|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On September 13 2024 07:50 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 07:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 13 2024 07:32 BlackJack wrote:On September 13 2024 06:40 Velr wrote:On September 13 2024 05:51 FlaShFTW wrote:
I'm still confused how this is a serious issue. News have come out that the business owners there are actually very happy about the high immigration into the area because it keeps their businesses open and the immigrants are hard workers. So what's the point or issue here? They are black. Right because a town of 60,000 would totally have no problem absorbing 15,000 immigrants if they just happened to be another color, right? People that make this argument will, with their next breath, talk about how awful gentrification is and it's terrible when white people move into historically black neighborhoods like harlem and drive up and price of housing and displace current residents and change the character of the neighborhood. 15,000 Hatian immigrants moving into Springfield Ohio = fantastic Some white hipsters buying houses in Harlem = terrible Surprise, there's one group of people where skin color is of paramount importance to how they feel about things. It's the same group of people that's always obsessing over skin color. The KKK? White nationalists? People who see brown and black workers as nothing more than unqualified diversity hires? (Judging people based on race is obviously not just a liberal/left-wing thing.) Fair point. I stand corrected. There are two groups of people where race is of paramount importance to how they feel about an issue. Far-right hate groups and mainstream liberals.
Pretty much every Republican leader and Fox News correspondent and any other conservative voicing their opinion has called Kamala Harris and/or Ketanji Brown Jackson merely an unqualified diversity hire. Trump is literally obsessed with Harris's race and refused to rent homes to black people and started the Obama birther conspiracy theory that tens of millions of Republicans believed. A whole bunch of average conservatives proudly display their Confederate flags, or voice their disbelief that Black Lives could possibly Matter, or try to spread their "love" of Southern Hatred Heritage, or think that every black person murdered by a cop deserved it, or completely deny the existence of systemic racism. But if you're willing to clarify "far-right hate groups" as "the Republican party", then I might be more likely to agree with you on that half of things (but I still disagree with you on the notion that mainstream liberals are necessarily racist, especially compared to conservatives).
|
I think we've been around this circle a few times already
Biden: I'm going to appoint a black woman to SCOTUS
People: Hey you shouldn't appoint someone based on the color of their skin
You: Why are you objecting to Biden's decision to appoint a black woman to SCOTUS? You must have an issue with black women or think they are unqualified
See the problem is you think the objection to forming policy around skin color is in itself making a judgement on skin color. I have no doubt you're arguing in good faith and you truly believe that so I'm happy to just agree to disagree.
|
I know we've been around that circle a few times, and we don't need to rehash the whole DEI conversation. I was just using that among many, many other examples in my list to point out that it's utterly ridiculous to think that racism is only an extremely far-right characteristic, as opposed to it permeating mainstream conservatism (both present and historical) and literally a cornerstone of the Republican party's leadership.
Also, why do you think that "mainstream liberals" necessarily believe both of these things in the first place:
"15,000 Hatian immigrants moving into Springfield Ohio = fantastic
Some white hipsters buying houses in Harlem = terrible"
I think I'm a pretty mainstream liberal, and I don't necessarily agree with either of these, let alone both of them.
|
United States24640 Posts
So to check, in a different country with a similar legal system where the population is 98% black, 2% white, but it just so happens that the top 9 legal scholars were white, with #10-500 being mostly black, the nine seats of SCOTUS should be filled with the 9 white scholars, #1-9, since they were the 9 most qualified candidates?
|
On September 13 2024 07:32 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 06:40 Velr wrote:On September 13 2024 05:51 FlaShFTW wrote:
I'm still confused how this is a serious issue. News have come out that the business owners there are actually very happy about the high immigration into the area because it keeps their businesses open and the immigrants are hard workers. So what's the point or issue here? They are black. Right because a town of 60,000 would totally have no problem absorbing 15,000 immigrants if they just happened to be another color, right? People that make this argument will, with their next breath, talk about how awful gentrification is and it's terrible when white people move into historically black neighborhoods like harlem and drive up and price of housing and displace current residents and change the character of the neighborhood. 15,000 Hatian immigrants moving into Springfield Ohio = fantastic Some white hipsters buying houses in Harlem = terrible Surprise, there's one group of people where skin color is of paramount importance to how they feel about things. It's the same group of people that's always obsessing over skin color.
It'd be something if that was actually the argument from mainstream Republicans. But their messaging is so dreadful that they're just screaming about eating cats and dogs and other nakedly racist declarations.
