Y'know that cliched scenario of illegals gathering in groups behind Home Depot waiting to be picked up by the truckload & taken away to do long hard hours for cheap pay.
Do you actually see American kids, unemployed or straight out of college also standing outside Home Depot?
This guy, what is cheap pay to you? Do you think those groups are just throwing their labor at whoever despite their market value? Just kick that shit from your head, they aren't "cheap" but they don't cost employers taxes. So in that form, they are cheap but they don't work for pennies.
Science typically has repeatable test results to back up their claims, and better models to explain their findings that ****ing gumballs in glass jars.
I don't think there is an accurate way to represent a complex issue like immigration with an oversimplified physical model.
Wow you are really dumb, all his numbers came from the world bank. He's using the gumballs as a visual to engage the audience rather then just sit and do a power point which apparently you prefer. You are being fcking ridiculous cause the visual smacks you with reality.
Now all you are trying to do is say "nah none of that is true there isn't a billion people Africa"
I know his numbers came from the World Bank, dumb ass. I paid attention to the video. Had you been paying attention to my posts, you'd realize I've been criticizing the simplicity of his visual aid, which he used to misrepresent the issues of immigration, overpopulation, and poverty to make the point that immigration to the U.S. (and other wealthy developed countries) makes no significant humanitarian impact. He goes on to suggest that immigration is a bad thing, and proposes we should do something to alleviate the economic conditions of these poorer countries, though he makes no indication of what that might be.
When you have millions of people represented by gumballs, it's easy to undermine the amount of people who benefit from immigrating to the U.S., especially when you're comparing it to the total populations of the regions being immigrated from. There are also many variables to consider that such a moronic model can't accurately represent.
So what was his point? That because we take in a hundred-thousand immigrants from, say India, and they attain for themselves at the very least a modest and comfortable living, yet most of India's 1.3 billion population remains poor, immigration has failed as a humanitarian effort?
His underlying message is to keep immigrants out of the US and let them fend for themselves in their home countries.
And they need to do that to earn economic gain for themselves and their kids in your Society. They don't mind that. We also live in a global community and often skilled immigrants are a valuable cheap resource.
__________________
Last edited by Putinbot1 on Feb 24th, 2018 at 07:03 PM
How about something much simpler then, get a glass fill it with water now add an extra straw for every illegal immigrant.
Does the water get used faster, is their less water to be distributed when more straws are added? Hmm seems simple yet absolutely explains a complex problem with a simple model.
That is such a bullshit argument. Make up your ****ing minds: Are immigrants mostly skilled and educated professionals, or are they mostly unskilled laborers?
It seems to change whenever it's convenient for whatever argument you're trying to make.
Just like the drop in the bucket argument Roy Beck was trying to make against immigration. So a million immigrants from across the globe who came to the U.S. and made a better life for themselves is an insignificant number to use as a humanitarian cause in support of immigration, but a few thousand people leaving their home country suddenly depletes its talent pool?
**** off.
__________________
Last edited by Eternal Idol on Feb 24th, 2018 at 08:56 PM
Ahh so you have nothing to say of actual substance
People can still be low skilled workers that leave their country and take away from that countries raw gdp, worker population and taxable income for the country.
Nothing I said contradicts what I said, you lack the ability to think substantively because your just trying to win this argument.
**** off
__________________
Thanks Esta!
Last edited by Blindside12 on Feb 24th, 2018 at 09:38 PM
What is this, edgey atheistic teenagers on the internet?
"Burden of Proof" is a bullshit concept that doesn't show up in almost any legit science.
It works like this:
Science A says 1
Science B says 1.2.
Therefore, Science A is not as correct as B.
You're supposed to do B if you disagree with A. Instead of saying "burden of proof! lawlz!"
If you don't want to entertain outrageous claims, then don't. If you don't want to make the effort to prove something, that will contradict the arguments and facts presented by others, then don't. But don't be lazy and take the old and tired anti-intellectual position of "burden of proof, man!!!"
Edit - I just read some of the lazy-ass arguments in this thread. His claims can be researched. "Burden of proof" my ass. Stop being lazy and search for the answers in the video. If you find that decent research supports his numbers, there's your proof. If you find different numbers, make a counter argument. Stop being lazy dipshits that just want to shit on all idea you think are not "liberal."
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Feb 24th, 2018 at 09:52 PM
KMC Community Forums
Feb 23rd, 2018 11:10 PM
