Obama Promise
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=182995
Printed Date: 22 February 2026 at 9:38pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Obama Promise
Posted By: oldsoldier
Subject: Obama Promise
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 2:38pm
|
Having watched Obama's speech before Congress on his medical care initiative, where he stated "There will be no funding for illegal aliens in this bill" or words to that effect.
Now we find out that his goal now is how to "legalize" the illegal alien population. http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/18/obama-ties-immigration-to-health-care-battle/?feat=home_cube_position1 - http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/18/obama-ties-immigration-to-health-care-battle/?feat=home_cube_position1 So in his mind if he legalizes the illegal alien population he did not break his promise. And most of you here will buy into this logic. Please People....I have a bridge for sale in Brooklynn ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 2:45pm
|
It's a good thing that we don't already pay for illegal aliens when they go to hospitals. Wait... |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 2:47pm
|
See, you get it, that "promise" in the speech is as hollow as the individual making it. Just tell the sheeple what they want to here, not what we are actually doing or going to do, they will buy it. -------------
|
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 2:49pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
agentwhale007 wrote:Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 2:55pm
If you are serious about that bit, then that is what separates you from those with rational thought. And OS, I agree that it is underhanded, the way he went about. You won't find any backing from me concerning his method there. If you want to include health care to everyone, including aliens, grow a pair and be honest about it. |
Posted By: God
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 2:58pm
| Why not just have global health care and not have to worry about if someone is legal or not. Is your money more important that someones life? To some of you it seems to be the case. |
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:01pm
|
Double. ------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:01pm
And why is me not wanting my money to be spent on medical bills for people here illegally make me a bad person? ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:02pm
|
Because hospitals are more worried about treating a dieing person than figuring out if they are legal or not. "Yes, sir, I can see you have been shot 7 times, but before we can treat you we need proof that you are here legally. Sir! being unconscious isn't going to move this along any faster. Nurse, just go stick him in the waiting room until he decides he wants to talk to us." ------------- 
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:03pm
I agree, not American = Not human! ------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:04pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:05pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: Ceesman762
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:08pm
Ha!! LOL'ed! ------------- Innocence proves nothing FUAC!!!!! |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:12pm
The difference is that one is a theoretical excusing of crime, and the other is medical treatment. It is apples to oranges. Treating an alien is not excusing his or hers activities. In your world, if someone is hurt while committing a crime, do we not send them to the hospital as well?
And who, from an international relations standpoint, is going to enforce that this bill is paid? And why bill the country? The birth-nation of the alien didn't want said person to leave in the first place, most likely. Here is a crazy idea: Why not make it much easier to become a citizen? Then all these people coming to the country who are considered illegal can start paying taxes. Crazy idea, I know. |
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:14pm
Yes, because I'm sure the countries that they left for reasons such as healthcare and poverty will be more than happy to foot the bill for them within another country and further neglect the citizens still within theirs... ------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: Flurry
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:25pm
|
Oh, Come on guys...Most people are given a get outta jail free card. Commit crime, Get arrested, Go to jail, Contact attorney, Go to court, Get out scott free because of some minor screw up ot loop hole. That ot the judge just feels sorry for the "poor fellow" with 5 DUI's, he didn't mean to do it, doesn't need another one I'll let him go.
People are people. It doesn't matter if they are legal or not, if you need to go to the hospital. Just PAY your bill. I have picked up illegals before just to have them turned loose at the end of the day. It's all bs. ------------- It sucks being antisocial alone. |
Posted By: Ceesman762
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:27pm
|
why not take them to Canada?
------------- Innocence proves nothing FUAC!!!!! |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:34pm
|
NOT MY COUNTRYMEN
------------- 
|
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:37pm
|
Soo....
If I am camping with my buddies, and we kind of climb a fence into some guy's sweet back yard to pitch our tent instead of sticking to the public grounds - when we get mauled by bears, should the ER decline to treat us because we were there illegally?
