Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 225

Thread: Immigration rant no. 137

  1. #51
    Veteran Member Kitten Foster's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2010
    Posts
    360
    Thanks
    178
    Thanked 129 Times in 92 Posts
    My Mood
    Yeehaw

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    a lot of the time the identities that they steal are that of children and babies as it usually takes longer for someone to catch on to these and gives them time to sell them to fellow illegal immigrants and the cycle continues.

  2. #52
    Banned
    Joined
    Sep 2010
    Location
    In your dreams :)
    Posts
    604
    Thanks
    398
    Thanked 254 Times in 156 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by Kitten Foster View Post
    a lot of the time the identities that they steal are that of children and babies as it usually takes longer for someone to catch on to these and gives them time to sell them to fellow illegal immigrants and the cycle continues.
    Babies? Oh so they stopped using dead people's identities? Interesting.

    Thats not too smart using babies...

  3. #53
    Banned
    Joined
    Sep 2010
    Location
    In your dreams :)
    Posts
    604
    Thanks
    398
    Thanked 254 Times in 156 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by Kitten Foster View Post
    they steal identities in order to do it. it's very common here in arizona. we have a very high identity theft rate here.
    Well said.

    and unfortunately this is very easy to do

  4. #54
    Veteran Member Kitten Foster's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2010
    Posts
    360
    Thanks
    178
    Thanked 129 Times in 92 Posts
    My Mood
    Yeehaw

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by KaylaM View Post
    Babies? Oh so they stopped using dead people's identities? Interesting.

    Thats not too smart using babies...

    lol i'm sure they are still using dead people's identities too but yeah identity theft of children and babies is definitely on the rise here.


    if we tighten up our border and cut off all their freebies and welfare it could curb a lot of this poor behavior.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Kitten Foster For This Useful Post:


  6. #55
    Featured Member flickad's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,860
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 103 Times in 67 Posts
    My Mood
    Pensive

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    To the OP: I see what you mean. While this isn't technically illegal, it does look a lot like circumventing the purpose of the immigration laws, much like tax loophole schemes. It is of course perfectly understandable that these parents want US citizenship for their children, much as it presents no mystery that people will avoid paying tax if they can. But these legal-but-dodgy sorts of evasions do seem like they put an extra burden on the rest of us for no good reason (since they don't involve the sort of special circumstances that would normally warrant an exemption from the laws that bind everyone else).

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to flickad For This Useful Post:


  8. #56
    Featured Member flickad's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    1,860
    Thanks
    268
    Thanked 103 Times in 67 Posts
    My Mood
    Pensive

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by jester214 View Post
    Isn't there something to be said though for wanting to protect your bottom line? Giving your country and the people in it the best they can possibly get? Even if that means keeping others out?
    There's a balance of considerations at play here, I think. When the infrastructure and economic health is there, there's not a lot of rational justification for keeping out immigrants with clean criminal histories, no infectious diseases and who are generally of fit and proper character. But when the infrastructure of your own country isn't able to support all its citizens, it doesn't make a lot of sense to open the borders to more people. Immigration policy at any relevant time should reflect the given circumstances. Sometimes it is appropriate to tighten controls on it so as to best serve the people who already live in the country (who are always going to be - and should be - the government's first priority), and sometimes we are in a position to be more giving in terms of our resources and, in that case, it might be appropriate to raise immigration quotas.

    With respect to Australia, where I live, the infrastructure to support a huge influx of people is not currently available. In Melbourne we have a rental shortage and our roads and public transport are stretched beyond capacity. The economy here has survived the GFC quite well, but is not so robust as to support jobs for a large number of new applicants. Growth is slow. Given these factors, it would fly in the face of common sense to have a high immigration quota right now. The resources for that just aren't there. At a later time, when and if infrastructure is sufficiently improved, that may change.

