OT: My response to Doces300 (yes, it's more political shit)
BurlingtonHoFactory
New Jersey, near the Shore
Doces300 and I were admonished not to hijack a thread by turning it into a political discussion. That seems fair enough, so I'm posting this for anyone who has an opinion. It's about immigration. This is a topic that looms large for me because probably 40 to 50% of the strippers in this country are immigrants and many of them are here illegally. And yet many mongers who use their services are nonetheless opposed to immigration themselves, to varying degrees.
For the record, Doces300 said the following: "As for your political statement you forgot one very important word. We don't like "illegal" immigrants , not because they don't assimilate, but because they are illegally, and thus are criminals."
I responded by saying: "Stupid laws are meant to be broken. For example, that whole "you're not allowed to pay for sexual contact" thing. "What part of legal immigration don't you understand?" LOL"
And then I posted this helpful graphic flowchart courtesy of the Reason Foundation: http://reason.com/assets/db/immigration-…
Doces300 responded by saying: "Burlington are you really that stupid?? All countries control their immigration. Immigration control is not a stupid law, in fact, it is necessary for a nations security. Wow it is a process, and difficult, yet millions have done it. What you don't have skills or a good reason to be here... well cry me a river. Let me guess, you also believe that even though it is illegal to murder someone, you believe it should be more illegal to murder someone from certain groups."
Anyway, my response is, yes, every modern country does attempt to control their immigration flow. And it is necessary to some extent. People who want to come to America should be subject to a basic health screening, vaccinations if necessary, a background check, their social media pages should get some basic scrutiny, etc. But there shouldn't be arbitrary quotas or limits or H1B visas or permits. If you can pass the basic scrutiny you should be allowed to have legal residence. Not immediate citizenship, just legal residence. Simple as that. You shouldn't be hassled endlessly just because you want to live in one country instead of another. The point is that, for many people, under the current system, it is NOT a process. There is no process. They are simply barred from being able to enter the country because they don't have family here and they don't have a job offer from an employer who is willing to fill out a lot of forms and pay hefty fees on their behalf.
Doces300 also implies that people who don't have skills or "a good reason to be here" shouldn't be here. Ok, but lots of people who were born here also don't have skills or a good reason to be here. So what should we do about them?
Lastly, I'm not sure what Doces300 meant with the comment about me believing that murder should be more illegal for certain groups than for others. Perhaps he can elaborate.
But my main point in posting this thread was to solicit opinions from PLs who routinely get dances from foreign-born strippers. How do you feel about immigration? Do you support restrictive immigration controls? Do you think this would have a negative effect on your clubbing? If you're opposed to liberalized immigration do you think you're being hypocritical? For those of you who like your dancers from Mexico, Brazil, Russia, Ukraine, China, Vietnam, Jamaica, etc., but you still want a wall on the border, how do you square that circle?
Personally, I prefer American dancers, but that doesn't affect my political opinions. Also, I was born in America; my parents were born in America; and three of my four grandparents and several of my great-grandparents were born in America. too. But having a less restrictive immigration process just seems like the right thing to do, IMO.
This was the post I referenced: https://www.tuscl.net/?page=post&id=5294…
Also, check out the flowchart above and then ask yourself, if the current restrictive system had been in place when your ancestors first came to this country, how many of you would even be here today at all?
For the record, Doces300 said the following: "As for your political statement you forgot one very important word. We don't like "illegal" immigrants , not because they don't assimilate, but because they are illegally, and thus are criminals."
I responded by saying: "Stupid laws are meant to be broken. For example, that whole "you're not allowed to pay for sexual contact" thing. "What part of legal immigration don't you understand?" LOL"
And then I posted this helpful graphic flowchart courtesy of the Reason Foundation: http://reason.com/assets/db/immigration-…
Doces300 responded by saying: "Burlington are you really that stupid?? All countries control their immigration. Immigration control is not a stupid law, in fact, it is necessary for a nations security. Wow it is a process, and difficult, yet millions have done it. What you don't have skills or a good reason to be here... well cry me a river. Let me guess, you also believe that even though it is illegal to murder someone, you believe it should be more illegal to murder someone from certain groups."
Anyway, my response is, yes, every modern country does attempt to control their immigration flow. And it is necessary to some extent. People who want to come to America should be subject to a basic health screening, vaccinations if necessary, a background check, their social media pages should get some basic scrutiny, etc. But there shouldn't be arbitrary quotas or limits or H1B visas or permits. If you can pass the basic scrutiny you should be allowed to have legal residence. Not immediate citizenship, just legal residence. Simple as that. You shouldn't be hassled endlessly just because you want to live in one country instead of another. The point is that, for many people, under the current system, it is NOT a process. There is no process. They are simply barred from being able to enter the country because they don't have family here and they don't have a job offer from an employer who is willing to fill out a lot of forms and pay hefty fees on their behalf.
