The Political Memes Thread (memes too spicy for Channel Zero)

[Dark_Knight]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

2 hours ago, Dirty_habiT said:

 

I think it's pretty obvious that sneaking across a border into another country is kinda.... illegal.  Anywhere in the world.

The government has all sorts of rules most of us are in violation of as one point or another. Most people (like myself) don’t even acknowledge these laws, especially one’s that imagine crimes without any actual victims.

 

[Kults]

18 minutes ago, Mercer said:

The government has all sorts of rules most of us are in violation of as one point or another. Most people (like myself) don’t even acknowledge these laws, especially one’s that imagine crimes without any actual victims.

 

 

 

 

[Mercer]

[metronome]

19 hours ago, Mercer said:

The government has all sorts of rules most of us are in violation of as one point or another. Most people (like myself) don’t even acknowledge these laws, especially one’s that imagine crimes without any actual victims.

 

 

I find it hard to be angry at people fleeing dire circumstances to try and make life better for themselves and their children.  

[Mercer]

[Dirty_habiT]

The victims of illegal immigration are the people of the country that has been illegally immigrated into.

 

If you think it's ok for people to be here within our home illegally, then you should get rid of any home defense you have inside your own home.

 

If anyone ever breaks in uninvited or unannounced you must enact your same sort of logic here..... they're just people trying to get into a place and who are you to keep them from doing it, your stuff is everyone's to share.  No problem with that logic right?

 

Seriously, right?  That would be ok, for someone to come inside your house and just do whatever they feel like?

 

Or wait, is it ok for YOU to decide what others should be allowed to do in MY house?

 

Some people don't understand what sharing means very well, and I don't mean sharing with outsiders, I mean sharing ownership of something.  We share ownership of USA and to keep it nice, we have to not make stupid decisions for others.

 

Letting people with no plan flood into our country because "you have free shit for us" is stupid as fuck and anyone that believes otherwise, I will sit here and say, without thinking twice that they're also mentally bankrupt.  You only have to think just a few steps ahead to see illegal immigration is retarded.

 

I love hearing people that don't live near the Mexican border and have no sense of the Mexican way of life talk about this too.

 

If you're up in Chicago and have been there your whole life, then you could keep your comments about mexican border and illegal immigration to yourself because you wouldn't possibly know what you're talking about.  Fill in chicago with whatever place that doesn't border Mexico that you'd like..... then decide whether or not the above is offensive to you  or not because your decided upon placing or not placing yourself into the group of people that talks without knowing what they're talking about.

 

[Dark_Knight]

[Mercer]

21 minutes ago, Dirty_habiT said:

If you think it's ok for people to be here within our home illegally, then you should get rid of any home defense you have inside your own home.

 

 

 

You have the right to decide the "laws" on your property, and can forcibly remove anyone in violation of these laws on your property like uninvited guest's, or trespassers.  The same laws you make for your own property, don't apply to your neighbors property. Ignoring the logical consistency behind this takes immense cognitive dissonance. In short, a welcome guest at your next door neighbor's property isn't trespassing against you,  the same basic logic applies to all the other property you don't own.

 

Likewise your neighbor doesn't have the right to forcibly evict one of your invited/welcome guests from your property under the guise of trespass. I'd never allow my neighbor the right to decide this for my property, legally or not. Imagine some stranger knocking on your door saying "hey, you're no longer allowed to associate with this otherwise law abiding individual". Either because they feel like a victim somehow, or a regulatory body hasn't processes certain paperwork.

 

Like even if my neighbor was a landscaper, he'd just have to deal with the fact I've decided to hire a Guatemalan to fix my garden. By him asking the state to intervene in my voluntary associations, he's no different than a long term welfare recipient deciding to tax me because it's "helping" them enjoy the comforts of a parasitic lifestyle. If my neighbor did better work for less money than my Guatemalan homie, he'd be the one planting my marijuana.

 

You can't fault a communist for not understanding how property rights work, and how stealing from someone for having more than you is wrong, while allowing yourself the exact same indulgences in cognitive dissonance. AKA, what's the point of telling yourself you've got "principals" if some of these so called principals are demonstrably false,  using the same logically consistency of other closely help beliefs. Imagine trying to write software using this method, wondering why you keep coming up with error codes because one line of code (that looks good by itself) interfere's with the next line, and so on.

 

I'm not arguing for introducing an open borders policy under our current system. In fact, I acknowledge this would have disastrous results if the border just suddenly opened. My point here aside from logical consistency, is a non-interventional solution is superior to closed borders. You have to first acknowledge the State based solutions faults first, before it's possible to imagine the superiority of logically consistent methods of increasing the standards of living within any set of imaginary lines.

 

Even in a 100% welfare state free society, I acknowledge opening borders with a less advanced economy would initially be very harmful to those native to the more advanced economy. This has more to do with the economic reality of the situation, than it has to do with any moral argument on behalf of those negatively effected. 

 

Letting go of this illusion opens the door for considering free market, voluntary based solutions. In short it's the state that is the parasite, and needs you to exist, for it to exist, not the other way around. Much like the government taking money from a rich person, then stringing a family out on a "free" welfare system that cuts off this aid the moment the dad lives with the family. The government does far less than you'd think protecting yours, and mine standard of living by enforcing a border where one team has a monopoly on violence on one side, and harms one set of individuals to benefit the other.

 

For example, let's set the entire welfare state argument aside, and we agree our end goal is to benefit Americans as much as possible. If a person can earn 3x more here, even if 3x more is still undercutting the market wage rate here wages here go down. Common sense. Those in professions that can be easily filled by a non-native language speaking labor are negatively effected first , eventually followed by increasingly more specialized labor, until wages in both markets reach an equilibrium and there's no incentive for one person to move physically. This is as an inevitable law of the universe that the laws of man cannot correct, or prevent much like the futility of a drug war, or prohibition, and eventually discovering you can't even keep hard drugs out of max security prisons let alone a "free" society . Eventually you'll find these efforts to shape commerce in your favor, ultimately just harm commerce in the big picture, thus lowering your living standard. These policies are extremely harmful to people born here in a way that is unintuitive, but very real. It's retarding our own economic advancement, and creating an ever greater problem at the same time.

 

Think about East/West Germany, and how one side had BMW's, AUDI's and Porches with well fed people in them, while the other side had pieces of shit that blew black smoke and barely ran. Now think about what happened after they combined, West Germany eventually profited, along with the East and historically that's the norm, not the exception. All the effort put into artificially separating the two is naturally put towards more productive endeavors, and productivity itself just so happens to be what we should be encouraging if we want higher living standards.

 

TLDR: Closed borders don't protect standards of living.

[Kults]

[ndv]

I Dub this one 'Conservative Socialism'

[Mercer]

[Dirty_habiT]

[ndv]

^^ GOLDEN!!

[Kults]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Kults]

[Dark_Knight]

[Kults]

[Mercer]

[Kults]

[Mercer]

[Kults]

[Kults]

[Kults]

[metronome]

[Mercer]

 

[Mercer]

 

 

Facts