Study of Farmers Branch, Texas: Immigrants seen as threat to white, middle-class 'American' identity

Jul 06, 2010

Who belongs in America? Immigration has sparked a raging national debate about that question — including in the Dallas suburb of Farmers Branch, Texas, the first U.S. city to adopt an ordinance requiring renters to prove they are legal residents.

Contrary to what many believe, however, race isn't the only driving reason that many white, middle-class people feel threatened by immigrants, according to a new analysis by anthropologists at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. White, middle-class people also perceive immigrants who are settling in their suburban communities as a threat to their class status and to their very identity as Americans, say anthropologists Caroline B. Brettell and Faith G. Nibbs.

Immigrants — with cultures and traditions different from white suburbanites — are viewed as an assault on long-standing symbols of American nationality, the researchers say. Those symbols include middle-class values and tastes, and the perception that Americans are patriotic and law-abiding, say the researchers, both in SMU's Department of Anthropology.

"For many whites, American identity is wrapped up with being suburban and middle class, and when they see immigrants changing their communities and potentially threatening their class status, they react with anti-immigrant legislation," says Brettell.

Class and culture

It's true that for some whites, immigrants can represent competition for and scarce resources, say Brettell and Nibbs — but in the suburbs they are also seen as a threat to the white, middle-class concept of "social position." Because of that, Brettell and Nibbs argue for greater attention to class and culture in the study of contemporary immigration into the United States.

The anthropologists base their conclusion on a close analysis of Farmers Branch, a suburb of almost 28,000 people. Farmers Branch made news in 2006 as the first U.S. city to adopt an ordinance requiring that apartment managers document tenants as legal residents.

For their analysis, the researchers looked at newspaper articles and blogs, conducted a lengthy interview with a key City Council member, carried out background historical research and analyzed U.S. Census data.

The research has been accepted for publication in the journal International Migration in an article titled "Immigrant Suburban Settlement and the 'Threat' to Middle Class Status and Identity: The Case of Farmers Branch, Texas." See www.smuresearch.com for links to more information.

Flooding into suburbia

New immigrants to the United States are settling in major gateway cities like Dallas and making their homes directly in middle-class suburbs, say Brettell and Nibbs.

These suburbs — once called the "bourgeois utopia" where middle-class values triumph — are populated by white people who decades before fled the central cities to escape poor housing, deteriorating schools, and racial and ethnic diversity, the researchers say.

But when immigrants and white suburbs mix, the result can be explosive — as in the case of Farmers Branch. Whites view their hometown changing. And the changes feel very foreign to them — new religious institutions, ethnic strip-shopping malls, signs in languages other than English, and bilingual programs for education, health care and law-enforcement programs.

"Free and white"

The historic roots of Farmers Branch lie in a land grant designed to draw "free and white" inhabitants to the area in the 1850s, say the researchers. Farmers Branch grew to 17,500 by 1970, and at that time there were 320 Hispanic surnames in the city. By 2000, however, the Hispanic population had grown to more than one-third of the total. By 2008, Hispanics were the largest demographic group, with 46.7 percent of the population.

Today, like many such cities, Farmers Branch sees its minority, elderly and low-income population growing faster than the national average, say Brettell and Nibbs.

The number of owner-occupied homes in Farmers Branch has fallen dramatically, from 87 percent in 1960 to 66 percent in 2000. Raw median income in 2000 was below what it was in 1970 dollars, adjusted against 2008 dollars, say the researchers.

"If you are a family with options, would you move into this neighborhood if presented with these figures?" asks Mayor Tim O'Hare in the journal article. O'Hare led the fight for the renter's ordinance.

"Rule of Law"

Brettell and Nibbs say that white suburbanites have also invoked the "Rule of Law" in Farmers Branch and elsewhere.

"As the formulation of laws and their enforcement are disproportionately unavailable to ethnic minorities, and completely inaccessible to undocumented immigrants, the principle of Rule of Law has become a convenient weapon for the Farmers Branch middle class in their fight for status and the status quo," say Brettell and Nibbs in the article. "Add to this a bit of the legacy of Texas frontier mentality and patriotism and you have a line drawn in the sand by those who stand for the Rule of Law as something absolutely fundamental to American identity and hence perceive illegal immigrants as a threat to that identity."

