Politics

[Polish Leppy 22]

Between 1820 and 1860 nearly 2 million Irish arrived in the United States -- 75 percent of them as a result of the potato famine. They arrived to an angry sneering American public who made proclaimations about how they would destroy the fabric of the nation and were regularly discriminated against. They have acclimated.

As a direct result of the onset of WWI, 250,000 German Jews came to the United States, adding to the 2 million who immigrated here from Russia, Austria-Hungary and Romania prior to 1924. They were looked down upon and worked and lived in the worst possible conditions. They worked hard and eventually they acclimated into society.

In 2010, 430,000 Asians (36% of all new immigrants) arrived in the United States. They represented the largest percentage of immigration (31 percent were Hispanic). Many of these people will be looked down upon. They will be ridiculed ... but they will acclimate into our society just as millions have done before them. And, we'll be a stronger country for it.

We aren't talking about every nation in the world sending their citizens to America and having us take care of them. We are talking about thousands of kids who are escaping with their lives and the clothes on their backs. We are talking about kids whose parents are still left to fend for themselves in places that are amonst the most violent on earth. You say we can't take care of them ... I say as Americans, we can't not take care of them. And one day, these kids will grow up to be a war heros, great teachers, scientists, police officers, preachers, and they will make their mark on a country who treated them with dignity and compassion. That is what this country is and that is what it ALWAYS has been.

I'm not the right wing, racist, anti-immigration Bill the Butcher as you try to paint. I am pro immigration, the legal way. I am anti illegal immigration.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

I am not talking about legalizing the people here, you are now trying to tie those two things together. I am not talking about regular immigration I am talking about the flood of children crossing our borders and how we need to handle that issue. You do realize that our law doesn't allow us to send them back without a hearing correct? To get a hearing there is a slightly under 600 day wait period to get in front of an immigration judge. Please don't let facts get in the way of your opinions though.

Here is the breakdown for the spending of the bill I am talking about.
House Says ‘No’ to Obama’s Request for $3.7 Billion to Address Border Crisis — Here’s How the Money Would Be Spent | TheBlaze.com

LOL let me do some homework on the aspect of that law while you address the 2 other points I made and you ignored.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Liberty, equality, diversity-- pick two. No nation has all three. The generous welfare states of Europe are possible because they have much less diversity to contend with. That, in turn, allows them to coordinate the political will to pass the higher taxes necessary to support such programs. People are inherently more willing to sacrifice for members of "their tribe"-- those who look like them, share their values, etc. In other words, low diversity is what allows them to achieve more egalitarian results.

The US is highly diverse, which is why we have to make more difficult trade-offs between liberty and equality. Historically, we've erred on the side of liberty-- by Western standards, our taxes are low and our safety nets are modest. But, that's partly why America has been so open to immigration. A low-tax, modest-benefits, high liberty nation is one that can afford to let in lots of immigrants. But if we move toward single-payor heathcare or a Basic Income, we'll have to get much more picky with who we let in. For instance, it's not easy to get a guest worker visa to Germany or Sweden, let alone citizenship.

I mention this only because we seem to be debating the moral imperatives of both universal health care and immigration simultaneously. Due to the nature of the political process, those are conflicting goals. A nation with high taxes and generous benefits is not one who can welcome the huddled masses indiscriminately.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

I miss the old kinda immigrants

At least they gave us great characters like Al Capone and the Obanion Brothers.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Liberty, equality, diversity-- pick two. No nation has all three. The generous welfare states of Europe are possible because they have much less diversity to contend with. That, in turn, allows them to coordinate the political will to pass the higher taxes necessary to support such programs. People are inherently more willing to sacrifice for members of "their tribe"-- those who look like them, share their values, etc. In other words, low diversity is what allows them to achieve more egalitarian results.

The US is highly diverse, which is why we have to make more difficult trade-offs between liberty and equality. Historically, we've erred on the side of liberty-- by Western standards, our taxes are low and our safety nets are modest. But, that's partly why America has been so open to immigration. A low-tax, modest-benefits, high liberty nation is one that can afford to let in lots of immigrants. But if we move toward single-payor heathcare or a Basic Income, we'll have to get much more picky with who we let in. For instance, it's not easy to get a guest worker visa to Germany or Sweden, let alone citizenship.

