Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9045 total)
129 online now:
AZPaul3, PaulK, vimesey (3 members, 126 visitors)
Newest Member: maria
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 887,139 Year: 4,785/14,102 Month: 383/707 Week: 114/197 Day: 3/55 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   CATO Institute had a big IMMIGRATION AND NATIONAL IDENTITY survey, April 27, 2021
Percy
Member
Posts: 20219
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.8


Message 106 of 129 (888292)
09-11-2021 10:24 AM
Reply to: Message 102 by PaulK
09-11-2021 3:22 AM


Re: The Trump Presidency thread is being discussed.
I think you're doing an admirable job of responding to LNA, but it's a difficult task. The reason why I don't usually engage with LNA, and why when I do it's not for too long, is that each of his replies contains additional misunderstandings, and the number of misunderstandings quickly grow past the point of possibility of straightening them all out. Compounding the problem is that often even the explanations of what he's misunderstood are themselves misunderstood. And now that he's added purposeful misrepresentation and targeting of individuals to his MO I'm even less interested in engaging with him.

Clarifying my position on walls again, I'm against them. I wish we didn't need any, but in some places we do. I prefer technology-based approaches first and walls second, and in tandem where appropriate. All approaches require a human element.

Is LNA racist? I think once you've said enough that you have to repeatedly declare, "I am not a racist," that you've pretty much proven you're a racist.

We have to be careful how we judge someone a racist, though. I defended Lee in the Post yesterday, calling him a man of his time and place, and got called a racist by multiple people.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : LMA -> LNA, thanks to nwr for noticing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by PaulK, posted 09-11-2021 3:22 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by nwr, posted 09-11-2021 11:39 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 5789
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 4.7


Message 107 of 129 (888296)
09-11-2021 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 106 by Percy
09-11-2021 10:24 AM


Re: The Trump Presidency thread is being discussed.
Is LMA racist?

What does that "M" stand for? (I think you were referring to LamarkNewAge).

I don't know whether he is racist. What he writes is too incoherent to be sure of anything. He obviously had some strong reason for starting this thread, but I'm still not at all sure of what point he was trying to make.


Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by Percy, posted 09-11-2021 10:24 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33409
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 108 of 129 (888300)
09-11-2021 12:45 PM


From Today's New York Times.

This is the International Border crossing a Los Ebanos.

The ferry is hand powered and a-ways up the hill is a Post Office, store and Customs Border Control.


My Website: My Website

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by Percy, posted 09-11-2021 1:04 PM jar has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20219
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.8


(1)
Message 109 of 129 (888301)
09-11-2021 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 108 by jar
09-11-2021 12:45 PM


And here's the gate you must pass through to reach the ferry. I assume you pull up to the gate and someone comes out of the building in the background to conduct the border check.

AbE: That's an active window, but the way. You can pan around, zoom in/out, change your location, etc.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : AbE.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by jar, posted 09-11-2021 12:45 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by jar, posted 09-11-2021 3:19 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33409
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 110 of 129 (888305)
09-11-2021 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Percy
09-11-2021 1:04 PM


Pretty much impenetrable.

The trees are mostly Ebony which is the source of the name.

AbE: expand the view and you will see that you are looking at loops where Mexico is actually north of the US just to the east of the ferry.

AbE2: note the masks. The image is recent, taken during the pandemic. This is an example of pretty much how most of the border is in reality; mostly people going back and forth for business, shopping (the town on the Mexican side is many many times bigger than Los Ebanos with far more shopping opportunities), and to visit family and friends.

Edited by jar, : No reason given.

Edited by jar, : see AbE:

Edited by jar, : see AbE2:


My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Percy, posted 09-11-2021 1:04 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1947
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 111 of 129 (888306)
09-11-2021 6:32 PM


I was planning on making a comment about equating immigration policy with race policy
That will have to come in my next post, or later in this post.

FIRST I have to respond to yet another lie of Percy:

He claimed that I said "I am not a ******". It is a false quote. I never ever said that anywhere, and I mean anywhere in space/time, in the entire Universe.

I did correctly point out the fact that I was called a ******, in several posts, but that was an attempt to get the persons who made the weak comments to address the actual post, that the comment was a "reply" to.

NOW MY COMMENT ABOUT EQUATING IMMIGRATION POLICY WITH RACE POLICY:

It is true that racists are clearly a large "swing vote" that can make the difference between success and failure of a given policy.

But just because racists side with a particular referendum issue, political candidate, or policy proposal DOES NOT mean that everybody who supports the same policy, candidate, or issue is also a ******.

This CATO poll asked people whether opposition to immigration is primarily due to racism or other sincere policy concerns.

So, the BIG PICTURE view can clearly allow one to say that the 53% of Americans, who support cutting benefits to immigrants, are only in the majority due to the general support, for this policy position, provided by racists. What cannot be said is that INDIVIDUALS who respectively support barring/cutting benefits to immigrants are racists.

(The opposition to benefits for immigrants was 53%, but that is not tug o be confused with the much more hypothetical "tradeoff" policy which eliminates benefits for immigrants with a parallel policy of increasing immigration levels above 1 million per year)

This discussion might not be possible here. There are too many people who post here who use evasion techniques. Hit and evade. Hit with a false strawman accusstion, then evade the request to back up the hit. A person trying to engage that type of behavior is getting into a situation much like stepping quick sand. The ground is "bad", you will be really limited in what you can do on/in it.


Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by AZPaul3, posted 09-11-2021 9:45 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1947
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 112 of 129 (888308)
09-11-2021 7:36 PM


Dictionary.cambridge.org NEED verb
Need

Verb

A1

To have to have something, or to want something very much

I am about to quote Percy's exchange with me, during our "debate" , years ago.

Just because I quote his words does not mean I accept his strawman arguments, mind you. He accused me of getting "Republican talking points" while I was actually reading an ACLU article, which was saying Democrats are playing semantic games on the issue of a wall verses fence. I will quote the entire paragraph, so I am not accused of something I will nevertheless get accused of anyway.

(Percy likes to say I am confused when I don't accept his non sequitur arguments)

(I prefer to get back to the facts)

Hey Percy.

Spare me your semantics, context twisting, and various evasion techniques.

That is a watered down list of Percy's tactics.

Quotes coming soon...

...to the Percy near you...

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 2571
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 113 of 129 (888311)
09-11-2021 8:56 PM


Other Polls?
How many other polls support your CATO data?

How many other polls do not support your CATO data?


What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5984
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.6


(3)
Message 114 of 129 (888314)
09-11-2021 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by LamarkNewAge
09-11-2021 6:32 PM


Re: I was planning on making a comment about equating immigration policy with race policy
So, the BIG PICTURE view can clearly allow one to say that the 53% of Americans, who support cutting benefits to immigrants, are only in the majority due to the general support, for this policy position, provided by racists.

No. What your survey shows is that American Society, the institution, is still racist, selfish and harsh.

What cannot be said is that INDIVIDUALS who respectively support barring/cutting benefits to immigrants are racists.

Of course we can. Whether their proponents recognize it or not, political policies that have major negative effects on one unwanted group are racist. That is one of the major problems in a racist society. Those that can't see our racism repeat it and those that do see it don't care. The society is racist, LNA.

But you say you are not racist. You come in here and stir up passions pushing this latent racist social agenda.

(Seriously, taxing dirt poor immigrants desperately trying to feed their families? How American.)

You're here fighting this for what purpose?


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by LamarkNewAge, posted 09-11-2021 6:32 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by LamarkNewAge, posted 09-11-2021 10:39 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded
 Message 116 by LamarkNewAge, posted 09-11-2021 10:44 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded
 Message 123 by LamarkNewAge, posted 09-12-2021 11:46 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1947
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.2


(1)
Message 115 of 129 (888316)
09-11-2021 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by AZPaul3
09-11-2021 9:45 PM


Re: I was planning on making a comment about equating immigration policy with race policy
You never asked me about the details of an immigration increase. The tax idea was my idea, but it had to do with a hyporhetical big immigration increase. It was am idea that was based on taxes on future immigrants, and I would prefer at least 2 million more immigrants per year. A tripling of levels.

First generation Americans already pay $63 billion more per year than they get from the government.

The CATO Institute brought us this previous study. I shared it here. Years ago.

I would urge you to understand that Democrats acrually do not support increasing the yearly immigration levels, in this poll. Or any other. They seem to max out at 47%. Americans finally broke 30% support for yearly increases, in the Gallup poll, around 3 years ago. Democrats were at 47% then. Then national support fell to 27% for an increase, in the poll a few years ago.

New ground was broken in the last 2 Gallup polls. 34% supported an increase, them 33% in the last one.

This Cato poll has the nation at 29% and Democrats at 47%.

So the political winds are not blowing in favor of a yearly increase.

There needs to be a big idea to get a humane number of immigrants the chance to immigrate.

Do you know it is almost impossible for a poor person to immigrate here?

Do you know how few refugees get to immigrate here?

You have the chance to immigrate here in 20 years, if you have a relative that became a citizen.

A highly skilled worker stands a somewhat less than awful chance to immigrate at some point.

Do you know how few people are admitted per year via the lottery? It is about 50 000 per year.

Refugees need to increase from 50,000 per year to (at least) 1 million.

Family members should increase from 500,000 a year to at least 1 million.

The lottery needs to be raised to (at least) 1 million, from 50,000.

If I would keep anything the same, it would be worker VISA levels.

But Democrats refuse to budge on allowing the total numbers above 1 million, combined, pet year.

( I caught Biden once, in the primary, say we can take in 2 million more, but that wont go anywhere)

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by AZPaul3, posted 09-11-2021 9:45 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by PaulK, posted 09-12-2021 2:56 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1947
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 116 of 129 (888317)
09-11-2021 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by AZPaul3
09-11-2021 9:45 PM


Re: I was planning on making a comment about equating immigration policy with race policy
Many immigration reformers, that advocate for big increases per year, tend to favor ending family & worker immigration, and having all immigrants admitted, aside from refugees, be through a lottery.

The number often tends to be 3 million.

The lottery is my favorite immigration category.

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by AZPaul3, posted 09-11-2021 9:45 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 16962
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.8


(2)
Message 117 of 129 (888320)
09-12-2021 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by LamarkNewAge
09-11-2021 10:39 PM


Re: I was planning on making a comment about equating immigration policy with race policy
quote:
You never asked me about the details of an immigration increase. The tax idea was my idea, but it had to do with a hyporhetical big immigration increase. It was am idea that was based on taxes on future immigrants, and I would prefer at least 2 million more immigrants per year. A tripling of levels.

You also said that it was to get public support for immigration. So presumably the tax would be enacted first and then the increase in immigration levels would follow - if the public support materialised. What if the public support did not materialise?

quote:
I would urge you to understand that Democrats acrually do not support increasing the yearly immigration levels, in this poll. Or any other. They seem to max out at 47%.

To put that in context that is much higher than the figure Cato found for Republicans (11%) or Independents (21%).

quote:
New ground was broken in the last 2 Gallup polls. 34% supported an increase, them 33% in the last one.

This Cato poll has the nation at 29% and Democrats at 47%.

So the political winds are not blowing in favor of a yearly increase.


Increasing anti-immigration rhetoric from the Right may be the cause.
Looking at the line graph supplied by Cato for their polls, the figure for Democrats may be only a “blip” - the trend is still upwards (and the decrease on last year’s high is small). This is not so for Republicans who have a small downward trend. Independents have a lower upward trend than Democrats, but the decrease on last year is much more severe.

quote:
There needs to be a big idea to get a humane number of immigrants the chance to immigrate.

What makes you think that an extra tax on 1st generation immigrants is that idea?

quote:
Do you know it is almost impossible for a poor person to immigrate here?

That doesn’t make an extra tax sound like a good idea. The poor are those who can least afford an extra financial burden.

quote:
Do you know how few refugees get to immigrate here?

I don’t think your proposed tax would have any effect on support for refugees. It’s shameful but the opponents of refugees won’t think of them as paying taxes anyway.

quote:
But Democrats refuse to budge on allowing the total numbers above 1 million, combined, pet year.

If their own partisans don’t support the idea - and the uncommitted are even more negative about it - that would seem to be sound politics, especially in these days of electoral uncertainty. It’s no use increasing immigration figures if the Republicans come in and reverse it in a few years time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by LamarkNewAge, posted 09-11-2021 10:39 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by LamarkNewAge, posted 09-12-2021 11:36 AM PaulK has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1947
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 118 of 129 (888322)
09-12-2021 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 117 by PaulK
09-12-2021 2:56 AM


Re: I was planning on making a comment about equating immigration policy with race policy
Just so people understand that graph:

Cato combined the Gallup polls from 1974 to 2020/21 with CATOs April 2027 poll.

The graph is a composite based on 2 polling outfit's polls.

Gallup had 2 polls in a row, which showed at least 33% support for yearly increases. The last 2.

(The silver lining in the universe of immigration polls, is that there are alot of voters, who oppose immigration increases, but, will vote for Democrats anyway.

Less than 40% of all African Americans support increasing yearly immigration levels, but 87% voted for Biden. White liberals only support an increase in immigration numbers by a narrow margin over their fellow white liberals who do not, but at least 80% of white liberals reliably vote for Democrats in these times.

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by PaulK, posted 09-12-2021 2:56 AM PaulK has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by AZPaul3, posted 09-12-2021 1:03 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 5984
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.6


(2)
Message 119 of 129 (888323)
09-12-2021 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by LamarkNewAge
09-12-2021 11:36 AM


Re: I was planning on making a comment about equating immigration policy with race policy
And all of this means what to you?

Why all the polls and numbers? What are you trying to say to us.


Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by LamarkNewAge, posted 09-12-2021 11:36 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 1947
Joined: 12-22-2015
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 120 of 129 (888324)
09-12-2021 1:44 PM


The Gallup poll, showing 33% support for higher levels, is very recent. July 23, 2021
So that means support for higher immigration levels, is high enough (?) for a possible legislative push?

If the entire Democratic political class was forced to defend ssf uchva proposal, then the registered Democrats (plus Democratic leaning independents) would surely start to defend the policy, and support could go north of 40%.

Biden won by 4.4% and he said during the campaign we can take in 2 million more immigrants a year.

I say go for 3 million a year.


  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021