Netanyahu: "Seventy years ago, only Shanghai opened the door... to Jewish refugees"

So in your view, taking in refugees means "open borders". Sorry, I don't accept that characterization. That ship had 6 million people on it? All six million of the exterminated Jews were bound for the US and refused entry? I think your heart is in the right place, but the US is not single-handedly responsible for the Holocaust. What do such claims add to the dialogue?Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Not having a visa means no requirements for entry in order to visit. That does not mean that anyone could stay forever. You put the term in "scare quotes". What the heck were you implying that the term was supposed to mean?And you still did not explain who the US turning around a ship is responsible for the death of 6 million Jews. And if the UK took in 1 of 10 asylum seekers, that would seem to be doing their share. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Sure. I will buy that. But does that translate to fewer laborers and more white-collar workers? What the heck is merit? Are a strong back and a powerful work incentive not indicative of a contributor?Because when some people make this argument, what they are pushing is not allowing people here from shit hole countries like Nigeria, who turn out to be among the most educated folks to come here, and a desire for more Australians who seem to have it pretty good at home, and who don't want to come here.The fact is that no country has a claim to have the best and brightest. Folks come here with potential and make the best of our opportunities and education and become valuable. What country do you have to come from in order to make the best of what's here?Convince me that "folks who can contribute" is not just racist double talk.

So no refugees then? Are you requiring folks who come here to be financially well off before they get here? To be already educated? So no young folks either?In my opinion, your policy would be extremely short-sighted absent some actual malicious intent.

That's because you are a laborer. I suspect that tech workers who feel as you do, don't want too many eager workers who can program for less than what the tech workers want to be paid. If we adopt a "don't compete with me" immigration policy, just who would get in?And do you make-up hotel beds or do gardening?So you are not for a merit-based immigration policy at all. What you consider contributing is just not competing with you. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

That's right. What's fair is that folks just crawl away into a corner and die instead of competing with you. Sorry, but it is difficult to imagine a less Christian sentiment.

How would you feel if you were faced with the choice between living in a war zone, not being able to educate your children, living in a tent city with no job prospects, and no way to even envision a future.I suppose it is possible to pretend that every new person, born in the US or out of it, is a threat to your own existence. But the truth is that such thinking is sheer paranoia. How many refugees would we have to admit to this country before your job prospects would be negatively affected in an appreciable way.I imagine that to your mind, the answer is just one.

Does the fact that a poor person doesn't have something like a TV set mean that somebody in the middle class has exploited you? Is the company you worked for owned by somebody in the middle class? Is some middle-class person ultimately responsible for the fact that you yourself are not in the middle-class?If the answer to those question is not yes, then I suggest that your obvious ire is misplaced. Even your boss does not have the power to offer you raises that change your status more than incrementally.You've got a lot of anger. But it is no more well directed than the anger that caused mine workers or air conditioning factory workers to vote for Trump. I know that telling you that does not help, and in fact is a complete turnoff. But somebody needs to say it.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.