Quote (Black XistenZ @ May 2 2022 04:48pm)
He was invoking a Darwinian argument: that the natural behavior of any group of living beings is to want to pass on their genes (and in the case of humans also their memes), and that it's deeply fucked up and - in a Darwinian sense - unnatural when a particular society would rather attempt to let strangers carry on its legacy and instiutions just to (hypothetically) save a few bucks on education and childcare spending. Which brings me to the next point:
This is only true if several conditions are met:
1. the migrant is qualified enough that he ends up in a job where he pays enough taxes to become a net contributor to society. No, a pool boy or uber driver is not gonna be a great boon. From a societal perspective, it would be more efficient to automate these jobs or to fill them with unemployed already living in the country.
2. the migrant is young enough to build up his own retirement plan and doesn't end up on Social Security. A guy in his 40s would be too old unless he's super qualified/productive.
3. the migrant doesn't eventually bring in a lot of low(er)-productivity relatives via chain migration.
4. the migrant is successfully assimilating.
You're probably thinking of cases where there's a bright young dude coming to a U.S. college, but China/India or so paid for his primary and secondary education. Yes, in cases like that, it would of course be a huge win if he stays after graduating and boosts the productivity in the U.S. rather than in his home country. But that's far from the norm, and no, Mexican high school dropouts are not making the U.S. a more prosperous place.
Misunderstanding evolution is exactly how fascism works. Evolution is descriptive, not prescriptive. We are humans, not robots propagating our genes. So no, that argument doesn't hold weight and you are actively perpetuating fascist ideologies by arguing for it.
Virtually all immigrants are net contributors. Contrary to conservative lies, immigrants don't get welfare benefits. It's actually incredibly hard for a working immigrant to not be a positive to society.
Immigrants don't get social security until they're full citizens. Also, social security only pays out in proportion to what you put in. I know you're foreign so I don't expect you to understand that part.
The chain-migration argument is also garbage. It's insanely difficult to get approval for family to come in. Often the line is literally DECADES long. Which is why we have so much illegal immigration. And if they are bringing in people via chain migration illegally they aren't going to be people who aren't working, unless they are children maybe.
"assimilation" is poorly defined. It basically just means whatever the person wants to make immigrants look bad.
You are just spouting right-wing talking points with no critical thought behind them. As usual.
Quote (Black XistenZ @ May 2 2022 06:25pm)
They don't have to measure up. A country's native born population has a right to be there via birth. By contrast, immigration is a choice. Contrary to what many open borders activists claim, there exists no human right to settle in any country of one's choosing.
Simply put, the home grown dregs of society are a problem that each society has to deal with, but there is no reason or obligation to let in the dregs of other societies on top of that. Countries have a right to pick their immigrants, to only accept those who can be expected to fit in and contribute.
What's it like being a piece of shit? Genuinely curious. You really think people risking their lives to cross the border to get a better life are dregs? What a crock of shit.
This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on May 2 2022 05:29pm