« prev   random   next »

8
1

French City with 40% Muslim Population is the Most Dangerous City in Europe

By zzyzzx following x   2017 Sep 25, 11:44am 3,188 views   46 comments   watch   sfw   quote     share    


http://www.frontpagemag.com//point/214086/french-city-40-muslim-population-most-dangerous-daniel-greenfield
Muslims have now set up unofficial checkpoints in various parts of Marseille.

Muslims had attacked the port city in the 9th century capturing it and enslaving its native inhabitants. That which Muslims once took, their theologians insist is theirs in perpetuity. The Muslim return to Marseille is seen as a reconquista, a return to the land that was once theirs.

Nearly half of all immigrants to France are Muslim. In Marseille 41.8 percent of those under 18 were of foreign descent.

La Marseillaise, France’s National Anthem, got its name when volunteer revolutionaries from Marseille sang the song. Now Marseille is at the center of a new revolution. The Islamic Revolution. Muslim volunteers from France have been identified training with the Taliban and after Mohammed Merah’s massacre at a Jewish school, a group of Jews in Marseille were attacked by Muslim men shouting, “Vive Mohamed Merah, F— the Jews, Palestine will win.”

Article is from 2014, I am sure it's worse now!!!

#rapefugees

« First    « Previous    Comments 7 - 46 of 46    Last »

7   P N Dr Lo R   ignore (0)   2018 Jan 3, 11:24am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

anon_2925a says
(with their vast range of issues)
The only significant "issue" is 20% Muslim.
9   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Oct 11, 8:52am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

zzyzzx says
French City with 40% Muslim Population is the Most Dangerous City in Europe


I was told Muslims are peaceful.
10   HeadSet   ignore (1)   2018 Oct 11, 11:17am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
zzyzzx says
French City with 40% Muslim Population is the Most Dangerous City in Europe


I was told Muslims are peaceful.


Yes, the issue must caused by the 60% non-muslims.
11   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Oct 11, 11:54am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Islamic Supremacy in action: Mob sets out to intimidate mosque-protesters in Worcester, UK over a huge mosque to be built in the middle of the old city.

Vid at the link!

British citizens march against construction of a $4 million mosque in the heart of Worcester city.

Army of Invaders charge the protestors & attack the castrated police...

Members of the Church of England clergy backed the bid of the new mosque despite Christian outrage. pic.twitter.com/aVh9YO53Wt— Amy Mek (@AmyMek) October 11, 2018

12   NuttBoxer   ignore (2)   2018 Oct 11, 12:04pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

France should take a chapter from their former colonial nation, Senegal. Majority Muslim population, none of the nonsense.
13   curious2   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 12:25pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

NuttBoxer says
France should take a chapter from their former colonial nation, Senegal. Majority Muslim population, none of the nonsense.


Nominated.

Like most countries with Muslim majorities, most Muslims in Senegal demand Sharia. So, if you were to say something like, "Christianity is just as good as Islam," you would become a criminal just for saying that. The Sharia punishment is the death penalty, although Senegal suspended capital punishment some years ago (probably as part of a French aid package). As long as the French continue enabling the current government with "aid", they would send you to prison instead of killing you.

Also, if France became a copy of Senegal (and France is moving in that direction), the French might look forward to other typical Muslim numbers. Life expectancy is around 60. Literacy is below 60%. Poverty is also widespread, leaving Senegal dependent on French "aid".

Islam causes Islamic dysfunction. There is nothing else like it. Once you have an Islamic majority, you can no longer have a real democracy in the sense that western secular liberals understand that term. Once they prohibit blasphemy, they cannot handle free speech, nor even a cartoon. If the government does not execute you for blasphemy, vigilante Sharia patrols form to do the job, murdering blasphemers in broad daylight with no consequences. Senegal is already beginning to see that dynamic forming, including recent convictions of Senegalese jihadists reaching out to Boko Haram.

You can dislike me for proving you wrong again, but I encourage you to visit Senegal and tell the locals that Christianity is just as good (or bad) as Islam. Please bring your pit bull as a "support animal", especially if you plan on showing them a cartoon. As an added bonus, you won't need to buy a return ticket.