    This doesn't mean that illegal immigrants are evil and should be demonised (or incarcerated for years on end, which as well as being disproportionate, would cost far more than letting them stay in the country, even with years of welfare payments), but it does mean that each country needs to be sensible and take care of its existing citizens in determining what their immigration policy needs to be at any given point.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to flickad For This Useful Post:


  10. #57
    Featured Member
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,968
    Thanks
    798
    Thanked 1,121 Times in 605 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by ArmySGT. View Post
    Yes, thats fine actually. The difference really is that your Grandmother had a support system there on hand. She didn't need to take from the Government coffers because ostensibly your Family provided. Being aged likely some Govt health care was still used that someones tax dollars provided for.
    .
    Umm, yes. Our tax dollars. My parents and mine and my other family members here. It all goes into the pot and we've more than paid our share. We started paying taxes the second we got here. Sales tax, vehicle tax, property tax, income tax. It all goes into the pot. At least the government still provides for the elderly and children, just like all other civilized countries. Where I come from, elderly ladies are begging in the streets or standing on frozen sidewalks trying to sell bootleg cigarettes so they can eat. I don't know how much she got from social security because it was long ago. But I'm happier living in a country that WILL take care of elderly who cannot work, rather than throwing them onto the streets. What would have happened if we all died in an accident after she got here, once she had at least some type of non-permanant residency established? Make her starve and live in the streets without any assistance?

    Want to make Texas a better place? Make all the lazy fucks living on Section 9 housing smoking weed all day and selling drugs out of their free housing go to work.

  11. #58
    Featured Member
    Joined
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    1,968
    Thanks
    798
    Thanked 1,121 Times in 605 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by ArmySGT. View Post
    . When he did start a Family, his children were forbidden to speak Portuguese in front of guests. He was so damn proud that they could speak English he wanted his guests to know it. They also had to take turns reading the news paper out loud in English. Both to help him and because he was just as proud they could read. He wanted his descendants to be Americans not another dumb Portagee fisherman.
    .
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellydancer View Post
    I think in KS Stevia's case that seems right. I know of a case where this couple came here after they retired from USSR before the country split up and managed to get social security here though they never paid in. I'd like to know how they did it but they did and it makes me livid, especially if social security goes broke as predicted.

    my one guy friend (the one I call Flakey) is more anti illegal immigration than me. What I don't mention is his parents are immigrants from Italy! They worked hard, came here legally and learned English. My friend barely speaks Italian and served in the navy.
    So being American is about forgetting your ties and foreign language skills? Knowing a second or third language actually creates more marketable job opportunities in this global culture. Although the case for ArmySGT is different, in that it was generations ago...for Flakey, shame on him for being proud not to know Italian. I've just been doing some work with the Italian Trade Commission. All of those guys are US born Italians, or immigrants from a young ago who kept their language. Now they are doing great helping American exports into Italy and quality Italian imports into the US...also US/Italy foreign relations work.

    US is a melting pot, one can assimilate and keep their roots, traditions, and language strong.

    Re: being "livid" because the retired couple got social security. SS abuse occurs every single day. What else was the couple going to live on? Are you aware of the incomes in the former Soviet Union, they weren't shit. People didn't make enough money to save.

    Also, how did a retired couple managed to come here from USSR without any skills or family or any support? Me thinks you don't know the entire story. Coming from a community of soviet refuges, I know all the tricks and back door ways of entry. And believe me, either they had some family, familial support, OR they needed the money so they didn't starve on the streets.

    Lots of presumptiousness here by people who have lived very comfortable lives as american citizens. And no I am not against immigration control, just trying to wrap my head around some of your insensitivities.

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to KS_Stevia For This Useful Post:


  13. #59
    Featured Member
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,030
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 117 Times in 78 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by Djoser View Post
    Trying to say the US has no history of imperialism, while ignoring the genocide practiced on Native Americans in order to take their land, is a pretty useless argument. Trying to say we should throw open our borders to every starving, uneducated, desperate person wanting US citizenship, because the USA has a checkered history of exploitation from 150 years ago, is an equally invalid approach.
    I don't think anyone said the US had no history of imperialism, and I while personally don't consider everything that was done to Native Americans to always have been for imperialist reasons, some scholars disagree.

    The fact still stand though that that we had little imperialist action in Africa and only a slight amount in South America. Considering those are the places that most of our immigrants come from, the argument that our "imperialist behavior" caused us to have the immigration problems with have today makes little if any sense. Which was the point that was made.

  14. #60
    God/dess tempest666's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Hamburg, Pennsylvania
    Posts
    10,607
    Thanks
    2,705
    Thanked 13,685 Times in 4,414 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5
    My Mood
    In Love

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    I didnt expect this this thread to mushroom overnight.
    "Fake tits are like Kevlar. They don't guarantee your chances of survival but they sure as hell improve it."
    Tempest

  15. #61
    God/dess
    Joined
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,066
    Thanks
    440
    Thanked 1,844 Times in 779 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    it is an absurd argument when people use this "my great grand parents came here from italy and they did it legally" rationale. it is an extremely rare thing for an immigrant to not do SOMETHING illegal, whether it be bribing someone, changing a birthdate on a document to increase the odds of getting a visa, lying about something on an application, whatever.

    it is VERY difficult to get into the united states. the likelihood for entry decreases with age, skin darkness, socioeconomic status, education level...so again, there are far too many people who are ranting and raving about doing shit the "legal" way when they don't know the obstructions in place that make the legal way nearly impossible for so many people.

    and if you really don't see the bigotry inherent to "arizona is starting to look like mexico", then i don't know what to tell you. if you do not want to live in close proximity to mexicans, perhaps you should not live so close to the mexican border.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to camille27 For This Useful Post:


  17. #62
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by KS_Stevia View Post
    So being American is about forgetting your ties and foreign language skills? Knowing a second or third language actually creates more marketable job opportunities in this global culture. Although the case for ArmySGT is different, in that it was generations ago...for Flakey, shame on him for being proud not to know Italian. I've just been doing some work with the Italian Trade Commission. All of those guys are US born Italians, or immigrants from a young ago who kept their language. Now they are doing great helping American exports into Italy and quality Italian imports into the US...also US/Italy foreign relations work.

    US is a melting pot, one can assimilate and keep their roots, traditions, and language strong.

    Re: being "livid" because the retired couple got social security. SS abuse occurs every single day. What else was the couple going to live on? Are you aware of the incomes in the former Soviet Union, they weren't shit. People didn't make enough money to save.

    Also, how did a retired couple managed to come here from USSR without any skills or family or any support? Me thinks you don't know the entire story. Coming from a community of soviet refuges, I know all the tricks and back door ways of entry. And believe me, either they had some family, familial support, OR they needed the money so they didn't starve on the streets.

    Lots of presumptiousness here by people who have lived very comfortable lives as american citizens. And no I am not against immigration control, just trying to wrap my head around some of your insensitivities.
    I think Flakey is wrong in that aspect because I wish I knew the languages my ancestors knew. I can barely speak Polish and know a little of French, though my grandparents were fluent in these languages. Regarding Flakey it's almost like he's ashamed his parents were born in Italy because he often makes a point of talking about his military service or things like that instead of Italian. I've asked him in the past to teach me some Italian culture and language and he was almost annoyed with that.

    As for the USSR couple I feel sorry for them but if they came here without any support then it's not fair we pay for them. I realize it was rough there but it's rough here too (especially now) and we can't support people who never paid in. Btw when I say that I mean anyone who abuses the welfare system, whether immigrants or citizens. I know that many other countries do limit older people from coming because they'll never be able to pay into the system and they can't be supported. If someone comes and is taken care of by family members that is completely different.

  18. #63
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Btw, everyone who doesn't see the problem with illegal immigration watch this video: . This was a video from CBS News.

  19. #64
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    A kid born in an Arizona hospital is just as American as any other kid born in the US no matter who their parents are or where they are from, i don't see what the debate is.
    How do I say this tactfully ... this isn't what the original constitution says, and it's not what the 14th amendment says either. Basically, in the absence of an official congressional determination or a relevant US supreme court ruling, it is what the US federal gov't has allowed to evolve since the 1965 LBJ signing of the 'Immigration and Nationalization Act'.

    Historically speaking, in the 19th century the USA basically had an open and unrestricted immigration policy ... meaning that anyone from anywhere else in the world could come to America and become a 'legal' permanent resident. The children of those 'legal' permanent residents were automatically granted American citizenship ... arguably on the basis that their parents were legal residents and ( via the naturalization process ) eligible for American citizenship. But in the 1920's the open and unrestricted immigration policy ended ... and with it a distinction was created between temporary visiting foreign nationals and 'legal' immigrants to the USA. Illegal aliens are not 'legal' permanent residents and are not eligible for the naturalization process. Legally speaking, they are foreign nationals who have 'overstayed' their visitor status in violation of US law.

    Thus the 'chain' of potential citizenship that automatically existed prior to the enactment of immigration restrictions in the 1920's ( i.e. pre 1924 where everyone who entered the USA was eligible for 'legal' permanent resident status and eventual US citizenship, versus post 1924 'consular control' legislation instituting visa requirements being enacted) was then technically broken in regard to the children of non visa holding 'visiting' foreign nationals born in the USA.


