Who are we talking about here?
i am a rich guy who takes advantage of minorities. I would do the same to non-minorities if they were worth a shit. I’m a capitalist homie.
OOTB's Political Thread . ..
- Thread starter BillyL
- Start date
I like how you just dismissed the Pinkerton Detective Agency comment. Did that hit a little close to home?
I have no idea what you are babbling about. But it passes the time
Really? You're the same guy who commented, "Do you even history, bro?" to me? And you don't even know who the Pinkertons were?
If you’ll take the time to scroll up, you’ll notice I responded before your edit.
Regardless, every time one of your asinine arguments gets shredded, you pivot to a new subject.
Strikebreaking isn't a new subject. It's what we've been talking about for the last few posts. What is your response to the fact that I'm calling you a common day strikebreaker, besides the obvious comment of "you're an idiot," which seems to be your go-to conclusion?
You.
Have.
Nothing.
Game.
Set.
Match.
What you have here, folks, is just another businessman who cares more about his bottom line than his common man. He's the Randolf and Mortimer Duke of the current decade.
So when you can’t keep up with the debate, you try and disparage me? And poorly at that.
My beliefs on labor have nothing to do with the efficacy of the wall.
Your reach on the whole strikebreaker shit doesn’t substitute the fact you know shit all about the impact of immigrants in this economy.
You think you are clever. It’s kind of cute.
So when you can’t keep up with the debate, you try and disparage me? And poorly at that.
My beliefs on labor have nothing to do with the efficacy of the wall.
Your reach on the whole strikebreaker shit doesn’t substitute the fact you know shit all about the impact of immigrants in this economy.
You think you are clever. It’s kind of cute.
LMAO! Did you pick that up from an Onion article? What do you think you did before I posted that?
Ok, you’re losing me now. I’ve hung on as long as possible. Once again, you’re the last kind standing in the playground after to ran off everyone else
Look, do you want me to go back and show you where you veered off track? I'll do it for you, but it's going to take me a minute to accomplish all of it, and it's going to end all your arguments when you do. Just let me know.
Or let me know if you just want to keep trading barbs, which is what you've turned this thread into.
We’ll start here:
Me: If you want to talk about it from a fiscal standpoint, the wall would save money long term. For those of you who don't think a wall doesn't work, Israel just called.
You: It wouldn't save money. Israel's wall situation is nothing like ours. (No real response here. You just basically told me I’m wrong.)
Me: Of course, it would save money long-term. The money saved from social programs would eventually overtake the cost of the wall. How many years would it take to make that money back? I don't know for sure. I just know that at some point the wall would become economically feasible.
And Israel's situation is exactly like ours. We're trying to keep illegal people from coming over here and doing harm to our country and its citizens. Now, are Israel's issues more extreme? Absolutely. (Here I tell you why the wall would save us money long-term. It isn’t a weird statement. We spend a few billion today to save on tens of billions of what would constitute welfare, healthcare, employment, and wages for our current citizens).
You: That is assuming a few things:
1. The wall would actually work. It wouldn't. Even if it stopped all illegal border crossings it would not matter. Far more people come in illegally by overstaying their Visas.
2. You neglect the economic impact of not having a bunch of hispanics to do the work that Americans can't and won't do.
As for Israel. They have far fewer people trying to cross a much shorter border. It is beyond apples and oranges.
1. (First off, what does “actually work” mean? It’s a broad accusation which is followed by “Even if it stopped all illegal border crossings it would not matter.” Well, if it stops some illegal crossings, then it works. Does it work to what you deem acceptable? I guess not. However, that wasn’t the point of the conversation.)
2. (Next, you claim that Americans won’t participate in hard labor, even though that has been proven wrong in the past and the present. Did immigrants build the Hoover Dam or the interstate system?)
3. I obviously point out that China had logistically defended a much bigger border, centuries ago. You attempt to deflect on this, but that will come later.
Me: 1) It isn't the only factor needed, however it would still save money. You can always control how many visas you hand out, it's much harder to control illegal border crossings.
2) The impact would be more jobs, higher wages, and less impact on the social safety net.
3) So, your argument is that China could do it centuries ago, but we can't do it in this day and age? Gotcha.
1) I obviously point out that it will save money over the long haul (duh). Even you admitted this in a prior pass, although I’m guessing that your argument was really that it wouldn’t save enough during the time frame. I don’t know for sure, because you didn’t really enunciate your point.
