192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 04:14 pm
@izzythepush,
I wonder if these same people would have voted for Hillary "carpet bagger" Clinton in NY for her Senate run? How many years did Clinton live in NY before she ran?
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 04:34 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
1) automation makes everything cheaper. Keeping the cost increases down = makes the items cheaper

Only to a point as the only saving is in labor costs. Why aren't cars cheaper if automation does as you said it does? Cars have gotten more expensive as time has gone on, not cheaper.

Quote:
2) the jobs they'll take are the jobs that their living here will require.

That's not an answer. That sounds like a lot of people ending up on welfare and other social programs.

Quote:
Open up a new grocery store, hire people looking for jobs to fill it. Bring 200,000 people to an area over 10-15 years and new business will pop up all over in response to customer demand. That is how capitalism works. When people move to an area, they build a city around them.

Great, why not move poor people from the inner cities to some plot of land somewhere and let them just start their own town... Nothing you have stated here is a positive for immigration when we already have millions of poor and unskilled and under educated people here in the US. You want to bring in more of the same for them to compete against, and then increase social welfare spending for those who "can't cut it."

Quote:
3) we are at basically full employment; there are jobs available, hundreds of thousands just on monster.com (55,000 just in Chicago, 65k in LA, 45k in Phoenix). That doesn't even count laborer jobs or gig-economy jobs like Uber.

So why are so many able bodied people still on welfare on other social welfare programs? If we are at 100% employment and things are so good, then we can cut those programs, no need to expand them.

Quote:
4) American citizens can be hired to teach English. Hey look, more jobs.

Who's going to pay citizens to teach foreigners to speak English? More govt spending and tax increases?

Quote:
5) They'll find jobs the same way people who don't speak English find jobs today. They work for other non-English speaking people or they work for companies who have dual-language employees. Or they'll be babysitters for Spanish speaking families who work or any number of jobs.

I'm not sure the way they find work now is a good thing. It seems to only encourage more illegal immigration.

Quote:
6) They live in immigrant communities at first, like all immigrants before them. Why do you think there are pockets of immigrants in all cities and communities. Over time they integrate or their children who attend American schools integrate and then those kids take care of their immigrant parents...just like most immigrants before them.

Unlike previous immigrants before them, we are making it easier and easier to not assimilate into our culture and to leave people as they are. You wouldn't even support English as the official language of the US if it was put to a vote, you have said as much in previous threads.

coldjoint
 
  -3  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 04:46 pm
@Baldimo,
Quote:
Unlike previous immigrants before them, we are making it easier and easier to not assimilate into our culture and to leave people as they are. You wouldn't even support English as the official language of the US if it was put to a vote, you have said as much in previous threads.

Theodore Roosevelt would be very unhappy. A progressive hero and a patriot, what happened?
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  6  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 04:57 pm
@Baldimo,
I guess the laws of supply and demand don’t apply anymore. You’ve claimed that capitalism is dead or somehow doesn’t apply here.

I’m not making up the jobs numbers. I went to monster.com and clicked on cities.
maporsche
 
  5  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 05:08 pm
@Baldimo,
And cars, when adjusted for inflation and quality features have gotten cheaper. Car companies keep adding new things to make the prices basically the same year over year which means you can’t just compare apples to apples.

Also cars bought today last something like 50% longer than cars in the 80’s and 90’s
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 05:10 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
I guess the laws of supply and demand don’t apply anymore. You’ve claimed that capitalism is dead or somehow doesn’t apply here.

I don't think you are framing how our economy works or even how supply and demand works in a proper manner.
roger
 
  3  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 05:12 pm
@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

Quote:
A suspect package found in a post box at the home of billionaire businessman George Soros contained an explosive device, New York police have confirmed.

The item was discovered on Monday by an employee of Mr Soros, who took it to a nearby wooded area, where it was later destroyed by bomb squad officers.

The incident is being investigated by the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force.

Mr Soros has become a frequent target for criticism by right-wing groups due to his support for liberal causes.

What happened?
Mr Soros was not at his home in the town of Bedford in Westchester County at the time of the incident, according to reports.

"An employee of the residence opened the package, revealing what appeared to be an explosive device," a Bedford Police Department official told the New York Times.

Officials say that police received a call about a suspicious package at about 15:45 local time (20:45 GMT) on Monday.

Arriving at the scene, police discovered a device that was later confirmed by officials to have contained explosive powder and "had the components" of a bomb. It was then "proactively detonated", police said.

The FBI tweeted that it was investigating an incident in the area.



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45949737


Absolutely brilliant. Suspicious package? Let's open it and see what makes it tick.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  3  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 05:14 pm
@Baldimo,
Ok. 100,000 legal people move to a city, increasing the population by 20%

What does that do to the demand for houses?
Grocery stores?
Schools?
Banks?
Police?
Hospitals?
Mechanics?
Auto parts stores?
Building/construction?



Does the demand for those services:
a) go up
b) go down
c) no change
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 05:17 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
Ok. 100,000 legal people move to a city, increasing the population by 20%

That does not happen with legal immigration, a pretty dumb thing to say.
maporsche
 
  4  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 05:21 pm
@coldjoint,
No one is asking you. You haven’t shown me that have the ability to have this conversation.

