|
Frank
|
Melanias purse wrote Today at 7:02pm: Frank wrote Today at 6:51pm: Melanias purse wrote Today at 6:21pm: Frank wrote Today at 3:47pm: Melanias purse wrote Today at 3:35pm: Frank wrote Today at 3:16pm: greggerypeccary wrote Today at 10:37am: Frank wrote Today at 9:36am: Melanias purse wrote Today at 9:22am: Frank wrote Today at 6:27am: Melanias purse wrote Yesterday at 9:28pm: And precisely because of immigration.
Not because of Somalia, Paki, Haitian, Afghan, Guetamalan immigration. The US grew to preeminence in the 20th century while it had virtually no immigration. If immigration was really key to any economic development then Korea, Japan China, Singapore would be inexplicable. The economic value of mass migration is grossly overstated to cover the serious social damage indiscriminate mass migration has done to every Western country that succumbed to it. Oh, I see. So California had no immigration, is it? Cunning. None of it happened, dear boy. Cortez, the Spanish Empire, the Mexican American war, the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, the Gold Rushes, the Transcontinental Railroad, the Oklahoma Land Rush, the California Land Grab, two world wars, and on and on. In 1984, Goldstein defines the future as a jackboot stomping on a human face. So, I put it to you, dear boy: who's wearing the boot? And who's lying splayed, legs in the air, howling for more? Focus. Stop pretending you do not speaka, just to tickles gweggy's fancies. "The US grew to preeminence in the 20th century while it had virtually no immigration." The "Great Wave" (1900–1919): More than 14.5 million immigrants entered the United States in the first two decades of the 1900s. Between 1901 and 1920, the population grew by 39% to over 105 million, driven largely by this wave of immigration.Post-1965 Resurgence: The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 replaced the national-origins quota system, leading to a new, major wave of immigration that increased to over 1 million people per year by the end of the century. Exactly. Almost nothing from the and of WWII until the 60s. Then Ted Kennedy and Prez Johnson lied and America, and the West, has undergone a profound demographic change, a replacement: Senator Ted Kennedy was a key champion of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 (Hart-Celler Act), which abolished national-origins quotas that favored Northern Europeans. As a floor manager in the Senate, Kennedy argued for fairness and predicted the law would not fundamentally change the nation's ethnic mix, despite its transformative impact. https://www.history.com/articles/immigration-act-1965-changes Oh? California was inhabited solely by Spaniards, Zapatistas and little tinted chappies until 1848, dear boy. Yes, 1848 - the same year Europeans revolted, chucked out their deplorables and sent them packing for the New World. And it emerged from sombreroed stupefaction and obscurity and became 'California, USA'. The rest of the Mexico and Central America remained stupefied backwaters under mustashoid swarthies. Different people, different spirits. Different culture, different genius, different everything. People are not the same, obviously. Different countries, you say? How insightful of you, old chap. So, scrap all that krap about zero immigration. How to outbreed the mustachioed swarthies, that's the ticket. Turns out you now favour mass migration after all, no? You are a grimacing retard. What else are you? A pedestrian? What, you disagwee? Shurely shome mishtake. You've changed your tune so many times you don't know whether you're coming or going. Do you know what you are, dear boy? You're a bit of a pedant - and that's okay. You probably can't help it. Some of our best friends have a fondness for pedantry, no? It could be worse, I could be like you - a pedestrian. When did you realise you were a pedestrian?
|
Forum
Pages: 