I mention this only because we seem to be debating the moral imperatives of both universal health care and immigration simultaneously. Due to the nature of the political process, those are conflicting goals. A nation with high taxes and generous benefits is not one who can welcome the huddled masses indiscriminately.

Historically, we also had lots of land that we "bought" from natives that allowed for large waves of immigrants.

Prime example: Northern California

 

[GoIrish41]

All those groups you mentioned above came here legally and thus, did all the right things the right way and built a future for themselves. They did not just show up one day, get clothes, food, healthcare, and housing. Most of them had to fight, scratch, and claw for every penny they earned. They were handed nothing.

Your reasoning for taking in these people is the awful situation they came from. Fine. What if dozens of other countries in the same situation sent their people here for America to take care of? We can't do it. We have millions of Americans unemployed. The last thing we need is an invasion of more illegal immigrants (don't care what country) who are going to live off of government services. It is unsustainable.

Take the emotion out of it for 5 seconds and think...how can America do this? How can America afford this financially? How is it America's responsibility? These children belong back home with their families. If ANY of them want to come here legally, by all means we are a big melting pot with open arms.

Many of these kids already have family members in the United States who can care for the children. They aren't all necessarily going to become wards of the state. You keep saying "what if?" What if dozens of outher countries in the same situation sent their people here. Well, they aren't. Most of these children are coming from three Central American nations -- they are refugees escaping horrible violence. They don't have time for us to have a long, drawn-out debate about what should or should not happen legally. They are running for their lives. Instead of dragging its collective feet on immigration reform or job creation plans out of political expediency, maybe Congress should start focusing on the problems we face. Instead they use these problems as convenient excuses to do nothing to help refugee children that have nowhere else to go except back to the hellish violence of their homelands.

And let's be clear, you are saying the same stuff now as has been said throughout this nation's history when people came here. They are never accepted with open arms and they are always going to be that last straw that breaks the nation's back. But it never turns out that way. We have historically been better for our acceptance of immigrants. This country is better than denying refuge to the tired, the sick or the huddled masses. We are the richest country in the world, and if we can't afford to help the helpless, who can?

 

[GoIrish41]

I'm not the right wing, racist, anti-immigration Bill the Butcher as you try to paint. I am pro immigration, the legal way. I am anti illegal immigration.

I didn't say or even suggest you were any of those things.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

I am not talking about legalizing the people here, you are now trying to tie those two things together. I am not talking about regular immigration I am talking about the flood of children crossing our borders and how we need to handle that issue. You do realize that our law doesn't allow us to send them back without a hearing correct? To get a hearing there is a slightly under 600 day wait period to get in front of an immigration judge. Please don't let facts get in the way of your opinions though.

Here is the breakdown for the spending of the bill I am talking about.
House Says ‘No’ to Obama’s Request for $3.7 Billion to Address Border Crisis — Here’s How the Money Would Be Spent | TheBlaze.com

Did some quick research. Found that immigrants can come here under any of these 5 pretenses:

Family-based: spouses, unmarried minor children, or parents of US citizens all are eligible.

Employment-based: Self explanatory (temporary visas)

Refugees: "Refugees are admitted to the United States based upon an inability to return to their home countries because of a “well-founded fear of persecution” due to their race, membership in a social group, political opinion, religion, or national origin."

Diversity VISA program: Instituted in 1990. They are given out randomly (55,000 per year) to countries with low immigration numbers to the US.

Other forms of Humanitarian Relief: This gets verrrrrry gray. "Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is granted to people who are in the United States but cannot return to their home country because of “natural disaster,” “extraordinary temporary conditions,” or “ongoing armed conflict.” TPS is granted to a country for six, 12, or 18 months and can be extended beyond that if unsafe conditions in the country persist.

Conclusions: These people don't qualify for 1-4, but in number 5 under "extraordinary temporary conditions", I guess America could house, feed, clothe, educate, all these people until their home countries get their shit together. That may be 60 years from now but hey, if we send these people back home we are mean racists who hate immigrants.

If you're an immigration lawyer I guess you could argue they're going to stay here under "extraordinary temporary conditions", but on the other side I could say the people in Chicago or South Central LA have it just as bad. Where should those parents send their kids?