But over decades that can absolutely happen. Look no further than cities in California that are almost 50% Hispanic.
Baldimo
 
  -2  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 05:30 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
Ok. 100,000 legal people move to a city, increasing the population by 20%

What does that do to the demand for houses?
Grocery stores?
Schools?
Banks?
Police?
Hospitals?
Mechanics?
Auto parts stores?
Building/construction?



Does the demand for those services:
a) go up
b) go down
c) no change

When you take such a basic look at things it's easy but when you start drilling down it doesn't work. I live in Denver, as I mention Denver think of the entire Denver Metro area, not just the city, I see what happens when you have a massive amount of people moving to a city, I've seen Denver grow for the last 20+ years. You aren't looking at the finer details on why just moving people somewhere isn't a good idea. Denver has only done as well as it has due to large companies moving here and causing a demand for certain types of labor. The things you mention above are relying on the service industries to support an economy and that isn't how it works. This massive influx of people has also caused a massive rise in property costs to the point where people who have lived here for decades can no longer afford to live here. There is such a thing as sustainability and just throwing people at the "economy" and thinking it's all going to work is naive. What happens when you have to much of either supply or demand?

You mentioned legal people, but we all know this isn't about legal immigration, it's really about illegal immigration or eliminating illegal immigration with an open border policy so all immigrants are legal.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 05:36 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
No one is asking you

That is too bad. How many of the 50% are legal?
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  4  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 05:40 pm
@Baldimo,
I’m saying open up the LEGAL floodgates so to speak. Make those here illegally legal residents. Allow anyone who wants to enter whatever green cards or visas it takes to make them legally able to work and be part of our society.

The problem with illegal immigrants is their status keeps them out of most legit forms of employment. Changing their status could fix a lot of that.


Your Denver example doesn’t help your point that a massive influx of people would destroy an area. Prosperity values going up and the demand to live there are typically good things for a city.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  4  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 05:44 pm
@Baldimo,
What percentage of the Fortune 500 do you think relies on a consumer customer base?

Would more consumer customers increase or decrease the demand for the services of the 500 largest companies in the US?

If those companies have more customers and grow their services, do you think that will mean more or fewer jobs?


The impact is even greater with subsequent generations. The children of immigrants who become more and more assimilated and educated and English speaking.


I mean sure the grocery store may seem like a menial job but they sell products that need to be manufactured somewhere. Those products neeed to be shipped to somewhere. Someone needs to work in the warehouses that store these products. Truck drivers need to truck these products around the country.

I wouldn’t be talking down those jobs either. My mom works as a baker serving customers. It’s honest work.

Does any of this make sense? Am I still confused on how our economy works?
coldjoint
 
  -3  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 06:47 pm
@maporsche,
Quote:
The impact is even greater with subsequent generations.

Is that why the second generation Muslims in Europe are the radicals?
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 06:57 pm
Quote:
About 80 Percent' Of Migrant Caravan 'Are Men Under The Age Of 35'

Send them back. Let them fix their country, who thanks to them has lost its foreign aid. Do we need people that would do this to their own country?
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=59240&fbclid=IwAR38dCV9MGlIAtiuPCajFgWw5lWPfISxKxNo3kvQ3HX9KJCerwx5OoWFwIs
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 08:55 pm
@hightor,
hightor wrote:
It's almost amusing how the Trump supporters insist that any concern about a presidential candidate receiving an unprecedented amount of help from a foreign government thought to be hostile to Western democracy is just rank partisanship.
That is what happens when the Democrats hijack an issue and transform it into a witch-hunt against people who disagree with them. What might have been an investigation into a legitimate problem becomes a matter of rank partisanship.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 09:00 pm
@Blickers,
Blickers wrote:
I can't name anything in the dossier that has been proven wrong because nothing has been discovered yet. Which means the dossier is reliable.
Unproven charges are by definition NOT reliable.

Blickers wrote:
YOU are the one claiming the dossier is not reliable, not me.

It's easy to prove any account wrong, just find something the account said that has been successfully refuted. Easy enough, if what you say is true. So again, prove your statement that the quite reliable dossier is not reliable, or stop making a fool of yourself.
The absence of proof that the dossier is reliable, is proof that it is unreliable.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Tue 23 Oct, 2018 09:21 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
The two greatest Republican presidents in my never humble opinion were Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. and Dwight David Eisenhower. I don't think I would have liked TR in private company, but everybody liked Ike, even those who didn't vote for him. Eisenhower had a good deal to say about the state of the world which has largely been forgotten, more's the pity.
I'm not a fan of Ike.

He is responsible for that idiot rule that the military can't target something with a nuke larger than 2MT unless they can justify why a smaller nuke is insufficient.

He kept undercutting the weapons labs by lying to the press that we weren't trying to develop nukes larger than 15MT, then forcing the labs to curtail their work on larger bombs so that he wouldn't be exposed as a liar.

When the military tried to buy enough weapons to destroy 90% of Soviet nukes, he told them that he'd be fine with a capability to destroy 70%.

Even before he became president he was trying to screw up WWII, when he told Stimson that we shouldn't use the A-bombs because he thought that Japan was already trying to surrender.

We'd be better off today if he'd never been president.
0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.58 seconds on 07/17/2025 at 08:22:52