Colonel Macgregor: "Cut defense spending, because you've got to dismantle the empire"

submitted by MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee from (youtu.be)

sorted by:
new (suggested)
topinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]CrazyjanecreepyjeffReality Monger 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (28 children)

He’s good on foreign policy and the domestic economy. His take on immigration is ignorant. We obviously don’t have open borders which he claims. He implies the immigrants here now are less hard working than the ones of his generation which not true. He says if they’re here illegally they should be asked to leave immediately but then who would pick our crops and slaughter our meat? He says people don’t care about immigration but that’s just because an immigrant hasn’t camped out on their lawn, which is a fictitious scenario I’ve never heard of happening. He says they need to learn English if they are here but he doesn’t offer up any integration opportunities. He doesn’t talk about the legally born children but illegal parents. Are we going to create orphans out of them? He says we don’t have to take on other’s political problems but doesn’t make the connection that we created their political problems that led to their immigration. Honestly he just seems racist against hispanic immigrants because he seems to have no problem with the white immigrants He grew up with. He also doesn’t discuss the detention centers and what to do with those. He says we shouldn’t put so much emphasis on college but doesn’t reconcile his view that we should allow only college educated immigrants into the country.

Overall i think people like him want similar things for our country as people like me but scapegoating hispanic immigrants is misguided and won’t achieve that. In fact deporting all of them immediately would mean most of the production of commodities and housing that happens in America would come to a screeching halt.

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (27 children)

who would pick our crops and slaughter our meat?

Yeah, who'll pick the cotton?

It's not as if punishing the corporations could possibly stop them from exploiting a person's immigration status to force him to work for substandard wages under the threat of deportation... and anyway, we deserve to have our crops picked and meat slaughtered by these lesser beings. We couldn't possibly dirty our hands doing it ourselves.

There's simply no possible wage you could offer an American to do that kind of work.

And even if there were the poor corporations shouldn't have to pay the kind of wages a legal, unionized, American workforce would demand. Unthinkable.

And the price of avocados would skyrocket if they did. Won't someone think about the Whole Foods shoppers?!

Don't listen to that racist colonel. Let's keep importing more slav - er, I mean, generously allowing undocumented immigrants to take their rightful place in the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

*note: "rightful place" subject to terms and conditions.

[–]CrazyjanecreepyjeffReality Monger 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (26 children)

So you think if we deported immigrants corporations would magically start paying a higher wage?

What would happen immediately would be a food shortage and huge inflation.

Then corporations would start importing because labor is cheaper elsewhere. Commodity production in America would cease to exist. Inflation would continue because these products will still be expensive.

Many of these immigrants are the equivalent of slaves which is another problem. These traffickers and their corporate clients will fight tooth and nail to keep these people from being deported since in many cases they are literally indentured and captive.

His solution to deport illegal immigrants immediately would cause an insane cascade of problems for the American people he purports to want to help.

It won’t just be avocados. Eggs, chicken, flour. Literally anything you ate today would be nonexistent for a period of time and then crazy expensive.

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (25 children)

Actually, I didn't say anything about deportation. I said we should fine the corporations breaking employment laws. Also, we don't have to allow corporations to import goods from other countries... Trump of all people demonstrated that pretty clearly.

But more to the point, I'm puzzled by what you seem to think would happen to all the farms and ranches we have. They're going to be used by someone, right? Corporations aren't just going to hang on to them and let everything rot in the fields, are they? Like, what, purely out of spite, they'd turn into import-only companies, and no one would do anything useful with all that land? The facilities that already exist will just stand empty and decay? Capitalism has problems, but this weird scenario isn't one of them.

One more issue: you may be underestimating just how important America is in the global supply chain. Very few other countries have anywhere near our capacity, and no one at present could replace us, let alone replace us and feed us. Like, it isn't close. China is #2 and their production seems to be ~2/3 of ours. (Not going to try to read up on the details since it's so wildly one-sided.)

Also, I just read this morning a link you posted about our wild overcapacity, to the point that we subsidize food production that we don't need. I'm sure there would be some readjustment pains, but just how disastrous would it be?

edit: sorry for the heavy sarcasm in that first reply :) I'll try to be less disagreeable.

[–]penelopepnortneyBecome ungovernable 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I said we should fine the corporations breaking employment laws.

This has alwasy been the right approach IMO. You can't expect immigrants not to try and cross the border if they have a chance to get jobs to support their families at home, which is how many immigrants use much of their earnings. Employers will continue to fuel the immigration crisis in search of cheap labor. But Americans also need to understand that the cost of many goods and services are inextricably tied to illegal immigration, and if they want to stem the flow they need to be prepared to pay higher prices. I have no sympathy for huge corporations, they've sucked enough profit out of the system; it's the small business owners and franchisees (restaurants, motel/hotel) that will find it difficult to keep operating.

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We also have to consider the downstream costs like housing, infrastructure strain, educational standards (teachers get swamped, school resources swing to ESL instead of AP), and public services - just the other day NYC reported that there are now more migrants than homeless NYers in city shelters. Our roads and electrical grid have been in a parlous state for decades; we can't sustain the sheer volume forever, even if there were no other downsides.

[–]NetweaselContinuing the struggle 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

This has always been the right approach IMO. You can't expect immigrants not to try and cross the border if they have a chance to get jobs to support their families at home, which is how many immigrants use much of their earnings.

There are two components to this, that probably need to be looked at separately.

People coming to the US, and people already in the US. Stopping (by some method) employment of undocumented immigrants might reduce, or even stop, the inflow, but might not do much about the ones already here.

Those really are (IMO) two different issues.

[–]penelopepnortneyBecome ungovernable 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed.

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Unfortunately, Democrats made it impossible to consider them separately when they fooled Reagan with that amnesty. The GOP will never agree to address one without the other, not after losing California and its electoral votes forever.

[–]NetweaselContinuing the struggle 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Unfortunately, Democrats made it impossible to consider them separately

Consider? Possibly.
Discuss? Why not? If you split the two components, it may be possible to get to some sort of solution.

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Bush43 tried. He was flattened - as a just-reelected president.

Jeb brought it up. $100m went up in smoke.

If social security reform is the third rail of American politics, amnesty is the third rail cubed of internal GOP politics. Touch it and you die. No ifs, ands, or buts.

[–]NetweaselContinuing the struggle 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Oh, I see....

Dealing with the components out of order.

First, repair the dam, then repair the flood damage.
The other way around never works as well.

[–]NetweaselContinuing the struggle 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I said we should fine the corporations....

One point that often gets missed:

We should fine the corporations at a level much greater than that which they gained by their transgressions, so as to make said transgressions no longer worth doing in the future.

If you can save a million dollars by doing a thing, but run a one-in-five chance of losing twenty million if you do it (purely made up numbers there) fewer people would take that chance.

If you can save a million dollars by doing a thing, but run a one-in-five chance of losing twenty thousand.....

[–]CrazyjanecreepyjeffReality Monger 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Using corporate fines as a solution to get illegal immigrants to leave our country sounds ineffective and laughable to me. I can't see a world where even large corporate fines would lead to immigrants leaving.

[–]NetweaselContinuing the struggle 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

My point was about corporate fines in general.

If you're gonna do em, do em right. If you don't do em right there's no way they would be effective at leading to anything.

[–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Definitely. The fines the EU imposes on Alphabet, Facebook, and other multinationals may look astronomical, but if they're insufficient to deter the behavior being penalized there's no point beyond feeding the bureaucratic state. It's the worst of all worlds.

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[deleted]

    [–]penelopepnortneyBecome ungovernable 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    corporate chemotherapy

    Corporate colonoscopy would be apt.

    [–]NetweaselContinuing the struggle 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    the Corporate Death Penalty.

    A concept that never gets enough airtime.

    [–]CrazyjanecreepyjeffReality Monger 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

    But more to the point, I'm puzzled by what you seem to think would happen to all the farms and ranches we have. They're going to be used by someone, right? Corporations aren't just going to hang on to them and let everything rot in the fields, are they? Like, what, purely out of spite, they'd turn into import-only companies, and no one would do anything useful with all that land? The facilities that already exist will just stand empty and decay? Capitalism has problems, but this weird scenario isn't one of them.

    Farmers would default on their payments and banks would take the land as leverage. The land would be unused while the owners decide what to do with it. The American people in the meantime would be getting killed by inflation so yea maybe eventually they could exploit that desperation and get people in the fields. It would be a fascinating thing to watch play out. Lower middle class Americans would see a markedly lower quality of life ironically in this scenario.

    One more issue: you may be underestimating just how important America is in the global supply chain. Very few other countries have anywhere near our capacity, and no one at present could replace us, let alone replace us and feed us. Like, it isn't close. China is #2 and their production seems to be ~2/3 of ours. (Not going to try to read up on the details since it's so wildly one-sided.)

    Exactly, people would starve in the short-term due to food shortages. It would be horrific.

    Also, I just read this morning a link you posted about our wild overcapacity

    I outlined the problem of overproduction. Not sure what overcapacity means in this context.

    I'm sure there would be some readjustment pains, but just how disastrous would it be?

    Are you talking about readjustment pains regarding deporting illegal immigrants? Not quite sure I understand how you're relating that to my comment about overproduction.

    [–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

    I guess I just don't see this as a remotely likely scenario, when looking at farmland ownership. Even if it were, farm subsidies have been commonplace, and I'd say some of the least controversial spending since FDR.

    "Readjustment" referred to wages, prices, and production, in the hypothetical.

    [–]CrazyjanecreepyjeffReality Monger 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

    Readjustment pain if all illegal immigrants get deported literally means food shortages and starvation, production stops. Wrapping it in a watered down phrase doesn’t change that. These extra hypothetical subsidies for higher wages and keeping farmers from defaulting would be akin to the US gov essentially nationalizing the entire industry. It’s like bank bailout size money. It’s certainly an interesting scenario to imagine but I just don’t see it happening. Much more likely that a transfer of ownership would take place and they’d squeeze the American public until they became desperate enough to take these low wage grueling jobs. Hell there’s not even any will to raise the min wage from 7 something dollars.

    Food shortages also tend to lead to revolutions and civil unrest so this whole mass deportation idea is likely to never be considered by anyone in power. And logistically it’s a bigger nightmare than Trumps H1b visa fiasco.

    [–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    they’d squeeze the American public until they became desperate enough to take these low wage grueling jobs

    This is the real disconnect we're having, because I find this sentence incoherent. If the supply of labor is constricted wages rise. This isn't a hypothetical; the wage increase we both want happened under Trump, at the fastest rate in decades, precisely because he restricted immigration. Even Politico admitted it.

    if all illegal immigrants get deported

    Sheesh, I've said this a couple of times now, I don't think this is necessary, feasible, or even desirable. I'm simply not going to defend this straw man; I don't see it happening any more than you do! I agree with you, there is no politician anywhere on the horizon who would implement Operation Wetback Part 2, and I never said I'm looking for one.

    This is why we don't have rational conversations about immigration in this country. Any hint of restrictions is met with "racist," "everyone will starve to death," and "you can't deport them all."

    [–]CrazyjanecreepyjeffReality Monger 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    As it relates to agriculture I think the inflation of food will impact people more than any wage increase employers might be willing to entertain. But this all hinges on MacGregors ridiculous proposal to deport every illegal immigrant immediately, which you don’t agree with. so the conversation is essentially moot.

    [–]CrazyjanecreepyjeffReality Monger 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

    Colonel MacGregor said we should deport every illegal immigrant immediately in the video you posted. I came in with a critique of that specific point along with others. Not only did you not denounce that specific part of his proposal you mocked my critique and generally defended his take. Your very clear language here is useful now to understand your position and would have been even more useful earlier on.

    [–]MeganDelacroix🤡🌎 detainee[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    Y'know what, that's totally fair, and it's on me that I didn't notice earlier how we were talking past each other. I thought Macgregor was using hyperbole, but of course you're right that actually deporting all illegals immediately is untenable.