Although unlikely, taxation, regulation, cronyism, and/or public hostility to wealth creation could greatly undermine or even eviscerate the ability and willingness of businesses to deliver life-enhancing innovations to the marketplace. [More]Any of you cheap labor "immigration" geniuses care to address this without equivocation, weasel-wording or subject-changing?:
Produce credible data – not opinion, not anecdotes – something that can be independently validated, that “amnesty” and a “pathway to citizenship” for MILLIONS of foreign nationals in this country illegally (and legally, with CURRENT culturally suicidal policies) WILL NOT overwhelmingly favor Democrats and anti-gunners. Show us your sources and methodologies for determining this WILL NOT result in supermajorities in state and federal legislatures that will be able to pass all kinds of anti-gun edicts.
Show us how this WILL NOT result in nominations and confirmations of judges to the Supreme and federal courts who will uphold those edicts, and reverse gains made to date.
Do it.
4 comments:
I don't see conditions when my youngest grandchild turns 56 to be rosy at all. I fully expect the result of all this "progressive" activity will be the collapse of western civilization. A Muslim dominated Europe will have fallen to 7th century technology levels. A world-wide famine (caused by the collapse of our current world-girdling civilization) will reduce the human population to levels consistent with Dr. Malthus' theories. Malthus' theory wasn't wrong so much as the good Dr. did (could?) not anticipate the enormous progress in farming which allows us today to feed a population which would astound him. If Islam becomes dominant in this hemisphere as it is rapidly becoming in Europe, I fear we will enter a dark age lasting a thousand years if not forever.
If the world ever does experience a new renaissance, I believe that the people looking back at our times are likely to call the next few decades "the great die-off".
David,
You're asking the impossible. No one yet has been able to successfully predict what will happen tomorrow, let alone forty years from now. I'm reminded of the 1890 prognostication that by 1930, horse manure would rise to Manhattan's third-story windows. Credible data was being relied upon for that belief. Was Orwell's intention in penning a dystopian novel to predict our 2016 existence? He was only off by thirty-two years. Technology experts predict, through gene manipulation and computer integration, that people will live forever. If no one ever dies, the planet will eventually become so overcrowded that people will be bumping elbows even in rural Kansas. No one thinks that's actually a possibility, right? Not entered into the equation is natural or man-made disasters of such biblical proportion as to wipe the slate clean; to reset the clock of humanity and give rise to the next species that will dominate the third rock from the sun. Age has a way of clarifying one's vision and one's resolve. Patrick Henry, 39 when life-expectancy was 47,approaching the autumn of his years declared, "Give me liberty, or give me death." Perhaps that was the "molan labe" phrase of his time. The bottom line is, nothing besides conjecture exists in the debate over immigration/assimilation argument. The great political experiment that was the United States is too in it's autumn of existence. Prepare accordingly, but know that disaster strikes even the prepared.
HinMO
Rather than address my points, you're playing a word game that deflects from the real issue, making it equivalent to all that manure in Manhattan. If I drop a ball, I can be statistically certain that it will hit the floor unless something out of the blue prevents it. Care to bet a dollar a drop with me?
Yes, of course, it's impossible to foresee future events with 100% accuracy. Everybody knows that. So?
It's not impossible to asymptotically approach a potential outcome to where others are so improbable as to be negligible. There's conjecture and there's data-based probability that -- barring some totally unforeseen development outside of all known factors -- allows for predictions with statistical reliability approaching certainty.
If Hillary wins, she WILL give amnesty and start a pathway to citizenship. If that happens, they WILL overwhelmingly support democrats. It's on you to come up with a superior evaluation if you're going to cast doubt on that.
As usual, HinMo's reasoning is right out of Left-"Libertarian" Chatroom Commando bizarro world, replete with acid-trip strawmen. Probably read The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress a few dozen too many times.
HinMo's driving towards a cliff at 150 miles an hour, but there's no reason to expect that when he gets there in 30 seconds, someone won't have built a big net to catch him, or invented and installed anti-gravity in his car. No reason at all. He's a positive, glass half-full kind of dude. Fuck the overwhelming empirical evidence. Unlimited immigration, invasion-occupation and anchor Democrat fast-breeding is by definition one big happy meal.
Step AWAY from the bong, HinMo.
Left "Libertarians" (as opposed to real or 'paleo' libertarians like me) are traitors. They don't believe American citizens have the moral right to have borders or immigration limits - in spite of the clear intent of the Constitution and the inherent logic of nationhood and citizenship. They don't think the invasion of the USA is a crime. They are extremely subversive to the survival of the USA as an independent sovereign nation, vastly more subversive and damaging than Democrats, since they operate ostensibly from inside the Liberty Tent. Not one of them can honestly take the federal oath or even the pledge of allegiance.
Post a Comment