The Truth About Immigration And Welfare. Shocking Video & Research Via Stefan Molyneux.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

Which means I just reread the SMALL Print in the intro.

Which means you haven't read the study.
I wouldn't expect more. From a reactionary.

And I expected more from YOU to turn to personal insults of the Messenger (2 in this case)

Like I said, I was mistaken.

a reply to: BatheInTheFountain
It's not an insult any more than saying someone is ignorant is.
You haven't even looked the word up, have you?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

Will the term "Hitler" come soon?

No.
But tell me, upon what does he base his assessment of "quality?"

He has more than 20 charts discussing such.

If I were talking about Rapists, thieves, inmates....etc. Would you be asking me about "Quality"?

If quality is quantifiable based on PRODUCTIVITY vs. BUREN of resources via "Welfare"...then what are we arguing?

Subjectivity? That's not subjective at face value.

If someone TAKES more than OTHERS...disproportionately compares to their peers ..they are in that instance...... of lesser QUALITY.

I guess if you compared the CULTURE of say Denmark, with that of the deepest poverty stricken recesses of Brazil or the CONGO....there would be no issue of "quality'...as a whole.

All "subjective"...all semantics...oops my bad.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain
It's not an insult any more than saying someone is ignorant is.
You haven't even looked the word up, have you?

Your baiting minutia is getting tedious Phage.

a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

He has more than 20 charts discussing such.

Only 20. Gosh, just think how much righter he would be with 50.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

He has more than 20 charts discussing such.

Only 20. Gosh, just think how much righter he would be with 50.

Yep...20....and you haven't refuted ONE.

50 and your head might explode.

a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

You're the one who said I was insulting you.
I'm guessing you looked it up by now.

a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

Yep...20....and you haven't refuted ONE.

Sorry, I haven't had the time to compile the data. But you're right, I haven't refuted the data. I've argued that the conclusion reached is not valid.

originally posted by: BatheInTheFountain
Hello,

Ran across this video by Stefan Molyneux and actually took the time to watch the entire thing. With so much going on in the world dealing with immigration, we here in America tend to take our eyes off of our OWN problems.

Stefan breaks down data compiled by the Center For Immigration Studies (CIS) with charts one by one.

*Sources:

* cis.org... CIS

* cis.org... PDF FILES Data seems to be based off of 2012 data. 4 years old but relevant Variability could be HIGHER or LOWER compared to 2015 fiscal data...unknown margin of error.

* cis.org... DHS report.

Watch the entire thing if you dare. Not for the squeamish.

VIDEO:

Does he also make the point that government can create all the money it needs out of thin air exactly the same way the banks do to provide all the goods and services needed by the economy? If not why not?

Does he also make the point that govt spending on welfare for individuals is weekly or monthly (depending on when its paid) economic stimulus package? If not why not?

Does he make the point that this weekly or monthly economic stimulus package bounces through the bank accounts of little people just like you and me and straight into the local shopping centers, local service providers etc, and as a result of this people survive financially for another week or month and others remain employed? If not why not?

Does he make the point that very little of this weekly or monthly economic stimulus is spent on imported goods because the people spending the money usually only buy the necessities of life and buy many of their goods secondhand? If not why not?

Dos he inform the viewer of how many shops and service providers would go out of business within a few weeks if all the economic stimulus was suddenly cut off? Does he inform the view of how people will react when they get very hungry and thirsty? if not why not?

cheers

Yes, Stefan Molyneux the Irish born speaker who lives in Canada where his cancer is treated under Canada's universal coverage. Good for him.

I wonder why he didn't choose to include the U.S. Department of Agriculture's data from 2013. Which states that 40.2 percent of SNAP recipients are white, 25.7 percent are Black, 10.3 percent are Hispanic, 2.1 percent are Asian and 1.2 percent are Native American But we all know why.

a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

I will not argue the facts (despite checking them out myself), although I would bring out that mostly people like that, people who are either racist or anti-immigration, are also the cause behind such effect.

If there is a choice for business owner, too many prefer locals rather than immigrants even when the immigrant has better skill set. Even finding a reasonable job can be tough, even if one is hard worker and skilful at what they do. Due to that, they have no other choice for survival than getting welfare. I personally got into argument with my boss, because he preferred a local rookie to an indian who was superior to him, just becase he was indian...

I finally looked through the video and to be honest it wasn't exactly what I
thought it would be like.I was not impressed and definitely not stricken with
terror or anger.

The graph might come from cherry picking but there's no denying that he's at least half right. Newely arrived immigrants logically use more welfare in general, unless we lied to ourselves, we already knew it. It's a shame that Hispanics and Blacks are needing that much help but mainly, it's sad to think that maybe they don't have the same opportunities.

Positively, I'd bet that 25%~ of people on constant welfare wouldn't be good workers anyway and crime would be much worst without welfare.

One thing for certain, we eventually have to change how our economic system works.

originally posted by: sopasdepollito
Yes, Stefan Molyneux the Irish born speaker who lives in Canada where his cancer is treated under Canada's universal coverage. Good for him.

Which costs 65 000$ per year...while a year of welfare is about 7800$. So this immigrant is costing Canadians, like me, more than 8 citizens on welfare. What an hypocrite!

Except for the fact that he had the surgery in America...

And the fact that in Canada he couldn't purchase his own healthcare legally.



But yes, by all means, slander him.

originally posted by: Cabin
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

I will not argue the facts (despite checking them out myself), although I would bring out that mostly people like that, people who are either racist or anti-immigration, are also the cause behind such effect.

If there is a choice for business owner, too many prefer locals rather than immigrants even when the immigrant has better skill set. Even finding a reasonable job can be tough, even if one is hard worker and skilful at what they do. Due to that, they have no other choice for survival than getting welfare. I personally got into argument with my boss, because he preferred a local rookie to an indian who was superior to him, just becase he was indian...

Ahhh, so welfare dependence is caused by Racism. It's actually the HOST nation's fault.

Good to know

a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

Seems like a lot of finger pointing by people on both sides.

originally posted by: Semicollegiate
The case from the graphs is

Immigrants use more welfare their whole lives than do Americans born in the USA.

The previous nationalities of immigrants that use welfare the most are the nationalities from which the immigrants allowed in since 1964 have come, when the welfare state started.

That immigrants use more welfare is the only possible conclusion from the data, and is arrived at directly from the data, no logical process necessary.

Precisely, this is raw data (and old data at that).

I am hardly surprised that nobody seems to have watched it.

What seems to be the caltrops in the doorway is the assumption that his conclusion is that we shouldn't accept immigrants.

Nay, immigrants aren't the problem, what we need to do is discontinue welfare.

Have you researched this person, what he believes, what his history is, etc.

I actually agree with some things he says, stands for but, really?

A Voice for Men: Molyneux was a panelist at a 2014 Detroit conference held by the men's rights movement and manosphere organization, A Voice for Men. According to Jessica Roy of Time Magazine Molyneux argued that violence in the world is the result of how women treat their children, and that "If we could just get people to be nice to their babies for five years straight, that would be it for war, drug abuse, addiction, promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases, ... Almost all would be completely eliminated, because they all arise from dysfunctional early childhood experiences, which are all run by women.”[51] en.wikipedia.org...

(yes, I know its wiki and an opinion.)