountered by an immigration officer within 100 air miles of the U.S border, and not physically present in the United States for the 14-day period immediately before their arrest. Aliens processed for expedited removal procedures are not detained pending a hearing before an immigration judge, but are immediately processed for a formal administrative removal order. If an alien expeditiously removed returns illegally, he may be considered for criminal prosecution (Illegal Re-entry after Removal)."

Nice cheap way to inflate numbers.

Here is another interesting one...

https://www.ice.gov/doclib/about/offices/ero/pdf/ero-removals1.pdf


"FY2007-FY2012 Removal Data Includes Returns. The term ‘Returns’ include Voluntary Returns, Voluntary Departures and Withdrawals under docket control. "

Once again, seems like in 2007 they changed the way they report data as well. (yes, under Bush) Making the whole thing very murky.

And finally.. the nail in Obama's coffin.

http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1312/131219washingtondc.htm?f=m


"In FY2013, ICE conducted a total of 368,644 removals, 235,093 of whom were apprehended while, or shortly after, attempting to illegally enter the United States, and 133,551 of whom were apprehended in the interior of the United States. Nearly 60 percent of ICE's total removals had been previously convicted of a criminal offense, and that number rises to 82 percent for individuals removed from the interior of the U.S. Other than convicted criminals, the agency's enforcement priorities include: those apprehended while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States, illegal re-entrants – individuals who returned to the U.S. after being previously removed by ICE – and immigration fugitives. "

http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1110/111018washingtondc.htm 2011

http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1212/121221washingtondc2.htm 2012

http://immigration.procon.org/sourcefiles/ice2006achievements.pdf 2006


"Roughly 186,600 aliens were removed from the United States last fiscal year, a record for ICE and a ten percent increase over FY 2005. ICE removed 50,222 aliens from the United States via Justice Prisoner and Alien Transportation System (JPATS)
flights to foreign countries. "

If there are reports similar to the 2011-2013 reports, I can't really find them in the ICE website.

2013 is the only report to say tho, how many people were "removed" at the border. It really begs to question, when did they start reporting like that?

[Atlanteax]

Equal when it's convenient but special when it's too tough? Legalize it!
No credit checks for anyone buying a home? Legalize it!
Everyone should go to college/degree mills because you deserve to? Legalize it!
I like this game.
Healthcare that someone else pays for? Legalize it!


No one said that. Women should get equal pay for equal work. Right now, they don't.
Actually thats what lead to the housing bubble. Banks were actually getting paid even when people went default.
America has one of the highest education costs in the world. Guess who makes the money? If a student wants to then they should be able to without getting strapped with a crippling loans at the beginning of their lives.
Everyone pays so everyone can have.


(equal pay response)
And people were buying homes they couldn't afford because the government was telling the banks.. LEND LEND LEND!! Then guaranteeing the loan if the person defaulted.

This is the fault of the people that say "95% of all kids should go to college". Face it, America is getting stupider. Yet we want to send all our kids to college..... remember when college costs were down. It's back when generally only the brightest went to college. Now if you want to answer phones for a car dealership you need a 4 year degree. College is still a limited access item. When you have 10,000 people applying for 2500 spots.. guess what.. you can charge more. When you have the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT guaranteeing low rate loans to go to college... guess what.. you can charge more.

The best way to lower costs is NOT to make it easier to get money to go... it's to make it harder. Frankly we don't need 95% of our population getting a degree.. (guy a work with has a daughter that graduates in may with a degree in 19th century french poetry... and she can't find a job in her field).

College should be available to anyone that wants to go, but that doesn't mean everyone should feel that they have to go, nor does it mean it should be practically free. (costs have gone sky high, but then again.. colleges spend MILLIONS on building stupid ass buildings now a days as well).

Actually.. not everyone pays for it, but keep thinking that. I know it lets you sleep at night.

Back gets smoked...

[AnticorRifling]

No one said that. Women should get equal pay for equal work. Right now, they don't.

No one said any of this stuff...




Actually thats what lead to the housing bubble. Banks were actually getting paid even when people went default.

No shit.




