Recent Influx of Immigration

[Darorinag]

the title initially was "immigration", then it was changed (upon Violette's request) to Recent Influx of Immigration... I am confused too.. maybe she didn't notice the change?

[loleeg]

lol immigrants and immigration are different. immigration is an influx of immigrants influx of immigration doesn't make sense

[Darorinag]

Originally posted by loleeg lol immigrants and immigration are different. immigration is an influx of immigrants influx of immigration doesn't make sense

Ohhh, damn, I didn't pay attention to it... lol.. yeah, makes sense.

[anileve]

Originally posted by Seapahn Unfortunately to many on the outside lookin in on this country, it seems as if life here is all about kicking back, consuming, spending the money that grows on trees, and basically like a shortcut to heaven.

What they don't realize is that although the opportunities for all that is DEFINITELY here, they are still going to have to work their asses off... maybe a lot more than they are used to back in their seemingly so "crappy" home countries.

Many outsiders simply don't realize how hard the Americans actually work ... relative to europeans for example. Of course there is exception to any general statement, but having lived and visited both US and several places in Europe, I feel comfortable in making that statement.

I have no doubt that the potential immigrant pool is going to contain some extremely bright, intelligent, and hardworking people, and some extremely useless garbage with the norms being somewhere in between. So now the difficult question is HOW to distinguish the good from the bad and I admit it is not very easy.

I share patlajan's view. I am so glad you've joined.

[loleeg]

Originally posted by Darorinag Ohhh, damn, I didn't pay attention to it... lol.. yeah, makes sense.

yay! violette see? you and me rock! hehehehehehe!!!!!!!

[Sip]

Originally posted by Darorinag A whole science? lol... statistics isn't rocket science, you know... especially interpreting them.

It is true that statistics is not rocket science. However, much like rocket science, in the hands of the novice, statistics can blow up and make a big ass mess like when the turkey blows up in the microwave.

It is absolutely a science ... it is absolutely completely non-trivial to deal with it .. .and especially very non trivial to interpret it.

If you refer to my example posted above about average salaries of graduate geography studends at UNC being about $300K per year ... if you didn't understand that statistic correctly, you'd be very tempted to go study geography at UNC.

I have a feeling that's what Anileve has been trying to get accross the whole time that simply copy-pasting percentages from a website does not a good little racist boy make.

Put some effort into it ... put some thought into it ... then maybe you can become a good racist one day.

... or maybe you will realize that racism is inherently the product of a lazy mind. To go back to the point you brought up earlier about me saying humans are not created equal ... I hope you realize the fundamental difference between what I am saying and what you are babbling. I made distinction between individual humans. You just group them up and make "borsh" out of them and then decide which borsh you like and which you don't.

[Sip]

Originally posted by anileve I share patlajan's view. I am so glad you've joined.

Thanks for all the kind welcomes

[Darorinag]

It is absolutely a science ... it is absolutely completely non-trivial to deal with it .. .and especially very non trivial to interpret it.

I never claimed it's not science. I've studied statistics for a long time. I know how to deal with it. I know how to interpret it. It's not difficult.

I have a feeling that's what Anileve has been trying to get accross the whole time that simply copy-pasting percentages from a website does not a good little racist boy make.

I was not simply copy-pasting the percentages. I pasted them so that everyone can read them and interpret them. I did not post them because I'm a copy-paste-done type. Arguably, I did make an argument using them. And so far, neither you, nor anileve, nor anyone else, has pointed out what is wrong in my usage of those statistics and in my interpretation of them.

What is unclear in my interpretation? I am claiming that more than 45% (increasing constantly) of NEW immigrants (hence the TITLE of the thread : RECENT influx of immigration) know neither English nor French. I am not talking about USA. I'm talking about Canada here. I don't claim to know the state of immigration in USA since I don't live there (unlike you-know-who). Never did I make the claim that those percentages applied to the entire population. We were stritctly talking about NEW immigration and the number of immigrants (and source countries) being brought in. Nothing more, nothing less. Simple.

Put some effort into it ... put some thought into it ... then maybe you can become a good racist one day.

Nothing in what I was arguing was racist. I might BE a racist in reality, but that is irrelevant to an argument if you can't prove the role it plays in my argument. Just because my argument and my racism occur simultaneously doesn't mean that one is causing the other. Saying that I am racist and that's why I hold those views and therefore my views don't make sense is an ad hominem circumstancial. Besides, which comes first, racism, or immigration? How do you know that it is not immigration that caused me to be racist (if I am), but rather that my racism caused me to have those views on immigration?

I hope you realize the fundamental difference between what I am saying and what you are babbling.

Your biased language and choice of words disqualifies you from making any objective statements in this thread; you are arguing that *I* am in that situation because I am racist, but aren't you in the same position too? You are, after all, an anti-racist, no?

You are attacking ME, NOT my arguments. You are YET to point out any logical errors in my conclusion from the statistics. If you still want to do it, please do. I am not interested in name-calling. I am interested in holding a decent discussion.

But of course, without even looking at the actual URL of the source, Ms. Anileve assumed that it came from a White supremacist website because it wasn't favourable to her position. How about THAT for prejudice? What makes HER position any better than mine? Simply because she's being politically correct?

If you don't have anything of substance to say in reply to my argument, just don't say it at all, is my point of view. Because then you lose all credibility for attacking the person behind the argument, rather than the argument itself.

So, Ms. Anileve, how was that oh-so-white-supremacist website? Did you think your trick would work all the time like it did with Martin Luther King?

[Darorinag]

Originally posted by anileve I share patlajan's view. I am so glad you've joined.

I would be SO glad too, if I were in the same position as you are in this thread.

peace

[Sip]

Originally posted by Darorinag Your biased language and choice of words disqualifies you from making any objective statements in this thread; you are arguing that *I* am in that situation because I am racist, but aren't you in the same position too? You are, after all, an anti-racist, no?

I am anti-stupid ways of thinking. I am not going to argue with anyone about differences in races! Obviously there are differences in races. Just the definition of race itself implies something different ... some sort of classification.

What I am "anti" is anti pre-judging an individual based on a general categorization. That is stupid-thinking according to me and yes, I am anti that.