Should people have a right to sleep on city streets?

Maybe you should think about building a wall...

 

Sorry son, but my 72 years on this earth & and having been to nearly 100 countries overland around the globe in more than one direction (living and working in some of them 'freelance') trumps your little all-expenses-paid, government-sanctioned, pre-planned holidays. My "pretzel" convictions are broad, and the ends meet in a tidy connect-the-dots configuration. Yours have many loose ends that relying on imagination and guess-work which is not the definition of logic.

 

If true, you'd have some rationale to explain your suspicions.

100 countries? Umm, yeah... then you would know that not everybody has the same values. You'd actually have something substantial to bring to the table of debate. This reply of yours is not substantial.

 

Our fundamental problem is not the migrants. They are merely opportunists who exploit the weaknesses of our immigration laws and/or loopholes. My government (as it stands at the moment) is at fault. Building a theoretical "wall" under those circumstances would have dozens of unlocked & unguarded doors. We have, in any case, a natural moat of sea around us already so you can't just saunter across in the dead of night undetected. Our problem is strictly political.

 

So .... what do you think I've been talking about if not that values vary?

By your above statement, one would think you are in agreement with me but then you wave away your own conviction by saying it's not substantial.

 

My values are that we don't need illegals. Yours? Well, you do mention that they aren't actually Swedish citizens so...

I dunno where we disagree, if I'm honest. You talk of people who aren't of your country squatting, I talk of people who aren't of my country squatting...

I'm confused.

 

Yeah, I get that. Those unlocked and unguarded doors are a problem. Our moat is a small river that can easily be waded across. My personal belief is that machine gun embankments would work until we get some more of that wall built.

 

Regroup your thoughts. You are responding to two separate discussions and trying to put them into the same basket.
1. Illegal immigration.
2. American destitute population sleeping in the street, being deprived of employment/housing

 

I agree. Your problem is:
* ILLEGAL migrants
* ILLEGAL practice of Americans employing them.

Our problem is:
* Bending the rules to circumnavigate our laws in order to make them LEGAL

I don't agree with that.

 

Yeah well, not everybody is worth the minimum wage. If your labor isn't worth a dollar, but the minimum wage is 10 dollars an hour, you're going to be doing a lot of stuff that doesn't involve working for a living.

Illegal immigrants can be worth something, but let's put that a bit higher than American homeless. At least their ancestors probably did something to secure this country. I want Americans to succeed when they can, but don't really care enough to help them. That's just Darwin explaining to the numbnuts that maybe their particular gene pool isn't helping the rest of us, so... well... sucks to be you!

 

Welfare should be set at the minimum existence "wage" (ambiguous and intricate) but the law should see to it that they are actively either seeking employment or occupied doing community service of some sort. Minimum wage (non-ambiguous) should be set higher.

So I disagree with you about who is "worth" what. Everyone is worth survival and the "right" to a roof over their head. The subject of Illegals is an entirely different subject and they ought to be subject to deportation within the confines of the law, of course. There are exceptions to every rule & law but what we have here (in Sweden) regarding illegals is the exception being "law-abiding/law-enforced".

Is this comment meant to be directed at me personally?

 

Everyone is worth survival and the right to a roof over their heads? Maybe this is where we really disagree. It gets down to the basics of what a right is, and why they are valuable. You're talking about positive rights that require people to provide for others. For example, the "right to medical care" requires somebody to provide medical care.

We Americans mostly believe in negative rights. Those don't require anything from others, except to be left alone. For example, the right to self defense. I don't need police for that. I don't even need the government to supply me with a gun. I can get a gun myself, or a baseball bat, or a knife from the kitchen, or...

Positive rights are a form of slavery, while negative rights are freedom.

 

I wrote "right" in quotation marks. Everyone ought to have a "right" to it but you should not be compelled to utilize it if you don't want it.

There is no "right" to self-defense any more than there is a "right" to breath or to raise your hand to your mouth to eat. It is called "ability".

Only Americans and third-world nations at war equate self-defence with guns. I have the ability to defend myself too but I'm not such a useless person that I need a gun to do it with.

 

Yeah well, I guess we're a bit boorish like that. Don't worry. We're used to europeans looking down on us. It might come as a bit of a shock, but we don't think much of Europeans either.

 

It's different when we do it!

Sorry to pop your socialist utopia bubble, but it's really not different at all.

 

No, you did not answer why you think that I'm an American. I'm not by the way, so you're wrong.

 

Do you think I am "looking down on Americans"? Why do you think that?

 

You make no sense.

 

I answered all of your questions already.

 

Maybe the bit about Americans and third world nations had something to do with it.

Sorry, but it's all relative, I guess. You see us and think we're just gun toting rednecks, and we look at you and think... pfft! Five minutes and the Swedish military would be swiss cheese.

 

Not fighting on their own ground in mountainous terrain. They're tough, or at least have been in history.

 

That was then, this is now.

 

Is there any reason why you've attached that photo?

 

And look how well that turned out.

The American military banned trannies after that debacle, while the Swedish military is putting the LBQTXYZ nuttery on recruiting posters.

 

How did it turn out? Do you have anything interesting to say?

Another reason why Sweden is better than the U.S. We don't have such debacles. It looks to me that you not only have corruption and an everyday problem with committing war crimes but you also have no discipline. The U.S. never amounted to anything and the proof is a day-to-day spectacle with the world watching you.