If I am in an accident caused by my illegally high speed, should the ER decline to treat me?
And presumably we must now all carry national IDs to show our eligibility for medical care - forget about clean underwear. Anybody who can't produce their ID within three days of treatment: Time to call ICE.
Is that about right? ------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: rednekk98
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 3:56pm
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 4:14pm
Really, is it that irrational to not want to support criminal parasites with one's own hard-earned income?
Then by all means, feel free to invite them to Canada where the kind and caring government will take care of all their needs at your expense like they did for http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090917/ap_on_re_us/us_mystery_man;_ylt=AjX_ljej1n_W6AMeklh78Y.CfNdF - this guy . Excerpt below:
------------- 
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 4:18pm
|
What did that quoted article have to do with my point at all? ------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 4:24pm
|
It, combined with my witty, yet scathing commentary, points out the humor in a Canadian citizen insisting that hardworking American should welcome and support the poor of the world while his own country is being somewhat less accepting of those with problems.
-------------
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 4:25pm
|
OK Peter, if a group of illegals from Mexico decide to pitch a tent on your property, should law enforcement lower the priority to pick them up based on the fact they are only illegals and are not doing any real harm? And these illegals then demand that you personally pay for thier medical care, food and lodging, based on the fact that they do live on your property, you would pay gladly without reservation, since they are only illegals and are not doing anything truely harmfull. Just wondering. -------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 4:29pm
|
He probably would . . . and more power to him. It makes him a kinder person than me. However, when he complains about the expense and asks me for help I am going to laugh* and have another beer. *More of a snort combined with a sneer actually. -------------
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 4:33pm
| I'd like to point out that everyone in this thread that is a U.S. citizen already pays for the health care of illegal aliens. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 4:34pm
|
And some of us . . . at least me . . . are not happy about it at all.
-------------
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 4:38pm
|
Yes, because situations like that are a really common occurance... I don't recall saying the Canadian system was perfect. ------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 4:38pm
|
That's why only now it's been so important to complain about it?
-------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 4:44pm
|
I was going to say I've complained about it before, just not here, but I think I have at least once before and was labeled a heartless <child who was born out of wedlock> at the time.
-------------
|
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 4:53pm
Oh cool, as long as you aren't just hopping on the bandwagon. -------------
|
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 5:03pm
Excellent analogy that I brought upon myself.
After attempts at persuasion, I would eventually call the police to have trespassers removed, regardless of their immigration status. Unless we came to an arrangement on lawncare, of course.
But if I were in the business of providing a service or a charitable something, I would not deny it to them, either on basis of their status as trespassers or illegals. Frankly, I would be more upset with them for trespassing than for being illegal.
My point here was that a person's immigration status is unrelated to their healthcare needs. We have a basic rule that ERs must care for PEOPLE. If Charlie Manson breaks out of prison and gets injured, he can walk into the ER and get treatment. Surely we can do the same for a student who overstayed his visa.
And yes, in both cases they would and should get a bill.
And yes, if Manson were recognized, the hospital should call the police.
But, of course, most criminals in the ER are not Charlie Manson, and are not recognized, and therefore slip quietly into the night after getting treated. We do not criminal background checks on ER patients - why should we run immigration checks?
I, for one, am far more concerned about Charles Manson than some random illegal immigrant. Let's not make immigration violations out to be some great immoral act that they are not.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: God
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 5:15pm
| Redneck... where did i mention the UN? Ask any doctor (or any non plastic surgery one), a patient is a patient is a patience. What else is there judge a person on? The ability of the patient to pay so that they can pay off their six figure student loan debts? Not too many doctors think that way. |
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 6:17pm
|
China gets a big wall, why dont we? |
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 18 September 2009 at 7:38pm
Because people having equal rights/ opportunities is communism remember? |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 1:08am
Let's see, they're not here legally and they aren't citizens. While the ACLU would probably disagree I really don't see how this gives them the right to use up resources they don't contribute to. As for the people who belong here, it is about an equal opportunity, not equal results. If you don't go to school, get a decent job, or work hard despite not having a college education you have no right to the same things (i.e. big screen tv, health care) as the people who did work for them if you can't afford them. What you have is the right to try for whatever your goal is. -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 1:12am
|
Why is healthcare lumped in with a big screen tv?
