Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 8:09 am

Kammekor wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:11 am

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 8:35 pm

Kammekor wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:00 pm

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 12:54 pm

Yes the civilized thing to do is send children to a country they have never been to or as in the case of my own country, deny some children of the military serving our civilized nation borne outside the country where their parents are stationed American citizenship. Why use the word civilized when what you really mean is white?

Did you just play the racism card?

As you are speaking of your own home country and the top 10 nation providing asylum seekers are non-white and 9 are Muslim, it is pretty evident what you consider to be civilized. Non-whites make up less than 10% of the Netherland population and Muslim make up 5% of the population. More people migrated from the Netherlands in 2017 than immigrated to the Netherlands.

I am just saying if the wooden shoe fits.

Cherrypicking in data. Try a longer range, and better use Eurostat as a source.
I have nothing against migration, I am living abroad myself, but in my country the problem with illegal immigrants is getting bigger and bigger (with a large group of asylum seekers from Albania for instance), and illegal immigrants getting children is part of this problem.
Deporting illegal immigrants is extremely difficult, deporting illegal immigrants with small children poses an extra ethical problem my country has no real answer to.
Ranting against these deportations is easy, but I don’t overlook the fact people staying illegally have their own responsibility. Not everything is the responsibility of the government of the country they live in.

I used statistics provided by the government of the Netherlands posted on Government of The Netherlands websites. The last official figures for Albanians (predominantly a Muslim people) is 2800 living within your borders, less than live in the much smaller Belgium and a far smaller figure than the 7000 German nationals who immigrated to the land of Hans Brinker. Can you really claim that Germans have cost your nation less than Albanians have?

The Netherlands has a long history of colonization. By my research 17 nations were invaded by the Dutch, none of them "white, Christian" nations, peoples that I suggest you refer to as uncivilized. The Royal Netherland East Indies Army after total defeat in WW2 could hardly wait to show their strength and courage at the massacre of Rawagede (1947) in which it slaughtered all the male inhabitants of the Indonesian village. However, as a sign of atonement in 2008 the Government of the Netherlands issued an apology claiming to deeply regret the incident. A 1948 United Nations report called the killing "deliberate and merciless"
60 years to apologize for the murder of 431 men, referring to your homeland as civilized is a bit of a stretch, I am suggesting "white" is the word you really meant but were aware of just how racist your post would appear.

newkidontheblock wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:37 am So in summary, the civilized thing is to grant anyone entering a western country, either through official ports of entry or by crossing borders, automatic citizenship so they can enjoy the transfer of wealth and benefits from all the taxpayers of that country to them (and all their children, parents, entire villages that they manage to bring with them) in perpetuity.

Then that country can be pronounced as kind and humane.

Because tax paying citizens only exist to fund all the people of the world with freebies.

Don’t worry, I pay enough in taxes already. If I end up paying taxes at 100% of income, then it’s really time to move to the KOW and start over.

Kammekor wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 10:09 am

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 8:09 am

Kammekor wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 7:11 am

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 8:35 pm

Kammekor wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:00 pm

Did you just play the racism card?

As you are speaking of your own home country and the top 10 nation providing asylum seekers are non-white and 9 are Muslim, it is pretty evident what you consider to be civilized. Non-whites make up less than 10% of the Netherland population and Muslim make up 5% of the population. More people migrated from the Netherlands in 2017 than immigrated to the Netherlands.

I am just saying if the wooden shoe fits.

Cherrypicking in data. Try a longer range, and better use Eurostat as a source.
I have nothing against migration, I am living abroad myself, but in my country the problem with illegal immigrants is getting bigger and bigger (with a large group of asylum seekers from Albania for instance), and illegal immigrants getting children is part of this problem.
Deporting illegal immigrants is extremely difficult, deporting illegal immigrants with small children poses an extra ethical problem my country has no real answer to.
Ranting against these deportations is easy, but I don’t overlook the fact people staying illegally have their own responsibility. Not everything is the responsibility of the government of the country they live in.