14   curious2   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 12:44pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

@zzyzzx you might want to correct the OP headline to show that Marseille is 20% Muslim, not 40%.

curious2 says
The article says 40% "of those under 18 were of foreign descent." Marseille is ~20% Muslim.


20% Muslim is actually critical mass for Islam. Once the Muslim population of a jurisdiction exceeds 20%, the situation deteriorates and there is no way of stopping it without force.
15   NuttBoxer   ignore (2)   2018 Oct 11, 12:46pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Senegal has a very diverse history, and that fuels its balanced view on Islam. It's the only Muslim country where inter-marriage between Christians and Muslims is common, and drinking alcohol in public is allowed. How do you reconcile that with the Sharia bullshit from PEW?

Senegal is also the most stable, and economically successful country in Africa. And yes, I am familiar with South Africa, but a country that threatens to take away people's land based on their skin color is not stable.

You're reply is typical of people caught up in hysteria who go to the extreme, rather than examine the facts. If this was the 50's you'd fit right in with the red wave of fear.
16   Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Oct 11, 12:48pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Rin says
We need RinWah Law, not Sharia Law!

A world under RinWah Law is a world at peace.


Too many wealthier Frenchmen following the RinWah Law diverting young French girls from reproducing in the past 3-4 decades is the reason why the place is being taken over by muslims.

BTW, it's the same reason why Roe v. Wade has over the long run produced today's American conservative demographic despite all the liberal brainwashing in schools: the liberals aborted their younger generation of voters.

In order to maintain a secular classical liberal (libertarian / conservatrive) society, the resident population has to be at least self-sustaining. That means, not every couple having 1 or 2 kids either, as that would result in spoiling of kids and turning them into either communists or religious fanatics (communists are one type of religious fanatics), but the wealthier and better off men need to take up the burden to raise multiple children in the next generation, so that the young siblings will learn from a young age what competition, collaboration/accommodation and personal responsibility mean.
17   curious2   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 12:59pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

NuttBoxer says
The Muslims in Senegal are Sunni, a minority in most Muslim countries.


Your ignorance continues to astound. 80% of Muslims are Sunni. Most Muslims are Sunni in all Muslim countries other than Iran and Iraq.

NuttBoxer says
that fuels it's balanced view


Please learn the difference between its and it's, after you learn the distribution of Sunni Islam.

NuttBoxer says
How do you reconcile that with the Sharia [data] from PEW?


If you want to have any credibility, you might also learn to stop using profanity, but I can see you are angry. Perhaps IRL, when you are angry being proven wrong, you use profanity and your pit bull to 'persuade' people not to argue further. It doesn't work here. Try learning. Make fewer mistakes, and you will not suffer so much cognitive dissonance. If you insist on a flat earth, and people prove you wrong, you have a choice: (a) learn that the earth is round and the pain of cognitive dissonance goes away, or (b) curse and shout and get a pit bull so that people don't dare prove you wrong. The latter is basically the Islamic way, prohibiting blasphemy as a capital offense. I can see why you prefer it, since you pride yourself on being a "nuttboxer", but it is a mistake. Sooner or later you get to a forum where your obviously wrong opinions and misstatements of fact can be disproved, and thus you end up boxing yourself.

NuttBoxer says
You're reply....


Please learn the difference between your and you're, after you learn the difference between its and it's.

NuttBoxer says
rather than examine the facts.


You are obviously the one who has failed to examine facts, or even grammar. You sound increasingly angry, and your proliferating errors are only further embarrassing you. If only your pit bull could lunge through a computer screen, you might have your usual chance of "winning" by silencing the disproof of your obviously wrong opinions and misstatements of fact. Of course, if you were in Senegal, you could be silenced from claiming that Christianity is just as good as Islam. Would that make you believe in the superiority of Islam?

NuttBoxer says
If this was the 50's you'd fit right in the red wave of fear.


