dagblog - Comments for "Why 2012 Matters"

See my new comment below,

artappraiser — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:40:13 +0000

In reply to "Not until the late 1800s did

See my new comment below, Resistance.

Still hot news for some

artappraiser — Fri, 15 Jun 2012 21:39:18 +0000

In reply to Why 2012 Matters

Still hot news for some participants on this thread even though it's from more than a month ago--could be it's time to find someone else to argue about:

Net Migration from Mexico Falls to Zero—and Perhaps Less
by Jeffrey Passel, D’Vera Cohn and Ana Gonzalez-Barrera,

Pew Hispanic Center, April 23, 2012, updated May 3, 2012

The May 3 update includes the full methodology appendix and a statistical profile of Mexican immigrants in the United States.

"Not until the late 1800s did

Resistance — Mon, 11 Jun 2012 18:25:50 +0000

In reply to Why 2012 Matters

"Not until the late 1800s did the public begin to question that policy. After the Civil War, some states started to pass their own immigration laws, which prompted the Supreme Court to rule in 1875 that immigration was a federal responsibility.

Immigration continued to rise in the 1880s,

bringing an "avalanche of cheap labor."(1) With this" influx of foreign cut-rate workers", (2) "economic conditions began to deteriorate in some areas," (3)

So Congress passed a series of immigration laws

http://www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/about/history/legacy/ins_history.xml

At every opportunity, the exploiters of labor, have tried to overturn or ignore the will of the people.

1) WE THE PEOPLE don't want an "avalanche of cheap labor."

2) WE THE PEOPLE don't want this "influx of foreign cut-rate workers,"

Lincoln didn't go to war to free the slaves; he did it to contain slavery's economic advantage

3) WE THE PEOPLE don't want "economic conditions to deteriorate in some areas".

WE ABOLISHED THE SLAVE STATES FOR ECONOMIC REASONS.

Why do we want to return to those days? So Corporations can make more profits?

The more Mexicans in a region, the better for manufacturing to relocate there?

Corporations and manufacturing leaders: "Screw you in the N.E. and Rust Belt regions; relocate to the Southwest where there is plenty of cheap labor, besides TACOs are delicious.

Frijoles and free ~~cheap~~ labor; kind of a good thing; NO?

"Si Senor manufacturing patron (boss) ; I work real cheap and so does my brothers, cousins, uncles, sisters, and their brothers, cousins, uncles, sisters, and their brothers, cousins, uncles, sisters, "

"Si Senor you'll make mucho denario; more than you will with American workers.

Me too.

EmmaZahn — Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:10:13 +0000

In reply to I know it's an easy thing to

Me too.

"The thing about tariffs is,

Flavius — Mon, 11 Jun 2012 12:24:51 +0000

In reply to New appointees to the Supreme

"The thing about tariffs is, they do the trick". Keynes.

As to the black caucus, when Bloomberg stops concentrating on arresting 17 year old blacks it will be time for it to dissolve. Don't hold your breath.

I am not teasing at all. I

A Guy Called LULU — Mon, 11 Jun 2012 00:18:58 +0000

In reply to I am never going to live that

I am not teasing at all. I thought it was quite interesting that the phrase, 'The die is cast', could be used with alternate meanings for 'die' and for' cast, both. When you used the word 'dye' the other day I googled it and found that using 'dye' is an archaic way to use the expression but it is the way some have done. I was tickled to find that your usage, even if an error, was another valid way to use the phrase.

"The dye is cast, meaning: the tint has been poured, and the water cannot be clear again."

“But once the dye had been cast, there was no washing it out.”

"Once a cloth has been dyed darker it cannot ever be dyed back to a lighter shade".

In this particular case it just seemed to fit using any of the two [so far] meanings applied to the words 'die' and 'cast' or using their homonyms. There cannot be another phrase in the English language quite like this one.

I know it's an easy thing to

MrSmith1 — Sun, 10 Jun 2012 23:45:23 +0000

In reply to You have probably already

I know it's an easy thing to do, but I wish there was a way we didn't have to make 'white' synonymous with 'plutocracy' ...

I am never going to live that

MrSmith1 — Sun, 10 Jun 2012 23:36:27 +0000

In reply to The US Census for the year

I am never going to live that one down, am I? LOL

Lemming?

Resistance — Sun, 10 Jun 2012 23:09:38 +0000

In reply to I'd rather discuss, "whatever

Lemming?

New appointees to the Supreme

Resistance — Sun, 10 Jun 2012 22:55:19 +0000

In reply to Why 2012 Matters

New appointees to the Supreme Court can support drastic reduction of labor rights, voting rights, citizen rights.

As a Plutocrat might think

Step 1 .... get the people and the government to turn a blind eye to enforcing the existing immigration laws and you open the border, so workers can put pressure on indigenious labor; rights. Decent pay with benefits.

the more workers than jobs and the wages go down.

Besides with an unemployment rate of ++8 1/2 % ; workers will be glad for a job and they wont even think about making demands upon the Corporations. Push for amnesty.

Maybe those corporations that located overseas might consider returning, once the American worker learns to accept less?

Step 2 .... create fear and panic, so you can put in place, LAWS that you were always trying to implement any ways, but didn't have the basis for attempting until; you could get the Nation to cut their own throats first.

The plutocracy, (the minority) didn't speak up...... why should they?

The blind working class wont see, they were manipulated to do what the plutocracy wanted them to do.

Like leading sheep to the slaughter.

First you let em all in.... then you reign them all in.

Further protections for corporate and lobbying power can be fixed by national and state legislators in laws difficult to undo or dislodge.

NAFTA, WTO ... FREE TRADE