Jump to content
H-Town Man

CULBER-GONE!

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, KinkaidAlum said:

Again, I've never voted straight party ticket until this year but I'd like to point out that it was the GOP who pushed the "straight slate" thing for decades here but now that it can hurt them, it's gone. Funny how that works.

 

Of course, the "straight slate" thing had nothing to do with straight party voting (and was hardly a thing for decades).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to  lithiumaneurysm great points. He's right, and its time, especially with this historic change.  We have a chance for  a new start,  with an open mind,  minus the vitriol.

There are several serious game changing opportunities, that we must act on, if Houston is to remain a viable world city,

Traffic is the most important, with flooding and housing not far behind.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slaters gonna hate.  Immigrants are currently the new boogieman for conservatives.  But, Homosexuals will be returned to the top of the list, sometime soon.  Not hard to predict.     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mkultra25 said:

 

Those who were here in the 80s will no doubt associate "Straight Slate" with a very specific meaning that went well beyond simple straight-ticket voting. 

 

straight slate poster.jpg

Such backwards thinking smh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see this thread spiraling out of control. Let's at least try to keep it on transportation and the potential changes we see coming due to the change in power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19th century transportation technology v. 21st century space technology. Which would you rather your city be associated with? Houston will never become a world class city if it keeps shooting itself in the foot. Culberson was right about Metro and more importantly he is right about NASA. Science and space exploration are the future. After the party of science led by Obama gutted US human space exploration Trump has been bringing it back and that will only benefit Houston. Losing Culberson; Houston has lost it's best NASA ally and it's best hope to remain relevant in the future. Sad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 102IAHexpress said:

19th century transportation technology

 

This is such an old and lame meme. Really, I can buy the more rational arguments that rail is too expensive, not appropriate for most places in Houston, etc. but just calling it old is so out of touch with reality it renders the rest of your comment irrelevant. If rail is a 19th century technology, then someone explain why the most technologically advanced nations (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, China, Western Europe) all have such extensive and wildly successful high-speed rail systems. East Asian countries in particular have been at the forefront of all the high-tech breakthroughs of the last 50 years and they've been building more rail, not less. China is literally exporting high-speed rail systems to tens of millions of people in Southeast Asia and Africa as part of their grand geopolitical strategy.

 

Seriously. Imagine being more concerned with ideology than practical solutions for problems that have been solved time and time again in other cities around the world. Houston may not have a population density or layout appropriate for an extensive rail system, but at least be honest with yourself that it's a relevant and widely adopted technology that is essential to the functioning of the world's most modern cities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lithiumaneurysm said:

 

This is such an old and lame meme. Really, I can buy the more rational arguments that rail is too expensive, not appropriate for most places in Houston, etc. but just calling it old is so out of touch with reality it renders the rest of your comment irrelevant. If rail is a 19th century technology, then someone explain why the most technologically advanced nations (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, China, Western Europe) all have such extensive and wildly successful high-speed rail systems. East Asian countries in particular have been at the forefront of all the high-tech breakthroughs of the last 50 years and they've been building more rail, not less. China is literally exporting high-speed rail systems to tens of millions of people in Southeast Asia and Africa as part of their grand geopolitical strategy.

 

Seriously. Imagine being more concerned with ideology than practical solutions for problems that have been solved time and time again in other cities around the world. Houston may not have a population density or layout appropriate for an extensive rail system, but at least be honest with yourself that it's a relevant and widely adopted technology that is essential to the functioning of the world's most modern cities.

 

Agreed, but its obvious that this dude is trolling.

 

9 hours ago, 102IAHexpress said:

19th century transportation technology v. 21st century space technology. Which would you rather your city be associated with? Houston will never become a world class city if it keeps shooting itself in the foot. Culberson was right about Metro and more importantly he is right about NASA. Science and space exploration are the future. After the party of science led by Obama gutted US human space exploration Trump has been bringing it back and that will only benefit Houston. Losing Culberson; Houston has lost it's best NASA ally and it's best hope to remain relevant in the future. Sad. 