    Illegal immigrants are under US jurisdiction. If they get caught breaking any US laws and are convicted, they will go to jail or prison. They do not have diplomatic immunity.
    You are attempting to confuse / unconstitutionally expand the basic right of the American gov't to prosecute and punish visiting foreign nationals who commit crimes while in the USA with the American gov't assuming legal 'jurisdiction' over a foreign national as soon as they step on / commit a crime on US soil.

    There's a historically based discussion of this issue in depth at which includes some extremely telling commentary by the senators / congressmen who drafted the 14th amendment.

    This basic logic of a gov't having 'jurisdiction' over citizens / legal residents but not having 'jurisdiction' over visiting foreign nationals applies in the way I have described it in virtually every country in the world. To clarify the point I'll provide an example ... if the concept of 'jurisdiction' actually worked the way you claim, then gov'ts would have 'jurisdiction' to immediately draft every foreign visitor stepping foot in their country into that country's military. Similarly, if 'jurisdiction' actually worked the way you claim, every foreign visitor stepping foot in their country would have an immediate right to vote in that country's elections as well as an immediate right to collect social welfare benefits.

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 10-18-2010 at 12:29 PM.

  20. #65
    God/dess
    Joined
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,066
    Thanks
    440
    Thanked 1,844 Times in 779 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    i still don't see why this is bad. they want their children to have better lives, so they do whatever is necessary.

    i am not a mother, but i would walk through hell if it meant my child would have a better chance in the world.

    again, this is a terrible forum to use the "they're wasting our tax dollars!" argument.

    but immigrants are an easy scapegoat and that's why they bear the brunt of so much hostility. i find it a bit ironic that sex workers, perhaps society's favorite scapegoats, are so up-in-arms over a marginalized group of people. but i suppose if you give people the opportunity to oppress someone else, they take it.



    Quote Originally Posted by Kellydancer View Post
    Btw, everyone who doesn't see the problem with illegal immigration watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_ZnX9JRo5M. This was a video from CBS News.

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to camille27 For This Useful Post:


  22. #66
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by camille27 View Post
    i still don't see why this is bad. they want their children to have better lives, so they do whatever is necessary.

    i am not a mother, but i would walk through hell if it meant my child would have a better chance in the world.

    again, this is a terrible forum to use the "they're wasting our tax dollars!" argument.

    but immigrants are an easy scapegoat and that's why they bear the brunt of so much hostility. i find it a bit ironic that sex workers, perhaps society's favorite scapegoats, are so up-in-arms over a marginalized group of people. but i suppose if you give people the opportunity to oppress someone else, they take it.
    Did you watch that video? They interviewed a woman who got free c-section courtesy of American taxpayers! Yes it is bad. I don't want to pay for someone's free c-section who never paid in. I'd prefer my tax dollars go to people who pay in, not mooches like her.

  23. #67
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    ^^^ not to mention the probable 18 to 21 years worth of US taxpayer funded welfare checks, food stamp benefits, subsidized housing benefits, subsidized utility benefits, medicaid benefits, subsidized public education / public college tuition benefits etc. that the US born 'anchor baby' and his now semi-legal resident parent(s) will be eligible to receive under present de-facto US gov't policy.

    I have avoided a personal opinion on this topic, but I will offer some comments I have heard in my new 'home' way south of the border. The locals down here consider this de-facto US policy discriminatory because it tends to favor Mexicans who are within 'walking distance' of the US border !!!

    However, by the same logic, this de-facto US policy also discriminates against the citizens of every other country besides Canada and Mexico because their ability to illegally enter the USA is far more difficult. Of course Canadians have no motivation to illegally enter the USA since their own country's social welfare benefits are equally generous. But Mexico's social welfare benefit system is nowhere near as generous.

    The basic issue boils down to the goals of LEGAL US immigration policy i.e. the US gov't approving legal immigrants who A. are not a public health hazard, B. possess enough basic education / skills such that the probability of them becoming a 'burden' on US taxpayers is reasonably low. The de-facto policy of granting US citizenship to any child born on US soil, and in turn granting that child ( and the now semi-legal parents ) full access to US social welfare benefits, completely bypasses this LEGAL immigration policy.
    Last edited by Melonie; 10-18-2010 at 02:13 PM.

