Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard

Immigration simplified using gumballs


Recommended Posts

This is a heck of an interesting video. It explains how even the most liberal immigration policies can't really have an effect on the world's poorest people. Mexico is a big part of the demonstration. It turns out, though, that the guy is quite possibly against immigration, although he doesn't state that in his talk.

What he misses is that "the value of an individual escaping poverty and improving his or her condition of life is not reduced by the existence of others in poverty."

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My first thought when he began talking was, "I have never heard or read anyone anywhere linking immigration and reduction of world poverty. So I took a Google stroll.

"Beck has gained notable attention via a colorful presentation on YouTube where he used gumballs to illustrate the infeasibility of immigration as a tool to alleviate world poverty. The conclusion was to help the impoverished where they are, instead of exporting them to richer countries.[7] Figures from the world bank do not match the video, they show 1.85 billion people living on less than $1.90 in 1990 reduced to 881 million in 2012 and 767 million in 2013.[8] The video starts with the premise "Some people say mass immigration can help poverty". According to the American Immigration Council, there are no categories of immigration intended to alleviate poverty. The categories for immigration to the US are Family Based, Employment/Skilled Based, Refugees and Asylees.[9]"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, saw that, and various other arguments... all against. I knew this would start some talk. But regardless of his intent, it was an interesting presentation. The knowledge that he used "alternative facts" does not decrease the OMG factor for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is this notion that economic refugees are now legitimate. Every country I can think of, every international agency involved with this work, does not assist economic refugees. This is why Canada, for example, has never accepted a refugee application from Mexico. Of course many refugees are counselled as what to say, how to trick the system, etc - but generally the fakes are caught out. I have met many of these true refugees and one that stands out to me was a 40 year old man from El Salvador. He was a union leader and was severely beaten by government thugs. Multiple bones broken and left for dead. He was truly grateful that Canada offered compassion, and gave him a chance - but his true dream was to return home and live/work with his countrymen. These countries have to stand up and say we know you would like to live a better life in ______, but if you don't have the skills we need, and you need to support yourself - too bad. This is hardly anything new. Likewise, in Canada or the U.S., if they offer green card, if that person commits felony, punishable for more than six months in jail, they serve their term, and then are sent back to their country of origin. Again - nothing new here.

And that Beck guy, if you are going to make a youtube presentation, maybe wear a shirt that fits. Maybe he spent his shirt money on gumballs.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The gumball illustration was originally depicting how hard it would be to eat the gum balls if you knew that out of, say 10,000, there were 5 poisonous ones. Would you even want to try one? This was the point in not allowing refugees because among them were ISIS members.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2017 at 4:51 PM, CHILLIN said:

What I don't understand is this notion that economic refugees are now legitimate. Every country I can think of, every international agency involved with this work, does not assist economic refugees. This is why Canada, for example, has never accepted a refugee application from Mexico. Of course many refugees are counselled as what to say, how to trick the system, etc - but generally the fakes are caught out. I have met many of these true refugees and one that stands out to me was a 40 year old man from El Salvador. He was a union leader and was severely beaten by government thugs. Multiple bones broken and left for dead. He was truly grateful that Canada offered compassion, and gave him a chance - but his true dream was to return home and live/work with his countrymen. These countries have to stand up and say we know you would like to live a better life in ______, but if you don't have the skills we need, and you need to support yourself - too bad. This is hardly anything new. Likewise, in Canada or the U.S., if they offer green card, if that person commits felony, punishable for more than six months in jail, they serve their term, and then are sent back to their country of origin. Again - nothing new here.

And that Beck guy, if you are going to make a youtube presentation, maybe wear a shirt that fits. Maybe he spent his shirt money on gumballs.

Canada has accepted significant #'s of refugees from Mexico.    While the # of claimants that qualify is not high, they have, do, and will continue to exist and be accepted.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canada-s-refugees-by-the-numbers-the-data-1.3240640

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Canada's number of immigrants is trivial compared to that of the U.S. both in percentages and in absolute numbers.

Canadians have no concept of what it is like to have a 1000 people with no skills and no resources walk into to their country uninvited every day. 

Look at your own numbers.  And read your own papers:

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/07/03/misbehaving-syrian-students-are-a-federal-problem

Quote

“After Importing Thousands Of Refugees, Canadians Now Say Muslim Immigrants Have ‘Fundamentally Different Values’”, by Peter Hasson, Daily Caller, June 7, 2016:

After welcoming almost 12,000 refugees to their region, three-quarters of Canadians living in the province of Ontario now say that Muslim immigrants hold fundamentally different values and a majority believe mainstream Islam promotes violence, according to a new survey to be released this week.

The survey was funded by the province and the city of Toronto as part of a joint educational campaign “to address xenophobia, Islamophobia, and anti-immigrant sentiments.”

