Joe Legal vs Jose Illegal

[rnen]

[quote=SK in CV][quote=KSMountain][quote=SK in CV]Do you really think that Jose’s 8 year old son really deserves less of an education than Joe’s son simply because of where his parents were born?[/quote]

SK in CV: Meet 8 year old Juanita from Paraguay. She is very cute and bright and innocent. She smiles a lot and is very likable.

Do you really think she deserves less of an education than Joe’s son simply because of where SHE was born? How arrogant!

Why should we discriminate based on a criteria as passe as physical location? Why not educate everyone in the whole world?

We can either fly everybody here for 18 or so years or we can just send out say 200 million teachers to do it on location. That’ll give class sizes of about 30 students per teacher. Hope that’s ok with you.[/quote]

I suppose you’ve made a point here. I have no idea what it is. I think Juanita is as worthy of an education as any other child. Unfortunately, living in Paraguay, with one of the lowest literacy rates on the planet, she’s unlikely to get much of an education. Hopefully her parents will find a way to sneak her across the border so we can provide it.

(And in case you were wondering, I ould have no problem with a world without borders. In theory anyway.)[/quote]

I do not think anyone here would argue that she is not worthy of an education, it is how she gets it is the assue. Life is unfair and and she and millions of others have no say in where or when they are born. I encourage those that feel that everyone should have an education to donate to the many organizations that are in place just for that purpose. I do not want those same people TAKING money from my pocket to satisfy THEIR need to feel like they have done something worthy. There is a big difference between offering help to those less fortunate and having some one take from you to give to others. I donate to the Childrens Heritage Fund every month out of choice. That is how I CHOOSE to help others.

Those that feel they need to TAKE from others and force them to comply with THEIR sense of morality need to get out of others business and do what is right for them.

Personally I think that being forced to pay for the education of illegal children, the welfare of illegals who have kids here and the health care of those who are here illegally pisses me off. Those of you who feel the illegals are entitled to it PONY UP the money then relax at home with light heart knowing you have done some good in this world. Let the rest of us be charitable by means of our own choosing.

[SK in CV]

[quote=rnen]
I do not think anyone here would argue that she is not worthy of an education, it is how she gets it is the assue. [/quote]

I do wish that was true. It was almost exactly the question I asked, and there was, I believe, an unequivocal response. That John’s kids were more worthy than Jose’s kids.

As to your last paragraph, though I’m not pissed off about it, I don’t disagree.

[SK in CV]

[quote=rnen]
I do not think anyone here would argue that she is not worthy of an education, it is how she gets it is the assue. [/quote]

I do wish that was true. It was almost exactly the question I asked, and there was, I believe, an unequivocal response. That John’s kids were more worthy than Jose’s kids.

As to your last paragraph, though I’m not pissed off about it, I don’t disagree.

[SK in CV]

[quote=rnen]
I do not think anyone here would argue that she is not worthy of an education, it is how she gets it is the assue. [/quote]

I do wish that was true. It was almost exactly the question I asked, and there was, I believe, an unequivocal response. That John’s kids were more worthy than Jose’s kids.

As to your last paragraph, though I’m not pissed off about it, I don’t disagree.

[SK in CV]

[quote=rnen]
I do not think anyone here would argue that she is not worthy of an education, it is how she gets it is the assue. [/quote]

I do wish that was true. It was almost exactly the question I asked, and there was, I believe, an unequivocal response. That John’s kids were more worthy than Jose’s kids.

As to your last paragraph, though I’m not pissed off about it, I don’t disagree.

[SK in CV]

[quote=rnen]
I do not think anyone here would argue that she is not worthy of an education, it is how she gets it is the assue. [/quote]

I do wish that was true. It was almost exactly the question I asked, and there was, I believe, an unequivocal response. That John’s kids were more worthy than Jose’s kids.

As to your last paragraph, though I’m not pissed off about it, I don’t disagree.

[KSMountain]

SK was pretty hard on people earlier in the thread, so I felt a little examination of SK’s position was warranted.

