I understand Ron Paul has a very devoted following and he has many good positons on foreign policy, monetary policy, tax policy. But RP has simply been terrible on immigration and he still is terrible on immigration. Ron Paul has also been brow beaten in to giving up any public loyalty to our White American people. RP will now never criticize Black criminals who assault, rob, rape or even kill White Americans - it's all supposed to be about free market economics.
@lastpaganemperor This is from 1988! Oh please, about the race crap. Ron Paul sees people as individuals. Maybe you should try that. Loyalty? Our White American people? Black criminals? How racist are you. Go for Newt. He's your guy.
I reply: This is referred to as someone who: "can't see the forest for the trees" ie he can't see the big picture. The big picture is that America is being radically transformed in to a 3rd world country, where we Anglos are marginalized and pushed aside. We can't participate in politics in LA, Atlanta, Philadelphia - this is racial reality. Go pedal your Libertarian nonsense to Algeria/Zimbabwe.
His views I believe have changed over time. This video is misleading. Go back to 1988 and look right now in 2011. Our immigration problems are MUCH worse than the immigrations problems in 1988 so I believe he would have a slightly different answer. But how was it back then? Just because you do have let some in, doesn't mean you want a swarm of them come over. Also Ron is against amnesty AND benefits for illegals so saying he wants them to come over is absurd. He's right in this vid.
@Yabuturtle - Ron Paul is still receiving "F" failing immigration grades from NumbersUSA this 2011 year. He hasn't changed on immigration, he's in the Libertarian true believer camp that race and ethnicity, do not matter - Free Markets will save the entire world.
Put Ron Paul in a Somalian refugee camp in Kenya and he will mouth these same Libertarian solutions until he dies of bubonic plague.
Please get out of raceles Libertarianism - it's a cult.
@lastpaganemperor If anything Libertarians are one of the few that don't see people in collective groups. I'm saying he's doesn't want Mexicans to swarm all over the place. Illegal immigrants were not as bad in 1988 as they are now. Nonetheless he's still against amnesty and benefits. You're over exaggerating to prove your point. No one said Free Markets would solve everything but they do help.
I'll still vote for Ron. All you have are ad hominid attacks and misinformation.
"Libertarians are one of the few that don't see people in collective groups."
I reply: And there lies the problem. High IQ Americans/Westerners insisting in the face of 2,000 years of recorded history that groups shouldn't matter, that every individual should be "free to choose" - they doom our side to lose, always lose in terrible ways to others who do form groups, who do form mobs, who worked for the collective power of Hispanics, Blacks, Muslims etc
@lastpaganemperor Go for Newt. He represents your low IQ. I can find just as many white people who are corrupt and evil as you can find of other races. It's not specific to race. Grow up.
@PleasantlyPeanut - Oh yeah. Can you find just as many White people of any kind in Zimbabwe, Algeria, Detroit, South Central LA, Birmingham, Memphis these days? These cities were once prosperous, overwhelmingly White places - but Whites have been ethnically cleansed from these areas. These cities weren't ghettos when Whites lived there.
@Yabuturtle why couldn't he see the immigration problems in 1988? Why was he such a clueless idiot when he was ~ 50 years old, a grown man? What kind of idiot thinks it's a good thing to be invaded by millions of low skilled, 3rd world peasants who don't speak your language and are of a radically different culture? There are no Japanese political leaders who would approve of such nonsense!
@btorrres18 At least some can see the big picture. Others just focus on things that were said in 1988 about a situation that was much different, or on their own agendas.
I love Ron paul, but can not get over how bad he still sucks on immigration. He brings up crops. We have a temprary visa program for farm workers whuch farmers , if no local labor is handy, can bring in UNLIMITED number of workers, yet some prefer illegals. Paul, even today spouts silly stuff like how eveil it is to make buisness use E Verify. The E verify progarm is the least costly in time and money of any government burden placed on business, and will stop job magnet, Paul gets F numbersusa
@lastpaganemperor No he doesn't. Free market capitalism entails the market determining the immigration, not some government. Immigration is CONDUSIVE to economic growth...it's not debatable, look up the data. You cannot be for free market capitalist amd simultaneously for closed borders. Besides, we have negative net immigration since the 2008 collapse of the economy, so this scapegoatism to blame immigration for anything.
