3 ms·

Democrats do not desire Hispanic immigration because they're likely to vote democrat. It's convenient but not all convenient things are causal. By and large De

by jdashg 6y ago

Democrats do not desire Hispanic immigration because they're likely to vote democrat. It's convenient but not all convenient things are causal. By and large Democrats prioritize the most disadvantaged first, and that's poor immigrants, many of whom happen to be coming across from Mexico.

m0zg 6y ago
> the most disadvantaged first How about prioritizing the most disadvantaged _US citizens_ first instead of kicking the stool from underneath them by importing cheap labor?
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  My dad talks about helping Mexicans pick cotton on his grandfathers farm in Central California. One reason my dad tried to do well as he could in school. I'm less worried about Mexicans spilling over into California than I am about jobs being off shored to the far east. Clinton lost in 2016 because she and Bill Clinton are poster childs for NAFTA and letting China into the world trade organization.
  - m0zg 6y ago
    You should be worried about Mexicans. Even today a lot of CA schools are majority-Hispanic. If migration continues at the present rate, the United States will lose sovereignty by the end of the century at the latest. Read "Flashpoints" by George Friedman, he explains really well what's going to happen. 50-75 million foreign nationals in the country who can also vote in Mexican elections is not a good scenario to pursue in the long term, even if you want some tactical electoral gains. Globalists don't really give a shit, but you, with your very much localized wealth, should. Then there are also the working poor (and _especially_ black working poor) facing stiff wage competition from Mexicans willing to work without worker protections and for a lower wage than would be sustainable for an American. What are those people supposed to do? Live off welfare? Who will pay for the welfare? Me? Why?

3 ms·

Democrats do not desire Hispanic immigration because they're likely to vote democrat. It's convenient but not all convenient things are causal. By and large De

by jdashg 6y ago

m0zg 6y ago
> the most disadvantaged first How about prioritizing the most disadvantaged _US citizens_ first instead of kicking the stool from underneath them by importing cheap labor?
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  My dad talks about helping Mexicans pick cotton on his grandfathers farm in Central California. One reason my dad tried to do well as he could in school. I'm less worried about Mexicans spilling over into California than I am about jobs being off shored to the far east. Clinton lost in 2016 because she and Bill Clinton are poster childs for NAFTA and letting China into the world trade organization.
  - m0zg 6y ago
    You should be worried about Mexicans. Even today a lot of CA schools are majority-Hispanic. If migration continues at the present rate, the United States will lose sovereignty by the end of the century at the latest. Read "Flashpoints" by George Friedman, he explains really well what's going to happen. 50-75 million foreign nationals in the country who can also vote in Mexican elections is not a good scenario to pursue in the long term, even if you want some tactical electoral gains. Globalists don't really give a shit, but you, with your very much localized wealth, should. Then there are also the working poor (and _especially_ black working poor) facing stiff wage competition from Mexicans willing to work without worker protections and for a lower wage than would be sustainable for an American. What are those people supposed to do? Live off welfare? Who will pay for the welfare? Me? Why?