TakeYouToTasker Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 (edited) You sound like Marx saying capitalism is doomed....chuckle I'm absolutely stunned here... You actually got this one correct. Prime example of a broken watch being right twice per day. Marx, while wrong about his theories of a workable socialism, was a brilliant thinker who made a wide variety of observations which continue to be relevant today. For example, he was the first to put his finger on exactly what capital is. Marx was also correct in his assessment of the eventual decline of capitalism, and when I am describing the failure of our current system, I am steping on Marx's observations to do so. We are currently in the sliding decline, well past the point of laissez faire, currently approaching what Marx defined as his "tipping point" in which more individuals are consuming the system's resources then are contributing to the system, a trend that will not be bucked, given a democratic system in which individuals vote for what they percieve to be their own immediate self-interest. So again, Marx was correct here. The system is doomed. They only real discussion is: what will replace it when it's gone? What's best at that point is where Marx and I diverge. Edited June 12, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 I'm absolutely stunned here... You actually got this one correct. Prime example of a broken watch being right twice per day. Marx, while wrong about his theories of a workable socialism, was a brilliant thinker who made a wide variety of observations which continue to be relevant today. For example, he was the first to put his finger on exactly what capital is. Marx was also correct in his assessment of capitalism, and when I am describing the failure of our current system, I am steping on Marx's observations to do so. We are currently in the sliding decline, well past the point of laissez faire, currently approaching what Marx defined as his "tipping point" in which more individuals are consuming the system's resources then are contributing to the system, a trend that will not be bucked, given a democratic system in which individuals vote for what they percieve to be their own immediate self-interest. So again, Marx was correct here. The system is doomed. They only real discussion is: what will replace it when it's gone? What's best at that point is where Marx and I diverge. This I agree with too that the current system is doomed. And unfortunately the whole !@#$ing thing will need to implode before any major (and you're talking MAJOR) changes can be made. Those changes will never fly until people see that the system is 100% !@#$ed. It will never be changed while so much of the population thinks things are just fine. You are good at systems analysis. I'm good at people analysis. You work with systems all day, I work with people. And a good majority of people have their head planted deeply in the sand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 I do understand your points I just think they are impossible to implement. This country can't even implement the ACA without inciting "riots" amongst the population. What you're proposing is a plan and that's it. Why have you avoided commenting on the political viability? Because it not politically viable and how do you plan to get aroud that? You have these gradiose ideas of what will work. In your mind it's a perfect solution. Even if it were the perfect solution please explain how you would completely unwind over 200 years of political/cultural history and implement these changes without making it political? Whether I agree with your ideas or not is immaterial at this point. I'd love to hear how you would make these vast changes reality? The system will only change one of three ways: Military coup d'etat , or revolution, after which reforms are implemented at the point of a gun. Every sane person in the country prays this will never happen. Drastic, and immediate, political shift in which all three branches of government are transformed, and those same reforms are implemented democratically. I think everyone can agree this in incredibly unlikely. Collapse of of the existing system under it's own weight. This is not only likely, but unavoidable. The things I propose are not for today. They are for the post collapse, which will be the only opportunity to change the system we use. You keep saying you're not for opening the borders. Ok then are you proposing a system by where people from outside the US need to pass some sort of financial, educational exam in order to be let in? You made it sound like they can travel here, it's their human right but in order to stay here they have to be productive members of society. The first I agree with and have always agreed with that but it can't happen until the borders are secured. The second way is impossible to enforce. So explain how you plan on doing that. I am for opening the borders for residence not for citizenship, and the benfits there of. Further, I am for placing merit restrictions of citizenship, even amongst those individuals born here, regardless of the birthplace of their parents. I am also a proponent of restricting the use of various federal services to those who are citizens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 I'm absolutely stunned here... You actually got this one correct. Prime example of a broken watch being right twice per day. Marx, while wrong about his theories of a workable socialism, was a brilliant thinker who made a wide variety of observations which continue to be relevant today. For example, he was the first to put his finger on exactly what capital is. Marx was also correct in his assessment of capitalism, and when I am describing the failure of our current system, I am steping on Marx's observations to do so. We are currently in the sliding decline, well past the point of laissez faire, currently approaching what Marx defined as his "tipping point" in which more individuals are consuming the system's resources then are contributing to the system, a trend that will not be bucked, given a democratic system in which individuals vote for what they percieve to be their own immediate self-interest. So again, Marx was correct here. The system is doomed. They only real discussion is: what will replace it when it's gone? What's best at that point is where Marx and I diverge. Boom! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 The system will only change one of three ways: Military coup d'etat , or revolution, after which reforms are implemented at the point of a gun. Every sane person in the country prays this will never happen. Drastic, and immediate, political shift in which all three branches of government are transformed, and those same reforms are implemented democratically. I think everyone can agree this in incredibly unlikely. Collapse of of the existing system under it's own weight. This is not only likely, but unavoidable. The things I propose are not for today. They are for the post collapse, which will be the only opportunity to change the system we use. Ok, now we're getting somewhere. I may not agree with everything you propose but I do agree what is going to happen in order to make those changes. The whole thing needs to collapse. I am for opening the borders for residence not for citizenship, and the benfits there of. Further, I am for placing merit restrictions of citizenship, even amongst those individuals born here, regardless of the birthplace of their parents. I am also a proponent of restricting the use of various federal services to those who are citizens. And this is where I disagree 100%. The massive influx of "residents" will completely overload and crash the system. Look at what we have coming over now. The majority of the challenges in CA can be traced directly to overpopulation due to illegal immigration. And that's pretty much what we have now. Millions of residents who are not citizens. And by making it a merit based system, thinking that if you make life hard for these people they will just go home is absurd. Even living here without government handouts is still better than living where they do now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 And this is where I disagree 100%. The massive influx of "residents" will completely overload and crash the system. Look at what we have coming over now. They would crash the current system, which doesn't scale. They would not crash the new system, as I have outlined it, which does. The majority of the challenges in CA can be traced directly to overpopulation due to illegal immigration. And that's pretty much what we have now. Millions of residents who are not citizens. Correct. With a system not designed to accomodate their residence, and affording them most of the benefits and services of citizenship. And by making it a merit based system, thinking that if you make life hard for these people they will just go home is absurd. Even living here without government handouts is still better than living where they do now. Which is fine, because they wouldn't be draining the reources of the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 They would crash the current system, which doesn't scale. They would not crash the new system, as I have outlined it, which does. Correct. With a system not designed to accomodate their residence, and affording them most of the benefits and services of citizenship. Which is fine, because they wouldn't be draining the reources of the system. Ahhhh they systems analyst who deals with pen, paper and calculator. Everything works well on paper. Enter the people analyst, the realist if you will. The person who deals with people who are bound and determined to do things their way regardless how difficult it may be for them or the system. Those that fight the system. Your system will only work in a perfect world and when you're dealing with people, people of hundreds of different cultures and backgrouds the world is far from perfect. So I get your plan of merit and scalability but in the end you'll have to deal with people. That is why I never hire people with a background as analyst. They have no idea how to deal with people. I mean look at Tom for God sakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 12, 2014 Author Share Posted June 12, 2014 One question that I have not seen asked here is how are all these children from South America arriving at our southern border without assistance? Is Mexico freely letting them into their country? http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/ex-border-agents-immigrant-flood-orchestrated/ An organization of former Border Patrol agents Wednesday charged that the federal government, under the administration of President Obama, is deliberately arranging for a flood of immigrant children to arrive in America for political purposes. “This is not a humanitarian crisis. It is a predictable, orchestrated and contrived assault on the compassionate side of Americans by her political leaders that knowingly puts minor illegal alien children at risk for purely political purposes,” said the statement released by the National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers. “Certainly, we are not gullible enough to believe that thousands of unaccompanied minor Central American children came to America without the encouragement, aid and assistance of the United States government,” the officers said. WND exclusive: Congressmen say Obama “attempt to flood border” part of infamous socialist “Cloward-Piven” strategy “Anyone that has taken two six- to seven-year-old children to an amusement park can only imagine the problems associated with bringing thousands of unaccompanied children that age up through Mexico and into the United States.” Republicans are blaming Obama’s immigration policies for enticing the illegals, particularly the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program launched in 2012, which recently was renewed. Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/ex-border-agents-immigrant-flood-orchestrated/#xjHFDpuD8QiglqL4.99'>http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/ex-border-agents-immigrant-flood-orchestrated/#xjHFDpuD8QiglqL4.99 Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/06/ex-border-agents-immigrant-flood-orchestrated/#xjHFDpuD8QiglqL4.99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Ahhhh they systems analyst who deals with pen, paper and calculator. Everything works well on paper. Enter the people analyst, the realist if you will. The person who deals with people who are bound and determined to do things their way regardless how difficult it may be for them or the system. Those that fight the system. Your system will only work in a perfect world and when you're dealing with people, people of hundreds of different cultures and backgrouds the world is far from perfect. So I get your plan of merit and scalability but in the end you'll have to deal with people. That is why I never hire people with a background as analyst. They have no idea how to deal with people. I mean look at Tom for God sakes. How do they break a system which dictates that they can only receive what they pay for, and can't become entitled to the benefits of citizenship unless they citizenship test (comprehensive of math, the sciences, US history and civics, and english proficiency), and either own a business or property or have served in the military? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 How do they break a system which dictates that they can only receive what they pay for, and can't become entitled to the benefits of citizenship unless they citizenship test (comprehensive of math, the sciences, US history and civics, and english proficiency), and either own a business or property or have served in the military? Seriously?? That's exactly what we have now. People here illegally are not entitled to benefits of citizenship. They"ll survive just as they do now. Through panhandling, black market, under the table wages (which cuts the open market wage you're suggesting by doing away with minimum wage) criminal activity and figuring out how to job the system. Only with your plan, no border, there will be a much, much larger influx. Once again even with no benefits of citizenship it will still be better (in their mind and in some cases in reality) than what they currently have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Seriously?? That's exactly what we have now. People here illegally are not entitled to benefits of citizenship. Ah, but they are. They are entitled to government schools, housing and food benefits, medical care, etc. They"ll survive just as they do now. Through panhandling, black market, under the table wages (which cuts the open market wage you're suggesting by doing away with minimum wage) criminal activity and figuring out how to job the system. I have no issues with panhandling (it's the giver's choice), and the black market only persists where desirable articles are made illegal or are taxed excessively; that will always persist as long as those conditions are in place. As far as under the table/minimum wages goes, wage will always be dictated by the supply/demand curve of a particular skill set. If an influx of unskilled labor drives down wages for unskilled labor, I'm fine with that, as it leads to decreases in price. This also doesn't cause changes in skilled labor markets, as their supply/demand curves aren't affected. Various criminal activities or fraud would be punishable by military conscription under my system; and conscription based service would not be applicable towards attaining citizenship as voluntary service would. (however voluntary service towards citizenship would certainly be offered at the end of one's conscription period) Only with your plan, no border, there will be a much, much larger influx. Once again even with no benefits of citizenship it will still be better (in their mind and in some cases in reality) than what they currently have. Initially, perhaps; but the reality would soon set in and the inflows would curb. But even if/while the influx was in play, the system scales, and would not be overwhelmed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 Ah, but they are. They are entitled to government schools, housing and food benefits, medical care, etc. I have no issues with panhandling (it's the giver's choice), and the black market only persists where desirable articles are made illegal or are taxed excessively; that will always persist as long as those conditions are in place. As far as under the table/minimum wages goes, wage will always be dictated by the supply/demand curve of a particular skill set. If an influx of unskilled labor drives down wages for unskilled labor, I'm fine with that, as it leads to decreases in price. This also doesn't cause changes in skilled labor markets, as their supply/demand curves aren't affected. Various criminal activities or fraud would be punishable by military conscription under my system; and conscription based service would not be applicable towards attaining citizenship as voluntary service would. (however voluntary service towards citizenship would certainly be offered at the end of one's conscription period) Initially, perhaps; but the reality would soon set in and the inflows would curb. But even if/while the influx was in play, the system scales, and would not be overwhelmed. You have no problem with panhandlers? Where do you live. Do you like homeless people too? I guarantee the amount of homeless people will skyrocket. They come here because they heard the border is now open. They realize they can't make it (like most today) but they stay hoping to some day make it. Kind of like waiters in Hollywood. Your plan will not change that. The black market also exists when there are people that are willing to undercut the true market to survive. The sellers create the market not the buyers many times. The legality or amount of taxes on their product has nothing to do with it. Especially when their cost of goods is zero. Criminal activity would be punishable by giving criminals guns and taught how to kill people? I think you'd get a good portion of the criminal population that would commit crimes just so they could do that? Any idea how many gang bangers join the military? And why do they do that? Once again, where do you live? Have you ever lived in a border state? Your plan will not deter undesirables from coming here. I understand your desire to change the way things are now. But if your plan doesn't work and the borders are wide open it could be a major !