Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
I don't see how it ties into this discussion.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
- Thread starter ExileOnDaytonStreet
- Start date
- Status
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
Here's how it ties in, a wolf in sheeps clothing is a sheep
Here's how it ties in, a wolf in sheeps clothing is a sheep
Patman
Rodent of Unusual Size
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
That's like saying it'd be an open question as to what would happen to federal spending under Obama. Kerry's never had a fiscal control interest. Most of his interest is the betterment of John Kerry... and that usually means, for a democrat, spending. Many of these ideas that they (Dems) want now were things they've wanted for several decades.
That's like saying it'd be an open question as to what would happen to federal spending under Obama. Kerry's never had a fiscal control interest. Most of his interest is the betterment of John Kerry... and that usually means, for a democrat, spending. Many of these ideas that they (Dems) want now were things they've wanted for several decades.
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
They would also need to have the yarbles to tackle entitlement reform (SS, Medicare, Medicaid), which are even bigger gobblers of money than Defense.
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
you need to remove SS from that argument since it's tax seperately. FICA tax. 8% or whatever it is now and capped at certain income level.
Maybe we should break down our income tax into it's constiuent patrs. Have a special war tax so people can see and feel the pain of the current war in financial terms if not physical or emotional.
you need to remove SS from that argument since it's tax seperately. FICA tax. 8% or whatever it is now and capped at certain income level.
Maybe we should break down our income tax into it's constiuent patrs. Have a special war tax so people can see and feel the pain of the current war in financial terms if not physical or emotional.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
I'm with you on this, though arguably things like health care extend the life and productivity (not to mention happiness) of citizens even as the programs expand. Military spending is very beneficial up to the point at which defense ends and offense begins, at which point it becomes massively counterproductive on every index and leads to many of our ills. Nobody knows exactly where the line between a defense for a republic ends and an offense for an empire begins, but we crossed it during the Cold War and blew through it like tissue paper during Cheney's Follies.
I'm all for having the numbers pulled for each department's budget be right there on the pay stub --for that matter, I'm all for totalling up all the spending and saying, fine there's your revenue target, spin tax rates up or down to meet it. I'm pretty sure social security and Medicare are going to survive that without much problem. Medicaid and welfare programs will probably take a hit (the regional map of giving to those programs will match the electoral map). The defense budget will take a hit too (same deal, verso map). All in all, people could start feeling like at least their dollars weren't going for stuff they opposed. The South could fund the Empire, the West and Northeast could fund education, social services and health care, and the Center could fund agribusiness subsidies.
I'm with you on this, though arguably things like health care extend the life and productivity (not to mention happiness) of citizens even as the programs expand. Military spending is very beneficial up to the point at which defense ends and offense begins, at which point it becomes massively counterproductive on every index and leads to many of our ills. Nobody knows exactly where the line between a defense for a republic ends and an offense for an empire begins, but we crossed it during the Cold War and blew through it like tissue paper during Cheney's Follies.
I'm all for having the numbers pulled for each department's budget be right there on the pay stub --for that matter, I'm all for totalling up all the spending and saying, fine there's your revenue target, spin tax rates up or down to meet it. I'm pretty sure social security and Medicare are going to survive that without much problem. Medicaid and welfare programs will probably take a hit (the regional map of giving to those programs will match the electoral map). The defense budget will take a hit too (same deal, verso map). All in all, people could start feeling like at least their dollars weren't going for stuff they opposed. The South could fund the Empire, the West and Northeast could fund education, social services and health care, and the Center could fund agribusiness subsidies.
Last edited:
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
I respectfully disagree. SS is heading for insolvency and needs to be addressed.
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
I think we need a strong defense to the extent that if anyone hits us, they know they're going to be hit back harder. I believe the "war" on terror is real even if it may not be a war in the traditional sense or against a traditional enemy. That said, I think we need to wind down the war in Afghanistan and gracefully as possible exit from there (and Iraq as well). The country can't afford it, especially since we can't ensure the desired results anyway (democratic rule) in either location, with all the opposing factions involved internally in those countries.
I do think we need to be prepared to hit Iran hard militarily, but only if they take some type of initial action (or we have hard evidence that some action from them is imminent). In all likelihood, Israel will hit Iraq first in such a situation and we would then be supporting Israel.
I think we need a strong defense to the extent that if anyone hits us, they know they're going to be hit back harder. I believe the "war" on terror is real even if it may not be a war in the traditional sense or against a traditional enemy. That said, I think we need to wind down the war in Afghanistan and gracefully as possible exit from there (and Iraq as well). The country can't afford it, especially since we can't ensure the desired results anyway (democratic rule) in either location, with all the opposing factions involved internally in those countries.
I do think we need to be prepared to hit Iran hard militarily, but only if they take some type of initial action (or we have hard evidence that some action from them is imminent). In all likelihood, Israel will hit Iraq first in such a situation and we would then be supporting Israel.
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
Otherwise, all increased health care does is extend people's retirements and require more SS checks to be cut. Oh, there might be a sick day or two less here or there, but that's a 2nd order effect compared with increasing the average retirement duration.