The main concern is that yuppies are turning Harlem into a homogenous bore, the same concerns apply to places like New York's Little Italy or the Philadelphia 76er's stadium plans around Chinatown. It isn't specifically a racial thing, people are concerned about the impact to what many feel to be historically and culturally significant neighborhoods.
But people tend to forget that this always happens. Bensonhurst before the Italians was a German enclave and is now potentially a Chinese one with the Italians dying out/moving to the white picket fences. Chinatown in New York was primarily a Jewish enclave. Change is the only constant and there will always be NIMBYs that do everything they can to fight it.
|
On September 13 2024 08:35 micronesia wrote:
So to check, in a different country with a similar legal system where the population is 98% black, 2% white, but it just so happens that the top 9 legal scholars were white, with #10-500 being mostly black, the nine seats of SCOTUS should be filled with the 9 white scholars, #1-9, since they were the 9 most qualified candidates?
I'm guessing that BlackJack would say yes, because the premise includes a magical ranking system where everyone can be placed in some perfectly evaluated order, and all relevant attributes - which may or may not include race - have already been considered. (BlackJack, please correct me if I'm wrong.)
I think that's a crucial difference though, micronesia: in real life, it might be impossible to rank people in such a perfect way. In many cases, the best we can do is recognize candidates as highly qualified for a position like SCJ, and then just choose from that group. There might not be a way to objectively know which legal scholar ought to be on deck for a SCJ position.
|
On September 13 2024 07:27 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 06:46 NewSunshine wrote:On September 13 2024 05:51 FlaShFTW wrote:
I'm still confused how this is a serious issue. News have come out that the business owners there are actually very happy about the high immigration into the area because it keeps their businesses open and the immigrants are hard workers. So what's the point or issue here? Careful, you're attacking the unspoken assumption that everyone makes when they say immigration is inherently a bad thing. There's no possible way that immigrants could be good, hard working people who become a valuable part of their community. That first requires you to consider an immigrant as a human being. "Immigration is inherently a bad thing" Same old tired strawmans
I'm sorry, did you see the debate with the rest of us? I'm not into wading through the weeds with you, you can go off.
|
I'd like to point out we're still at the blowing something completely out of proportion part. The crime that "migrants bring" (they don't) is committed by a small fraction. When compared to the general crime rate of the population (adjusted for socio-economic factors), in most cases the migrant crime rate practically becomes meaningless. This has to be proven false first before the argument can even be considered valid, and conservatives have certainly not done that. Especially not Trump himself, who started this whole conversation about cat eating by blasting it out into public consciousness during the debate.
Mouse into elephant. One of the top Republican tactics.
|
On September 13 2024 08:35 micronesia wrote:
So to check, in a different country with a similar legal system where the population is 98% black, 2% white, but it just so happens that the top 9 legal scholars were white, with #10-500 being mostly black, the nine seats of SCOTUS should be filled with the 9 white scholars, #1-9, since they were the 9 most qualified candidates?
I don’t know how you would quantify a ranking of best legal scholars, but assuming you are able to, then sure. I don’t know why you would not want the 9 best at something.
|
Funny, because this is far from the first time I’ve brought up immigration in this thread. Most of the previous times it’s in reference to NYC and the pill of regret they are having to swallow from inviting migrants into their city and creating a crisis. Their mayor, Eric Adams, has gone on record saying the migrant crisis is destroying the city.
Yet all the times I’ve talked about that in this thread nobody claimed NYC was not actually receiving a significant amount of immigrants because of data they’ve sourced from the 2020 census. Nobody questioned whether their resources for policing, housing, schooling were being strained due to the migrant crisis. Nobody questioned the mayors motivations in using extreme language like “this is destroying our city.”
But suddenly it happens in bumfuck Ohio and it’s all either “they haven’t had that many migrants come in but even if they did it’s not a big deal. They are only disgruntled cause they don’t like black people.”
Amazing how that works.
|
On September 13 2024 14:37 BlackJack wrote:
Funny, because this is far from the first time I’ve brought up immigration in this thread. Most of the previous times it’s in reference to NYC and the pill of regret they are having to swallow from inviting migrants into their city and creating a crisis. Their mayor, Eric Adams, has gone on record saying the migrant crisis is destroying the city.
Yet all the times I’ve talked about that in this thread nobody claimed NYC was not actually receiving a significant amount of immigrants because of data they’ve sourced from the 2020 census. Nobody questioned whether their resources for policing, housing, schooling were being strained due to the migrant crisis. Nobody questioned the mayors motivations in using extreme language like “this is destroying our city.”
