Posts: 274
Threads: 30
Joined: Mar 2019
(05-22-2019, 04:18 AM)taramarie Wrote: (05-22-2019, 03:51 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: (05-20-2019, 11:44 PM)taramarie Wrote:
This is very suitable here in this forum and paints views with EVERYONE here hence we can never see eye to eye. It paints kinsers view UNLESS he can provide proof behind his prophecy of course, otherwise it reminds me of Eric. I will wait and see. I hope he is far more grounded.
My comment wasn't so much a prediction, as it was a statement of fact. Immigrants (legal or otherwise) bring their problems with them. Disarming the population while at the same time importing people from high corruption and high crime countries will inevitably lead to the most criminal and most corrupt being the most armed.
Like I said those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither. It was true when Benjamin Franklin said it, it is still true today.
Sacrificing liberty...what if I were to say that the people here were given the liberty to vote if they wanted this law to take place? What f I were to say that disarming from certain guns being legal does not mean the people are still not armed? Why do reds in USA believe that disarming means the people are not protected with guns? They still are. Yes I will hear you are not AS armed as you were in your country, but can you tell me why those sorts of guns are necessary for regular folk and can you tell me in what real life situations is it appropriate to have those sorts of guns? I rather real life situations just as you do of course.
People voting to take away my freedom is the same to me as a politician doing it to me. You shouldn't get to vote away fundamental rights in the name of Democracy. 1979 Iran was Democracy. Look how that went!
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
(05-22-2019, 04:42 AM)AspieMillennial Wrote: People voting to take away my freedom is the same to me as a politician doing it to me. You shouldn't get to vote away fundamental rights in the name of Democracy. 1979 Iran was Democracy. Look how that went!
It is posts like these that I wish we had a like button for.
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
(05-22-2019, 06:38 AM)taramarie Wrote: Ok so no logical reason given then other than this? Btw very interesting this is called tyranny when people wanted this. I will wait for a better reasoning and if it does not appear, then I can draw my conclusions.
I think the reason you likely won't get the type of answer you're looking for is because it doesn't exist. What role Americans and Kiwis will tolerate from their governments are decided culturally and not logically. American culture will not tolerate gun control beyond registration. Not to mention that much going beyond that can run afowl of the constitution--and Trump has made it a point to appoint Strict Constructionists.
That being said, I believe it highly illogical to ban a tool because someone used it to commit a crime.
I certainly won't be turning in my weapons any time soon. And anyone coming to take them by force will end up with a face full of lead. But then again the main forces behind gun control in the US were the same as those that kept my people first in chain and then segregated into ghettos.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
(05-22-2019, 03:51 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: (05-20-2019, 11:44 PM)taramarie Wrote: his is very suitable here in this forum and paints views with EVERYONE here hence we can never see eye to eye. It paints kinsers view UNLESS he can provide proof behind his prophecy of course, otherwise it reminds me of Eric. I will wait and see. I hope he is far more grounded.
My comment wasn't so much a prediction, as it was a statement of fact. Immigrants (legal or otherwise) bring their problems with them. Disarming the population while at the same time importing people from high corruption and high crime countries will inevitably lead to the most criminal and most corrupt being the most armed.
Like I said those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither. It was true when Benjamin Franklin said it, it is still true today.
Many of the illegal immigrants are running from problems that others imposed upon them -- like weak governments that could not keep the drug gangs out of the country, gangs well funded with money gotten from American addicts. The countries in which narco-traffickers have taken refuge become arenas for near-civil-wars between drug gangs. The people fleeing through Mexico would just as soon stay home and farm a small plot of land or work in some cottage industry... but the drug traffickers replete with cash and utterly devoid of any semblance of morality make such modest desires irrelevant if any community is for all practical purposes a war zone between rival drug lords.
The money comes from the consumption habits of American addicts. A long-term solution is to ease American addicts off drugs, and a short one is to do what the British do -- prescribe the drugs to addicts and have the drug users take their drugs in a clinical setting so that troublesome drugs do not have a profitable market. Meanwhile addicts get the opportunity for drug rehab.
Part of liberty is security. We need formal protections from an all-powerful state, and we all need to watch the police forces to keep them responsible. We also need to suppress blatant crime, and communities unable or unwilling to do so need different governments.
