Jump to content
270soft Forum

After the UK Prime Minister announced a snap General Election


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, Presidentinsertname said:

Could someone with asperger hold office? i considering running when i am old enough for a small position but just wondering for any level.

Yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Presidentinsertname said:

Had anyone ever did before?

It's unknown because they normally don't disclose it for some reason. But it's speculated that Washington, Jefferson, maybe Al Gore have it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, koneke said:

Let's say Southerners were fleeing the South to come to Europe, would we see the Left come out in massive numbers and say refugees welcome? It is a hypothetical question but it is an interesting thought. The Left is tolerant of those who hate the White Christian males. Immigration from the Third World will change Europe, which is enough of a reason to be against it. I don't see how preserving your civilization and way of life is far-right or xenophobic. That is not dehumanising anyone, but rather shows healthy signs of self-preservation and pride. I can tell you that if you keep telling people that it is far-right, people will flock to the far-right and it won't be happy for you leftists.

If they were fleeing a civil war, then I'd hope they'd be accepted, and they probably would, because they're white and Christian, like a significant portion (a majority?) of Europe. They'd change Europe's "culture," if such a monolithic thing even exists, as well so I fail to see how that's any different from Syrian refugees, except that sometimes they have different melanin levels in their skin cells and follow a different one of the three Abrahamic religions. (If you let in all the Southerners, you'd get more Walmarts, more cheap beer, bigger pickup trucks and more of them, 7,689,374% more Confederate flags, way more guns, etc. Trust me, as a white Christian male in a kinda-sorta Southern state, I spend a significant portion of my time around conservative white Christian Southerners, many of whom are male).

And yes, it's dehumanizing to see billions of people not as human beings seeking to better themselves and/or flee war by coming to Europe but rather as cultural invaders set on destroying Europe. What part of "European culture" would change or end if you let in refugees, anyway?

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, CalebsParadox said:

We can switch states. You can take deep red Tennessee, and I'll take Maryland... :P 

 

18 hours ago, jvikings1 said:

Which state are you thinking about moving to?

Also, where are you thinking you will go to college, when that comes around?

 

TN would be nice, something Deep Southern. Clemson is a great school! So is SMU.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bruce Fischer said:

If they were fleeing a civil war, then I'd hope they'd be accepted, and they probably would, because they're white and Christian, like a significant portion (a majority?) of Europe. They'd change Europe's "culture," if such a monolithic thing even exists, as well so I fail to see how that's any different from Syrian refugees, except that sometimes they have different melanin levels in their skin cells and follow a different one of the three Abrahamic religions. (If you let in all the Southerners, you'd get more Walmarts, more cheap beer, bigger pickup trucks and more of them, 7,689,374% more Confederate flags, way more guns, etc. Trust me, as a white Christian male in a kinda-sorta Southern state, I spend a significant portion of my time around conservative white Christian Southerners, many of whom are male).

And yes, it's dehumanizing to see billions of people not as human beings seeking to better themselves and/or flee war by coming to Europe but rather as cultural invaders set on destroying Europe. What part of "European culture" would change or end if you let in refugees, anyway?

 Why don't they go to the countries that have the same culture?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, koneke said:

 Why don't they go to the countries that have the same culture?

Because the wealthiest of those countries with the highest standards of living (the Persian Gulf Monarchies, with their glittering, ultra-modern cities built on oil profits) forbade these refugees by royal decrees (which are sufficiently binding law there, are these nations are NOT, in any sense of the word, constitutional monarchies) from even setting foot on their land.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

Because the wealthiest of those countries with the highest standards of living (the Persian Gulf Monarchies, with their glittering, ultra-modern cities built on oil profits) forbade these refugees by royal decrees (which are sufficiently binding law there, are these nations are NOT, in any sense of the word, constitutional monarchies) from even setting foot on their land.

maybe they know them better than we do and that is the reason they don't want them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎14‎/‎05‎/‎2017 at 0:41 PM, koneke said:

Let's say Southerners were fleeing the South to come to Europe, would we see the Left come out in massive numbers and say refugees welcome? It is a hypothetical question but it is an interesting thought. The Left is tolerant of those who hate the White Christian males. Immigration from the Third World will change Europe, which is enough of a reason to be against it. I don't see how preserving your civilization and way of life is far-right or xenophobic. That is not dehumanising anyone, but rather shows healthy signs of self-preservation and pride. I can tell you that if you keep telling people that it is far-right, people will flock to the far-right and it won't be happy for you leftists.

 

On ‎14‎/‎05‎/‎2017 at 5:26 PM, Bruce Fischer said:

If they were fleeing a civil war, then I'd hope they'd be accepted, and they probably would, because they're white and Christian, like a significant portion (a majority?) of Europe. They'd change Europe's "culture," if such a monolithic thing even exists, as well so I fail to see how that's any different from Syrian refugees, except that sometimes they have different melanin levels in their skin cells and follow a different one of the three Abrahamic religions. (If you let in all the Southerners, you'd get more Walmarts, more cheap beer, bigger pickup trucks and more of them, 7,689,374% more Confederate flags, way more guns, etc. Trust me, as a white Christian male in a kinda-sorta Southern state, I spend a significant portion of my time around conservative white Christian Southerners, many of whom are male).

And yes, it's dehumanizing to see billions of people not as human beings seeking to better themselves and/or flee war by coming to Europe but rather as cultural invaders set on destroying Europe. What part of "European culture" would change or end if you let in refugees, anyway?

I am personally of the opinion that uncontrolled immigration is a bad thing, and we need to screen refugees closely before we let them in, and I'm fiercely Eurosceptic and against what people consider to be the left right now, but I agree with Bruce here. Of course we would take Southerners fleeing a civil war. We not only have a responsibility to take the refugees, but we would react more to people who we can identify with more than Islamic refugees. The sight of seeing other people who live lifestyles like ours would shock us, and then, I hope, we would open our doors to all refugees, no matter their nationalities.

 

 

Also if I could vote in 2040, I would be very conflicted between Fischer/Lagsalott vs. Jvikings/Reagan04

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LegolasRedbard said:

 

I am personally of the opinion that uncontrolled immigration is a bad thing, and we need to screen refugees closely before we let them in, and I'm fiercely Eurosceptic and against what people consider to be the left right now, but I agree with Bruce here. Of course we would take Southerners fleeing a civil war. We not only have a responsibility to take the refugees, but we would react more to people who we can identify with more than Islamic refugees. The sight of seeing other people who live lifestyles like ours would shock us, and then, I hope, we would open our doors to all refugees, no matter their nationalities.

 

 

Also if I could vote in 2040, I would be very conflicted between Fischer/Lagsalott vs. Jvikings/Reagan04

Well, thank you for yet another clichéd and purely partisan statement on this forum, right down the ballotline and with your side of the mace chosen as sheepishly as possible. :S

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patine said:

Well, thank you for yet another clichéd and purely partisan statement on this forum, right down the ballotline and with your side of the mace chosen as sheepishly as possible. :S

When I ran for the Scottish Youth Parliament, my teacher said I was a born politician. Now I understand what she means.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LegolasRedbard said:

When I ran for the Scottish Youth Parliament, my teacher said I was a born politician. Now I understand what she means.

Mixing Scottish cultural clichés with politics. I get the reference there. My mother's side of my family are descended from Clan Thomson (that's my mother's maiden name, and that of all my uncles), and my great-grandfather moved here to Edmonton in Canada from Scotland. I also worked with two guys on a work visa from Scotland, too.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LegolasRedbard said:

 

I am personally of the opinion that uncontrolled immigration is a bad thing, and we need to screen refugees closely before we let them in, and I'm fiercely Eurosceptic and against what people consider to be the left right now, but I agree with Bruce here. Of course we would take Southerners fleeing a civil war. We not only have a responsibility to take the refugees, but we would react more to people who we can identify with more than Islamic refugees. The sight of seeing other people who live lifestyles like ours would shock us, and then, I hope, we would open our doors to all refugees, no matter their nationalities.

 

 

Also if I could vote in 2040, I would be very conflicted between Fischer/Lagsalott vs. Jvikings/Reagan04

It'd be much more sensible if refugees seek countries that are closer to them culturally and ethnically. The Left wants to mix very different cultures and ethnicities which is a real problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, koneke said:

It'd be much more sensible if refugees seek countries that are closer to them culturally and ethnically. The Left wants to mix very different cultures and ethnicities which is a real problem.

The only problem is that the countries surrounding Syria either don't want them there or the refugees want to become economic migrants in the EU

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LegolasRedbard said:

The only problem is that the countries surrounding Syria either don't want them there or the refugees want to become economic migrants in the EU

20% of the people coming to Europe as economic migrants are Syrians. It is wrong that it is because of the Syrian Civil War that we see this migration.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, koneke said:

20% of the people coming to Europe as economic migrants are Syrians. It is wrong that it is because of the Syrian Civil War that we see this migration.

"Economic migrant" and "refugee" are completely different things. An "economic migrant" is someone seeking work, while a refugee is seeking refuge from a war or the like

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bruce Fischer said:

"Economic migrant" and "refugee" are completely different things. An "economic migrant" is someone seeking work, while a refugee is seeking refuge from a war or the like

An economic migrant can also be a person who wants to be on another country's welfare. Most of the people who are coming to Europe are going to the places with the highest welfare spending.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, koneke said:

An economic migrant can also be a person who wants to be on another country's welfare. Most of the people who are coming to Europe are going to the places with the highest welfare spending.

A lot of refugees go to X country, and X country spends a lot on welfare does not mean that they're going there because that country has a lot of welfare. Correlation does not equal causation.

They're going to Sweden and Germany and other countries with robust welfare states for many reasons, I'm sure. For one, those seem to be the only ones that both accept them AND treat them remotely like human beings. Richer countries that have better job markets also, obviously, have better welfare states (except the US because we love freedom, including the freedom to die on the street if we can't find jobs).

Then you have millions of refugees that would like to come to the US (but can't because we have a horrible President and an even worse Congress), where the welfare system would be completely inaccessible to them unless they also contribute to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bruce Fischer said:

A lot of refugees go to X country, and X country spends a lot on welfare does not mean that they're going there because that country has a lot of welfare. Correlation does not equal causation.

They're going to Sweden and Germany and other countries with robust welfare states for many reasons, I'm sure. For one, those seem to be the only ones that both accept them AND treat them remotely like human beings. Richer countries that have better job markets also, obviously, have better welfare states (except the US because we love freedom, including the freedom to die on the street if we can't find jobs).

Then you have millions of refugees that would like to come to the US (but can't because we have a horrible President and an even worse Congress), where the welfare system would be completely inaccessible to them unless they also contribute to it.

They have websites in their native languages that tell them what social benefits and welfare payments the different countries gives. There is a correlation between the welfare payments a country have and the number of economic migrants/fake refugees it receives.

About the jobs though.

In Sweden and Germany you need an education and native language skills to get a job. Most of the people who come have neither.

That is the Anglo-saxon way of handling economics, Laissez-faire is the absolute truth. Anyway i don't think a big welfare system would be a good idea because of the demographic problems that the West are facing with many elderly and fewer in the working-age. It wouldn't be able to function. Another thing is the racial demographics in the US. There is a lot of Africans which is a big economic burden in terms of welfare payment, low job-frequency, crime and et cetera.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, koneke said:

They have websites in their native languages that tell them what social benefits and welfare payments the different countries gives. There is a correlation between the welfare payments a country have and the number of economic migrants/fake refugees it receives.

About the jobs though.

In Sweden and Germany you need an education and native language skills to get a job. Most of the people who come have neither.

That is the Anglo-saxon way of handling economics, Laissez-faire is the absolute truth. Anyway i don't think a big welfare system would be a good idea because of the demographic problems that the West are facing with many elderly and fewer in the working-age. It wouldn't be able to function. Another thing is the racial demographics in the US. There is a lot of Africans which is a big economic burden in terms of welfare payment, low job-frequency, crime and et cetera.

"Laissez-faire is the absolute truth?" Well thank you for your 'objectivist' statement on the issue, Ms. Rand. Forgive me if I don't agree and have seen a crap tonne of evidence that proves that economic model you so praise has failed, as utterly and completely as Communism, Colonialism, and Feudalism before it. I see clear evidence of the failures of laissez-faire capitalism/corporatism in sharp detail just a few blocks from where I live, in Edmonton, the capital of Alberta, the richest Province in Canada, one of the very richest countries in the world with one of the very highest standards of living. I work in a welfare office for a living, and strangely, the vast majorities of the clients in the office I work in were born in Canada (especially the really screwed-over Native Canadians). So, don't try to pass that sort of crap over on me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, koneke said:

There is a lot of Africans which is a big economic burden in terms of welfare payment, low job-frequency, crime and et cetera.

Ah, I see. I hope you learn the truth one day instead of false stereotypes, but I don't believe there's any way I could win a debate with you if you have this mindset, so I'm done.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Bruce Fischer said:

Ah, I see. I hope you learn the truth one day instead of false stereotypes, but I don't believe there's any way I could win a debate with you if you have this mindset, so I'm done.

Check the stats for welfare usage by Africans in the US. Look at the Homicide rate for Africans in the US. It costs the US society lots of money.

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Patine said:

"Laissez-faire is the absolute truth?" Well thank you for your 'objectivist' statement on the issue, Ms. Rand. Forgive me if I don't agree and have seen a crap tonne of evidence that proves that economic model you so praise has failed, as utterly and completely as Communism, Colonialism, and Feudalism before it. I see clear evidence of the failures of laissez-faire capitalism/corporatism in sharp detail just a few blocks from where I live, in Edmonton, the capital of Alberta, the richest Province in Canada, one of the very richest countries in the world with one of the very highest standards of living. I work in a welfare office for a living, and strangely, the vast majorities of the clients in the office I work in were born in Canada (especially the really screwed-over Native Canadians). So, don't try to pass that sort of crap over on me.

I wasn't saying the Laissez-faire is the absolute truth. I said that in Anglo-Saxon countries Laissez IS the absolute truth. It is rather an observation not a commitment on my behalf to Laissez-faire.

About the welfare though.

Canada has one of the strictest immigration policies. The refugees who are coming to Canada are handpicked so it is the cream of the crop. The European countries doesn't have any say over what people come to their countries, so they are a much lower standard in terms of education et cetera.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, koneke said:

Check the stats for welfare usage by Africans in the US. Look at the Homicide rate for Africans in the US. It costs the US society lots of money.

Seeing as the number of people who hold African citizenship is not especially high in the US, I can't imagine they're that high.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...