Anti-Racist=Anti-White still going on..

[Freiheit Reich]

He supports the minimum wage and wants to increase it even more.

And?

He supports bringing in poor and uneducated immigrants from unstable nations to fill jobs while paying Americans (using taxdollars) to NOT work (4.3 million on welfare) and ignoring the fact 12 million US citizens are unemployed (and many more underemployed).

Oh look, no sources.

Increased taxes

And?

Increased welfare spending

More people on welfare tends to increase welfare spending. Really, this is a concept elementary school children could grasp.

Source not given because it is on page 16 of this thread. Here it is though:

12 million US people unemployed. Make sure these people get jobs before bringing in foreign labor.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Welfare, 4.3 million. First, make sure these people are employed (and kick them off welfare if they are too good to take crappy menial jobs like being a janitor, cook, fruit picker):

http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/

Minimum wage will cause companies to pack up and move their production to China, Vietnam, or other places with cheaper labor (and less regulations). Then they can sell these products to Americans without providing American jobs.

As I said many times, a business will not hire somebody just to lose money. Simple math. If a business can make $5 per hour extra profit by hiring a worker but the minimum wage is $7 an hour should the business hire the worker? Only if the owner is on LSD or crack. The business will lose $2 per hour if they hire the worker. This means the business won't hire the worker. Business loses chance to make extra profit. Business is not at 100% capable production which means consumers also lose out (extra potential profit means somebody wants the extra good). Worker has no job and must live in a cardboard box and beg for money at a major intersection near you.

Other scenario. No minimum wage. Business finds worker willing to take the job for $3 an hour. Business makes $2 per hour profit, worker makes $3 per hour instead of $0 per hour (the true minimum wage). Both worker and business have an agreement and both are happy. If worker finds better job, he will quit. If he can't than at least he is making $3 an hour. The worker is not enslaved. He can leave anytime. Worker is not rich but he shares a 2 bedroom apartment with 5 other workers. He has a simple diet of oatmeal, carrots, onions, eggs, rice, and beans which is boring but healthy so he is not starving and not obese. He goes to the thrift store and can find the clothes he needs. He is not rich but he has his necessary basics.

What situation seems better for the economy?

Higher taxes: businesses say screw the USA and move to nations with lower taxes. Wealthy Americans renounce their citizenship and move to friendlier nations.

Here is an example of a wealthy and famed novelist moving for this reason:

http://www.focusdep.com/biographies/Arthur/Hailey

Following the success of Hotel in 1965, he moved to California; in 1969, he moved to the Bahamas to avoid Canadian and U.S. income taxes, which were claiming 90% of his income.

[Mavorpen]

Source not given because it is on page 16 of this thread. Here it is though:

12 million US people unemployed. Make sure these people get jobs before bringing in foreign labor.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Welfare, 4.3 million. First, make sure these people are employed (and kick them off welfare if they are too good to take crappy menial jobs like being a janitor, cook, fruit picker):

http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/

So basically, none of what you said was true. You said Obama is ignoring unemployment and welfare. Where is your source?

Minimum wage will cause companies to pack up and move their production to China, Vietnam, or other places with cheaper labor (and less regulations). Then they can sell these products to Americans without providing American jobs.

Oh look, no source.

As I said many times, a business will not hire somebody just to lose money. Simple math. If a business can make $5 per hour extra profit by hiring a worker but the minimum wage is $7 an hour should the business hire the worker? Only if the owner is on LSD or crack. The business will lose $2 per hour if they hire the worker. This means the business won't hire the worker. Business loses chance to make extra profit. Business is not at 100% capable production which means consumers also lose out (extra potential profit means somebody wants the extra good). Worker has no job and must live in a cardboard box and beg for money at a major intersection near you.

Why do you hate the free market? If your business cannot compete with the rising wages, your business doesn't deserve to stay afloat. Why should bad businesses get special breaks that allow them to stay?

Other scenario. No minimum wage. Business finds worker willing to take the job for $3 an hour. Business makes $2 per hour profit, worker makes $3 per hour instead of $0 per hour (the true minimum wage). Both worker and business have an agreement and both are happy. If worker finds better job, he will quit. If he can't than at least he is making $3 an hour. The worker is not enslaved. He can leave anytime. Worker is not rich but he shares a 2 bedroom apartment with 5 other workers. He has a simple diet of oatmeal, carrots, onions, eggs, rice, and beans which is boring but healthy so he is not starving and not obese. He goes to the thrift store and can find the clothes he needs. He is not rich but he has his necessary basics.

What situation seems better for the economy?

Neither.

[Stanisburg]

He's not making the economy fail. The economy is doing that on its own.

He supports the minimum wage and wants to increase it even more.