Again you resort to the fallacy of associating unrelated things. Without digressing into the issues behind the cold war, I will at least encourage you to read John Walker. And here is a cartoon:

18   curious2   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 1:02pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Reality says
is the reason


No, the decisions to import Muslims and to tolerate Islam are the reasons. France survived for centuries with a smaller French population than it has now, and without getting taken over by Muslims. France survived plague without getting taken over by Muslims. A slowly falling population does not in itself pose any threat. Japan and China are not being taken over by Muslims.
19   Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Oct 11, 1:14pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

curious2 says
Reality says
is the reason


No, the decisions to import Muslims and to tolerate Islam are the reasons. France survived for centuries with a smaller French population than it has now, and without getting taken over by Muslims. France survived plague without getting taken over by Muslims. A slowly falling population does not in itself pose any threat. Japan and China are not being taken over by Muslims.


The decision to import Muslims was the direct result of declining/insufficient French population. Japan has been mired in depression for nearly 3 decades now due to the demographic decline. China is about to enter the same stage (if not already), once again due to demographic implosion.
20   curious2   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 1:22pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Reality says

The decision to import Muslims was the direct result of declining/insufficient French population.


No, the decision was de Gaulle's way of ending the war in Algeria. He turned over Algeria to terrorists and imported a huge number of Muslims, hoping to ingratiate France with Muslim countries that sell petroleum. It backfired of course.

Recent decisions to import even more Muslims result from Petrodollar corruption of NATO governments and media, e.g. via the Dassault Group and Islamic Cultural Center and its associated committees and councils.

The French could have imported Poles, Indian Hindus, or Latin American Christians, but France chose Muslims.

It is also false to call a smaller population "insufficient" when it proved plenty in the past. Japan and China are not exactly in "depression." Net increase in GDP is not a real measure of wealth. It matters only to the extent that pension obligations might depend on larger generations paying into a Ponzi scheme: the solution is to control spending and to avoid Ponzi schemes. Landlords tend to want a rising population to increase housing demand, but it isn't necessary for the country.

Muslim countries prove that population increase can correlate with poverty, and the transition from Christianity to Islam can result in actual depression and civil war (e.g. Lebanon).
21   HeadSet   ignore (1)   2018 Oct 11, 2:20pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

It matters only to the extent that pension obligations might depend on larger generations paying into a Ponzi scheme: the solution is to control spending and to avoid Ponzi schemes.

Absolutely correct. The USA was very prosperous with 200 million and would still be prosperous if we gradually went back to that number. The lower population would also allow renewables to be sustainable while keeping a First World society. The idea that a population must continuously grow is absurd on its face - when do we stop, 500 million? One billion?
22   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (2)   2018 Oct 11, 3:03pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

HeadSet says
The idea that a population must continuously grow is absurd on its face

Is it?
How many examples of economies do we have that have stagnated without becoming conformist, sclerotic and eventually dying? How many organisms in nature stop growing and continue to do well for long?
Have you read the book "Scale"?
23   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Oct 11, 4:23pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

That's why Mars and the Moon, bitchez.

I'm not being facetious.
24   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Oct 11, 4:32pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The population of Europe is massive compared to a century ago. France has about double the people it had in 1900.

A huge chunk of growth happened in the European Babyboom, 1950-1970, that got going a few years after ours.

The problem isn't that French don't reproduce. It's that landlords and businesses want high rents and cheap labor as if a babyboom is always in play. They sold the entire culture of Europe out to get it. They don't care if French workers pay the high rents, or the government pays it on behalf of refugees, so long as somebody pay and the demand stays high.

Another issue is that left parties are no longer interested in actual workers. They don't subsidize or otherwise encourage the construction of new affordable housing, indeed they try to stop it. The left party of Limo Socialists has a Turd World, Postmodernist attitude where only POCs count, but every European Worker is a wealthy greedy bastard. This also effects household formation and child bearing.

The 68'ers thought they could virtue signal and get the Turd Worlders to pay for their retirement. Now they have turned on Western Culture through the worst decadence ever seen in history (perhaps a necessary pendulum swing from the Glorious 50s-70s) and seem to want to destroy the whole fucking thing - so long as it happens after they die.
25   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (2)   2018 Oct 11, 4:36pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
That's why Mars and the Moon, bitchez.

Exactly, that's we continue to grow.
We won't stop at 500 millions.
26   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (2)   2018 Oct 11, 4:47pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
They don't care if French workers pay the high rents, or the government pays it on behalf of refugees

The landlords are part of an economy that seeks to continue to grow, while manufacturing is leaving. And once you have 65 millions for an area the size of CA, it starts to feel pretty tight.

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
Another issue is that left parties are no longer interested in actual workers

Though France actually has real socialists - even communists. They are animated by their good heart and so not against immigration. They are against development too, so building is not liked.


TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
seem to want to destroy the whole fucking thing - so long as it happens after they die.


I'm not sure they are clear on the fact that civilization is not indestructible, and they may be the first surprised when the stuff they take for granted suddenly goes away.
27   HeadSet   ignore (1)   2018 Oct 11, 5:27pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says
That's why Mars and the Moon, bitchez.

Exactly, that's we continue to grow.
We won't stop at 500 millions.


I was clearly talking about limiting population within the geographical boundaries of the USA, not the universe. If humankind can find (or terraform) inhabitable spots in outer space, I say go for it.
28   HeadSet   ignore (1)   2018 Oct 11, 5:36pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
HeadSet says
The idea that a population must continuously grow is absurd on its face

Is it?
How many examples of economies do we have that have stagnated without becoming conformist, sclerotic and eventually dying? How many organisms in nature stop growing and continue to do well for long?
Have you read the book "Scale"?


Economies dying when they stop growing? I'll mention the Black Plague that devastated Europe's population in the 1300s and how the Renaissance happened immediately after.

Organisms that stop growing? I'll mention the Petri dish were the culture rapidly grows and then completely dies off when all food is consumed.

We are talking about humans living in a First World lifestyle. Not enough resources for that in the US if the population grows to a billion.
29   Patrick   ignore (1)   2018 Oct 11, 5:39pm   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Reality says
The decision to import Muslims was the direct result of declining/insufficient French population. Japan has been mired in depression for nearly 3 decades now due to the demographic decline.


Japan remains quite rich, safe, and stable. The reason is mainly that almost everyone there is Japanese. They care about each other and work hard. The young are supporting their own grandmas, and that's much more tolerable than supporting someone else grandmas.

The reason for the import of both illegals here and Muslims in Europe is primarily pressure from business owners, who fear paying out higher wages as the population of workers declines. Mass import of poor people is a way to drive down wages for the lower half of the population.

There are also political reasons: Angela Merkel feared that Germany, unlike Japan, would not be able to support a large population of native German retirees with the small population of younger Germans. When people are promised certain pension levels and the promise is broken, people get angry and vote for the opposition.

Or if you're really paranoid (an maybe I am) you might see the mass import of distinctly foreign people as a way to break the solidarity of the population and thus make them easier to rule. Divide and conquer.
30   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (2)   2018 Oct 11, 5:49pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

HeadSet says

I was clearly talking about limiting population within the geographical boundaries of the USA, not the universe. If humankind can find (or terraform) inhabitable spots in outer space, I say go for it.


In the meantime, we'll grow on earth.

The big unknown here is AI: if AI takes off and we can decouple the economy from human population, then maybe... I'm not sure economy is sufficient.

Patrick says
Japan remains quite rich, safe, and stable. The reason is mainly that almost everyone there is Japanese.

Humm... also because they export a lot of stuff and also because they keep borrowing stupendous amounts of money, just to stay in the same place.
I doubt we can say Japan is doing well as a society. Their youths don't look very inspired.
31   HeadSet   ignore (1)   2018 Oct 11, 5:50pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Or if you're really paranoid (an maybe I am) you might see the mass import of distinctly foreign people as a way to break the solidarity of the population and thus make them easier to rule. Divide and conquer.

You may be over-thinking this. The reasons the disparate group of people at the top come together to support unfettered immigration is really two bullet points:
1. Cheap labor (Democrat and Republican)
2. Perceived votes (Democrat)

The "rabble" have various reasons to go along with unfettered immigration, such as virtue signaling (I care about the poor migrant) and outright racism (the white man has had it too good for too long, so lets dilute with non-Europeans). A few even see the immigrants as a way to secure their SS, and care not about the long term effects on the nation as a whole.
32   HeadSet   ignore (1)   2018 Oct 11, 5:56pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The big unknown here is AI: if AI takes off and we can decouple the economy from human population, then maybe... I'm not sure economy is sufficient.

Even without AI, we have continuing increases in efficiency. That is, less workers needed to produce a given output. The limiting factor is still land, water, related resources, and energy. You are an enigma. From your posts it seems you are a AGW fan. Yet how can you be pro population growth knowing that more first world people means more resource consumption along with more carbon footprints?
33   curious2   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 11, 7:01pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
How many examples of economies do we have that have stagnated without becoming conformist, sclerotic and eventually dying? How many organisms in nature stop growing and continue to do well for long?


Prior to birth control, populations grew until reduced by natural disaster (e.g. plague), famine, or war. Since birth control, population growth has become optional.

Trees don't grow to the sky; if they grew too tall, they would fall over and die. Trees in a forest don't multiply infinitely: they reach a balance with environmental constraints, e.g. the tree line on mountains. Evolution teaches them their limits.

Patrick says
Or if you're really paranoid (an maybe I am) you might see the mass import of distinctly foreign people as a way to break the solidarity of the population and thus make them easier to rule. Divide and conquer.


Hillary Clinton acknowledged that lethal terrorism is "clearly rooted in Islamic thinking," but she campaigned on importing more Muslims, and used Islamic terrorism as an argument to increase mass surveillance on everyone in order to detect who is about to commit Islamic terrorism. I watched her say it on CNN, and linked the transcript in the Islam thread. Recent changes to PatNet have broken the links and I can't edit old comments to fix them, and the Islam thread is too long to search efficiently, but old links to the original comment are still on PatNet.

Paranoia can result from loss of memory, which the Internet experiences as broken links. When people lose their memories, they can't distinguish between threats that they remember actually versus threats that are purely imaginary. If you follow that link and figure out how to fix it, you will see that she said what she said. Some clinically paranoid people imagine the government has put microchips in their heads; if Hillary had imported enough Muslims, there is no telling how much "surveillance" everyone would end up needing.
34   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Oct 11, 7:34pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I should clarify: Growth doesn't have to be in terms of population. It can be economic or even cultural/artistic (though they are usually linked).

The US population could be stable or even slightly negative, so long as we are developing Luna Legumes, Martian Mushrooms, and improving the Isp of our nuclear engines, we're in great shape. The Earth's resources are fractional to that of the Solar System. Despite environmentalist propaganda, H20 isn't rare, it's common as dirt and the elements that make it are abundant. Hell the Lunar Surface is predominantly Oxygen by Mass.

I'm just about to order "Merchants of Despair" by Robert Zubrin, which is supposed to be a double barrel attack against anti-humanists.
35   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (2)   2018 Oct 11, 9:46pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Well we don't have the technology to survive space radiations or even low gravity. We're as good as stuck here.
As long as this is the case, we're facing the double threat of no growth on one side, and too much growth on the other. We're gonna hit one of these 2 walls this century, unless Elon Musk smokes enough pot to get us out or AI does it without killing us.
I don't know why global warming is seen as a bigger threat.
Maybe I'm wrong.
36   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Oct 11, 11:07pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
Well we don't have the technology to survive space radiations or even low gravity. We're as good as stuck here.


The moon is easier than the ISS. There's some gravity, not just microgravity. We can also build a centrifuge, and pile regolith on top of housing. Water is also an amazing radiation shield as well as an insulator. We certainly know how to melt Ice. And there are massive lava tubes and perma-dark craters that provide more than enough protection.

On microgravity Space Stations, humans have survived space for well over a year. Scott Kelly was almost at consecutive 400 days, Polyakov spent something like 430+ consecutive days (and like 22 months total), and Padalka has 800+ (more than two years) non-consecutive days in space. The moon is only 3 days away, so rotating a crew every 5-6 months is very doable.