This said, governments have gotten the burden, since the Great Depression, to foster prosperity. The Great Depression was enough to crack the shaky democracy in Germany that people then failed to recognize was the difference between war and peace in Europe. Demagogues have always offered easy solutions to economic messes -- often destructive ones (like drive out the Jews, Chinese, or South Asians before they can take their property, and spread 'their' wealth among the masses) that prove destructive. Clear and well-respected title to property is obviously essential to a prosperous society that can avoid central planning.
Today I could make a slight modification to Franklin's quip:
those who sacrifice liberty for economic gain or feeling good about themselves deserve neither liberty, prosperity, nor self-esteem.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
Or perhaps what the US could do is completely legalize the drugs trade and take it out of the hands of the criminals. Given the choice between Pablo Escobar the crime boss and Pablo Escobar the CEO I'd take him as a CEO instead. He'll just take you to court rather than cutting off your head with a chainsaw.
Much like prohibition of alcohol, prohibitions of narcotics doesn't work. But that is neither here nor there.
My point, PBR since you obviously missed it yet again. is that third world people bring with them their third world problems and that first world states cannot easily address the needs of their own populations much less the the needs of a huge influx of third worlders. Or did you expect that the lack of desire for hordes of immigrants in this country sprung out of a vacuum.
Posts: 4,336
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2016
(05-22-2019, 12:16 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: My point, PBR since you obviously missed it yet again. is that third world people bring with them their third world problems and that first world states cannot easily address the needs of their own populations much less the the needs of a huge influx of third worlders. Or did you expect that the lack of desire for hordes of immigrants in this country sprung out of a vacuum.
That's always been true, yet the US had open door policies in the past and Canada still does. Both gained from the practice, so what's your point here?
Intelligence is not knowledge and knowledge is not wisdom, but they all play well together.
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
(05-22-2019, 06:05 PM)David Horn Wrote: (05-22-2019, 12:16 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: My point, PBR since you obviously missed it yet again. is that third world people bring with them their third world problems and that first world states cannot easily address the needs of their own populations much less the the needs of a huge influx of third worlders. Or did you expect that the lack of desire for hordes of immigrants in this country sprung out of a vacuum.
That's always been true, yet the US had open door policies in the past and Canada still does. Both gained from the practice, so what's your point here?
The US had an open door policy when it lacked a welfare state and it worked out okay because 2 out of 3 immigrants went back to where they came. An open door policy now will decimate the welfare state. As for Canada, they are a full election cycle behind the US. I expect Trudeau (unemployable former substitute drama teacher that he is) to be tossed out on his ass and a Trump like figure to emerge there.
We have a choice we can have a welfare state, or we can have an open door policy. It seems that the American nation wants a welfare state of some degree and as such we cannot, indeed must not, have open door immigration policy.
The laws of economics are iron clad.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
(05-22-2019, 12:16 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: Or perhaps what the US could do is completely legalize the drugs trade and take it out of the hands of the criminals. Given the choice between Pablo Escobar the crime boss and Pablo Escobar the CEO I'd take him as a CEO instead. He'll just take you to court rather than cutting off your head with a chainsaw.
Drugs ruin lives. Such is the rationale for prohibitions of heroin, cocaine, meth, Quaalude, PCP, etc. Or child pornography.
Just because something is profitable does not mean that it is acceptable. I suspect that if someone came up with an entertainment in which live people cast live persons into an aquarium with tiger sharks, crocodiles, or polar bears (maybe even leopard seals) there would be paying customers, just as there were for people watching Christians being fed to "lions and tigers and bears, oh my!") in ancient Rome.
Quote:Much like prohibition of alcohol, prohibitions of narcotics doesn't work. But that is neither here nor there.
I have seen people messed up on drugs. It could be that people with problems often gravitate to drugs, and people would be far wiser to turn to something else -- like classical music. Maybe if our economic system and medical system worked better we would not have so many people dependent on opiates and meth. Oh, our economic order works well at making people already filthy rich even more filthy rich because such is the only objective of our economic elites. No human suffering can ever be in excess so long as the economic elites get what they want?
That will crash, if not this 4T then in the next 4T when those elites are brittle targets as the seas start inundating prime farmland and reducing food supplies. If this 4T does nothing to resolve the extreme inequities of our society, then I can easily imagine this country going down a route parallel to that of the Soviet Union except for being plutocratic instead of 'socialist'. Most important it will be devoid of human values, and it will be able to get people to work only with brutality because people will get few rewards for their efforts. The image of America around AD 2080 will be the drunks and dopers. Productivity will fall to meet the low level of real pay. The old Soviet joke
"We pretend to work and they pretend to pay us"
will apply.
