[Bill Watterson]

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...ration.html?hp

Anti-immigrant conservatives keep on eating their words. First, latino migrants heavily outperformed their native counterparts in Georgia, which means that wages rose 10% yet productivity suffered a significant drop-off.

Now, we have actual data proving that net traffic is at zero, and possibly negative. This means the flow of illegal immigration is stopping, and it is at its lowest level in decades. So, contrary to pseudo-conservative thought, illegal immigration has been slowing down.

It seems Mexicans actually ARE fixing their home country, they are immigrating less than they have in the past, and it all has to do with economic opportunities. I thought they were invading America?

http://reason.org/files/a87d15508538...458f116079.pdf

Read before commenting on immigration policy.

[Kite09]

They may also be seeing how are country is on the slippery slope to self destruction.

[Tuff]

Originally Posted by Bill Watterson

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...ration.html?hp

Anti-immigrant conservatives keep on eating their words. First, latino migrants heavily outperformed their native counterparts in Georgia, which means that wages rose 10% yet productivity suffered a significant drop-off.
Now, we have actual data proving that net traffic is at zero, and possibly negative. This means the flow of illegal immigration is stopping, and it is at its lowest level in decades. So, contrary to pseudo-conservative thought, illegal immigration has been slowing down.

It seems Mexicans actually ARE fixing their home country, they are immigrating less than they have in the past, and it all has to do with economic opportunities. I thought they were invading America?

"First, latino migrants heavily outperformed their native counterparts in Georgia, which means that wages rose 10%"

The above sentence is a major lol right there.

"net traffic at zero" = lol

[Bill Watterson]

Originally Posted by Tuff

"net traffic at zero" = lol

Losing credibility.

Do you know what net traffic is?

[barrel roll]

Traffic on the internet, duh.

[Bill Watterson]

Originally Posted by Tuff

"First, latino migrants heavily outperformed their native counterparts in Georgia, which means that wages rose 10%"

The above sentence is a major lol right there.

"net traffic at zero" = lol

LOL. Nice job failing to quote the sentence, and instead selectively picking a fragment. Wages on avg for that work rose 10%. Sorry you're kinda bad at comprehending what you read.

[Tuff]

So you quoted something and made a post. Then what - you sat there and hit refresh every 10 min to someone else made a post, and then quoted the same stuff and replied again? The only credibility at a loss here is your own as you sit here in the we hours of the morning high on drugs with another immigration thread.

Let's hope they fix their country and stay there. A lot of people around the country would be happy. I'm sure you'll be miserable though.

On a side note indirectly related to this, a direct play on the last sentence of your first post - "It seems global warming actually IS fixing itself, it is warming less in the past 10 years. I thought warming was affecting the planet?"

Throw that Umami's way, maybe he can explain it to you.

[SuperSupra619 (Banned)]

So Tuff completely ignored the facts you stated and decided to "lol" at the facts you posted without providing ANY information for a rebuttal in any way, shape, or form while simultaneously crying in his posts like a child.....

Yup, sounds like Tuff

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/geo...armers-fields/

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/...20076243.shtml

Learn your facts little one

[vantrepes]

Partly, emigrants say, illegal life in the United States became harder. Laws restricting illegal immigrants’ rights or making it tougher for employers to hire them have passed in more than a dozen states since 2006. The same word-of-mouth networks that used to draw people north are now advising against the journey. “Without papers all you’re thinking about is, when are the police going to stop you or what other risks are you going to face,” said Andrés Orozco.

Between the drug gangs fighting at the boarder, the cost of an illegal trip skyrocketing because of the increased enforcement at the boarder, and the enforcement past the boarder, the US is less attractive for people who want to come here illegally.
As for it being a net zero, they said in 2010, 100,000 illegals either crossed the boarder, or overstayed their visas to settle here.
They do not address short term illegals, only people that settle here permanently.
I do find it interesting that they give Clinton credit for Operation Gatekeeper, and Blockade.... Revisionist history at it's finest.
Here's the other issue:

State Department figures show that Mexicans who have become American citizens have legally brought in 64 percent more immediate relatives, 220,500 from 2006 through 2010, compared with the figures for the previous five years.

Once on person is in legally, they move on the paperwork to bring in the rest of the family. Why jump the boarder when you can have your extended family bring you in legally?

This article also focuses only on Mexican illegals, it does not talk about the flow of people from Central America coming up through Mexico. From what I understand, that flow has slowed also, but that was driven more by the cost of the illegal crossing, and enforcement here, not increased opportunity in their home countries.

I have always liked Mexico's idea of immigration. I think we should model our immigration laws one for one by theirs......

[Seahawk6060]

Originally Posted by Bill Watterson

Anti-immigrant conservatives keep on eating their words.

Just a correction. When you say "anti-immigrant" conservatives, who are you really talking about? I'm a conservative and have several conservative friends, but none of them could be correctly categorized as "anti-immigrant." If you're talking about a segment of the population at the extreme end of the bell curve, then your attack is rather useless and baseless. Most of us are not "anti-immigrant," but anti-illegal immigration. We want a regulated border, not a closed border.

[Tuff]

Originally Posted by SuperSupra619

So Tuff completely ignored the facts you stated and decided to "lol" at the facts you posted without providing ANY information for a rebuttal in any way, shape, or form while simultaneously crying in his posts like a child.....

Hey look, it's the guy who got his *** kicked in the Israel-Palestine argument, all of a sudden back in politics to troll with Bill. Why haven't you posted in here for so long, but chose this thread to rejoin discussion?

Oh and you lied stating I ignored facts. I ignored nothing at all. There was nothing that needed a long wind rebuttal, you're just looking to troll 9very obviously). And vantrepes made a valid point about how rates bringing people here legally also stems the flow. India has been doing this for years now, decades even.

Thanks or contributing nothing to this thread, see you again in the month. Bye now!

Originally Posted by Seahawk6060

Just a correction. When you say "anti-immigrant" conservatives, who are you really talking about? I'm a conservative and have several conservative friends, but none of them could be correctly categorized as "anti-immigrant." If you're talking about a segment of the population at the extreme end of the bell curve, then your attack is rather useless and baseless. Most of us are not "anti-immigrant," but anti-illegal immigration. We want a regulated border, not a closed border.

He's literally just trying to flame conservatives. The guy is a liberal, pretending to be a conservative. When he was directly asked when his brand of conservatism was practiced in history s an example, he gae no example. Then he preached FDR. To be fair, I've said close the border, but not necessarily forever. Close it, set up parameters and defensive measures, then talk about reopen. Then again, if Mexico fixes their own country like many have wished, maybe they'll go away for good. However, one year of decrease does not mean a problem has gone away, and his own friends have supported my argument on different topics, so the OP has to agree with me, or call them wrong. Additionally, he's still mad I'm better than him at Call of Duty. Either way, I win.

[EpShot]

Originally Posted by SuperSupra619

So Tuff completely ignored the facts you stated and decided to "lol" at the facts you posted without providing ANY information for a rebuttal in any way, shape, or form

That's because Tuff is a troll, stop feeding it.

[SuperSupra619 (Banned)]

Originally Posted by Tuff

cry-baby high school talk

Post #1 with 0 facts, statistics, or debating points

I'm going to keep track of all of these. Should add up quickly

It's a simple concept here. Many of you claim illegal immigrants do not help society in any way. Georgia passes legislation that intimidates illegals to leave, and it's agricultural sector takes a big stinky ****.

[SuperSupra619 (Banned)]

Originally Posted by Tuff

He's literally just trying to flame conservatives. The guy is a liberal, pretending to be a conservative. When he was directly asked when his brand of conservatism was practiced in history s an example, he gae no example. Then he preached FDR. To be fair, I've said close the border, but not necessarily forever. Close it, set up parameters and defensive measures, then talk about reopen. Then again, if Mexico fixes their own country like many have wished, maybe they'll go away for good. However, one year of decrease does not mean a problem has gone away, and his own friends have supported my argument on different topics, so the OP has to agree with me, or call them wrong. Additionally, he's still mad I'm better than him at Call of Duty. Either way, I win.

You don't know the first thing about being conservative. You spew Fox News on a daily basis and think you're a true conservative. It's obvious you don't understand even the basic principles of classic conservative thought. Bill is a million times more of a true conservative than some neo-con like you.

[Tuff]

Originally Posted by SuperSupra619

Post #1 with 0 facts, statistics, or debating points

I'm going to keep track of all of these. Should add up quickly

It's a simple concept here. Many of you claim illegal immigrants do not help society in any way. Georgia passes legislation that intimidates illegals to leave, and it's agricultural sector takes a big stinky ****.

Oh and you lied stating I ignored facts. I ignored nothing at all. There was nothing that needed a long wind rebuttal

What's with the two posts, very Bill like there.
Let's see how many times you are willing to repeat yourself, while I keep repeating the above. There was nothing worth refuting at all in what he said. What was worth debating? You are here to troll, nothing more. You've been notably absent in PBN: Politics for a month, and your first journey back you are here fiercely defending Bill. What's odd is I've agreed with you on Israel-Palestine relations before, and you actually opted to argue against me on that, much less this. Methinks you're a bit confused. Neither you or ep**** have asked for a single specific, nor explained on what needs to be elaborated upon. What do I need to factually show here? Did you make note of vantrepes post? What - you didn't read it? Oh right - you're here to troll, I almost forgot. You're pretty much in here banging your chest trying to impress the people on the other side of the glass.

Continue the troll job, by all means Supra. A month out of the forum and you've waltz in here to argue. I imagine you'll leave after everyone begins destroying you on your anti Israel stance here soon enough.

[SuperSupra619 (Banned)]

Post #2 with no facts, statistics, or rebuttal points

You obviously thought Bill's facts on wages increasing 10% and productivity decreasing were laughable. Show that they are not true you troll

[Tuff]

Originally Posted by SuperSupra619

I hate Israel, troll,

Post #4 with no purpose & intent on meaningful discussion.

See, I can do this too.

You "obviously" thought wrong. I know another guy who attempts to distort other people's posts by twisting them around to suit his needs. Hmm.

Anything else Supra? Do you need something clarified or are you going to come clean and admit your real purpose here?

[victimhere]

Originally Posted by Seahawk6060

Just a correction. When you say "anti-immigrant" conservatives, who are you really talking about? I'm a conservative and have several conservative friends, but none of them could be correctly categorized as "anti-immigrant." If you're talking about a segment of the population at the extreme end of the bell curve, then your attack is rather useless and baseless. Most of us are not "anti-immigrant," but anti-illegal immigration. We want a regulated border, not a closed border.

So True. Most people want to turn it into a pro or anti thing, such as on this thread.
However, if you allow illegals to become legal, by going through the proper process(whatever it is) those people could actually become part of the solution, instead of taking their income back to their own countries and spending it there, America would become their country. this is just a thought so have fun attacking it.

[Bill Watterson]

Originally Posted by Seahawk6060

Just a correction. When you say "anti-immigrant" conservatives, who are you really talking about? I'm a conservative and have several conservative friends, but none of them could be correctly categorized as "anti-immigrant." If you're talking about a segment of the population at the extreme end of the bell curve, then your attack is rather useless and baseless. Most of us are not "anti-immigrant," but anti-illegal immigration. We want a regulated border, not a closed border.

Neo-cons. You're more nuanced, so I don't throw you into that group.

BTW, if you want a regulated border, simplifying the immigration process is the way to go. The only reason people come here illegally is because waiting 10+ years is too costly.

edit: Hey tuff you're wrong about me not being conservative. I've said thousands of times my main influences (political philosophy wise) are Edmund Burke, Michael Oakeshott, Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, and lately I've been reading more Thomas Hobbes. Now that you know, you'll see that I'm influenced by classical conservatives and classical liberals, and the most well-known contractarian. Thanks for letting me know you missed my post.

[Tuff]

Edmund Burke was pretty cool.

[Swerve22]

Originally Posted by Bill Watterson

Neo-cons. You're more nuanced, so I don't throw you into that group.

So who exactly are you referencing when you say "anti-immigrant"? I haven't seen any credible poster making an anti immigration argument on the boards in quite some time. Illegal immigration is what conservatives have a problem with, you conveniently repeatedly forget to acknowledge that.

Our economy is diving and the opportunities here are drying up, why would they want to keep coming over? That doesn't have anything to do with the need for a secure border, this entire thread is yet another red herring.