I used statistics provided by the government of the Netherlands posted on Government of The Netherlands websites. The last official figures for Albanians (predominantly a Muslim people) is 2800 living within your borders, less than live in the much smaller Belgium and a far smaller figure than the 7000 German nationals who immigrated to the land of Hans Brinker. Can you really claim that Germans have cost your nation less than Albanians have?

The Netherlands has a long history of colonization. By my research 17 nations were invaded by the Dutch, none of them "white, Christian" nations, peoples that I suggest you refer to as uncivilized. The Royal Netherland East Indies Army after total defeat in WW2 could hardly wait to show their strength and courage at the massacre of Rawagede (1947) in which it slaughtered all the male inhabitants of the Indonesian village. However, as a sign of atonement in 2008 the Government of the Netherlands issued an apology claiming to deeply regret the incident. A 1948 United Nations report called the killing "deliberate and merciless"
60 years to apologize for the murder of 431 men, referring to your homeland as civilized is a bit of a stretch, I am suggesting "white" is the word you really meant but were aware of just how racist your post would appear.

It's the word 'civilized' which got you of?

With the word I meant nothing but to imply deporting illegal immigrants with small children poses ethical questions / matters our society has no answer to. I guess I did not make that clear.

And no, I am not proud about our history in for instance Indonesia. But calling a country uncivilized for actions done some 70 years ago by some of our grandparents is a long stretch, isn't it?

Will be interesting to see how the world will judge the way the current (and future) migration / asylum patterns are handled.

Anthony's Weiner wrote:

newkidontheblock wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:37 amSays the son of immigrants whose lives are immeasurably better because of immigrating to America. Would your parents qualify for immigration to the USA under current rules? How can you justify their good fortune while denying others the same opportunity? Do you feel all should be taxed the same rate? Do you feel there should be no safety net for citizens? The highest federal tax rate is 37%, you can choose a state with lower state and a city with a lower tax rate but then you will get the services and education you pay for.

My parents did not have a choice where to live. I guess my life is better because I wasn’t nuked and then liberated by the communists.

My dad got a job because the Vietnam War sucked out all the skilled workers and sent them to the battlefield. Middle of nowhere needed his skills and thus sponsored him on an H1-B Visa. He arrived with an almost empty suitcase and a few dollars in his pocket. He lived at his workplace by himself for many years.

There aren’t just federal taxes and state taxes here. Some cities also charge tax too. There is a tax from Medicare. A tax from social security. School tax, car tax. Even utility bills have special taxes. Even retirement savings have taxes. Does paying a higher tax on utility bills give me a superior education?

As for the graduated income tax, even if everyone was taxed at the same rate, those who made more will pay more, those who make less will pay less. But at least everyone will pay something. A good many pay nothing right now.

Do you truly believe that this recent wave of immigrants are more skilled and educated than in previous times? That they are assimilating and becoming American citizens? Or are they trying to transform America into an image of their own country? I see fewer people speaking English these days. At a soccer game down in the valley, supposed citizens were proudly waving ... the Mexican flag.

Following the rules and going through the process is not just good fortune. It’s hard work, time, and effort as well as luck. How is being against illegal immigration somehow denying others the ‘same opportunity’? Why don’t these illegals do the same as my parents did and not bypass the system?

Does anyone truly believe illegal immigration helps promote greater citizenship and brings highly educated, socioeconomically middle and upper class people to America?

I’ve heard just the opposite. Highly educated, middle class folks from other countries turned away from America because there are too many ‘immigrants.

Safely nets should be for citizens not people illegally staying in the country. And it should be a safety net, not a way of life. Where I grew up, people on welfare bought mansions and drive fancy cars. Those that didn’t game the system were seen as fools. Guess where all those high taxes went to?

Sorry for the long reply. I’ll get off my diatribe now.