------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: Flurry
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 1:49am
|
If a perosn from any other country wants to come here to live and work and enjoy all of the rights that comes with living here, do it the legal way. The Big problem with this is not the fact that they are here, but the fact that they are here accepting...Demanding society's resources with out attempting to pay back society...our society in any way. That is the problem with the health care and social security benifits being given to illegals. Expired Student Visa's, We have record of them coming here, and we know who they are and they came here legal. They just haven't gone back. Start the paperwork to stay. Random Illegal: No records, just came over and started to hang out. People of the world: Come to the States, BUT do it legal, obay the laws, and learn ENGLISH. Life isn't that hard. But then again we have natural born US citizens who can't get the simple stuff right eather.
jmac3: TV's and Healthcare are both expensive...thats the closest thing between the two. ------------- It sucks being antisocial alone. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 11:42am
No, you have to have three strikes for that.*
. . . and it was a randomly chosen example of things some people feel there entitled to. (Specifically, a relative I have that "can''t afford" to pay their hospital bills but can afford a big screen tv and a buttload of dvds and thinks this is why we need nationalized health care.) *Bandwagon; banned-wagon.  -------------
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 11:52am
|
Not true. I only have one strike right now, but I bet if I made a thread and filled it with screen shots of 2girls1cup, I would be instabanned
-------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 12:23pm
Not trying to start a debate, but healthcare isn't a luxury. There people who actually can't afford it or a big screen tv. Lumping them together is retarded. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: God
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 12:44pm
What I am proposing has nothing to do with borders, every country contributes to a pool of money, everyone goes to a hospital were they can get to one. Bill is paid out of the global pool of money. Basically the concept of if you get sick, you go to the nearest doctor and you get healthy. No more fight over who belongs where. Patients are people, what difference does it make where someone lives or was born?
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 12:50pm
That would mean paying for MUSLIMS!
-------------
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 1:21pm
Since when is healthcare a luxury item? ------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 2:23pm
|
I'm not saying it is. I'm saying if people want it they should either work harder or spend smarter rather than expecting those who do to pay for it for them.
-------------
|
Posted By: carl_the_sniper
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 2:44pm
|
And how well is that working? There are over 46 million uninsured Americans (Note: statistic taken before the recession). Do none of them deserve it since they clearly didn't work hard enough? ------------- <just say no to unnecessarily sexualized sigs> |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 3:28pm
Mack, what about the people who work hard and still can not afford? This is what I don't get. People just think it is possible for uninsured to "stop being lazy bums" and they'll suddenly be able to afford it. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 3:43pm
Stuck up much? No disrespect but you're coming off as an a-hole. -------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 4:20pm
|
^^^Is that better or worse than a heartless <child whose was born out of wedlock>? With that said, if someone wants to go back and review my posts in other threads on that subject, they will find where I voiced support for insurance programs for both children and those in school up through college. They will also find where I supported some type of less expensive insurance option (with corresponding benefits) to help those who can't afford it currently. However, in the context of this thread (which is specifically about working citizens supporting illegal aliens) I am completely opposed to providing assistance. I would ask that my comments be kept in that context. (Although I believe I strayed somewhat from it as well.) I am not even opposed to health care reform. As a minimum, the system need adjustment. What it does not need is the added expense of supporting a bunch on non-contributors who are not even in the country legally. -------------
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 4:33pm
So do you actually think that, or do you think that people who cannot afford insurance should just work harder, bootstraps, etc.? Because that ^ quote is a lot different than the same thing you said in this very thread. |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 7:33pm
|
These numbers thrown around by the various interests in this debate a highly questionable. There are those out there that take the chance and voluntarily do not have health insurance. There are those out there myself included that do not have health insurance, we are covered by the VA or Tri-Care so we are included in the number without health insurance by several left arguements.