 

None of this is an actual argument. Cars are 1920's tech and earlier. Boats have been around since the beginning of civilization. Lunacy and Strawman arguments have been around just as long, and for someone who is complaining about us using outdated things I would suggest you update that noodle of yours. Why are you wasting your time and everyone elses?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, an electric light rail train with large, open gangways is vastly different than a steam locomotive pulling 2 passenger cars and a caboose behind it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Luminare said:

 

Agreed, but its obvious that this dude is trolling.

 

 

None of this is an actual argument. Cars are 1920's tech and earlier. Boats have been around since the beginning of civilization. Lunacy and Strawman arguments have been around just as long, and for someone who is complaining about us using outdated things I would suggest you update that noodle of yours. Why are you wasting your time and everyone elses?

 

Yes, there is no argument to be found. But I do share the same sentiment in hoping Houston can stay relevant in terms of space transportation and technology, whether it comes in the form of NASA or private enterprise. I might not have agreed with all of Culberson's policies, but I appreciated that he was a strong voice for NASA in the greater Houston area.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The wheel is 5th or 6th millennium B.C. transportation technology. It's time we stopped tying our city to old technology.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, CaptainJilliams said:

 

Yes, there is no argument to be found. But I do share the same sentiment in hoping Houston can stay relevant in terms of space transportation and technology, whether it comes in the form of NASA or private enterprise. I might not have agreed with all of Culberson's policies, but I appreciated that he was a strong voice for NASA in the greater Houston area.  

 

Same.

 

However, what happened in the election isn't a zero sum game. Its not like the Space Industry and Light Rail are like to like industries. NASA has a dedicated budget (probably should be bigger than it is now), and Light rail money comes from other areas. Now if they were pulling from the same pot then there might be an argument, but there is none. I also don't see how focusing more on transportation within the city in anyway takes away focus on NASA. Even if his post were actually serious, and not a troll, the current President supports increased funding in both Space and Infrastructure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Luminare said:

 

Agreed, but its obvious that this dude is trolling.

 

 

None of this is an actual argument. Cars are 1920's tech and earlier. Boats have been around since the beginning of civilization. Lunacy and Strawman arguments have been around just as long, and for someone who is complaining about us using outdated things I would suggest you update that noodle of yours. Why are you wasting your time and everyone elses?

obviously the point was that spaceships are the future, that tech is only from the 1960s, soon we will all be traveling to and from work in our own personal spaceships!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, Luminare said:

 

Same.

 

However, what happened in the election isn't a zero sum game. Its not like the Space Industry and Light Rail are like to like industries. NASA has a dedicated budget (probably should be bigger than it is now), and Light rail money comes from other areas. Now if they were pulling from the same pot then there might be an argument, but there is none. I also don't see how focusing more on transportation within the city in anyway takes away focus on NASA. Even if his post were actually serious, and not a troll, the current President supports increased funding in both Space and Infrastructure.

 

We need a Space Force base!

 

And then we can run light rail to it.  Problem solved.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Besides an ad that made fun of Europa, do we have definitive evidence that Fletcher wouldn't support and play an important role in protecting NASA's budget?

Did she say she wouldn't support NASA? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the problem...

 

Quote

Culberson, a Republican from Texas, has led the House appropriations committee that funds NASA for the last four years. And he's been a stanch advocate of science and human spaceflight over his nearly two decades in office, said Keith Cowing, editor of NASA Watch, a website devoted to space news.  

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/nation-world/space/article/Culberson-s-ouster-could-spell-big-problems-for-13371064.php

 

Fletcher is a newbie to Congress and won't be appointed to lead the appropriations committee.  Whoever gets that chair will have a big say so, but it won't be Lizzie Fletcher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would a waterway canal ststem be any less expensive than building new rail? We at least already have a bayou system in place, so some of the capital costs are accounted for.  They are both centries old technologies. Zero emissions too. What other ancient technology can we spend billions on to “modernize” Houston?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forget trains and canals, we should all the way back to when the ancestors of humans became bipedal.  Zero emissions plus you get a good tan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 102IAHexpress said:

Would a waterway canal ststem be any less expensive than building new rail? We at least already have a bayou system in place, so some of the capital costs are accounted for.  They are both centries old technologies. Zero emissions too. What other ancient technology can we spend billions on to “modernize” Houston?