We haven't developed shielded modules yet because there has been no demand from it; hell, we're barely have our own indigenous human rated space craft again.

Great thing about the moon, it's entirely doable at our current budget. Less time having probes dick around asteroids, more time exploring the Poles. We barely "scratched the surface" of the Moon, and with only 3 seconds turnaround, unlike Martian Remote Vehicles, it's merely an annoying lag. So we can prepare all kinds of shit in advance of sending people, and in the beginning they'd only need to go for short periods.

There's also two more reasons we have to be on the moon: National Security and GSO. Much easier to refuel (LOX, thanks to Polar Ice in the many millions of tons) and repair and even build the "Dumb" sections of massive Satellites in Geosynchronous Orbit from the moon, rather than fighting the worst Gravity Well in the inner solar system.

I used to be a Mars direct guy, but we are going to have to solve Life support and test ISRU shit on the Moon before we can get there. Having refueling at the moon would greatly extend the range, capacity, and capabilities of any Mars mission. Even without spaceflight beyond Earth's influence, we'd have the ability to send out more robust, more capable probes to the Belt and Outer Solar System if we can refuel them on the moon first.
37   Dannyman   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 12:32am   ↑ like (4)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I live in Europe and I know what muslims and the war refugees from Syria and other countries have done to France and other European countries that accepted them.
Well, these countries have thought that the refugees will accept the jobs that their citizens are not meant to do, for a lower wage of course, but they forgot about religion.
Religion keeps destroying the human society even now in the XXI century.
38   Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Oct 12, 6:02am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Japan is peaceful and stable largely because it is populated by the supremely peaceful and submissive Japanese. In what other country of over 50 million population would there not be riot / looting after the kind of tsunami and nuclear meltdown that they had? Another crucial factor propping up Japan is its massive export economy (i.e. net tax base). The entire non-export economy in Japan is a giant black hole: the perceived stability is purchased at the cost of hardly ever laying off any worker and keeping zombie companies alive across the entire domestic economy. Prosperity left Japan 20+ years ago. People are not rioting because they know their jobs have negative value (outside the export sector); everyone is dependent on social approval and government approval to make a living in the make-belief Japanese economy (outside the export sector), while the entire economy is kept going by the large export sector. That's why they have witnessed a massive concentration of population into Tokyo (government hand-outs to connected corporations), youths have been emigrating, and Japanese men have the highest suicide rate among the Group of 7 nations (despite not having guns, which usually account for a large percentage of successful suicides in other countries because suicide by gun is far less painful and far more decisive than just about any other method of suicide).

The fundamental reason why growing population is necessary for economic growth is not GDP growth per se, but the nature of division of labor: as technology progresses: specialization becomes more detailed and finer. Contrary to the usual nonsense about technologies eliminating jobs, they actually create more jobs than they eliminate: e.g. the replacement of horse cabs by automobiles taxis eliminated numerous jobs (horse breeders, ferriers, and etc.) but enabled far more jobs brought on by cheaper local transportation cost.

Regional wars in the rest of the world and resulting refugees have historically benefited the US: e.g. the Bulkan Wars before WWI and the Greek-Turkish War after WWI brought the massive number of Greeks to the US, the Vietnam War brought massive numbers of Vietnamese and Cambodians to the US. They all integrated and provided relatively cheap labor that benefited new (and old) businesses as well as average Americans already living in the US.

The difference this time with Middle Eastern immigrants is: the proliferation of welfare system and identity politics is removing the incentive to integrate and preventing them from integrating; that is creating a welfare dependent population instead of cheap labor that can benefit corporations and the average American population in general. Likewise for the recent immigration from south of the border. That is the economic aspect.

The spiritual aspect of the problem is that the collapse of religion in the West has created a vacuum for massive expansion of Islam. Society can not survive without religion (communism and nationalism are religions too, both with dire economic consequences on trade and division of labor). Why? think this way: in Detroit and large parts of Chicago, only 15% of of homicide cases are solved. That is a statistical fact. How can a society keep functioning if the population lose the religious (that which is believed but not proven) faith in murderers getting caught instead of getting away with it 85% of the time? On top of that, traditional religions like Christianity (and Islam) suppress women's hypergamy and induce the local population to multiply and provide the labor force that is necessary for growing specialization in the economy.
39   Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Oct 12, 6:23am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Economic prosperity is a dynamic concept: improvement and betterment. People have expectations based on their prior/existing experience. Failing to meet those expectations results in depression.

As much as we admire the prosperity of the 1950's, if any of us is transported by a time machine back to the1950's, we'd find the life miserable: no internet, no cell phones, not even color TV! Car crashes could easily kill you!
40   P N Dr Lo R   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 8:25am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Reality says
if any of us is transported by a time machine back to the1950's, we'd find the life miserable: no internet, no cell phones, not even color TV! Car crashes could easily kill you!
No we wouldn't because we don't miss what we've never had. We don't miss today the marvels people may have 50 years from now. People in their 50's in the 50's, as my parents were, had seen nothing but a steady line of improvement their entire lives. New houses built in the 1950's with their built-ins and central heat and air are still usable today with proper maintenance. Compared to what had existed even just ten years earlier was so far advanced as to not be comparable. Comparing the 50's home to one 50 years earlier, 1905, the same difference between the 60's and today, with its wood stove, gas lighting or very rudimentary electric lighting, no radio or TV, probably no telephone, no refrigeration for food, limited sanitary conditions was like comparing life in the 50's to the 19th century. That generation saw more progress than any in human history. The Internet would be roughly equivalent to radio (1920) for my parents' generation and TV (1946) for the World War II generation.
41   Reality   ignore (5)   2018 Oct 12, 8:35am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

P N Dr Lo R says
Reality says
if any of us is transported by a time machine back to the1950's, we'd find the life miserable: no internet, no cell phones, not even color TV! Car crashes could easily kill you!
No we wouldn't because we don't miss what we've never had. We don't miss today the marvels people may have 50 years from now.


Thanks for making my exact point: prosperity is a dynamic concept relating to improvement (reality exceeding one's expectations), not a static absolute reality.

Due to that reason, historically immigrants with low living standard expectations and willing to work hard for a relative pittance in pay tended to benefit their new host country. Whereas today's Middle East immigrants looking forward to receiving welfare while not "taking any jobs" from the native population are actually far worse! What a lot of people don't understand is that: willing to do a job for less actually creates jobs (just like technology, because the money consumers save can be spent on new real economic demand) whereas welfare that has to be paid by taxes actually cost far more jobs!
42   NuttBoxer   ignore (2)   2018 Oct 12, 1:17pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

curious2 says
Of course, if you were in Senegal, you could be silenced from claiming that Christianity is just as good as Islam. Would that make you believe in the superiority of Islam?


Out of that entire post, this is the only point that you seem to have against my original post that Senegal gives us a view into how Islam doesn't automatically mean radicalism. And it's wrong. You don't understand the culture there, obviously, or you would never make such blanket, racist statements.

I'm not a Muslim apologist by any means, but I will react against the bullshit of you and others who seek to label an entire populace without ever knowing a Muslim yourself. You've never been to Senegal, and you don't know dick about Islam except that you hate it. If I don't bow to your brown fear I think independent, rational people will understand.

And it doesn't matter if it's McCarthyism, Terrorism, The War on Us, or Global Warming. You fear-mongers are all the same. Extreme in your view, without the slightest pause to understand your subject matter other than to hate and fear it, and everyone who doesn't cow-tow to your racist, elitist, superfluous bullshit.
43   NuttBoxer   ignore (2)   2018 Oct 12, 1:18pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

The fact that you try to pull in completely unrelated arguments from other threads, shows you don't have shit. You wanna cry about my whipping your ass over your bulldog fallacies, do it in the right thread, bitch.
44   TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce   ignore (4)   2018 Oct 12, 1:22pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

P N Dr Lo R says
No we wouldn't because we don't miss what we've never had. We don't miss today the marvels people may have 50 years from now. People in their 50's in the 50's, as my parents were, had seen nothing but a steady line of improvement their entire lives. New houses built in the 1950's with their built-ins and central heat and air are still usable today with proper maintenance. Compared to what had existed even just ten years earlier was so far advanced as to not be comparable. Comparing the 50's home to one 50 years earlier, 1905, the same difference between the 60's and today, with its wood stove, gas lighting or very rudimentary electric lighting, no radio or TV, probably no telephone, no refrigeration for food, limited sanitary conditions was like comparing life in the 50's to the 19th century. That generation saw more progress than any in human history. The Internet would be roughly equivalent to radio (1920...
Reality says
Due to that reason, historically immigrants with low living standard expectations and willing to work hard for a relative pittance in pay tended to benefit their new host country. Whereas today's Middle East immigrants looking forward to receiving welfare while not "taking any jobs" from the native population are actually far worse! What a lot of people don't understand is that: willing to do a job for less actually creates jobs (just like technology, because the money consumers save can be spent on new real economic demand) whereas welfare that has to be paid by taxes actually cost far more jobs!


Great points here.

The period 1950-1970s was the greatest explosion in living standards in human history.
45   HEYYOU   ignore (23)   2018 Oct 12, 2:15pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Rep/Cons will find anything to talk about because they are afraid of what Mueller knows. No one is above the law. We may soon find out how Rep/Cons think they were.

Let's worry about France & Muslims while Trump & his Republican trash let illegals roam the homeland.
All the Rep/Con constantly complain & do nothing to protect America.
The perverted,sexual assaulter, pussy grabber Republicans don't care if illegal "rapist" take white women.
Republican women love being raped by wetbacks or wouldn't vote for the sick GOP.
46   curious2   ignore (0)   2018 Oct 12, 2:22pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

In brief response to comments 42&43 about Islam and Senegal: Senegal prohibits blasphemy nationwide, as per Sharia, as per Islam. As in most countries that have Muslim majorities, most Muslims in Senegal demand Sharia, as per Islam. The population of Senegal exceeds 15 million, so no one person could ever meet a representative sample. Comments here show much of what "NuttBoxer" says about Islam is demonstrably wrong. When proven wrong, a willfully ignorant person (for example one who refuses to learn the difference between anecdotes and statistics), gets angry and tries to retaliate instead of learning. Examples include making false allegations including especially racism, and using profanity and name-calling:

NuttBoxer says
curious2 says
Of course, if you were in Senegal, you could be silenced from claiming that Christianity is just as good as Islam. Would that make you believe in the superiority of Islam?


Out of that entire post, this is the only point that you seem to have against my original post that Senegal gives us a view into how Islam doesn't automatically mean radicalism. And it's wrong. You don't understand the culture there, obviously, or you would never make such blanket, racist statements.

I'm not a Muslim apologist by any means, but I will react against the bullshit of you and others who seek to label an entire populace without ever knowing a Muslim yourself. You've never been to Senegal, and you don't know dick about Islam except that you hate it. If I don't bow to your brown fear I think independent, rational people will understand.

And it doesn't matter if it's McCarthyism, Terrorism, The War on Us, or Global Warming. You fear-mongers are all the same. Extreme in your view, without the slightest pause to understand your subject matter other than to hate and fear it, and everyone who doesn't cow-tow to your racist, elitist, superfluous bullshit.


NuttBoxer says
The fact that you try to pull in completely unrelated arguments from other threads, shows you don't have shit. You wanna cry about my whipping your ass over your bulldog fallacies, do it in the right thread, bitch.

« First    « Previous    Comments 7 - 46 of 46    Last »





The Housing Trap
You're being set up to spend your life paying off a debt you don't need to take on, for a house that costs far more than it should. The conspirators are all around you, smiling to lure you in, carefully choosing their words and watching your reactions as they push your buttons, anxiously waiting for the moment when you sign the papers that will trap you and guarantee their payoff. Don't be just another victim of the housing market. Use this book to defend your freedom and defeat their schemes. You can win the game, but first you have to learn how to play it.
115 pages, $12.50

Kindle version available


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions