1
   

Illegal Immigrants not a burden to health care?

 
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 10:22 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
Tancredo is upholding the law of the land.


He most certainly only hired the two illegal immigrants to remodel his basement due to his Christian altruism.


You got proof of that?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 10:28 am
LoneStarMadam wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
Tancredo is upholding the law of the land.


He most certainly only hired the two illegal immigrants to remodel his basement due to his Christian altruism.


You got proof of that?


No, that was irony. He said, he didn't know it.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 10:31 am
I'm not up on the Tancredo story but it's very possible he didn't know. the construction trades are dominated by illegals in the U.S. these days. You interview and hire a contractor, who then sends over a bunch of Mexicans to do the work. You have no idea who they are. Typically, one of them will know English well enough to speak for the crew. That would be the foreman. It's nothing new, but it's getting really old.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 10:46 am
roger wrote:


You are taking this too broadly, Wilso. The only illegals paying federal income and social security taxes are those working under counterfeit documents. Tax deductions are made through payroll, as is required. It's not the governments fault there is no social security account for the money to be applied to. And who knows? Maybe someday, they will actually get a valid ss account and all that money will be just waiting to be applied. So far as income tax deductions go, it's no more stealing than when they take it from me. I'm legal, by the way.


This is incorrect.

The IRS issues a Taxpayer Information number to anyone who requests one that can be used to file income taxes.

I have a couple of friends who work as housekeepers and file taxes as sole proprietors. Many immigrants want to pay taxes, and do so as independent contractors. I am pretty sure the number of millions of dollars collected under these TIN numbers is public information, but right now I am too lazy to look for it.

Many of the agencies that help undocumented workers preach that immigrants need to be responsible with their taxes since this is part of being part of American society (which most immigrants dearly want), and most of them provide support to help people file.

I can say from personal knowledge that many undocumented workers... even those that don't have money withheld, pay taxes.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 10:58 am
You mean to say that people want to pay taxes that they don't really owe since they aren't really here in the first place? Oh, wait, I forgot, all those illegals will wind up voting Dumbocrat once given amnesty (ebp wets his pants with excitement).
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 11:00 am
The only amnesty for illegal immigrants that i have seen in this nation in my lifetime was during the Republican administration of Ronnie Ray-gun. I guess it was a bad idea when a Republican came up with it, too, huh?
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 11:04 am
Sorry, ebrown. I should have qualified my statement to limit it to my experience. Those working with unverifiable social security numbers do pay social security taxes. Also, federal taxes are withheld, depending on filing status, gross income, number of dependents declared, and so on.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 11:10 am
Setanta wrote:
The only amnesty for illegal immigrants that i have seen in this nation in my lifetime was during the Republican administration of Ronnie Ray-gun. I guess it was a bad idea when a Republican came up with it, too, huh?


It was, but twenty years ago we didn't have 20 million illegals either.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 11:19 am
If it's a bad idea, it's bad idea with twenty people or twenty million people. You're trying to hedge your bet there. Apart from that, i think you're making **** up with that 20,000,000 figure, i've consistently read 12,000,000 in news accounts, so you've inflated it by 67% in the attempt to make your point more lurid. But, you don't really have a point.

According to Wikipedia, the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act applied to 2.7 million people. Even if that is not 12,000,000, that's still a significant number. But apart from that, the 1986 IRCA had employer sanctions which have been largely ignored. That's because whether the politicians are Democrats or Republicans, far too many of them benefit from the contributions of employers who don't want the situation to change.

You were attempting to claim that Democrats are creating or going to create a problem for the nation with regard to illegal immigrants. This is not a partisan issue--Republicans have hemmed and hawed, dragged their heels and cheated outright in these matters just as much as Democrats have.

Your prejudices are showing again (as is usual); this time, it's your partisan prejudices.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 11:42 am
According to this article in The Washington Times, dated July, 2003, Hispanic voters are turning from the Democrats to the Republicans. The Washington Times, founded by the Moonies, is well known as a conservative newspaper.

According to this USA Today article, published just after the 2004 election, Bush got 44% of the Hispanic vote. USA Today is considered to be a "centrist" newspaper, although its founder, Al Neuharth is considered to be a conservative.

This article by an Associated Press writer contains the following interesting paragraphs:

Quote:
Half of Hispanic voters in Texas, traditionally Democratic, gave their support to GOP Gov. George W. Bush, who made it clear that he had no interest in the sort of anti-immigrant policies backed by California Republicans.

Helping matters, Bush also speaks fluent Spanish. So does his brother, Jeb Bush, who is married to a Mexican-American and was elected governor of Florida, thanks in part to a strong Hispanic vote.

Meanwhile, in California, Hispanics are still furious at GOP support for anti-immigrant and English-only measures, and they delivered 78 percent of their votes to Democrat Gray Davis for governor and 70 percent to Democrat Barbara Boxer for Senate, based on exit polls conducted for The Associated Press by Voter News Service.

"If the GOP wants to stay in control and move forward, then they need to sort of follow the steps taken by Bush by both Bushes to include the Latino vote," said Lydia Camarillo of the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project, which worked to mobilize Hispanic voters in four states.


Despite Cjhsa's rhetoric, i suspect that politicians, Republican and Democrat, pay attention to these sorts of reports, and that both parties will be interested in policies which can attract a large and important voting block to their cause.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 11:59 am
& that is what it's all about, & to hell with our immigration laws as far as politicians are concerned!!!
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 12:06 pm
LoneStarMadam wrote:
& that is what it's all about, & to hell with our immigration laws as far as politicians are concerned!!!


Yes, let's take the law one's own hands!
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 12:08 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
& that is what it's all about, & to hell with our immigration laws as far as politicians are concerned!!!


Yes, let's take the law one's own hands!


That's what the 2nd amendment is about - when politicians won't do their jobs properly, we have the crowbar of truth to correct the problem.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 12:17 pm
cjhsa wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
& that is what it's all about, & to hell with our immigration laws as far as politicians are concerned!!!


Yes, let's take the law one's own hands!


That's what the 2nd amendment is about - when politicians won't do their jobs properly, we have the crowbar of truth to correct the problem.


Huh???

I don't remember the "crowbar of truth" being mentioned in the 2nd Amendment.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 12:24 pm
ebrown_p wrote:
cjhsa wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
& that is what it's all about, & to hell with our immigration laws as far as politicians are concerned!!!


Yes, let's take the law one's own hands!


That's what the 2nd amendment is about - when politicians won't do their jobs properly, we have the crowbar of truth to correct the problem.


Huh???

I don't remember the "crowbar of truth" being mentioned in the 2nd Amendment.


Quote:
Main Entry: met·a·phor
Pronunciation: 'me-t&-"for also -f&r
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English methaphor, from Middle French or Latin; Middle French metaphore, from Latin metaphora, from Greek, from metapherein to transfer, from meta- + pherein to bear -- more at BEAR
1 : a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness or analogy between them (as in drowning in money); broadly : figurative language
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 12:50 pm
But what is it a metaphor of?

The 2nd amendment doesn't give you the right to hit people over the head with a crowbar.

And if you want the right to hit someone over the head with the truth, that would be the first amendment-- not the second.

It is not a very good metaphor.
0 Replies
 
LoneStarMadam
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 12:51 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
LoneStarMadam wrote:
& that is what it's all about, & to hell with our immigration laws as far as politicians are concerned!!!


Yes, let's take the law one's own hands!
Thanks for most valuable input. Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 01:16 pm
It was a pleasure.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 04:19 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
Women have been having babies without doctors present for thousands of years.
Nobody should be turned away if they have a life threatening emergency,but having a baby does not,in most cases,fall into that category.
When it does,then the expectant mother should be admitted,if it doesnt,she can have her baby at home.
If an illegal immigrant does go into the hospital to deliver,she should be returned to her home country ASAP after the baby is born.


I agre: newborn stations/maternity rooms should be closed or used for better, things, generally, I agree. (Just leave a small unit for emergencies.)

A question would be, what to do with the new born Amercian citizen, when her/his mother is her home country ASAP.
Of course, she/he has all oportunities open and should work hard to get along - but what jobs are there for a some days old?


If you are asking what to do with the newborn if the mother is here illegally,the answer is simple.

We give the mother the choice.

Let me explain.
If the mother is here illegally,she will be returned to her home country,no matter what she decides.
Her choices are simple.
She either takes the baby with her,thereby surrendering its status as an American citizen,or she leaves the baby here and it grows up with all the rights and priveleges of being an American citizen.

Of course,she will never see her baby again,but the choice will be hers...
Does the newborn stay in the US or does it go home with her?
Its her choice,but either way she gets deported to her home country.
Her decision is irrevocable and final!
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 21 Nov, 2006 04:40 pm
Mysteryman,

Aside from the inherent cruelty of your suggestion, does the fact that it is unconstitutional bother you even a little bit?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/18/2024 at 10:04:49