We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
To people who do not understand religion, a religious hierarchy is just another institution that can be subordinated to meet the needs of the state. They also don't understand how an institution can exist without a hierarchy, so they insist on imposing them.
another guy named Dan
Re: A merit-based future beats our 19th-century immigration system
I can't read the article because that site does not play well with others and just locks up my computer, but I have to be a little bit skeptical of what the headline suggests. "A merit-based future" suggests the view of a technocrat who believes we can scientifically know and control the future, that past performance is a guarantee of future success. Are you seriously confident that the government can be trusted to pick winners and losers in the immigration game any better than they can pick winners and losers in any other aspect of our lives? I'd rather trust that 19th century immigration policy of accepting any immigrant with the demonstrated gumption to pack up their stuff and move to a new country where they may not know anybody, they may not speak the language, they may not have any prospects, but they do have faith in the American dream that there's a world of opportunity available to anybody who's willing to take a risk and chase their dreams.
In the 19th century, moving lock,stock & barrel to the US required considerable more gumption than it does today (where you read up on the internet and then jump on a plane). Progress has rendered these choices mundane. Because of this, any form of merit-based selection is now an absolute minimum requirement. Immigrants have a natural tendency to be under-educated and under-qualified to contribute toward society - history and current events are very clear on this point. Let's agree first that prospective immigrants should add something to their adoptive country, rather than the reverse. Agreed? With that premise, how can a process of examination and selection be avoided then?
Most aliens/foreigners who come to the U.S. illegally are aided and abetted by people already living here. Not just Mexicans who make up the majority but Chinese and other Asians, Central and South Americans, Indians and even Europeans and Africans. Typically this assistance is in itself unlawful annd often a felony. It would seem that aggressively seeking out the support system within this country for the continuing problem of illegal immigration would help reduce this crime. Ironically one of the better known felons helping illegal immigration is Khzr Khan who the Democrats featured at the DNC convention.
Re Knives Kill Far More People Than Rifles. That knife violence is just intolerable. Obviously we need some common sense knife control laws. When I lived in Florida in the 1970s a woman beat her husband to death with a big heavy frying pan. The Florida legislature promptly banned those assault frying pans. The ban was a total success because there wasn't another case of frying pan murder while I lived in Florida.