In that way, the "Rule of Law" is a tool to exclude unauthorized immigrants and attempt to legislate a certain quality of life, such as English-only communication, as well as proof of citizenship to rent a dwelling, apply for food stamps or get school financial aid, say the researchers.

"Everyone is looking at race but not at class in the study of immigrants, and particularly in anti-immigrant backlash," Brettell says. "We add to this literature the analysis of 'Rule of Law' as a newly rhetorical device that excludes illegal . Our article offers a new way of looking at this issue."

Explore further: Study finds law dramatically curbing need for speed

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Anti-immigrant sentiment greater in California than Texas

Mar 02, 2009

Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore and Washington DC (March 2, 2009) California and Texas have the largest populations of Mexican immigrants in all of the United States. A recent study, published by SAGE in the January/February ...

Suicide More Likely Among Divorced Immigrants

Mar 19, 2008

Divorced immigrants are more than twice as likely to commit suicide as native-born Americans who are divorced, according to a study of Riverside County residents co-authored by UC Riverside sociology professor Augustine J. ...

Study: Immigration can lower prices of consumer products

Aug 23, 2007

An important new study examines how immigration influences the prices of consumer goods. The study, forthcoming in the Journal of Political Economy, challenges the predictions of the perfectly competitive model – that a ...

Recommended for you

Study finds law dramatically curbing need for speed

Apr 18, 2014

Almost seven years have passed since Ontario's street-racing legislation hit the books and, according to one Western researcher, it has succeeded in putting the brakes on the number of convictions and, more importantly, injuries ...

Newlyweds, be careful what you wish for

Apr 17, 2014

A statistical analysis of the gift "fulfillments" at several hundred online wedding gift registries suggests that wedding guests are caught between a rock and a hard place when it comes to buying an appropriate gift for the ...

Can new understanding avert tragedy?

Apr 17, 2014

As a boy growing up in Syracuse, NY, Sol Hsiang ran an experiment for a school project testing whether plants grow better sprinkled with water vs orange juice. Today, 20 years later, he applies complex statistical ...

Creative activities outside work can improve job performance

Apr 16, 2014

Employees who pursue creative activities outside of work may find that these activities boost their performance on the job, according to a new study by San Francisco State University organizational psychologist Kevin Eschleman ...

User comments : 56

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Shootist
1 / 5 (4) Jul 06, 2010
When they see invaders come uninvited into the home their Fathers' died to protect? Yeah, they pass anti-illegal immigration legislation.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 06, 2010
A criminal record request is a legitimate prerequisite for applications of all sorts.
Illegal immigrants are breaking US law and like ALL legal residents, should provide valid government ID upon request.
frajo
4 / 5 (4) Jul 07, 2010
When they see invaders come uninvited into the home their Fathers' died to protect?
Was the white man invited when he settled in North America?
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 07, 2010
When they see invaders come uninvited into the home their Fathers' died to protect?
Was the white man invited when he settled in North America?

Were Asians invited?
Doug_Huffman
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 07, 2010
Aborigines have lost ALL of the culture wars, Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas. Immigration is no more than a battleground strategy in the culture war. History is written by the victors if they are literate. History is always read by the vanquished.
marjon
1 / 5 (1) Jul 07, 2010
Aborigines have lost ALL of the culture wars, Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas. Immigration is no more than a battleground strategy in the culture war. History is written by the victors if they are literate. History is always read by the vanquished.

Why do aborigines loose?
frajo
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 07, 2010
When they see invaders come uninvited into the home their Fathers' died to protect?
Was the white man invited when he settled in North America?

Were Asians invited?
Why don't you tell your comrade Shootist that it doesn't matter whether invaders are invited?
otto1923
5 / 5 (2) Jul 08, 2010
Bloody freaking hell
Aborigines have lost ALL of the culture wars, Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas. Immigration is no more than a battleground strategy in the culture war. History is written by the victors if they are literate. History is always read by the vanquished.

Why do aborigines loose?

http://www.lesson...ose.html
marjon
1 / 5 (3) Jul 08, 2010
Bloody freaking hell
Aborigines have lost ALL of the culture wars, Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas. Immigration is no more than a battleground strategy in the culture war. History is written by the victors if they are literate. History is always read by the vanquished.