America has one of the highest education costs in the world. Guess who makes the money? If a student wants to then they should be able to without getting strapped with a crippling loans at the beginning of their lives. Oh so it's because they want to. I want a lot of things but that doesn't mean they should be given to me. I make a decent living and didn't have a degree until December of last year. And weird I got that degree without crippling loans at the beginning of my life. No one is forced into that crap, just like no one was forced to buy a house they couldn't afford. I built my first house when I was 24, I was approved for a shit ton more house but I can do basic math and understand living within my means...personal responsibility...weird.




Everyone pays so everyone can have. Everyone pays sounds nice, let's start with getting that started properly. Make sure everyone pays the same amount, we're all equal right?

[Back]

Equal when it's convenient but special when it's too tough? Legalize it!

Why do you hate women?

[Atlanteax]

Why do you hate women?

Quoting this gem where Back implied that women are disabled

[Back]

Quoting this gem where Back implied that women are disabled

Refer to the original quote.

[Jarvan]

Refer to the original quote.

Nice how Back can't reply to my post that is semi on topic.

Instead, he replies to all the "war on women" crap.

What do you say tho now back, once I have shown what most would hopefully consider proof that Obama's numbers on deportation are meaningless... like every number Obama touts.

[Jarvan]

Staying on topic.. looking at it.. if ICE changed it's reporting in 2007.. 2006's 186,600 people would be all interior removals. 133,551 interior in 2013 would mean that Obama deported 28.5% less people in 2013 then Bush did in 2006. Tough on immigration, huh?

[Back]

Nice how Back can't reply to my post that is semi on topic.

Instead, he replies to all the "war on women" crap.

What do you say tho now back, once I have shown what most would hopefully consider proof that Obama's numbers on deportation are meaningless... like every number Obama touts.

"War on Women" crap? Women are short changed in this economy. Women should get equal pay for equal work.

Dude.

The numbers may be inflated, but the numbers are still higher than the previous administrations.

[Jarvan]

"War on Women" crap? Women are short changed in this economy. Women should get equal pay for equal work.

Dude.

The numbers may be inflated, but the numbers are still higher than the previous administrations.



Women should get equal pay. And in almost all non professional jobs I bet they do. The problem arises in jobs where employers can take in numerous other things into pay. As I said before, you can't pay equal money with unequal experience. Of course women do tend to get paid less when they have equal or greater experience, and that's the problem. Of course you aren't part of the solution, so yes.. for you it's "war on women crap" because you just bring it up because you think it's a good talking point to "stick it" to the republicans. Or do you honestly think Republicans want to pay women 50 cents on the dollar because they are women?

And as someone else said Back.. when Democratic lawmakers start paying their female staff the same amount as male staff, THEN they can say something.




133k is higher then 186k?

Do you even think before you type? if Obama deported 133k people in 2013 that had NOT been caught at the border... and Bush deported 186k people that had NOT been caught at the border... which one is higher?

Is this another one of those "But you don't understand how the math really works" things? Where you somehow prove that 2 is greater then 1 because T/Q in the 12th dimension is really P?

Reporting of deportations was changed. (to quote Obama with ACA) PERIOD.

Numbers now include a significant portion of the "caught while crossing border" figures. PERIOD.

People caught while crossing the border and returned had not previously been reported as deported. PERIOD.

Now... I know that when Obama says PERIOD, he doesn't REALLY mean PERIOD.

But I am capitalizing it for you so you know that I REALLY mean it.

[Latrinsorm]

How unsurprisingly arrogant of you.

Just because it isn't happening to you personally doesn't mean it isn't happening at all.Perhaps we merely disagree on what totalitarian means. Or perhaps you can cite some cases where a government agency has dictated terms to the President.
Women should get equal pay. And in almost all non professional jobs I bet they do.Good news! There is a place (http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat39.htm) where you can find male and female wages for dang near any job you can think of. I don't know exactly what you mean by professional, but here is a brief sample of those occupations where men get paid more than women that I think you will agree are non-professional:

cook
janitor
security guard
construction
factory worker

All told, there are 141 jobs that list a wage for both men and women. If we call a wage being within 1% a tie, the score goes 137 men, 3 women, 1 tie. I think you have lost your bet.

[Wrathbringer]

"War on Women" crap? Women are short changed in this economy. Women should get equal pay for equal work.

Dude.

The numbers may be inflated, but the numbers are still higher than the previous administrations.

