It’s not that RP isn’t “accurate”, he’s just incorrect.
Ummmm, no. The fact of the matter is that immigrant workers are very unlikely to pay taxes, even if they’re properly documented. There is nothing wrong with this IMO, the problem is that anyone does have to pay taxes. As far as taxes and/or free-riding is concerned, consider:
Anyone who works under-the-table for cash (immigrant or citizen) is unlikely to pay taxes on that income.
The wealthy might not pay “their fare share” (whatever that means, since I don’t believe that any “share” is “fair” to begin with!), but they do, as a rule, pay taxes.
The most people who don’t pay taxes (not “their taxes”) are poor & middle class, most of whom pay zero net taxes, and many of whom are actually net recipients of taxes.
That is the danger that I see. Mexico is Mexico primarialy becuase of the people and thier culture. As bad and complacent as Americans are when it comes to corruption and encroachment on our liberties. Mexico is much, much worse. This is true of many third world countries. I veiw those cultures as interesting, but I do not wish to live or raise a family there and prefer to keep them at arms length. I guess that is where my aversion to what is happening in the US comes from.
Dont forget the role government has played in the destruction of neighborhoods. The use of the school systems to break down cultural and racial barriers. The construction of public housing in and near formerly middle class neiborhoods. Along with the use of tax codes and labor law to deny people their right of association.
Doesn’t look like anyone wants to touch this with a ten-foot pole:
The drug war, and its concomitant violence is a natural and predictable outcome of prohibition, which is an affront to liberty everywhere. Get rid of the prohibition, gets rid of the monopoly prices and drug-cartel profits, and the drug “problem” will drastically reduce.
Everyone wants low prices for everything, except for their own particular wage. You can’t have your cake and eat it, too. Deal with it. This is fundamentally, a retarded argument. If nobody ever worked harder, or smarter, or cheaper, a DVD player would still cost $800 (or more likely, DVDs wouldn’t even exist and we’d be churning butter by hand and tilling soil with Grandpa’s femur).
Nobody gets SS unless via fraud, in which case the immigrant is not the problem, the fraud is the problem. Most welfare programs require some amount of documentation, i.e., SSN, ID etc. The welfare benefits, well, you could easily make an argument against welfare. if we stop providing these things on a welfare basis, the incentive to come here and “abuse” the system would be very, very small. No system to exploit = no exploitation.
But also, if you think people are risking life and limb to crawl through a f*cking desert on their hands and knees, just so they can get a free trip to the hospital if they break their leg falling off a ladder, you’re mistaken.
So is Detroit, and we don’t have the convenient scapegoat of “Mexicans”.
That’s about as racist as it gets, dude. Seriously.
From my experience it is incorrect and misses the real dangers to our society. All the things that he has described is present in most white communities and most obvious substance abuse problem is alcohol. The real issue is whether they are more accepting of overbearing and corrupt government, what their concept of rights are, and whether all of this is compatable with our population. When you compare Mexico to the US I think there are some real differences and problems.
This is not true. Yes, they do speak Spanish and very few learn English early on, but there is no threat to “U.S. sovereignty”. The majority of Mexicans left Mexico because they disagree with their government’s policies. I’m sure that very few would accept Mexican rule in Southern California, so the entire idea that immigration is a threat to a State’s sovereignty is false.
This is true, only because of minimum wage. Increasing the labor pool is only an ingredient to increasing productivity.
Another reason to get rid of government welfare, but not restrict immigration.
This is a hyperbole. I live in San Diego and crime in San Diego is relatively low compared to crime where there are less Mexicans living. And, crime does not stem from a greater amount of immigrants, just a greater amount of poverty, and that is not caused by immigration… it’s caused by government.
This is false. It would be like me saying that I’ve never met a white person who isn’t fat.
Indeed. I also live in Southern California. Currently I live in Orange County. I used to live in LA County. Communities in southern CA have problems but it’s hardly a “wreck.”
Things maybe different in Southern Cal and there maybe a bunch of political refugees there, but over here on the other coast I get a completely different impression. These fellas here are intensely proud of being Mexican. They say they are here to make money and then return home to their families. I fact there has been a significant flight of workers back to Mexico since the construction market has collapsed.
As far as the threat that is posed to the border states and US integrity, we need look a little at history. It wasent long ago that all the the American Southwest was Mexican territory. At the time the area was sparsely populated and the Mexican government encouraged Americans to emigrate and settle the region. Seemed like a good idea at the time. It wasent long however untill the population was predominately American and it wasent long after that till the new populace began to advocate for independance from Mexico.
Dont underestimate the strength of blood ties. Mexican nationalism is a powerful force and when the US begins to show signs of weakness, it will become a major problem.
And? Is it un-libertarian to admit when you dont like certain people (be they brown, white, whatever) living around you? I doubt Juan Pablo in Mexico would like it very much if his town become heavily populated with white American retirees.
And for those of you who are denying socal’s ‘problems’, youre in denial.
I’m still not sure how that is a threat to “our sovereignty”.
Over 150 years ago. There is no Mexican nationalism in what used to be Mexican territory. There are Mexicans who are proud of being Mexican, but there are few Mexicans who would like to see a Mexican-ruled Southwestern United States.
You’re missing some key points of this history. The United States is markedly less tyrannical than the current Mexican government. The U.S. economy is larger than Mexico’s. In terms of economic rights, they are far more respected in the United States than in Mexico. The same incentives are not in place to catalyze some sort of Mexican revolution.
If I gave the impression that it is an immediate threat then I appologize it is not what I intended. But the idea that because today the idea of spliting the American Southwest from the US as either an independant nation or reunification with Mexico is marginal at best does not mean that in the future when certain circumstances change that it is not possible. One of the things to make this possible is for the character of the population to change from those with strong cultural, religious, and historical ties to the US into a population with cultural, religious, and historical ties to Mexico. When left to their own devices people form associations with those that they feel a kin to. Like I said certain prerequisites must be made and this is just one. I think some others will be changing in my lifetime. Just to reiterate I’m not talking about today or ever 10 years from now.
It would only make sense if secession from the United States and incorporation into Mexico provided economic advantages, which is unlikely. Even then, if the population of an area wanted to secede I don’t see the disadvantage to that (and, in any case, it would be secession to form a sovereign nation, not “return” to Mexico). Sorry, but I think that restricting immigration on the basis that in the far future it may cause secession is not justified.
But you don’t know that. You’re just assuming it. The way racists assume that people of a certain race or nationality are not individuals, but part of some collective. It would be like someone assuming you are a liberal or a welfare recipient or a warmonger or a cowboy because you’re American. Doesn’t make much sense does it?