2) This is obvious. A restriction of immigration would lead to more employment and higher wages among citizens. It’s a simple supply and demand concept that you evidently don’t approve of because it f***s with your bottom line.
3) Again, just reaffirming that the logistical “nightmare” of defending a border this big wasn’t a big deal for China but is something we evidently can’t accomplish.
You: It’s not just the inflation we have to worry about, which would be insane, but the quality. Guys like @UNC71-00 and I work in the construction industry. I’d take two 45 year old immigrants over 10 college educated millennials to do just about any physical job.
People have no idea how integral immigrant labor is to our economy
Also, your 200 year statement is stupid. We did it with slave labor and then Irish, German, Jewish, and Italian immigrants.
(Slave labor is nothing but a red herring. We obviously did it back in the 50’s and 60’s. I wasn’t aware that there was slavery back then. Just another deflection, although I had to laugh at the fact you threw in college graduates as part of the blue-collar labor crew. I guess it could be true if they majored in liberal arts and couldn’t depend on public subsidies to fund their jobs. As for inflation, I covered that earlier in the thread. Maybe you missed it, but I brought up how inflation would force the government to stop spending so much, because it would likely cause a riot. There would be a period of change, but it wouldn't be detrimental long-term.)
You: Then there was a bunch of comments about how US citizens couldn’t engage in manual labor.
Me: I don't know how we ever built anything before Mexicans. Did the Romans import Mexicans to build the Colosseum?
(Obviously the Romans weren’t importing Mexicans to build infrastructure for them, which was the point I was trying to defuse, your claim that only Mexicans would do hard work.)
You: You’re not helping your argument. All great civilizations built their infrastructure on slave labor.
The Roman Empire fell apart when they became too fat and happy, among other things.
The US has been built on Slave and immigration labor.
Do you even history, bro?
(This is just another red herring using slavery. Nobody had brought slavery into the conversation. You could have asked me what you meant, but you tried to play the race care…typical response for someone who is starting to lose their grip on the conversation.
Me: So, someone who has a stake in the game isn't going to work harder than someone who doesn't? That kind of flies in the face of common day management, doesn't it?
(What you were claiming here flies against everything that is being taught by common day management theory. If you treat your employees better and give them incentives, then they’ll work harder for you. There’s nothing crazy here. I don’t know how long ago you graduated. Maybe they were still teaching the “crush your workers spirit” method back then. I’m just telling you that it isn’t what they’re saying nowadays.)
You: Who’s gonna work harder?
The guy who’s been handed everything and livees for his smartphone
Or
The guy escaping violence and poverty in order to feed his family?
(Again, we weren’t talking about destroying work ethic by crushing wages. You kind of proved my point with this post. For that, I thank you.)
Me: That isn't who we're talking about here. Do you know who you sound like? You sound like some rich white guy who wants to take advantage of minorities.
Edit: Maybe you can hire the Pinkerton Detective Agency to keep them in line as well.
(This is me calling you a modern stay strikebreaker, even though you didn’t get it.)
You: Who are we talking about here? (You obviously don’t have a clue.)
This is about where the conversation really breaks down. You accused me of not knowing history (by trying to attribute claims to me that I never made), but you’re obviously the one who doesn’t know about history. Even after you recognized my Pinkertons quote, you just didn’t get it. You didn’t know who they were. That’s fine, but it’s pretty funny when you try to make that claim about other people by manipulating their quotes.
If you have any issues, just let me know.
Me: If you want to talk about it from a fiscal standpoint, the wall would save money long term. For those of you who don't think a wall doesn't work, Israel just called.
You: It wouldn't save money. Israel's wall situation is nothing like ours. (No real response here. You just basically told me I’m wrong.)
Me: Of course, it would save money long-term. The money saved from social programs would eventually overtake the cost of the wall. How many years would it take to make that money back? I don't know for sure. I just know that at some point the wall would become economically feasible.
And Israel's situation is exactly like ours. We're trying to keep illegal people from coming over here and doing harm to our country and its citizens. Now, are Israel's issues more extreme? Absolutely. (Here I tell you why the wall would save us money long-term. It isn’t a weird statement. We spend a few billion today to save on tens of billions of what would constitute welfare, healthcare, employment, and wages for our current citizens).
