So, What's Up?
Saturday, 26. May 2007, 02:08:30
It's been a long time since my last post. Not that I haven't been thinking a lot.
Ron Paul. Not a Libertarian, but close enough as a Republican. His stance on immigration I can accept although I do not agree with it. Same for his pro life stance and his stance on the sanctity of marriage. I'm not really going to get into abortion or marriage, as those things harken back to either pragmatism or religion and thus are inarguable. I will, however, touch on immigration.
For starters, from a philosophical standpoint, nobody on this continent can call this place 'homeland'. Even the native Americans were not native. They came from Russia or by boat or something. So the Republicans who wander around talking about ruining our 'culture' that we have some inherent right to are being silly.
Not that people aren't free to defend what they rightfully stole; that's history. If they'd honestly say that, then there'd be a reason I can't argue with. It's just natural to want to defend what you have, and the behavior reactionaries show is just exactly what you'd expect.
However, from a financial standpoint, the argument that we ought to stop the influx of immigrants is pretty stupid. We've got a serious future accounts deficit problem with social security and medicare/medicaid. To fix this problem, we need a workforce that grows, not shrinks, which is what we've got.
So, ideally, what we need to do is make it very much easier for immigrants to come into this country and become citizens, so we can attract the kind of dominating workforce we have traditionally enjoyed as well as remain solvent as a country.
So, at least Ron Paul thinks citizenship ought to be easier to achieve, so I can accept his wish to reduce the influx of illegal citizens.
Ron Paul. Not a Libertarian, but close enough as a Republican. His stance on immigration I can accept although I do not agree with it. Same for his pro life stance and his stance on the sanctity of marriage. I'm not really going to get into abortion or marriage, as those things harken back to either pragmatism or religion and thus are inarguable. I will, however, touch on immigration.
For starters, from a philosophical standpoint, nobody on this continent can call this place 'homeland'. Even the native Americans were not native. They came from Russia or by boat or something. So the Republicans who wander around talking about ruining our 'culture' that we have some inherent right to are being silly.
Not that people aren't free to defend what they rightfully stole; that's history. If they'd honestly say that, then there'd be a reason I can't argue with. It's just natural to want to defend what you have, and the behavior reactionaries show is just exactly what you'd expect.
However, from a financial standpoint, the argument that we ought to stop the influx of immigrants is pretty stupid. We've got a serious future accounts deficit problem with social security and medicare/medicaid. To fix this problem, we need a workforce that grows, not shrinks, which is what we've got.
So, ideally, what we need to do is make it very much easier for immigrants to come into this country and become citizens, so we can attract the kind of dominating workforce we have traditionally enjoyed as well as remain solvent as a country.
So, at least Ron Paul thinks citizenship ought to be easier to achieve, so I can accept his wish to reduce the influx of illegal citizens.