In fact, women should be at home raising children. That's what's wrong with this country today.

[Back]

In fact, women should be at home raising children. That's what's wrong with this country today.

Whats wrong with this country is you.

[Jarvan]

Whats wrong with this country is you.

And Back still won't admit Obama's numbers are bullshit and meaningless. Woo Hoo!!

[Back]

And Back still won't admit Obama's numbers are bullshit and meaningless. Woo Hoo!!

Obama has deported more people than previous administrations. Facts are facts.

[Jarvan]

Perhaps we merely disagree on what totalitarian means. Or perhaps you can cite some cases where a government agency has dictated terms to the President.Good news! There is a place (http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat39.htm) where you can find male and female wages for dang near any job you can think of. I don't know exactly what you mean by professional, but here is a brief sample of those occupations where men get paid more than women that I think you will agree are non-professional:

cook
janitor
security guard
construction
factory worker

All told, there are 141 jobs that list a wage for both men and women. If we call a wage being within 1% a tie, the score goes 137 men, 3 women, 1 tie. I think you have lost your bet.

Hmm.. do these jobs take into account years in the job? Or are they comparing (for example) a man that has been a game warden for 20 years, and a woman that has been for 1?

Like I said, any job I ever worked, starting salary was starting salary. Some of the management jobs I hired for at one point tho, took experience into account and offered higher starting wages because of that.

Unless this data is for new hires only (zero experience for everyone), it's meaningless.

Lets look at this one for example...

Physicians and surgeons
All - Men - Women
667 1,885 - 426 2,087 - 241 1,497

How long have they been practicing, what colleges did they attend, where are they working, etc etc.. without these pieces of info, the data is skewed.

Maybe the majority of the women are new, or work in rural areas, and the Men have been practicing longer and work in urban settings? I would expect say a John Hopkins Alum to get paid more then someone that got theirs at Temple University as well.

Now.. if people think that Joe who graduated from a community college with a law degree, should get paid the same amount as Mary who graduated top of her class from Yale law, when they both get hired by the same firm.. you are nuts. Mary should get paid more. Of course... there WILL be people that say the reverse shouldn't be true because it would then be sexist.

[Latrinsorm]

Like I said, any job I ever worked, starting salary was starting salary. Some of the management jobs I hired for at one point tho, took experience into account and offered higher starting wages because of that.And any cop I've ever seen hasn't been shooting an innocent person, but it happens hundreds of times a year in America.
Unless this data is for new hires only (zero experience for everyone), it's meaningless.All sociological data is going to have confounding factors. What you have to ask yourself is how likely it is that these confounding factors are so perfectly weighted that 97% of jobs happen to skew male wages higher. YOU HAVE TO!!! When I asked myself, he said that it of course was possible, but not likely enough to assume it is true without evidence.

I mean, explain how janitors fit into your theory.

[Back]

Nice how Back can't reply to my post that is semi on topic.

Look, I am not about making you look bad. You already do that yourself. Thats not my issue. What I have issue with is people who are misinformed. And those people possibly misinforming other people. Truth has no bias.

[Wrathbringer]

What I have issue with is people who are misinformed. And those people possibly misinforming other people. Truth has no bias.

:spaz:

[Wrathbringer]

Whats wrong with this country is you.

Do elaborate.

[Back]

Do elaborate.

Your comment on women may have been off the cuff but men don't do this alone. Women are as much a part of life as men are. They should be paid as much as men do for the same jobs.

[waywardgs]

So it's jarvan's contention that women are less qualified than men 97% of the time? Heh.

[Jarvan]

Obama has deported more people than previous administrations. Facts are facts.

If the Obama admin LIES about the numbers, how is it a fact? I have already shown you proof, do you deny ICE itself?

Sorry Back. You can't just go a fact is a fact, when the facts show it is NOT true.

Once again... since you are a bit slow...

Explain to me how 133k deportations in a year is greater then 186k?


Look, I am not about making you look bad. You already do that yourself. Thats not my issue. What I have issue with is people who are misinformed. And those people possibly misinforming other people. Truth has no bias.


When presented with truth.. you run away from it.

Truth.. Obama deported 133k people in 2013, Bush deported 186k in 2006.

