ImmortalOne's forum posts

Avatar image for immortalone
ImmortalOne

4064

Forum Posts

262

Wiki Points

79

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Avatar image for immortalone
ImmortalOne

4064

Forum Posts

262

Wiki Points

79

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@monsterstomp said:

@immortalone: Unpopular opinion? Ross is the best friend of the group.

Maybe I'm on Reddit too much lol, tons of people seem to hate him over there.

Avatar image for immortalone
ImmortalOne

4064

Forum Posts

262

Wiki Points

79

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Unpopular opinion, but Ross.

Avatar image for immortalone
ImmortalOne

4064

Forum Posts

262

Wiki Points

79

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Avatar image for immortalone
ImmortalOne

4064

Forum Posts

262

Wiki Points

79

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@sophia89 said:

@immortalone: @willpayton: I'm getting bored; also I'm sick and want to chill, so this will be my last reply. I'll leave people to decide based on our posts.

@willpayton said:
@sophia89 said:

4. Remember you just said he was a conartist. He will con them into better deals; duh.

He's already conned you, that's for sure. But if you think that Trump will actually get anything accomplished with other nations by trying to bully and con them, you're seriously mistaken.

Isnt it funny that the only world leader so far that actually likes Trump is... Putin? I guess it takes one ego-maniacal deceitful tyrant to know another.

Isn't funny that Saudi Arabia is funding Hillary? BTW isn't good that we have good relations with Russia, the second major power after us. Finally, other countries aren't supposed to nose in on our politics, so other leaders aren't supposed to endorse a candidate. Trump has gained lots of support worldwide from RW though.

@willpayton said:

@sophia89: And BTW you still havent admitted that you were lying with that meme about what happened to Ambassador Stevens. Funny how when I called you out on it you immediately started trying to distract people with all this talk about Bernie.

This is your MO each time. You post random b.s. about people you dont like and then when you're called on it you distract by spamming other nonsense and trying to waste people's time trying to argue with you.

Sorry, my common sense refuses to believe that Al Quada attacked the embassy then left before doing anything after winning. The equivalent of this would be taking your kid to disney world after months of him asking for it, and after getting there and before doing anything there, he asks to go back home. You're ok with thinking that Al Quada backed away and nice libyan came in and saved his life and he died peacefully in the hospital because you believe in the word of a woman that said it was a protest over a movie and had a man arrested for it even though she knew it was a terrorist attack.

@immortalone said:
@sophia89 said:

1. What? First of all, what far leftist site did you go to that says unauthorized immigrants. Second, source for that insane number. Third, studies found that most Illegals send their money back home to their families not pay taxes, hence the "illegal" part.

2. And now you know why working class Americans are voting for Trump. They want those jobs that you say no one wants.

3. Yes he plans to make them pay more. Why does he want more military might. Simple because the government is only necessary for 2 jobs. 1 of which is to protect it's citizens from outside or inside (Police/Military).

4. Remember you just said he was a conartist. He will con them into better deals; duh.

1. I linked it. Use your eyes. Far leftist? Nah, it was ABC news, which is actually pretty moderate on the scale, according to Pew Research Center

2. Immigrants usually represent a net gain for the jobs market actually. It's been extensively researched. Here's some links:

In a study I conducted with Chad Sparber (“Task Specialization, Immigration and Wages,” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1:3, July, 2009), we show that, due to the limited knowledge of the language, immigrants specialize in manual jobs. As a consequence, firms and sectors that hire immigrants generate higher demand for jobs requiring coordination, communication, and interaction — jobs that are typically staffed by natives, whose language skills are superior. This dynamic specialization according to skills pushes natives to upgrade their jobs to better paid, communication-intensive occupations and protects their wages from competition from immigrants. By taking the manual jobs that natives progressively leave, immigrants push a reorganization of production along specialization lines that may increase the effectiveness and efficiency of labor. A related line of research by Ethan Lewis at Dartmouth shows that, in markets with many immigrant workers, firms adopt techniques that are particularly efficient in the use of less- educated, manual-intensive workers. Hence, they are able to absorb a large number of less-educated manual workers without a loss in productivity and wages.

According to an April 2015 symposium on the effects of illegal immigrants in the Southern Economic Journal, illegal immigrants actually raise wages for documented/native workers.

[...]

Why? The law of comparative advantage says we get more productive when we have more trading partners, and the arrival of undocumented workers with limited English skills frees up low-skill American workers who can then specialize in tasks that require better English.