@#$ing disaster. Major. Do you really think Jose and Maria from deep in the slums of Mexico City or Guatemala will understand anything that you're talking about. They'll hear "the border is down, let's go!" But if you think reality will set in and more will go back than are coming I'm going to ask you a third time. Where do you live? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 . Various criminal activities or fraud would be punishable by military conscription under my system; and conscription based service would not be applicable towards attaining citizenship as voluntary service would. (however voluntary service towards citizenship would certainly be offered at the end of one's conscription period) Service for what??? What are you going to have this army of criminals doing? And would they get paid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 (edited) You have no problem with panhandlers? Where do you live. Do you like homeless people too? I guarantee the amount of homeless people will skyrocket. They come here because they heard the border is now open. They realize they can't make it (like most today) but they stay hoping to some day make it. Kind of like waiters in Hollywood. Your plan will not change that. No, I have no issue with panhandlers. Asking someone for money hurts noone, and it is the givers choice to give, or not. No, I have no issue with the homeless. Not having a place to live is not a crime, nor should it be. The choice to be homeless, while not acceptable to myself, is not an immoral one, nor is it a property crime. Where people choose to stay is a non-starter issue for me. People can stay where they choose. The black market also exists when there are people that are willing to undercut the true market to survive. The sellers create the market not the buyers many times. The legality or amount of taxes on their product has nothing to do with it. Especially when their cost of goods is zero. The black market is part of the true market, and the black market is litterally created by legislation against certain products or taxes which drastically increase price. Two examples: The market for illicit drugs (desirable products made illegal) The market for duty free cigarettes (a rapidly growing black market industry, skirting heavey taxes on the product) Criminal activity would be punishable by giving criminals guns and taught how to kill people? I think you'd get a good portion of the criminal population that would commit crimes just so they could do that? Laughable. The military is about respect and discipline. It turns boys into men. Further, any gang members or criminals inclined to those ends have likely already done so. You should also note that I've not included gang membership or related crimes in any lists of offenses which would lead to conscription. That's your baby, not mine. Any idea how many gang bangers join the military? And why do they do that? Some to escape the gang lifestyle, others as an alternative to prison. Obviously some enlist to take advantage of tactical combat training. However, the issues associated with gang members in the military are largely because the military doesn't know who they are when they enlist. This is the opposite of what I suggest, in which the military would be well aware of prior affiliations, or offenses, as it would be a major part of their paying their debt to society. And again, this isn't even part of my larger discussion, as conscription of gang memebers is your thing, not mine. Once again, where do you live? Have you ever lived in a border state? I live on the East Coast currently, but lived for years in Arizona. Though I fail to see the relevance. Your plan will not deter undesirables from coming here. No plan will stop undesirables from coming here. I understand your desire to change the way things are now. But if your plan doesn't work and the borders are wide open it could be a major !@#$ing disaster. Major. Do you really think Jose and Maria from deep in the slums of Mexico City or Guatemala will understand anything that you're talking about. They'll hear "the border is down, let's go!" But if you think reality will set in and more will go back than are coming I'm going to ask you a third time. Where do you live? They stay because of the benefits, and because of the knowedge that any children born here will be US citizens, anchoring them to this country. I take that away from them. Service for what??? What are you going to have this army of criminals doing? And would they get paid? Currently? They'd be getting their asses shot off in Iraq and Afghanistan. And no, they wouldn't be getting paid. They'd be paying their debt to society. Edited June 12, 2014 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 No, I have no issue with panhandlers. Asking someone for money hurts noone, and it is the givers choice to give, or not. In fairness, that really depends on where the panhandlers are asking for the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 In fairness, that really depends on where the panhandlers are asking for the money. Agreed. If they are on private property, then they are trespassing. They have every right, however, to use public property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted June 12, 2014 Share Posted June 12, 2014 No, I have no issue with panhandlers. Asking someone for money hurts noone, and it is the givers choice to give, or not. No, I have no issue with the homeless. Not having a place to live is not a crime, nor should it be. The choice to be homeless, while not acceptable to myself, is not an immoral one, nor is it a property crime. Where people choose to stay is a non-starter issue for me. People can stay where they choose. The black market is part of the true market, and the black market is litterally created by legislation against certain products