California Taxpayer Protection Act of 2012

[Clinton Huxley]

CES, sometimes you are such an idiot. I can't tell if it's an act or not.

Well, the part about England was me busting your balls.

But, if you think they're "starving" in South America because the United States has agriculture subsidies, then I'd say you ought not call anyone else an idiot.

Did I mention South America? Fact is, agricultural subsidies depress market prices and make it more difficult for third world farmers to compete. It keeps their incomes lower than they otherwise would be. That is what is known as a "fact". It pushes third world producers closer to poverty. You wrung your hands and went through your usual defence of the status quo when Trinity dared to suggest a more equitable solution. The way it is now is neither the way it should be nor the way it has to be. Now, heat yourself up another pop tart.

[Coito ergo sum]

CES, sometimes you are such an idiot. I can't tell if it's an act or not.

Well, the part about England was me busting your balls.

But, if you think they're "starving" in South America because the United States has agriculture subsidies, then I'd say you ought not call anyone else an idiot.

Did I mention South America? Fact is, agricultural subsidies depress market prices and make it more difficult for third world farmers to compete. It keeps their incomes lower than they otherwise would be. That is what is known as a "fact". It pushes third world producers closer to poverty. You wrung your hands and went through your usual defence of the status quo when Trinity dared to suggest a more equitable solution. The way it is now is neither the way it should be nor the way it has to be. Now, heat yourself up another pop tart.

No, you made an even more sweeping generalization about "the rest of the world." I tried to narrow it down to specifics. So, now we're at "rest of the world, except South America." So, who are you talking about, really? Africa? Asia? Which part? You tell me.

The price of American food is artificially high, not artificially low, due to factors other than subsidies. Just look at sugar and milk. Moreover, the subsidies of things like, oh, corn, cause US growers to grow more of that, much more than the US market needs. If you take those away, then they would grow less corn. That would reduce the amount available for export to the poor countries you want fed.

No, Trinity did not suggest a solution. She made an emotional appeal that there should be more equity, and that the west should "share." That's no "solution" at all. I asked her to describe her solution - to let me know what the system would be like once the present one is overhauled. Maybe she'll let me know then.

There is no need for you to get all testy. You know I'm right about Trinity's kind-hearted appeal to "helping" other people being unrealistic, given the fact that if the western world donated everything we have, it still would not be enough to lift 4 billion people out of poverty. The solution lies in the third world countries themselves. Somehow, the world must act in a way that raises the standard of living in those countries, and a mere "shifting of resources and money" is not going to do it.

[Clinton Huxley]

No, CES, the solution lies both in reform in the third world and in the dismantling of the barriers the developed world has put around itself. If you deny that subsidies affect the incomes of third world farmers, then you are being either wilfully obtuse or blinkered. Your ridiculous scenario of transferring all of the western wealth to the third world is typical of your disingenuous debating techniques. No-one is suggesting any such thing. The inequality in global trading systems will take decades to work out. That's no excuse not to start. If you seriously think that US subsidies have no impact on developing nation farmers you are more ideologically inert than I'd given you credit for

[Coito ergo sum]

No, CES, the solution lies both in reform in the third world and in the dismantling of the barriers the developed world has put around itself.

That's what the US tries to do with free trade.

If you deny that subsidies affect the incomes of third world farmers, then you are being either wilfully obtuse or blinkered. Your ridiculous scenario of transferring all of the western wealth to the third world is typical of your disingenuous debating techniques. No-one is suggesting any such thing. The inequality in global trading systems will take decades to work out. That's no excuse not to start. If you seriously think that US subsidies have no impact on developing nation farmers you are more ideologically inert than I'd given you credit for

I'm not saying that you're suggesting it, dingbat. I'm saying that EVEN IF YOU DID THAT it wouldn't solve the problem. The idea, which trinity raised, that we can lift the rest of the world up to our level by "sharing" is fucking stupid. And, the fact that your spouting this nonsense is really surprising, not to mention the personal attacks, which are starting to piss me off, and which I am starting to respond to in kind.

Start WHAT? What are you going to change?

Let's agree. This all needs to change. Let's change it?

To what? Tell me what you want it to be like.

And, again - you have your own Parliament. End your own fucking subsidies and put your own farmers out of work. That is what happens, right? Farm subsidies induce poor countries to import food that local farmers could otherwise produce more efficiently - yes? That's your beef? Well - take away the billions of dollars of subsidies European farmers get. Then what happens to the European growers? As I said, you first.

