Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 95

Thread: Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

  1. #61
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,701
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Bzzt. Wrong again. If you're going to criticize me on issues of logic then you're going to have to up your game.

    Here is what she wrote:


    Nearly all of us are descendants of immigrants, immigrants who came here legally. I'm all for immigration. The more the merrier.



    Her argument makes a statement of fact and solely on the basis of that statement she arrives at her conclusion. I merely duplicated her thought process to highlight how ridiculous it was.

    What you class as appeal to fear is no such thing. Her conclusion is "the more the merrier." I'm simply accepting her at her word. The US with 308,000,000 needs a whole lot more people in order to make it a merrier place. OK then, what are the consequences which follow from both increased population density and increased population. She concludes that more people makes things merrier.
    When they are here legally. Which was made crystal clear in the part of my post you ignored. I've concluded that you make no distinction between legal and illegal immigrants, and want all those damned foreigners out of your pure American country! How's that working for you?

  2. #62
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Bzzt. Wrong again. If you're going to criticize me on issues of logic then you're going to have to up your game.

    Here is what she wrote:


    Nearly all of us are descendants of immigrants, immigrants who came here legally. I'm all for immigration. The more the merrier.



    Her argument makes a statement of fact and solely on the basis of that statement she arrives at her conclusion. I merely duplicated her thought process to highlight how ridiculous it was.

    What you class as appeal to fear is no such thing. Her conclusion is "the more the merrier." I'm simply accepting her at her word. The US with 308,000,000 needs a whole lot more people in order to make it a merrier place. OK then, what are the consequences which follow from both increased population density and increased population. She concludes that more people makes things merrier.
    False. The comment was nothing more than a statement of fact (that most people are currently here today are only here because of legal immigration). It was designed to point out what se perceived of as the flaw in your previous statement which she felt blurred the line between legal and illegal immigration. A proper response to that would have been "I do blur the line because I consider both to be problematic for x, y, z reasons" or " I make x, y, and z distinctions between legal and illegal immigration."

    After she made that comment she shared her opinion on legal immigration (that she was all for it), and her argument for that was "the more the merrier".

    If you wished to go after her argument, then you should have focused on how a thought-terminating cliche is not a real argument (Hell, simply quoting the cliche and saying "really? can you prove that?").

    Instead of going after the fallacy that she was guilty of, you tried to present the idea that increased population would certainly lead to overpopulation, which is an appeal to fear.

    P.S. I bring my A game every time, but I can't help it if some of my opponents aren't at the same competitive level as me and are unable to keep up with me.

    P.P.S. In order to be "wrong again" I have actually have been wrong before.
    Last edited by Tucker Case; 08-21-11 at 07:01 PM.

  3. #63
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,078

    Re: Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    James...dude...Im on youre side on this issue. Really. I dont propose we make illegals citizen out of the typical mindless bleeding heart feel good "we have to for the sake of the children" type mindset. Your idea is simply not based in reality and when an argument isnt based in reality it is worthless. Politicians will not enact legislation or insist that existing legislation get enforced. It would not be politically expedient and politicians..both sides...are worried about votes and reelection. Strike one. Start pushing those buttons and you have massive lawsuits and in no time you have a case before the 9th cirtcuit court of appeals halting all deportation. Strike two. You create a racial divide in a nation with avery significant hispanic population. Strike three...next batter. You spend billions and billions that you dont have. Strike one. You completely abandon the responsibility the country bears for creating this situation. Strike two. You take away employment opportunities for people already working their ass off and living under the radar...and baby...they aint going home. You create an even GREATER potential for gang involvement, crime, etc. Strike three...next batter...we got a no hitter going here...

    Amnesty in and of itself isnt a working solution. Neither is building a fence. Without working together you have done nothing to change the environment that created the situation. And like it or not...the US is at least partially responsible for the mess we are in.

    States can simply do what Oklahoma and Arizona have done,eventually states like California will be forced to join because its one thing when those 12-20 million illegals are spread out across the country and its another thing when they are all in your state because they fled states that are hostile to them. Not all states have to deal with the 9th circuit court of appeals.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  4. #64
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,744

    Re: Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    States can simply do what Oklahoma and Arizona have done,eventually states like California will be forced to join because its one thing when those 12-20 million illegals are spread out across the country and its another thing when they are all in your state because they fled states that are hostile to them. Not all states have to deal with the 9th circuit court of appeals.
    Dont quote me on this...Im not a lawyer...but thats actually not true. All states DO have to deal with the 9th...its a federal court and a case brought before the 9th is binding. If Im not mistaken, which I may be. But I dont think I am.

  5. #65
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    States can simply do what Oklahoma and Arizona have done,eventually states like California will be forced to join because its one thing when those 12-20 million illegals are spread out across the country and its another thing when they are all in your state because they fled states that are hostile to them. Not all states have to deal with the 9th circuit court of appeals.
    Doesn't California have the most illegal immigrants, though? Arizona and Oklahoma have barely any compared to them.