Research shows that immigration will positively affect U.S. workers’ wages and employment. How can that be? While overly simplistic views of economic theory might suggest that wages will decline in the short run as the supply of labor increases, this is not the case with immigration for two reasons.

First, immigrants generally do not have a direct negative impact on the earnings of native-born workers, as native-born workers and immigrant workers generally complement each other rather than compete for the same job. Native-born workers and immigrants tend to havedifferent skill sets and therefore seek different types of jobs. Thus, immigrants are not increasing the labor market competition for native-born workers and therefore do not negatively affect American workers’ earnings.

To be sure, there are some instances when immigrants and the native born are similarly skilled and substitutable for similar jobs. Recent research has found, however, that firms respond to an increase in the supply of labor by expanding their business. Thus, an increased supply of labor as a result of immigration is easily absorbed into the labor market as a result of increased demand for labor, without lowering the wages of native-born workers.

Second, research finds small but positive impacts on native-born workers because of the indirect effects that immigrants have on the labor market and economy. As economists Michael Clemens and Robert Lynch explain in The New Republic, “In some areas of the economy, lesser skilled immigrants have kept entire industries alive.” This not only helps native-born workers within the industries but also native-born workers whose jobs are associated or closely connected to those industries.

3. That doesn't answer how Trump is just going to force other nations to pay more, and why we need to spend more only what constitutes over 50% of our budget.

4. So, no answers, just try to redirect like a coward. Yet again.

1. Sorry, I'm using Windows 10 so it keeps making things colored differently on random. Anyways using what you posted, illegals have paid in 100 billion in the past 10 years, considering it costs 113 billion yearly we get 1,130 billion that illegals cost us in the past 10 years. Lets minus the 100 B they paid in, and we get: 1030 billion dollar. So they still cost us way more than they made for us.

2. K. Sure illegals create more jobs and raise the wage of the average native worker. Meanwhile in reality that is not how things work. 10 people compete for a job ends up with 9 people being unemployed and the wage lower since there is lots of competition for a lower wage.

3. He doesn't have to, and they don't need to pay. We will simply walk away. No where in the constitution does it say we have to protect other countries.

4. Well it was a stupid question, so it got a stupid answer. When we deal with china we send people who don't about business, we send politicians (Example Kerry). Trump said he will send other Business tycoons to make the deal.

1. Let's go back and address YOUR 113 billion figure first, because that's pretty sketchy. I found several problems with it: first off, various economists have said that it's pretty difficult to calculate exactly just how much undocumented immigrants cost the US. Second, FAIR isn't the most credible of resources- and I find it difficult to believe that its estimate of $113 billion, which is pretty much the only estimate that implicates undocumented immigrants to such a degree. Furthermore, yes, undocumented immigrants may end up costing the US- but that's not an argument for saves to be made by deporting all 11 million of them. That's going to be pretty difficult and costly, if not impossible. Doing so would require massive government action, driving up spending.

Oh, and I'm not the only one with problems on how FAIR got their number; the American Immigration Council states that FAIR inflates the costs and misinterprets how much education and healthcare are going to undocumented children. I'm not going to list all their points, but I would suggest a read. Furthermore, FAIR doesn't incorporate how much America is going to be losing with deporting 11 million people:

  • The costs associated with apprehending, detaining, and deporting millions of unauthorized men, women, and children would be enormous. A 2010 study by the Center for American Progress (CAP) “calculates a price tag of $200 billion to enforce a federal dragnet that would snare the estimated 10.8 million undocumented immigrants in the United States over five years.”
  • In addition, the U.S. economy would suffer if millions of unauthorized workers, consumers, and taxpayers left the country.A 2010 IPC/CAP study estimates that removing all unauthorized immigrants from the United States and “sealing the border” to future unauthorized immigration would reduce U.S. GDP by 1.46 percent—or $2.6 trillion.

A more recent estimate of how much it's going to cost as well: $400-$600 billion

2. I... just cited and quoted 3 different studies to show that yes, that is how things work. I'll be glad to tell Berkeley, the Southern Economic Journal, and the Center for American Progress that they're wrong because you said so though.

3. Addressing the roots of why we're talking about NATO in the first place, it's all about the money. Trump claims that America spends "billions and billions" on NATO- but the figure is actually closer to $500 million. Looking at this as a matter of paying for what you own, the reason that America spends much more than the other NATO countries is because of its military actions around the world. The other NATO countries have no obligation to pay more because they're not engaging in American operations anyway. I actually agree that Europeans in NATO aren't paying their share- but the thing is, it's because they don't spend nearly as much as we do on military (which is something that Trump wants to increase), and they're pretty disillusioned with American military operations after the disasters in the Middle East. They're really not likely to just bow down to Trump. Even so, let's say Trump saves millions of dollars (which isn't much, considering the US spends $3.5 trillion annually) on NATO. Then, he scales up our military yet again. How much money are we really saving?