or taxes which drastically increase price. Two examples: The market for illicit drugs (desirable products made illegal) The market for duty free cigarettes (a rapidly growing black market industry, skirting heavey taxes on the product) Laughable. The military is about respect and discipline. It turns boys into men. Further, any gang members or criminals inclined to those ends have likely already done so. You should also note that I've not included gang membership or related crimes in any lists of offenses which would lead to conscription. That's your baby, not mine. Some to escape the gang lifestyle, others as an alternative to prison. Obviously some enlist to take advantage of tactical combat training. However, the issues associated with gang members in the military are largely because the military doesn't know who they are when they enlist. This is the opposite of what I suggest, in which the military would be well aware of prior affiliations, or offenses, as it would be a major part of their paying their debt to society. And again, this isn't even part of my larger discussion, as conscription of gang memebers is your thing, not mine. I live on the East Coast currently, but lived for years in Arizona. Though I fail to see the relevance. No plan will stop undesirables from coming here. They stay because of the benefits, and because of the knowedge that any children born here will be US citizens, anchoring them to this country. I take that away from them. Currently? They'd be getting their asses shot off in Iraq and Afghanistan. And no, they wouldn't be getting paid. They'd be paying their debt to society. Asking for money hurts noone (sic)? This is why I ask where you live. Say no to a panhandler in the Haight and see if there's a possibility you may get hurt. You have no issue with homelessness? Once again that's why I ask where you live. Where do you think homeless people go to defecate and urinate? Yeah that's right the streets. That is a major health issue. Now this is 100% anecdotal but three years ago my wife become deathly ill while we lived in SF. They were never able to determine what it was but it was thought is was due to the homeless people living and bathing around the corner from our house. Now you may come back with I don't have to live in SF (which I don't anymore) but why should one have to leave because of that. So the black market exists only because of products and services being illegal or overly taxed. Those may be two of the major factor but not the only reasons. Someone who can't find work and because of that cannot pay for the government services may steal anything and sell it on the black market. Our house was broken in to and several thousands of dollars of jewelry was stolen. Where do you think that was sold? Macys?? Illegals only stay here because of the free handouts and anchor babies? That is again why I asked where you live. I've been in CA for over 30 years and I am very aware of why illegals are here. Sure those are two big reasons but many come here for the same reason Willy Sutton robbed banks. It's where the money is. I commend you for the thought you put in to your ideas. But once again the implementation of this would be nearly impossible. It would take a complete implosion of the current system and several generations (50-100 years) before it would come to a final solution. Sorry, was that a poor choice of words? Agreed. If they are on private property, then they are trespassing. They have every right, however, to use public property. And every right to harass you if you don't fork over the 40's money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 13, 2014 Share Posted June 13, 2014 (edited) Obama Admin Forbids Lawmakers From Taking Photos Of Illegal Immigrant Facility by Chuck Ross The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is welcoming members of Congress and their senior staff to tour a temporary shelter being used to house illegal immigrant children — but the invite comes with a list of rules, including a suggestion that members leave their cellphones in their vehicles. The 40-minute tour will take place Friday at the Ventura County Naval Base in Oxnard, Calif., according to the email invitation, obtained by The Daily Caller. The tours are meant to give members and staffers an inside look at how temporary facilities are being used to house illegal immigrant children who came to the U.S. without their parents. The minors, who hail mostly from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala, are being called “Unaccompanied Children,” or UACs. Sent to members of Congress and staff by Rose Hacking, of the office of the assistant secretary of legislation at HHS, the invitation comes with the following commands: No recording devices will be allowed (We may ask you to leave your cellphone in our vehicle) No questions will be allowed during the tour, but questions will be addressed later No interacting with staff and children at the shelter We will provide photos of the facility after the tour During the tour, ”the tour guide will detail what goes on from room to room and the services youth are provided on a daily basis,” the email invitation reads. But one congressional staffer invited to tour the facility called the planned tours “a dog and pony show.” “Don’t talk to anyone, don’t record anything you might happen to see, but come visit us and we’ll give you a sanitized story with only the photos and accounts we want you to have,” said the staffer, who requested anonymity. Read more: http://dailycaller.c.../#ixzz34YCBKVAY . Edited June 13, 2014 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted June 13, 2014 Share Posted June 13, 2014 hoo ya gonna believe... yer lyin' eyes or the administration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) White House floods us with illegals who have been lied to, as we see six year olds who "have walked 1,000 miles" in flip-flops and are spotless. On immigrant surge, White House story falls apart Washington Examiner [DC], by Byron York Original Article Edited June 16, 2014 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts