Immigrants good for me and you? Bad? How to make a good answer that is accurate?

You answered your own question. You Americans are schizophrenic about illegal immigration. You get your knickers in a twist about "illegality" but you know you depend on the illegals. Running in all directions at once is inevitable.

If somebody says, "My door is always open," that doesn't mean you can go in and steal his stapler. It still implies a certain standard of courtesy is expected.

After the first dozen or so, their enthusiasm will probably start to wane.Do you really think people would try to jam themseves in where there's no room? Populations tend to be self-regulating. That's what causes migration in the first place.

It does, but I bet I could get in.

A lot of Muslims are Asian.

Socialism is the natural state of social species.In humans there is a conflict between individual interests (greed) and collective interests. Doesn't, "Go ye into all the world," suggest that the gospel has a collective component?

Jubillee.

Mercy for debts. Redistribution of wealth. A check on rampant greed.

Of course there is. Don't be silly. The whole point was to prevent people from being financially ruined forever. The money they would have paid was kept for their own (more productive) use. You're making a strawman of socialism.

Socialism done in a non-socialistic way? Or maybe you just have the wrong idea of what socialism is.Edited by ringo, : spellinge

There was labour, which is the same as money for most purposes. When their debts were forgiven, they were free to use their labour for their own (more productive) purposes, instead of making some fat cat even fatter. You should make up your mind whether you're ranting against socialism "in general" or against just the totalitarian kind of socialism. When you said, "We don't need more socialists," which kind did you mean? On the contrary, it seems to be the lefty-types who are pushing for more freedom for blacks, women, homosexuals, etc. They may have been right - but the kind of religion that you preach is thoroughly immoral. Y'see, you're the one who is saying we can't afford to "safely" grant freedoms any more. The real danger of totalitarian oppression is from your bunch.

It's better to be called a bigot than to be one. It's better to admit being a bigot than to deny it.

In Canada we think of it as a mosaic rather than a melting pot - i.e. the individual characteristics are preserved to a great extent. Much less "wrecking" involved.

We think of it as more of a salad than a stew. Healthier. And we're willing to learn as well as teach. Your viewpoint is understood all to well. That's why we want to improve on it.

What kind of "regulation" do you want to preserve your privileges? Just keep everybody out who is willing and able to do your job better for less?