Originally Posted by Taramarie

Personally, I also loathe Hillary. If I were to vote for anyone (if i could) it would be Bernie. Bernie would be the best chance to beat that ahole Trump.

I think that the Donald's chances are better than you think. First, Trump has been doing the media game for better than forty years. Second, you are underestimating the hatred and suspicion of Clinton from just about every demographic. Third, the FBI has just interviewed Huma so there is a very good chance that they will cast a rather large vote against her. Contrary to the MSM opinion Trump has proved to be very competent through the years. Doesn't mean I trust him, but then I think that anyone who seek political power should automatically be disqualified from holding any office.

Bernie's popularity rests on his free shit giveaways which even nominally liberal economists admit that he has no way to pay for. Back in the day Bernie thought that communism was a good idea. Given the state of Venezuela, why anyone thinks a socialist would make a good president is a bit of a mystery.

The usual media sources, as usual, have been less than truthful and so I recommend that you look at the following video. Molyneux, if nothing else, does his homework.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

He wants to boot out illegal immigrants correct?

Who wouldn't? You do realize that they broke the law in coming to the country without going through the proper channels right? Nevermind the fact that we have a shortage of jobs to go around. The best way to raise wages is not mandating a $15.00 minimum wage, but rather to restrict the supply of labor.

Furthermore, by ending the insane trade policies of the last 25+ years there would be fewer immigrants coming because Latin American farmers wouldn't be forced off their lands because they wouldn't have to compete with subsidized US grain. It is a win win.

There has also been talk of further enforcing the hiring laws and increasing the fines for hiring illegal immigrants. And before you start on the "he hates brown people shtick" I honestly don't think he cares where the illegals come from, Ireland or Mexico...doesn't matter.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

What about them?

Apparently you didn't understand my point. The Supreme Court made a ruling. The Supreme Court is not going to overturn that ruling unless someone brings a suit to it on the grounds of same-sex marriage. Therefore, it is a dead issue until and unless someone can some how get 2/3rds of both houses of Congress to pass an amendment to the Constitution and get said amendment ratified by 3/4th of the states. A process that is very difficult to do, and evidenced by the fact that we have the oldest written constitution in the world and it only has 27 times.

And just so you know in the House of Representatives alone thousands of bills to amend the constitutions are proposed, almost all of them die in committee.

At that comment....wow just wow. You better hope he cannot take away that right...but then again you sound like you do not give a shit about anyone but yourself. Those three words are a total shock to me. I expected better of you.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Who wouldn't? You do realize that they broke the law in coming to the country without going through the proper channels right? Nevermind the fact that we have a shortage of jobs to go around. The best way to raise wages is not mandating a $15.00 minimum wage, but rather to restrict the supply of labor.

Furthermore, by ending the insane trade policies of the last 25+ years there would be fewer immigrants coming because Latin American farmers wouldn't be forced off their lands because they wouldn't have to compete with subsidized US grain. It is a win win.

There has also been talk of further enforcing the hiring laws and increasing the fines for hiring illegal immigrants. And before you start on the "he hates brown people shtick" I honestly don't think he cares where the illegals come from, Ireland or Mexico...doesn't matter.

I am not for immigrants to come in illegaly. I am sure you saw the Eric and tara showdown where Eric now assumes i am a trump supporter because i am against people coming in when a society is unable to cope with them coming in. But if they have jobs, we need people to fill in those roles. You remove them and cannot replace them in time with people willing to do the hard labour....i hate to imagine the result.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

So you are attracted to him i take it.

Well, he is handsome...but no not really. The term "Daddy" is commonly used in the gay community to denote a masculine older man who "takes care of" his "boy". As such I'm using it as a term of endearment at most. Mostly I use it because it pisses Trump haters, and people who think I have no business being a faggot with the "wrong opinions" off. It is provocative.

The rest of your comment is not worth responding to because it is incoherent bullshit. I've already told you what system New Zealand has...a Welfare State Capitalist system. To prove me wrong you then go on to demonstrate that New Zealand has a welfare state which was never under contention.

Also maybe you're speaking to the wrong Americans. In a country with 300 million people there is a diversity of opinion.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Who wouldn't? You do realize that they broke the law in coming to the country without going through the proper channels right? Nevermind the fact that we have a shortage of jobs to go around. The best way to raise wages is not mandating a $15.00 minimum wage, but rather to restrict the supply of labor.