Illegals are basically "stealing" funding from the current system, and nothing is done. As I asked Peter if these illegals parked in his backyard, and then demanded that he support them with all the needed items in life, and the government said he had to pay for the illegals on his property, would he? Trespassing is a fun word, the United States is a property owned by the citizens, and the illegals are trespassing, but since it affects someone else most here are not going to press for thier removal from the property. The system as we have now is functional, changing to a VA or Medicade styled system for 350million is a fiasco waiting to happen with the potential of the government to run it financially into the ground in mere months. The project tree as already published shows the path the money takes from patient to provider, with all the government stops in between. So how many cuts does the $1.00 in healthcare recieve, I am betting by the time the government is done the amount going from patuent to provider will be pennies on that dollar. Nature of the government beast, and we think the insurance companies take too much, just sit back and wait till the government gets thier hands in the pie. -------------
|
Posted By: Evil Elvis
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 10:47pm
|
Legalizing illegal aliens would be the best thing for all of us. Not only could we tax them and make Billions in revenue, Legal aliens then could get valid driving licenses and plates increasing money made by states. They could rent legally increasing money in areas and decreasing crowded slumlord ran roach motels in seedy area that lure in crime and other unwanted aspects.
These legalized Migrant Workers would be given basic healthcare and would be screened upon entry at the country. Many of the fats rising Arab countries have similar programs in place and they and the Migrant Workers are making great money. After their season is over they can return to their country of origin and return the next crop or working season. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 19 September 2009 at 10:50pm
I kind of thought the paragraph that followed the one you quoted clarified that issue. -------------
|
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 11:42am
I would love to see an example of this. I honestly doubt that this is true.
To the contrary - illegals generally contribute MORE to society than US citizens of equal socioeconomic status. If illegals are a drain, it is because they tend to be poor, and poor people are a drain. But as between a poor American and a poor illegal, the illegal is quite likely to be less of a drain than the American.
How so? If these programs are so bad, should we not just cancel them altogether? If they are good, should we not extend them?
You continue to sound like you support social benefits for yourself but not for anybody else.
Actually, there are numbers available showing the net efficiency for government programs, both in the US and abroad. And, as we keep pointing out, the US private healthcare industry is the most expensive and wasteful in the world. More overhead, more waste, less care per dollar. Medicaid and the VA, for instance, both have LOWER overhead than their private counterparts.
We all have to remember that private healthcare is not truly a free market anywhere in the world. It is one of the most regulated of all industries - as it should be - and as a result we cannot expect that market forces will be able to streamline the process. Moreover, healthcare is a natural monopoly of sorts, due to the inherent shortfall of information to the public, which further inhibits the ability of the market to create a good result.
The free market is a powerful tool, but it has significant limitations, and pretty much all of those limitations come into play with regard to healthcare. There are arguably not many industries at all that are LESS suited for free market success than healthcare.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 11:44am
Absolutely. Managing immigration is a central problem for this country, and it is a shame that we have allowed this to go on. Kudos to GW for making an honest attempt at fixing the problem; unfortunately, I don't think it is high on Obama's list. ------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 12:51pm
|
Not exactly sure how poor Americans are a bigger drain on society than illegals. Please explain.
