Anyone?

You are posting on an international usenet arena - you think the rest of the world can't comment on US posts?

John

Ignore him. He hasn't designed electronics in decades, and never very well.

He still claims that he didn't say it and others, who were there, have said that they didn't hear him say it, either. What he should say is "I didn't say 'shithole' but I should have." Wind up the lefties some more. Watch their heads spin for weeks!

^^^ any

Commenting on US policy? That's productive.

Isn't it of some use to get other viewpoints? Why else would you post? You may not agree with them, but at least you can 'listen'...

John

We could admit some people, from everywhere, if we screened them, and then monitored them and kick out the bad ones. An illegal with a half-dozen felony arrests should't be walking the streets of the USA. Heck, a citizen with a half dozen felonies shouldn't be free, but we can't deport him.

We do need to control the border. Most countries do.

Right LWS (liberal weenie snowflake) I would rather have people living here. Buying houses, paying taxes, kids part of the local soccer team.

Well with my kids, kids I can get a geometric growth going... though with only two I'm not off to a good start. :^)

I think I'm paying ~$1k less, from the doubling of the standard deduction, (though I'm not sure.) Big tax cuts and no budget, what's the prediction for the debt increase this year?

George H.

Do you see me posting about what a shit-hole style of government you have in Canada? I could, but then, again, I'm not in the slightest bit envious of that shit-hole form of government.

Why do _you_ feel a need to comment... you don't live in the U.S. ?? ...Jim Thompson

Non-US-citizens are invited to keep their comments to themselves. ...Jim Thompson

My Hispanic in-laws certainly feel that way. (All of which were LEGAL immigrants... one family so gung-ho to become American that their children can't speak "Spanish".) ...Jim Thompson

Let's just suppose that Trump DID say it _exactly_ as quoted... want to make something of it? ("Progressives" are such piece-a-shit hypocrites >:-} ...Jim Thompson

More people will make more productivity and more consumption, which cancels first-order but causes crowding in urban areas. If the immigrants are less productive than the average population, or are willing to work for less, they reduce overall well-being.

Growing the economy with numbers, just increasing GDP, is not inherently a good thing to do.

As long as people want to eat, there will always be citizens to grow and harvest and cook the crops. Japan and Denmark never starved for lack of illegal immigrant farm labor. They just paid enough to get the labor that they needed.

The jobs that "Americans don't want", farm work and construction and such, aren't wanted because cheap immigrant labor has driven the pay scale down. Caesar Chavez hated "wetback" illegal workers precisely for that reason.

It's interesting - FDR specifically wanted Social Security payments to show up on people's pay stubs. That specifically doesn't sound like "buying votes" to me. I am old enough to where my grandparents were of FDR's primary constituency and that wasn't how they saw it at all.

We don't have a coherent concept of how government debt should be used, yet - this figured prominently at the recent AEA meeting as shown on CSPAN. There's pretty much only ideology driving it.

TB has evolved a bit to be more antibiotic resistant.

I'm not sure that there are that many immigrants working at McDonalds - most of the immigrants I run into run small shops that they own.

We're rather short on teenagers. Demography is destiny....

Immigrant students are a significant profit center for universities. For example - Carnegie Mellon Computer Science limits grad school to the top five percent of graduates - all the other seats are either paid for out of the student's pocket, by their government ( it's cheaper and quicker than establishing a university system in the home country ) or by employers.

I'm unsure of that. People were a lot more identified by their country of origin ( or that of their ancestors ) 100 years ago. It took a generation or two to assimilate.

GW Bush, having been at ranches in Texas and being a reasonably intelligent and observant person, is and was quite aware that Texas was once ( a very distant and unsupportable ) part of Mexico. To the extent that we are talking about Mexican emigration, you have the problem of history and that's not specific to democrats.

Of course, there's always Fred Reed and his tile roofs hypothesis: when towns in Mexico start having tile roofs, people won't want as much to leave because tile roofs imply a better economic situation in that place.

Haiti had a revolt against the empire of France in the late 18th Century, and it's been a lot isolated since. The other half of the island, the Dominican Republic, has done much better. So US policy has had a hand in the poverty there.

I go to the 'States quite often. Immigration officials aside, nearly everyone I meet seems pretty decent irrespective of pigmentation or ancestry.

Then you get this Thompson guy. What a jerk.

Cheers

It's _you_ that is the JERK.

Your statement "...irrespective of pigmentation or ancestry" implies that I am a racist... the typical fallback of leftists when they're left with no argument.

My family is classic blend of the "melting pot". Yours? Hypocrite.

"Non-US-citizens are invited to keep their comments to themselves."

(y)uk ;-) ...Jim Thompson

Which brings up an interesting observation... the East coast, aka the "weenie" states, are noted for very few fences, whereas out here in the West we have a strong sense of "property"... everyone has a fence, or, as in my case, a WALL >:-}

And more guns than people ;-) ...Jim Thompson

The likes of Robertson and Sloman believe in a world without borders, so they'd like to think their lofty pronouncements carry weight world-wide. IOW, they're delusional dickheads.

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

Fences are good, high walls are better.

-- This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.