In other words: when it comes to fiscal conservatism, death panels FTW!
Only if people start saying, "you know, with all this increased health care, I'll probably live a few years longer, so I'll go ahead and delay my retirement by a few years."
Otherwise, all increased health care does is extend people's retirements and require more SS checks to be cut. Oh, there might be a sick day or two less here or there, but that's a 2nd order effect compared with increasing the average retirement duration.
In other words: when it comes to fiscal conservatism, death panels FTW!
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
I hope Israel waits until our troops come home before they attack.
I hope Israel waits until our troops come home before they attack.
Kepler
Cornell Big Red
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
Great Jebus I agree with all of this.
The lesson we should take from Iraq is: don't start stupid, useless, pointless wars just because the president has a personal vendetta and some oil leases to give to his buddies.
The lesson we should take from Afghanistan is: nation-building or military-beheading, pick at most one. Use all the diplomatic carrots and sticks to entice a rogue state into the fold or, if they won't play, quarantine them and let their people work it out. If it comes to an absolutely , positively must strike situation like Iran about to nuke Israel, (1) have the Israelis do it if possible, and (2) do it without boots on the ground -- zero out all their military and arms-related industries. Since you actually want their comand and control to function because you're not going to invade and you need somebody to talk to hit the off switch, that means you don't have to "shock and awe" your way to 300,000 civilian causalities, thus turning the entire local population into rabid hatred of us for four generations.
We've got the quarantine case going in North Korea and Iran. Pakistan is probably going to be the next Afghanistan, if it isn't already, so it would be a good idea to get our border-straddling troops out of there ASAP so they don't wind up essentially hostage of Pakistani regional whims.
Great Jebus I agree with all of this.
The lesson we should take from Iraq is: don't start stupid, useless, pointless wars just because the president has a personal vendetta and some oil leases to give to his buddies.
The lesson we should take from Afghanistan is: nation-building or military-beheading, pick at most one. Use all the diplomatic carrots and sticks to entice a rogue state into the fold or, if they won't play, quarantine them and let their people work it out. If it comes to an absolutely , positively must strike situation like Iran about to nuke Israel, (1) have the Israelis do it if possible, and (2) do it without boots on the ground -- zero out all their military and arms-related industries. Since you actually want their comand and control to function because you're not going to invade and you need somebody to talk to hit the off switch, that means you don't have to "shock and awe" your way to 300,000 civilian causalities, thus turning the entire local population into rabid hatred of us for four generations.
We've got the quarantine case going in North Korea and Iran. Pakistan is probably going to be the next Afghanistan, if it isn't already, so it would be a good idea to get our border-straddling troops out of there ASAP so they don't wind up essentially hostage of Pakistani regional whims.
Last edited:
ExileOnDaytonStreet
Drunkard
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
Forward this to Palin, stat!
Forward this to Palin, stat!
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
The Dems didn't start the wars (or many others)...the GOP did and that's what matters here. If the Dems pushed for starting wars and the GOP resisted, good chance that would be enough for me to switch parties permanently.
Why is it so hard for you to switch your vote to another party if your original party of choice pursues the exact opposite of your most important position? By any measure, W Bush left true fiscal conservatives out to dry.
Oh...and I believe someone asserted that fiscal conservatives were actually full of conviction and left W very early. It appears they didn't.
On the other side of the conservative coin, Bush merits a 70 percent approval rating from small government conservatives. Washington Post, Jan 08.
Again, I'm still doubting the credibility of so called fiscal conservatives as the remaining 25% disapproval among small govt conservatives is about as low as you can get for a segment.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2009/01/bush_approval_a_last_look.html
The Dems didn't start the wars (or many others)...the GOP did and that's what matters here. If the Dems pushed for starting wars and the GOP resisted, good chance that would be enough for me to switch parties permanently.
Why is it so hard for you to switch your vote to another party if your original party of choice pursues the exact opposite of your most important position? By any measure, W Bush left true fiscal conservatives out to dry.
Oh...and I believe someone asserted that fiscal conservatives were actually full of conviction and left W very early. It appears they didn't.
On the other side of the conservative coin, Bush merits a 70 percent approval rating from small government conservatives. Washington Post, Jan 08.
Again, I'm still doubting the credibility of so called fiscal conservatives as the remaining 25% disapproval among small govt conservatives is about as low as you can get for a segment.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2009/01/bush_approval_a_last_look.html
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
This is 100% correct. I don't buy it when people start telling me fiscal conservatives broke with George W Bush. Fiscal conservatives went off the cliff with him. The reason for that is they now believe in tax cuts at all costs, even if that means borrowing money to do so. There is no way most of the people who now claim they were against him and his spending actually were. They were so overwhelming in support of him its a useless exercise to figure out who's now telling the truth and who isn't. Maybe that's unfair to a guy like Bob who may have been against him, but really when 3/4ths of the people telling this story now are lying to you, I no longer believe any of them.