Furthermore, by ending the insane trade policies of the last 25+ years there would be fewer immigrants coming because Latin American farmers wouldn't be forced off their lands because they wouldn't have to compete with subsidized US grain. It is a win win.

There has also been talk of further enforcing the hiring laws and increasing the fines for hiring illegal immigrants. And before you start on the "he hates brown people shtick" I honestly don't think he cares where the illegals come from, Ireland or Mexico...doesn't matter.

Not only that....what about their children who may be US born citizens. What about the costs to ship them out? How are they going to round these people up and are they going to force their US born kids out with them? They will have to because who will look after them? Is that right to force out citizens? Loads of things to consider. Btw never going to go on the racist rant. I will leave that to the dems. I am considering stability of a nation.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

At that comment....wow just wow. You better hope he cannot take away that right...but then again you sound like you do not give a shit about anyone but yourself. Those three words are a total shock to me. I expected better of you.

There is nothing to hope about. He can't. Congress could, but that would require them to get their collective shit together long enough to do so--which isn't going to happen any time soon. I've already outlined the process required for Congress to rid the country of the "privilege" for gays to get ripped off in divorce court. The simple fact of the matter is that issue is dead. It isn't going to be undone, just like the legality of abortion is not going to be undone.

As for "expecting better of me" is that some sort of attempt to shame me into having the proper opinion? It doesn't work like that with me. The SJW types try it all the time, particularly with me because I'm gay and black and have the audacity to not sit quietly in the little bucket they've provided for me. And yes, the BF and I have been together for 10+ years now, love each other very much but we both agree that the idea of getting married and buying a couple chihuahuas is revolting. When sex is some-what illicit it is more fun after all.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Well, he is handsome...but no not really. The term "Daddy" is commonly used in the gay community to denote a masculine older man who "takes care of" his "boy". As such I'm using it as a term of endearment at most. Mostly I use it because it pisses Trump haters, and people who think I have no business being a faggot with the "wrong opinions" off. It is provocative.

The rest of your comment is not worth responding to because it is incoherent bullshit. I've already told you what system New Zealand has...a Welfare State Capitalist system. To prove me wrong you then go on to demonstrate that New Zealand has a welfare state which was never under contention.

Also maybe you're speaking to the wrong Americans. In a country with 300 million people there is a diversity of opinion.

Handsome? Ha! he is a fugly old fuck inside and out. Well the term does not piss me off. It was weird and confusing. Weird because i cannot understand how anyone can adore him. But i guess money is attractive as well as the thought he will turn us to into commies. As for you being gay...i am an ally. Oh bullshit is it. Says the man who does not live here. Guess you know as much about my country as i do about yours. Yes, clearly i am speaking to the wrong American.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

There is nothing to hope about. He can't. Congress could, but that would require them to get their collective shit together long enough to do so--which isn't going to happen any time soon. I've already outlined the process required for Congress to rid the country of the "privilege" for gays to get ripped off in divorce court. The simple fact of the matter is that issue is dead. It isn't going to be undone, just like the legality of abortion is not going to be undone.

As for "expecting better of me" is that some sort of attempt to shame me into having the proper opinion? It doesn't work like that with me. The SJW types try it all the time, particularly with me because I'm gay and black and have the audacity to not sit quietly in the little bucket they've provided for me. And yes, the BF and I have been together for 10+ years now, love each other very much but we both agree that the idea of getting married and buying a couple chihuahuas is revolting. When sex is some-what illicit it is more fun after all.

No, i did actually expect more of you. I would have thought of that kind of unsympathetic response from someone like Eric but not you. Too hard nosed I think. Now i see how hard nosed you are. It is sad.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

There is nothing to hope about. He can't. Congress could, but that would require them to get their collective shit together long enough to do so--which isn't going to happen any time soon. I've already outlined the process required for Congress to rid the country of the "privilege" for gays to get ripped off in divorce court. The simple fact of the matter is that issue is dead. It isn't going to be undone, just like the legality of abortion is not going to be undone.

As for "expecting better of me" is that some sort of attempt to shame me into having the proper opinion? It doesn't work like that with me. The SJW types try it all the time, particularly with me because I'm gay and black and have the audacity to not sit quietly in the little bucket they've provided for me. And yes, the BF and I have been together for 10+ years now, love each other very much but we both agree that the idea of getting married and buying a couple chihuahuas is revolting. When sex is some-what illicit it is more fun after all.