Quote:My point, PBR since you obviously missed it yet again. is that third world people bring with them their third world problems and that first world states cannot easily address the needs of their own populations much less the the needs of a huge influx of third worlders. Or did you expect that the lack of desire for hordes of immigrants in this country sprung out of a vacuum.
Cultural differences? The bulk are from Latin America, culturally more similar to the United States than much of Europe. It is a Spanish base instead of an English base... so what? Do you have a problem with East Asian or South Asian people in America? I'd be delighted to exchange our dopers for more of them -- wouldn't you?
Bringing their problems with them? Many seem to have not done so. Most seem to want to fit in, with the exception of those Muslims who want to bring jihad with them. Anyone who wants jihad can go back home.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
(05-23-2019, 12:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: Have to say after thinking about it I agree with kinser about legalizing drugs. Once legalized it would take the power out of criminals hands, it could regulate how drugs are produced, the money would go elsewhere....not to criminals or at least not as much and less people in prison for non violent crimes. People will get hold of drugs either way, at least make it so the criminals don't profit and so there are standards put in place for how the drugs are produced and sold. Unless someone has another thought about this of course?
Let me give an example of how legalizing drugs worked in one producing country. Its name is Turkey and at one time produced nearly all the heroin that the US consumed. It was able to do this because no other crop paid farmers as much money as the opium poppy did and Turkey is really good at growing opium poppies. Like Coca in Peru or Bolivia it was litterally grow this crop or not have enough money to live on.
At the time the crop was illegal, and well guess who ran the collection of the illegal crop? The Italian Mafia which then sold it to their American Cousins. This is well documented for anyone who wants to check it out. They either called it the French Connection (as they used Marseilles as a hub, or the Pizza connection because the Italian-American Mafia used pizzerias as their cover businesses for this).
Well to deal with the illicit trade Turkey could go out and harass farmers and arrest people and basically spend tons of cash for no real effect...or it could try something completely radical. It could legalize growing the poppies, and then offer the production to pharmaceutical companies.
When Turkey legalized growing the poppies Bayer took over as the main purchaser, offering as much as the mafia did (and often more to compete with them), all completely legal and taxed, and they produced many life saving drugs with it.
Simply put prohibition has never worked, and will never work. The fact that PBR deliberately refuses to see the absolute and utter failure of this policy either indicates insanity or stupidity or both.
==
As for the differences between Latin Americans and Anglo Americans it is immaterial. I don't want ANY foreigners in the US. I don't care where they come from.
Since being subtle hasn't worked let me try absolute bluntness.
![[Image: il_570xN.1007169627_800t.jpg]](https://img1.etsystatic.com/114/1/11265505/il_570xN.1007169627_800t.jpg)
Posts: 683
Threads: 41
Joined: May 2016
05-23-2019, 08:16 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-23-2019, 08:17 AM by beechnut79.)
(05-23-2019, 01:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: (05-23-2019, 01:21 AM)Kinser79 Wrote: (05-23-2019, 12:52 AM)taramarie Wrote: Have to say after thinking about it I agree with kinser about legalizing drugs. Once legalized it would take the power out of criminals hands, it could regulate how drugs are produced, the money would go elsewhere....not to criminals or at least not as much and less people in prison for non violent crimes. People will get hold of drugs either way, at least make it so the criminals don't profit and so there are standards put in place for how the drugs are produced and sold. Unless someone has another thought about this of course?
Let me give an example of how legalizing drugs worked in one producing country. Its name is Turkey and at one time produced nearly all the heroin that the US consumed. It was able to do this because no other crop paid farmers as much money as the opium poppy did and Turkey is really good at growing opium poppies. Like Coca in Peru or Bolivia it was litterally grow this crop or not have enough money to live on.
At the time the crop was illegal, and well guess who ran the collection of the illegal crop? The Italian Mafia which then sold it to their American Cousins. This is well documented for anyone who wants to check it out. They either called it the French Connection (as they used Marseilles as a hub, or the Pizza connection because the Italian-American Mafia used pizzerias as their cover businesses for this).
Well to deal with the illicit trade Turkey could go out and harass farmers and arrest people and basically spend tons of cash for no real effect...or it could try something completely radical. It could legalize growing the poppies, and then offer the production to pharmaceutical companies.
