Youths want no migration controls
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
So, youths are naive morons.
I'm struggling to ascertain why this qualifies as news.
I could have told them this without the "migration control survey" test, what a waste of time.
I suppose solid data is usefull in some cases, but it's not like there's anything we can do about 15 to 17 years olds being ignorant fools.
What they should do is go back and ask the same people the same question in 10 years time, every one of them would laugh at their original answer.
This would prove that teenagers are stupid and these findings could be presented to teenagers in a cartoon featuring a breakdancing bear.
I'm struggling to ascertain why this qualifies as news.
I could have told them this without the "migration control survey" test, what a waste of time.
I suppose solid data is usefull in some cases, but it's not like there's anything we can do about 15 to 17 years olds being ignorant fools.
What they should do is go back and ask the same people the same question in 10 years time, every one of them would laugh at their original answer.
This would prove that teenagers are stupid and these findings could be presented to teenagers in a cartoon featuring a breakdancing bear.
It should be noted that generations upon generations of people have fought for national homelands. Even today, there are stateless people that continue to fight for a land their own - the Kurds, the Tibetans, the Sikhs, the Palestinians - and the destruction of borders and infinite immigration present a problem to thes sustaining of this system. Inevitably, people of different backgrounds, religions, languages, and values clash. And people do not take kindly to their culture being raped by aliens.
Ultimately, we should have strictly national states.
Immigration freedom, by the way, only -hurts- the poor. Inevitably, it is the poor who get their jobs stolen away from them. Look at the poor in the United STates. Those Mexican scabs are stealing the food right off their table.
Ultimately, we should have strictly national states.
Immigration freedom, by the way, only -hurts- the poor. Inevitably, it is the poor who get their jobs stolen away from them. Look at the poor in the United STates. Those Mexican scabs are stealing the food right off their table.
It's really not worth taking the question seriously.
To point out the flaws is like pointing out wrestling is fake - you make yourself look like an idiot by bothering.
Nobody on earth who had an adequately developed brain would entertain the idea for a second.
It's like "maybe we should put all the food on earth into a giant blender and make one giant bowl of soup which we can all eat from".
It's just sheer unbridled idiocy.
Idealism stems directly from ignorance.
Where real knowledge is absent there is vacant space, which invariably fills with bullshit.
This is idealism in a nutshell.
I can't think of anything which is of less value than the opinions of teenagers.
Nothing.
To point out the flaws is like pointing out wrestling is fake - you make yourself look like an idiot by bothering.
Nobody on earth who had an adequately developed brain would entertain the idea for a second.
It's like "maybe we should put all the food on earth into a giant blender and make one giant bowl of soup which we can all eat from".
It's just sheer unbridled idiocy.
Idealism stems directly from ignorance.
Where real knowledge is absent there is vacant space, which invariably fills with bullshit.
This is idealism in a nutshell.
I can't think of anything which is of less value than the opinions of teenagers.
Nothing.
Interesting though that a surplus of resources leads to a decrease in birth rate, making immigration necessary for the survival of the society in any case.
SamCDKey:
Unless the society has a birth rate less than 2 per couple, the society will never run out of people.
Unless the society has a birth rate less than 2 per couple, the society will never run out of people.
I'm with them. We should be able to live wherever we want. No friggin government should boss us around! This is the modern world! Governments are too behind!
I think there should still be immigration laws, but the process should be faster and easier. I think governments have the right to prevent criminals from entering the country. But the Canadian governmnet, for example, often keep families apart for no logical reason. I think that's just ridiculous. :bugeye:
Anyways... just my two cents...
That's what's happening in Canada. Unfortunately, the government was very slow in action. This country needs people- desperately. And worse then that, the Canadian Pension Plan (CPP) is bankrupt due to a huge increase in old people, thanks to the baby boomers. It took the government several years to react to that. As a result, we see HELP WANTED signs everywhere, everyone is desperate for employees, and a lot of people have been turned own from immigration, which doesn't help them. Finally, they are letting students work, but they will probably still lose a lot of money unnecessarily.... :bugeye:
The birth rate doesn't need to be negative. It totally depends on how fast the economy is growing.
Economies can, and do, slow down to meet population growth. They do not need endless population growth in order to survive.
Do you understand the economical implications of a very old population?
Indeed I do. But you also realize that very old populations eventually die off, yes? Moreover, the majority of nations shall not have a mere replacement rate of population increase. Generally, nations tend to grow over years, not decline.
It is also somewhat of a false dilemma: We do not need to prop up old people to such an extent as Canada does.
It is also somewhat of a false dilemma: We do not need to prop up old people to such an extent as Canada does.
Err, unless there's a death rate > 2/couple.
What does not make sense to me, if there is a war on terrorism, why have immigration at all?
how exactly do you win a war like this when you have immigration?
If you have immigration, I think it should be controlled meaning, if a person is educated and has something to offer, let them in. I don't think just anyone s hould be able to immigrate anywhere. Do you really want to open the borders to the uneducated? On the other hand, if someone is willing to get an education you should let them in.
We just don't have jobs for the uneducated anymore, it's pointless to let them in unless you want to create more ghettos, which I guess is the whole point.
Whenever there are more people than jobs, the result is ghetto.
The poor have no right to any job. They don't own their jobs. This is not socialism, it's capitalism, it's definately not communism. This means you don't have any job by birthright. It's not about rich and poor, it's about educated and uneducated. You can go to college even while poor. I'm not rich, but I'm at least trying not to stay poor forever.With a degree, it will be my ticket into the middle class, if I can find a wife who wants to go along for the ride.
The same for anyone else here. As for the people without degrees, they are poor because they are uneducated. If a person is uneducated and not trying to get an education, they'd be better off staying in their home country, because the USA has nothing to offer the uneducated. I should know, I'm poor now, I'm lucky to be able to go to college because of the financial aid system, but we obviously cannot afford to give finacial aid to every immigrant who wants to go to college, so a lot of people coming here have no hope of ever breaking out of poverty. I don't get it.
The only way out is with an education, and it's still not a guarenteed out.
TimeTraveller:
Education is certainly the way out, but bringing in hordes upon hordes of immigrants doesn't aid this. In fact, it prevents it from happening, by stressing the system, and taking away from the money which can give people the means whereby they can gain their education.
Roman:
Presuming people don't die immediatly after they give birth to those children, but do not die until those children produce children, the soviety is infinitely sustainable.
Education is certainly the way out, but bringing in hordes upon hordes of immigrants doesn't aid this. In fact, it prevents it from happening, by stressing the system, and taking away from the money which can give people the means whereby they can gain their education.
Roman:
Presuming people don't die immediatly after they give birth to those children, but do not die until those children produce children, the soviety is infinitely sustainable.
I did notice you didn't post the actual graph I saw yesterday further delimiting exactly which teenagers were overwhelmingly in favour of reduced controls - namely those who live in shitholes. I imagine their parents would say much the same thing, if it meant they could get away from the hell they've created for themselves.
I also wonder how many of those teenagers in the more developed countries were immigrants themselves, or born of immigrant families. terribly flawed poll, really. And did you notice the disclaimer? Heh. Such an balanced article, wouldn't you say?
I wonder how long it will take those of you endlessly posting these "studies" to realise how useless they really are.
A little deeper examination, Sam, would reveal that the EU was formed specifically because individual European countries could not compete with each other or on the global market.
The EU is co-operation for the purpose of rendering them more competitive in a global market, not co-operation for the sake of an ideal of co-operation.
The "world" is not changing at all, Sam, if you're speaking of attitudes - other than in making itself far more efficiently competitive than it was. The map is changing - only rather than the boundaries being national, they are becoming more economic.
More generally:
"I can't think of anything which is of less value than the opinions of teenagers.
Nothing."
There aren't many occasions when I'd agree wholeheartedly with Dr Lou, but the above quote would certainly be one of them.
Removing all border controls would result in Africa and the Middle East halving their populations within a matter of weeks, and the US and other western nations struggling with hordes of unwelcome refugees. Imagine the utter horror on the faces of complacent Europeans upon the realisation that their current troubles with non-European immigrants are only a drop in the ocean compared to the certain cultural annihilation they'd face without those controls.
I also wonder how many of those teenagers in the more developed countries were immigrants themselves, or born of immigrant families. terribly flawed poll, really. And did you notice the disclaimer? Heh. Such an balanced article, wouldn't you say?
I wonder how long it will take those of you endlessly posting these "studies" to realise how useless they really are.
A little deeper examination, Sam, would reveal that the EU was formed specifically because individual European countries could not compete with each other or on the global market.
The EU is co-operation for the purpose of rendering them more competitive in a global market, not co-operation for the sake of an ideal of co-operation.
The "world" is not changing at all, Sam, if you're speaking of attitudes - other than in making itself far more efficiently competitive than it was. The map is changing - only rather than the boundaries being national, they are becoming more economic.
More generally:
"I can't think of anything which is of less value than the opinions of teenagers.
Nothing."
There aren't many occasions when I'd agree wholeheartedly with Dr Lou, but the above quote would certainly be one of them.
Removing all border controls would result in Africa and the Middle East halving their populations within a matter of weeks, and the US and other western nations struggling with hordes of unwelcome refugees. Imagine the utter horror on the faces of complacent Europeans upon the realisation that their current troubles with non-European immigrants are only a drop in the ocean compared to the certain cultural annihilation they'd face without those controls.
Last edited:
dixonmassey
Valued Senior Member
From standpoint of a job alone (meaning chances to get any job regardless of compensation) "educated" have smaller chances for the obvious reasons. These days one need to think twice about being "educated" (meaning selecting the right field, right university, etc. One need to graduate at the exact time when economy is good.) because education per se doesn't guarantee you a job or income. More than that you quite can educate yourself out of jobs and become ultimately unemployable with all that education (hint: wrong advanced degree, wrong field, wrong time).
Hope you've done good research. Because you know there are many people who die with educational loans unpaid.
BS, truck drivers who's started driving at 21 will make more $ than the average educated unit per life time. And there are plenty other occupations. Besides, if you are born to make money, formal education is the last thing on Earth you need. Most really rich and selfmade folks didn't graduate from anywhere.
USA has less and less to offer to educated too
Yes you don't get that economy made of 100% college graduates is absurd. 3 years more of education and you may start to comprehend that.