Just a quick reminder - HAIF has an 'ignore' function that can prove useful.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, august948 said:

 

 

We need a Space Force base!

 

And then we can run light rail to it.  Problem solved.

 

 

 

Not sure about a base but a Space Force Millitary Academy would have been a boon for the local economy and a boost in national reputation. Not going to happen now with Culberson gone. Oh well, citizens have a right to vote against their own interests if they want. That's democracy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2018 at 4:51 PM, Naviguessor said:

Slaters gonna hate.  Immigrants are currently the new boogieman for conservatives.  But, Homosexuals will be returned to the top of the list, sometime soon.  Not hard to predict.     

I am conservative, so let me explain. We are fully for legal immigration. We are just against illegal immigration. There are a number of reasons and factors why like increase strain on the welfare system and for higher wages in legal minority communities. It is not fair to the people who wait and come in the legal way to have others cheating. I don't like it when non-conservatives always come out with a blatantly false statement.  Also, I am Hispanic as well, so don't start on the accusation of racism that usually follows.

Edited by cougarpad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, cougarpad said:

I am conservative, so let me explain. We are fully for legal immigration. We are just against illegal immigration. There are a number of reasons and factors why like increase strain on the welfare system and for higher wages in legal minority communities. It is not fair to the people who wait and come in the legal way to have others cheating. I don't like it when non-conservatives always come out with a blatantly false statement.  Also, I am Hispanic as well, so don't start on the accusation of racism that usually follows.

 

while I agree that illegal immigrants need to be treated justly, I also believe that there's a bigger issue with immigration overall. the system currently sucks.

 

it takes too long. 

the cost is too damn high, even if you don't hire a lawyer to help.

there are too many reasons to list, but the point is, the system makes it nearly impossible for someone to become a citizen.

 

so of course people are going to come into the country illegally. all they really want to do is be here legally so they can survive. 

 

our immigration system is broken, rather than building walls to try and treat the symptom, we should be adjusting the system so it can work for people who want to come in and work hard and earn a living.

 

as it relates to trains, and I guess spaceships, well, it doesn't. I imagine some of these posts should be moved to the politics area, maybe the whole thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, cougarpad said:

I am conservative, so let me explain. We are fully for legal immigration. We are just against illegal immigration. There are a number of reasons and factors why like increase strain on the welfare system and for higher wages in legal minority communities. It is not fair to the people who wait and come in the legal way to have others cheating. I don't like it when non-conservatives always come out with a blatantly false statement.  Also, I am Hispanic as well, so don't start on the accusation of racism that usually follows.

I agree with Samagon. The system in place is terrible for immigrants. Yeah immigrants who are here illegally need to be held accountable but not ripped apart from their families or sent back home without just cause. There are a lot of good people here illegally who are simply afraid of being sent back home, so they avoid the process all together. When you have a president who doesn't understand that not everything is black and white, it's hard to feel comfortable as an immigrant in this country. Anyways screw Culberson. That guy had no interest in seeing Houston grow and develop the way it should. Blame straight ticket voting or whatever but Lizzie won fair and square. And if that many people voted straight ticket Democrat, it should tell us all that this county and state is progressively turning more and more blue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, samagon said:

 

while I agree that illegal immigrants need to be treated justly, I also believe that there's a bigger issue with immigration overall. the system currently sucks.

 

it takes too long. 

the cost is too damn high, even if you don't hire a lawyer to help.

there are too many reasons to list, but the point is, the system makes it nearly impossible for someone to become a citizen.

 

so of course people are going to come into the country illegally. all they really want to do is be here legally so they can survive. 

 

our immigration system is broken, rather than building walls to try and treat the symptom, we should be adjusting the system so it can work for people who want to come in and work hard and earn a living.

 

as it relates to trains, and I guess spaceships, well, it doesn't. I imagine some of these posts should be moved to the politics area, maybe the whole thread.

You are right there does need to be corrections made to the process. The price for becoming a citizen should be much lower. Also, the system needs to be streamlined to prevent backlog when the issues to the process are addressed, there still needs to be border protection.