He supports bringing in poor and uneducated immigrants from unstable nations to fill jobs while paying Americans (using taxdollars) to NOT work (4.3 million on welfare) and ignoring the fact 12 million US citizens are unemployed (and many more underemployed).

has not ended embargo on Cuba.

Has not ended Foreign Corrupt Practices Act:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Co ... ctices_Act

Increased taxes

Increased welfare spending

Gave away billions to help nations that hate the USA (Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan)

Plenty more things but this is a start.

Yeah, none of that is the cause of the recession.

[Freiheit Reich]

Source not given because it is on page 16 of this thread. Here it is though:

12 million US people unemployed. Make sure these people get jobs before bringing in foreign labor.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

Welfare, 4.3 million. First, make sure these people are employed (and kick them off welfare if they are too good to take crappy menial jobs like being a janitor, cook, fruit picker):

http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/

So basically, none of what you said was true. You said Obama is ignoring unemployment and welfare. Where is your source?

Minimum wage will cause companies to pack up and move their production to China, Vietnam, or other places with cheaper labor (and less regulations). Then they can sell these products to Americans without providing American jobs.

Oh look, no source.

As I said many times, a business will not hire somebody just to lose money. Simple math. If a business can make $5 per hour extra profit by hiring a worker but the minimum wage is $7 an hour should the business hire the worker? Only if the owner is on LSD or crack. The business will lose $2 per hour if they hire the worker. This means the business won't hire the worker. Business loses chance to make extra profit. Business is not at 100% capable production which means consumers also lose out (extra potential profit means somebody wants the extra good). Worker has no job and must live in a cardboard box and beg for money at a major intersection near you.

Why do you hate the free market? If your business cannot compete with the rising wages, your business doesn't deserve to stay afloat. Why should bad businesses get special breaks that allow them to stay?

Other scenario. No minimum wage. Business finds worker willing to take the job for $3 an hour. Business makes $2 per hour profit, worker makes $3 per hour instead of $0 per hour (the true minimum wage). Both worker and business have an agreement and both are happy. If worker finds better job, he will quit. If he can't than at least he is making $3 an hour. The worker is not enslaved. He can leave anytime. Worker is not rich but he shares a 2 bedroom apartment with 5 other workers. He has a simple diet of oatmeal, carrots, onions, eggs, rice, and beans which is boring but healthy so he is not starving and not obese. He goes to the thrift store and can find the clothes he needs. He is not rich but he has his necessary basics.

What situation seems better for the economy?

Neither.

OK, 12 million unemployed. They need jobs. Why would we bring in poor immigrants to fill these jobs ahead of the 12 million unemployed? He is ignoring the unemployed by his actions (not words):

http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-a ... ted-states

He supports illegal immigrants as well:

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/15/us/im ... eportation

Yes, both scenarios suck but pick 1. Which one will cause greater harm for those affected directly?

Giving the people a choice to work for whatever wage they want to sounds like freedom. Letting businesses decide a fair wage in which to pay employees also seems to be part of the free market. Workers are commodities just like fruit, cars, or pencils. The supply and demand market for their skills should set the wages. Do we have a minimum price for apples or bananas? Why should we have a minimum price on what to pay for workers? No tax dollars would be paid to 'subsidize' the businesses.

I don't remember Adam Smith supporting a minimum wage. Perhaps I missed something.

[Mavorpen]

OK, 12 million unemployed. They need jobs. Why would we bring in poor immigrants to fill these jobs ahead of the 12 million unemployed? He is ignoring the unemployed by his actions (not words):

http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-a ... ted-states

Where in the world has Obama EVER hinted that he's bringing in SPECIFICALLY poor immigrants JUST to fill these jobs?

He supports illegal immigrants as well:

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/15/us/im ... eportation

Aaand that doesn't say anything close to, "Obama supports illegal immigrants."

Yes, both scenarios suck but pick 1. Which one will cause greater harm for those affected directly?

Ask this again, but in English.

Why should we have a minimum price on what to pay for workers?

Because it helps the economy.

I don't remember Adam Smith supporting a minimum wage. Perhaps I missed something.

Actually, he DID support minimum wage. He also supported protectionism of infant companies through subsidies and tariffs. At this point, I don't even expect you people to have ever read anything by Smith. It's probably for the best, you would undoubtedly consider him a dirty socialist.

It is but equity...that they who feed, clothe and lodge the whole body of the people, should have such a share of the produce of their own labor as to be themselves tolerably well fed, clothed and lodged.

[Stanisburg]

So basically, none of what you said was true. You said Obama is ignoring unemployment and welfare. Where is your source?

Oh look, no source.

Why do you hate the free market? If your business cannot compete with the rising wages, your business doesn't deserve to stay afloat. Why should bad businesses get special breaks that allow them to stay?

Neither.