  24. #68
    God/dess
    Joined
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,066
    Thanks
    440
    Thanked 1,844 Times in 779 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    yes, i watched it.
    i suppose you would rather the doctors let her bleed out on the ground outside of the hospital? or maybe waited for the mother and baby to die from complications? if you cannot see the obvious reason why she was given a free c-section courtesy of u.s. taxpayers, then i don't know what to tell you.

    the fact is, your tax dollars go to lots of shit. if you knew about all the things that tax money is used for, you would probably be very unhappy. but you are choosing an easy scapegoat for your hostility.
    your tax dollars provide rapists in prison with medical care, wifi internet access, and three meals a day, but a pregnant woman who just crossed a river should be turned away from a hospital? please.


    again. compassion. a lovely trait to possess.

  25. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to camille27 For This Useful Post:


  26. #69
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by camille27 View Post
    yes, i watched it.
    i suppose you would rather the doctors let her bleed out on the ground outside of the hospital? or maybe waited for the mother and baby to die from complications? if you cannot see the obvious reason why she was given a free c-section courtesy of u.s. taxpayers, then i don't know what to tell you.

    the fact is, your tax dollars go to lots of shit. if you knew about all the things that tax money is used for, you would probably be very unhappy. but you are choosing an easy scapegoat for your hostility.
    your tax dollars provide rapists in prison with medical care, wifi internet access, and three meals a day, but a pregnant woman who just crossed a river should be turned away from a hospital? please.


    again. compassion. a lovely trait to possess.
    Yes I know taxpayer money is wasted but I don't want HER to take money SHE NEVER PAID INTO. She should have been deported or better yet let her work off her debt from the hospital. I know people who had surgeries they couldn't afford and the hospital went after them for everything. Why not do the same to freeloading mooches like her?

  27. #70
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    ^^^ not to mention the probable 18 to 21 years worth of US taxpayer funded welfare checks, food stamp benefits, subsidized housing benefits, subsidized utility benefits, medicaid benefits, subsidized public education / public college tuition benefits etc. that the US born 'anchor baby' and his now semi-legal resident parent(s) will be eligible to receive under present de-facto US gov't policy.

    I have avoided a personal opinion on this topic, but I will offer some comments I have heard in my new 'home' way south of the border. The locals down here consider this de-facto US policy discriminatory because it tends to favor Mexicans who are within 'walking distance' of the US border !!!

    However, by the same logic, this de-facto US policy also discriminates against the citizens of every other country besides Canada and Mexico because their ability to illegally enter the USA is far more difficult. Of course Canadians have no motivation to illegally enter the USA since their own country's social welfare benefits are equally generous. But Mexico's social welfare benefit system is nowhere near as generous.

    In fact I've heard (you probably have too) that Mexico is very strict who they allow in and they deport often. I'm sure that we are paying for this mooch and others like her. There's another video I saw on CBS where it interviewed this illegal couple moving from Arizona because "they don't want us here". Of course the family were both unemployed, had 10 kids and didn't speak English. Want to bet we pay for them too?

  28. #71
    God/dess
    Joined
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,066
    Thanks
    440
    Thanked 1,844 Times in 779 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    again, educating yourself on how someone can obtain citizenship in the united states, and the actual demographic of u.s. citizens who do not pay taxes or who "mooch" off the aid systems in place would be beneficial here. this is the problem with getting your information from fox news. because you start saying nonsensical things like, "well, i HEARD mexico is strict about...."

    try not to spread false and inflammatory information. it is VERY easy to enter mexico. i did so earlier this month. you can enter mexico without any documentation of any kind. you might be shit out of luck if you want to leave or get into trouble with the police, but you can definitely cross the border without showing anyone identification. porous borders is part of nafta.

  29. #72
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    But the question isn't about how many citizens mooch off the system (I oppose that too), the question is how many ILLEGALS mooch off the system. That's the difference. Btw, I don't watch Fox News at all. I have seen articles that Mexico is very strict on who can mooch off the system and who can become citizens. That illegals are deported to whatever country they came from. I have seen the stats on how many illegals mooch off the system and it's somewhere in the 6 billion dollar range or so. That money would be better off spent on things like educating kids or helping American citizens.

  30. #73
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    i suppose you would rather the doctors let her bleed out on the ground outside of the hospital? or maybe waited for the mother and baby to die from complications? if you cannot see the obvious reason why she was given a free c-section courtesy of u.s. taxpayers, then i don't know what to tell you.
    I have no problem with the illegal immigrant mother and her baby receiving the required medical care at US taxpayer expense, out of simple human compassion if nothing else. What I do have a problem with is that, after the US taxpayer funded medical treatment during the birth, there will be another 18-21 years worth of other US taxpayer money that will have to be handed over to the 'anchor baby' and her now quasi-legal parents in the form of ongoing social welfare benefits.

    Like it or not, where US taxpayers are concerned, this is arguably a 'zero sum' game. Every US taxpayer dollar that is spent by the gov't to provide subsidies / social welfare benefits for 'anchor babies' and their now quasi-legal parents is a dollar that the citizen / legal immigrant US taxpayer is unable to spend on behalf of their own children !!!

  31. #74
    God/dess
    Joined
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,066
    Thanks
    440
    Thanked 1,844 Times in 779 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    how many "mooch" off the system? where are you getting your information from? what are the numbers of undocumented immigrants who are "mooching"? because there are very few progressive countries in which a hospital will turn ANYONE away because of their inability to pay, whether it's for a childbirth, a papercut, a heart attack, whatever.

    so what are the welfare systems that mexican immigrants are draining? public education? public education has been failing for decades. healthcare? this is provided in any humane society despite one's ability to pay. any stable country you go to, no doctor will let you die because you cannot pay. food subsidies? so people should starve? and then they will end up in the emergency room anyway? show the significant drain that mexican immigrants are placing on society. jobs? that was the goal of nafta! u.s. citizens want cheap everything and then they get shocked when jobs have to go to non-us citizens in order to keep costs low.


    so where is the drain on the "system"? your tax dollars are going mostly to build highways and to fund weapon research for present and future wars, not to pregnant mexican women.

    even if you kicked every undocumented immigrant out of the united states, the public education system would still be a trainwreck, the healthcare system would still me a mess, government aid would still be ineffective. that is the problem with a scapegoat. you are blaming something that is not the cause for the problem. it is so common during a bad economy to blame an easy target for everything. hitler did this. he was extremely successful at getting rid of his problem. isn't this what the other poster was suggesting? rounding up all of "them", jailing anyone who tried to protect "them", getting "them" out of our country?



    Quote Originally Posted by Kellydancer View Post
    But the question isn't about how many citizens mooch off the system (I oppose that too), the question is how many ILLEGALS mooch off the system. That's the difference. Btw, I don't watch Fox News at all. I have seen articles that Mexico is very strict on who can mooch off the system and who can become citizens. That illegals are deported to whatever country they came from. I have seen the stats on how many illegals mooch off the system and it's somewhere in the 6 billion dollar range or so. That money would be better off spent on things like educating kids or helping American citizens.

  32. #75
    Banned
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    11,037
    Thanks
    1,891
    Thanked 5,124 Times in 3,086 Posts

    Default Re: Immigration rant no. 137

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    I have no problem with the illegal immigrant mother and her baby receiving the required medical care at US taxpayer expense, out of simple human compassion if nothing else. What I do have a problem with is that, after the US taxpayer funded medical treatment during the birth, there will be another 18-21 years worth of other US taxpayer money that will have to be handed over to the 'anchor baby' and her now quasi-legal parents in the form of ongoing social welfare benefits.

    Like it or not, where US taxpayers are concerned, this is arguably a 'zero sum' game. Every US taxpayer dollar that is spent by the gov't to provide subsidies / social welfare benefits for 'anchor babies' and their now quasi-legal parents is a dollar that the citizen / legal immigrant US taxpayer is unable to spend on behalf of their own children !!!
    This is what I agree with entirely. I am compassionate but there comes a time we can't support everyone who comes here.

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Arizona and Immigration
    By tempest666 in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 210
    Last Post: 12-19-2010, 06:56 AM
  2. immigration/visa questions
    By Corgan in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-04-2008, 01:33 AM
  3. New Immigration Law....?
    By LuckiCharm in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 05-21-2007, 06:38 AM
  4. The facts on immigration ...
    By Melonie in forum Member Boards
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-16-2007, 09:22 AM
  5. stripping and immigration
    By Adelina in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-10-2007, 10:29 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •