Comments by "ootmaster1" (@ootmaster1) on "How Many People Crossed Illegally into the U.S. This Year? | Man on the Street" video.

  1. 20
  2. 11
  3. 3
  4. 2
  5. 2
  6. 2
  7. 2
  8. 2
  9. 2
  10. 1
  11. 1
  12.  @eggynack  "being a nation is about having sovereignty about what goes on within said nation" So when people say no, and it happens any way, and the people who come in now out vote the people here before what happened to " having sovereignty about what goes on within said nation"? "People being allowed to enter as they please does not challenge this capacity. " you are willfully ignorant to the words you yourself speak..... "In point of fact, the idea that a nation must express their power in this way, by limiting immigration, is a limitation on its sovereignty." "you cant be sovereign if you dont let anyone in at all" you are seriously not a real person. you have to be a parody you clearly dont know what a nation actually is... so let me educate you c.1300, nacioun, "a race of people, large group of people with common ancestry and language," from Old French nacion "birth, rank; descendants, relatives; country, homeland" (12c.) and directly from Latin nationem (nominative natio) "birth, origin; breed, stock, kind, species; race of people, tribe," literally "that which has been born," from natus, past participle of nasci "be born" (Old Latin gnasci), from PIE root *gene- "give birth, beget," with derivatives referring to procreation and familial and tribal groups. The word is used in English in a broad sense, "a race of people an aggregation of persons of the same ethnic family and speaking the same language," and also in the narrower sense, "a political society composed of a government and subjects or citizens and constituting a political unit; an organized community inhabiting a defined territory within which its sovereignty is exercised." Read the 1790 nationality act and tell me what it means " America" is as a nation
    1
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20. 1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1
  30. 1
  31. 1
  32. 1
  33. 1
  34. 1
  35. 1
  36. 1
  37. 1
  38. 1
  39. 1
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43.  @eggynack  literally googling " negative impacts of immigration" will lead you to several sources. why you are being this dishonest only means you intentionally are pushing what is in your own best interests... "Immigrant workers increased US GDP by about 1.7 trillion, or 10.7% in 2013. The vast bulk of this gain went to the immigrants themselves. Only 2% went to natives. For native-born Americans, immigration s major impact is distributional: It lowers the wages of native born workers and raises the income of their employers and other upper income natives who derive disproportionate share of their income from capital gains, stock options and other non-wage income. By increasing the number of workers in the economy, immigration lowers the wages of native born workers. At the same time however native born employers gain from immigration because they can now hire workers at lower wages. Native born consumers also gain , especially the wealthy. Similarly natives who derive most of their income from dividends, capital gains, and other non wage income gain as immigration drives up corporates profits. Immigrations biggest winners then, at least among us natives, are the wealthy, while its biggest losers are disproportionally found among the nations poor and middle class. Clearly immigration exacerbates the economic divide of the have and the have nots. Current levels of over one million legal admissions per year, and defacto amnesty and non enforcement policies that serve to protect those aliens who are here unlawfully are only placing greater economic strain on those citizens who can afford it least. " You are either a fraud or a liar
    1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. 1
  49. 1
  50. 1
  51. 1
  52. 1
  53. 1
  54.  @eggynack  "Immigrant workers increased US GDP by about 1.7 trillion, or 10.7% in 2013. The vast bulk of this gain went to the immigrants themselves. Only 2% went to natives. For native-born Americans, immigration s major impact is distributional: It lowers the wages of native born workers and raises the income of their employers and other upper income natives who derive disproportionate share of their income from capital gains, stock options and other non-wage income. By increasing the number of workers in the economy, immigration lowers the wages of native born workers. At the same time however native born employers gain from immigration because they can now hire workers at lower wages. Native born consumers also gain , especially the wealthy. Similarly natives who derive most of their income from dividends, capital gains, and other non wage income gain as immigration drives up corporates profits. Immigrations biggest winners then, at least among us natives, are the wealthy, while its biggest losers are disproportionally found among the nations poor and middle class. Clearly immigration exacerbates the economic divide of the have and the have nots. Current levels of over one million legal admissions per year, and defacto amnesty and non enforcement policies that serve to protect those aliens who are here unlawfully are only placing greater economic strain on those citizens who can afford it least. " it LITERALLY makes it worse for natives.... im sorry you have lost the argument and have resorted to name calling, but that doesn't work here
