Immigration Ban

It's really fairly interesting to watch the GOP line up behind him when he does something outstandingly racist like this. It shows you just how far they'll go to maintain power & try to spin everything like it's normal. It never fails to disappoint me how many of them suddenly can't find the words or magically "didn't read or see what he said." Of course the conservative media are always there to soften the blow & convince us the real problem is those dang Democrats.

There's probably nothing short of him dropping the N word on a tape repeatedly on a tape that would get them to admit anything is wrong about his behavior. Until that happens, he's just being strong, blunt & decisive. Of course, we've already seen what happens when such a tape drops - the GOP denounces him in very strong terms, only to go crawling back without objection in a couple weeks. 

@Bornhusker I know it's off topic, but I'm trying to engage in good faith. I read your WashExaminer piece & just didn't find their argument convincing at all. First, it tries to frame the repeal of NN as a bad thing for corporate giants like Netflix, Amazon & Google. But it never explicitly states HOW it's a bad thing for them. In reality, it is - but only because the repeal of NN allows telecom providers to throttle those specific services/sites on consumers and thus shake them down if they want to access higher speeds for them. So, yippee - the corporates giants transfer some of their power to telecoms, who can now charge more money on the consumer if they want to use certain services. It also seems to me their argument boils down to "the free market will take care of it" & "competition." Well what would you (or WashExaminer) say to lots of Americans who live in areas that only have one ISP available? Is the free market going to save them too? Because from what I've seen firsthand, those people and up paying too much for lousy internet service with poor customer service. 

The reality is that in some of these sectors that have de facto monopolies going on, the free market isn't going to improve things short of some miraculous breakthrough. Google tried to do so recently with Google Fiber - but they were shut down at the edict of the telecoms who took legal action & mobilized indebted politicians to oppose this as well. Free marketism as a solution simply isn't viable when such a small number of corporations have a stranglehold on the status quo of an industry.

 
Do you know how many leave each year?


Ask and you shall receive...

Immigration_in_USA.png


less than 50,000 TOTAL immigrants from Norway living in the US in 2000.  That's cumulative immigration over many years.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/586510/emigration-from-norway/

Looks like around 40,000 people emigrate from Norway each year.  That may sound like a lot, but its actually pretty low.  People move around a lot, especially in Europe.  And those that leave are NOT going to the U.S.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate

This is interesting.  Net migration is immigration minus emigration.  Norway has one of the highest net migration rates per capita in the world.  That means they are taking in WAY more than are leaving.  Tenth highest in the world, and second among developed countries behind Switzerland, and just ahead of Australia, Canada and Sweden.

That was all, of course, completely unnecessary.  And a lengthy tangent.  But you did ask (assuming I wouldn't have an answer).  So I thought I would oblige.

Good day

giphy.gif


 
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/trump-demands-poem-on-statue-of-liberty-be-revised-to-exclude-s#!thole-countries

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Donald J. Trump demanded on Thursday that the poem at the base of the Statue of Liberty be revised immediately to exclude nations he considered “s#!thole countries.”

Speaking to reporters, Trump said that the poem as it currently stands “is basically an open invitation that says, like, if you come from a s#!thole country, welcome aboard.”

“I don’t know the entire poem, but it’s something like ‘Give us your tired, your poor, your yadda yadda yadda,’ ” he said. “We could keep all that but then put in, right at the end, in big letters, maybe, ‘except if you’re from a s#!thole country.’ ”

“I think if a boat from a s#!thole country came and saw that poem with those words at the end, they would turn around and go right back to wherever they came from,” he said.

Shortly after Trump made his remarks about “s#!thole” countries, representatives of the countries he designated as such released a joint response.

“We do not understand President Trump’s aversion to so-called ‘s#!thole countries,’ since he is doing his best to turn the United States into one,” the statement read.

(this is satire, BTW) 

 
No, I couldn't find that.  Only a site offering asylum to Americans in Norway.

Here's something:

http://www.who.int/gho/mental_health/suicide_rates/en/

The World Health Organization reports a 19.5 per 100k suicide rate for the United States.  Norway was 12.9.  I'll link the studies on the link between more guns and higher suicide rates a little later, if you like.  There is a 90% success rate with a gun, vs. much lower with other methods.  Gotta feed the kids, so I'll be back later...