Why do aborigines loose?

http://www.lesson...ose.html

Correcting spelling errors is all you can offer?
Why do aborigines LOSE?
otto1923
5 / 5 (3) Jul 08, 2010
Correcting spelling errors is all you can offer?
Why do aborigines LOSE?
First off i'm not sure what the question has to do with mexicans in the US. Are you saying that americans are now aborigines? Or are we being invaded by aborigines? Or is it just another pointless question? Whats your point in asking it?
Thrasymachus
4.3 / 5 (3) Jul 08, 2010
I believe what Doug is implying is that more primitive cultures generally fail when they come into conflict with more advanced cultures, and that aboriginal cultures, as the most primitive type of culture, always fail when in conflict with other cultures. The Mexican culture is far from aboriginal, however, so I'm not sure what his point was in bringing it up. At any rate, I fail to see why any government, i.e. law, thinks it has the right to tell people where they can live and work.
marjon
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 08, 2010
that more primitive cultures generally fail when they come into conflict with more advanced cultures

Rome failed to invade and conquer many more primitive cultures.
otto1923
5 / 5 (1) Jul 08, 2010
At any rate, I fail to see why any government, i.e. law, thinks it has the right to tell people where they can live and work.
So in other words you are for the gradual dissolution of countries, the globalization of rule and a single world government? Hey so am I. We would all be citizens of everywhere.

What do you think mojo? And by the way you failed to answer my reasonable question.
Thrasymachus
5 / 5 (3) Jul 08, 2010
Hence the word generally and not always. The reasons for Rome's collapse, and the collapse of all the great civilizations of history, are many and varied. They range from military overextension, to wide disparities in economic well-being, to natural disasters and ecological collapse. Immigration has never, to my knowledge, been the cause of the collapse of any of the great historical civilizations.
otto1923
5 / 5 (1) Jul 08, 2010
So say our history books but they are wrong! Nothing ended, nothing collapsed. Empire did it's Work and moved on. The Entity that was Rome relocated to more Strategic locations once it's Campaign around the Mediterranean was complete.
marjon
1 / 5 (3) Jul 08, 2010
At any rate, I fail to see why any government, i.e. law, thinks it has the right to tell people where they can live and work.
So in other words you are for the gradual dissolution of countries, the globalization of rule and a single world government? Hey so am I. We would all be citizens of everywhere.

What do you think mojo? And by the way you failed to answer my reasonable question.

I am all for sovereign individuals and the end of nation states, but not one world government.
Why did I ask why aborigines lose? To whom did most aborigines lose? What made western civilization so successful as to have the capability of invading other aboriginal territories?
Thrasymachus
5 / 5 (2) Jul 08, 2010
I can't imagine a one-world government with an actually functioning administration that would end up being much different than what we've got now. The cultural, economic and technological differences that persist means that only a very weak quasi-democratic system could work to maintain even a very tenuous peace between culturally and ethnically distinct populations, and that's what we've got in the U.N.
otto1923
5 / 5 (1) Jul 09, 2010
I am all for sovereign individuals and the end of nation states, but not one world government.
What, marjoe the 'god and country' isolationist is willing to see the US dissolve? Become another Texas?
Why did I ask why aborigines lose? To whom did most aborigines lose? What made western civilization so successful as to have the capability of invading other aboriginal territories?
NoNo- you cant answer a question with more questions. State your implications.
I can't imagine a one-world government with an actually functioning administration that would end up being much different than what we've got now.
I assume it would be a larger version of the US or Canada or somesuch- Federalist with certain powers to the states and overarching stewardship by a central govt.

Armies would become the police, with very big guns. There might be infrequent talk of secession like Quebec or Alaska, but what would be the point?
otto1923
5 / 5 (1) Jul 09, 2010
Everybody would vote for a spokesmodel president of the world, and everybody would have the feeling that they were a part of one big happy family and that they all had a meaningful say in the course of things, just like in the US or Canada... but of course they wouldnt, in reality. And they would still be the Enemy of Those in Charge, in an ongoing and perpetual Struggle of Order against chaos, Light against the Dark; as the Ark of the Enochian Priesthood endures in safety above the roiling Flood of humanity, protecting its precious Cargo of irreplaceable Knowledge.
marjon
1.3 / 5 (4) Jul 09, 2010
What, marjoe the 'god and country' isolationist is willing to see the US dissolve? Become another Texas?

