Re: oh, it's called a sweeping generalization retard ...

On 8/2/2026 10:13 AM, dart200 wrote:
> On 8/2/26 9:38 AM, Wilson wrote:
>> On 8/1/2026 10:31 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>> On 8/1/26 10:40 AM, Wilson wrote:
>>>> On 8/1/2026 1:06 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> u literally justify overriding free market principles with closed 
>>>>> borders because u profit from it!
>>>>>
>>>>> seriously, capitalists have no principles. it's all up for grabs 
>>>>> when there is profit to be made!
>>>>>
>>>>> it's fucking incredible you cried about how capitalism depends on 
>>>>> people acting ethically ... while here you are in just a thread 
>>>>> over shitting on basic principles of voluntary association because 
>>>>> YOU benefit from doing so!
>>>>>
>>>>> god ur such a delusionally confused basket case wilson and ur 
>>>>> wholly incapable of realizing it because the level of cognitive 
>>>>> dissonance in just how much a shithead u've been for long would be 
>>>>> too much for ur underdeveloped mind to handle,
>>>>
>>>> My business actually profits more from open borders and no tariffs.
>>>>
>>>> Open borders means more customers. Over 20% of my customers are 
>>>> immigrants.
>>>>
>>>> No tariffs means lower prices for my products.
>>>>
>>>> I support restricted immigration and some tariffs because I think it 
>>>> benefits the young and low pay workers. And in the end that will 
>>>> benefit the country at large even if it works against my short-term 
>>>> interests.
>>>
>>> which is still YOUR selected interests moron, as opposed to 
>>> supporting the principles generally for _all_  🖕🙄🖕
>>
>> Wait. You're saying those are my "selected interests" because I care 
>> about young people and the low wage population?
> there is a world of young people and even lower wage population you are 
> willfully ignoring because it's not YOUR selected interest
>
It should be in your selected interest to develop a skill that is 
marketable for employment, Nick. You're not young anymore.

The argument against immigration is the cultural-preservationist 
argument for border restrictions: Diverse groups weaken shared national 
traditions, values, and languages. An immigrant loses cultural and 
social cohesion and gets assimilated.