4. When we sent Kerry to China we weren't trying to implement a ridiculous trade tariff that was likely going to end in a trade war. Trump SAYS that he's going to force and bully the other countries to his will, but that's just not going to happen. He can have all the diplomats he wants go over to China or Mexico, but the inherent fact is, his goals aren't achievable because China and Mexico simply won't agree.

Avatar image for immortalone
ImmortalOne

4064

Forum Posts

262

Wiki Points

79

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@sophia89 said:

1. What? First of all, what far leftist site did you go to that says unauthorized immigrants. Second, source for that insane number. Third, studies found that most Illegals send their money back home to their families not pay taxes, hence the "illegal" part.

2. And now you know why working class Americans are voting for Trump. They want those jobs that you say no one wants.

3. Yes he plans to make them pay more. Why does he want more military might. Simple because the government is only necessary for 2 jobs. 1 of which is to protect it's citizens from outside or inside (Police/Military).

4. Remember you just said he was a conartist. He will con them into better deals; duh.

1. I linked it. Use your eyes. Far leftist? Nah, it was ABC news, which is actually pretty moderate on the scale, according to Pew Research Center

2. Immigrants usually represent a net gain for the jobs market actually. It's been extensively researched. Here's some links:

In a study I conducted with Chad Sparber (“Task Specialization, Immigration and Wages,” American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1:3, July, 2009), we show that, due to the limited knowledge of the language, immigrants specialize in manual jobs. As a consequence, firms and sectors that hire immigrants generate higher demand for jobs requiring coordination, communication, and interaction — jobs that are typically staffed by natives, whose language skills are superior. This dynamic specialization according to skills pushes natives to upgrade their jobs to better paid, communication-intensive occupations and protects their wages from competition from immigrants. By taking the manual jobs that natives progressively leave, immigrants push a reorganization of production along specialization lines that may increase the effectiveness and efficiency of labor. A related line of research by Ethan Lewis at Dartmouth shows that, in markets with many immigrant workers, firms adopt techniques that are particularly efficient in the use of less- educated, manual-intensive workers. Hence, they are able to absorb a large number of less-educated manual workers without a loss in productivity and wages.

According to an April 2015 symposium on the effects of illegal immigrants in the Southern Economic Journal, illegal immigrants actually raise wages for documented/native workers.

[...]

Why? The law of comparative advantage says we get more productive when we have more trading partners, and the arrival of undocumented workers with limited English skills frees up low-skill American workers who can then specialize in tasks that require better English.

Research shows that immigration will positively affect U.S. workers’ wages and employment. How can that be? While overly simplistic views of economic theory might suggest that wages will decline in the short run as the supply of labor increases, this is not the case with immigration for two reasons.

First, immigrants generally do not have a direct negative impact on the earnings of native-born workers, as native-born workers and immigrant workers generally complement each other rather than compete for the same job. Native-born workers and immigrants tend to havedifferent skill sets and therefore seek different types of jobs. Thus, immigrants are not increasing the labor market competition for native-born workers and therefore do not negatively affect American workers’ earnings.

To be sure, there are some instances when immigrants and the native born are similarly skilled and substitutable for similar jobs. Recent research has found, however, that firms respond to an increase in the supply of labor by expanding their business. Thus, an increased supply of labor as a result of immigration is easily absorbed into the labor market as a result of increased demand for labor, without lowering the wages of native-born workers.

Second, research finds small but positive impacts on native-born workers because of the indirect effects that immigrants have on the labor market and economy. As economists Michael Clemens and Robert Lynch explain in The New Republic, “In some areas of the economy, lesser skilled immigrants have kept entire industries alive.” This not only helps native-born workers within the industries but also native-born workers whose jobs are associated or closely connected to those industries.

3. That doesn't answer how Trump is just going to force other nations to pay more, and why we need to spend more only what constitutes over 50% of our budget.

4. So, no answers, just try to redirect like a coward. Yet again.

Avatar image for immortalone
ImmortalOne

4064

Forum Posts

262

Wiki Points

79

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@immortalone said:

@sophia89 said:

As for Trump, he is a successful BM, if he was just a con artist then the world wouldn't have giant TRUMP letters all over the place.