Ask and you shall receive...



less than 50,000 TOTAL immigrants from Norway living in the US in 2000.  That's cumulative immigration over many years.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/586510/emigration-from-norway/

Looks like around 40,000 people emigrate from Norway each year.  That may sound like a lot, but its actually pretty low.  People move around a lot, especially in Europe.  And those that leave are NOT going to the U.S.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate

This is interesting.  Net migration is immigration minus emigration.  Norway has one of the highest net migration rates per capita in the world.  That means they are taking in WAY more than are leaving.  Tenth highest in the world, and second among developed countries behind Switzerland, and just ahead of Australia, Canada and Sweden.

That was all, of course, completely unnecessary.  And a lengthy tangent.  But you did ask (assuming I wouldn't have an answer).  So I thought I would oblige.

Good day

giphy.gif














Hmmm....this is weird. It's almost like @Bornhusker's assertions aren't supported at all by the data, and are even actually completely disproven by statistical evidence? That can't be...

 
Hmmm....this is weird. It's almost like @Bornhusker's assertions aren't supported at all by the data, and are even actually completely disproven by statistical evidence? That can't be...




My last comment in this thread.. You originally said they are not leaving, then you found out they do leave and you found out they have left and have migrated to the US.. so you qualify that with "but not very many" and then again with "its actually pretty low". YOU made the claim they are not leaving, I didn't make any claim period.. I said "maybe" because of high taxes and high suicide rates. SO, in reality YOU are the one who has his facts wrong, not me. You dind't disprove anything I said.

plus, to top it off, you give a report that is 16 years old!

For the record.. wikipedia can be changed by anyone, not a site to use to back your claims.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ask and you shall receive...



less than 50,000 TOTAL immigrants from Norway living in the US in 2000.  That's cumulative immigration over many years.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/586510/emigration-from-norway/

Looks like around 40,000 people emigrate from Norway each year.  That may sound like a lot, but its actually pretty low.  People move around a lot, especially in Europe.  And those that leave are NOT going to the U.S.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migration_rate

This is interesting.  Net migration is immigration minus emigration.  Norway has one of the highest net migration rates per capita in the world.  That means they are taking in WAY more than are leaving.  Tenth highest in the world, and second among developed countries behind Switzerland, and just ahead of Australia, Canada and Sweden.

That was all, of course, completely unnecessary.  And a lengthy tangent.  But you did ask (assuming I wouldn't have an answer).  So I thought I would oblige.

Good day

giphy.gif
Sooooo interesting.  Thank you for the follow-up info.

Interesting to me the gray areas here - so they don't even qualify with min numbers in 2000.  Africa is the one I clued into based on his comments yesterday.  I wonder if that changed during the last 15 years?  Probably a bit, but I'm guessing it's still gray or at best there might be a couple more light peach in color.  It should be noted that the areas that show immigrants in Africa (Nigeria, Ghana, Egypt & Ethiopia) are not on his "banned" list.  

 
My last comment in this thread.. You originally said they are not leaving, then you found out they do leave and you found out they have left and have migrated to the US.. so you qualify that with "but not very many" and then again with "its actually pretty low". YOU made the claim they are not leaving, I didn't make any claim period.. I said "maybe" because of high taxes and high suicide rates. SO, in reality YOU are the one who has his facts wrong, not me. You dind't disprove anything I said.

plus, to top it off, you give a report that is 16 years old!

For the record.. wikipedia can be changed by anyone, not a site to use to back your claims.
The content on Wikipedia is sourced. Your argument is terrible.

 
LOL....It's been a fun week.  I've been accused of being a conservative shill secret Republican that supports horrible conservative economic views......and.....too liberal to even have a discussion with.

What a time to be alive.
That is funny.  Kind of like Medieval times - we'll stretch you wt horses from both direction.  How are you feeling? :o

Part of the issue is when you stray away from the far left or far right plantation. If a the person responding to your post is highly partisan either direction, you'll be a target.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
For the record.. wikipedia can be changed by anyone, not a site to use to back your claims.


I find Wikipedia to be quite useful as a clearinghouse of information, and as a place to START your research.  Yes, you can (temporarily) make stupid changes to the site, but the great thing is that Wikipedia shows its sources.  The data I referenced in Wikipedia came from the CIA's World Factbook.  Try this link to the same data:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2112rank.html

 
I find Wikipedia to be quite useful as a clearinghouse of information, and as a place to START your research.  Yes, you can (temporarily) make stupid changes to the site, but the great thing is that Wikipedia shows its sources.  The data I referenced in Wikipedia came from the CIA's World Factbook.  Try this link to the same data:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2112rank.html


This is how to skewer the childish dismissal of Wikipedia as a source. Use Wikipedia to begin your research, go to their source pages, and then use that in your actual argument. It prevents these tangents where people ignore the point and argue about Wikipedia.

 
Back
Top