But suddenly it happens in bumfuck Ohio and it’s all either “they haven’t had that many migrants come in but even if they did it’s not a big deal. They are only disgruntled cause they don’t like black people.”
Amazing how that works.
Not really, because the "They're eating cats" came from random facebook, which was then picked up and repeated by republican talking heads. The mayor and sheriff of bumfuck Ohio both indicated that it wasn't an actual issue that was actually happening, and was fabricated.
That's what makes the republicans look like they're disgruntled racists. They were so excited that black people were finally doing something abhorrent that they forgot to fact-check that it was actually happening, first. They just assumed it was actually happening because OF COURSE IT WOULD.
Hopefully that explains the difference between those for you.
|
On September 13 2024 14:37 BlackJack wrote:
Funny, because this is far from the first time I’ve brought up immigration in this thread. Most of the previous times it’s in reference to NYC and the pill of regret they are having to swallow from inviting migrants into their city and creating a crisis. Their mayor, Eric Adams, has gone on record saying the migrant crisis is destroying the city.
Yet all the times I’ve talked about that in this thread nobody claimed NYC was not actually receiving a significant amount of immigrants because of data they’ve sourced from the 2020 census. Nobody questioned whether their resources for policing, housing, schooling were being strained due to the migrant crisis. Nobody questioned the mayors motivations in using extreme language like “this is destroying our city.”
But suddenly it happens in bumfuck Ohio and it’s all either “they haven’t had that many migrants come in but even if they did it’s not a big deal. They are only disgruntled cause they don’t like black people.”
Amazing how that works.
Cutting through all the bullshit, it looks like Springfield, Ohio is having the same problem any gold/oilrush town faced: rapid population growth due to unexpected economic opportunities, and the infrastructure hasn't caught up. Here is what seem like two fair takes on it:
NewsNation, focusing on the problems large scale legal migration is causing by taxing the infrastructure: https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-news/immigration/residents-springfield-speak-immigrant/
Whereas AP highlights the economic benefits of legal migrants in the area: https://apnews.com/article/springfield-haitian-immigrants-trump-eating-pets-84aa8ae10963cbeadd48b3945b322620
Both of these things can be true at once. The number of migrants seems a bit all over the place, with some officials saying 15,000, but others saying 10% (which would be 6,000, or less than half of the other number), but regardless of whether it's 10% or 25%, a sudden influx of people like that will tax the local infrastructure; regardless of provenance or even economic situation. They'll need local doctors, their children will go to local schools, they'll drive and park cars on the local roads. Nome of that will be scaled to cope with the influx. Meanwhile the influx is clearly happening for a reason: the local businesses are desperate for employees, and word spreads through the Haitian community that there are jobs and opportunity in Springfield. These people aren't coming to beg for handouts from the famously generous Ohio state welfare system, they are coming to do the jobs that are clearly available.
Now, whether you should be happy that these jobs are done at all, or the businesses should go under because they didn't pay enough to keep the local population interested in doing those jobs in the first place in the 00s depends a lot on how much you align with GreenHorizons... but I thought a conservative capitalist would applaud this migration of labor as supply and demand in the labor market working exactly as it's supposed to...
|
I genuinely do not get the US's problem with immigration. For decades you have been hoovering the brightest, most hardworking people on the planet. These people have contributed hugely to your economy, to your culture (you'd probably still be eating boiled Brussel sprouts and saying 'splendid' if it weren't for immigrants) and to every aspect you can possibly think of. And yet, you continue to demonize them or only look at people in terms of how much economic output you can get from them.
In a way I am glad. The brightest and most hardworking people should stay in their home countries and contribute where they are actually wanted. I am finally coming back to Spain, I just accepted a job there and even though it's significantly less money, I cannot wait to get away. If there's something I've learned as an immigrant is that you cannot buy happiness.
|
On September 13 2024 17:41 EnDeR_ wrote:
I genuinely do not get the US's problem with immigration. For decades you have been hoovering the brightest, most hardworking people on the planet. These people have contributed hugely to your economy, to your culture (you'd probably still be eating boiled Brussel sprouts and saying 'splendid' if it weren't for immigrants) and to every aspect you can possibly think of. And yet, you continue to demonize them or only look at people in terms of how much economic output you can get from them.