 

A wall or fence on the border would still be helpful in preventing illegal immigration, and we still need to prevent people from coming in illegally. Also while making the visa process faster  there needs to be strict enforcement with those who violate the visa rules or try to illegally stay here when the visa ends. Border protection is still important and needs to be addressed.

 

Also if a family comes in with children they have to know that there are consequences. If I brake the law and go to prison I don't get to take my kids with me. Illegal immigrant adults need understand that minors can't be held after a certain number of days because they did not violate the law, the parents did. To prevent this all together there needs to be a streamlined deportation process, so the family is not split up after the set number of days based on current law. 

 

A country and its citizens have the right to choose who is allowed to immigrate here.  Immigration should be used to benefit the country as a whole, but also nobody had the right to immigrate here but a privilege. ,Also I firmly believe that when a person goes through the process to be a citizen they tend to have a better appreciation to be in the US, and also are more likely to be allegiant to this country and not the country they immigrated from.

Edited by cougarpad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, cougarpad said:

A country and its citizens have the right to choose who is allowed to immigrate here.  Immigration should be used to benefit the country as a whole, but also nobody had the right to immigrate here but a privilege. ,Also I firmly believe that when a person goes through the process to be a citizen they tend to have a better appreciation to be in the US, and also are more likely to be allegiant to this country and not the country they immigrated from.

 

Agreed.  The point that's missed in all the rhetoric about immigration is that the job market obeys the laws of supply and demand, like any other market does.  Part of the reason unemployment has suddenly gone down is that we've finally done something to restrict the labor supply.  The reason we've never gotten anything done, from either party, is that business leaders don't like a tight labor market.  They want as many people coming in as possible so they can keep their labor costs down and reduce turnover.  Those business leaders control both parties via lobbyists and money contributions.

 

Allowing unlimited immigration, both legal and illegal benefits the wealthy and powerful to the detriment of the working and middle classes. No one has any right whatsoever to be a resident or citizen of the US unless they are born here.  We need to manage the influx of immigrants closely to make sure the average working folks are protected.

 

As for citizenship, if you've come here illegally you should never, ever be allowed to be a citizen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, cougarpad said:

I am conservative, so let me explain. We are fully for legal immigration. We are just against illegal immigration. There are a number of reasons and factors why like increase strain on the welfare system and for higher wages in legal minority communities. It is not fair to the people who wait and come in the legal way to have others cheating. I don't like it when non-conservatives always come out with a blatantly false statement.  Also, I am Hispanic as well, so don't start on the accusation of racism that usually follows.

Since you are trying to explain things, then, maybe you can explain to me what problem you conservatives have with homosexuals.  And, the issue with trump's tone on immigration, is that all immigrants are suffering from backlash, not just illegal ones.  Just acceptable collateral damage, I suppose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Naviguessor said:

Since you are trying to explain things, then, maybe you can explain to me what problem you conservatives have with homosexuals.  And, the issue with trump's tone on immigration, is that all immigrants are suffering from a backlash, not just illegal ones.  Just acceptable collateral damage, I suppose. 

If your comments are regarding gay marriage, I actually believe the Federal government should get out of marriage altogether. For ages marriage has been a religious ceremony, so I think the certification of marriage should be left for religions and other social structures to decide. As for the National government and taxes, I believe that the only documentation needed should be something like a domestic partnership document. If States what to determine marriage they should do so by the will of the people in their State, but I think the States should take the same approach above.

 

I am a conservative in that I believe in a limited national government. I believe that the States should have most of the powers. The federal government should primarily be focused on defense, trade, the relationship between states, citizenship, and financing national interstate utilities.  My believe that the farther away the government is from the people, the more of the chance for tyranny. When most of the government is at the State and local level it is easier for the citizens to check against tyranny. I believe unless a power is precisely stated in the Constitution, it should be given to the States.

Edited by cougarpad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2018 at 4:34 PM, Houston19514 said:

 

Of course, the "straight slate" thing had nothing to do with straight party voting (and was hardly a thing for decades).

 

Of course it did. Democrats weren't running on an anti-homosexual agenda. 

 

Straight slate is what arose after the Southern strategy proved so successful in Dixie. Are you going to tell me that wasn't a party issue either? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CP, - That “straight slate” poster was created long before Gay Marriage was even considered a possibility by most of the public. So, your anti marriage equality position is your personal viewpoint but explains nothing.  The vilinization of gays as a threat is a common scare tactic from conservatives and is what is exactly happening now, with immigrants, middle easterners, refugees, etc...

for context, this was the same year (1985) when Houston Mayor Louis Welch, was recording saying that all queers should be shot.  Is it really any different than what a trump is threatening the people seeking asylum at the border? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could this be moved to the Way-off topic forum? It seems much more about politics than about trains :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Naviguessor said:

CP, - That “straight slate” poster was created long before Gay Marriage was even considered a possibility by most of the public. So, your anti marriage equality position is your personal viewpoint but explains nothing.  The vilinization of gays as a threat is a common scare tactic from conservatives and is what is exactly happening now, with immigrants, middle easterners, refugees, etc...

for context, this was the same year (1985) when Houston Mayor Louis Welch, was recording saying that all queers should be shot.  Is it really any different than what a trump is threatening the people seeking asylum at the border? 

 

I'm absolutely certain that there are some people who would be happy to relive the 80s, as it relates to the partners we take in life, but I am also absolutely certain that the majority of people in society have come to find out that their own lives aren't going to change if someone else loves differently than they do, so ultimately they are wondering why it ever mattered in the first place. 

 

The Marriage debate is over, love won, hate lost. 

 

We are in a different time, people don't go cruising around montrose looking to beat a couple within an inch of their lives just because it's two dudes holding hands, that doesn't happen any longer, and if someone were stupid enough to do that, they would find society doesn't turn a blind eye on them as it once may have. The same is true of politicians. 

 

while 30 years ago wasn't that long ago, it's a different time now, and it won't roll back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry...still on Politics in the Rail Topic, until the conversation gets moved.  But, the conversation is too important to let go. 

 

Samagon, I wish you were right.  But, according to the FBI, the rate of Hate Crimes have been on the rise (including for LGBT persons), in the past couple of years.  To believe that there are no longer many (or any) gay bashings, is incorrect.   

 

https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/FBI-Hate-crimes-in-U-S-CA-surge-in-first-year-13389522.php

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2018 at 3:51 PM, Naviguessor said:

Sorry...still on Politics in the Rail Topic, until the conversation gets moved.  But, the conversation is too important to let go. 

 

Samagon, I wish you were right.  But, according to the FBI, the rate of Hate Crimes have been on the rise (including for LGBT persons), in the past couple of years.  To believe that there are no longer many (or any) gay bashings, is incorrect.   

 

https://www.sfchronicle.com/crime/article/FBI-Hate-crimes-in-U-S-CA-surge-in-first-year-13389522.php

 

That's sad to see. The difference though is that in the 80s, while things were noted in the news, they weren't classified as hate crimes, if they were even classified as crimes at all. and at some point before then you didn't even hear a story on the news. So yeah, at the moment, the incidents being reported might be going up because bad actors feel emboldened, but society will never again let things regress to a point where we don't persecute these criminals.

 

My hope is that enough of the people perpetrating this violence are made examples of so others choose not to follow their footsteps.

 

And maybe at some point in our lifetimes people won't have to be motivated to not participate in hate crimes, not because they're scared of the repercussions, but because they just choose to let people live their best life because that's the nice thing to do and out of respect for their fellow human being.

 

I just see so many positives, Houston elected Parker, Colorado just elected Polis, the argument over marriage is buried, that even though things might be looking worse, on the whole, they are getting better.

 

but then, I'm also an eternally optimist fiscally conservative individual that identifies as very liberal on social matters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2018 at 10:41 AM, cougarpad said:

,Also I firmly believe that when a person goes through the process to be a citizen they tend to have a better appreciation to be in the US, and also are more likely to be allegiant to this country and not the country they immigrated from.

 

I don't agree with this last part. People who get an opportunity to succeed here are thankful regardless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2018 at 11:34 AM, august948 said:

 

Agreed.  The point that's missed in all the rhetoric about immigration is that the job market obeys the laws of supply and demand, like any other market does.  Part of the reason unemployment has suddenly gone down is that we've finally done something to restrict the labor supply.  The reason we've never gotten anything done, from either party, is that business leaders don't like a tight labor market.  They want as many people coming in as possible so they can keep their labor costs down and reduce turnover.  Those business leaders control both parties via lobbyists and money contributions.

 

Allowing unlimited immigration, both legal and illegal benefits the wealthy and powerful to the detriment of the working and middle classes. No one has any right whatsoever to be a resident or citizen of the US unless they are born here.  We need to manage the influx of immigrants closely to make sure the average working folks are protected.

 

As for citizenship, if you've come here illegally you should never, ever be allowed to be a citizen.

 

The people who come illegally are only really competing with high school dropouts in the labor force. I do agree with you that the same lobby who screams and yells about illegal immigrants also wants them to come so they can pay lower wages and make more profit, it's utter hypocrisy. As for the last part, if people are living here and contributing, it makes more sense to do another amnesty so they are in the system and pay taxes, which will help reduce the deficit. Ronald Reagan the republican hero did it, and Bush Sr. supported it also. But again, business leaders don't want that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/26/2018 at 10:04 AM, Slick Vik said:

 

The people who come illegally are only really competing with high school dropouts in the labor force. I do agree with you that the same lobby who screams and yells about illegal immigrants also wants them to come so they can pay lower wages and make more profit, it's utter hypocrisy. As for the last part, if people are living here and contributing, it makes more sense to do another amnesty so they are in the system and pay taxes, which will help reduce the deficit. Ronald Reagan the republican hero did it, and Bush Sr. supported it also. But again, business leaders don't want that.

 

Not exactly.  We don't know what skills they bring, since we aren't processing them and asking.  Some may already be skilled at this trade or that, or at least have worked farms growing up.  But what most certainly happens is that most will gain skills and become skilled labor in due course.  Thus they are competing not just against high school dropouts but also high school graduates who don't further their education one way or the other.

 

It isn't the same lobby screaming about illegals and then wanting them to come.  That would be nonsensical, and I can assure you the powers controlling the Democratic party (and the Republican party) in this matter aren't insane.

 

We tried amnesty, remember?  That led to even greater numbers trying to come in.  The proof is in the pudding on this one.  All Trump had to do was talk about it when he got elected and the numbers trying to cross dropped dramatically.  That's because suddenly amnesty became less certain and the likelihood of deportation became perceptibly higher.  At any rate, anyone who comes here illegally should not ever, ever have the chance to become a citizen.  Maybe make them permanent residents and they will be in the system and paying taxes (if they aren't already).  And it's laughable that either party is going to use any increased tax revenues to reduce the deficit.  They're paid well to dole that out to special interests.

 

I'm glad to see you think Reagan was a hero.  Trump may well go down in history as a hero, too.  At least he's trying to fix things that the Democratic and Republican establishments both don't really want fixed.  That's more than the presidents in between the two, from both parties, have tried to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎27‎/‎2018 at 9:22 PM, august948 said:

 

Not exactly.  We don't know what skills they bring, since we aren't processing them and asking.  Some may already be skilled at this trade or that, or at least have worked farms growing up.  But what most certainly happens is that most will gain skills and become skilled labor in due course.  Thus they are competing not just against high school dropouts but also high school graduates who don't further their education one way or the other.

 

It isn't the same lobby screaming about illegals and then wanting them to come.  That would be nonsensical, and I can assure you the powers controlling the Democratic party (and the Republican party) in this matter aren't insane.

 

We tried amnesty, remember?  That led to even greater numbers trying to come in.  The proof is in the pudding on this one.  All Trump had to do was talk about it when he got elected and the numbers trying to cross dropped dramatically.  That's because suddenly amnesty became less certain and the likelihood of deportation became perceptibly higher.  At any rate, anyone who comes here illegally should not ever, ever have the chance to become a citizen.  Maybe make them permanent residents and they will be in the system and paying taxes (if they aren't already).  And it's laughable that either party is going to use any increased tax revenues to reduce the deficit.  They're paid well to dole that out to special interests.

 

I'm glad to see you think Reagan was a hero.  Trump may well go down in history as a hero, too.  At least he's trying to fix things that the Democratic and Republican establishments both don't really want fixed.  That's more than the presidents in between the two, from both parties, have tried to do.