You: That is assuming a few things:
1. The wall would actually work. It wouldn't. Even if it stopped all illegal border crossings it would not matter. Far more people come in illegally by overstaying their Visas.
2. You neglect the economic impact of not having a bunch of hispanics to do the work that Americans can't and won't do.
As for Israel. They have far fewer people trying to cross a much shorter border. It is beyond apples and oranges.
1. (First off, what does “actually work” mean? It’s a broad accusation which is followed by “Even if it stopped all illegal border crossings it would not matter.” Well, if it stops some illegal crossings, then it works. Does it work to what you deem acceptable? I guess not. However, that wasn’t the point of the conversation.)
2. (Next, you claim that Americans won’t participate in hard labor, even though that has been proven wrong in the past and the present. Did immigrants build the Hoover Dam or the interstate system?)
3. I obviously point out that China had logistically defended a much bigger border, centuries ago. You attempt to deflect on this, but that will come later.
Me: 1) It isn't the only factor needed, however it would still save money. You can always control how many visas you hand out, it's much harder to control illegal border crossings.
2) The impact would be more jobs, higher wages, and less impact on the social safety net.
3) So, your argument is that China could do it centuries ago, but we can't do it in this day and age? Gotcha.
1) I obviously point out that it will save money over the long haul (duh). Even you admitted this in a prior pass, although I’m guessing that your argument was really that it wouldn’t save enough during the time frame. I don’t know for sure, because you didn’t really enunciate your point.
2) This is obvious. A restriction of immigration would lead to more employment and higher wages among citizens. It’s a simple supply and demand concept that you evidently don’t approve of because it f***s with your bottom line.
3) Again, just reaffirming that the logistical “nightmare” of defending a border this big wasn’t a big deal for China but is something we evidently can’t accomplish.
You: It’s not just the inflation we have to worry about, which would be insane, but the quality. Guys like @UNC71-00 and I work in the construction industry. I’d take two 45 year old immigrants over 10 college educated millennials to do just about any physical job.
People have no idea how integral immigrant labor is to our economy
Also, your 200 year statement is stupid. We did it with slave labor and then Irish, German, Jewish, and Italian immigrants.
(Slave labor is nothing but a red herring. We obviously did it back in the 50’s and 60’s. I wasn’t aware that there was slavery back then. Just another deflection, although I had to laugh at the fact you threw in college graduates as part of the blue-collar labor crew. I guess it could be true if they majored in liberal arts and couldn’t depend on public subsidies to fund their jobs. As for inflation, I covered that earlier in the thread. Maybe you missed it, but I brought up how inflation would force the government to stop spending so much, because it would likely cause a riot. There would be a period of change, but it wouldn't be detrimental long-term.)
You: Then there was a bunch of comments about how US citizens couldn’t engage in manual labor.
Me: I don't know how we ever built anything before Mexicans. Did the Romans import Mexicans to build the Colosseum?
(Obviously the Romans weren’t importing Mexicans to build infrastructure for them, which was the point I was trying to defuse, your claim that only Mexicans would do hard work.)
You: You’re not helping your argument. All great civilizations built their infrastructure on slave labor.
The Roman Empire fell apart when they became too fat and happy, among other things.
The US has been built on Slave and immigration labor.
Do you even history, bro?
(This is just another red herring using slavery. Nobody had brought slavery into the conversation. You could have asked me what you meant, but you tried to play the race care…typical response for someone who is starting to lose their grip on the conversation.
Me: So, someone who has a stake in the game isn't going to work harder than someone who doesn't? That kind of flies in the face of common day management, doesn't it?
(What you were claiming here flies against everything that is being taught by common day management theory. If you treat your employees better and give them incentives, then they’ll work harder for you. There’s nothing crazy here. I don’t know how long ago you graduated. Maybe they were still teaching the “crush your workers spirit” method back then. I’m just telling you that it isn’t what they’re saying nowadays.)
You: Who’s gonna work harder?
The guy who’s been handed everything and livees for his smartphone
Or
The guy escaping violence and poverty in order to feed his family?
(Again, we weren’t talking about destroying work ethic by crushing wages. You kind of proved my point with this post. For that, I thank you.)
Me: That isn't who we're talking about here. Do you know who you sound like? You sound like some rich white guy who wants to take advantage of minorities.
