Hispanics one-fifth of K-12 students

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

Now go and play with your toys and let the adults have an unbiased conversation, GROW UP.

The second you see anything about Mexico you go on the defense yet accuse me of being biased. The rest is not even worth reposting as it is your usual rubbish.

PS Where are your facts to prove otherwise dh?

First of all this post isn't about Mexico, it's about hispanics. Second, I respond because YOU know you are biased regarding HISPANICS in general, not only Mexico. Don't play dumb on me, we know what you stand for; all your history in VJ can attest to that . YOU ARE BIASED and have a particular idea about HISPANICS and now you want to wash your hands and play not guilty, come on be a man and stand for what you believe.

I love my country, I LOVE my Hispanic (not only Mexican) people and whenever somebody comes and tries to tarnish them based solely on "personal" opinions and because "they bet"...YES it becomes personal.

P.S. let's not forget you also hate the UK, I've seen your stupid rhetoric as well.

Edited March 5, 2009 by TävôLuDô

[Bootylicious!! 2]

What I want to see is a study of how much your Northern Mexican Latinos contribute in taxes when compared to other ethnicities.

I would also like to see how many kids the various ethnicities are each having.

I'd like to see your stupid@ss stop posting on VJ. But that's not gonna happen anytime soon.

[Heracles 417]

The only "facts" presented here are that hispanics make up 1/5 of K-12 students.

Everything after that has been speculation and innuendo.

So what does that mean, that unless there is a study that anyone's observation must be hearsay or wrong. Just because there is no study does not mean this is not the case.

Then again, for example, when the stats are presented, like 50% of those imprisoned are now of Latino origin. You discredit them. You refuse to accept that one particular demographic is committing more crimes than all of the others. You get stuck on the, "well that doesn't mean all Latinos are criminals". Which is correct but it also does not change the fact that 50% of people incarcerated (aka committing crimes) are of Latino origin.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why would anyone want to see an ethnic breakdown of tax contributions?

What would it show?

Surely a regional breakdown would be more useful...

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

The only "facts" presented here are that hispanics make up 1/5 of K-12 students.

Everything after that has been speculation and innuendo.

So what does that mean, that unless there is a study that anyone's observation must be hearsay or wrong. Just because there is no study does not mean this is not the case.

YES, you've never gone to school it seems.

Scientific METHOD is called you genius.

Edited March 5, 2009 by TävôLuDô

[Heracles 417]

I'd like to see your stupid@ss stop posting on VJ. But that's not gonna happen anytime soon.

Likewise ######.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The only "facts" presented here are that hispanics make up 1/5 of K-12 students.

Everything after that has been speculation and innuendo.

So what does that mean, that unless there is a study that anyone's observation must be hearsay or wrong. Just because there is no study does not mean this is not the case.

Then again, for example, when the stats are presented, like 50% of those imprisoned are now of Latino origin. You discredit them. You refuse to accept that one particular demographic is committing more crimes than all of the others. You get stuck on the, "well that doesn't mean all Latinos are criminals". Which is correct but it also does not change the fact that 50% of people incarcerated (aka committing crimes) are of Latino origin.

I don't refuse to accept it at all. What I object to is the idea you've floated in the past that because Group Y has a higher incarceration rate - that it justifies 100% of Group Y being treated as the lowest common denominator.

[Heracles 417]

Why would anyone want to see an ethnic breakdown of tax contributions?

What would it show?

Surely a regional breakdown would be more useful...

No it wouldn't. Under a user pays system we need to know who is actually paying and compare it with who is using all of the services.

But anyway, it is commons sense that the quickest way to acquire a visa for an illegal immigrant is to pop out kids the second you arrive on US soil. Hence, why countries like Australia changed the laws accordingly.

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

Here is your jail population genius,

Inmates By Race

White: 115,719

Black: 79,773

Hispanic: 64,775

Native: 3,568

Asian: 3,433

I don't see any 50% latino population, they majority is WHITE...am I going to generalize regarding the white ethnicity NO.

http://www.bop.gov/news/quick.jsp#1

Edited March 5, 2009 by TävôLuDô

[Heracles 417]

I don't refuse to accept it at all. What I object to is the idea you've floated in the past that because Group Y has a higher incarceration rate - that it justifies 100% of Group Y being treated as the lowest common denominator.

So basically you refuse to accept it. There are a lot of various ethnicities in the DC area. Yet the only one that is in the media almost 100% (excluding blacks and whites) is Latinos. Without fail, at least once or a number of times a week.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why would anyone want to see an ethnic breakdown of tax contributions?

What would it show?

Surely a regional breakdown would be more useful...

No it wouldn't. Under a user pays system we need to know who is actually paying and compare it with who is using all of the services.

But anyway, it is commons sense that the quickest way to acquire a visa for an illegal immigrant is to pop out kids the second you arrive on US soil. Hence, why countries like Australia changed the laws accordingly.

Of course it would - a regional breakdown would identify specific problem areas (likely the same economically deprived areas that we're already well aware of).

If you're focussing on ethnicity on a national level - all you're going to get a ballpark median average that ignores geographic trends.

Median averages are pretty blunt instruments. Useless for any sort of detailed analysis.

Edited March 5, 2009 by Paul Daniels

[Bootylicious!! 2]

Why would anyone want to see an ethnic breakdown of tax contributions?

What would it show?

Surely a regional breakdown would be more useful...

No it wouldn't. Under a user pays system we need to know who is actually paying and compare it with who is using all of the services.

But anyway, it is commons sense that the quickest way to acquire a visa for an illegal immigrant is to pop out kids the second you arrive on US soil. Hence, why countries like Australia changed the laws accordingly.

How do you come to that logic? A child of an illegal can't sponsor their parent until they are 21. 21 years doesn't seem all that quick to me. Honestly, the quickest way to get an illegal a visa is for them to marry a US citizen. They don't have to have any kids at all. See, it really would help for you to know what you're talking about before you spout off at the mouth. You aren't helping yourself out any.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't refuse to accept it at all. What I object to is the idea you've floated in the past that because Group Y has a higher incarceration rate - that it justifies 100% of Group Y being treated as the lowest common denominator.

So basically you refuse to accept it. There are a lot of various ethnicities in the DC area. Yet the only one that is in the media almost 100% (excluding blacks and whites) is Latinos. Without fail, at least once or a number of times a week.

No I don't object to it Boo. I accept the idea that certain ethnic communities have higher crime rates, higher drop out rates from schools, higher rates of teen pregnancy / single parent family, alcoholism, suicide etc. I totally get that.

What I utterly disagree with is the idea you have presented - that these things justify treating the entirety of those communities like #######; and punishing everyone for the actions of a relative few.

Clear enough for you?

[The_Dude 1,142]

And the Award for Racist Troll for Today goes to.............

[Heracles 417]

How do you come to that logic? A child of an illegal can't sponsor their parent until they are 21. 21 years doesn't seem all that quick to me. Honestly, the quickest way to get an illegal a visa is for them to marry a US citizen. They don't have to have any kids at all. See, it really would help for you to know what you're talking about before you spout off at the mouth. You aren't helping yourself out any.

Of course. That is the second avenue.

Your amigos are not exactly coming in using the highly skilled visas now are they. For obvious reasons.

Edited March 5, 2009 by Aficionado