In a way I am glad. The brightest and most hardworking people should stay in their home countries and contribute where they are actually wanted. I am finally coming back to Spain, I just accepted a job there and even though it's significantly less money, I cannot wait to get away. If there's something I've learned as an immigrant is that you cannot buy happiness.
The anti-immigration (including anti- legal immigration) hate also completely contradicts the supposed ideal of the American Dream - that coming to the United States and working hard to make a better life for yourself and your family is what matters and what ought to be valued. It's classic NIMBYism - people are okay with you pulling yourself up by your bootstraps *in some other town or state where I won't have to acknowledge your existence*, but just Not In My BackYard. And, of course, all these hypocritical racists are only here in the first place because they're descendents of people who made the same trip and worked hard and were allowed to succeed and survive and thrive in this country.
|
On September 13 2024 17:41 EnDeR_ wrote:
I genuinely do not get the US's problem with immigration. For decades you have been hoovering the brightest, most hardworking people on the planet. These people have contributed hugely to your economy, to your culture (you'd probably still be eating boiled Brussel sprouts and saying 'splendid' if it weren't for immigrants) and to every aspect you can possibly think of. And yet, you continue to demonize them or only look at people in terms of how much economic output you can get from them.
In a way I am glad. The brightest and most hardworking people should stay in their home countries and contribute where they are actually wanted. I am finally coming back to Spain, I just accepted a job there and even though it's significantly less money, I cannot wait to get away. If there's something I've learned as an immigrant is that you cannot buy happiness.
Every time someone makes a joke about British food, Gordon Ramsay gets a new TV series greenlit.
|
On September 13 2024 15:13 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 14:37 BlackJack wrote:
Funny, because this is far from the first time I’ve brought up immigration in this thread. Most of the previous times it’s in reference to NYC and the pill of regret they are having to swallow from inviting migrants into their city and creating a crisis. Their mayor, Eric Adams, has gone on record saying the migrant crisis is destroying the city.
Yet all the times I’ve talked about that in this thread nobody claimed NYC was not actually receiving a significant amount of immigrants because of data they’ve sourced from the 2020 census. Nobody questioned whether their resources for policing, housing, schooling were being strained due to the migrant crisis. Nobody questioned the mayors motivations in using extreme language like “this is destroying our city.”
But suddenly it happens in bumfuck Ohio and it’s all either “they haven’t had that many migrants come in but even if they did it’s not a big deal. They are only disgruntled cause they don’t like black people.”
Amazing how that works. Not really, because the "They're eating cats" came from random facebook, which was then picked up and repeated by republican talking heads. The mayor and sheriff of bumfuck Ohio both indicated that it wasn't an actual issue that was actually happening, and was fabricated. That's what makes the republicans look like they're disgruntled racists. They were so excited that black people were finally doing something abhorrent that they forgot to fact-check that it was actually happening, first. They just assumed it was actually happening because OF COURSE IT WOULD. Hopefully that explains the difference between those for you.
So if Trump and other Republicans said immigrants in NYC were eating cats would that then mean that people in this thread would argue a) NYC actually didn't receive a large influx of immigrants because their population has remained steady b) There aren't any significant problems with the (non-existent) large influx and c) NYC Mayor Eric Adam's is retroactively made a racist for his comments that migrants are destroying NYC?
|
On September 13 2024 17:41 EnDeR_ wrote:
I genuinely do not get the US's problem with immigration. For decades you have been hoovering the brightest, most hardworking people on the planet. These people have contributed hugely to your economy, to your culture (you'd probably still be eating boiled Brussel sprouts and saying 'splendid' if it weren't for immigrants) and to every aspect you can possibly think of. And yet, you continue to demonize them or only look at people in terms of how much economic output you can get from them.
In a way I am glad. The brightest and most hardworking people should stay in their home countries and contribute where they are actually wanted. I am finally coming back to Spain, I just accepted a job there and even though it's significantly less money, I cannot wait to get away. If there's something I've learned as an immigrant is that you cannot buy happiness.
It's only confusing if you conflate being against having a porous border where millions of people come through including gangs and drug dealers with all immigration in general. People have a problem with illegal immigration, not legal immigration. Donald Trump is married to an immigrant. JD Vance's stepparents are immigrants. Elon Musk himself is an immigrant.