SK also said he/she had no idea what my point was, so I tried to clarify.

I have no issue with generosity and charity. At all. I donate.

I have more of an issue when people’s utopian desires for a world without pain or want, and an inability or unwillingness to consider the practical limits of our budget (which is negative at the moment btw), cause them to advocate policies that aren’t tenable.

Also sometimes people don’t consider the consequences of the full expression of their ideas. For example, it’s easy to want to help Jose’s son. But we gave 20 million amnesty in 1984, and now we’re talking 20 million more (very rough figures).

Would that number be 100 million if we had open borders? Why not?

Would that be a good thing for the U.S.? More workers, for sure. Would the population be evenly distributed, or might the population densities in our largest cities go way way up?

It does become crucial to know whether legal/illegal immigrants are a net financial positive or negative, when you are multiplying by large numbers. I don’t know that that question has been “debunked” or reliably resolved one way or the other. It’s probably not that easy of a question to answer.

[KSMountain]

SK was pretty hard on people earlier in the thread, so I felt a little examination of SK’s position was warranted.

SK also said he/she had no idea what my point was, so I tried to clarify.

I have no issue with generosity and charity. At all. I donate.

I have more of an issue when people’s utopian desires for a world without pain or want, and an inability or unwillingness to consider the practical limits of our budget (which is negative at the moment btw), cause them to advocate policies that aren’t tenable.

Also sometimes people don’t consider the consequences of the full expression of their ideas. For example, it’s easy to want to help Jose’s son. But we gave 20 million amnesty in 1984, and now we’re talking 20 million more (very rough figures).

Would that number be 100 million if we had open borders? Why not?

Would that be a good thing for the U.S.? More workers, for sure. Would the population be evenly distributed, or might the population densities in our largest cities go way way up?

It does become crucial to know whether legal/illegal immigrants are a net financial positive or negative, when you are multiplying by large numbers. I don’t know that that question has been “debunked” or reliably resolved one way or the other. It’s probably not that easy of a question to answer.

[KSMountain]

SK was pretty hard on people earlier in the thread, so I felt a little examination of SK’s position was warranted.

SK also said he/she had no idea what my point was, so I tried to clarify.

I have no issue with generosity and charity. At all. I donate.

I have more of an issue when people’s utopian desires for a world without pain or want, and an inability or unwillingness to consider the practical limits of our budget (which is negative at the moment btw), cause them to advocate policies that aren’t tenable.

Also sometimes people don’t consider the consequences of the full expression of their ideas. For example, it’s easy to want to help Jose’s son. But we gave 20 million amnesty in 1984, and now we’re talking 20 million more (very rough figures).

Would that number be 100 million if we had open borders? Why not?

Would that be a good thing for the U.S.? More workers, for sure. Would the population be evenly distributed, or might the population densities in our largest cities go way way up?

It does become crucial to know whether legal/illegal immigrants are a net financial positive or negative, when you are multiplying by large numbers. I don’t know that that question has been “debunked” or reliably resolved one way or the other. It’s probably not that easy of a question to answer.

[KSMountain]

SK was pretty hard on people earlier in the thread, so I felt a little examination of SK’s position was warranted.

SK also said he/she had no idea what my point was, so I tried to clarify.

I have no issue with generosity and charity. At all. I donate.

I have more of an issue when people’s utopian desires for a world without pain or want, and an inability or unwillingness to consider the practical limits of our budget (which is negative at the moment btw), cause them to advocate policies that aren’t tenable.

Also sometimes people don’t consider the consequences of the full expression of their ideas. For example, it’s easy to want to help Jose’s son. But we gave 20 million amnesty in 1984, and now we’re talking 20 million more (very rough figures).

Would that number be 100 million if we had open borders? Why not?

Would that be a good thing for the U.S.? More workers, for sure. Would the population be evenly distributed, or might the population densities in our largest cities go way way up?