I do not give a shit what colour you are btw. But surprised you do not care about the rights of others.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

I am not for immigrants to come in illegaly. I am sure you saw the Eric and tara showdown where Eric now assumes i am a trump supporter because i am against people coming in when a society is unable to cope with them coming in. But if they have jobs, we need people to fill in those roles. You remove them and cannot replace them in time with people willing to do the hard labour....i hate to imagine the result.

Tara, I don't pay attention to Eric. Most of the time I completely ignore his existence. I'm happier that way. As such no I did not see that show down, that being said it is probably an incredibly boring read because knowing Eric he simply uses the same old tired tropes over and over.

As for the illegals, the roles they fill are for jobs that don't pay well. Jobs that most anyone in the US would be happy to do if they payed at least our current minimum wage. What role those illegals fill now are roles that were once filled by slaves, and they are often payed far less than minimum wage and treated far worse than many people can imagine.

All of them can be easily replaced with Americans provided that those who employ them pay a fair wage. As for not being able to replace them let us be clear, we are speaking about people who are here illegally. Skilled people have a very easy time getting the proper visa. Daddy and the rest of us here don't want to stop immigration completely (even for the unskilled) rather we want to allow people in on our terms. Just like every other country (except perhaps in the EU--but the EU is doomed) does.

For the record I checked and it would be very easy for me and my BF to immigrate to NZ. He is collage educated and a teacher, and it seems that NZ has a shortage of chefs (and I do have a culinary school degree), I just have no interest in immigrating because Daddy is gonna build the wall and fix the trade and everything will be at least a little better after that.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

Not only that....what about their children who may be US born citizens. What about the costs to ship them out? How are they going to round these people up and are they going to force their US born kids out with them? They will have to because who will look after them? Is that right to force out citizens? Loads of things to consider. Btw never going to go on the racist rant. I will leave that to the dems. I am considering stability of a nation.

Deportation costs to Mexico would run around 500 Million. I suppose we'll search the cushions in the couches in the congressional lounges. The "anchor baby" factor is vastly over stated. A child cannot sponsor a parent without being at least 21. Furthermore, we have child protective services here--we aren't Rawanda or some other shithole like that.

Personally I think the citizenship by birth thing was a terrible idea but constitutional amendments are difficult. I would say that some leeway can be found for the parents of citizen children.

If you are considering the stability of the nation then you should consider that a nation is a historically constituted group of people who share a territory, language, national psychology that manifests as a national culture, and an integrated economy. Taking in thousands or millions of aliens into the nation is a great way to destabilize a nation--which Europe is now learning and why UKIP is growing in popularity in the UK.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Tara, I don't pay attention to Eric. Most of the time I completely ignore his existence. I'm happier that way. As such no I did not see that show down, that being said it is probably an incredibly boring read because knowing Eric he simply uses the same old tired tropes over and over.

As for the illegals, the roles they fill are for jobs that don't pay well. Jobs that most anyone in the US would be happy to do if they payed at least our current minimum wage. What role those illegals fill now are roles that were once filled by slaves, and they are often payed far less than minimum wage and treated far worse than many people can imagine.

All of them can be easily replaced with Americans provided that those who employ them pay a fair wage. As for not being able to replace them let us be clear, we are speaking about people who are here illegally. Skilled people have a very easy time getting the proper visa. Daddy and the rest of us here don't want to stop immigration completely (even for the unskilled) rather we want to allow people in on our terms. Just like every other country (except perhaps in the EU--but the EU is doomed) does.

For the record I checked and it would be very easy for me and my BF to immigrate to NZ. He is collage educated and a teacher, and it seems that NZ has a shortage of chefs (and I do have a culinary school degree), I just have no interest in immigrating because Daddy is gonna build the wall and fix the trade and everything will be at least a little better after that.

Yes he does.

You better hope that the employers will be willing to pay them extra and give them the obvious rights they will demand and hope they will be able to pay the extra cash. I did not see any comment on the rights of their children who probably will be citizens.

Yes, of course....if you guys check out ok health wise and are not over a certain bmi size and have money to support yourself. Easier to immigrate to South Africa as they have no WINZ.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Deportation costs to Mexico would run around 500 Million. I suppose we'll search the cushions in the couches in the congressional lounges. The "anchor baby" factor is vastly over stated. A child cannot sponsor a parent without being at least 21. Furthermore, we have child protective services here--we aren't Rawanda or some other shithole like that.