As for legalizing aliens, how would this really solve anything? Isn't the point of coming in illegally to take jobs that no one else typically wants, that pay poorly? If we make them legal, doesn't this pretty much go against the theory? I..e, they are now legal and subject to U.S. labor laws which equates to having to abide by minimum wages, paying taxes etc.? Who is going to hire a foreign nanny, if they are actually going to have pay them true wages and take taxes out of their pay? Doesn't it just shift the work from patrolling the borders to having to police the sweat jobs and cabbage patches? If Juan (no racism meant) has to suddenly pay 20-30% of his income, or more, towards state and federal taxes, and now health insurance, doesn't this negate the reason for coming here in the first place? It will make the farmers, sweat shop owners, etc have to pay higher wages in order to compensate for the added expenses, which in turn will make hiring them in the first place a moot point won't it? Which puts us back to square one of people still sneaking in and not claiming themselves for not wanting to pay taxes. Getting licenses, auto insurance and legal living quarters all costs money, thus higher wages, thus thus, going back to hiring illegals. And if said aliens fail to pay taxes, which is what would most likely happen, as they woud just opt to do 1099, good luck finding them. Who's going to enforce it? What keeps them from just changing ID's and reapplying? Doesn't sound like it fixes the situation at all, just shifts the focus of enforcment to other agencies.
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 12:55pm
Actually eligible for welfare programs? ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 1:01pm
| Nothing like opinions based on fear and prejudice instead of information. |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 1:02pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 1:04pm
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 1:06pm
I'm not addressing any specific individual, just people doing that in general. People who are afraid of illegals ruining their country because they're illegals...and nothing more. |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 2:33pm
There probably is quite a bit of rear and prejudice involved. However, the link between illegal aliens and crime (MS13 probably being the best known example) does exist and it does fan the flames of fear and prejudice.
This ^^ is a very valid point. One of the topics covered in business ethics class I took dealt with the true costs of products and how in the interest of fairness those costs should be paid by the same people who get the benefits. I am going to digress with an example, so those who understand may feel free to skip the next paragraph. Butte Montana was the site of a major copper mine. The ore was removed as cheaply as possible and and the mining companies made good money while selling relatively inexpensive copper to consumers (of various types) who used if for their various needs. In this example the companies and consumers both got the benefits of inexpensively produced copper; however, the costs are still being paid by later generations that received no benefits from either the production, sales, or cheap purchases of the product. The cost is being paid through maintenance/clean up of the Berkely pit, which is a major part of the nation's largest superfund site. So this is an essentially "unfair" situation as those that received the benefits left the true costs for someone else to pay. (Those on the west coast who would like something else to be nervous about should research some of the potential the pit has for eventually affecting the water west of the continental divide.) Now back to the point made by oldpbnoob. Those of us who gain the benefits of cheap produce picked by illegals (as an example) may not be paying the true cost of the product we are enjoying the benefits of. While we like our cheap lettuce, who is actually paying for the costs related to the fact that some of these people are being a drain on the system without actually contributing? Perhaps all of us through taxes, but one could argue that the states where they are employed bear the burden more heavily than those where the produce is shipped to. A second question would be if we really want the system to change? Theoretically, food prices would go up (in this example), but there would be eventual potential for the "drain on society to decrease." (Not that we would ever see the money back, the government doesn't seem inclined to give refunds when they have surpluses. The best case scenario would be that the money was used wisely.) Oh well, just an observation/thought. I have to admit I have no idea where I was going with this point other than I found it interesting and figured perhaps someone else could expand on it. Edited to ask question in blue font above and correct misplacement of parenthesis. -------------
|
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 2:42pm
You know, your link actually explains in some detail many of federal benefits for which illegal immigrants are NOT eligible.
It points out that some manage to sneak by, but the fundamental point is that illegals are not eligible for huge chunks of state and federal benefits.
But, to answer your question in greater detail, we first have to divide the world of illegals in two:
1. First category: the truly undocumented. Working for cash, Home Depot parking lot, etc.
They pay property tax and sales tax at exactly the same rate as Americans of their economic status. They don't pay income tax, but neither do Americans at that income level. In fact, very poor Americans benefit from the occasional "tax credit" cash from the IRS, meaning that not only do the poorest Americans not pay the IRS, but the IRS pays them. Not so for illegals.