Chad Sexington wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 7:57 pm

pczz wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 6:39 pm

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 12:54 pm

Kammekor wrote: ↑Sat Aug 31, 2019 12:01 pm

Arget wrote: ↑
There is a difference in Australian born and born in Australia. Just because you were born in Australia gives no right of Australian citizenship. They take the nationality of their parents.

Happens a lot in my country. People apply for asylum, are denied, hang around illigally, have a child And then play the ‘inhuman’ card because the kid’s vulnerable, has never been to the parents’ country, rooted here, etc etc.
Pretty frustrating in civilized countries because many people manage to stay that way And drain the social security system for years

Yes the civilized thing to do is send children to a country they have never been to or as in the case of my own country, deny some children of the military serving our civilized nation borne outside the country where their parents are stationed American citizenship. Why use the word civilized when what you really mean is white?

Are we talking abou Australia or USA, both deporting kids ort, in the case of USA, just killing them at the border.
Sad fact of life is that the 2 countries that treat immigrants the worst are both countries created by immigrants and both rich and both with plenty of land and other resources.
Even the UK, a supposedly tolerant society, is guilty. Nepalese Gurkhas sent home on miniscule epnsions afet a lifetime of military service in the UK. The Windrush generation abused and kicked out, EU citizens who have lived in Uk for 30 years being denied permission to stay.
The worst people to have dealing with immigration are the children of immigrants. they dont want anyone else coming to the party and drinking the beer

pczz. Have you evidence that children are being killed by USA authorities at the Border? If a child dies because their parents or any other adult drags them across deserts in searing heat, while trying to enter the US illegally, instead of applying at one of the official border crossing points, that is the USA killing children is it?
And the Windrush generation are being kicked out of the UK are they? As I recall there was issues with some Windrush immigrants who had not bothered to actually complete the appropriate documentation entitling them to stay in the UK and some who had not bothered to hang onto those documents and were unable to present them to immigration when challenged. Most sensible people apply for the relevant visas on arrival in a country they wish to reside, and once they obtain them they keep them safe in the event they are asked to produce them.
As for EU citizens being kicked out of the UK after 30 years there, are you kidding? The UK won't even deport those convicted of serious crimes (the EU is concerned about the human rights of rapists and murderers, and wont allow their deportation) Why do you think folks voted for Brexit?

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 10:06 am

offroadscholar wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:24 am I think Dutton's right to enforce the law in this case.
The couple entered Australia illegally via people smugglers, then had children in Aust prior to obtaining permanent residency. That's irresponsible of them imo, and probably a strategy to be allowed to stay on compassionate grounds.
If Dutton bends on this one, it sets a precedent for more illegal immigrants to pump out kids in Australia as a means to be allowed to stay.

As Howard said in 2001,

"But we will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come"

In 1770, Lieutenant James Cook wrote that he had claimed the east coast of Australia for the United Kingdom and named it New South Wales, while on Possession Island off the west coast of Cape York Peninsula. However, it seems that no such claim was made when Cook was in Australia. Cook was not authorized to make such a claim and Joseph Banks, who was standing beside Cook, does not mention the event. Furthermore, Cook's purported declaration was made unilaterally and without any consultation with First Australians, in spite of his direct written orders from The Admiralty, which instructed him to conclude a treaty with the inhabitants (if any) and obtain their permission for the expropriation of land. British colonisation of Australia began in Sydney in 1788.

For sure, No one wants people coming to their land that don t have the courtesy to do it according to the rules. After all they may bring diseases or violence withem, god forbid they may even take over and real Australians would be forced to live in poverty in remote ares of their nation.

newkidontheblock wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 11:04 am

Anthony's Weiner wrote:

newkidontheblock wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:37 amSays the son of immigrants whose lives are immeasurably better because of immigrating to America. Would your parents qualify for immigration to the USA under current rules? How can you justify their good fortune while denying others the same opportunity? Do you feel all should be taxed the same rate? Do you feel there should be no safety net for citizens? The highest federal tax rate is 37%, you can choose a state with lower state and a city with a lower tax rate but then you will get the services and education you pay for.

My parents did not have a choice where to live. I guess my life is better because I wasn’t nuked and then liberated by the communists.

My dad got a job because the Vietnam War sucked out all the skilled workers and sent them to the battlefield. Middle of nowhere needed his skills and thus sponsored him on an H1-B Visa. He arrived with an almost empty suitcase and a few dollars in his pocket. He lived at his workplace by himself for many years.

There aren’t just federal taxes and state taxes here. Some cities also charge tax too. There is a tax from Medicare. A tax from social security. School tax, car tax. Even utility bills have special taxes. Even retirement savings have taxes. Does paying a higher tax on utility bills give me a superior education?

As for the graduated income tax, even if everyone was taxed at the same rate, those who made more will pay more, those who make less will pay less. But at least everyone will pay something. A good many pay nothing right now.

Do you truly believe that this recent wave of immigrants are more skilled and educated than in previous times? That they are assimilating and becoming American citizens? Or are they trying to transform America into an image of their own country? I see fewer people speaking English these days. At a soccer game down in the valley, supposed citizens were proudly waving ... the Mexican flag.

Following the rules and going through the process is not just good fortune. It’s hard work, time, and effort as well as luck. How is being against illegal immigration somehow denying others the ‘same opportunity’? Why don’t these illegals do the same as my parents did and not bypass the system?

Does anyone truly believe illegal immigration helps promote greater citizenship and brings highly educated, socioeconomically middle and upper class people to America?

I’ve heard just the opposite. Highly educated, middle class folks from other countries turned away from America because there are too many ‘immigrants.

Safely nets should be for citizens not people illegally staying in the country. And it should be a safety net, not a way of life. Where I grew up, people on welfare bought mansions and drive fancy cars. Those that didn’t game the system were seen as fools. Guess where all those high taxes went to?

Sorry for the long reply. I’ll get off my diatribe now.

So your father would not be allowed into the USA on a H-1 visa now because despite having a good education he was destitute. No doubt he didn t have to rely on any form of assistance to find shelter, clothing or food for his family. And if he had a good education as you claim he was lucky not to have to settle as a refugee as 700,000 fellow Vietnamese did. Thank your lucky stars that the world was not as cruel then as it is now. People on welfare buy mansions.. I call bullshit. How the F did they get a mortgage? If it people were as cold-hearted then as you are now, your mom, dad and yourself would not be bitching about how much tax you pay, you would be sharing a bowl of rice amongst the three of you. Shame on you!

clutchcargo wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 1:26 pm

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 10:06 am

offroadscholar wrote: ↑Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:24 am I think Dutton's right to enforce the law in this case.
The couple entered Australia illegally via people smugglers, then had children in Aust prior to obtaining permanent residency. That's irresponsible of them imo, and probably a strategy to be allowed to stay on compassionate grounds.
If Dutton bends on this one, it sets a precedent for more illegal immigrants to pump out kids in Australia as a means to be allowed to stay.

As Howard said in 2001,

"But we will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come"

In 1770, Lieutenant James Cook wrote that he had claimed the east coast of Australia for the United Kingdom and named it New South Wales, while on Possession Island off the west coast of Cape York Peninsula. However, it seems that no such claim was made when Cook was in Australia. Cook was not authorized to make such a claim and Joseph Banks, who was standing beside Cook, does not mention the event. Furthermore, Cook's purported declaration was made unilaterally and without any consultation with First Australians, in spite of his direct written orders from The Admiralty, which instructed him to conclude a treaty with the inhabitants (if any) and obtain their permission for the expropriation of land. British colonisation of Australia began in Sydney in 1788.

For sure, No one wants people coming to their land that don t have the courtesy to do it according to the rules. After all they may bring diseases or violence withem, god forbid they may even take over and real Australians would be forced to live in poverty in remote ares of their nation.

And the rules seem to change depending on the powers to be...