While 60 percent of Ontarians say they initially supported the decision to import Syrian refugees, 75 percent now say Muslim immigrants hold fundamentally different values and a majority now say Islam’s mainstream doctrines promote violence. Only one-third of those in the region have a positive impression of the religion.

Three-quarters of Ontarians wish their country would focus on taking care of its own citizens instead of devoting resources to foreign refugees.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The world is learning that their way of life is severely threatened by refugees who are not interested in assimilation into their society. People are getting tired of turning the other cheek.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Those stats to Canada are by source country - not citizenship. Canada has never supported assimilation, they encourage multi-culturalism. Teachers tell the parents, let us teach them English, you teach them your language and culture -celebrate it. Refugee "criminals" and welfare "bums" are always a convenient target for the most ignorant in our Western societies. The rich and powerful are quite relieved for these distractions, they are concerned that the anger will be directed towards them. Which in many cases, is much better deserved.

I  would think this quiet, compassionate approach has turned out pretty well for Canada and Mexico- as far as I know they are not in the target of multiple nuclear missiles.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe it is because both countries mind their own business, don't send military all over the place and aren't involved in constant foreign wars.

12 hours ago, ComputerGuy said:

The Daily Caller is a right-wing nutjob online propogater of clickbait and fake news. Ignore it.

 

Did you miss the citation they were writing about?  You can click on the embedded links and read the data yourself.  It is as reported.  The Toronto Sun link above the quote confirms it.  Is the Toronto Sun also right-wing nutjob in your view? 

What I find curious is that the originators of this survey bill it as to be used for combating "Islamophobia" while failing to notice and ask themselves why there was such a shift in sentiment among normally pretty easy going and liberal Canadians on this topic.  

Quote

While 60 percent of Ontarians say they initially supported the decision to import Syrian refugees, 75 percent now say Muslim immigrants hold fundamentally different values and a majority now say Islam’s mainstream doctrines promote violence. Only one-third of those in the region have a positive impression of the religion.

That's quite a shift of opinion I'd say.  What caused this abrupt change?  Is it possible that the actual experience with these so-called "refugees" didn't live up to the feel-good sales job put out by the government?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mainecoons said:

Did you miss the citation they were writing about?  You can click on the embedded links and read the data yourself.  It is as reported.  The Toronto Sun link above the quote confirms it.  Is the Toronto Sun also right-wing nutjob in your view? 

What I find curious is that the originators of this survey bill it as to be used for combating "Islamophobia" while failing to notice and ask themselves why there was such a shift in sentiment among normally pretty easy going and liberal Canadians on this topic.  

That's quite a shift of opinion I'd say.  What caused this abrupt change?  Is it possible that the actual experience with these so-called "refugees" didn't live up to the feel-good sales job put out by the government?

Yes, of course I read the links. The validity of the report (which, by the way, was an answer-heavy skewed poll, intended to qualify the claim; I know a lot of people across Ontario and Canada, and no one actually thinks that) has nothing to do with the fact that the Daily Caller is one of those Brietbart-type loser websites, scouring the Web daily for anything that will uphold it's pledge to devalue logic and humanity. My advice to ignore them still stands, unless that is the kind of thing one wants to read.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There you go again.  Are you trying to push fake news?

The poll was not conducted by the Daily Caller.  They just reported it.  You haven't provided a shred of evidence they reported it incorrectly.  Your argument is ad hominem.  You're addressing the messenger with whom you obviously have a problem and not showing why the information, which wasn't generated by that source at all, is not valid.

Try again and stop obsessing over the messenger and explain to us why a poll conducted to be used to label people with legitimate concerns as "Islamophobes" instead showed a very drastic shift in perceptions by your fellow Canadians in a pretty short time.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

First off, your accusation that I am trying to push fake news is a BS comment, and undignified. For a moderator, you are pushing your attitude a little too far these days. Second, I see no reason to answer your allegations and insults, because you have made it pointless. I would be happy to discuss the finer points, but not this way.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2017 at 0:40 PM, ComputerGuy said:

Yes, saw that, and various other arguments... all against. I knew this would start some talk. But regardless of his intent, it was an interesting presentation. The knowledge that he used "alternative facts" does not decrease the OMG factor for me.

Whether the number of gumballs is accurate or not, the point is well made:  The poor need to be helped where they are.  

The first thing needed is education. It's clear that the birth rate so exceeds the death rate that massive starvation is on the horizon.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Xena said:

I thought this web board was for discussing living in Mexico? This thread is meandering further and further afield. 

Hey, if it bothers you, don't read it and don't post. Simple, no? WE already have police here, called Mods. That decision is their job, not anyone else's. Why put more stress in YOUR life over nothing? Just sayin'.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, gringal said:

Whether the number of gumballs is accurate or not, the point is well made:  The poor need to be helped where they are.  

The first thing needed is education. It's clear that the birth rate so exceeds the death rate that massive starvation is on the horizon.