Where I live we have a ton of legal immigrants that work in tech. The so-called hoovering you mention. Nobody has an issue with this type of immigration. What people have an issue with is the Hondurans that dominate the drug trade in San Francisco. SFChronicle did a good story on it. Apparently they mostly come from a small collection of villages called Siria Valley in Honduras. They make so much money on the drug trade that some are able to build mansions back in their home villages and they emblazen the gates to their driveways with logos of the San Francisco 49ers or the Golden State Warriors (sports teams here). Some get arrested and deported but they return illegally shortly after. One person the Chronicle talked to did it 9 times.
Of course you can't even talk about this problem lest you risk being labeled a racist
San Francisco Mayor London Breed was called xenophobic and racist for saying last fall that “a lot” of the dealers are Honduran. She later apologized, saying it wasn’t her intention to single out one community or place the blame solely on them.
San Francisco Police Chief Bill Scott said there is no value in studying the demographics of potential offenders. “We do not consider race or nationality in how we police,” he said. “We focus on behavior. If we see someone selling drugs, we’re going to arrest them.”
Imagine trying to solve a problem that's racist to simply acknowledge
|
On September 13 2024 18:48 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2024 17:41 EnDeR_ wrote:
I genuinely do not get the US's problem with immigration. For decades you have been hoovering the brightest, most hardworking people on the planet. These people have contributed hugely to your economy, to your culture (you'd probably still be eating boiled Brussel sprouts and saying 'splendid' if it weren't for immigrants) and to every aspect you can possibly think of. And yet, you continue to demonize them or only look at people in terms of how much economic output you can get from them.
In a way I am glad. The brightest and most hardworking people should stay in their home countries and contribute where they are actually wanted. I am finally coming back to Spain, I just accepted a job there and even though it's significantly less money, I cannot wait to get away. If there's something I've learned as an immigrant is that you cannot buy happiness. It's only confusing if you conflate being against having a porous border where millions of people come through including gangs and drug dealers with all immigration in general. People have a problem with illegal immigration, not legal immigration. Donald Trump is married to an immigrant. JD Vance's stepparents are immigrants. Elon Musk himself is an immigrant. Where I live we have a ton of legal immigrants that work in tech. The so-called hoovering you mention. Nobody has an issue with this type of immigration. What people have an issue with is the Hondurans that dominate the drug trade in San Francisco. SFChronicle did a good story on it. Apparently they mostly come from a small collection of villages called Siria Valley in Honduras. They make so much money on the drug trade that some are able to build mansions back in their home villages and they emblazen the gates to their driveways with logos of the San Francisco 49ers or the Golden State Warriors (sports teams here). Some get arrested and deported but they return illegally shortly after. One person the Chronicle talked to did it 9 times. Of course you can't even talk about this problem lest you risk being labeled a racist Show nested quote +San Francisco Mayor London Breed was called xenophobic and racist for saying last fall that “a lot” of the dealers are Honduran. She later apologized, saying it wasn’t her intention to single out one community or place the blame solely on them.
San Francisco Police Chief Bill Scott said there is no value in studying the demographics of potential offenders. “We do not consider race or nationality in how we police,” he said. “We focus on behavior. If we see someone selling drugs, we’re going to arrest them.” Imagine trying to solve a problem that's racist to simply acknowledge
You underestimate how a hostile environment affects all immigrants, not just illegal ones. You should appreciate that that distinction gets blurred at the granular level. Constant stirring the pot against immigration makes things worse for all immigrants.
For the longest time I thought if I tried harder I would eventually fully fit in and not feel like an outsider. It never happened. I'm 'one of the good ones' as an educated white immigrant that speaks English well so I can't even imagine how tough it must be for others not as privileged as I am.
|
So now we've identified the problem a little better, and it has nothing to do with the number of migrants, and it has nothing to do with cat eating. Isn't that interesting.
|
On September 13 2024 10:33 Magic Powers wrote:
I'd like to point out we're still at the blowing something completely out of proportion part. The crime that "migrants bring" (they don't) is committed by a small fraction. When compared to the general crime rate of the population (adjusted for socio-economic factors), in most cases the migrant crime rate practically becomes meaningless.
If you look at all the countries in Europe where there has been significant immigration from third world countries over the last 30 years, crime rates have in fact skyrocketed. Also, who cares if the difference disappears if you adjust for socio-economic factors? (isn't that a circular argument to being with? Being an immigrant surely is a "social" factor?) "You now run a 5 times higher risk of being shot or assaulted than 10 years ago [roughly the numbers for Sweden], but don't worry that difference disappears if you adjust for socio-economic factors."
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
