Trump doubles down on birthright citizenship, willing to take it to SCOTUS - Polidicks

"Those people are refugees and we should make a valid effort to try to help them since we are clearly able to" "THEY WANT OPEN BORDERS NO PASSPORTS FUCKING RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE" Maybe if we left some of these countries alone and quit fucking them up they would be able to pull themselves out of poverty.

you're talking to the guy who loves brexit because it helps NZ while screwing the uk he's campaigning for pushing countries in poverty the fucker

He's openly admitted to just trolling, I'm still gonna call him out for being a retard regardless https://i.imgur.com/la8b7fV.png

So you going to tell me yet about what you'd do if you were a refugee and your boat was going to be sunk? waiting on a good answer for that for a while now

yeah but letting anyone in from all countries would also be similarly expensive, on a much smaller scale. Not to mention that more low skill workers = less low income jobs. average wage may "increase", but not for the native population.

Wasn't it a big scandal in Australia that a few politicians might actually be New Zealanders

As I said above, its a inflated number, probably unrealistic in our lifetimes, however even with half or quarter of that, you will still face the same issues. Open borders is cancer, the grass is always greener on the other side, and this applies to the rest of the world coming to the west. Ok Read the original citizenship post. I agree, we should be moving to decrease aid. The UK isn't going to go into poverty. What. I gave up answering that one because immediately after you said 'but what if it was the Jews' and pretended like modern intelligence doesn't exist nor already active refugee programs.

None that Boilrig stuff please

Source one claim you've made over the last 2 years, and maybe we'll have a conversation where everyone here treats you like an adult with valid tihngs to say as it is now, you're seen as little more than a sock puppet of propagandists you've been unable to actually see through You can't even source your claims that 50 million people would stretch the US to thin, so how do you plan on pulling more things out of your ass to answer that?

I was gonna say stop unnecessarily invading countries and stop fueling the war machine behind them, but leave it to you to come up with a solution that would just fuck over people.

"The problem is people are trying too damn hard to help each other for the better." - Boilrig prob'ly.

Who'd want to help people? People fucking suck. Just look at the guy you're mocking.

Boilrig, tell me, what's the point of not giving people citizenship by soil if you don't plan to just deport them outright? What do they have in common with the home country of their parents if they are born in another and never even get to see it? Isn't the whole point of the idea of a nation, and nationalism in general, that the nation is some sort of shared identity which serves as a unifying factor for the citizenry? If so, what exactly do they share in common with the so called countrymen assigned to them arbitrarily through their parents, how can they be said to be "of" that nation? After all, the culture they are born in and are raised at is usually, as in this case, completely different. Should a person (again, assuming you don't just wanna deport them outright) not be given full rights in the place they were born in and in which they live? Do they not fulfill the basic duties already as residents in the country, paying taxes and obeying laws? I honestly do not understand your logic besides "but what about those arriving legally". Assigning them the nationality of their parents does nothing and makes no sense because other than this absolutely arbitrary assigned identity there is nothing connecting them to their "homeland" at the moment of birth and later in life in said "foreign" country.

You still being the coffee intern in that broke-down financial agency, Boilrig?

This is too far.

Well new Zealand is pretty far from everywhere else.