Personally I think the citizenship by birth thing was a terrible idea but constitutional amendments are difficult. I would say that some leeway can be found for the parents of citizen children.

If you are considering the stability of the nation then you should consider that a nation is a historically constituted group of people who share a territory, language, national psychology that manifests as a national culture, and an integrated economy. Taking in thousands or millions of aliens into the nation is a great way to destabilize a nation--which Europe is now learning and why UKIP is growing in popularity in the UK.

Not asking about that. I am concerned about the child's right to stay in his or her natural born country. Yes it makes things complicated but that is just the way it is right now. You cannot tear apart a family. You can but it is wrong and also wrong to ship out a child who was born there. I would hope they would take that into consideration.

Yes of course....that is what i tried to tell Eric. But he says customers create jobs. I always thought they overwork people and underpay and hoard the money.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Deportation costs to Mexico would run around 500 Million. I suppose we'll search the cushions in the couches in the congressional lounges. The "anchor baby" factor is vastly over stated. A child cannot sponsor a parent without being at least 21. Furthermore, we have child protective services here--we aren't Rawanda or some other shithole like that.

Personally I think the citizenship by birth thing was a terrible idea but constitutional amendments are difficult. I would say that some leeway can be found for the parents of citizen children.

If you are considering the stability of the nation then you should consider that a nation is a historically constituted group of people who share a territory, language, national psychology that manifests as a national culture, and an integrated economy. Taking in thousands or millions of aliens into the nation is a great way to destabilize a nation--which Europe is now learning and why UKIP is growing in popularity in the UK.

Here in NZ, they have doubled the quota of how many immigrants will be coming in. It has made it near impossible to own a house now as prices go up and it has been connected to higher levels of immigration. Also they take up the jobs kiwis should be getting. So now we have high levels of unemployment as well as many folks turning to winz for help.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

Handsome? Ha! he is a fugly old fuck inside and out.

That is a matter of opinion. I only hope I look so good at 70.

Well the term does not piss me off. It was weird and confusing. Weird because i cannot understand how anyone can adore him. But i guess money is attractive as well as the thought he will turn us to into commies. As for you being gay...i am an ally. Oh bullshit is it. Says the man who does not live here. Guess you know as much about my country as i do about yours. Yes, clearly i am speaking to the wrong American.

It is bullshit. You demonstrated only that NZ has a welfare state which was never in contention. Kiwis can call it whatever they like but the fact is NZ is a Welfare State Capitalist system. I don't see your government owning the means of production, or even the major means of production, which even Germany does and they don't even try to claim to be socialist at all. Leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the western half of the country I'm told.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

No, i did actually expect more of you. I would have thought of that kind of unsympathetic response from someone like Eric but not you. Too hard nosed I think. Now i see how hard nosed you are. It is sad.

It is hardly unsympathetic. It is recognizing what same-sex marriage is, a give away to divorce lawyers, wedding planners, and the other sundry businesses associated with the marriage and wedding industry. I'm sorry, but I see no reason to get a slip of paper to tell me that my BF will live with me for the rest of his days. We already know we will, and we've already shared something stronger than a mere marriage--power of attorney.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

I do not give a shit what colour you are btw. But surprised you do not care about the rights of others.

Usually most who take up lines that I should have different opinions than I do base their view on the fact that I'm from a supposed "oppressed class". Believe me it is much easier for my white BF to hold similar opinions than it is for me socially. Usually it is on the basis of my race, if they know I'm also gay they throw that in too. I'm surprised you weren't indoctrinated with the basics of intersectionality when you were in university. Over here those institutions are breeding grounds for that particular brand of stupidity.

As for the rights of others, I care about them only insofar as their rights impact my own. I'm all in favor of people being allowed to say, do and be whatever they want. Marriage however is not a right, it is a social institution, one that can only serve to contaminate the gay community. In that I want to be allowed to do day and be whatever I want (like I want for all others) I do not want to be forced into a heteronormative role as someone's spouse. If breeders want to do that--that's on them but it ain't for me and will only serve to weaken the gay community.

But perhaps I should share what this faggot has to say:



Milo's the one I agree with.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

That is a matter of opinion. I only hope I look so good at 70.



It is bullshit. You demonstrated only that NZ has a welfare state which was never in contention. Kiwis can call it whatever they like but the fact is NZ is a Welfare State Capitalist system. I don't see your government owning the means of production, or even the major means of production, which even Germany does and they don't even try to claim to be socialist at all. Leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the western half of the country I'm told.



It is hardly unsympathetic. It is recognizing what same-sex marriage is, a give away to divorce lawyers, wedding planners, and the other sundry businesses associated with the marriage and wedding industry. I'm sorry, but I see no reason to get a slip of paper to tell me that my BF will live with me for the rest of his days. We already know we will, and we've already shared something stronger than a mere marriage--power of attorney.



Usually most who take up lines that I should have different opinions than I do base their view on the fact that I'm from a supposed "oppressed class". Believe me it is much easier for my white BF to hold similar opinions than it is for me socially. Usually it is on the basis of my race, if they know I'm also gay they throw that in too. I'm surprised you weren't indoctrinated with the basics of intersectionality when you were in university. Over here those institutions are breeding grounds for that particular brand of stupidity.

As for the rights of others, I care about them only insofar as their rights impact my own. I'm all in favor of people being allowed to say, do and be whatever they want. Marriage however is not a right, it is a social institution, one that can only serve to contaminate the gay community. In that I want to be allowed to do day and be whatever I want (like I want for all others) I do not want to be forced into a heteronormative role as someone's spouse. If breeders want to do that--that's on them but it ain't for me and will only serve to weaken the gay community.

But perhaps I should share what this faggot has to say:



Milo's the one I agree with.

Of course it is but i still think he looks like an orangy spud.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

That is a matter of opinion. I only hope I look so good at 70.



It is bullshit. You demonstrated only that NZ has a welfare state which was never in contention. Kiwis can call it whatever they like but the fact is NZ is a Welfare State Capitalist system. I don't see your government owning the means of production, or even the major means of production, which even Germany does and they don't even try to claim to be socialist at all. Leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the western half of the country I'm told.



It is hardly unsympathetic. It is recognizing what same-sex marriage is, a give away to divorce lawyers, wedding planners, and the other sundry businesses associated with the marriage and wedding industry. I'm sorry, but I see no reason to get a slip of paper to tell me that my BF will live with me for the rest of his days. We already know we will, and we've already shared something stronger than a mere marriage--power of attorney.



Usually most who take up lines that I should have different opinions than I do base their view on the fact that I'm from a supposed "oppressed class". Believe me it is much easier for my white BF to hold similar opinions than it is for me socially. Usually it is on the basis of my race, if they know I'm also gay they throw that in too. I'm surprised you weren't indoctrinated with the basics of intersectionality when you were in university. Over here those institutions are breeding grounds for that particular brand of stupidity.

As for the rights of others, I care about them only insofar as their rights impact my own. I'm all in favor of people being allowed to say, do and be whatever they want. Marriage however is not a right, it is a social institution, one that can only serve to contaminate the gay community. In that I want to be allowed to do day and be whatever I want (like I want for all others) I do not want to be forced into a heteronormative role as someone's spouse. If breeders want to do that--that's on them but it ain't for me and will only serve to weaken the gay community.

But perhaps I should share what this faggot has to say:



Milo's the one I agree with.

We have many many charity organizations. I mention i am part of one of them....the SVA, remember? Do we make money out of what we do? Hell no!

Originally Posted by Kinser79

That is a matter of opinion. I only hope I look so good at 70.



It is bullshit. You demonstrated only that NZ has a welfare state which was never in contention. Kiwis can call it whatever they like but the fact is NZ is a Welfare State Capitalist system. I don't see your government owning the means of production, or even the major means of production, which even Germany does and they don't even try to claim to be socialist at all. Leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the western half of the country I'm told.



It is hardly unsympathetic. It is recognizing what same-sex marriage is, a give away to divorce lawyers, wedding planners, and the other sundry businesses associated with the marriage and wedding industry. I'm sorry, but I see no reason to get a slip of paper to tell me that my BF will live with me for the rest of his days. We already know we will, and we've already shared something stronger than a mere marriage--power of attorney.



Usually most who take up lines that I should have different opinions than I do base their view on the fact that I'm from a supposed "oppressed class". Believe me it is much easier for my white BF to hold similar opinions than it is for me socially. Usually it is on the basis of my race, if they know I'm also gay they throw that in too. I'm surprised you weren't indoctrinated with the basics of intersectionality when you were in university. Over here those institutions are breeding grounds for that particular brand of stupidity.

As for the rights of others, I care about them only insofar as their rights impact my own. I'm all in favor of people being allowed to say, do and be whatever they want. Marriage however is not a right, it is a social institution, one that can only serve to contaminate the gay community. In that I want to be allowed to do day and be whatever I want (like I want for all others) I do not want to be forced into a heteronormative role as someone's spouse. If breeders want to do that--that's on them but it ain't for me and will only serve to weaken the gay community.

But perhaps I should share what this faggot has to say:



Milo's the one I agree with.

Which i agree with but i also do consider others may feel differently.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

That is a matter of opinion. I only hope I look so good at 70.



It is bullshit. You demonstrated only that NZ has a welfare state which was never in contention. Kiwis can call it whatever they like but the fact is NZ is a Welfare State Capitalist system. I don't see your government owning the means of production, or even the major means of production, which even Germany does and they don't even try to claim to be socialist at all. Leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the western half of the country I'm told.



It is hardly unsympathetic. It is recognizing what same-sex marriage is, a give away to divorce lawyers, wedding planners, and the other sundry businesses associated with the marriage and wedding industry. I'm sorry, but I see no reason to get a slip of paper to tell me that my BF will live with me for the rest of his days. We already know we will, and we've already shared something stronger than a mere marriage--power of attorney.



Usually most who take up lines that I should have different opinions than I do base their view on the fact that I'm from a supposed "oppressed class". Believe me it is much easier for my white BF to hold similar opinions than it is for me socially. Usually it is on the basis of my race, if they know I'm also gay they throw that in too. I'm surprised you weren't indoctrinated with the basics of intersectionality when you were in university. Over here those institutions are breeding grounds for that particular brand of stupidity.

As for the rights of others, I care about them only insofar as their rights impact my own. I'm all in favor of people being allowed to say, do and be whatever they want. Marriage however is not a right, it is a social institution, one that can only serve to contaminate the gay community. In that I want to be allowed to do day and be whatever I want (like I want for all others) I do not want to be forced into a heteronormative role as someone's spouse. If breeders want to do that--that's on them but it ain't for me and will only serve to weaken the gay community.

But perhaps I should share what this faggot has to say:



Milo's the one I agree with.

I did not throw it in as it is irrelevant to me. I would say that i expect anyone to believe anyone should have the equal opportunity to do as they please whether it is getting married, or being with who they want to be with etc. Btw i feel the same about marriage as you do but i also think people may have a different opinion and wish them well and all the best if they do choose to be married.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

Yes he does.

Eric is terribly predictable. Hence why I don't debate him--he's boring and I debate for my own amusement. I've even been known to take up preposterous positions that I don't agree with for the point of debating.

You better hope that the employers will be willing to pay them extra and give them the obvious rights they will demand and hope they will be able to pay the extra cash. I did not see any comment on the rights of their children who probably will be citizens.

Illegal immigrants have no legal recourse so those employers will not pay them the minimum wage let alone a fair wage, or even provide them with the worker's rights to which they would otherwise be entitled. Why is that? Because they are here illegally, and current policy is to deport the immigrant and to fine the company a small fee (far too small to be honest, so small it is considered "the cost of doing business").

As such the solution is to first stem the flow coming in--a wall will help there. And second a massive increase in fines for hiring them. No one is going to hire 100 Juans when the fine for being caught is 1 million dollars each. No jobs for them, no immigrants. This means these positions will either be automated (a lot of these jobs are very hard to automate) or hiring citizens with their full rights to benefits, minimum wage and etc.

Those with citizen children might be permitted to stay, in fact I think they should, but they should have to go through our legal process. I do not favor amnesty even if being in the country illegally is a misdemeanor. I'm looking at this from a national security perspective. We need to know who these people are, what they do and if they are a threat to our nation.

Yes, of course....if you guys check out ok health wise and are not over a certain bmi size and have money to support yourself. Easier to immigrate to South Africa as they have no WINZ.

I have no interest in emigrating to South Africa, I have a fetish for working electricity and they've been having rolling black outs for the past year according to the BBC. As for our health, neither of us has any major health problems (I do have a bum knee but it doesn't prevent me from working), and neither of us is obese. Like I said, I checked it out, it would be easy for both of us to emigrate to NZ but we have no desire to leave our country.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Eric is terribly predictable. Hence why I don't debate him--he's boring and I debate for my own amusement. I've even been known to take up preposterous positions that I don't agree with for the point of debating.



