There are a lot of laws we have on the books that SHOULDNT be enforced. The only reason they are there is because attempts to repeal them piss off a vocal minority, and vocal minorities can cause significant damage. It is usually easier to avoid enforcement of the law, instead of attempting to repeal it.
Case and point, Homosexuality in the military. The majority of the population supported allowing openly gay individuals in the military in 1992, but when Clinton attempted to allow gay people to openly serve, conservative groups flooded White House and Congressional Phone lines, shutting down government business in what might have been one of the first DDOS attacks in history. Faced with this challenge, the government decided to implement don't ask don't tell policy, essentially avoiding enforcement of the law.
Homosexuality was illegal in many states until 2003, consensual sex between 15 year olds is illegal everywhere in America, sex toys and fellatio is illegal in a couple of states. These are not mere factoids; there have been serious and concerted efforts to repeal these laws, only to be thwarted by passionate minorities.
We as a society could confront these minorities, but doing so incurs serious causes of social strife, with little or no benefit. A far superior method is to simply fail to enforce the laws, and rely on the power of jury nullification (That a jury has the legal right to acquit a defendant if they disagree with a law) incase a couple of overzealous officials attempt to enforce it.
Police officers and intelligence agencies have been able to catch terrorists for decades; this problem did not appear overnight. As time goes on, terrorists and criminals will simply adapt their methods to avoid surveillance (off the top of my head, I can imagine window tinting and carpooling through private parking garages, they will most likely be more original).
After this, terrorists are not impeded in the slightest bit, the public is several billion dollars poorer, and politicians now have a stunningly effective tool to control their populace (Wait until pictures of an Opposition MP in drag picking up a hooker are "leaked").
Not really, in order to scale large enough to make a dent in the economy, they will need to take over managed timber farms around the country, which make up most of our supply of wood. That just displaces the high cost of food to a high price of construction.
I agree that today nuclear technology is much better than it used to be. How do you propose we scale up nuclear power in the US? The main options I see are subsidizing capital costs for private firms, or engaging in a giant government construction program. Both leave a bitter taste in my mouth, what do you propose?
Nuclear power is very capital intensive. I imagine that a large scale effort to build many nuclear power plants at once would have an effect on capital availability in the general economy.
Suppose there is a coup d'etat by the US military, would you want there to be a video record that you are a dissident? The US has been spoiled, but democracies often fall into dictatorships. Spain, Germany, and Italy come to mind as prominent examples. It has even almost happened to the US in the early 30's and early 50's.
Read up on what the FBI did during the pre-nixon era. Read about the time the FBI attempted to have Martin Luther King kill himself( http://www.oilempire.us/graphics/mlksuicideletter. gif sorry for the partisan host site, Wikipedia linked to it.)Read about mk-ultra, about how easy it was for Nazi germany to round people up.
After this, tell me if you don't see the importance of maintaining our privacy from the government.
Ford Escape gets 35 MPG, you should fit in there. As for the 60 inch chest, that is not healthy, you really should consider liposuction or gastric bypass(Diet and exercise is much better, but I'm sure you've already tried that.)
What the fuck are you talking about? Tibet was a country, will an embassy in the US. Before the 50's, Tibet was never part of China. China had messianic visions for control of Asia, which is why proceeded to annex several states that had been independent for centuries(Xinjang, Tibet, Inner Mongolia...) and turning other nations in to puppet states(Mongolia). It then proceeded to declare war on India and Vietnam. China has stopped these activities, and now is a pretty good neighbor, but don't try and subvert history.
The shooter in lubney was shot several times by the police, he didnt stop shooting until he ran out of victims. Gun fights are not like the movies, if she had her gun, she would have shot him, probaly not have killed him, and then promptly been shot.
I'm from the middle east, I do not want to be called Asian, as it does not represent my heritage. I have far more in common with a North African than I do with someone in China. I think Indians would resent being lumped in too.
We're at war with Gambia? And there are several people on the Supreme Court who believe that US citizenship is not required to have constitutional rights and access to the legal system, just presence on US soil.