Doces300 also implies that people who don't have skills or "a good reason to be here" shouldn't be here. Ok, but lots of people who were born here also don't have skills or a good reason to be here. So what should we do about them?
Lastly, I'm not sure what Doces300 meant with the comment about me believing that murder should be more illegal for certain groups than for others. Perhaps he can elaborate.
But my main point in posting this thread was to solicit opinions from PLs who routinely get dances from foreign-born strippers. How do you feel about immigration? Do you support restrictive immigration controls? Do you think this would have a negative effect on your clubbing? If you're opposed to liberalized immigration do you think you're being hypocritical? For those of you who like your dancers from Mexico, Brazil, Russia, Ukraine, China, Vietnam, Jamaica, etc., but you still want a wall on the border, how do you square that circle?
Personally, I prefer American dancers, but that doesn't affect my political opinions. Also, I was born in America; my parents were born in America; and three of my four grandparents and several of my great-grandparents were born in America. too. But having a less restrictive immigration process just seems like the right thing to do, IMO.
This was the post I referenced: https://www.tuscl.net/?page=post&id=5294…
Also, check out the flowchart above and then ask yourself, if the current restrictive system had been in place when your ancestors first came to this country, how many of you would even be here today at all?
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion
50 comments
: )
Oh, and anyone who thinks that they take more out of the economy than they put in clearly hasn't had an economics class or didn't learn what was being taught. They have to live somewhere (thereby contributing to property taxes and overall housing demand), buy goods and services (paying sales taxes and keeping others employed through demand for goods and services) and have to work to live (paying SS taxes at the very least).
Besides, in America we have legal protections. Under our system you can't just vote someone else's property away from him or her.
Would I give them the right to vote? No, only citizens can vote. And besides, voting isn't supposed to be the center of our lives. Politics isn't supposed to be the center of our lives. There are more important things to Americans than politics. This isn't the Soviet Union.
Anyway, I'm sure your friend from the UK is a good guy, but he shouldn't need to play soccer and marry an American just to have the right to come here. How does that make him a productive citizen?
I chose this topic because it does seem to be related to the stripper business. I don't know what it's like in West Virginia, but where I live there are lots and lots of foreign-born dancers and I'm sure plenty of them are illegal. They're not my type, but I don't begrudge them the right to come here to try to make it.
You say I'm an idealist and you're a realist. Ok, maybe. But I would think a realistic person would acknowledge that immigrants are going to come here no matter what we do. And since they aren't hurting anyone simply by their being here, then why should we stop them?
The ideal that I'm trying to uphold is the American Way. Jefferson specifically cites immigration in the Declaration of independence. He doesn't mention anything about strippers but he does seem to want more immigrants to come. These people are "Americans by choice," as Ronald Reagan put it.
Also, you say you dislike illegal immigrants because they're criminals, so do you also dislike all the strippers who do extras and all of their customers who pay for sex with them? They're criminals, too, aren't they? And that's the majority of people who write reviews here.
But let's say you're right. If so, the solution is to have less welfare, not fewer immigrants. Are you okay with Americans receiving public benefits paid for with your tax dollars? Well I'm not!
I'm tuning out on this one. You can't possibly believe the shit you spew. This whole thread just has to be troll clickbait.
No, I'm not specifically looking for trolls, I was hoping that I could make people realize their own hypocrisy. It doesn't seem to have worked with skibum609, for example. Or with you. Didn't you say you're married to a Cuban immigrant? Well it just so happens that one of the only groups of immigrants who DO receive lots of welfare benefits are Cubans. At least they did up until Obama finally put an end to it before his term ended. They used to have a special status. Trust me, your wife got a lot more welfare than the average immigrant does. Don't get me wrong, I don't blame her at all, I blame the stupid system. Most Amercans have gotten some kind of money from the government at some point in their lives, myself included.
Anyway, Papi_Chulo told Doces300 and I not to hijack a thread with our political disagreement and to start a separate thread. He was right, so that's what I did.
Given this, I approve of significant legal immigration in the US, but we need to adopt a points system like Australia has. Let’s bring in engineers and wealthy entrepreneurs. Let’s stop allowing millions of unskilled laborers to enter.
Sure you can. It's called taxes, social programs and the everything-industrial complex. The legal protections are really only have the power the culture gives them. Mass immigration without cultural integration doesn't exactly help keep those protections.
Regarding the economy, it can go either way. E.g., "They have to live somewhere, etc" doesn't necessarily help. Seattle and Vancouver, for instance, have ridiculously expensive housing markets now. A friend sent me an interesting video the other week on the topic:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nk8-lLJE…
@burlinton, my friend from Britian finished his education and is a "working" professional in this country, that is why he is seen as productive and an asset.
I don't think it has as much to do with their population aging and dying off as the relations between the sexes. E.g., the herbivore movement, and guys buying used panties out of vending machines so they don't have interact in person with an actual woman.
I think it's fair to count China as industrialized, and they don't seem to need immigration to keep their population levels going.
Why? I like getting cheap oranges and low-cost lawn care.
“China faces a turning point over the next 15 years, particularly between 2021 and 2030. The aging of the population will accelerate, increasing pressure on social security and public services. At the same time, the working-age population will shrink, damaging economic growth and reducing the tax income required to support the elderly.
A quarter of China's population will be over 60 in 2030, compared with about 16 percent in 2015. “
But all of that shit is un-American. And so are restrictions on immigration. We have begun to get away from our country's roots. I don't think the solution is to do even more things that would take us even further away from the meaning of America, like restricting who can come here. And besides, what you're suggesting would still be espionage. Would they change the laws to redefine espionage, too? Doesn't this seem a little far-fetched to you? (Then again, the video that your friend sent has a paranoid conspiratorial tone to it, so what can I say?)
And who said there wouldn't be any cultural integration? Immigrants have always integrated in the past, even when there was much more legal immigration. What makes you think that would change now?
@burlinton, my friend from Britian finished his education and is a "working" professional in this country, that is why he is seen as productive and an asset."
If you're open to more legal immigration then you're basically in agreement with what I'm saying. And as for your friend working, well, most immigrants work.
But personally, I would not allow your friend to get American citizenship. Legal residence should be easy, but citizenship should be very hard. Just going to college and playing soccer and marrying someone should not equal automatic citizenship. I'm sure he's a good guy, but it doesn't strike me as fair.
Well, we have to do something. Right now we have 2.9 workers supporting each retiree. By 2030, that ratio is supposed to drop all the way to 2:1. It is simply unsustainable.
So we've got four choices: (1) breed more; (2) allow more young immigrants in (who will also breed more); (3) seriously cut benefits; of (4) turn our future generation into indentured tax slaves for the old and dying.
If you curmudgeonly types want to keep your benefits intact and don't want to fuck over your grandchildren, then you're going to have to get over those irrational cultural fears and let more people in to help support you, nevermind wipe your asses in nursing homes and to fill a variety of other jobs that will need replacement working as you continue to retire en masse. The newbies all assimilate eventually, just like the Germans, Italians, Irish, and other waves of immigrants did in past generations.
The immigrants we who have been showing up recently are on average more likely to vote for what you call the un-American shit, with the possible exception of targeted immigration.
> And besides, what you're suggesting would still be espionage. Would they change the laws to redefine espionage, too? Doesn't this seem a little far-fetched to you?
It doesn't seem far-fetched to me looking at California's trajectory over the past 25 years - 40% of people don't speak English at home, statism is rampant, a secession movement is gaining steam, etc. Are you going to show up there and tell recent immigrants that they are guilty of espionage because of their voting patterns?
How do you expect people to eventually culturally integrate if enough show up in short enough of a time for a state to secede?
You're right, that's why I wouldn't let them vote. I would just let them come and work. Like I said, residence should be easy, citizenship should be hard. Their children would be able to vote.
I understand what you're talking about with California, but lots of other states have big immigrant populations, too, and yet they don't have California's problems. Think of Texas and Florida, for example. So I think the problem stems more from the Americans who already lived in Cali to begin with. They had to be the ones who got this quasi-socialist ball rolling. It doesn't make sense to just blame the immigrants.
And no, I wouldn't tell people they are guilty of espionage just for voting. I'm talking about your elaborate conspiracy where China would "send" 300 million people here to vote away our property. That sounds pretty nuts and I'm sure our authorities would know about it quickly. It would be an act of war reminiscent of the Zimmerman Telegram.
That's not an elaborate conspiracy. It was an example of what your proposed policy would appear to allow for. I'm not sure if you have heard of Uranium One, but things along these lines have been happening.
> Read your constitution sometime to see just how impossible that really is.
The Constitution is a piece of paper and not immutable. People valuing its principles is what gives it power. There are already efforts to call a Constitutional Convention, "revise" the Bill of Rights, etc.
As for Uranium One, I'm familiar with it, and I don't see how it applies. I'm perfectly comfortable with selling uranium to Russia. Russia is a weak shell of its former self, and I don't think it poses nearly the threat to us that the Soviet Union did.
And California has been talking about secession for years. California wants to secede from America and different counties want to secede from California. I doubt it will ever happen, and regardless, it isn't driven by immigrants. It's equivalent to Barbara Streisand and Alec Baldwin saying that they want to move to Canada after Bush was elected. Somehow, sadly, they are still here.
You could if you presented a compelling argument. I have lived in another country where I did seek to culturally integrate. I learned the local language and had to comply with the immigration requirements, which actually made complete sense to me. In other words, my perspective is probably going to be a lot different, having willing gone through the steps that I think would make sense for the US to implement.
Immigrants do tend to be poorer than native born Americans, but real welfare is not available to immigrants for a period of many years. And it's never available to illegal immigrants. Unless you count things like public schools and treatment at a hospital. Hospitals are required to accept all patients, regardless of the ability to pay. If they don't, they risk not being allowed to accept Medicare. But that's not a direct taxpayer subsidy, strictly speaking. As for public schools (and school lunches)... well, you've got me there. Yes, public schools can be considered a welfare benefit that immigrants do receive regardless of how long they've been here. But it's a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of the entire country. But if they want welfare and public schools, then why don't they just stay home? After all, every country has welfare programs and public schools nowadays. It's not logical.
Yes, immigrants will eventually get old, too. But first they will have more than the average number of children who will each help to float our entitlement programs. You can't have it both ways. If immigrants don't assimilate, then that means they will have lots of kids. Part of assimilation means having fewer children.
I happen to think it's a fair comparison, comparing paying for sex with crossing the border. They're both crimes. What if the stripper gets pregnant from FS. The taxpayer will be supporting her baby for 18 years, and then we may even have to send it to college. Or what if one of you catches a disease? You may become a drain on our public health system. Does that mean the stripper should stop doing extras? No. It means the welfare state is a stupid idea. Many of our actions could theoretically lead to our becoming a drain on the system. Smoking, eating unhealthy foods, drinking, playing football, etc. The welfare state could ultimately be used as an excuse to curtail lots of behavior. And we allow people to make this argument. Instead of arguing against immigrants (or smoking, etc.) we should just argue against welfare. Doesn't anyone notice what these entitlement and welfare programs have done to us? We're talking about people coming to America, getting old, having children, etc., as though each person is just another economic unit on the government's balance sheet. Does this person or that person increase the deficit or decrease it? This is what it's come to. This is what having social welfare and entitlement programs have done to America.
And lastly, I am definitely not a progressive of any kind.
And just because other countries require you to go through various bureaucratic hurdles that doesn't mean that we should do the same. We are supposed to be different than the rest of the world. That's what American Exceptionalism means. I bet the other country you lived in doesn't mention immigration in its founding documents. But America does mention immigration in it's founding documents. Immigration is central to who we are.
Dude, the chicks were fucking hot. Like, nearly all of them.
In my opinion, we should increase the number of legal immigrants and prioritize those who can quickly assimilate and support themselves from day one. And, oh yeah, build the damn wall.
And, come on, you know as well as I do that the wall won't accomplish anything. Besides, even if it could solve the problem, does the only country in world history that was ever founded on the concept of liberty really want to militarize its own border?
As citizens, it is our right, through our government, to decide who can enter OUR country. Personally, there are lots of categories of people I don’t want here. People who prefer Sharia Law, for example. It is not the right of foreigners to determine who enters our country. If it is, then we no longer have a country.
Firstly, if we allowed entry to everyone who wants to come in, then obviously there would be no such thing as illegal immigration because all immigration would be legal by definition. But having said that, if you would read what I wrote, you would see that I'm not actually advocating anything like this. What I said is that people should be forced to submit to a background check, their social media accounts should be scrutinized, they should have to pass a basic health screening, they should be forced to submit to vaccinations, etc. And then if they can pass those basic requirements, they would be granted conditional permanent residence. Not citizenship. Just residence. That means that they can live and work here, unmolested, for as long as they wish, but they can't vote and they can't have welfare (except for school for their children). And if they're convicted of a crime against person or property they would be deported. If we got rid of quotas and visas and green cards, this would become a relatively easy, cheap, straightforward process. I actually envision charities arrayed along the border and in major coastal cities performing background checks and health screenings for new arrivals. People could be processed in a matter of weeks instead of years. I seriously doubt that a Jihadi terrorist would be allowed to enter the country under the procedure that I'm describing. But since very few people would ever be denied entry, they would be extremely easy to catch by border patrol if they did try to sneak in after being turned away.
Personally, I wouldn't care if they were permanently denied citizenship and never given the right to vote. Voting isn't what's important. But you're right, laws are determined by representatives who are elected by lawful citizens. Not residents. Citizens. And citizens frequently demand laws that you and I would both disagree with, including welfare, progressive taxation, laws against drugs and prostitution, etc. Laws can be bad. They can be wrong. And arbitrary restrictions on immigration is an example of that.