Back fact... Obama deported more people in 2013 then Bush did in 2006.

[Jarvan]

So it's jarvan's contention that women are less qualified than men 97% of the time? Heh.

Interesting. I don't THINK I said that. But then again, maybe that's just how your mind works.

I do find it funny that we have laws against it, but apparently 97% of every business in the entire country still does it.

Which seems more likely tho.. 97% of all businesses discriminate against women, or there is a flaw somewhere in the data? (I do accept women get paid less then men, I just do not accept that 97% of all jobs do it)

[AnticorRifling]

Why do you hate women?

Show me where I said I hate anything but special treatment. If you're confused on this and why you're retarded for equating that to hating women let me know.

[Laviticas]

Oh great, the Man hater / woman hater debate.

Thank you femanazis for turning my workplace into some high school drama fest.

[Wrathbringer]

Your comment on women may have been off the cuff but men don't do this alone. Women are as much a part of life as men are. They should be paid as much as men do for the same jobs.

Why do you hate children, Back? Why?

[Latrinsorm]

Interesting. I don't THINK I said that. But then again, maybe that's just how your mind works.

I do find it funny that we have laws against it, but apparently 97% of every business in the entire country still does it.

Which seems more likely tho.. 97% of all businesses discriminate against women, or there is a flaw somewhere in the data? (I do accept women get paid less then men, I just do not accept that 97% of all jobs do it)We have laws against discrimination, we do not have laws against female employees just happening to be paid less. Employers (like corporations) are people, you have to prove that you are doing equal work for inequal pay to bring the Equal Pay Act (et al) into effect. Like all criminal behavior, we could reasonably expect more comprehensive prosecution with more comprehensive surveillance.
Why do you hate children, Back? Why?Speaking for myself, they have a terrible understanding of hygiene.

[cwolff]

The fair pay act had some cool provisions. One of them was that pay would be public in the workplace. I'm a big fan of that. The more transparency the better. I used to be a fan of buyer beware. You get whatever you can negotiate. Of course I was a fan of that as a loan officer. Can't do that anymore and it's worked out really well. The mortgage industry has some really good regulations that came out of the meltdown.


I think you guys have a point about the "Deporter-in-Chief". They did change reporting that gave ICE higher numbers. They did it to have better continuity in dealing with repeat offenders. Some will say they did it just to look good. I'll have to remove that from my list of Stuff the President does that the GOP likes. From what I've seen Clinton may have set a record. He did 1.8 million in 2000.

[Johnny Five]

http://71513.stablerack.com/images/falklands-minefield1.jpg

If you make it you can stay.

[Parkbandit]

Look, I am not about making you look bad. You already do that yourself. Thats not my issue. What I have issue with is people who are misinformed. And those people possibly misinforming other people. Truth has no bias.

http://media.giphy.com/media/3i7zenReaUuI0/giphy.gif

[Jarvan]

http://71513.stablerack.com/images/falklands-minefield1.jpg

If you make it you can stay.

Add in some swamp with crocs and I think we are onto something here.

[Back]

Why do you hate children, Back? Why?

You are the problem, not the solution. If you claim to be the solution, it's your job to convince me.

[Jarvan]

The fair pay act had some cool provisions. One of them was that pay would be public in the workplace. I'm a big fan of that. The more transparency the better. I used to be a fan of buyer beware. You get whatever you can negotiate. Of course I was a fan of that as a loan officer. Can't do that anymore and it's worked out really well. The mortgage industry has some really good regulations that came out of the meltdown.


I think you guys have a point about the "Deporter-in-Chief". They did change reporting that gave ICE higher numbers. They did it to have better continuity in dealing with repeat offenders. Some will say they did it just to look good. I'll have to remove that from my list of Stuff the President does that the GOP likes. From what I've seen Clinton may have set a record. He did 1.8 million in 2000.

I would agree with pay being public. I wonder if unions pay women differently then men... maybe they are the 2%... altho.. teachers are in a union, and it seems they do get paid differently.. odd. Why do unions hate women?


As for Clinton... LOL. The problem is they are not using a linear reporting Cwolff. They didn't just go, ok add all caught at border into the deported amount, as the numbers don't jive. It seems like they are just padding the numbers so there is a significant increase over previous years, likely to justify a larger budget and make themselves look better.