On the benefit side, illegals are generally ineligible for any kind of financial assistance. They may or may not be able to attend public schools, and they can use the roads and whatnot, but they are generally ineligible for unemployment benefits, disability benefits, retirement benefits, medical benefits (Medicare), child support benefits, tuition support, educational grants, educational loans and guarantees, etc.
The state and federal governments provide a very long list of cash benefits to poor Americans, and illegal immigrants are ineligible for the vast majority of them.
So basically, the poorest illegals pay no less taxes than their American counterparts, while getting far fewer of the benefits.
2. The somewhat-documented. People working on stolen/fraudulent social security cards, or legitimate SS cards but expired visas, etc.
These folks pay property and sales tax at the same rate as their American economic counterparts. They also have paycheck witholding at the same rate as their American counterparts, but they tend not to file tax returns, and therefore tend not to get tax refunds. As a result, they pay MORE income tax than their American counterparts. In addition, they pay in the full amount of social security and medicare tax.
On the benefit side, they may be eligible for, or be willing to pretend to be eligible for, greater benefits than the truly undocumented. Even so, as a group they receive far fewer benefits than their American economic counterparts. The biggest/most visible chunk of this is social security and Medicaid. While paying in the full amount, these people are ineligible for either benefit. As a result, illegal immigrants are supporting both social security and medicaid to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars.
So, side by side with economically comparable Americans, illegal (and to a lesser extent legal) immigrants contribute more and get less.
The real issue is that illegals tend to be poor, and the poor contribute less and get more than the wealthy. But this is purely a matter of economic demographics, not immigration status.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 2:47pm
Good question indeed.
And clearly just legalizing, without also addressing the underlying flaws in the immigration system, accomplishes nothing.
But I do believe that legalization has to be part of the solution. Part of, but certainly not the whole.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 2:48pm
|
The article also said that legal aliens were 43% more likely to be on welfare or other public assitance due to education inequalities. Seems to me that it would offset any gains by sales tax and property taxes paid by illegals. Also, not sure what property taxes you are speaking of??? If you are illegal, how can you pay property taxes? I don't see many migrant workers buying houses....? I could be wayyy off base, but I would venture a guess that the vast majority of them rent. ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 3:17pm
|
Excepting that now they are in the country legally, with little or no education and now eligible for public assistance....... As mentioned, the article says that legal aliens are 43% more likely to be on public assistance than American citizens. The rate was stated at 21% vs 15%. I would imagine it could be higher now, due to unemployement rates and the mindset of American employers. I could be wrong. But regardless.... So we have just legalized 12 million (?) people that are now eligible for welfare, medicare, medicaid, and potentially healthcare, that have little or no education and/or work skills. And we potentially are still not getting any input from them. No offense, but would you rather pick fruit for $4.00/hour in the hot sun or sit on your butt and collect welfare? I admit, I have little of no data on this, but again, I would highly suspect that the vast majority of illegals are doing low paying, non-skilled, non-desireable work. So now, we have legalized them, made them eligible and taken away any incentive to work. By your own statement you are saying that poor Americans are more of a drain than illegals. If we go by your logic and make them legal, aren't we essentially creating more poor Americans for all intent purposes? ------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 4:37pm
I'm not sure how welfare received by LEGAL aliens relates to tax contributions by ILLEGAL aliens?
And property taxes - renters pay property tax indirectly through their rent.
First off, not all of those illegals are future welfare recipients. I know plenty of illegals who make more money than most people on this forum. Very successful people who pay lots of taxes. If they were legal, they could do even more.
"Illegal" is one of those fuzzy terms that gets tossed around. People tend to focus on the Mexican bordercrossers (and not illogically so), but there are plenty of others as well.
There are plenty of illegals, for instance, who are highly educated abroad, but are forced to work menial jobs here because they have to stay under the radar. Legalizing these guys would help everybody.
Like I said, it is not the only part of the solution.