 

We do know, skilled workers who have decent jobs don't risk their lives going through an unforgiving desert. The ones who come are desperate and poor. For the most part they go to slaughterhouses, farms, construction, janitorial services, and landscaping, not exactly skilled work. The farming lobby is 100% not wanting a sensible immigration to pass, because they can get cheap illegal labor. I've spoken to a Republican congressman in person about this (my uncle is a donor), and he told me blaming illegals is a smokescreen to protect farms and like businesses that hire illegal workers.

 

Regarding amnesty, the greater numbers had nothing to do with it. Illegal immigration went up because of 9/11, when borders were shut. Before that, workers came back and forth seasonally, and border guards didn't really care either, it was an understanding. As far as becoming citizens, the party who did that would have millions of votes coming their way. I guess there isn't much difference between being a permanent resident and citizen, but if someone is living here for a long time and contributing to society, why not? To send a message they are lesser? That just creates unnecessary resentment. 

 

Regardless if extra revenues are used for the deficit or not, they are still extra revenues that can be used to help the country. You're making a talking head assumption. 

 

Trump will never ever go down as a hero. He is despised worldwide and by half the people in his own country. He's not fixing anything, he's making things worse that will make it difficult for the next president to fix. The countdown to his demise is on, either the election or Mueller will lead to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Slick Vik said:

 

We do know, skilled workers who have decent jobs don't risk their lives going through an unforgiving desert. The ones who come are desperate and poor. For the most part they go to slaughterhouses, farms, construction, janitorial services, and landscaping, not exactly skilled work. The farming lobby is 100% not wanting a sensible immigration to pass, because they can get cheap illegal labor. I've spoken to a Republican congressman in person about this (my uncle is a donor), and he told me blaming illegals is a smokescreen to protect farms and like businesses that hire illegal workers.

 

Regarding amnesty, the greater numbers had nothing to do with it. Illegal immigration went up because of 9/11, when borders were shut. Before that, workers came back and forth seasonally, and border guards didn't really care either, it was an understanding. As far as becoming citizens, the party who did that would have millions of votes coming their way. I guess there isn't much difference between being a permanent resident and citizen, but if someone is living here for a long time and contributing to society, why not? To send a message they are lesser? That just creates unnecessary resentment. 

 

Regardless if extra revenues are used for the deficit or not, they are still extra revenues that can be used to help the country. You're making a talking head assumption. 

 

Trump will never ever go down as a hero. He is despised worldwide and by half the people in his own country. He's not fixing anything, he's making things worse that will make it difficult for the next president to fix. The countdown to his demise is on, either the election or Mueller will lead to it.

 

Most probably are unskilled, but there are going to be those who have skills who either can't find work in their native countries, or can make much higher wages in the US.  Some will risk the journey to make the higher wages available here.  I'm also sure it's not just the farming lobby that wants illegals.  Construction moguls benefit from it as well since most construction workers are contractors working for contractors so the Construction industry doesn't have to get it's hands dirty.

 

9/11 was a blip, if anything.  The number of illegals living in the US has been steadily increasing since the 80's.  http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/12/03/what-we-know-about-illegal-immigration-from-mexico/

 

The opinions of the world aren't really going to weigh on Trump's legacy here.  You may not be old enough to remember, but everyone hated Reagan too and thought he was leading us into world war 3 (sound familiar?)  If anything, that's proof that he's right that the rest of the world has been taking advantage of the US and now they're mad that we're not wiling to take it anymore.  I've been hearing for years, especially from friends and family from Asia that they can't believe how the US lets itself get taken advantage of.  They think we're stupid, and we have been.  If Trump can reverse that successfully, that alone will make him a pivotal president.  We'll see how North Korea works out, but he's done more in less time than anyone else.  And I don't even need to mention how the economy is humming along with unemployment the lowest in decades.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Blue Dogs said:

GOP Strategist Jessica Colon believes Fletcher will be vulnerable for defeat in 2020.

 

She might well be, but that's also exactly what I would expect a GOP strategist to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love it. The GOP’er is already elauating her performance, and she isn’t even in the seat yet.  Just what you’d expect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...