|
|
Post by packerconvert on Jan 2, 2013 16:32:28 GMT -5
Please do show me the math on how the population doubled when it was 215,973,198 in 1975 and is currently 312,800,000.
Do you even fact check your statements or do you reach behind yourself and pull them out of your arse?
|
|
|
|
Post by TW on Jan 2, 2013 17:56:10 GMT -5
Interestingly enough, I believe the Hispanic population has nearly doubled during that period of time.
I did hear, on TV over the last couple of days, that the growth rate of Hispanics is now down significantly, as more young women are finding it possible to have decent jobs, and opportunities that were gone just a handful of years earlier.
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Jan 2, 2013 18:11:30 GMT -5
I've heard that too as well as America having a negative birth rate to where were going to have to start importing workers to take up the slack. Hmmm....lol
|
|
|
|
Post by TW on Jan 2, 2013 18:12:59 GMT -5
I heard on person state it pretty clearly, as to how you stop illegal immigration. A deep recession, or depression.
They'll gladly go home, because the cost of living there is cheaper.
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Jan 2, 2013 18:17:06 GMT -5
The one thing I hate about the immigration debate is that it is usually one sided and racist and the other side doesn't say squat.
I've never heard a liberal state why they support having illegals in this country.
|
|
|
|
Post by happypacker on Jan 2, 2013 19:43:26 GMT -5
you should read more of the nations news. But i am sure we all miss things.
a government offical (REPublican) had stated that these illegels are doing the businesses of America a favor. the illegel workers are doing work that American Citizens would not do because they pay so Little or a cleaning toilets. or hard labor. wow,
|
|
|
|
Post by TW on Jan 2, 2013 21:24:01 GMT -5
The story of immigrants has always been to take on the jobs that Americans don't want to do. They persevere doing it, and for future generations, they move forward.
What stops Hispanics & blacks is that the color of their skin stands out, and makes them identifiable as "different" than the white American.
Even Jews have faced this problem, when white America started using facial features, and head shapes to "identify" them as a "lesser class" of human.
It's sad how this happens, and it's sad how we've seen it happen with the American Indian, who really is the only race of people in North America, outside of the Inuit/Eskimos, and Mexican/Indians, who really have a right to claim this as their homeland.
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Jan 3, 2013 8:05:41 GMT -5
How far do you go back in history to justify what is a homeland?
Native Americans have links to Asia in their DNA, which proves they traveled over a land mass many years ago.
Is America really China's homeland?
|
|
|
|
Post by TW on Jan 3, 2013 10:53:47 GMT -5
Maybe you have that reversed. Maybe the DNA found in Asia is similar to North Americans based on the fact North Americans migrated to Asia.
This is the opposite of what you stated, and actually possible as well.
I know this isn't a popular concept, but it is possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by happypacker on Jan 3, 2013 11:35:28 GMT -5
Please do show me the math on how the population doubled when it was 215,973,198 in 1975 and is currently 312,800,000. Do you even fact check your statements or do you reach behind yourself and pull them out of your arse? you seem to be checking things that are out dated. I will admit, i wanted to print the words" almost doubled from 1960, JFK days) but was typing very quickly , But i think you get the point, the reasons you gave have more to do with the cost of living and the population, and you know it, you just want to nip pick. but you can beleive in what you want, i get my intertainment from all kinds of sourses. why did you pick 1975 when you said 1970 before? works better i guess.? |
|
|
|
Post by happypacker on Jan 3, 2013 11:42:47 GMT -5
what is true is that the majority and early people came from the Eroupean continent first. and when the land masses were all linked(depends on what you want to beleive) they crossed all over the wprld with ease, did the first people come about in the middle east region? spread north? then west and east?
let tell every person that came from another country got there chops busted from others, some complained and other adapted. the wops, jews, Poliocks, I mean really who did not come under fire?
|
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Jan 3, 2013 11:53:55 GMT -5
Maybe you have that reversed. Maybe the DNA found in Asia is similar to North Americans based on the fact North Americans migrated to Asia. This is the opposite of what you stated, and actually possible as well. I know this isn't a popular concept, but it is possible. That would be stupendous because then the US could lay claim to Eurasia!!! |
|
|
|
Post by packerconvert on Jan 3, 2013 11:55:49 GMT -5
Please do show me the math on how the population doubled when it was 215,973,198 in 1975 and is currently 312,800,000. Do you even fact check your statements or do you reach behind yourself and pull them out of your arse? you seem to be checking things that are out dated. I will admit, i wanted to print the words" almost doubled from 1960, JFK days) but was typing very quickly , But i think you get the point, the reasons you gave have more to do with the cost of living and the population, and you know it, you just want to nip pick. but you can beleive in what you want, i get my intertainment from all kinds of sourses. why did you pick 1975 when you said 1970 before? works better i guess.? When debating, don't we always post what suits our argument. ;D And yes, I nitpicked your population statement to deflect away form "Cost of Living" adjustments in an attempt to discredit your premise. Its what I do here.  |
|
|
|
Post by TW on Jan 3, 2013 12:58:37 GMT -5
Something I found interesting. One of the cuts demanded by the right include cuts in Medicaid, but creates funding of part of the deficit from Medicare. Doesn't that seem a little flawed as far as thinking? Especially since mandatory cuts in Medicare are forthcoming?
Somewhere along the line, both sides have to sit down and determine exactly what is right, and wrong. Just because they make cuts at the federal level doesn't mean the program is going away.
What a lot of people aren't thinking about is how Medicaid shortfalls are going to fall back on them at the state level, meaning we're going to pay more state level taxes. All to make up for a shortfall in something that actually isn't falling short. Medicare.
There's something wrong with that picture. I see politicians on the federal level, on both sides of the aisle, trying to pull a bait and switch on us.
|
|