Nation states are dissolving before our eyes. Borders, language and culture mean nothing if borders are not enforced.
What does a passport mean if anyone can legally buy one?
A weak federation of states similar to what was originally intended by the US Constitution would be as far as I would go toward a world government.
But I prefer no world government.
NoNo- you cant answer a question with more questions. State your implications.

Answer my question, to yourself, and you have my answer. It is called an exercise for the student.
otto1923
5 / 5 (2) Jul 09, 2010
What, marjoe the 'god and country' isolationist is willing to see the US dissolve? Become another Texas?

Nation states are dissolving before our eyes. Borders, language and culture mean nothing if borders are not enforced.
What does a passport mean if anyone can legally buy one?
A weak federation of states similar to what was originally intended by the US Constitution would be as far as I would go toward a world government.
But I prefer no world government.
NoNo- you cant answer a question with more questions. State your implications.

Answer my question, to yourself, and you have my answer. It is called an exercise for the student.
As usual your answers make no sense.

1. A weak federation of states would necessarily be a world govt.
2. ?? You madam are no teacher.
marjon
1.3 / 5 (4) Jul 09, 2010
What, marjoe the 'god and country' isolationist is willing to see the US dissolve? Become another Texas?

Nation states are dissolving before our eyes. Borders, language and culture mean nothing if borders are not enforced.
What does a passport mean if anyone can legally buy one?
A weak federation of states similar to what was originally intended by the US Constitution would be as far as I would go toward a world government.
But I prefer no world government.
NoNo- you cant answer a question with more questions. State your implications.

Answer my question, to yourself, and you have my answer. It is called an exercise for the student.
As usual your answers make no sense.

1. A weak federation of states would necessarily be a world govt.
2. ?? You madam are no teacher.

I said I PREFER no world government.
Caliban
3 / 5 (2) Jul 10, 2010
Well, mangy, if you don't want world government, then why do you so rabidly defend its two main tools, religion and 'free market" capitalism?

They are precisely what drives us to World Government. On the one hand, we have religion-which creates and sustains division between peoples and cultures. On the other hand is FMC, which is nothing less than a vampire, designed to concentrate ever more wealth and power into the hands of a global elite- the soon-to-be masters of the World Government, that you have served so willingly and well all these years, as a good, god fearin', free market proselytisin', consumer goods buyin' dupe(in otto's sense of the word), furthering the cause of World Government(or, alternatively, world servitude) with every handful of fritos you've washed down with that Mountain Dew, while braying at the latest reality tv show.

Honestly- if you really were capable of thought, you would understand that you are being cynically and contemptuously exploited.
marjon
1 / 5 (3) Jul 10, 2010
If one follows the teaching of Jesus, there is no need for a world government as such individuals have no need for coercion to respect other individual's life and property.
In a free market, no coercion is used and people trade freely with each other respecting the other's right to his life and property.
Your 'understanding' of religion and free markets is warped.
Caliban
3 / 5 (2) Jul 10, 2010
No, your "understanding" of how they are used to control you and yours, and who ultimately benefits from them is nonexistent.

But do go on, mangy- you will be acting entirely within expectations, and precisely as you have been programmed to.

I sincerely hope that you enjoy the New World Order, since you've worked so long and diligently to bring it into being. Perhaps your masters will reward you with a few extra tortillas for your efforts in their behalf.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 10, 2010
Cali, my observations suggest there are two basic types of people. Those who want to control others and those who do not.
As you fall into the group that wants to control others, you cannot understand how those of use who do not want to be controlled and have no desire to control others can exist with each other.
All you can see in religion is control and you cannot understand how free people can trade with other in a FREE market.
I don't know if education can eliminate this desire to control others. BHO's Harvard education did not eliminate that desire. All the AGWite scientists have educations and they all want to use force to control the world.
Caliban
1 / 5 (1) Jul 11, 2010
Cali, my observations suggest there are two basic types of people. Those who want to control....
All you can see in religion is control and you cannot understand how free people can trade with other in a FREE market.
I don't know if education can eliminate this desire to control others. BHO's Harvard education did not eliminate that desire. All the AGWite scientists have educations and they all want to use force to control the world.