Fact is, I think Obama is deporting LESS people then Bush did, but making it seem like he is deporting more. Why? because it would play into his immigration policy. He can blame the removals on the GOP, saying he had to do it because they made him, while telling the Hispanic vote that if they help him, he will ensure they stop... by making them all legal at some point. Meanwhile even tho they are reporting numbers that dwarf Bush's, apparently only 41% of Latinos think Obama is deporting more then Bush did. So it sounds like they are certainly letting the community know... don't listen to what you hear.. it's all made up.

On a side note.. isn't it funny how the 2013 numbers show the change.. even in the ICE report.. AFTER he got re-elected. Prior to that, you didn't hear a peep about a change in the reporting.

[Back]

http://media.giphy.com/media/3i7zenReaUuI0/giphy.gif

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m7hujb57sI1rrd2hj.gif

[Back]

I would agree with pay being public. I wonder if unions pay women differently then men... maybe they are the 2%... altho.. teachers are in a union, and it seems they do get paid differently.. odd. Why do unions hate women?


As for Clinton... LOL. The problem is they are not using a linear reporting Cwolff. They didn't just go, ok add all caught at border into the deported amount, as the numbers don't jive. It seems like they are just padding the numbers so there is a significant increase over previous years, likely to justify a larger budget and make themselves look better.

Fact is, I think Obama is deporting LESS people then Bush did, but making it seem like he is deporting more. Why? because it would play into his immigration policy. He can blame the removals on the GOP, saying he had to do it because they made him, while telling the Hispanic vote that if they help him, he will ensure they stop... by making them all legal at some point. Meanwhile even tho they are reporting numbers that dwarf Bush's, apparently only 41% of Latinos think Obama is deporting more then Bush did. So it sounds like they are certainly letting the community know... don't listen to what you hear.. it's all made up.

On a side note.. isn't it funny how the 2013 numbers show the change.. even in the ICE report.. AFTER he got re-elected. Prior to that, you didn't hear a peep about a change in the reporting.

Thats nice and all. But you are wrong.

Maybe you should vote.

[cwolff]

I would agree with pay being public. I wonder if unions pay women differently then men... maybe they are the 2%... altho.. teachers are in a union, and it seems they do get paid differently.. odd. Why do unions hate women?


As for Clinton... LOL. The problem is they are not using a linear reporting Cwolff. They didn't just go, ok add all caught at border into the deported amount, as the numbers don't jive. It seems like they are just padding the numbers so there is a significant increase over previous years, likely to justify a larger budget and make themselves look better.

Fact is, I think Obama is deporting LESS people then Bush did, but making it seem like he is deporting more. Why? because it would play into his immigration policy. He can blame the removals on the GOP, saying he had to do it because they made him, while telling the Hispanic vote that if they help him, he will ensure they stop... by making them all legal at some point. Meanwhile even tho they are reporting numbers that dwarf Bush's, apparently only 41% of Latinos think Obama is deporting more then Bush did. So it sounds like they are certainly letting the community know... don't listen to what you hear.. it's all made up.

On a side note.. isn't it funny how the 2013 numbers show the change.. even in the ICE report.. AFTER he got re-elected. Prior to that, you didn't hear a peep about a change in the reporting.

I don't think he wants to be known for deportations. He sure as hell didn't want people thinking that before he got re-elected because he needed the hispanic vote. One reason they are changing reporting is not actually to change the reports but to get people into the ICE system which will make it easier to track multiple offenders.

Isn't teacher pay set by the districts or state and public information?

[Back]

Not to mention that more people with bad records are being denied entry under this administration. How is that a bad thing?

[Jarvan]

Thats nice and all. But you are wrong.

Maybe you should vote.

We should call Bob in to have him determine if 133k is greater then 186k.

Bob, if you are out there.. can you tell which one of those numbers are bigger?

[Back]

We should call Bob in to have him determine if 133k is greater then 186k.

Bob, if you are out there.. can you tell which one of those numbers are bigger?

Bob is a fictional character you need to support you view. Meaning... your view of things is fictional.

[Jarvan]

I don't think he wants to be known for deportations. He sure as hell didn't want people thinking that before he got re-elected because he needed the hispanic vote. One reason they are changing reporting is not actually to change the reports but to get people into the ICE system which will make it easier to track multiple offenders.

Isn't teacher pay set by the districts or state and public information?

Not sure about teacher pay. But if entry level pay for teachers is different for men and women, and public record, you would think you would have heard a big uproar about it.

[Back]

Not sure about teacher pay. But if entry level pay for teachers is different for men and women, and public record, you would think you would have heard a big uproar about it.

You obviously are not up to date with current events.

[Jarvan]

Bob is a fictional character you need to support you view. Meaning... your view of things is fictional.

So you are still going with 133k is bigger then 186k, got it.

It must be nice to live on fantasy island.

lets get Cwolff's input.. Cwolff.. if the reporting has been changed so deportations are inflated, and what was considered deportations in the past is LOWER under Obama then under Bush... who deported more people?

I know it's hard for you Back... it's like when your messiah changed the way the government would do job creation to include "saved" jobs.

Which means Obama is stupid, he could build a wall across the border, then claim he "deported or prevented" 10 million people this year. Sounds like something he would say.

[Jarvan]

You obviously are not up to date with current events.

Are you saying you have a news article that shows that a school district is paying starting women less money then starting men, and that it is public knowledge?????

OMG!! Where is it, I need to read this!!

[cwolff]

Is WB a teacher? What's the deal with Teacher pay WB? Is it the same for everyone within a district? Based on tenure, advanced degrees?

[Tgo01]

Women should get paid the same as men. It's as simple as that.

However I think anyone with a Y chromosome should get paid more. It's as simple as that.

[Back]

Are you saying you have a news article that shows that a school district is paying starting women less money then starting men, and that it is public knowledge?????

OMG!! Where is it, I need to read this!!

Why are you feeling so hostile?

I understand that when a liar is called out they get defensive. But you don't seem like an outright liar to me.

[Latrinsorm]

Not sure about teacher pay. But if entry level pay for teachers is different for men and women, and public record, you would think you would have heard a big uproar about it.Here (http://chronicle.com/article/Male-Female-Pay-Gap-Persists/135270/) you go. And here's (http://www.aauw.org/files/2013/02/graduating-to-a-pay-gap-the-earnings-of-women-and-men-one-year-after-college-graduation.pdf) the study itself.

[Warriorbird]

Is WB a teacher? What's the deal with Teacher pay WB? Is it the same for everyone within a district? Based on tenure, advanced degrees?

It is different based on whether it's a union or non union state (unions get more than I do.) It is different whether the teacher is in public, charter, or private schools(most private schools get the least.) For my state you get more based on how long you have taught, what degrees you have, and your certification status. Private schools in my state have almost no salary rules and if they want to pay a certain individual more to "retain them" they can. A friend of mine is paid more than his Caucasian colleagues because his private school wants to keep a diverse teaching staff. I'm sure similar could be done to retain a male elementary teacher in a private school and they could pull it off if they were careful. Public school wise there are damning figures about whether you are more likely to get promoted to principal based on your height and maleness but nothing is supposed to be based on gender.

[AnticorRifling]

Is WB a teacher? What's the deal with Teacher pay WB? Is it the same for everyone within a district? Based on tenure, advanced degrees?

My wife is a teacher, pay is the same, time in service, degrees, etc factor into pay increases.

[Jeril]

Bob is a fictional character you need to support you view. Meaning... your view of things is fictional.

This really cracks me up, you don't know who Bob is? I'll give you a hint, Bob is the first three letters of his PC handle.

[AnticorRifling]

This really cracks me up, you don't know who Bob is? I'll give you a hint, Bob is the first three letters of his PC handle.

Back was kidding.

[Jarvan]

Here (http://chronicle.com/article/Male-Female-Pay-Gap-Persists/135270/) you go. And here's (http://www.aauw.org/files/2013/02/graduating-to-a-pay-gap-the-earnings-of-women-and-men-one-year-after-college-graduation.pdf) the study itself.

Interesting study, tho it takes some leaps as far as I am concerned. Not to mention a study by two women on pay difference women face.. then some of the biased things they say...

I find it interesting that they found no significant difference in pay for a number of sectors. Also.. when I said about entry level pay at a school district.. and you offered this, I thought it would show a male teacher starting say at 9th grade teaching, and a female teacher doing the same, and getting paid differently. This report actually doesn't say anything, it just says women get paid less.

Maybe the data is different, K teachers tend to get paid less then HS teachers to start as an example. Women are more likely to be K teachers.


2008–09 Baccalaureate and Beyond Longitudinal Study, was the study they used. Which was based on 15,000 grads. Now.. out of those 15k grads, how many do you think just HAPPENED to start teaching in the same school district?

That's why these types of studies are flawed in my book. If a male teacher starts teaching in Beverly Hills, and a female does in Burbank, which is likely to get paid more? It's not an apples to apples comparison. The funny thing is, we have the greatest listing of statistical data possible just sitting around, but we can't use it. Imagine if the IRS could supply some of the data needed, and just take the names out of it. May not be easy to crunch, but using federal tax id numbers, gender info on submitting, and pay for the year, I am sure they could get some really really solid data. Not to mention they could do a year to year comparison, and eliminate anyone who filed the year before.

Long story short.. interesting report, but once again, seems flawed.

[Jarvan]

I was just thinking of something... shouldn't the WNBA players start demanding equal pay? Talk about paying women less in the same field, it's insane!

I think we should boycott the NBA till they pay the women athletes the same as men.




Now... Back to the topic... Obama deports less people the bush, but inflates the numbers. Most Hispanics believe he deports less/the same people as Bush. As long as the second statement is true, (currently is at 59%) then it doesn't matter what his numbers appear to be or what he says.

It's like how cat boy said that the gay community KNEW he supported gay marriage, and just had to lie about it to get elected.


I personally feel that if you commit a crime and are illegal, you should certainly get booted out, if you are here illegally and get caught working someplace under false pretenses, get booted out (lied about ssn or used false documents).

I really would like to change the "born on American soil" part of citizenship. We don't need it anymore. Make it "born to one or more legal citizens". That's all we need. Then we wouldn't have the murky waters of anchor babies.

In less then 30 years, we have seen about 12 million illegals living n our country.

Secure the borders.
Offer work programs.
Green Cards to people in work programs after a set period of time.

[cwolff]

The pay gap may go away without legislation. Females seem to be kicking ass in every category that's a predictor for success. Things like college degrees, grades through high school, advanced degrees. They're also breaking some high profile barriers. The first Female CEO for GM (maybe for any of the big three auto companies) is in place and Marissa Mayer is doing it in the tech world. Hopefully this will be a self correcting problem. Then all we have to worry about is if they get power and start cutting screwing with our ED and Low T pills.

[cwolff]

I personally feel that if you commit a crime and are illegal, you should certainly get booted out, if you are here illegally and get caught working someplace under false pretenses, get booted out (lied about ssn or used false documents).

I really would like to change the "born on American soil" part of citizenship. We don't need it anymore. Make it "born to one or more legal citizens". That's all we need. Then we wouldn't have the murky waters of anchor babies.

In less then 30 years, we have seen about 12 million illegals living n our country.

Secure the borders.
Offer work programs.
Green Cards to people in work programs after a set period of time.

We may have to change it. Close the loophole. It really hit home for me when I started reading about the Chinese flying here specifically to give birth then flying home. They're doing it on some of Pacific Island territories also. I get it when Mexicans do it. They want the kid to grow up here and have a life beyond dirt farming. I feel good that these people will assimilate. The chinese just dropping a kid, filing paperwork, then getting their passport punched scares the shit out of me.

[Jeril]

Back was kidding.

That Back, such a kidder.

[Latrinsorm]

Long story short.. interesting report, but once again, seems flawed.Well, let's look at it from the perspective of someone who has never heard of genders, some ET who so happens to have an odd fixation on human economics. You say this evidence is flawed, but what counter-evidence would you offer? Please note that I will accept counter-evidence even if it is published by men.
I was just thinking of something... shouldn't the WNBA players start demanding equal pay? Talk about paying women less in the same field, it's insane!They can't dunk, thus they aren't doing equal work.

[waywardgs]

They can't dunk, thus they aren't doing equal work.

But fundamentals!!

[Jeril]

I don't think anyone really doubts that there are women who get paid less then men, it is more a matter of exactly how many really do get paid less. I don't believe the problem is as big today as it was years ago and I think Cwolff has the right of it, this issue will fix itself without any more help and slowly go the way of the dodo.

[Atlanteax]

I don't think anyone really doubts that there are women who get paid less then men, it is more a matter of exactly how many really do get paid less. I don't believe the problem is as big today as it was years ago and I think Cwolff has the right of it, this issue will fix itself without any more help and slowly go the way of the dodo.

Maybe not.

The trend was correcting as the % of mothers that were stay-at-home decreased ... but now it has reversed

http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/08/news/economy/stay-at-home-moms/index.html?iid=Lead

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/140407145244-stay-at-home-moms-top-620xa.png

As long it is a prevailing notion that household duties are 'women's work', there will be a gender pay gap.

[Latrinsorm]

But fundamentals!!I know that's the joke, but they stink at that too! They're just bad at basketball! Not as bad as NCAA Div I teams being totally flummoxed by a basic zone defense, but still pretty bad.

[Jarvan]

Maybe not.

The trend was correcting as the % of mothers that were stay-at-home decreased ... but now it has reversed

http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/08/news/economy/stay-at-home-moms/index.html?iid=Lead

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/140407145244-stay-at-home-moms-top-620xa.png

As long it is a prevailing notion that household duties are 'women's work', there will be a gender pay gap.

I thought a recent study showed that Women are becoming more and more the bread winners in the family.

[Jarvan]

Well, let's look at it from the perspective of someone who has never heard of genders, some ET who so happens to have an odd fixation on human economics. You say this evidence is flawed, but what counter-evidence would you offer? Please note that I will accept counter-evidence even if it is published by men.They can't dunk, thus they aren't doing equal work.

These studies are not really apples to apples. Not quite apples to oranges.. more like oranges to grapefruit. You can't just say Person a Graduated from a college with a degree in x, person b graduated from a college with a degree in x, person 1 makes more then person b, person be is female, person a is male, therefore women make less then men.

Two men getting hired for the same job can get wildly different salaries even. That's why it's so hard to just say.. Women make less because they are women. I have never seen a study that looks at all the factors, and compares people in the same field working at the same place. Now.. it is VERY likely that women may get passed over for promotions due to sexist ideals. And while this is a HORRIBLE thing, I am sorry, you can't say that a women then gets payed less.

Here is something interesting tho... the New Female GM CEO got 58% more then her male counterpart.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/02/10/gm-ceo-barra-akerson-pay-compensation/5374869/

[Latrinsorm]

These studies are not really apples to apples. Not quite apples to oranges.. more like oranges to grapefruit. You can't just say Person a Graduated from a college with a degree in x, person b graduated from a college with a degree in x, person 1 makes more then person b, person be is female, person a is male, therefore women make less then men.

Two men getting hired for the same job can get wildly different salaries even. That's why it's so hard to just say.. Women make less because they are women. I have never seen a study that looks at all the factors, and compares people in the same field working at the same place. Now.. it is VERY likely that women may get passed over for promotions due to sexist ideals. And while this is a HORRIBLE thing, I am sorry, you can't say that a women then gets payed less.

Here is something interesting tho... the New Female GM CEO got 58% more then her male counterpart.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/02/10/gm-ceo-barra-akerson-pay-compensation/5374869/If you've never seen that study, why are you so sure that women aren't unequally paid?

[Jarvan]

If you've never seen that study, why are you so sure that women aren't unequally paid?

I am not sure of anything, other then the fact that this thread is wildly off topic.

[Wrathbringer]

I am not sure of anything, other then the fact that this thread is wildly off topic.

Allow me to remedy that. Boehner is correct about Obummer being inept. That's what he said, right?

[Atlanteax]

Dunno what existing thread would be best for this...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/09/26/dod-planning-to-let-illegal-immigrants-enlist/


The Defense Department plans to let some illegal immigrants who came to the U.S. as children enlist in the military -- a policy that comes as the Army is effectively firing active-duty soldiers due to budget cuts.

I actually am supportive of this.

From my viewpoint, they will actually 'earn' citizenship after completing tour(s), versus remaining as illegals and mooching off social programs.

Another upside is if they die in combat, it was not an American citizen death.