Edit: Maybe you can hire the Pinkerton Detective Agency to keep them in line as well.
(This is me calling you a modern stay strikebreaker, even though you didn’t get it.)
You: Who are we talking about here? (You obviously don’t have a clue.)
This is about where the conversation really breaks down. You accused me of not knowing history (by trying to attribute claims to me that I never made), but you’re obviously the one who doesn’t know about history. Even after you recognized my Pinkertons quote, you just didn’t get it. You didn’t know who they were. That’s fine, but it’s pretty funny when you try to make that claim about other people by manipulating their quotes.
If you have any issues, just let me know.
Last edited:
Definitely not. It just took me a while to dismantle so many of your arguments. Not hard, just time-consuming.
Whatever you need to tell yourself. I don’t even know where to begin. You speak a different language than me. Nothing I say will compel you. Happy New Year
Look, kid, I gave you the opportunity to walk away. This beating isn't on me. Instead, you had to call my bluff, and then do you know what happened?
Look, kid, I gave you the opportunity to walk away. This beating isn't on me. Instead, you had to call my bluff, and then do you know what happened?
Funny, but it doesn't change the fact that I continued to give you rope until you hung yourself.
You had such an easy out as well. You could have stated that you knew that it was an f'd up situation, but you had to do what you needed in order to compete. I would have understood that argument. Instead you had to double down on the modern day Gilded Age argument, which is pretty f'd up.
Oh Christ you are a simple one. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
Sweet dreams sugar.
This dude knows less than nothing about economics.
It is funny watching him self congratulate though. At first I thought he was joking. But he actually thinks he is about ten times smarter than he actually is
Oh, goody! More insults! It's starting to look like that's the only thing some of the posters on here can contribute.
If everyone is laughing at you, at what point do you acknowledge it might be you with the problem? Do we need an intervention here?
Everyone is laughing at me? That's such a narcissistic statement in this situation. Of course, for someone who is willing to crush the spirit of his fellow US citizens in favor of their bottom line, it's pretty much expected.
In B school you will learn there is one mantra for business owners.
Profits
Profits
Profits
That isn't what we're arguing here. You could have copped to that earlier, but you didn't. You put that out as your belief of how things should be. It still doesn't explain the insanely narcissistic comment from your prior post, which was liked by your extremely narcissistic partner, @uncboy10. Evidently, the two of you encompass "everyone".
You have no idea what you are trying to argue. You lose yourself in your arguments.
What is it you want to debate?
I don't know what I'm trying to argue? I'm not the one avoiding the other person's posts. You asked for that post and you still have yet to respond to it. Should I try to condense it into a 15 second Youtube post for you?
That post was the ramblings of a madman.
My points summed up for you:
- the border wall as proposed will be largely ineffective
- the US needs a cheap labor force
- we need to streamline immigration and find amnesty for those who contribute
Feel free to pick one at a time and discuss with me
Such broad statements. I've already covered all of that. Give me some specifics for once.
Edit: @uncboy10, can you come help the guy out?
Lol this clown calling people narcissistic is definitely a joke right?
Doubling down on his bad posts wasn't what I meant by "help the guy out." I want some real dialog here. I'm sure you guys are up to that.
Specifics? Your stance is build the wall, it will save money in the long run. That is the definition of vague.
The wall will work, it did so for China, despite China not building a wall to stem immigration, but slow down the adavance of invading Mongols. In an ironic twist, it didn’t work all that well and it was built by slave labor.
Americans will fill the void of empty job! That’s hysterical because young people would rather make $8/hr brewing coffee than $20/hr apprenticing in a trade
Okay, even though we're still rehashing some, we're still getting closer.
First, my stance was that the wall isn't the best solution, but that it is better than doing nothing, and yes it will save money in the long run. I've made multiple posts about this, so if you have an issue with any of my reasoning, let me know.
As for your China comment, again this is rehashing, but it essentially boils down to, "walls are meant to keep people out." The reasoning isn't really applicable. And before you reference visas, we've already covered this as well.
Then we come to the last part of your post. This is something that hasn't actually been rehashed, so let me answer this. The problem relies upon high school teachers, advisors, and administrators properly advising the students. If they aren't advising kids away from useless degrees, which generally lead to being a barista, in favor of useful degrees, such as trade degrees, then that is a breakdown of the biases of secondary education.
Similar threads