[Clinton Huxley]

The US only does free trade when free trade is in its own narrow interests.

I know you love wiki, you can go and read the articles on the problems of agricultural subsidies.

But maybe don't bother, the chance of you shifting your opinion on anything one iota is, I know, zero.

[maiforpeace]

The divide between the wealthy and the poor is less in the US than in most other countries. We're in the top-tier of countries relative to wealth equality.

Um.. where did you get that from?

I would like to hear that, too.

Income Inequality in the US

The US gini rank in income equality (27th) among the 34 "developed" countries of the OECD is higher before taxes and "transfers" are measured,[56] then after (31st) [57] -- i.e., the US has less income redistribution by government than some other post-industrial economies. However some developed countries, such as the Netherlands and Greece, have less inequality simply because incomes are more equal than in the US even before taxes.[58]

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0908770.html

We didn't even make the chart on this one.

It's this continued denial that the gap between the rich and poor is widening, and our ignorance of our true place in the world (sorry, 27th is fucking pitiful) that spawned the Occupy Movement.

How many illegal immigrants live in the United States and where do they come from?

Why do comparatively so many Mexicans migrate illegally?

Part of the explanation has to do with Mexico’s relative poverty and proximity. Mexico shares a 2000-mile land border with the United States. This border marks the largest income gap between any two neighboring countries in the world. The US-Mexico border is also something that meant much less in the past, and hundreds of thousands of Mexicans used to come and go between home and the US every year with relative ease until our immigration laws changed so dramatically in 1986. This long history as neighbors means that the border splits millions of Mexican and American families. As a result of the U.S-Mexico income disparity and our countries’ exceptional social, economic, and historical ties, a lot of Mexicans want to migrate to the US.

Another part of the explanation has to do with the fact that our immigration laws essentially treat Mexicans the same as just about any other nationality despite Mexico’s special status as a neighbor. That so many Mexicans compete with each other for such a small number of visas means that it’s virtually impossible for the typical Mexican immigrant to enter the country legally in his or her lifetime. With no way to enter legally, people make the difficult decision of migrating illegally.

In 2010, the US provided just under 180,000 visas to Mexicans for labor and family unification purposes. This figure is equivalent to just 2.7% the size of the undocumented Mexican population and 0.06% of total US population.

Whoops, there's that income gap problem again.

Anyone who entered the US after 1986 is just shit out of luck.

And all they have to do is the same thing that emigrants and the stories of the emigrated wives described in this thread and they'll get in.

Wasn't there a claim around here that the US deserves to enjoy the lion's share of world resources because it produces a high GDP...and I pointed out that California produces a much higher GDP than most other states, so why should I have to share with you? How about this strange concept...because I'm willing to share, so everyone can enjoy the same good things in life as I do.

People cannot help where they were born, and if you're lucky enough to emigrate and get out of the shithole you are in then fabulous - but the saddest fact is most of them have to stay there and will never get out...these illegal immigrants faced dangerous crossings, with the clothes on their backs, hoping for something better. And they made it.

It's heartless, cruel and I would venture to say in some cases inhumane to round them like cattle and discard them back to the poverty they desperately sought to escape. Yes, we should help them, and we should share with them. It's just pitiful that these conservatives are so greedy, selfish and lacking in compassion to show a little generosity of spirit and pay for some illegals to go to school, or get health care. I find it shameful that these REPUGNICANTS - I rarely use that term, but it fits like a glove here - are trying to get this on the ballot.

All these illegal immigrants want is the same thing your wives wanted, a better life for themselves, for their children. Some hope for a brighter future. So, for this reason I find the intolerance and disdain of your emigrated wife/wives grossly hypocritical. Shame on them!

We took in the huddled masses then, and we should now... especially those masses that are also our neighbor and ally. The only difference between the masses then and now are the walls we put up.

I'm not willing to sell the soul of this country by kicking these illegal immigrants to the curb.

It's against my patriotic duty!

[Coito ergo sum]

The US only does free trade when free trade is in its own narrow interests.

Yawn. And, the UK operates a philanthropic organization?

Which country doesn't trade in its own interests?

I know you love wiki, you can go and read the articles on the problems of agricultural subsidies.

But maybe don't bother, the chance of you shifting your opinion on anything one iota is, I know, zero.

No, not zero, but certainly it wouldn't change when confronted with moronic platitudes from you.

[Coito ergo sum]

It's very easy to "share" when you won't be the one paying, Mai.

And, I find your accusations about those of us who don't oppose this law to be shameful and repugnant. It's fucking bullshit.

And, if you have a problem with immigration law, then stop being such a partisan hack about it. It's ridiculous. The fucking Democrats don't do anything about restructuring immigration law to protect the needy immigrants any more than the Republicans do. Yet all your ire goes to Republicans.

I agree, Mai, that the illegal immigrants want a better life. However, that doesn't mean every fucking one of them can come here. We admit 1,000,000 new permanent residents every year, and 1,000,000 new citizens or thereabouts. Add to that the 60 million non-immigrants who visit for business, stay here on work visas, visit for pleasure and all that. The US is probably the most welcoming country in the world, and I won't have it called names because you think we should just build a bridge and invite all of Mexico over for tea and strumpets!

I find your attack on our wives to be unacceptable and shameful.

[Coito ergo sum]

And, Mai, the US admits more legal immigrants from Mexico than any other country. We are doing plenty. We aren't Mexico's dumping ground.

[Trinity]

Come one folks, let Coito win, he's tried so hard, he really deserves it. His ego must be quite inflated now and needs a rest, dear man. He must have such endurance, to keep slogging away sharing his insights and to succeed in always having the last word! My, we should all drink deeply of his piss and perhaps we can be excellent too .

[Seth]

Notice how right-wingers somehow presume to speak on behalf of all taxpayers. Just like with the so-called "TaxPayers' Alliance" over here.

The cool thing is that if you don't like the fact that your government doesn't have enough money to fund its social welfare programs, you, like Warren Buffet, can simply send more of your paycheck to the government to make up for the deficit. You can send as much as you like, even 100 percent of your income, to help the poor. Nobody's going to stop you, but then again nobody's going to force you to do so.

You, however, have no compunctions about forcing other people to pay more because of YOUR sense of entitlement, do you?

Pretty damned selfish, but then again that's what socialism is all about, selfishness.

[Coito ergo sum]

I've seen the light.

I get it now.

There shouldn't be an immigration law. Everyone should be allowed in anytime they want, even if no other country does that. It's only the heartwarming and generous thing to do. I'm preparing the spare bedroom for an 18 year old Korean girl I've had my eye on....I'm sure that my wife won't mind, when she sees how generous I'm being -- but, I digress.

Even if there is an immigration law, we should only enforce it against those who wish to obey it. The ones that violate it, well, they can't be expected to obey it, because they aren't like us smart Americans. We need to just enforce the law against those who wish to abide by it, and we ignore it when it comes to those who don't want to abide by it. That way, the people who violate the law won't have their self-esteem muddled up by the whole "judgmental" judicial process.

I'm calling my Congressman to make sure that he gets a bill into Congress that requires each American to tithe 10% of his or her income to illegal aliens. That way they're all paid for. The law will declare anyone who doesn't wish to pay a "selfish prick." But, to be nondiscriminatory about it, we will only enforce the tax on those that wish to pay it. Those that break the law will have someone else appointed to pay it for them.

Now, I'm off down to the border to walk little old ladies across the Rio Grande. Gotta do my part, so I'm not considered a heartless bastard. But, get those checkbooks out ladies, because "sharing" means you have to chip in too....we're going to go Dutch on this one.

[Trinity]

[Seth]

It's this continued denial that the gap between the rich and poor is widening, and our ignorance of our true place in the world (sorry, 27th is fucking pitiful) that spawned the Occupy Movement.

The "gap" between the rich and poor isn't the issue, what's important is the trajectory of everyone, including the middle class and poor, and that trajectory is upwards, more than 40 percent since the 70s and 18 percent or so for even the small number of truly poor people. In addition, the number of people making it into the top economic class has just about doubled, demonstrating that the American dream is not only possible, but is a reality for many.

The canard "the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer" is an absolute lie in the United States, and the CBO report proves it.

"Income inequality" is a Marxist mantra based on the false claim that wealth comes from a limited pool and that the only way one person gets rich is if other people are made poor. This is the Marxist zero-sum lie, and it's a pernicious one that they never, every rationally defend, they just state it as if it's a truth, which it's not, as a part of the Marxist Big Lie propaganda agenda of telling lies until they become accepted truth.

But they're still just lies.

[Seth]

Come one folks, let Coito win, he's tried so hard, he really deserves it. His ego must be quite inflated now and needs a rest, dear man. He must have such endurance, to keep slogging away sharing his insights and to succeed in always having the last word! My, we should all drink deeply of his piss and perhaps we can be excellent too .

At least his piss isn't poisonous, unlike the Marxist Kool Aid you've been drinking.