This is 100% correct. I don't buy it when people start telling me fiscal conservatives broke with George W Bush. Fiscal conservatives went off the cliff with him. The reason for that is they now believe in tax cuts at all costs, even if that means borrowing money to do so. There is no way most of the people who now claim they were against him and his spending actually were. They were so overwhelming in support of him its a useless exercise to figure out who's now telling the truth and who isn't. Maybe that's unfair to a guy like Bob who may have been against him, but really when 3/4ths of the people telling this story now are lying to you, I no longer believe any of them.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
It's like the "I was there" crap you hear 20 years after a major sports event. If everyone who says they were there during the "Miracle on Ice" were actually there, the attendance would have been in the millions.
It's like the "I was there" crap you hear 20 years after a major sports event. If everyone who says they were there during the "Miracle on Ice" were actually there, the attendance would have been in the millions.
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
Those are interesting numbers, no doubt about it. What I'd say it tells you though is that there's a lot of people out there who are casual fiscal conservatives, that claim the mantle when asked if they are by a poll, but aren't in a meaningful way. I'm sure if you lined up all the general conservatives, they'd all say they were fiscal conservatives also, although of course the level of interest/commitment many of them have to push fiscal conservancy is minimal at best. So, interesting numbers, but they aren't exactly defining.
And if you look at the underlying ABC story, it shows widespread concern about spending/deficits. If there was widespread concern, it's illogical to think that somehow fiscal conservatives weren't a part of that widespread concern, let alone probably leading the charge.
"The public still has qualms about some aspects of the federal response to the economic crisis. Nearly six in 10 oppose a second $350 billion infusion of funds to shore up flagging financial institutions, up from the initial opposition to the emergency measure in September. There is also widespread public opposition to last month's multibillion-dollar bailout of the auto industry. Nearly half call the federal budget deficit one of the highest priorities for Obama and the new Congress."
Those are interesting numbers, no doubt about it. What I'd say it tells you though is that there's a lot of people out there who are casual fiscal conservatives, that claim the mantle when asked if they are by a poll, but aren't in a meaningful way. I'm sure if you lined up all the general conservatives, they'd all say they were fiscal conservatives also, although of course the level of interest/commitment many of them have to push fiscal conservancy is minimal at best. So, interesting numbers, but they aren't exactly defining.
And if you look at the underlying ABC story, it shows widespread concern about spending/deficits. If there was widespread concern, it's illogical to think that somehow fiscal conservatives weren't a part of that widespread concern, let alone probably leading the charge.
"The public still has qualms about some aspects of the federal response to the economic crisis. Nearly six in 10 oppose a second $350 billion infusion of funds to shore up flagging financial institutions, up from the initial opposition to the emergency measure in September. There is also widespread public opposition to last month's multibillion-dollar bailout of the auto industry. Nearly half call the federal budget deficit one of the highest priorities for Obama and the new Congress."
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
And in on-going actual border issue news, here's a zinger from the Democratic Attorney General here in Arizona, who personally opposes SB1070:
""Your administration's decision to challenge Arizona's law before it even takes effect, without any effort to address Arizona's costs or to effectively deal with the cartel threat, has created substantial and justifiable anger here,"
http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2010/07/09/20100709arizona-governor-nominee-gop-neglects-states-needs.html
And in on-going actual border issue news, here's a zinger from the Democratic Attorney General here in Arizona, who personally opposes SB1070:
""Your administration's decision to challenge Arizona's law before it even takes effect, without any effort to address Arizona's costs or to effectively deal with the cartel threat, has created substantial and justifiable anger here,"
http://www.azcentral.com/news/election/azelections/articles/2010/07/09/20100709arizona-governor-nominee-gop-neglects-states-needs.html
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
And donation money is pouring into the Governor's office, as average everyday Americans show their support for Jan Brewer's defense of SB1070. Close to $500,000 has come in, with a large chunk of it appearing in the last couple days after the feds filed their lawsuit. Gives one a little hope in America.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/08/20100708arizona-immigration-donations-to-defend-law.html
And donation money is pouring into the Governor's office, as average everyday Americans show their support for Jan Brewer's defense of SB1070. Close to $500,000 has come in, with a large chunk of it appearing in the last couple days after the feds filed their lawsuit. Gives one a little hope in America.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2010/07/08/20100708arizona-immigration-donations-to-defend-law.html
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
It's also illogical to expect "fiscal conservatism" to have been a primary concern of conservatives in 2002 or 2004. The budget deficits (and projected budget deficits at the time) were nowhere near the levels they are today. If general conservatives are more concerned in particular about fiscal conservatism today, that could very well be a rational, reasoned, informed, response to the changing economic conditions rather than exhibit A that they're all a bunch of disingenuous hypocrites.
Re: Illegal Immigration Pt. III: It's Illegal to be Illegal? Really?
So a 10 trillion dollar debt is okay but a 13 trillion dollar one isn't? Is the RNC paying you for your posts?
So a 10 trillion dollar debt is okay but a 13 trillion dollar one isn't? Is the RNC paying you for your posts?
- Status