  6. #66
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Dont quote me on this...Im not a lawyer...but thats actually not true. All states DO have to deal with the 9th...its a federal court and a case brought before the 9th is binding. If Im not mistaken, which I may be. But I dont think I am.
    My understanding is that judicial decisions are not law (per se), but judicial precedence acts as a basis for judicial decision-making in most cases.

    Technically, though, the 9th only has jurisdiction over the district courts on the West Coast, Alaska, and Pacific. I'm not sure if the rulings of the 9th apply to other states outside their jurisdiction, but even if they do, those states can take it to SCOTUS, which has appellate jurisdiction over the entire country.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  7. #67
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    When they are here legally. Which was made crystal clear in the part of my post you ignored. I've concluded that you make no distinction between legal and illegal immigrants, and want all those damned foreigners out of your pure American country! How's that working for you?
    When I quoted you in my first response to your comment, this is the quote I selected: "Nearly all of us are descendants of immigrants, immigrants who came here legally." Your reference to legal immigration is right there. Not one thing I wrote in criticism is affected by whether the immigrant is legal or not. Do you really imagine that it is only illegal immigrants who increase the nation's population? Don't legal immigrants increase the nation's population? Look, I took your argument as you presented it. If the US population grows from 300 million to 600 million via births and legal immigration, and only legal immigration, which of the problems that I laid out are avoided by excluding illegal immigrants?

    If the Bay area grows from a population of 7.5 million to 45 million via lots and lots of legal immigrants, you know, the more the merrier as you said, and water rationing has to be expanded and commute times are lengthened and taxes have to be raised to pay for more infrastructure and suburbs have to be built hundreds of miles away from the city center and population density has to be increased in the urban areas, these are all unqualified good things to you?

  8. #68
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    If you wished to go after her argument, then you should have focused on how a thought-terminating cliche is not a real argument (Hell, simply quoting the cliche and saying "really? can you prove that?").
    You're advancing a normative critique. That type of critique doesn't have anything to add to the issue of your criticism of my comment which you claimed was nothing more than a red herring and a strawman.

    I didn't wish to diagnose what was wrong with her argument, I wished to duplicate the structure of her argument. The clue to this is that I did duplicate the structure of her argument. Can I be more obvious about what I wished to do?


    you tried to present the idea that increased population would certainly lead to overpopulation, which is an appeal to fear.
    When you are filling a glass from a pitcher of water and you tell all around you that you don't believe that there are limits on how much water the glass can hold, you know, saying something like "the more the merrier" then it is not an appeal to fear to point out that when the glass overflows the water will spill onto the floor.

    Increasing population has natural consequences on resource scarcity and resource allocation.

    Look, just admit that you shot from the hip with your criticisms, that they weren't well formulated and that you'd like to stop digging the hole you're in any deeper.

  9. #69
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    If the Bay area grows from a population of 7.5 million to 45 million via lots and lots of legal immigrants, you know, the more the merrier as you said, and water rationing has to be expanded and commute times are lengthened and taxes have to be raised to pay for more infrastructure and suburbs have to be built hundreds of miles away from the city center and population density has to be increased in the urban areas, these are all unqualified good things to you?
    Certainly those aren't the positive parts of population density, but there obviously are major positives too. There is a reason that the most expensive real estate in the country, by orders of magnitude, is in the most densely populated places. It also means more theaters, more stores within walking distance of your house, more people that are into whatever it is you're into nearby, higher wages, rising property values, more companies starting, more innovation, etc.

    Now, overpopulation is a real problem- it creates strains on the planet that are tough to sustain. But that equation works out the same regardless of which country the people are in. As long as they're on earth, they're going to have that impact.

    Now, of course, that doesn't mean that we should just open up the borders or whatever. Like everything else in life, it is about finding the right balance where the disadvantages and advantages balance out optimally.

  10. #70
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Do you prefer Border Control or Amnesty for illegals

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    When I quoted you in my first response to your comment, this is the quote I selected: "Nearly all of us are descendants of immigrants, immigrants who came here legally." Your reference to legal immigration is right there.
    Yes, and when you understand why she referenced legal immigration there you will understand why your response was a strawman (hint: the reason for that reference lies in the sentence which preceded it. There is an assumption that can be exploited there, and I've actually given you a specific sentence to exploit it with already, but instead you focus on the population growth red herring and appeal to fear argument*).



    * two hints for the price of one: you made an assumption regarding the meaning of "more" that was unfounded (hence your appeal to fear argument). In the context of that statement, the argument could easily be that more was specifically referencing legal immigrants. As in the more legal immigrants the merrier. It is certainly possible to have that situation without a population explosion that your appeal to fear focuses on.

Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •