the bots can have a bad side too

u know bitconnect

guy who is famous for that runs one.

so i dunno . i only upvote good content with mine. that isnt seen u know what i mean

me and the mods

not just self voting to print cash on shit content

like is done a lot. so i guess ppl will see that shit in the future lol. cant erase any of the history

how long before news in Mexico echos that of Venezuela

I'm wondering if AMLO's migrant rhetoric was serious or not. If he continues to advocate for open migration to the US will that increase support for the wall?

@Atkins did he make another claim recently? technically the actual context seemed more like he was suggesting being allowed in as a refugee is a human right. As the word "necessary" was stripped or lost in translation.

I still think he's making an argument for economic migrants. If people in Honduras, El Salvador, etc, are seeking asylum from criminal gangs, then they can and should apply for asylum in Mexico.

And Mexicans have no legitimate reason to apply for asylum.

Moreover, there are no refugees anywhere in Mexico or South America.

There is no war.

Asylum can be applied for if and only if there is reason to believe that the individual is being specifically targeted, or is being persecuted based on race/religion/politics, etc

i wouldn't say there is no legitimate reason to apply for asylum, unless the cartels level of violence is a myth. However, i don't think that is the current majority

"Less welcome to Mr Lopez Obrador’s team, perhaps, was the swift congratulations send by Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro – leader of a country which Mr Lopez Obrador’s critics said would be his model."

obviously it's his "critics" saying this but he does seem to align himself with Corbyn too

the cartels are not a legitimate reason to apply for asylum if i remember the catalogue of reasons correctly

really? a target for a criminal/terrorist organization does not count? Or from a government? i mean, lets face it, they are probably the government of parts of mexico

government yes, criminal organisation no (again: from memory)

They need to be a specific target.

Not merely being negatively affected by crime.

and yes... specifically targeted

Like if a cartel specifically has a hit out on them they can apply for asylum, but if they just live in a shithole with cartels it's not our problem.

does the cartel count?

well like i said, there is a legit reason to claim asylum, but that is not true of the majority of those people.

you said there is no legitimate reason coming from mexico

Dude, be realistic. 99.9999999% of people coming from Mexico are not coming because the cartel specifically wants them dead.

economic migrant is not a valid claim to asylum

like i said, the majority

Just turn the rest of the world into nuclear glass. Problem solved.

okay... the wording is "well-founded fear of being persecuted..." - sounds like government yes, cartel no to me?

In a society of 95% producers and 5% parasitic free-riders, is it morally justified for the producers to wield a level of coercive force over the free-riders?

I don't understand why more of them don't claim refugee status at the US Embassy first

Or maybe I do understand and don't want to say because it's a theory

@Atkins Yes. This is why Capitalism works. People who do work, specialize in needed fields, or take smart risks can and should earn more than others.

So only the producers earning more is justified? What about being able to wield some form of coercive power over non-producers?

Anyone who does any sort of work in exchange for money is a producer.

Yes.

But this *hypothetical* society has 5% who do nothing.