Also, I’d like to add that California is probably the main employer of Mexican maids and gardeners. Tons of money, big mansions, and right near the border. I’d imagine Texas and Arizona also have their fair share.
It’s punishment if you’re the one getting mined!!
My understanding is that the AZ attorney general has, over the objections of the proponents of the ballot measure, narrowed the scope of the law to exclude the prohibition of providing certain services – including hospital services – to undocumented people. The plain text of the proposition certainly did not specifically mention that health care services be exempted from the requirement for documentation.
In any case, Googling turns up an interesting news article: it says that the Proposition hasn’t done anything to curb illegal immigration. No illegal immigrants have been caught trying to register to vote, but 5,000 US citizens have been stopped. All of two illegals were caught trying to register for welfare. Out of fear that they might be turned in, illegal immigrants are not going to hospitals as much, leading to adverse outcomes like women being afraid to seek medical help when giving birth to children.
Look, I just think that babies should be delivered with the assistance of doctors. Call me a radical. Laws that discourage or frighten mothers from getting medical care to make sure that their kids have ten fingers and ten toes don’t seem to serve any moral good. Is illegal immigration really such a serious problem that mothers and infant children should have risk their health because of such a law?
Pardon me, but perhaps you want to avoid misrepresenting my positions on issues that haven’t even been discussed. Seriously. If you want to debate my position on giving welfare to illegal immigrants, perhaps you should be informed of my position: I’m against it.
I would hope that an apology is in the works for your ham-handed attempt to characterize my opinion on something that hasn’t been brought up heretofore.
How do you tell the legal from the illegal at 70MPH?
You know, I was really trying to resist doing this, but every single thing she says is wrong. I’ve never seen so much wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.
This sounds like a problem with the school. Plenty of US Citizens don’t speak English and plenty of schools can handle it. My school district had 67 different languages spoken in it, and I somehow managed to come out not only well-prepared for college, but ahead of the game.
And what parts of modern life did they have in mind when they were laying out their laws? Light bulbs? Britney Spears?
A triple doozy. Most people using emergency rooms as primary care are US citizens. It’s a result of our “health care system” that leaves the poor of all kinds without access to preventative treatment, diagnostic tests and primary care.
I’m not sure how you can “clog up” a school. But whatever.
And I, in all my years in California, have never felt like a “hated minority.” I’ve kissed too many Mexicans to think they all hate me underneath. Maybe your brother could give that a shot.
Now it’s Mexican Polka, all day long! The horror!
Yeah, and no other town has ever gone downhill unless the Mexicans were behind it. If it weren’t for Mexicans your town would still be Norman Rockwell perfect.
This town is in California? Spanish was spoken there long before English was ever in the picture, and has been spoken there continuously. Mexico didn’t come to us, we came to Mexico. Chances are the Spanish-speakers founded your town. There is a really good chance it has a Spanish name, just like most of our towns. Spanish is one of the native languages of California.
Once again, it’s not unreasonable for California to be like Mexico in some ways, seeing as how it was Mexico before it was America. We are the newcomers here, bub. We are the ones that didn’t assimilate.
Illegal immigrants typically pay more in taxes than citizens, because they use fake social security numbers and don’t have a way to claim their tax refunds.
Well, the biggest threat in California is methamphetamine, which is traditionally made by white bikers- often white supremacist bikers, in fact. And who do you think are buying these drugs? Probably not Mexicans, who could walk in to any pharmacy in Mexico and order whatever they want. Care to point some fingers?
Oh god! The Mexicans! These used to be such nice towns. We spent our time raising pigs for 4H and listening to Elvis. And now the towns are full of panaderías and the shops sell pinatas and there are taco trucks and it’s all just so horribly dreadful! When the founding fathers founded America, they were envisioning 1950s small town white America, dangnabit!
I’m surprised that you can tell they are the descendants of immigrants though, and not descendants of the Mexicans that were here when we got this land from Mexico.