Illegal immigrants have no legal recourse so those employers will not pay them the minimum wage let alone a fair wage, or even provide them with the worker's rights to which they would otherwise be entitled. Why is that? Because they are here illegally, and current policy is to deport the immigrant and to fine the company a small fee (far too small to be honest, so small it is considered "the cost of doing business").

As such the solution is to first stem the flow coming in--a wall will help there. And second a massive increase in fines for hiring them. No one is going to hire 100 Juans when the fine for being caught is 1 million dollars each. No jobs for them, no immigrants. This means these positions will either be automated (a lot of these jobs are very hard to automate) or hiring citizens with their full rights to benefits, minimum wage and etc.

Those with citizen children might be permitted to stay, in fact I think they should, but they should have to go through our legal process. I do not favor amnesty even if being in the country illegally is a misdemeanor. I'm looking at this from a national security perspective. We need to know who these people are, what they do and if they are a threat to our nation.



I have no interest in emigrating to South Africa, I have a fetish for working electricity and they've been having rolling black outs for the past year according to the BBC. As for our health, neither of us has any major health problems (I do have a bum knee but it doesn't prevent me from working), and neither of us is obese. Like I said, I checked it out, it would be easy for both of us to emigrate to NZ but we have no desire to leave our country.

I realize that. I was talking about their replacements.

Originally Posted by Taramarie

Here in NZ, they have doubled the quota of how many immigrants will be coming in. It has made it near impossible to own a house now as prices go up and it has been connected to higher levels of immigration. Also they take up the jobs kiwis should be getting. So now we have high levels of unemployment as well as many folks turning to winz for help.

Yes...and your government is allowing all of this because they want cheap labor. Ultimately it will destabilize NZ and will do it before it would the US because your country's population is orders of magnitude smaller.

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Eric is terribly predictable. Hence why I don't debate him--he's boring and I debate for my own amusement. I've even been known to take up preposterous positions that I don't agree with for the point of debating.



Illegal immigrants have no legal recourse so those employers will not pay them the minimum wage let alone a fair wage, or even provide them with the worker's rights to which they would otherwise be entitled. Why is that? Because they are here illegally, and current policy is to deport the immigrant and to fine the company a small fee (far too small to be honest, so small it is considered "the cost of doing business").

As such the solution is to first stem the flow coming in--a wall will help there. And second a massive increase in fines for hiring them. No one is going to hire 100 Juans when the fine for being caught is 1 million dollars each. No jobs for them, no immigrants. This means these positions will either be automated (a lot of these jobs are very hard to automate) or hiring citizens with their full rights to benefits, minimum wage and etc.

Those with citizen children might be permitted to stay, in fact I think they should, but they should have to go through our legal process. I do not favor amnesty even if being in the country illegally is a misdemeanor. I'm looking at this from a national security perspective. We need to know who these people are, what they do and if they are a threat to our nation.



I have no interest in emigrating to South Africa, I have a fetish for working electricity and they've been having rolling black outs for the past year according to the BBC. As for our health, neither of us has any major health problems (I do have a bum knee but it doesn't prevent me from working), and neither of us is obese. Like I said, I checked it out, it would be easy for both of us to emigrate to NZ but we have no desire to leave our country.

I have heard that will not stop those coming in from sea. Immigrants come from all over. If this wall is just between us and mexico i do not see how it will help at all. Immigrants come from all over. How will they make sure they leave when they are supposed to and how is a wall going to stop that? Does he really think the mexicans will build that wall?

Originally Posted by Kinser79

Yes...and your government is allowing all of this because they want cheap labor. Ultimately it will destabilize NZ and will do it before it would the US because your country's population is orders of magnitude smaller.

It already is in the ways i mentioned. I noticed Eric had no response when i told him this when he was debating with me that immigrants create jobs by being customers.....they need a freaking job before they become a customer! Therefore they are taking up jobs that kiwis are unable to get as they are a cheap hire. At my job alone, it is like spot the black or white person. Most of them are hispanic immigrants. I know because they say they were not born here. They favour them over citizens. Naturally because they are cheaper to hire. Destabilizing my country. Try tell Eric that though.