If we're going to have to accommodate a significant percentage of the Mexicans population illegally moving to the United States, wouldn't it be more cost effective to simply annex Mexico.
Posted on 05/27/2015 4:03:56 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
A lame stunt from an activist posing as a questioner, in keeping with the ethos of a network whose star anchor encourages journalists to eschew neutrality and shill hard for the issues that matter to them, like effectively erasing America’s borders. Coulter is unflappable, though, to her credit. By all accounts she did a nifty job keeping Jorge Ramos on the defensive during their interview yesterday despite knowing that Fusion is one of the least hospitable places in American media for a new book about the country’s immigration crisis. How nifty? Well, unless I’ve missed it somewhere, there’s no clip of the entire segment posted at Fusion’s website. The only clips available are short “boo! hiss!” moments for the enjoyment of amnesty fans, like this one and Coulter provocatively arguing that Americans have more to fear from illegals than they do from ISIS. It fell to Breitbart to record the following exchange for posterity, in which Coulter politely wonders what percentage of Mexico’s population the United States is morally obliged to absorb.
“We have taken in one quarter of the entire Mexican population,” Coulter asked him. “At what point will we have taken in enough, in your view?”
That’s where Ramos made his stunning admission.
“I think that with the legal system—“ he started to answer.
“Half the Mexican population? The entire Mexican population?” Coulter kept pressing.
“No, I think with the legal system we wouldn’t need and we wouldn’t be having hundreds of people dying crossing the border,” Ramos replied.
“That isn’t an answer to the question,” Coulter corrected him. “One quarter of the Mexican population. How much more do we have to take?”
Ramos dodged again, essentially admitting he supports no limit whatsoever.
“It’s an economic situation,” he said. “As long as you have people here who need immigrants and workers and as long as you have workers needing a job, they’re going to be coming here. It’s an economic situation.”
“It’s an economic situation” is the open-borders response: Eliminate restrictions on immigration, at least for illegals who seem to pose no criminal threat, and the labor market will sort out the rest. That’s a high-minded libertarian-ish reply but it doesn’t explain why Ramos also opposes deporting illegal immigrant children despite the fact that they’re not old enough to work. What he’s really about is ethnic solidarity — another point Coulter had the nerve to call him on — but he can’t admit that (or the fact that he supports allowing residency for anyone who makes it across) or else — gasp — the person onstage who seems the most radical on this issue might not be Ann Coulter.
Two clips here, one via Fusion and the other via Breitbart.
Is one quarter accurate. Or is that a Net Present Value of Mexicans by today’s population figures?
If you look at the number of Mexicans in Mexico in 1980.
Steve King was apparently misogynist when he grabbed the tattooed Dreamer thug’s hand and told her to stop importing lawlessnessness.
It was ironic because her deadbeat misogynist Mexican father who beat her mother was the reason she claims she and her mother were in America.
Ramos made an emphatic point about percentages and numbers. He had the percentage right and eventually got the numbers right.. 40 million.
But he seemed to brush off the point.. percentages and numbers alone do not matter -- it is culture, heritage, and language. Prior to the past few decades we could count on immigrants with knowledge of at least two of the three.
That lack could be made up with the willingness to learn and adopt. But is it there? Or do way too many cling to the mores and languages of their corrupt homeland? Especially Mexicorruption.
At least the percentages and numbers are there in federal stats.
http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/infographics/foreign_born_text.pdf
America's Foreign Born in the Last 50 Years During the last 50 years, the foreign - born population of the United States has undergone dramatic changes in size, origins, and geographic distributions. This population represented about 1 in 20 residents in 1960, mostly from countries in Europe who settled in the Northeast and Midwest. Today’s foreign - born population makes up about one in eight U.S. residents, mostly immigrants from Latin America and Asia who have settled in the West and South. The Decennial Census and the annual American Community Survey allow us to trace the changes in the foreign - born population over time.
| Decade | Millions | Percentage | Europe | N America | Latin America | Asia | Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1850 | 2.2 | 9.7 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1860 | 4.1 | 13.2 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1870 | 5.6 | 14.4 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1880 | 6.7 | 13.3 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1890 | 9.2 | 14.8 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1900 | 10.3 | 13.6 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1910 | 13.5 | 14.7 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1920 | 13.9 | 13.2 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1930 | 14.2 | 11.6 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1940 | 11.6 | 8.8 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1950 | 10.3 | 6.9 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1960 | 9.7 | 5.4 % | 75 % | 10 % | 9 % | 5 % | 1 % |
| 1970 | 9.6 | 4.7 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1980 | 14.1 | 6.2 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 1990 | 19.8 | 7.9 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 2000 | 31.1 | 11.1 % | - | - | - | - | - |
| 2010 | 40.0 | 12.9 % | 12 % | 2 % | 53 % | 28 % | 5 % |
Huh, Ramos says nothing on Mexico’s strict immigration laws. If Coulter decided to live in Mexico without a passport she’d be kicked out asap.
Good post. Thanks.
America was not founded by wetbacks. The only thing lower
than a wetback is the treasonous criminals that hire them.
That’s if Ann doesn’t get raped or beheaded first.
But yeah, I don’t know why the amnesty shills never talk about Mexico’s immigration policy, which is second only to Japan in strictness.
I'm gratified to see that fewer and fewer are willing to play these stupid gotcha games with the progressive reprobates.
She should have asked him, “Since it seems the majority of Mexican citizens want to live under the American system of government would you be okay with the U.S. conquering Mexico, eliminating the Mexican government, flag, and nationality? Then everyone south of the current border could stay south of the border and still be an American and start paying taxes to the IRS to fund the Social Security for millions of white Americans. You’re good with that, right?”
I thought Ann was pro-amnesty/immigration. Or just pro-Romney. Same thing.
Ann should have said, the hug, if any , comes after legal entry and a long hot shower, and not before!
Hug THIS Bish!
An addendum to my post above:
Ann then should have added:
“And we are going to send you Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, and all the other open borders politicians to run the place for you. Good luck with the Hondurans and Guatemalans!”
“And oh, by the way, we are also sending down all of our Hollywood and inner-city druggies so instead of shipping the drugs north, they can be right by the supply. It’s all about what best for the marketplace as you say.”
Mexico needs to live with the poverty it creates from it’s corrupt economic/political system and be prevented from using the US as a poverty safety valve.
Imagine a few million young Mexican males agitating for economic change bottled up in their own country.
Ramos was playing a game with the percentages. He said that the percentage 90 years ago is about the same at it is today (it is) and implied that it is some sort of norm. However, as your table shows, this was a high water mark, which caused a substantial reduction of legal immigration with the 1925 Immigration Act. During the period 1920 to 1965, immigration averaged 195,000 a year. It is now 1.1 million a year.
Ann should have called him on it. In 1970 one in 21 was foreign born; today it is one in 8, the highest in 90 years; and within a decade it will be one in 7, the highest in our history. We have just had the two highest decades of immigration in American history. Over 30 million legal permanent immigrants have entered this country since 1990.
We need to reduce legal immigration no matter where the people come from.
Mexico’s unemployment rate is less than ours.
How can they not be 125% over poverty required by law before getting a green card or citizenship? Follow the laws.
Took my wife ( from Mexico) 21 years to get citizenship legally.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.