5 ms·

>How does people coming to the United States, speaking a different language, eating different food, and holding different beliefs affect your life in any way?

>How does people coming to the United States, speaking a different language, eating different food, and holding different beliefs affect your life in any way? Eventually it becomes South Miami where there are parts where workers don't speak English. Kind of sucks when you try to order from a butcher shop and have to point at the meat and then the grinder. >>I haven't seen anyone seriously calling for an outright ban of all refugees, so that seems like a bit of a strawman. >I think this is dishonest. Many people are calling for an outright ban on refugees. Yea it's impossible to really argue this. Some do yes. Many just want increased vetting. Language is all I really care about. I don't understand how you can mesh with a society at all if you can't even speak to them. Eat and do whatever the hell you want, at the very least know English though.

PhasmaFelis 8y ago
> Eventually it becomes South Miami where there are parts where workers don't speak English. Kind of sucks when you try to order from a butcher shop and have to point at the meat and then the grinder. Yeah, that would be kinda annoying. Leaving innocent people to die in a totalitarian hellhole ought to demand a slightly higher bar than "kinda annoying."
- spacehome 8y ago
  No. Immigration should be at the pleasure of and to the benefit of the host population. Every population should have the right to control who enters their land. And we can't save them all, anyways. If everyone living in a totalitarian regime showed up in the US they would vastly outnumber the current Americans.
  - PhasmaFelis 8y ago
    > Every population should have the right to control who enters their land. Obviously nations have the right to do that. I don't think anyone has said otherwise. Saying "your right to not be tortured and killed by a tyrannical government is less important than my right to prompt convenience at the grocery store" is still a dick move.
    - spacehome 8y ago
      Should the US rescue all of them? You seem eager to give away other people’s country.
      - PhasmaFelis 8y ago
        > Should the US rescue all of them? I never said that. See my reply to ApolloFortyNine. > You seem eager to give away other people’s country. It's my country too, thanks. Just want to point out, again, that right now you are specifically arguing that convenience at the butcher's is more important than human life. Are you really making your point effectively and convincingly?
        ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
        We're being realistic, you can't save everyone. There's billions of people who have a quality of life magnitudes below yours and mine. It's naive to think we can simply allow them all into our country without consequence.
- ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
  In that case shouldn't the U.S allow in the vast majority of Africa? Where do you draw the line? There's only 300 million people in the U.S. A quick search reveals that 780 million people don't have access to clean water. What do you do?
  - PhasmaFelis 8y ago
    I don't know exactly where to draw the line, but we can start with not sending actual refugees back home to die.

PhasmaFelis 8y ago

> Eventually it becomes South Miami where there are parts where workers don't speak English. Kind of sucks when you try to order from a butcher shop and have to point at the meat and then the grinder. Yeah, that would be kinda annoying. Leaving innocent people to die in a totalitarian hellhole ought to demand a slightly higher bar than "kinda annoying."

spacehome 8y ago
No. Immigration should be at the pleasure of and to the benefit of the host population. Every population should have the right to control who enters their land. And we can't save them all, anyways. If everyone living in a totalitarian regime showed up in the US they would vastly outnumber the current Americans.
- PhasmaFelis 8y ago
  > Every population should have the right to control who enters their land. Obviously nations have the right to do that. I don't think anyone has said otherwise. Saying "your right to not be tortured and killed by a tyrannical government is less important than my right to prompt convenience at the grocery store" is still a dick move.
  - spacehome 8y ago
    Should the US rescue all of them? You seem eager to give away other people’s country.
    - PhasmaFelis 8y ago
      > Should the US rescue all of them? I never said that. See my reply to ApolloFortyNine. > You seem eager to give away other people’s country. It's my country too, thanks. Just want to point out, again, that right now you are specifically arguing that convenience at the butcher's is more important than human life. Are you really making your point effectively and convincingly?
      - ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
        We're being realistic, you can't save everyone. There's billions of people who have a quality of life magnitudes below yours and mine. It's naive to think we can simply allow them all into our country without consequence.
ApolloFortyNine 8y ago
In that case shouldn't the U.S allow in the vast majority of Africa? Where do you draw the line? There's only 300 million people in the U.S. A quick search reveals that 780 million people don't have access to clean water. What do you do?
- PhasmaFelis 8y ago
  I don't know exactly where to draw the line, but we can start with not sending actual refugees back home to die.