The idea that Trump is a businessman and should thus run our country is ridiculous. Trump is a "successful" business man who's filed for bankruptcy four times. He's not a con artist, but you need to separate being a businessman from having full access to the nation's economic plans. Trump started out rich, with big loans from rich parents, and got richer through the real estate business. That has nothing to do with increasing or decreasing spending, managing tariffs, or managing the nation's debt, all of which he has proven that he would be incompetent in.

You should check out Trump University and the ongoing law suit. It was actually a scam, and there's no other word for it.

http://zhlaw.com/cases/trump-university/

Trump himself made comments and promises that were false and misleading. He told people they'd get one thing, and after paying tens of thousands of dollars they found out it was all a scam and they never got much more than folders full of useless information.

Loading Video...

In the words of Mitt Romney: "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud. His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University."

Other reports:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ_IEvczweY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfKURh567os

I stand corrected then. Either way, he's definitely a deceitful snake.

Avatar image for immortalone
ImmortalOne

4064

Forum Posts

262

Wiki Points

79

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#8  Edited By ImmortalOne

@sophia89: If "donaldjtrump.com" is where you're getting all your information, I can see why you support his idiotic plans. Nevertheless, I'll address your lazy cut and paste job.

Trump's plan is to basically hurt Mexico until it caves in and pays for his wall. Blocking remittances, imposing trade tariffs. But the thing is, Mexico won't pay for it. Trump thinks that he can just force China to be nice with tariffs. That's not going to happen either. Reuters states that if anything, it would likely just spark trade wars, crashing our economy because we depend on exports. Furthermore, it would disrupt various industries, such as the auto industry. Why is this more likely the case? Because it's already happened before. Heck, just read the whole article. It addresses basically everything wrong with his tariff plans.

Several expert economists in there as well. I would think that they know better than Donald Trump, who has no political or economic experience.

There's my "Y".

Avatar image for immortalone
ImmortalOne

4064

Forum Posts

262

Wiki Points

79

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#9  Edited By ImmortalOne

@sophia89 said:

Control our debt by saving 113 billion dollar annually.

No Caption Provided

Control our debt by bringing in more jobs for the unemployed; therefore getting the off welfare and into paying taxes.

Control our debt by making other Nato countries pay more for defence.

Control our debt by making better deals with other countries so businessmen would flock to the US.

1. Nope. Doesn't take into account how much illegal immigration actually contributes, not to mention the other economic benefits from taking jobs on the lower end of the rung.

Take Social Security. According to the Social Security Administration (SSA), unauthorized immigrants -- who are not eligible to receive Social Security benefits -- have paid an eye-popping $100 billion into the fund over the past decade.

EDIT: Oh an another thing: illegal immigrants aren't mostly people just jumping over the fence and fleeing into America. Most of them are people who came here with legal visas, but weren't able to renew them. The vast majority of them want to be contributing members to society.

2. Nope. Immigrants are taking the jobs on the lower end of the rung; multiple studies have proven that if anything, they actually provide labor for jobs that people are unwilling to take.

3. Wow, Trump is gonna "make" other NATO countries pay more. Then why is he planning on raising our already drastically high military spending? I think this point illustrates everything wrong with Trump. He says he's gonna do this. He says he's gonna do that. But in the real world outside of his skull, it just wouldn't work.

4. Nope. Trump has no diplomatic sense. If anything, he's only going to escalate trade wars. Not to mention his plan to you know, borrow and then renegotiate if the economy crashes because he's the "king of debt." Oh, and also his plan to print more money, which would undoubtedly lead to inflation.

Avatar image for immortalone
ImmortalOne

4064

Forum Posts

262

Wiki Points

79

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

#10  Edited By ImmortalOne

@sophia89 said:
@immortalone said:

@sophia89: For the love of God, stop citing Donald Trump in support for Donald Trump's proposals. He knows nothing about how the economy works, of course he's going to be saying positive things about his own proposals. Just further your ignorance by using this inane circular reasoning, why don't you.

*Sigh* How will Drump do X?

Answer.

You can't cite Trump's plan on how to do X. No you can't use a video to say how Trump will do X. No you can't use any pro Trump site to say how he will do X. Nice answer, where is the sources that Trump can do X.

I give up.

*sigh*

Let me explain this to you.

Donald Trump is running for president. Donald Trump proposes that we do X. I cite Y to show you why X won't work. You say X will work, because Donald Trump said so.

That's circular reasoning. Bernie Sanders also has detailed reports on how he's gonna pay for his plans, but I know that if someone presented that to you you'd dismiss it offhand.