Zack Smith
Registered Member
If it pisses you off, why should I? You're the only one whining about it. Don't be a dick and we'll go from there.
White supremacy is really about white degeneracy
- Thread starter James R
- Start date
If it pisses you off, why should I? You're the only one whining about it. Don't be a dick and we'll go from there.
The question was: Why would you WANT to put a dent in the number of productive workers?
Why would you want to deport ANYBODY who has a job and pays taxes? Why would you spend a nickel on finding them and kicking them outwhen you NEED them?
Zack Smith
Registered Member
There is NO dent. That's a false narrative.
Most of these people are being deported because they've committed crimes.
You're not paying attention. I asked why anybody would WANT to make a dent.
Really? Do you have evidence to back that up? Isn't the standard procedure to try criminals and deport them if found guilty?
Yep. Most of which were parking tickets, speeding tickets, immigration problems (i.e. missing a court date) or drug use (i.e. smoking marijuana.) Not really a threat to the fabric of America.
Zack Smith
Registered Member
FFS, you're like a death by a thousand paper cuts.
There is NO dent. At most, it's a surface scratch that's easily buffed out with those that continue to come here legally or those who continue to sneak in illegally.
Yes.
https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/statement-secretary-kelly-recent-ice-enforcement-actions
Did you criticize the Obama administration for deporting more than any other president?
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/obamas-deportation-policy-numbers/story?id=41715661
Zack Smith
Registered Member
Zack Smith
Registered Member
Link?
They broke the law as soon as they entered the country illegally. That's not what is part of the fabric of America.
They broke the law as soon as they entered the country illegally. That's not what is part of the fabric of America.
Last edited:
Zack Smith
Registered Member
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
You're going to have to do better than Politifact.
Link to government data or a more reputable source. I've gone directly to the source.
There wasn't a category for parking tickets. There wasn't a category for non-dangerous drugs.
Here's a novel idea. If you come to a country illegally, stay the fuck out of trouble to keep a bullseye off of your back.
Last edited:
It was obvious long before Obama that the policy isn't working.
Zack Smith
Registered Member
Using your logic, the same should be applicable to the current administration.
There's no doubt the policy needs overhauled, however not following the policy that's currently in place isn't helping matters.
Why don't you and your NDPites, get Trudy to accept all comers from Mexico and Central America. We'll be happy to give em a ride north.
Perhaps FOX News? Or Qanon? Or the crazy guy who is yelling outside the supermarket? If you look hard enough you'll find someone who says what you want.
Meanwhile, immigrants (both legal and illegal) commit crimes at a lower rate than the rest of the US - and most of the crimes people are deported for are traffic tickets and the like.
We pretty much do already. If they have jobs and pay taxes, I'm all for them staying forever.
Zack Smith
Registered Member
I don't follow QAnon and FNC is as bad as any other media source. No surprise that you reflexively chose FNC as an example. You're like Pavlov's dog.
You're making shit up. Most aren't deported for traffic tickets and the like, whatever "the like" means. What it really means is that you're full of shit and throwing it at all wall to see what sticks.
ICE has a breakdown of 29 categories. It also breaks it down by criminal charges and criminal convictions. You may want to read your own link and then click on the link from ICE. You won't be so uniformed next time. Maybe.
Zack Smith
Registered Member
You're doing a terrible job of marketing to Mexicans. You need them, as they only account for 0.1% of your population.
What about the ones who don't work and pay taxes? Have you seen California lately? Their state is not only last in the high school graduation rate , they're also home to 1/3 of the nation's welfare leeches.
Mod Hat — Having made your point
If we skip out on the, "we'll go from there", part, it's because you've already made your point. Nonetheless, you should probably learn to attend the rest of your own advice.
You've taken nearly seventy opportunities and yet failed to support the fallacy at the heart of your pretense, preferring instead to imitate flaccid right-wing standards of insult. If we are to consider the rational merit of your argument, then you need an argument with rational merit. As all you have shown is fallacy and belligerence, there is no rational merit about your behavior.
Or, more directly, it is as you've been told: You're bullshitting.
And what you need to understand is how merciful↑ that assessment is, because it comes with the sweetener of observing your capabilities, and while it is clear you are, in fact, ignorant and misled, there comes a point at which insisting on your capabilities is an empty courtesy.
As your only apparent sincerity is antisocial, there is only so much social convention people will afford you. Having made your point, as such, there really isn't anything left for you to say, is there? After all, when presented with the fallacy, the best you can manage is to triple down on bullshit. We understand. You've made your point, loudly and clearly, and we accept disruption and hatred are all you are capable of bringing.
In the U.S., we used to have a back and forth about accused criminals, that affording convicted or, in many cases, merely accused persons human rights at all somehow meant one would not punish criminals. The reason they believed this is that they had no choice according to their own politics; the answer, of course, is that some people lack particular culpability owing to other factors, but are still dangerous and must be confined, and, goshy, it's just too bad those same political advocates went and elected officials who closed down that part of the government. Their argument was an all or nothing fallacy; there was, in practice, confining a psychiatrically incompetent person in dangerous circumstances until the date of his appointed homicide, or, by their theory of governance, setting them free.
That they chose to not attend the alternatives except to show gaslit disrespect does not mean those alternatives do not exist. But somewhere between the colloquial American pabulum about how some criminal obviously can't be sane if they behave that way, a quiet trend distinguishing our societal differentiation 'twixt a black gangbanger and a white supremacist terrorist, to the one, and your apparent inability to post rational discourse, to the other, it is true I dissent from our neighbor's assessment conceding your capabilities. While we generally presume people capable and competent, any given person can certainly challenge, by their conduct, that presumption.
Thinking back on that old, unfinished American discussion, we might observe that your conduct, if informed and competent, is abysmal and deliberately disruptive. To the other, if the problem is incompetency, well, yes, the behavior is still disruptive.
Consider your response↑ to Sideshowbob: "Most of these people are being deported because they've committed crimes." This is another fallacious response, a change of subject compared to your own earlier post↑: "All 20 million of them? LOL." And when the question↑ is why you would want to put a dent in the workers, you changed the subject↑ to what is happening now, i.e., "There is NO dent", which is actually a strange thing to say compared to what we're hearing from farmers about production disruption, but, more importantly, attends an assertion about the now compared to the question of why one would want to, which considers a potential not in effect at this time; you're hardly new in that particular weak sleight, but it does in its occasion only reiterate the point that all you have shown is fallacy and belligerence.
What is going to happen, now, is that you will take some time out and reconsider your conduct and expectations. People have waited long enough for you to show even the slightest modicum of decency. You will make what choices you make, but nobody here is obliged to tolerate your clownish, self-denigrating intolerance. If you've a rational argument, you should bring it, but, as noted, you don't seem to be bringing it. Nor is anyone surprised that you aren't bringing one.
They shouldn't have to race to the bottom you're scraping just because you're not up to the task. Seventy posts worth of lazy fallacy does make its point.
If we skip out on the, "we'll go from there", part, it's because you've already made your point. Nonetheless, you should probably learn to attend the rest of your own advice.
You've taken nearly seventy opportunities and yet failed to support the fallacy at the heart of your pretense, preferring instead to imitate flaccid right-wing standards of insult. If we are to consider the rational merit of your argument, then you need an argument with rational merit. As all you have shown is fallacy and belligerence, there is no rational merit about your behavior.
Or, more directly, it is as you've been told: You're bullshitting.
And what you need to understand is how merciful↑ that assessment is, because it comes with the sweetener of observing your capabilities, and while it is clear you are, in fact, ignorant and misled, there comes a point at which insisting on your capabilities is an empty courtesy.
As your only apparent sincerity is antisocial, there is only so much social convention people will afford you. Having made your point, as such, there really isn't anything left for you to say, is there? After all, when presented with the fallacy, the best you can manage is to triple down on bullshit. We understand. You've made your point, loudly and clearly, and we accept disruption and hatred are all you are capable of bringing.
In the U.S., we used to have a back and forth about accused criminals, that affording convicted or, in many cases, merely accused persons human rights at all somehow meant one would not punish criminals. The reason they believed this is that they had no choice according to their own politics; the answer, of course, is that some people lack particular culpability owing to other factors, but are still dangerous and must be confined, and, goshy, it's just too bad those same political advocates went and elected officials who closed down that part of the government. Their argument was an all or nothing fallacy; there was, in practice, confining a psychiatrically incompetent person in dangerous circumstances until the date of his appointed homicide, or, by their theory of governance, setting them free.
That they chose to not attend the alternatives except to show gaslit disrespect does not mean those alternatives do not exist. But somewhere between the colloquial American pabulum about how some criminal obviously can't be sane if they behave that way, a quiet trend distinguishing our societal differentiation 'twixt a black gangbanger and a white supremacist terrorist, to the one, and your apparent inability to post rational discourse, to the other, it is true I dissent from our neighbor's assessment conceding your capabilities. While we generally presume people capable and competent, any given person can certainly challenge, by their conduct, that presumption.
Thinking back on that old, unfinished American discussion, we might observe that your conduct, if informed and competent, is abysmal and deliberately disruptive. To the other, if the problem is incompetency, well, yes, the behavior is still disruptive.
Consider your response↑ to Sideshowbob: "Most of these people are being deported because they've committed crimes." This is another fallacious response, a change of subject compared to your own earlier post↑: "All 20 million of them? LOL." And when the question↑ is why you would want to put a dent in the workers, you changed the subject↑ to what is happening now, i.e., "There is NO dent", which is actually a strange thing to say compared to what we're hearing from farmers about production disruption, but, more importantly, attends an assertion about the now compared to the question of why one would want to, which considers a potential not in effect at this time; you're hardly new in that particular weak sleight, but it does in its occasion only reiterate the point that all you have shown is fallacy and belligerence.
What is going to happen, now, is that you will take some time out and reconsider your conduct and expectations. People have waited long enough for you to show even the slightest modicum of decency. You will make what choices you make, but nobody here is obliged to tolerate your clownish, self-denigrating intolerance. If you've a rational argument, you should bring it, but, as noted, you don't seem to be bringing it. Nor is anyone surprised that you aren't bringing one.
They shouldn't have to race to the bottom you're scraping just because you're not up to the task. Seventy posts worth of lazy fallacy does make its point.
We're not trying to market anything. We're just trying to respond to the failures in the rest of the world as best we can.
I note that you point to California and not to Canada. If you think we have a problem with immigrants/refugees not working or paying taxes, feel free to point to the evidence. If not, I would suggest that you change the policies on your side of the border before criticizing ours.
Zack Smith
Registered Member
Reading comprehension appears to be an issue with you.
Zack Smith
Registered Member
Welp, you're failing. You need to take in all of world's immigrants.
Outside of the founding of the greatest sport on the planet, what big achievement has Canada recently accomplished, to help the quality of life for those around the globe?
BTW, are you a B.C. boy, from TO or Montreal? You don't come off as someone who resides in Alberta, Saskatchewan or Manitoba.