You obviously ignored the Brexit threads. Did I say 'too thin'? No. The challenge is to not decrease the living standards of the current population, which I would say is impossible if population continues to increase, that's 50 million to the largest cities, not 50 million to the rust belt, you can't tell people where to live within your own borders as that is illegal under the UN as you cannot treat people as second class citizens, so with open borders, the situation is made worse. I don't need to source that, that's just logic, like about a year ago people on here having a dig at my countries less people per square km that most countries on the planet, which the answer from you guys was 'you can take a lot more buddy', and couldn't understand that we can't, as the land is used for farming, not for housing population, which was a stupid argument to apparently fill up every square inch of your country, but you know, 'muh economy'. Technically food aid does fuck over their farming situation. The idea is that you have such a system where after children are born, immigration has already decided to deport the parents and the children if they don't meet the jus soli requirements, as we have over here, meaning at such a young age they won't have an attachment to the country unless the NZ government decides to place them into foster care and they grow up in the country while their parents are deported. I don't see why a person should be given full rights where they are born unless their parents meet the jus soli requirements. Assigning them the nationality of their parents is the legal way of how the system operates, as countries usually accept the children or else they become stateless. This is why we actively turn pregnant women around at the border over here to avoid such situations. I won't deny there are issues surrounding the points you raise, however I don't see an overall problem in following other countries in either not observing or having restrictions on jus soli, the way I see it, the rest of the world carries on just fine without it, it was a colonial era policy that the Americas needed to kick start countries, now that a country has been formed, I don't see why it would need to remain. Yeah no.

No, I just read the articles you posted, and they always contradicted the point you were trying to make. When that was pointed out to you, you ignored it. So, what is there to say but LOL This isn't "Just logic" if you can't support it with any arguments or factual reports. The US could support more people without a drastic reduction in living quality, there is enough wealth to go around in the US, a country where the wealth gap has only grown and grown.

https://i.imgur.com/BQQZHeZ.png

But a reduction nonetheless, failing the exercise. You can never convince the population to open its borders nor accept mass migration if they will take a hit to their living standards.

What then of the cases in which, say, the kid already was born and has lived for quite some time in said country to have an attachment to it and know its culture alone? Are they to be expected to go to the homeland of their parents despite them neither knowing it nor, very likely, the language and culture of the place - having no real shared history that would tether them to the place and give them a reason to feel like they belong? Did you not, in earlier discussions, mention the importance of a connection to the nation to be a productive citizen in society - the need for assimilation? The problem is you assume the laws are followed entirely to the latter and enforce perfectly, and do not see how they crash against messy reality and the real situations that result in this way. The question is why kick them out at all, not "why not?". There is nothing to be gained from doing so in situations such as these other than some fulfillment of some vague ideal of law and order.

That's not how agriculture works you dolt

I understand what you're implying but that doesn't make it any less autistic

There's a lot of things where it's as simple as "No that's not how it works" with Boilrig, but he'll literally never stop peddling what he thinks as fact

A similar issue is happening with Australia, children from NZ taken over there as young kids, but eventually commit a crime and are deported due to character issues and vice versa. There will always be honest casualties of laws and immigration policy, it is an active debate over here, but when it comes to our immigration laws, you cannot have one family stay while the other must leave, the rules cannot be bent, and when they are, as they are over here time to time, then the population becomes increasingly displeased with foreigners and now there are calls for not only less immigrants, but even less refugees, a side effect of someone in immigration misreading or feeling sorry for a family. To maintain the value of being a legal part of society, value of citizenship, if we diminished that role, why would anyone even attempt to immigrate to the US legally, or get a green card, or even pay their taxes. That is how food aid works, we literally import food into their countries, that they are then unable to compete with, that is then reinforced by our standards of food and other policies like the EU's CAP.

Indeed, the laws shouldnt be bent. But they can be - and are - selectively enforced either due to people looking the other way or limited capacity to enforce the law fully, and more importantly, they can be changed - or in the case of the US as it is now, kept the same. Those who can immigrate legally certainly will because it's much less of a hassle to go through and they aren't left at the mercy of the state. You're saying this as if a lot of people will suddenly move with their pregnant women solely so their children can be born in this other, safer country. I don't get the point of the taxes part, you do realize many illegal immigrants pay taxes just like everyone else, right?

Do you understand the difference between commercially sold food and actual food aid? Do you even know what the CAP is? Do you understand what these terms you put in your posts mean?

I think Boilrig has to write the next "Economics Text book" because apparently, he's the only one who understands economics in the manner that he does.

Oh God you don't even get the most innocent jokes and you feel the need to rebute them. Jesus Christ I can just imagine what kind of guy you are when not behind a keyboard.