OK, 12 million unemployed. They need jobs. Why would we bring in poor immigrants to fill these jobs ahead of the 12 million unemployed? He is ignoring the unemployed by his actions (not words):

http://www.examiner.com/article/obama-a ... ted-states

He supports illegal immigrants as well:

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/15/us/im ... eportation

Yes, both scenarios suck but pick 1. Which one will cause greater harm for those affected directly?

Giving the people a choice to work for whatever wage they want to sounds like freedom. Letting businesses decide a fair wage in which to pay employees also seems to be part of the free market. Workers are commodities just like fruit, cars, or pencils. The supply and demand market for their skills should set the wages. Do we have a minimum price for apples or bananas? Why should we have a minimum price on what to pay for workers? No tax dollars would be paid to 'subsidize' the businesses.

I don't remember Adam Smith supporting a minimum wage. Perhaps I missed something.

Adam Smith is not in charge. He's been dead for 200 years.

I didn't realize "be unemployed and collect welfare" was an Islamic religious practice. I also didn't realize it's possible to take someone's job while simultaneously being unemployed.

(Oh, wait. Neither of these things are true. I was just reading an article full of paranoid gibberish.)

The minimum wage allows the government to tell employers not to pay their workers less than the workers' cost of living. It would be nice if the "invisible hand of the market" prevented that on its own, but it doesn't. If businesses underpay their employees the employees tend to end up on welfare or in prison, which costs the government money instead of their employers.

Also businesses have to sell their products to someone in order to profit. If there's no demand they have no reason to hire anyone. Demand mostly comes from wage workers spending their wages on consumer goods. Lower wages = less demand = less profitable businesses = less economic growth = higher unemployment. That's how macroeconomics works in the real world, as opposed to how microeconomics works in theoretical situations where you assume demand is constant.

It gets worse if rich people are making more money and trying to keep their investments profitable by lending it out to poor people who are making less money. (That gets you inflation and lots of people defaulting on loans.) That's what has been happening to our economy for the last 40 years. Obama really has nothing to do with it, and neither do immigrants. (Except the ones who work below minimum wage because they're undocumented, which you could solve easily by granting them visas, but they're not a significant factor overall.) If anything the immigrants help by coming in, getting jobs, and buying things. It's not a zero sum game with a fixed number of jobs--jobs appear when there are more consumers with more money in their pockets. (Assuming there's plenty of investment capital available, which there is because rich people's incomes are rising faster than poor people's incomes.)

Personally, I think we should just sell Arizona to Mexico to pay down the national debt.

[The Steel Magnolia]

The ignore button is your friend, folks. Use it.

[Benomia]

Guys, this is a touchy subject for some people so lets just knock it off we could get in trouble ok!

Are you saying that we cannot discuss touchy subjects?

Are you implying that we cannot touch the subject?

Explain.

[Meinkraft]

^ awesome Quotes Material.

[Seriong]

Guys, this is a touchy subject for some people so lets just knock it off we could get in trouble ok!

Are you saying that we cannot discuss touchy subjects?

Are you implying that we cannot touch the subject?

Explain.

No, it's that the subject will touch you in was you don't want, so keep away from it. The trouble you could get in would be the inappropriate touch.

[Alien Space Bats]

No, it's that the subject will touch you in was you don't want, so keep away from it. The trouble you could get in would be the inappropriate touch.

"O.K., Kenny, look at this doll and show me where the bad subject touched you..."

[Munrova]

Like all genocide, this one leads to population growth. Yup.

[Dejanic]

I do believe White people are declining towards extinction. But unlike a lot of White nationalists, I think it is mainly self inflicted. It just so happens that most of the majority White countries are developed and as a result, have lower birth rates than replacement level. Combined with loose immigration policies which let non-Whites come in and reproduce at a faster rate, the only trend which can result that makes sense is a contraction of the White population as a global percentage until White skin disappears as a noticeable trait entirely.

It is definetly self inflicted, I have a black girlfriend by choice, I wasn't brainwashed by the Jews like these boneheads claim.

[Farnhamia]

I do believe White people are declining towards extinction. But unlike a lot of White nationalists, I think it is mainly self inflicted. It just so happens that most of the majority White countries are developed and as a result, have lower birth rates than replacement level. Combined with loose immigration policies which let non-Whites come in and reproduce at a faster rate, the only trend which can result that makes sense is a contraction of the White population as a global percentage until White skin disappears as a noticeable trait entirely.

It is definetly self inflicted, I have a black girlfriend by choice, I wasn't brainwashed by the Jews like these boneheads claim.

The thing is, you wouldn't be able to tell. They're that good.

[Dejanic]

It is definetly self inflicted, I have a black girlfriend by choice, I wasn't brainwashed by the Jews like these boneheads claim.

