Le Pen kills the European Union

[Faith No More]

All that said, I believe nations must choose between having open borders and generous public assistance programs. Having both has become a financial disaster in the USA. Why should the EU be any different? When you make yourself a magnet for third-world populations that do not want to integrate with the existing first-world culture then you are destined to become third-world yourself.

Really? You think that's what caused our financial problems? Forget corporate welfare and billions wasted on unused defense programs. People getting free food is what is bankrupting us!

And you do realize that the U.S. has been a magnet for third-world populations since the very beginning, right? I seem to remember something about huddled masses yearning to be free. Are we not the land of the free anymore?

[Iroscato]

So, did people in the US decide immigration was a bad thing right after the white settlers were done exterminating the natives? I'm just curious.

[Faith No More]

So, did people in the US decide immigration was a bad thing right after the white settlers were done exterminating the natives? I'm just curious.

Pretty much. The rhetoric has been the same throughout our history, only it used to be about the Irish and Italians instead of the Latinos.

People like Chad like to ignore the history of our country and instead choose to fuel unfounded xenophobic fears.

[Neo-Scholastic]

I never said that so-called entitlements are the sole source of US financial woes. Big Government is always in bed with Big Business, because a powerful intrusive state can more easily direct funds and favors to cronies and large enterprises, while the 'little guys' get screwed. Nevertheless everyone knows that entitlements are by far the largest part of the federal budget and swelling the ranks of recipients doesn't help in the least.

You might not be aware that many local governments, usually the most politically progressive, require private home developers to perform extensive impact studies to show that the local infrastructure and environment can support the proposed population increase that a housing development will bring. Growth is good, but not unrestricted growth. Illegal immigration is unrestricted and makes huge demands local communities who are unprepared and incapable of adjusting. But when it comes to national immigration policy those same progressives abandon the approach they know makes sense locally.

The USA did and still could accept large immigrant populations. During those periods of mass immigration, the industrial revolution was in full swing and the growing economy could easily absorb legal immigrants who wanted to settle in and become Americans. Prior immigrant groups may have retained their cultures of origin (a good thing) but they did not try to retain their national allegiances (which would have been a bad thing). But that is what is happening today. Some immigrant groups want all the benefits of the US economy, but still want to retain national allegiances.

[Faith No More]

But that is what is happening today. Some immigrant groups want all the benefits of the US economy, but still want to retain national allegiances.

Do you have evidence that immigrants were more accepting of assimilation previously than now?

[Dystopia]

I agree with her on the EU because I'm Euro-skeptic, not because I support her party. The EU has many problems, and one of them is that it's basically and oligarchy dictated by the strongest countries (I'm looking mostly but not exclusively at Germany) and also highly limited by a high number of international and regional conventions, contracts and agreements. What works for Germany might not work for Bulgaria, and what works for the UK might not work for Ukraine, etc - The ideas of homogenization of the EU are naive and very far away from reality. Europe might have proximity between peoples because of a common history and geographical location, but it's very far from being enough to justify a federation or a supreme political authority. I think we will progressively assist to a sort of semi-deglobalization process starting in the EU and I hope international organizations lose power and regional power is increased, specially city-wise. I hope that zones that search for independence get it and manage to break free from oppressive forces. Seriously, the reason why hate speech laws are still in motion is because international organizations said so. I also hope states start to worry about workers more and abolish corporate welfare. If that doesn't change, revolutions will happen no matter what.

[Minimalist]

The  EU expanded too rapidly to places that were not ready for it.

[Neo-Scholastic]

But that is what is happening today. Some immigrant groups want all the benefits of the US economy, but still want to retain national allegiances.

Do you have evidence that immigrants were more accepting of assimilation previously than now?

Personal and family history. I don't need a research study to justify everything I know. Search your own background and draw your own conclusions.

[Faith No More]

Personal and family history. I don't need a research study to justify everything I know. Search your own background and draw your own conclusions.

Just what I thought. You haven't got any sort of appropriate evidence, and the cherry on top is that you've based your nonsensical political opinion on one single personal piece of data.

People that want their views to be correct don't operate that way. That's what people are talking about when you hear them use the phrase "critical thinking." Try it some time.

[ReptilianPeon]

France named Iran as an ally in the war against Islamic Fundamentalism. That is pure insanity. They have been at war with the US since 1979. They are every bit as much of a threat to world peace as ISIS. Probably more now and for certain when they have the bomb.

Care to explain how you came to that conclusion? What has Iran done recently, let's say ten years, that makes them as big a threat to world peace? The threats by the United States makes to loads of different countries, like Iran, makes Iran feel threatened, so of course they want to have 'the bomb'. Did you know the United States helped to overthrow a democratically elected Iranian government because they were unhappy that the oil industry in Iran was going to be nationalized?

It's no wonder Iranians are bitter. They had to deal with several decades of Shah (until 1979), a puppet of the United States. So much for democracy. What I'm trying to say is, I'm fairly certain that the Iranians would only want nukes for self defense so that United States can't bully them as easily.

P.S. The United States has refused repeatedly demands to a adopt a 'no first use policy' for its own nuclear weapons. China (PRC), India and the Russian Federation all have no first use policies for their nuclear weapons. Sadly, NATO does not. United States LOVES to warmonger. I believe the puppet regime in Pakistan does have a no first use policy either.