Whites losing majority status in 2042

Somehow I see that resulting in even more illegal immigration...THE_DRUGGIE

Not if we use landmines.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="Atheists_Pwn"] it would require a ton of government jobs in the process. "oh noez socialismzz!"coolbeans90

It wouldn't create many Government jobs, as I said all we have to do is enforce our laws already. Illegals cost us BILLIONS a year anyways, in California alone estimates range from $10billion to even as high as $20 billion.

Funny, because illegal immigrants are the reason for California's budget crisis.

No, decreased revenues due to the recession, and the failure to address the budget shortfalls by the California government are. :|

http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=19805&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1741

"While these annual costs for illegal immigration have been steadily draining California's budget year after year, the costs have risen and are placing an even greater strain on the state's resources in 2009. The original 2004 cost estimate was based on an illegal alien population estimated at 2,900,000. Today, FAIR estimates California's illegal alien population has grown to 3,200,000, a 10.3 percent increase. As a result of both the continued growth in the illegal alien population and the higher cost of governmental services, the current fiscal cost outlays for the illegal alien population in California are now approaching $13.1 billion annually more than half the projected shortfall for next year."

[QUOTE="dkrustyklown"]Full english fluency for starters. There should also be a literacy requirement as well as educational standards with preference for people with a secondary education. Immigrants should also be obligated to pay a substantial deposit that would be refunded after a number of years. Requiring that immigrants be in good health is a restriction that should return, as well. Any immigrant with a criminal history should be excluded. The US should really be more selective about who is allowed to emmigrate here.THE_DRUGGIE

What would increase in more illegal immigration is amnesty.

[QUOTE="THE_DRUGGIE"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]For example, EVERY Fortune 500 company has a policy of "diversity." By "diversity," they don't mean people with diverse ideas, what they mean is people with different skin color. This means they purposely will hire unqualified minorities over white people (also known as Affirmative Action), and this is racist to the core.http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6938738.html""I want to make sure, because of problems identified in the Fire Department ? that the next fire chief is strong enough to make deep cultural changes, and focus very diligently on making our fire department more diverse, racially, ethnically and in the number of women in the fire department," Parker said."Basically, she is saying she will make it more "diverse" even if it means hiring unqualified people. It's not only racist, it's sexist too.I say let the BEST person get the job, regardless of gender or ethnicity, but apparently today that is "racist."AHUGECAT

There's racial quotas for companies, they have to be "diverse" or they could get in trouble, which is not only hardcore racist, but sexist as well.

Here, the New York Times pays execs MORE to hire women and minorities over white men: http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-new-york-times-pays-execs-extra-if-they-hire-minorities-and-women-2010-3

Not only that, but there's also discrimination at unversities. The Supreme Court has actually OKAYED racial discrimination against white people in universities!

http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/culture/racism/2903-Supreme-Court-Defends-Racism-Americas-Universities.html

Basically, University of Michigan has a 150 point system, and you need 100 to get in. Well, if you are black or Hispanic, you automatically get 20 points. Not onl that, but a PERFECT SAT score is worth only TWELVE points.

It's not only companies that discriminate, but politicians, schools, etc. etc.

Affirmative action based on race or gender is actually illegal in Michigan now.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

It wouldn't create many Government jobs, as I said all we have to do is enforce our laws already. Illegals cost us BILLIONS a year anyways, in California alone estimates range from $10billion to even as high as $20 billion.

Funny, because illegal immigrants are the reason for California's budget crisis.

AHUGECAT

No, decreased revenues due to the recession, and the failure to address the budget shortfalls by the California government are. :|

http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=19805&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1741

"While these annual costs for illegal immigration have been steadily draining California's budget year after year, the costs have risen and are placing an even greater strain on the state's resources in 2009. The original 2004 cost estimate was based on an illegal alien population estimated at 2,900,000. Today, FAIR estimates California's illegal alien population has grown to 3,200,000, a 10.3 percent increase. As a result of both the continued growth in the illegal alien population and the higher cost of governmental services, the current fiscal cost outlays for the illegal alien population in California are now approaching $13.1 billion annually more than half the projected shortfall for next year."

Thanks for proving my point. The California government DID NOT address budget shortfalls.

oh, in the States. cause if it was the world, they lost it awhile back.Advent_Gamer

They never had it to begin with.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="THE_DRUGGIE"] I think the companies use such tactics for easy PR.topgunmv

There's racial quotas for companies, they have to be "diverse" or they could get in trouble, which is not only hardcore racist, but sexist as well.

Here, the New York Times pays execs MORE to hire women and minorities over white men: http://www.businessinsider.com/henry-blodget-new-york-times-pays-execs-extra-if-they-hire-minorities-and-women-2010-3

Not only that, but there's also discrimination at unversities. The Supreme Court has actually OKAYED racial discrimination against white people in universities!

http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/culture/racism/2903-Supreme-Court-Defends-Racism-Americas-Universities.html

Basically, University of Michigan has a 150 point system, and you need 100 to get in. Well, if you are black or Hispanic, you automatically get 20 points. Not onl that, but a PERFECT SAT score is worth only TWELVE points.

It's not only companies that discriminate, but politicians, schools, etc. etc.

Affirmative action based on race is actually illegal in Michigan now.

Good, now if we could get it banned on a Federal level, especially in private industry.

In20 years whites are the minorty in all the major cities in Canada. I was just in Fargo ND and the number of minorites was not even close to the number where I live in Canada. It really surprised me.

What would increase in more illegal immigration is amnesty.AHUGECAT

Like Mexico's policy.

Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:
Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress." (Article 32)
Immigration officials must "ensure" that "immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents. (Article 34)
Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets "the equilibrium of the national demographics," when foreigners are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when "they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy." (Article 37)
The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest." (Article 38)
Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:
Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)
A National Population Registry keeps track of "every single individual who comprises the population of the country," and verifies each individual's identity. (Articles 85 and 86)
A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).
Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:
Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)
Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)
Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:
Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)
Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)
Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico -- such as working with out a permit -- can also be imprisoned.
Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says,
"A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally." (Article 123)
Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)
Foreigners who "attempt against national sovereignty or security" will be deported. (Article 126)
Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:
A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)
Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)

AHUGECAT

Those sound an awful lot like America's current immigration policy. Someone cannot immigrate to America unless they will be a productive member of American society; unless they are able to financially care for themselves; and when they have been convicted of a felony. I know all of this, because I went through the immigration process. The only point in there that America does not have (to my knowledge) is the point that an immigrant may be barred if he or she changes the demographics of the country, but since you're in favor of equality and have said that you're fine with demographic change, I presume that you wouldn't want a policy like that.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]What would increase in more illegal immigration is amnesty.THE_DRUGGIE

When Reagan did his amnesty all it did was increase illegal immigration.

[QUOTE="THE_DRUGGIE"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]What would increase in more illegal immigration is amnesty.AHUGECAT

When Reagan did his amnesty all it did was increase illegal immigration.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Like Mexico's policy.

Mexico welcomes only foreigners who will be useful to Mexican society:
Foreigners are admitted into Mexico "according to their possibilities of contributing to national progress." (Article 32)
Immigration officials must "ensure" that "immigrants will be useful elements for the country and that they have the necessary funds for their sustenance" and for their dependents. (Article 34)
Foreigners may be barred from the country if their presence upsets "the equilibrium of the national demographics," when foreigners are deemed detrimental to "economic or national interests," when they do not behave like good citizens in their own country, when they have broken Mexican laws, and when "they are not found to be physically or mentally healthy." (Article 37)
The Secretary of Governance may "suspend or prohibit the admission of foreigners when he determines it to be in the national interest." (Article 38)
Mexican authorities must keep track of every single person in the country:
Federal, local and municipal police must cooperate with federal immigration authorities upon request, i.e., to assist in the arrests of illegal immigrants. (Article 73)
A National Population Registry keeps track of "every single individual who comprises the population of the country," and verifies each individual's identity. (Articles 85 and 86)
A national Catalog of Foreigners tracks foreign tourists and immigrants (Article 87), and assigns each individual with a unique tracking number (Article 91).
Foreigners with fake papers, or who enter the country under false pretenses, may be imprisoned:
Foreigners with fake immigration papers may be fined or imprisoned. (Article 116)
Foreigners who sign government documents "with a signature that is false or different from that which he normally uses" are subject to fine and imprisonment. (Article 116)
Foreigners who fail to obey the rules will be fined, deported, and/or imprisoned as felons:
Foreigners who fail to obey a deportation order are to be punished. (Article 117)
Foreigners who are deported from Mexico and attempt to re-enter the country without authorization can be imprisoned for up to 10 years. (Article 118)
Foreigners who violate the terms of their visa may be sentenced to up to six years in prison (Articles 119, 120 and 121). Foreigners who misrepresent the terms of their visa while in Mexico -- such as working with out a permit -- can also be imprisoned.
Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony. The General Law on Population says,
"A penalty of up to two years in prison and a fine of three hundred to five thousand pesos will be imposed on the foreigner who enters the country illegally." (Article 123)
Foreigners with legal immigration problems may be deported from Mexico instead of being imprisoned. (Article 125)
Foreigners who "attempt against national sovereignty or security" will be deported. (Article 126)
Mexicans who help illegal aliens enter the country are themselves considered criminals under the law:
A Mexican who marries a foreigner with the sole objective of helping the foreigner live in the country is subject to up to five years in prison. (Article 127)
Shipping and airline companies that bring undocumented foreigners into Mexico will be fined. (Article 132)

GabuEx

Those sound an awful lot like America's current immigration policy. Someone cannot immigrate to America unless they will be a productive member of American society; unless they are able to financially care for themselves; and when they have been convicted of a felony. I know all of this, because I went through the immigration process. The only point in there that America does not have (to my knowledge) is the point that an immigrant may be barred if he or she changes the demographics of the country, but since you're in favor of equality and have said that you're fine with demographic change, I presume that you wouldn't want a policy like that.