The thing is, you wouldn't be able to tell. They're that good.

True.

But still, I and many others destroy the assumptions these white nationalists make. They claim that most anti racists are middle class folk who live in white neighbourhoods and support mass non white immigration while living with other white people only. I'm an anti racist who happens to be white yet I come from a working class area which is majority non white, and the only white people here including myself are of immigrant backgrounds.

They also claim that anti racists are indoctrinated by the Jewish public school system, I was home schooled.

[Farnhamia]

The thing is, you wouldn't be able to tell. They're that good.

True.

But still, I and many others destroy the assumptions these white nationalists make. They claim that most anti racists are middle class folk who live in white neighbourhoods and support mass non white immigration while living with other white people only. I'm an anti racist who happens to be white yet I come from a working class area which is majority non white, and the only white people here including myself are of immigrant backgrounds.

They also claim that anti racists are indoctrinated by the Jewish public school system, I was home schooled.

And just the idea of "the Jewish public school system" is laughable.

[Alien Space Bats]

BTW, I ran across a portrait of one of my distant ancestors (in the 15th Century). He was an English nobleman with black hair and blue eyes, just like my father.

The thing is, I have "dirty blonde" hair with blue eyes. So much for the death of the "fair race".

[Quintium]

But still, I and many others destroy the assumptions these white nationalists make. They claim that most anti racists are middle class folk who live in white neighbourhoods and support mass non white immigration while living with other white people only.

For Western Europe, that is generally true. In an area that's 80% non-white, the local social democratic party held a meeting about immigration issues. Guess who showed up? Only white men. Support for open-door immigration policies is highest in areas that practically amount to gated communities with estates. I went to an all-white school in an all-white area where everyone was upper middle class or above, and in the end I quite nearly supported just opening all borders and starting a hippie peace fest for all the world on my expense. Then I entered a university with a fair amount of foreign students, in a city where more than half of the population isn't European, and now I support closing all borders and kicking them out the moment they do anything bad.

I'm an anti racist who happens to be white yet I come from a working class area which is majority non white, and the only white people here including myself are of immigrant backgrounds.

Well, you know what they say about the exception and the rule. I live in an area that's largely non-white, and it's a bloody nightmare every day. Whenever I get on the bus to university, I wonder what's going to happen. I've been offered a drug smuggling job, I've been threatened, I've been spat upon and I've been punched. Good thing they were unable to take my laptop or my phone because I had hidden them, too. There are preciously few non-whites that I can get along with, and those I do get along with are all East Asian. The rest is just awful, rude and violent. I support nationalist parties now.

They also claim that anti racists are indoctrinated by the Jewish public school system, I was home schooled.

I don't, and only the extreme fringe claim that. Get your facts straight.

[Quintium]

BTW, I ran across a portrait of one of my distant ancestors (in the 15th Century). He was an English nobleman with black hair and blue eyes, just like my father.

The thing is, I have "dirty blonde" hair with blue eyes. So much for the death of the "fair race".

In Western Europe, mass immigration started only a few decades ago.
Plenty of time left.

[Nationalist State of Knox]

True.

But still, I and many others destroy the assumptions these white nationalists make. They claim that most anti racists are middle class folk who live in white neighbourhoods and support mass non white immigration while living with other white people only. I'm an anti racist who happens to be white yet I come from a working class area which is majority non white, and the only white people here including myself are of immigrant backgrounds.

They also claim that anti racists are indoctrinated by the Jewish public school system, I was home schooled.

And just the idea of "the Jewish public school system" is laughable.

That's exactly how the Zionists have programmed you to think over years of indoctrination.

[Ovisterra]

But they're taking our jobs and our womenfolk or something. I dunno, I wasn't really listening last time a "White Genocide" ranter came along.

[Amaterasu]

Many whites are ashamed of their race and wish for their whiteness to disappear (that is why so many get suntans).

No, people get suntans because they find it to be attractive, not because they're ashamed of "their race."

[Curiosityness]

Being racist is being racist. Your an asshole either way

[Freiheit Reich]

Many whites are ashamed of their race and wish for their whiteness to disappear (that is why so many get suntans).

No, people get suntans because they find it to be attractive, not because they're ashamed of "their race."

Well than they are retarded because it makes them look 55 when they are really 40. Not to mention skin cancer risks. I hate getting burned, I can't understand why people like it.

East Asian women look younger because they are careful to avoid the sun. White women should try that approach.

[The Steel Magnolia]

No, people get suntans because they find it to be attractive, not because they're ashamed of "their race."

Well than they are retarded because it makes them look 55 when they are really 40. Not to mention skin cancer risks. I hate getting burned, I can't understand why people like it.

East Asian women look younger because they are careful to avoid the sun. White women should try that approach.

Oh my godddd.