I resent the assertion that we are incapable of prosecuting terrorism without resorting to torture, improper detention, and foreign abduction. I understand that terrorism never stops, so it is difficult to present evidence without corrupting ongoing operations. However, these are the same challenges that police deal with every day. How is this any different from prosecution of drug gangs or organized crime? Somehow, we manage to give every drug lord and every crime boss a free and fair trial, without sending their tortured bodies to Cuba.
If a student dosnt get stellar grades in tough subjects(Mostly A's, B's are forgivable and C's are a sin allowable in freshman year), he is essentialy barred from any school out of their state(There are exceptions, but they are pretty rare). This has the potential to make a large difference on your future salary(While it is possible to recover from going to a bad undergraduate school, it is pretty rare). I argue that the upper 10% to 20% of the school is capable of reaching such performance on a dependable basis.
"And how many of them even attempt to learn english? That's a major difference."
No idea, though judging by the parity in other statistical indicators, probaly a very simular number. Maybe higher, considering that the economic benefit of learning English is much higher now, because there is less ghettoisation and a large industry devoted to such things.
"Which basically means that we've had immigration laws as long as anyone's been alive. So what?"
My original question was: How are Hispanic immigrants any different from earlier european ones. One of your points was that most Mexicans are illegal. My counter point was that this distinction is invalid, as there was no such thing as illegal immigrants back when significant European immigration occurred.
"Bullshit. We have rules on who we let in, and we have the right to enforce them. This is a major part of the problem."
If by "we" you mean the Federal government, sure, the Supreme Court agrees with you.
"They do exist. You can debate the level of their influence, but they are still around."
Wikipedia does not acknowledge the existence of any group by the same of "Aztlan" or "La Raza". "Aztlan" is the name of the Aztec homeland, and "La Raza" is Spanish for "Hispanic people". The only group with mild secessionists tendencies I could find any references for is MEChA, which as far as I can see, does not exist anymore. If you have any other sources, I'd be happy to see them.
"It's not a monoculture - you can identify a handful of broad cultures that account for the vast majority of Americans. Give it time and some of the differences between them will fade."
I'm not sure if thats true, we live in a different world today. Cheaper communication, faster transportation, and the explosion in diversity of media all spell out that differences between people are bound to increase, not decrease. Past cultural cohesion was once based on an entire nation watching the same shows, listening to the same radio, and facing the same challenges. The language barrier prevented cross border exchange.
Mass media is now highly fragmented, and an entire generation is being raised worldwide that is fluent in English. And worldwide, mass migration is destroying traditional cultural borders. Because of this, I don't the common cultural values of New York are any more likely to converge to South Carolina's as they are to Paris's.
"My ancestors assimilated, and the ones who didn't speak english learned. They also went the legal route and didn't demand that the people already here accomodate them. This is in stark contrast to the current wave of illegals, mostly from mexico."
Your ancestors probably didn't. Statistics show that Hispanic immigrants have roughly similar rates of English proficiency as 19th century German and early 20th century italian immigrants did. The first generation of immigrants never fully assimilate, and a lot of them never learn English(though if you check, the rate of first generation Hispanic immigrants who speak English is pretty high). The second generation on the other hand, almost always does(Studies show that over 90% of children of Hispanic immigrants use English in their primary language. My parents still speak Hebrew and Arabic at home, and there are still Italian grandmothers who can't speak a word of English.
As for legality, there was no such thing as an "illegal" immigrant until the 1920s, there was literally no legal concept. If you were turned back at Ellis Island, you could still sneak in through Canada if you had the money, and the US would not have any legal right to deport you(Unless you were Chinese, we thought they were stupid and uneducated back then). So this is really a moot point.
"We've got a culture, it's just young."
I don't think we do. Define American culture, and make sure that it includes every American citizen, something that everyone from New York City to Rural Alabama can agree on. When you do, you'll realize that we share those same things with nearly every other industrialized country in the world.
"Well, they're mostly illegal"
Because of discriminatory immigration law, most Asian-Americans are decedents of illegal immigrants. Since the 20's, most US naturalized immigrants came semi-illegally first(Over staying Visas, etc.), and set up a life in the US. With the money they gained from living in America, they were able to afford legal proceedings to legitimize their status.
"and they bring groups with them like Aztlan and la Raza. The implication is that they want to convert some part of the US to another mexican state."
These groups and movements share negligent support from Mexican Americans. In fact, neither Aztlan or La Raza are functional groups, they both date to 1960 era student movements. It is not clear that they even exist anymore.
There were some German Americans who wanted Germany to annex America during WW2, at least as many as there are Hispanic separatists now. As a much more potent example, Italian immigrants participated in mass terror attacks against America, bombing Wall street in 1920 killing 30 people, and German immigrants caused over 30 million dollars in Damage by the Black Tom bombing. Hispanic Immigrants have never been involved in attacks on this scale.
"Sparky, one more time, check the price of a barrel now compared to last summer. It was hire then. It is not OPEC it is Exxon, Haliburton, and American politicians."
Dear god, I wish I'd stop hearing this. Haliburton is a construction company, they get a lot of improper government pork that is almost certainly politically motivated, but they have NOTHING to do with long term oil prices. Exxon? Their global market share of the petroleum market is 2%. American Politicians? Gasoline taxes and ethanol mandates bring the price up, but those have held steady for the last couple years, and have nothing to do with the recent increases.
What has keeping oil prices up is the risk premium, that the worlds oil supply might be severely disrupted at any moment by someone crashing a plane into a Saudi shipping center. Companies buy oil futures to hedge their bets, shoving prices up. That, and supply and demand, oil companies are having a really hard time finding new sources of cheap oil, while demand looks to keep increasing.
And prices are very high right now, we have not seen prices on our current level for over 25 years. The fact that prices were high enough last summer is irrelevant, and mostly due to a merciful hurricane season.
""Diplomacy" wouldn't have put us in the dominant position after WWII. Killing and destruction are what brought us to power."
In WW2 we were attacked, and a genocidal nutjob had the real capacity to destroy the world, I'm happy we stopped Hitler, but I couldn't care less that we won "Dominance" over the world.
As an American, I don't want "dominance" of the world, just prosperity. We don't need military bases on every continent and spend more than every other nation in the world combined to be prosperous. As long as I and those in my community are doing well economically, I couldn't care less how much soft power I wield over foreign officials. And before you tell me that our economic success is contingent on our military strength, look at Ireland. They have a higher GDP per capita then us, faster growth, and far better foreign relations. Somehow, they managed to do this without a giant military.
Slashdot Mirror
Case and point, Homosexuality in the military. The majority of the population supported allowing openly gay individuals in the military in 1992, but when Clinton attempted to allow gay people to openly serve, conservative groups flooded White House and Congressional Phone lines, shutting down government business in what might have been one of the first DDOS attacks in history. Faced with this challenge, the government decided to implement don't ask don't tell policy, essentially avoiding enforcement of the law.
Homosexuality was illegal in many states until 2003, consensual sex between 15 year olds is illegal everywhere in America, sex toys and fellatio is illegal in a couple of states. These are not mere factoids; there have been serious and concerted efforts to repeal these laws, only to be thwarted by passionate minorities.
We as a society could confront these minorities, but doing so incurs serious causes of social strife, with little or no benefit. A far superior method is to simply fail to enforce the laws, and rely on the power of jury nullification (That a jury has the legal right to acquit a defendant if they disagree with a law) incase a couple of overzealous officials attempt to enforce it.
After this, terrorists are not impeded in the slightest bit, the public is several billion dollars poorer, and politicians now have a stunningly effective tool to control their populace (Wait until pictures of an Opposition MP in drag picking up a hooker are "leaked").
Not really, in order to scale large enough to make a dent in the economy, they will need to take over managed timber farms around the country, which make up most of our supply of wood. That just displaces the high cost of food to a high price of construction.
Then wouldnt we see large scale deployment of nuclear power in mostly regulation-free second world countrys(Latvia, South Africa, Poland, etc.)?
This is not a game. Or if it is, the US should stop playing.