When Turkey legalized growing the poppies Bayer took over as the main purchaser, offering as much as the mafia did (and often more to compete with them), all completely legal and taxed, and they produced many life saving drugs with it.
Simply put prohibition has never worked, and will never work. The fact that PBR deliberately refuses to see the absolute and utter failure of this policy either indicates insanity or stupidity or both.
==
As for the differences between Latin Americans and Anglo Americans it is immaterial. I don't want ANY foreigners in the US. I don't care where they come from.
Since being subtle hasn't worked let me try absolute bluntness.
Totally agree with you about legalization of drugs and a fantastic example.
The same can be said about sex work as well. Don't you think it's time for us to legalize or at least decriminalize that as well for all the same reason? So far their had been very little movement on this issue although it's prohibition hasn't worked any more than it did with liquor a century ago
Posts: 1,499
Threads: 16
Joined: May 2016
(05-23-2019, 08:16 AM)beechnut79 Wrote: [quote pid='43806' dateline='1558594351']
The same can be said about sex work as well. Don't you think it's time for us to legalize or at least decriminalize that as well for all the same reason? So far their had been very little movement on this issue although it's prohibition hasn't worked any more than it did with liquor a century ago
[/quote]
Personally I favor the Nordic Model as to prostitution. Where the prostituted themselves is decriminalized and offered services to leave prostitution but the pimps and johns are still subject to criminal prosecution.
https://nordicmodelnow.org/what-is-the-nordic-model/
Posts: 450
Threads: 17
Joined: May 2017
(05-21-2019, 02:17 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: (05-20-2019, 11:44 PM)taramarie Wrote:
This is very suitable here in this forum and paints views with EVERYONE here hence we can never see eye to eye. It paints kinsers view UNLESS he can provide proof behind his prophecy of course, otherwise it reminds me of Eric. I will wait and see. I hope he is far more grounded.
Good one. There is absolute truth, at the least with mathematical and physical laws and the all-powerful dialectic.
You lost me at dialectic... I have no problems w/ 4th Turning, but why do I have to believe in dialectics?
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
The dialectic is the means by which we synthesize understanding of reality -- if we are good at it.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 604
Threads: 68
Joined: May 2016
The 2010s will go down in history as a restatement of the 1920s.
Which stands to reason: Both were "3-decades" - in that 1+9+2+0=3, and 2+0+1+0 also equals 3.
Both decades played host to hideously widening income and wealth inequality, along with finger-wagging elders constantly kvetching about youth whose hedonism was not tempered with so much as a hint of idealism.
"These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a Christian nation" - Justice David Brewer, Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 1892
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
(01-15-2020, 01:21 PM)Anthony Wrote: The 2010s will go down in history as a restatement of the 1920s.
Which stands to reason: Both were "3-decades" - in that 1+9+2+0=3, and 2+0+1+0 also equals 3.
Both decades played host to hideously widening income and wealth inequality, along with finger-wagging elders constantly kvetching about youth whose hedonism was not tempered with so much as a hint of idealism.
Let's see; 1+8+4+0 is 3, modulo 10...
We had a big economic meltdown beginning in 2007 (maybe earlier if one counts the mass foreclosures in real estate) culminating in the Crash of 2008 that reversed in 2009... if anything, the Double-Zero Decade is the analogue to the Roaring Twenties. The problem is that the 2010's have brought to America the economic inequality characteristic of a feudal order or a fascist regime. Our economic order is fascist, and it has only three objectives that I can easily fit into the acronym PIG -- (elite) Power, Indulgence, and Gain at the expense of all else. What passes as the job market is a grim contest to determine who can accept and endorse the nastiest in their lives on behalf of rapacious overlords who increasingly look like the first people to be executed in the wake of a revolution.
Let us not fault X and Millennial adults. Those are the ones who endure American capitalism at its worst, and they could never understand or assimilate the aetherial anti-materialsm of Idealist generations at their best because they were not raised for such. Boomers? Most Boomers are innocent of the worst deeds of the elites because they never had a chance. A Boomer truck driver, barber, or nurse typically did nothing to shape the culture of untrammeled greed among people in a position to monopolize the economy and squeeze small business. People who have had to do real work have been shut out from advancement in bureaucratic corporations since the time when Boomers were young workers. Boomer economic elites have been horrible.
We had a Crisis event to initiate a Crisis, and we found ourselves in an even worse Degeneracy.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
|