But it does have to be part of the solution, simply because otherwise we are left with this giant class of people living here in documentary no-man's land. Will legalizing be initially costly? Probably. Will it in the long run save us money by having everybody on the same page? Yes. Will it reduce crime by giving people a legitimate choice? Yes. Will it save the lives of children by getting them better healthcare? Yes.
The bottom line is that we have a society full of structure. But we also have this class of people who have no specified place within the structure, and that is bad for everybody. What place exactly they should have is a matter for discussion - I am not even saying that all current illegals should necessarily be eligible for various benefits - but we need to define what their place is.
Right now we have this tremendous labor pool that is being underutilized because it is forced into menial labor regardless of actual capabilities. That is wasteful. It also strains our society's ability to cope with these people whom we do not know how to characterize and categorize.
Would it have been better if they had never come in illegally, and we had a rational immigration system from the beginning? Yes, but that isn't what happened. Instead we have this mess, and we have to deal with it. Clearly we need to stop illegal immigration. But once we have done so, we also need to deal with the reality of the millions of undocumented people already here. "Kick'em out" is not a realistic option, for several reasons, therefore they have to stay, at least most of them. After that, it is just a matter of how to categorize them.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: oldpbnoob
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 5:03pm
|
I would argue that your illegals that are extremely successfull are an extreme minority. I still don't see how making illegals legal is going to help the economy or anything else, when the statistic clearly says that even legal aliens have a higher rate of public assistance usage than do poor citizens. I have yet to hear a scenario that makes sense. Again, by legalizing them, we are opening the gates to further immigration arent we? So now that they are legal, what's to keep them from bringing their families over as well? So instead of 12 million, we now have 36 million accounting for wives, children etc. I would imagine that is a pretty conservative figure.
Interesting site regarding education figures and impacts: http://www.usillegalaliens.com/impacts_of_illegal_immigration_education.html - http://www.usillegalaliens.com/impacts_of_illegal_immigration_education.html
Also, from 2002, but:
http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html - http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
------------- "When I grow up I want to marry a rich man and live in a condor next to the beach" -- My 7yr old daughter. |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 5:20pm
No doubt. I use them merely as an example of the oft-underestimated diversity of the illegal crowd.
Wrong comparison. The better question is "would legal status (of some kind) allow current illegals to contribute more to society than they do now?"
And there I would think the question is rather obviously yes. The market forces of capitalism say so.
Slavery, indentured servitude, and all other forms of restricted labor are by definition inefficient use of resources. Illegal aliens (while not slaves) are restricted in their ability to better themselves and restricted in their ability to put their talents to the best use. This is wasteful.
Therefore, if we remove those barriers, and allow illegal aliens to be all they can be, so to speak, then the market will take care of the rest. Some illegals will move up corporate ladders, some will go to school, others will run for office... Putting college professors (actual or potential) to work driving cabs is wasteful. It is the kind of thing that Mao did. It was bad economic policy then, and it is bad economic policy now.
It benefits society when all members of society can seek their highest and best use.
Probably.
But, of course, full citizenship is not the only option. Various guest-worker programs have been proposed. The central issue with US immigration isn't really about citizenship, but employment authorization. Right now our system is set up to attract the least educated and least capable, instead of the most educated and productive. Automatic citizenship (or even citizenship at all) is not required to remedy this problem.
The current bundle of illegals living here today is a legacy problem. It is not the main problem, but a side effect we have to deal with once we get a handle on the real problem.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 5:20pm
|
When the government moves to Soylent Green, you will wish we had those extra 36 million.
-------------
|
Posted By: brihard
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 5:51pm
No dude, no proper documentation on raising and transportation. They wouldn't have met FDA food quality standards. ------------- "Abortion is not "choice" in America. It is forced and the democrats are behind it, with the goal of eugenics at its foundation." -FreeEnterprise, 21 April 2011. Yup, he actually said that. |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 21 September 2009 at 6:22pm
lulz also, 12,000 posts. -------------
|