I agree that today nuclear technology is much better than it used to be. How do you propose we scale up nuclear power in the US? The main options I see are subsidizing capital costs for private firms, or engaging in a giant government construction program. Both leave a bitter taste in my mouth, what do you propose?
Nuclear power is very capital intensive. I imagine that a large scale effort to build many nuclear power plants at once would have an effect on capital availability in the general economy.
Read up on what the FBI did during the pre-nixon era. Read about the time the FBI attempted to have Martin Luther King kill himself( http://www.oilempire.us/graphics/mlksuicideletter
After this, tell me if you don't see the importance of maintaining our privacy from the government.
What your talking about is an externalities, nothing new to economists.
Ford Escape gets 35 MPG, you should fit in there. As for the 60 inch chest, that is not healthy, you really should consider liposuction or gastric bypass(Diet and exercise is much better, but I'm sure you've already tried that.)
Theft falls under that, promiscous sex does not.
Thank you
What is a Cardonic equation? I am a math major who graduates in a month, and I have never heard of such a thing. Google's only result is your post.
What the fuck are you talking about? Tibet was a country, will an embassy in the US. Before the 50's, Tibet was never part of China. China had messianic visions for control of Asia, which is why proceeded to annex several states that had been independent for centuries(Xinjang, Tibet, Inner Mongolia...) and turning other nations in to puppet states(Mongolia). It then proceeded to declare war on India and Vietnam. China has stopped these activities, and now is a pretty good neighbor, but don't try and subvert history.
Wow, thanks for pointing that out to me. Why are the standards so low for police?
The shooter in lubney was shot several times by the police, he didnt stop shooting until he ran out of victims. Gun fights are not like the movies, if she had her gun, she would have shot him, probaly not have killed him, and then promptly been shot.
I'm from the middle east, I do not want to be called Asian, as it does not represent my heritage. I have far more in common with a North African than I do with someone in China. I think Indians would resent being lumped in too.
I resent the assertion that we are incapable of prosecuting terrorism without resorting to torture, improper detention, and foreign abduction. I understand that terrorism never stops, so it is difficult to present evidence without corrupting ongoing operations. However, these are the same challenges that police deal with every day. How is this any different from prosecution of drug gangs or organized crime? Somehow, we manage to give every drug lord and every crime boss a free and fair trial, without sending their tortured bodies to Cuba.
If a student dosnt get stellar grades in tough subjects(Mostly A's, B's are forgivable and C's are a sin allowable in freshman year), he is essentialy barred from any school out of their state(There are exceptions, but they are pretty rare). This has the potential to make a large difference on your future salary(While it is possible to recover from going to a bad undergraduate school, it is pretty rare). I argue that the upper 10% to 20% of the school is capable of reaching such performance on a dependable basis.
No idea, though judging by the parity in other statistical indicators, probaly a very simular number. Maybe higher, considering that the economic benefit of learning English is much higher now, because there is less ghettoisation and a large industry devoted to such things.
"Which basically means that we've had immigration laws as long as anyone's been alive. So what?"
My original question was: How are Hispanic immigrants any different from earlier european ones. One of your points was that most Mexicans are illegal. My counter point was that this distinction is invalid, as there was no such thing as illegal immigrants back when significant European immigration occurred.
"Bullshit. We have rules on who we let in, and we have the right to enforce them. This is a major part of the problem."
If by "we" you mean the Federal government, sure, the Supreme Court agrees with you.
"They do exist. You can debate the level of their influence, but they are still around."
Wikipedia does not acknowledge the existence of any group by the same of "Aztlan" or "La Raza". "Aztlan" is the name of the Aztec homeland, and "La Raza" is Spanish for "Hispanic people". The only group with mild secessionists tendencies I could find any references for is MEChA, which as far as I can see, does not exist anymore. If you have any other sources, I'd be happy to see them.
"It's not a monoculture - you can identify a handful of broad cultures that account for the vast majority of Americans. Give it time and some of the differences between them will fade."
I'm not sure if thats true, we live in a different world today. Cheaper communication, faster transportation, and the explosion in diversity of media all spell out that differences between people are bound to increase, not decrease. Past cultural cohesion was once based on an entire nation watching the same shows, listening to the same radio, and facing the same challenges. The language barrier prevented cross border exchange.
Mass media is now highly fragmented, and an entire generation is being raised worldwide that is fluent in English. And worldwide, mass migration is destroying traditional cultural borders. Because of this, I don't the common cultural values of New York are any more likely to converge to South Carolina's as they are to Paris's.
This affects oil prices...how? Equipment is a pretty competitive market, I don't see any plausable way they can affect the price of oil.
Ah, a Final Solution
"Muslims that follow the Koran are definitely enemies of liberty. "
So are Jews and Christians who strictly follow the bible. Your point?
Your ancestors probably didn't. Statistics show that Hispanic immigrants have roughly similar rates of English proficiency as 19th century German and early 20th century italian immigrants did. The first generation of immigrants never fully assimilate, and a lot of them never learn English(though if you check, the rate of first generation Hispanic immigrants who speak English is pretty high). The second generation on the other hand, almost always does(Studies show that over 90% of children of Hispanic immigrants use English in their primary language. My parents still speak Hebrew and Arabic at home, and there are still Italian grandmothers who can't speak a word of English.
As for legality, there was no such thing as an "illegal" immigrant until the 1920s, there was literally no legal concept. If you were turned back at Ellis Island, you could still sneak in through Canada if you had the money, and the US would not have any legal right to deport you(Unless you were Chinese, we thought they were stupid and uneducated back then). So this is really a moot point.
"We've got a culture, it's just young."
I don't think we do. Define American culture, and make sure that it includes every American citizen, something that everyone from New York City to Rural Alabama can agree on. When you do, you'll realize that we share those same things with nearly every other industrialized country in the world.
"Well, they're mostly illegal"
Because of discriminatory immigration law, most Asian-Americans are decedents of illegal immigrants. Since the 20's, most US naturalized immigrants came semi-illegally first(Over staying Visas, etc.), and set up a life in the US. With the money they gained from living in America, they were able to afford legal proceedings to legitimize their status.
"and they bring groups with them like Aztlan and la Raza. The implication is that they want to convert some part of the US to another mexican state."
These groups and movements share negligent support from Mexican Americans. In fact, neither Aztlan or La Raza are functional groups, they both date to 1960 era student movements. It is not clear that they even exist anymore.
There were some German Americans who wanted Germany to annex America during WW2, at least as many as there are Hispanic separatists now. As a much more potent example, Italian immigrants participated in mass terror attacks against America, bombing Wall street in 1920 killing 30 people, and German immigrants caused over 30 million dollars in Damage by the Black Tom bombing. Hispanic Immigrants have never been involved in attacks on this scale.
Dear god, I wish I'd stop hearing this. Haliburton is a construction company, they get a lot of improper government pork that is almost certainly politically motivated, but they have NOTHING to do with long term oil prices. Exxon? Their global market share of the petroleum market is 2%. American Politicians? Gasoline taxes and ethanol mandates bring the price up, but those have held steady for the last couple years, and have nothing to do with the recent increases.
What has keeping oil prices up is the risk premium, that the worlds oil supply might be severely disrupted at any moment by someone crashing a plane into a Saudi shipping center. Companies buy oil futures to hedge their bets, shoving prices up. That, and supply and demand, oil companies are having a really hard time finding new sources of cheap oil, while demand looks to keep increasing.
And prices are very high right now, we have not seen prices on our current level for over 25 years. The fact that prices were high enough last summer is irrelevant, and mostly due to a merciful hurricane season.
In WW2 we were attacked, and a genocidal nutjob had the real capacity to destroy the world, I'm happy we stopped Hitler, but I couldn't care less that we won "Dominance" over the world.
As an American, I don't want "dominance" of the world, just prosperity. We don't need military bases on every continent and spend more than every other nation in the world combined to be prosperous. As long as I and those in my community are doing well economically, I couldn't care less how much soft power I wield over foreign officials. And before you tell me that our economic success is contingent on our military strength, look at Ireland. They have a higher GDP per capita then us, faster growth, and far better foreign relations. Somehow, they managed to do this without a giant military.