[quote]
We have transisted to a service economy and these illegals support a lot of that.
[quote]
Yeah, sure. The transition to a service economy is the result of Mexicans, not the big white corporations.
This has already been spoken for.
They send money home because they are working to support their family, not because they hate America.
Most of us are able to get through the day surrounded by immigrants without ever being exposed to this “hate.” Some of us befriend and even love illegal immigrants. Want to know the difference? Want to take some guesses as to why you just can’t seem to get along?
You aren’t sacrificing your country or your way of life. You are sacrificing the corpse of an ideal of whitebread America. Your America is dead. Your America never existed. It was a figment of television and your righteous delusions. America is and always has been about working hard, making sacrifices, providing for your family and creating a vibrant culture. America is thriving. In Los Angeles, in El Paso, in Oakland, in New York City- in every place where people continue to work, innovate and thrive. This America can weather anything. It can certainly handle a few Mexicans. It’s your America, which is content to sit and let it’s nannies and poolmen take care of things, that can’t last.
Are you under the impression that this proves something. The United States, according to the last census, is 13.5 percent Hispanic, which gives us 37 million Hispanics within the country. The various studies seem to put the number of “illegal” immigrants at about ten to eleven million. That means that a given Hispanic is more than twice as likely to either be a citizen or have entered the country legally as illegally.
My only personal experience with illegal immigration came during my summers in Wyoming. Hotels in the Jackson Hole area would hire a busload of foreign workers on six-month visas to do the dishwashing, maid service and so forth. A couple weeks before their visas expired, the workers would all run off to small towns in remote regions and gets jobs waiting tables or something. And they’d stay there. The INS almost never looks for illegal immigrants in Wyoming or Idaho.
All of these workers were from Russia or the Balkans. But still, the work was being done by Caucasians, so it’s all good, right?
Yes, actually it does.
Do you support deportation of those who are found to be in this country illegally also?
Of course. I can’t see what else we should do with people who are in our country illegally. But if they’ve committed a serious or violent crime, I support locking them up, letting them serve their time, and then deportation.
What language is the sign in? Can the people its directed at read even in their native language?
I have little problem with increased funding to better control or borders, searching threads under my name will list numerous instances of me supporting measures restricing illegal entry, however, this should not be done by laying lethal traps. Fences and other passive measures fine, live patrolling officers, great. Arrests require human intervention, and not just to pick up the scraps.
First of all, someone born on US soil possesses birthright citizenship, not naturalized citizenship. Naturalization is what happens to legal immigrants when they become citizens.
Second, it is very difficult to ratify an amendment to the Constitution, which is what it would take to change this. You can’t just pass a law that negates the Constitution.
I’m not sure that is true Fearitself. My understanding is that the naturalization right is based on an interpretarion (judicial) of the 14th amendment. I will, however, check on that.
Obviously, no reasonably person wants to deny anyone emergency care. The problem in Arizona is, however, indicative of the wider problem. THe sheer volume of people who coming across the border (most of whom are unskilled) is causing a tremendous economic and social strain on state economies. Something should be done about it though minefields and rhetoric aren’t the answer either.
Not sure which part you are taking issue with. Naturalization is what happens to legal immigrants; if you are born here, you are not naturalized.
And if you are born here, you are a citizen. It doesn’t matter if your family has been here for 10 minutes or 10 generations, you are as much a citizen as I am. And that is guranteed by the Constitution, which cannot be changed by judicial interpretation.
Am I the only Doper who’s suspicious enough to wonder if the “grass-roots” anti-illegal-immigrant efforts are being backed by the large corporations/farms/companies who hire illegals? “Stop whining about your 18-hour work days, or I’ll turn you over to those militias and let them run you up with the thumbscrews!”
And yeah, count me among those who are pissed off by the knee-jerk “blame everything on illegals” meme. If you really want to stop illegal immigration, pass a law that says anyone caught employing an illegal immigrant gets fined $1,000,000 per person. That’ll stop the influx toot sweet.
Good lord. So, are you suggesting that the Department of Homeland Security should put signs along the border telling people not to cross illegally… only this time, those signs should be in Spanish? :smack:
So THAT was the problem! Those signs we have now must be written in Aramaic! No wonder nobody heeds the signs… it’s a dead language!
-
-
- Well, I am just asking if it’s true or not. I have read it on forums that are rather “reactive” to the subject of illegal immigration.
-
…But if it is a real problem then really, denying care is the only way isn’t it? It will happen, one way or the other. US hospitals already do this with uninsured patients more or less, even if they are citizens. Medical care costs real money, it cannot be given away in unlimited quantities. You can choose between letting the entire hospital system degenerate due to non-payment, or you can set some standards for public hospitals regarding admissions and care levels, that favor people who can prove they have the means to at least partially pay.
…And if you do not do this (and you allow the entire “public” hospital system to degenerate) then people with the means to pay–such as those who maintain health insurance–will simply move to private hospitals that will provide a better level of care than the public ones. But if you set any standards for admissions, then illegal immigrants are going to be the first ones to get kicked. They are among the least likely to have permanent addresses, bank accounts and medical insurance.
-Does the US Constitution make any mention of free medical care?
~
You say this like it’s a bad thing. If they’re being paid on the books, then they’re paying for taxes and social security contributions but won’t be able to claim benefits. See this article. (Unless, of course, your son was paying the illegals under the table so that they weren’t paying taxes. But he wouldn’t have done that, would he?)
Uhhh… so you’re in favor of health care rationing. Check. I’ll remember that if we ever get into a debate about the pros and cons of a national health insurance program.
I want to understand your exact position on this, however: Which group of people do you think should be cut off from access to hospitals first: Really sick people (Americans or otherwise, because they run up the biggest bills); poor people (whether American or otherwise, because they can’t pay the bills); illegal immigrants (because they’re not here legally), poor illegal immigrants (because they can’t pay the bills and they’re not American); or poor, sick illegal immigrants (because they’re the worst of all worlds)?
Which one of these groups do you think should be the first to be turned away if a hospital happens to be crowded on a particular night?
What if a hospital isn’t crowded? If doctors are just sitting around, waiting for something to happen, would it be okay then for them to treat poor, sick, illegal immigrants, even if they likely couldn’t pay for the services, so long as nobody else is “losing” any access to health care during the treatment of said person?
Finally, no, the Constitution doesn’t guarantee free health care. It does a great job of setting up a system of government, but I don’t think the Framers intended it to be a moral guide. I think it’s immoral to tell doctors not to heal sick people, period, so what the Constitution says or does not say on the subject is irrelevant.
The only one breaking the law in the OP, as far as I can see, is suzeekay’s son.
Hmmm, must be one of them damned ferriners.
[smartass]
Actually, Aramaic is still spoken in small areas of Syria, Iraq, Turkey, and Iran.
[/smartass]
-
-
- I am in favor of health care rationing by economics. Not by race or nationality, or even citizenship status.
-
-
IF it is true that [some particular group] is a high risk for medical non-payment and hospitals are facing operational problems because of that, then it only makes sense to begin cutting off the people who are causing disproportionate amounts of the problem. Why turn away people with insurance, who are “paying customers”? Your reasoning doesn’t make a lot of sense: you would rather have a hospital go bankrupt treating deadbeats and then not be able to treat anyone, rather than offer services appropriate to what different economic levels of patients can pay.
But any one person’s opinion hardly matters–if the system fails due to non-payment, then medical care to the poor will be economically-restricted there anyway, citizens or otherwise. And I’m sorry if it bothers you, but (if we are discussing charity medical care) I personally feel that someone who went to the trouble to become a legal citizen deserves priority over someone else who didn’t.
~