That's supposed to be like America's immigration, but it's changed the past 20 years.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="THE_DRUGGIE"] ...But wouldn't that make illegal immigrants legal? :?Atheists_Pwn

When Reagan did his amnesty all it did was increase illegal immigration.

Great refutation. History is on my side.

That's supposed to be like America's immigration, but it's changed the past 20 years.

AHUGECAT

Changed how?

I can assure you that I, as an immigrant to America, most certainly was checked out to ensure that I met all the criteria.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="THE_DRUGGIE"] ...But wouldn't that make illegal immigrants legal? :?Atheists_Pwn

When Reagan did his amnesty all it did was increase illegal immigration.

Amnesty would be giving a big "screw you" to everyone who has been trying to come here legally through the proper channels. Why keep trying to come here legally if you can just break the law and expect to be forgiven for it down the road?

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]What would increase in more illegal immigration is amnesty.THE_DRUGGIE

The ones here already. It largely depends on the legislation itself whether future immigrants who come across in the same manner will be covered by immigration reform.

[QUOTE="Atheists_Pwn"][QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

When Reagan did his amnesty all it did was increase illegal immigration.

AHUGECAT

Great refutation. History is on my side.

It was quite a plausible point, and you have yet to prove that facts are on your side.

I was going to confirm this with my crystal ball, but I figure it isn't worth the time.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

That's supposed to be like America's immigration, but it's changed the past 20 years.

GabuEx

Changed how?

I can assure you that I, as an immigrant to America, most certainly was checked out to ensure that I met all the criteria.

For example, in the 1990s, Congress raised the legal immigration ceiling from 500,000 to 700,000, and created new "diversity visas" for people from "underrepresentated countries," and issued 65,000 visas a year to high-tech qorkers. Polls showed the public wanted less immigration, but Congress gave them more.

In 2000, the number of visas increased from 65,000 to 195,000.

It's pretty much giving them to anyone now, though it is easier just to cross the border.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="Atheists_Pwn"] correlation is not causationcoolbeans90

Great refutation. History is on my side.

It was quite a plausible point, and you have yet to prove that facts are on your side.

When Reagan did his amnesty, America (especially California) was flooded with illegal immigrants afterwards.

It's pretty much giving them to anyone now

AHUGECAT

Uhh, no, not really; in fact, I (like all immigrants coming to work in America) had to be fit into a specific professional category in order to qualify for my work visa.

[QUOTE="coolbeans90"]

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Great refutation. History is on my side.

AHUGECAT

It was quite a plausible point, and you have yet to prove that facts are on your side.

When Reagan did his amnesty, America (especially California) was flooded with illegal immigrants afterwards.

You have not proved that the reform caused it. I find it entirely possible, but never provided a causal argument. Until you do so, history isn't on your side. ;)

Also, while we're speaking of polls on immigration, only 30% of Americans want the illegal immigrants in America to leave. 44% want them to be able to stay and eventually be able to apply for US citizenship. And 57% want immigration to America either to stay at its present level or be increased.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

It's pretty much giving them to anyone now

GabuEx

Uhh, no, not really; in fact, I (like all immigrants coming to work in America) had to be fit into a specific professional category in order to qualify for my work visa.

We are allowing too many legal immigrants as well, too many increases in visas as well (which is how 40% of people become illegal immigrants).

We are allowing too many legal immigrants as well, too many increases in visas as well (which is how 40% of people become illegal immigrants).

AHUGECAT

As I illustrated above, polls most certainly do not show that most Americans want less immigration.

Yes, people know what things are going to be like thirty-two years into the future... -_-

Wait a minute...

If 2012 is the end of the world, why would they care about 2042? :| ;)

Also, while we're speaking of polls on immigration, only 30% of Americans want the illegal immigrants in America to leave. 44% want them to be able to stay and eventually be able to apply for US citizenship.

GabuEx

Americans who don't live near them should have no say.

It's easy to be for illegal immigration when you don't live near thousands of them like I do.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Also, while we're speaking of polls on immigration, only 30% of Americans want the illegal immigrants in America to leave. 44% want them to be able to stay and eventually be able to apply for US citizenship.

AHUGECAT

Americans who don't live near them should have no say.

It's easy to be for illegal immigration when you don't live near thousands of them like I do.

Americans already don't have any say, considering that America is not a direct democracy; however, you just cited poll results and now you seem to be arguing against poll results, so...

so what. there are plenty of other hot women out there that is not white

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

We are allowing too many legal immigrants as well, too many increases in visas as well (which is how 40% of people become illegal immigrants).

GabuEx

As I illustrated above, polls most certainly do not show that most Americans want less immigration.

Their votes differ. Bush tried to force amnesty down our throats and we said NO.

Their votes differ. Bush tried to force amnesty down our throats and we said NO.

AHUGECAT

Said "no" how?

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Also, while we're speaking of polls on immigration, only 30% of Americans want the illegal immigrants in America to leave. 44% want them to be able to stay and eventually be able to apply for US citizenship.

AHUGECAT

Americans who don't live near them should have no say.

It's easy to be for illegal immigration when you don't live near thousands of them like I do.

I actually agree with you for the first time. People who live away from the problem should have no say. I think giving people who came here illegally amnesty is just wrong. I went through the proper procedures to get my citizenship and people who break the law by coming here illegally should not just get it handed to them.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Also, while we're speaking of polls on immigration, only 30% of Americans want the illegal immigrants in America to leave. 44% want them to be able to stay and eventually be able to apply for US citizenship.

GabuEx

Americans who don't live near them should have no say.

It's easy to be for illegal immigration when you don't live near thousands of them like I do.

Americans already don't have any say, considering that America is not a direct democracy; however, you just cited poll results and now you seem to be arguing against poll results, so...

67% want illegal immigration to decrease.

Even the majority of legal Hispanics want illegals to go home: http://cis.org/Minority-Views-Immigration

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Also, while we're speaking of polls on immigration, only 30% of Americans want the illegal immigrants in America to leave. 44% want them to be able to stay and eventually be able to apply for US citizenship.

kidsmelly

Americans who don't live near them should have no say.

It's easy to be for illegal immigration when you don't live near thousands of them like I do.

I actually agree with you for the first time. People who live away from the problem should have no say. I think giving people who came here illegally amnesty is just wrong. I went through the proper procedures to get my citizenship and people who break the law by coming here illegally should not just get it handed to them.

Exactly, which just boggles my mind why any legal immigrant who worked hard to get in this country would be for illegal immigration.

67% want illegal immigration to decrease.

Even the majority of legal Hispanics want illegals to go home: http://cis.org/Minority-Views-Immigration

AHUGECAT

They want illegal immigration to decrease, yes.

However, they do not want the illegal immigrants currently in the country to be deported.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Their votes differ. Bush tried to force amnesty down our throats and we said NO.

GabuEx

Said "no" how?

DREAM ACT. It's showing up again now though.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

Their votes differ. Bush tried to force amnesty down our throats and we said NO.

AHUGECAT

Said "no" how?

DREAM ACT. It's showing up again now though.

No, I asked how "we" said "NO".

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

67% want illegal immigration to decrease.

Even the majority of legal Hispanics want illegals to go home: http://cis.org/Minority-Views-Immigration

GabuEx

They want illegal immigration to decrease, yes.

However, they do not want the illegal immigrants currently in the country to be deported.

How many voted were illegal immigrants themselves?

As I said, they shouldn't be able to vote unless they live near them, because the media paints them in a different light than what they are.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Said "no" how?

GabuEx

DREAM ACT. It's showing up again now though.

No, I asked how "we" said "NO".

60% of Americans opposed the Dream Act.

How many voted were illegal immigrants themselves?

AHUGECAT

What?

You can't say "67% say..." and then when someone else pulls out a poll result say "oh, but how many who voted were illegal immigrants?" Either poll results are valid barometers of American thought or they aren't.

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

How many voted were illegal immigrants themselves?

GabuEx

What?

You can't say "67% say..." and then when someone else pulls out a poll result say "oh, but how many who voted were illegal immigrants?" Either poll results are valid barometers of American thought or they aren't.

The 26% (opposite of the 67%) were probably illegals/anchor babies.

Many Americans do support amnesty, but that's because they don't live near them. Amnesty would pretty much hasten the economic collapse of America but the media portrays it as if they would save the economy.

The 26% (opposite of the 67%) were probably illegals/anchor babies.

AHUGECAT

Wait, are you claiming that illegal immigrants make up 26% of the American population?

Who will be the majority then?

[QUOTE="AHUGECAT"]

The 26% (opposite of the 67%) were probably illegals/anchor babies.

GabuEx

Wait, are you claiming that illegal immigrants make up 26% of the American population?

I wouldn't be surprised :lol: (then you gotta count anchor babies)

Some Americans do support amnesty, no doubt about it, but they are misinformed about it and can't get the truth because they don't live near them.