    1
  55. 1
  56. 1
  57. 1
  58. 1
  59. 1
  60. 1
  61. 1
  62. 1
  63.  @eggynack  who is switching? you were the one pulling the appeal to authority on specific topics... you may be an "authority" on " economics" but you are a dishonest liar for ignoring the hard truth of the negative impacts on immigration. you defend it because you benefit "Immigrant workers increased US GDP by about 1.7 trillion, or 10.7% in 2013. The vast bulk of this gain went to the immigrants themselves. Only 2% went to natives. For native-born Americans, immigration s major impact is distributional: It lowers the wages of native born workers and raises the income of their employers and other upper income natives who derive disproportionate share of their income from capital gains, stock options and other non-wage income. By increasing the number of workers in the economy, immigration lowers the wages of native born workers. At the same time however native born employers gain from immigration because they can now hire workers at lower wages. Native born consumers also gain , especially the wealthy. Similarly natives who derive most of their income from dividends, capital gains, and other non wage income gain as immigration drives up corporates profits. Immigrations biggest winners then, at least among us natives, are the wealthy, while its biggest losers are disproportionally found among the nations poor and middle class. Clearly immigration exacerbates the economic divide of the have and the have nots. Current levels of over one million legal admissions per year, and defacto amnesty and non enforcement policies that serve to protect those aliens who are here unlawfully are only placing greater economic strain on those citizens who can afford it least. "
    1
  64. 1
  65. 1
  66. 1
  67. 1
  68. 1
  69. 1
  70. 1
  71. 1
  72. 1
  73. 1
  74. 1
  75. 1
  76. 1
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. 1
  81. 1
  82. 1
  83. 1
  84. 1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98. 1
  99.  @eggynack  "its irrelevant" I just explained to you that your " statistic" is bogus, and you try to weasel your way out of being wrong. " think that second generation immigrants have such ridiculous rates of criminality that they inflate the rates for US born citizens. Despite the fact that they are substantially exceeded in population size by said citizens." 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th generations too... Anyone who does any amount of research into crime and ethnicity can see this abundantly clear. you are a disingenuous fraud and nothing you say holds any weight under the mildest of scrutiny... which is why you stopped trying in every thread i replied to you..... "Moreover, this logic is deeply perverse. What, we're keeping immigrants out because they might have children and those children might be criminals?" Yes? Do any amount of research into crimes and who commits them. its pretty obvious as the other guy who brought it up stated, if you only counted ethnically European peoples in crime statistics, the US would have a crime rate similar to other European nations. why the fk does everyone on the planet who wants to come in get to come in? it isnt their nation. it is a nation of Europeans and Europeans are being ethnically cleansed everywhere they live. you are disingenuous in your arguments because you despise borders, nations, and my people "What kind of sense does that make? It's like punishing people for future crimes, except it's not even their crimes. It's the crimes of their currently hypothetical children." How is NOT letting someone into my nation punishment? why do you have the right to come in but i dont have the right to say no? what sovereignty is there? None. but thats what you wanted. you hate borders and my people. its clear how much you despise these very ideas of nationhood and sovereignty "Anyway, you've given literally no basis for the idea that this is a reasonable lens to apply to the data in the first place. So I also don't consider it a particularly strong challenge on that basis." Yes, it IS a reasonable lens to apply to the data. you just dont like the reality of the data i presented. You throwing out everything i say, and saying " no your wrong actually" isnt an argument. It isnt a reasonable idea, and it makes far less sense then what i have repeatedly stated over and over. you are a fraud and an intellectual coward.
    1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102.  @eggynack  my replies are no longer visible "its irrelevant" I just explained to you that your " statistic" is bogus, and you try to weasel your way out of being wrong. " think that second generation immigrants have such ridiculous rates of criminality that they inflate the rates for US born citizens. Despite the fact that they are substantially exceeded in population size by said citizens." 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th generations too...Anyone who does any amount of research into crime and ethnicity can see this abundantly clear. you are disingenuous and nothing you say holds any weight under the mildest of scrutiny... which is why you stopped trying in every thread i replied to you..... "Moreover, this logic is deeply perverse. What, we're keeping immigrants out because they might have children and those children might be criminals?" Yes? Do any amount of research into crimes and who commits them. its pretty obvious as the other guy who brought it up stated, if you only counted European peoples in crime statistics, the US would have a crime rate similar to other European nations. why the f**k does everyone on the planet who wants to come in get to come in? it isnt their nation. it is a nation of Europeans and Europeans are being e(thni)cally erased everywhere they live. you are disingenuous in your arguments because you despise borders, nations, and my people "What kind of sense does that make? It's like punishing people for future crimes, except it's not even their crimes. It's the crimes of their currently hypothetical children." How is NOT letting someone into my nation punishment? why do you have the right to come in but i dont have the right to say no? what sovereignty is there? None. but thats what you wanted. its clear how much you despise these very ideas of nationhood and sovereignty "Anyway, you've given literally no basis for the idea that this is a reasonable lens to apply to the data in the first place. So I also don't consider it a particularly strong challenge on that basis." Yes, it IS a reasonable lens to apply to the data. you just dont like the reality of the data i presented. You throwing out everything i say, and saying " no your wrong actually" isnt an argument. It isnt a reasonable idea, and it makes far less sense then what i have repeatedly stated over and over.
    1
  103. 1
  104. 1
  105. 1
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111.  @eggynack  "Immigrant workers increased US GDP by about 1.7 trillion, or 10.7% in 2013. The vast bulk of this gain went to the immigrants themselves. Only 2% went to natives. For native-born Americans, immigration s major impact is distributional: It lowers the wages of native born workers and raises the income of their employers and other upper income natives who derive disproportionate share of their income from capital gains, stock options and other non-wage income. By increasing the number of workers in the economy, immigration lowers the wages of native born workers. At the same time however native born employers gain from immigration because they can now hire workers at lower wages. Native born consumers also gain , especially the wealthy. Similarly natives who derive most of their income from dividends, capital gains, and other non wage income gain as immigration drives up corporates profits. Immigrations biggest winners then, at least among us natives, are the wealthy, while its biggest losers are disproportionally found among the nations poor and middle class. Clearly immigration exacerbates the economic divide of the have and the have nots. Current levels of over one million legal admissions per year, and defacto amnesty and non enforcement policies that serve to protect those aliens who are here unlawfully are only placing greater economic strain on those citizens who can afford it least. " why does it matter? Im closer in my beliefs to the founders of my nation than you are... you subversive
    1
  112. 1
  113. 1
  114. 1
  115. 1
  116. 1
  117. 1
  118. 1
  119. 1
  120. 1
  121. 1
  122. 1
  123. 1
  124.  @eggynack  no they dont we went over this multiple times but you just like to lie to people "Immigrant workers increased US GDP by about 1.7 trillion, or 10.7% in 2013. The vast bulk of this gain went to the immigrants themselves. Only 2% went to natives. For native-born Americans, immigration s major impact is distributional: It lowers the wages of native born workers and raises the income of their employers and other upper income natives who derive disproportionate share of their income from capital gains, stock options and other non-wage income. By increasing the number of workers in the economy, immigration lowers the wages of native born workers. At the same time however native born employers gain from immigration because they can now hire workers at lower wages. Native born consumers also gain , especially the wealthy. Similarly natives who derive most of their income from dividends, capital gains, and other non wage income gain as immigration drives up corporates profits. Immigrations biggest winners then, at least among us natives, are the wealthy, while its biggest losers are disproportionally found among the nations poor and middle class. Clearly immigration exacerbates the economic divide of the have and the have nots. Current levels of over one million legal admissions per year, and defacto amnesty and non enforcement policies that serve to protect those aliens who are here unlawfully are only placing greater economic strain on those citizens who can afford it least. "
    1
  125. 1
  126. 1
  127. 1
  128. 1
  129. 1
  130. 1
  131. 1
  132. 1
  133. 1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1