It does become crucial to know whether legal/illegal immigrants are a net financial positive or negative, when you are multiplying by large numbers. I don’t know that that question has been “debunked” or reliably resolved one way or the other. It’s probably not that easy of a question to answer.

[KSMountain]

SK was pretty hard on people earlier in the thread, so I felt a little examination of SK’s position was warranted.

SK also said he/she had no idea what my point was, so I tried to clarify.

I have no issue with generosity and charity. At all. I donate.

I have more of an issue when people’s utopian desires for a world without pain or want, and an inability or unwillingness to consider the practical limits of our budget (which is negative at the moment btw), cause them to advocate policies that aren’t tenable.

Also sometimes people don’t consider the consequences of the full expression of their ideas. For example, it’s easy to want to help Jose’s son. But we gave 20 million amnesty in 1984, and now we’re talking 20 million more (very rough figures).

Would that number be 100 million if we had open borders? Why not?

Would that be a good thing for the U.S.? More workers, for sure. Would the population be evenly distributed, or might the population densities in our largest cities go way way up?

It does become crucial to know whether legal/illegal immigrants are a net financial positive or negative, when you are multiplying by large numbers. I don’t know that that question has been “debunked” or reliably resolved one way or the other. It’s probably not that easy of a question to answer.

[NotCranky]

Amnesty is an interesting term. For all practical purposes these,mostly workers, are invited here. For political reasons it is not admitted that the border is deliberately semi- porous where Mexicans are concerned. If Jose is good enough to come up here and do unhealthy shit work and participate in Federal nation building agendas(including reproducing) with which the state of California is in cahoots, his kid is as deserving as any. I understand people feeling they are hurt by it but I don’t understand for a minute any desire to direct the backlash at Jose himself.

Bringing Juanita from Paraguay into it is too much. Not because it test the limits of someone’s generosity. If there was anyone who could threaten to make that kind of equality nearly universal he would be killed. At least Jose vs. Joe is somewhat real.

[NotCranky]

Amnesty is an interesting term. For all practical purposes these,mostly workers, are invited here. For political reasons it is not admitted that the border is deliberately semi- porous where Mexicans are concerned. If Jose is good enough to come up here and do unhealthy shit work and participate in Federal nation building agendas(including reproducing) with which the state of California is in cahoots, his kid is as deserving as any. I understand people feeling they are hurt by it but I don’t understand for a minute any desire to direct the backlash at Jose himself.

Bringing Juanita from Paraguay into it is too much. Not because it test the limits of someone’s generosity. If there was anyone who could threaten to make that kind of equality nearly universal he would be killed. At least Jose vs. Joe is somewhat real.

[NotCranky]

Amnesty is an interesting term. For all practical purposes these,mostly workers, are invited here. For political reasons it is not admitted that the border is deliberately semi- porous where Mexicans are concerned. If Jose is good enough to come up here and do unhealthy shit work and participate in Federal nation building agendas(including reproducing) with which the state of California is in cahoots, his kid is as deserving as any. I understand people feeling they are hurt by it but I don’t understand for a minute any desire to direct the backlash at Jose himself.

Bringing Juanita from Paraguay into it is too much. Not because it test the limits of someone’s generosity. If there was anyone who could threaten to make that kind of equality nearly universal he would be killed. At least Jose vs. Joe is somewhat real.

[NotCranky]

Amnesty is an interesting term. For all practical purposes these,mostly workers, are invited here. For political reasons it is not admitted that the border is deliberately semi- porous where Mexicans are concerned. If Jose is good enough to come up here and do unhealthy shit work and participate in Federal nation building agendas(including reproducing) with which the state of California is in cahoots, his kid is as deserving as any. I understand people feeling they are hurt by it but I don’t understand for a minute any desire to direct the backlash at Jose himself.

Bringing Juanita from Paraguay into it is too much. Not because it test the limits of someone’s generosity. If there was anyone who could threaten to make that kind of equality nearly universal he would be killed. At least Jose vs. Joe is somewhat real.

[Author]

Posts