It's quite simple, mangy. Those who wish to control others aren't hampered by little things like morality, compassion, and regard for the needs of their fellow creatures. And they aren't really concerned by which method(s) control is maintained -be it through religious belief, or rank self interest. You are controlled by both.

There are many other methods, to be sure, but since these two are the very ones that you continually drum for here on physorg, I'll leave it at that.

Your blindness saddens me so- I didn't even downrank you.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 11, 2010
It's quite simple, mangy. Those who wish to control others aren't hampered by little things like morality, compassion, and regard for the needs of their fellow creatures. And they aren't really concerned by which method(s) control is maintained -be it through religious belief, or rank self interest. You are controlled by both.

I don't know how you can say that as I have ZERO interest, desire or advocacy to initiate force to control anyone, even you.
You and many here HAVE indicated they support the use of state coercion to force people to live the way you believe they should live.
ForFreeMinds
1 / 5 (4) Jul 11, 2010
This statement "As the formulation of laws and their enforcement are disproportionately unavailable to ethnic minorities, and completely inaccessible to undocumented immigrants, the principle of Rule of Law has become a convenient weapon for the Farmers Branch middle class in their fight for status and the status quo," in essence states that majorities of voters can create laws that discriminate against others.

Laws that discriminate against race are certainly immoral, and unconstitutional IMHO (regardless of former Justice O'Connor's views on affirmative action). While it's probably true that most illegal immigrants are Mexican, the Farmer's branch law is color blind. So in essence, the authors of the study, are saying that there shouldn't be laws against illegal immigration. So instead of addressing the Farmers Branch law, shouldn't they address the federal laws against illegal immigration? Coming to the same conclusions will require even more contorted reasoning.
Caliban
1 / 5 (1) Jul 11, 2010
I don't know how you can say that as I have ZERO interest, desire or advocacy to initiate force to control anyone, even you.
You and many here HAVE indicated they support the use of state coercion to force people to live the way you believe they should live.


And there you go again, re-stating the assertion that you have already made and restated a half-dozen times in this thread, alone.

You, by virtue of serving narrow self-interest and religious dogma, ARE CONTROLLED. And, by serving the mechanisms of control, you thereby are an extension of, and implement for- that control.

As to the second part of your assertion- I have done no such thing. I advocate for the intervention of our representatively elected government to regulate the worst abuses of those who would control, through the taxation of excess income/profits, to offset the inordinate stress placed on the producers of that wealth by those who pocket it.

The creators of Love Canal don't live there.
marjon
1 / 5 (1) Jul 11, 2010
As to the second part of your assertion- I have done no such thing. I advocate for the intervention of our representatively elected government to regulate the worst abuses of those who would control, through the taxation of excess income/profits, to offset the inordinate stress placed on the producers of that wealth by those who pocket it.
Yes, you are a satist, no independent thought.
Hooker Chemical company DID live there. Hooker Chemical was forced to sell Love Canal to the local school district so they could build houses and expand the tax base. Love Canal was caused by greedy governments.
Caliban
1 / 5 (1) Jul 11, 2010
Yes, you are a satist, no independent thought.
Hooker Chemical company DID live there. Hooker Chemical was forced to sell Love Canal to the local school district so they could build houses and expand the tax base. Love Canal was caused by greedy governments.


And you are a piece of work, ever ready to evade, provoke, half-truth or strawman, in order to not make a direct argument subject to direct refutation.

As I've said before, merely mingy mangy, emitting noise from his mangyhole.

That datapoint chair should be pretty overstuffed by now, considering how much noise mangy emits.

In case anyone needs the relevant facts re Love Canal, as opposed to the mangy distortion:

http://en.wikiped...ve_Canal

marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 11, 2010
""This Indenture [is] made the 28th day of April, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty Three, between Hooker Electrochemical Company. . . and the Board of Education of the School District of the City of Niagara Falls, New York," which would, "in consideration of One Dollar" paid to Hooker, receive title to the described property. The kicker is the deed’s closing paragraph:

Prior to the delivery of this instrument of conveyance, the grantee herein has been advised by the grantor that the premises above described have been filled, in whole or in part, to the present grade level thereof with waste products resulting from the manufacturing of chemicals by the grantor at its plant in the City of Niagara Falls, New York, and the grantee assumes all risk and liability incident to the use thereof."
http://reason.com...ve-canal
The government KNEW Love Canal was full of chemical wastes.
Caliban
3 / 5 (2) Jul 12, 2010
Nice try, but as usual, mangy lifts a factoid up for examination, bereft of its matrix of context, as well as, of course. from a source friendly to his purpose.

No, mangy- you would never try- much less want to try to control anyone, now would you?

Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (1) Jul 12, 2010
Cali, my observations suggest there are two basic types of people. Those who want to control others and those who do not.

Then what group do the heads of Church fall under? You're already trying to control my actions by telling me to live like Jesus. What makes your opinion of lifestyle superior to mine? What makes enforcement of your lifestyle NOT a form of control?

That's the problem with you Marjon, you just don't get it. All morality is merely a form of group control, a surrender of the individual to the wants of a larger body of leaders and followers.

The men you follow are evil in my opinion, and so you want to control my actions so that I follow them anyway. What happened to your philosophy of no controlling government? It seems more likely that you want to replace our government with a theocracy, and at that time I would pick up arms against you.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 12, 2010
You're already trying to control my actions by telling me to live like Jesus. What makes your opinion of lifestyle superior to mine?

Opinion and debate are attempts at persuasion and are not force.
Laws, jails, guns and the state are force.
so you want to control my actions

How can I control your actions? I advocate no law or state action to force you to do anything. You and other 'independent' thinkers, however, DO advocate and support the use of force to control others.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 12, 2010
"Hooker in 1941 began studies of the suitability of using the Canal as a chemical dump. The findings were affirmative, and by April of the next year the company completed the legal transactions to commence dumping what ultimately amounted to approximately 21,800 tons of the company’s waste before the Canal property (which included a strip of land on either side of the Canal) was donated by Hooker to the Niagara Falls Board of Education in 1953, under pressure from the Board that if Hooker didn’t willingly deed the land the property would be seized under eminent domain for the building of a school.

It’s also worth noting here that other wastes besides these 21,800 tons from Hooker have apparently been dumped into the Canal. According to New York State officials, federal agencies, especially the Army, disposed of toxic chemical wastes there during and after World War II. The city of Niagara Falls also regularly unloaded its municipal refuse into this Hooker-owned pit."
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 12, 2010
"One thing, however, is clear: according to the School Board’s own records, the Board was already well along in its planning of the 99th Street School more than two years before Hooker deeded the Canal to the Board. And the Board meant business. It was gearing up for a string of condemnation proceedings for the Canal site and all properties abutting it. "
http://reason.com...-canal/1
Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (1) Jul 12, 2010
Opinion and debate are attempts at persuasion and are not force.
And what would you do if someone disagreed with your opinion?
Laws, jails, guns and the state are force.
Very general and entirely incorrect. If you live by the laws you'll never see jail, or guns. If you never contradict the laws, you'll never encounter the state. Are you sure you can distinguish which is which?
How can I control your actions? I advocate no law or state action to force you to do anything.
So then you'd allow people to rape and kill and you won't do anything about it?
you and other 'independent' thinkers, however, DO advocate and support the use of force to control others.
Yes but only when people break the laws. That is what a Republic is based on, the rule of law, not the rule of your opinion. The latter would be tyranny.

The laws apply to everyone equally. Break the law and suffer the consequence. You seem to be upset by the fact that you aren't in charge.
Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (1) Jul 12, 2010
I advocate no law or state action to force you to do anything. You and other 'independent' thinkers, however, DO advocate and support the use of force to control others.

So if I murder your family nothing will happen in your world? I prefer mine. I prefer a world of reasonable rules and ethics, organized into regulations and laws by which society on the whole can flourish.

You're recommending we devolve our society to match Somalia. I was in Somalia on a tour of duty, I am very glad I left Somalia.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 12, 2010
I prefer mine. I prefer a world of reasonable rules and ethics, organized into regulations and laws by which society on the whole can flourish.

What are 'reasonable'? The state has been growing and imposing quite unreasonable rules. The men who wrote the Constitution respected faith in God and understood that the Constition could not function without 'men of good character'. We can't depend upon men of good character in a society that devalues character.
You statists alway love to use 'murder' and Somalia to justify your love of state.
I would be satisfied with a return to Constitutional limits on the state.
Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (1) Jul 12, 2010
What are 'reasonable'?
Insipiring reason is foreign to you? Oh that's right, I forgot who I was talking to.
The state has been growing and imposing quite unreasonable rules.
Name a few for me.
The men who wrote the Constitution respected faith in God and understood that the Constition could not function without 'men of good character'. We can't depend upon men of good character in a society that devalues character.
First, no, no they didn't respect God. Most of them were rather disrespectful, most of the others were Deists or lapse Anglicans. Deism by the way is more Star Wars than God talk. A permeating godlike force that determines the rules of existence. Along with that, most of them were big time pot smokers. Just look at Washington. A deist who used the term God like Einstein used the term God. An esoteric non-humanlike permeating force.

Tell us Marjon, what is your definition of character? In my book character is the sum total of your actions, not just words
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 12, 2010
"Character is what we do when no one is watching "
http://www.jewish...ah.shtml
"I hope that we all decide to be honest, fair, humble, willing to learn, and willing to help others. I believe that these are some reasonable character traits that can lead to a successful and happy life."
http://ezineartic...=1482742
Caliban
3 / 5 (2) Jul 12, 2010
Debate on any level besides "I know you are, but what am I?" is, of course, out of the question. It is not the intention of mangy to debate rationally, much less ethically.

No, mangy's object is to blow a continuous stream of noise from the mangyhole, like a siren's call to those who would engage in real debate, for the purpose of creating for the naive or uninformed the illusion that there is scope for rational debate regarding the ethos mangy so fervently proselytizes.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 13, 2010
Debate on any level besides "I know you are, but what am I?" is, of course, out of the question. It is not the intention of mangy to debate rationally, much less ethically.

No, mangy's object is to blow a continuous stream of noise from the mangyhole, like a siren's call to those who would engage in real debate, for the purpose of creating for the naive or uninformed the illusion that there is scope for rational debate regarding the ethos mangy so fervently proselytizes.

My critics continue to insult instead of discuss or defend their POV. Typical.
Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (1) Jul 13, 2010
My critics continue to insult instead of discuss or defend their POV. Typical.
Try answering the questions asked of you and further the conversation rather than crashing it into the guard-rail of epic failure.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 13, 2010
My critics continue to insult instead of discuss or defend their POV. Typical.
Try answering the questions asked of you and further the conversation rather than crashing it into the guard-rail of epic failure.

Reasonable rules?
"With a new mandate looming that will require business owners to file millions more tax forms, the Internal Revenue Service has begun the daunting process of figuring out how to turn the law's sweeping demands into actual rules for taxpayers."
http://money.cnn....9_flood/
This is a great way to stimulate wealth creation!
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 13, 2010
James Madison, co-author of the “Federalist Papers,” was an Episcopalian and trained for the ministry with the Rev. Dr. John Witherspoon. He was a member of the Virginia legislature from 1776-80 and 1784-86, of the Continental Congress in 1780-83, and the Constitutional Convention in 1787. It was in that Convention that he earned the title "Father of the Constitution."
"He was a sponsor of the Bill of Rights while a member of the House of Representatives from 1789 to 1797, "
""We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self government; upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." "
http://www.faitho...son.html
Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (1) Jul 13, 2010
Reasonable rules?
This is a great way to stimulate wealth creation!
I'm sure it's paying the book binders and forms makers well. With 330million people in the country, if you change one form, as is done every year, how many actual forms are New and Have to be filled out?

Answer: Millions.

Your inability to understand even the most basic of propaganda is hilarious.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 13, 2010
Reasonable rules?
This is a great way to stimulate wealth creation!
I'm sure it's paying the book binders and forms makers well. With 330million people in the country, if you change one form, as is done every year, how many actual forms are New and Have to be filled out?

Answer: Millions.

Your inability to understand even the most basic of propaganda is hilarious.

I guess you don't understand wealth creation.
http://www.econli...ss1.html
By your logic above, if the IRS increased the number of form by a factor of 1000, 100000...the USA economy would be booming.
Or why not make the minimum wage $100/hr? Then everyone can be rich.
Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (1) Jul 13, 2010
guess you don't understand wealth creation.
http://www.econli...ss1.html
By your logic above, if the IRS increased the number of form by a factor of 1000, 100000...the USA economy would be booming.
Or why not make the minimum wage $100/hr? Then everyone can be rich.
No Marjon, that is not my logic nor is that what I was getting at.

Since we've established that you read at a third grade level I'll expand upon my statement for you.

If I want to make up a big lie about the IRS what can I say while still keeping my statement 100% truthful?

"Every year the IRS introduces new forms. Taxpayers will have to fill out millions of new forms each and every year. That can't be cost effective!"

When the truth is the 2009 and 2010 forms are in fact different forms. The 2010 form will also be a "new form", even if it has 99% content similarity to the old form.

Ihope this clarifies the article you offered in a way that is approachable.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 13, 2010
SH, you obviously did not read the article:
"The new regulations, which kick in at the start of 2012, require any taxpayer with business income to issue 1099 forms to all vendors from whom they purchased more than $600 of goods and services that year. That promises to launch a fusillade of new paperwork: An estimated 40 million taxpayers will be subject to the requirement, including 26 million who run sole proprietorships, according to a report released this week by National Taxpayer Advocate Nina Olson."
""The new reporting burden, particularly as it falls on small businesses, may turn out to be disproportionate as compared with any resulting improvement in tax compliance," the Taxpayer Advocate Service wrote in a report released this week."
http://money.cnn....9_flood/
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 13, 2010
More 'reasonable' government rules:
""They're going to try to expand the rolls of Medicaid ... and at the same time they want to reduce the reimbursement to doctors," he said. "With the (pay) trend going downwards, I don't see additional physicians signing up. It's just not going to happen.""
"In planning their business survival strategies, doctors "have tended to look at what is the lowest-paying part of the market, which is Medicaid. It's not a hard economic decision," Banning said."
http://www.nbcdfw...569.html
This is perfectly 'reasonable' if the goal of the government is a complete takeover of health care. Base upon BHO's latest appointee, that is the goal.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 13, 2010
More 'reasonable' government rules:
""They're going to try to expand the rolls of Medicaid ... and at the same time they want to reduce the reimbursement to doctors," he said. "With the (pay) trend going downwards, I don't see additional physicians signing up. It's just not going to happen.""
"In planning their business survival strategies, doctors "have tended to look at what is the lowest-paying part of the market, which is Medicaid. It's not a hard economic decision," Banning said."
http://www.nbcdfw...569.html
This is perfectly 'reasonable' if the goal of the government is a complete takeover of health care. Based upon BHO's latest appointee, that is the goal.
Skeptic_Heretic
5 / 5 (1) Jul 13, 2010
Marjon, you've never owned a business I'm guessing.

Here are the current 1099 issuance guidelines:
http://www.ehow.c...099.html
From the link
Issue 1099-MISCs if you have or manage a trade or business and have paid $600 or more to an individual or partnership (or certain corporations) or have paid $10 or more in royalties.


Again your mastery of propaganda is "inciteful".

This is perfectly 'reasonable' if the goal of the government is a complete takeover of health care. Based upon BHO's latest appointee, that is the goal.
They didn't expand medicaid did they? Weren't you one of the loudest when it came to the cuts in medicaid? Oh yes, yes you were. I'm not feeding your idiocy any longer. Keep spewing your noise and know it is fully ignored.
marjon
1 / 5 (2) Jul 13, 2010
Weren't you one of the loudest when it came to the cuts in medicaid?

Why would I complain about cutting Medicaid?

More news stories

Egypt archaeologists find ancient writer's tomb

Egypt's minister of antiquities says a team of Spanish archaeologists has discovered two tombs in the southern part of the country, one of them belonging to a writer and containing a trove of artifacts including reed pens ...

NASA's space station Robonaut finally getting legs

Robonaut, the first out-of-this-world humanoid, is finally getting its space legs. For three years, Robonaut has had to manage from the waist up. This new pair of legs means the experimental robot—now stuck ...