@ProIndividual I am sorry to see you fall down 100% in this Libertarian free market cult. There has never existed any society/country that implemented 100% free markets with next to no government and no control of immigration/borders. Your true belief in free markets as THE TRUTH is virtually the same as those who saw pure Communism as THE TRUTH and all the horrible failures of Communism were dismissed that USSR, POL POT weren't the pure Communism the Communist theorists believed in.
@lastpaganemperor Cult? you mean the only economists who predicted the collapse of the economy...lol.
Nice ad hominem.
The only controls my family faced entering this country, and that are in the Constitution, were medical checks and background checks. What endangers security is the current system which MAKES people avoid those checks by sneaking in. Look up the stats, it takes 131 YEARS on AVERAGE for a 30 yr old Mexican with a HS diploma and a U.S. citizen sister here to get in legally!
You also didn't adress the FACT it hurts the economy to limit immigration BELOW or ABOVE market levels...an indisputable FACT.
Also, comparing libertarianism, an anti-authoritarian market philosophy (almost identical to the Founders classical liberalism), to authoritarian anti-market philsophies fails on it's premises, merits, and logic.
I suppose the fact the quotas aren't in the Constitution or it's original intent in regulating immigration doesn't bother you either?
@lastpaganemperor It's nativism, economic ignorance, or xenophobia (or worse racism) that drives these nonsense beliefs in closed borders and protectionism (closed borders are labor protectionism, hence why unions lobby for it). It's counter productive economically, socially, and security-wise.
It's fitting your name has "emperor" in it. You seem to like government violence against innocents. Next you'll tell me tax isn't extortion on the threat of kidnapping (prison). GL w/ ur rationalization
@lastpaganemperor No he doesn't. Free market capitalism entails the market determining the immigration, not some government. Immigration is CONDUSIVE to economic growth...it's not debatable, look up the data. You cannot be for free market capitalism and simultaneously for closed borders. Besides, we have negative net immigration since the 2008 collapse of the economy, so this is scapegoatism to blame immigration for anything.
@mrhulot101 Can you show me in the Constitution where these quotas on immigration are? Can you show me data to prove native poverty rates or native unemployment rates are corollary to immigration rates? No, you can't. They have never been corollary in any nation in history. You make products cost more to us all to limit MARKET LEVEL (not above or below, caused by government) immigration, outsourcing, or technology. Look up comparative advantage ala David Ricardo.
@ProIndividual I can show you in the Constitution where it is the Governments PRIMARY duty to protect the country from invasion. I can show you throughout recorded history time after time when a country allowed massive immigration by those that held religous or territorial grievances against the native population then bloodshed followed soon after. Also , you confuse comparative advantage with absolute advantage. You want it both ways.
@mrhulot101 good points. But you are wasting your time using reason to convince Libertarian free market cultists that we need to protect America's borders. These people are true believers and will insist that all 7 billion diseased 3rd world people must have the right to move to the United States and this horrible invasion is someone good for America, because it raises America's GDP. When Libertarian candidates win less than 2%, it doesn't stop them - they still insist they alone have THE TRUTH.
@mrhulot101 Invasion in terms of threat. You seem to confuse threats with economically, socially, and security-wise beneficial immigration (movement, you know, a Natural Right?). Show me the immigration quotas in the Constitution...or in any original intent of the Constitution! You cannot. It's fairly recently in our history the unConstitutional quotas were put in place...like the unConstitutional federal drug laws. Do you see an Amendment, like w/ alcohol, for drugs? Nope.
@mrhulot101 You cannot show in this country's history where massive immigration led to:
1. Increases in native poverty
2. Increases in native unemployment
3. Increases in crime rates
4. Increases in bloodshed
Everything you said was false. The largest influxes of immigration were Italians and Irish (previous to the wave in the 80s from Mexico, which has ended and is returning now; negative net immigration since 2008). They had no quotas on them. It benefited America socially, economically, etc
@mrhulot101 Besides...if nativists beat immigrants, that is hardly an argument against immigration...it's an argument agaisnt violence of natives. So, lock up the native thugs, obviously. Violent people, whether native or immigrant, should be separated from society, logically.
There is NO religious litmus test for immigration, nor should there be. Besides, Mexicans are Christians (Catholics largely). Moreso than us, in many provinces.
@mrhulot101 Lastly, I confuse nothing. If you understood comarative advantage then you'd be for free trade (not free trade agreements, because as Rothbard put it, you need no treaty to trade across borders of your own free will). Free trade is the free exchange of goods and labor across invisible lines governments draw on maps, i.e. borders. It's economically beneficial, not to mention repsects property rights of those trading. You'd understand the Fallacy of Trade Deficits...
@mrhulot101 ...Fallacy of Trade Deficits...as well as understanding labor is a type of good, and therefore must be exchanged freely across borders or you make ALL AMERICANS poorer. You increase the price of goods via labor above market values. Who do you think this benefits? Your nonsense suggests you think native laborers. WRONG! It benefits those companies with the largest market shares in those industries who use that labor. Why? Because they can afford higher wage rates, while smaller...
@mrhulot101 ...while smaller competitors cannot. This is why all protectionism is DESIGNED to monopolize industry. Bailouts are another type of protectionism. "Protecting" native industry on behalf of cronies at the expense of sonsumers (the natives) is economically suicidal...unless you're the monopolist. This is exploitative state dependent capitalism at it's worst. It is NOT what free markets entail. Protectionism is a failure, it hurts us all, and disrespects property rights.
@ProIndividual If you use a credit card you are in a national database as is every transaction you ever make. E Verify, while not perfect, is the least burdensome in time and money to a business owner than any governmemnt regulation..
I understand Ron Paul has a very devoted following and he has many good positons on foreign policy, monetary policy, tax policy. But RP has simply been terrible on immigration and he still is terrible on immigration. Ron Paul has also been brow beaten in to giving up any public loyalty to our White American people. RP will now never criticize Black criminals who assault, rob, rape or even kill White Americans - it's all supposed to be about free market economics.
lastpaganemperor 2 months ago
@lastpaganemperor What is terrible about his immigration position?
1775novten 1 month ago
@lastpaganemperor This is from 1988! Oh please, about the race crap. Ron Paul sees people as individuals. Maybe you should try that. Loyalty? Our White American people? Black criminals? How racist are you. Go for Newt. He's your guy.
PleasantlyPeanut 1 month ago
@PleasantlyPeanut says:
"Ron Paul sees people as individuals."
I reply: This is referred to as someone who: "can't see the forest for the trees" ie he can't see the big picture. The big picture is that America is being radically transformed in to a 3rd world country, where we Anglos are marginalized and pushed aside. We can't participate in politics in LA, Atlanta, Philadelphia - this is racial reality. Go pedal your Libertarian nonsense to Algeria/Zimbabwe.
lastpaganemperor 1 month ago
His views I believe have changed over time. This video is misleading. Go back to 1988 and look right now in 2011. Our immigration problems are MUCH worse than the immigrations problems in 1988 so I believe he would have a slightly different answer. But how was it back then? Just because you do have let some in, doesn't mean you want a swarm of them come over. Also Ron is against amnesty AND benefits for illegals so saying he wants them to come over is absurd. He's right in this vid.
Yabuturtle 2 months ago 4
@Yabuturtle - Ron Paul is still receiving "F" failing immigration grades from NumbersUSA this 2011 year. He hasn't changed on immigration, he's in the Libertarian true believer camp that race and ethnicity, do not matter - Free Markets will save the entire world.
Put Ron Paul in a Somalian refugee camp in Kenya and he will mouth these same Libertarian solutions until he dies of bubonic plague.
Please get out of raceles Libertarianism - it's a cult.
lastpaganemperor 2 months ago
@lastpaganemperor If anything Libertarians are one of the few that don't see people in collective groups. I'm saying he's doesn't want Mexicans to swarm all over the place. Illegal immigrants were not as bad in 1988 as they are now. Nonetheless he's still against amnesty and benefits. You're over exaggerating to prove your point. No one said Free Markets would solve everything but they do help.
I'll still vote for Ron. All you have are ad hominid attacks and misinformation.
Yabuturtle 2 months ago 3
@Yabuturtle writes:
"Libertarians are one of the few that don't see people in collective groups."
I reply: And there lies the problem. High IQ Americans/Westerners insisting in the face of 2,000 years of recorded history that groups shouldn't matter, that every individual should be "free to choose" - they doom our side to lose, always lose in terrible ways to others who do form groups, who do form mobs, who worked for the collective power of Hispanics, Blacks, Muslims etc
lastpaganemperor 2 months ago
@lastpaganemperor Go for Newt. He represents your low IQ. I can find just as many white people who are corrupt and evil as you can find of other races. It's not specific to race. Grow up.
PleasantlyPeanut 1 month ago
@PleasantlyPeanut - Oh yeah. Can you find just as many White people of any kind in Zimbabwe, Algeria, Detroit, South Central LA, Birmingham, Memphis these days? These cities were once prosperous, overwhelmingly White places - but Whites have been ethnically cleansed from these areas. These cities weren't ghettos when Whites lived there.
lastpaganemperor 1 month ago
@Yabuturtle This asshole in 1988 didnt even know that guest worker visas covered agricultural work. What does that tell you?
denverreallyblows 2 months ago
@Yabuturtle why couldn't he see the immigration problems in 1988? Why was he such a clueless idiot when he was ~ 50 years old, a grown man? What kind of idiot thinks it's a good thing to be invaded by millions of low skilled, 3rd world peasants who don't speak your language and are of a radically different culture? There are no Japanese political leaders who would approve of such nonsense!
lastpaganemperor 1 month ago
@Yabuturtle
Oh, so ron paul is a flip flopper just like any politician.
taledarkside 1 week ago
You fix the economy -> you automatically fix illegal immigration - Everybody wins
btorrres18 3 months ago 7
@btorrres18 At least some can see the big picture. Others just focus on things that were said in 1988 about a situation that was much different, or on their own agendas.
PleasantlyPeanut 1 month ago
I love Ron paul, but can not get over how bad he still sucks on immigration. He brings up crops. We have a temprary visa program for farm workers whuch farmers , if no local labor is handy, can bring in UNLIMITED number of workers, yet some prefer illegals. Paul, even today spouts silly stuff like how eveil it is to make buisness use E Verify. The E verify progarm is the least costly in time and money of any government burden placed on business, and will stop job magnet, Paul gets F numbersusa
mrhulot101 4 months ago
@mrhulot101 Thanks for your great reply.
Yes, Ron Paul - he's great on so many issues, he just sucks on immigration.
lastpaganemperor 4 months ago
@lastpaganemperor No he doesn't. Free market capitalism entails the market determining the immigration, not some government. Immigration is CONDUSIVE to economic growth...it's not debatable, look up the data. You cannot be for free market capitalist amd simultaneously for closed borders. Besides, we have negative net immigration since the 2008 collapse of the economy, so this scapegoatism to blame immigration for anything.
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@ProIndividual I am sorry to see you fall down 100% in this Libertarian free market cult. There has never existed any society/country that implemented 100% free markets with next to no government and no control of immigration/borders. Your true belief in free markets as THE TRUTH is virtually the same as those who saw pure Communism as THE TRUTH and all the horrible failures of Communism were dismissed that USSR, POL POT weren't the pure Communism the Communist theorists believed in.
lastpaganemperor 4 months ago
@lastpaganemperor Cult? you mean the only economists who predicted the collapse of the economy...lol.
Nice ad hominem.
The only controls my family faced entering this country, and that are in the Constitution, were medical checks and background checks. What endangers security is the current system which MAKES people avoid those checks by sneaking in. Look up the stats, it takes 131 YEARS on AVERAGE for a 30 yr old Mexican with a HS diploma and a U.S. citizen sister here to get in legally!
ProIndividual 4 months ago
You also didn't adress the FACT it hurts the economy to limit immigration BELOW or ABOVE market levels...an indisputable FACT.
Also, comparing libertarianism, an anti-authoritarian market philosophy (almost identical to the Founders classical liberalism), to authoritarian anti-market philsophies fails on it's premises, merits, and logic.
I suppose the fact the quotas aren't in the Constitution or it's original intent in regulating immigration doesn't bother you either?
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@lastpaganemperor It's nativism, economic ignorance, or xenophobia (or worse racism) that drives these nonsense beliefs in closed borders and protectionism (closed borders are labor protectionism, hence why unions lobby for it). It's counter productive economically, socially, and security-wise.
It's fitting your name has "emperor" in it. You seem to like government violence against innocents. Next you'll tell me tax isn't extortion on the threat of kidnapping (prison). GL w/ ur rationalization
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@lastpaganemperor No he doesn't. Free market capitalism entails the market determining the immigration, not some government. Immigration is CONDUSIVE to economic growth...it's not debatable, look up the data. You cannot be for free market capitalism and simultaneously for closed borders. Besides, we have negative net immigration since the 2008 collapse of the economy, so this is scapegoatism to blame immigration for anything.
Fixed the typos.
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@mrhulot101 Can you show me in the Constitution where these quotas on immigration are? Can you show me data to prove native poverty rates or native unemployment rates are corollary to immigration rates? No, you can't. They have never been corollary in any nation in history. You make products cost more to us all to limit MARKET LEVEL (not above or below, caused by government) immigration, outsourcing, or technology. Look up comparative advantage ala David Ricardo.
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@ProIndividual I can show you in the Constitution where it is the Governments PRIMARY duty to protect the country from invasion. I can show you throughout recorded history time after time when a country allowed massive immigration by those that held religous or territorial grievances against the native population then bloodshed followed soon after. Also , you confuse comparative advantage with absolute advantage. You want it both ways.
mrhulot101 4 months ago
@mrhulot101 good points. But you are wasting your time using reason to convince Libertarian free market cultists that we need to protect America's borders. These people are true believers and will insist that all 7 billion diseased 3rd world people must have the right to move to the United States and this horrible invasion is someone good for America, because it raises America's GDP. When Libertarian candidates win less than 2%, it doesn't stop them - they still insist they alone have THE TRUTH.
lastpaganemperor 4 months ago
@lastpaganemperor When you're done fellating each other let me know...slurp, slurp...lol.
Two economically ignorant individuals in a daisy chain...wonderful. Try reading a few books, please...it's patriotic, I swear.
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@mrhulot101 Invasion in terms of threat. You seem to confuse threats with economically, socially, and security-wise beneficial immigration (movement, you know, a Natural Right?). Show me the immigration quotas in the Constitution...or in any original intent of the Constitution! You cannot. It's fairly recently in our history the unConstitutional quotas were put in place...like the unConstitutional federal drug laws. Do you see an Amendment, like w/ alcohol, for drugs? Nope.
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@mrhulot101 You cannot show in this country's history where massive immigration led to:
1. Increases in native poverty
2. Increases in native unemployment
3. Increases in crime rates
4. Increases in bloodshed
Everything you said was false. The largest influxes of immigration were Italians and Irish (previous to the wave in the 80s from Mexico, which has ended and is returning now; negative net immigration since 2008). They had no quotas on them. It benefited America socially, economically, etc
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@mrhulot101 Besides...if nativists beat immigrants, that is hardly an argument against immigration...it's an argument agaisnt violence of natives. So, lock up the native thugs, obviously. Violent people, whether native or immigrant, should be separated from society, logically.
There is NO religious litmus test for immigration, nor should there be. Besides, Mexicans are Christians (Catholics largely). Moreso than us, in many provinces.
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@mrhulot101 Lastly, I confuse nothing. If you understood comarative advantage then you'd be for free trade (not free trade agreements, because as Rothbard put it, you need no treaty to trade across borders of your own free will). Free trade is the free exchange of goods and labor across invisible lines governments draw on maps, i.e. borders. It's economically beneficial, not to mention repsects property rights of those trading. You'd understand the Fallacy of Trade Deficits...
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@ProIndividual comparative advantage*
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@mrhulot101 ...Fallacy of Trade Deficits...as well as understanding labor is a type of good, and therefore must be exchanged freely across borders or you make ALL AMERICANS poorer. You increase the price of goods via labor above market values. Who do you think this benefits? Your nonsense suggests you think native laborers. WRONG! It benefits those companies with the largest market shares in those industries who use that labor. Why? Because they can afford higher wage rates, while smaller...
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@mrhulot101 ...while smaller competitors cannot. This is why all protectionism is DESIGNED to monopolize industry. Bailouts are another type of protectionism. "Protecting" native industry on behalf of cronies at the expense of sonsumers (the natives) is economically suicidal...unless you're the monopolist. This is exploitative state dependent capitalism at it's worst. It is NOT what free markets entail. Protectionism is a failure, it hurts us all, and disrespects property rights.
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@ProIndividual consumers*
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@mrhulot101 BTW, E-Verify puts all of us citizens in a database...it's backdoor national ID...D that fascist nonsense.
ProIndividual 4 months ago
@ProIndividual If you use a credit card you are in a national database as is every transaction you ever make. E Verify, while not perfect, is the least burdensome in time and money to a business owner than any governmemnt regulation..
mrhulot101 4 months ago
F that fascist nonsense*
ProIndividual 4 months ago