Why do we want to import more poverty in the US when we have enough already?

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
What's to explain? If you believe that other people should be forced to assimilate to your culture and customs, then you don't believe in their freedom. Or at least not any more so than the Borg.

What is the value of this assimilation anyway? Do you hate Chinese, Mexican, or Italian foods? Should St Patricks Day or Oktoberfest be banned?
And if all immigrants are to be assimilated, which American culture should they assimilate into? Because there isn't just one. So which one?

Who said I wanted uniformity? Someone said they were assimilated, not me.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
What's to explain? If you believe that other people should be forced to assimilate to your culture and customs, then you don't believe in their freedom. Or at least not any more so than the Borg.

What is the value of this assimilation anyway? Do you hate Chinese, Mexican, or Italian foods? Should St Patricks Day or Oktoberfest be banned?
And if all immigrants are to be assimilated, which American culture should they assimilate into? Because there isn't just one. So which one?

It's not an issue of force but rather of allure. One way to say it is that we corrupt their youth to our heathen ways...
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
898
126
Sure, anyone who immigrated here 100 years ago, or rather, their grandkids and great grandkids, is now largely assimilated. What are you getting at?

We still have a lot of tribal frictions in this country. I'm not saying that assimilation means all frictions are 0, but, we still are not very unified. For sure people with skin color is a bigger factor than the country they were from, but it still seems that assimilation is not the right term.
 
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
Most wealthy people inherited their wealth, so in a very real way, you could say it's really not their money either, except through legal fictions.
Right wing reactionaries, like yourself, tend to hold 2 fundamental economic misconceptions.
The first is that macroeconomies are zero sum, ie that the total amount of wealth is fixed and thus any increase in wealth among one group means a decrease in wealth among other groups. That is completely wrong. On the macro level, wealth is not only dynamic, it is relative. And it is capable of increasing (or decreasing) among all groups simultaneously, with increases generally driven by technology.
And second, reactionaries tend to view asset ownership as fixed in time. This one, in particular, is where Ayn Rand got it completely wrong. John Galt might have invented a kind of perpetual motion machine, but he didn't invent the math and science that made it possible for him to do so. He didn't invent the language that made it possible for him to learn that math and science, and for him to communicate his own developments to others. Almost all of the modern technologies (and the wealth derived from same) that we rely on every day were invented by persons no longer living. So who owns all that? According to right wingers, it is to be owned by the descendants of those inventive persons, who mostly did nothing in their own right to deserve it except their accident of birth, so that they can enslave the rest of us in perpetuity.

TL;DR, what you and the rest of the right are most opposed to is the proposition that all men are created equal.

I have never stated that. Provide proof and stop spreading lies.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,222
14,911
136
I have never stated that. Provide proof and stop spreading lies.

The word you should have put in bold was the word, "tend". As in; people like incorruptible tend to make really stupid posts.

Tend: regularly or frequently behave in a particular way or have a certain characteristic.