Well said, gringal.  Lack of decent education is how those governments control the poor. They must be helped where they are so that everyone can see that a better life is possible in their cultural and their country. That is the ONLY way to make a difference. You just cannot turn the money over to their government for this, as it will just go into pockets, as always.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, gringal said:

Whether the number of gumballs is accurate or not, the point is well made:  The poor need to be helped where they are.  

The first thing needed is education. It's clear that the birth rate so exceeds the death rate that massive starvation is on the horizon.

Agree, very well put!  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jim Bowie said:

Hey, if it bothers you, don't read it and don't post. Simple, no? WE already have police here, called Mods. That decision is their job, not anyone else's. Why put more stress in YOUR life over nothing? Just sayin'.

If reading and commenting on threads or posts creates stress for you don't project that onto me. Noticing a thread being allowed to go off track and pointing that out isn't "stressful" at all. It is amusing. Just sayin'.  If my posts bother you as much as they seem to, I suggest you "Foe "me. As you said you don't need to read them and comment. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, gringal said:

Whether the number of gumballs is accurate or not, the point is well made:  The poor need to be helped where they are.  

The first thing needed is education. It's clear that the birth rate so exceeds the death rate that massive starvation is on the horizon.


'Helping them where they are' is an excellent point.

As Chapala.com is a board for foreigners (heavily US citizens) dialoguing on Mexican issues,  I'd love to to hear what people think of about the 22 years of NAFTA-required subsidies on corn sold in Mexico ~ as related to poor Mexicans being helped where they are.   When NAFTA was written, USA's to big agriculture businesses got the US negotiators & US Congress to put in a clause that forces Mexico to 'accept' US corn at roughly ½ of market prices.  NAFTA further requires US taxpayers to reimburse (pay) US big agribusiness the $$ difference between US corn dumped on Mexico at ½-market-price vs the full price.   The fiscal consequence of this clause buried in NAFTA is that US taxpayers have paid between $4 billion - $4.5 billion a year, every year since 1994,  totaling over $90 billion US dollars to dump huge amounts of US corn onto Mexican markets,  forcing 1.5 million Mexican corn farming families into bankruptcy by 1994.

At least 7 different sources have shown that by 1994, the Mexican corn farming families could not compete with the US taxpayers $40 billion in NAFTA mandated subsidies spent to dump US corn onto Mexican markets, and 1.5 million Mexican corn farming families lost everything.   The economists and demographers then found that for every Mexican farm that was bankrupted, rougly 7 jobs were lost in the surrounding rural communities.   As a result almost 9 million rural Mexican workers & farmers lost their jobs & farms.   Out of those 9 million Mexican workers whose economic lives were destroyed by the NAFTA mandated $40 billion in US taxpayer subsidies,  7 million of them moved North to find work in the same country (USA) whose taxpayers had put them out of work.   => 7 million illegal economic refugees crossed into the USA to replace the work & jobs destroyed by one mostly-hidden NAFTA clause. ... So,  American tax dollars (manipulated by insider-power-players & Congress) and American taxpayers paid to cause the same immigrants that so many Americans are  so frustrated over now..

An additional toll of the NAFTA required US taxpayer subsidies to dump artificially cheap US corn onto Mexican markets?  Note that the the other 2 million economic refugees from the ruined rural Mexican economies moved into the Mexican cities & into the lucrative easy-money Narco-trade.

When a country like the USA spends over $90 billion of government money,  to dump roughly $180 billion in corn  onto Mexico,  then are there any responsibilities for those economic refugees? ... What is the 'right' thing to do with these ~GUMBALLS~  ... Is there a case where any help or aid should be made to force them to stay put,  force them to return to Mexico...  and wait for aid ?    ... The 7 million Mexican workers & farmers who lost everything and went to the USA to look for work ... to feed their families ... felt they could not wait for the US AID to arrive to 'rescue them'.

I much enjoy simple discussions & the solutions~proposals that come from clear yet simple cause & effect situations,   especially when there are 22 year of facts & data documenting  both the causes and & effects,   

There's an added benefit,  that this steers the 'gumball' discussion over to set of real topics that have directly affected Mexico & the USA, and may affect our positions, status & perceptions here in Mexico.

For people who have never read nor heard about this elephant in the room, there are a wealth of good university studies, government studies and US news reports documenting the little discussed problem

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/27/business/us-corn-subsidies-said-to-damage-mexico.html

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/11/24/what-weve-learned-from-nafta/under-nafta-mexico-suffered-and-the-united-states-felt-its-pain

Here's a University report that's presented in ways that are not typical dry research journal material:
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~mindi22l/classweb/wp/crisis.html

and if needed, there's a wealth of official US government data documenting the $10 billion a year of 23 years US Federal government spending on  NAFTA mandated subsides to dump artificially cheap US big ag products onto Mexican markets at prices far lower than market prices.


Should the 9 million Mexican rural workers & farmers be forced to stay-in ... or forced to go back to  their communities,   and wait for help ?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...