 

[MJ12666]

Two comments:

This morning I was at a diagnostic lab having some blood drawn. While I was waiting to be seen I noticed a lady crying at the check in desk. As I listened in, she was crying because her husband who has cancer was only going to be able to get a few of the test his doctor had ordered because he doesn't have insurance and only had enough money to cover a couple of them. It was heart breaking to watch. It makes me sick that people cannot get past this political bullshit and see how badly we need basic medical care available for all. Continually hearing people politicizing something that should automatically flow from their heart is disgusting. It's not about politics, it's about human fucking decency.

If the kids crossing the border had blonde hair and blue eyes or were black, they'd sure have a lot better representation. I've got news for everyone, nobody that landed at Plymouth Rock had a passport, they were illegals.

From now on, before I listen to anyone's opinion, I want to know more about them and their credibility. What have they done for others? What have they done for our country? Right now in the media, my country sounds more like a bunch of prejudiced, lazy, entitled crybabies than I can stomach.

Go ahead and try to turn my rant here into a republican vs democratic thing. If you do try, you're a stooge. I honestly could care less about political parties anymore. I think people need to stop talking and get to doing, because being a true American is about doing, not talking.

End rant.

I have spent the majority of my career working for three major US pharmaceutical companies. All three of the companies that I worked for offered an "indigent care" program that offered medication for free or at greatly reduced costs. The amount owed would be based on the patient's level of income. Now I cannot state with 100% certainty, but I would guess that all major US based pharmaceutical companies offer this type of program. If you encounter a similar situation as you described above regarding an individual who is having difficulty paying for medication or tests I would suggest the following steps:

1. For any medication you should advise the individual to contact the Public Relations department of the manufacturer of the medication and ask if they offer an indigent care program. If the company does, the patient will need to request further information on how to apply. Doing so may allow the patient to obtain the medication at no or significantly reduced cost as I noted above.
2. Regarding testing, you do not need medical insurance to have tests done and generally the tests are not that expensive. In order to relieve your own and the patience's stress (and I am not trying to be "flippant" with this suggestion), you should consider offering to pay for the tests that the individual could not afford to pay for. At most it would have cost you maybe a couple hundred dollars (probably less). In the grand scheme of things a couple hundred dollars will probably not destroy you financially and this act will really make you feel good.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Did some quick research. Found that immigrants can come here under any of these 5 pretenses:

Family-based: spouses, unmarried minor children, or parents of US citizens all are eligible.

Employment-based: Self explanatory (temporary visas)

Refugees: "Refugees are admitted to the United States based upon an inability to return to their home countries because of a “well-founded fear of persecution” due to their race, membership in a social group, political opinion, religion, or national origin."

Diversity VISA program: Instituted in 1990. They are given out randomly (55,000 per year) to countries with low immigration numbers to the US.

Other forms of Humanitarian Relief: This gets verrrrrry gray. "Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is granted to people who are in the United States but cannot return to their home country because of “natural disaster,” “extraordinary temporary conditions,” or “ongoing armed conflict.” TPS is granted to a country for six, 12, or 18 months and can be extended beyond that if unsafe conditions in the country persist.

Conclusions: These people don't qualify for 1-4, but in number 5 under "extraordinary temporary conditions", I guess America could house, feed, clothe, educate, all these people until their home countries get their shit together. That may be 60 years from now but hey, if we send these people back home we are mean racists who hate immigrants.

If you're an immigration lawyer I guess you could argue they're going to stay here under "extraordinary temporary conditions", but on the other side I could say the people in Chicago or South Central LA have it just as bad. Where should those parents send their kids?

South Central now (maybe crack era) is not on the level of Mexico or some of those South American Countries. Don't think Chicago is either

Signed Former SC resident

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Many of these kids already have family members in the United States who can care for the children. They aren't all necessarily going to become wards of the state. You keep saying "what if?" What if dozens of outher countries in the same situation sent their people here. Well, they aren't. Most of these children are coming from three Central American nations -- they are refugees escaping horrible violence. They don't have time for us to have a long, drawn-out debate about what should or should not happen legally. They are running for their lives. Instead of dragging its collective feet on immigration reform or job creation plans out of political expediency, maybe Congress should start focusing on the problems we face. Instead they use these problems as convenient excuses to do nothing to help refugee children that have nowhere else to go except back to the hellish violence of their homelands.

And let's be clear, you are saying the same stuff now as has been said throughout this nation's history when people came here. They are never accepted with open arms and they are always going to be that last straw that breaks the nation's back. But it never turns out that way. We have historically been better for our acceptance of immigrants. This country is better than denying refuge to the tired, the sick or the huddled masses. We are the richest country in the world, and if we can't afford to help the helpless, who can?

Really? I thought the narrative was their parents were at home and sent their kids here BY THEMSELVES to get away from the chaos. If not, how many of these THOUSANDS of kids have families here? Are they legal citizens or one of the 12 million?

Congress focuses on laws. Enforcing our immigration laws should be one of their top priorities. Let's be VERY clear and you still can't wrap your head around this: The Irish, Jews, Asians, etc. ALL came here legally. Were they discriminated against? Yes. Did Nativists hate them? Yes. Did they get through it? Yes.

I am NOT sitting here as an anti immigration nativist rejecting thousands of ILLEGAL immigrants because they're from Central America. I don't give a shit if they're from Ireland or Sweden. If you're here illegally, you're 1) breaking our laws and 2) living off of taxpayers.

Our PRIVATE SECTOR made us the richest nation in the world. Our government is beyond broke and getting more broke every day. We already have 12 million illegal immigrants here. We can not afford this invasion, nor are we obliged to morally or legally.

Again I ask...where do the parents of children in Chicago or South Central LA send their kids?

 

[pkt77242]

Did some quick research. Found that immigrants can come here under any of these 5 pretenses:

Family-based: spouses, unmarried minor children, or parents of US citizens all are eligible.

Employment-based: Self explanatory (temporary visas)

Refugees: "Refugees are admitted to the United States based upon an inability to return to their home countries because of a “well-founded fear of persecution” due to their race, membership in a social group, political opinion, religion, or national origin."

Diversity VISA program: Instituted in 1990. They are given out randomly (55,000 per year) to countries with low immigration numbers to the US.

Other forms of Humanitarian Relief: This gets verrrrrry gray. "Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is granted to people who are in the United States but cannot return to their home country because of “natural disaster,” “extraordinary temporary conditions,” or “ongoing armed conflict.” TPS is granted to a country for six, 12, or 18 months and can be extended beyond that if unsafe conditions in the country persist.

Conclusions: These people don't qualify for 1-4, but in number 5 under "extraordinary temporary conditions", I guess America could house, feed, clothe, educate, all these people until their home countries get their shit together. That may be 60 years from now but hey, if we send these people back home we are mean racists who hate immigrants.

If you're an immigration lawyer I guess you could argue they're going to stay here under "extraordinary temporary conditions", but on the other side I could say the people in Chicago or South Central LA have it just as bad. Where should those parents send their kids?

Um, what are you even arguing?

If you read my original post you would see that I was originally for sending them back home, but as this drags on and our politicians use these children as a political football then I am starting to feel that we then owe them something. You also never once answered anything that I talked about nor anything about the bill. I think it is crazy that we keep them here for over 1.5 years on average waiting to get in front of a judge and then we send them back home. Lets hire more judges and get the backlog down a reasonable number such as 3-6 months and send the children home but you can't use them as a political football for a party's gain and leave them there in a crappy conditions (or send them to live with relatives in the US for 1.5 years) and then send them home. So I think you are arguing with the wrong person about your topic.

 

[pkt77242]

Historically, we also had lots of land that we "bought" from natives that allowed for large waves of immigrants.

Prime example: Northern California

Isn't that what N.D., S.D., Wyoming, New Mexico, Idaho, Montana, Alaska, etc are for?

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Um, what are you even arguing?

If you read my original post you would see that I was originally for sending them back home, but as this drags on and our politicians use these children as a political football then I am starting to feel that we then owe them something. You also never once answered anything that I talked about nor anything about the bill. I think it is crazy that we keep them here for over 1.5 years on average waiting to get in front of a judge and then we send them back home. Lets hire more judges and get the backlog down a reasonable number such as 3-6 months and send the children home but you can't use them as a political football for a party's gain and leave them there in a crappy conditions (or send them to live with relatives in the US for 1.5 years) and then send them home. So I think you are arguing with the wrong person.

OK. Misunderstood. I apologize. From what I read, Congress has question marks as to where all the money is going and want more details broken down line by line.

Don't expect much from this Congress on any matter, let alone this one in an election year. Children shouldn't be used for anything, but bottom line is we need to get them home to their families.

 

[irishog77]

A brief look at why congress isn't racing to pass this president's $3.7 BILLION border spending request.

Should Republicans rubber stamp Obama’s $3.7 billion border funding request? | Rare

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Historically, we also had lots of land that we "bought" from natives that allowed for large waves of immigrants.

Prime example: Northern California

Didn't we basically take California by right of conquest after the Mexican-American war? The treaty that ended the war did involve a nominal "purchase", but I don't think there were any natives involved.

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Didn't we basically take California by right of conquest after the Mexican-American war? The treaty that ended the war did involve a nominal "purchase", but I don't think there were any natives involved.

Yeah, Mexico sold the U.S land that various tribes had been on for who knows how long that pretty much had no Americans or Mexicans. A lot of the people who populated the area for America were immigrants. ** After the Redskins debate here on IE, I've been asking a local Native friend about the history of the area. As of now I have a very basic understanding of what happened way back when.

But the main point is that the USA has been so willing to let in immigrants is to due to the huge tract of Indian land that could be populated with newcomers. Is it a coincidence that the original Tea Party, the Know Nothings, popped up when a large number of immigrants showed up in American cities?

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

Yeah, Mexico sold the U.S land that various tribes had been on for who knows how long that pretty much had no Americans or Mexicans. A lot of the people who populated the area for America were immigrants. ** After the Redskins debate here on IE, I've been asking a local Native friend about the history of the area. As of now I have a very basic understanding of what happened way back when.

But the main point is that the USA has been so willing to let in immigrants is to due to the huge tract of Indian land that could be populated with newcomers. Is it a coincidence that the original Tea Party, the Know Nothings, popped up when a large number of immigrants showed up in American cities?

Race baiting. The Tea Party has absolutely nothing to do with race. The Tea Party evolved because a large number of people became disgusted with Democratic spending and establishment Republicans acting the same way.

 

[GoldenDomer]

Seriously? Have you ever moved? Do you not realize how expensive it is to move? Is that really your answer? Did you ever think that maybe they are living close to family who can watch their children and help her take care of him when he is really sick?

Yup, moved from Jersey to North Carolina about 11 years ago. Still the best decision I've made. All my family is still there.

 

[pkt77242]

A brief look at why congress isn't racing to pass this president's $3.7 BILLION border spending request.

Should Republicans rubber stamp Obama’s $3.7 billion border funding request? | Rare

So before I even start breaking down this article that you posted, I am just going to point out how ridiculous it is that the Republicans keep calling this an important humanitarian issue but they are dragging their feet.

Now here is my problem with each of the points.

1. Then just pass the part for the border issue that is 3.7 billion and pass the 600 million for the wild fires out west separately. Seriously that is the easiest problem that I have ever solved.

2. This person wants the President to do the exact same thing for which the House is suing the President. Rap your mind around that one.

3. A conspiracy theory. Wonderful. He has absolute proof but throws it out there anyways. By that reasoning why don't we just not give any money to departments and make them by everything with their own cash first and then turn in receipts to get reimbursed. These children will spend on average between 1.5 years and 2 years each at the border, that is a lot of healthcare (paying for Doctors, NPs, Nurses, administrative people to keep track of the paperwork, new computers for them to use to put the medical records into, etc)

4. You can't just stick children onto the plane and ship them out without adults there, and that is just taking into account the children who already are here not the children who will be coming within the next year that we will have to ship out, plus they will need to hire more Border Patrol agents to help with all of the children. Again he goes conspiracy theory.

5. Nope and he isn't just as the House passed a bill last week that wasn't offset either (in that case it was a tax cut House Republicans vote for business tax cut - CNN.com), so I find it funny that they want an offset to an emergency bill to help a problem that they have termed a humanitarian crisis.

Overall, I think that these are some of the worse reasons to not pass either the President's bill or their own version. The truth is that Republicans want this to drag on longer so that they can use it against the President. Sorry.

4.

 

[pkt77242]

Yup, moved from Jersey to North Carolina about 11 years ago. Still the best decision I've made. All my family is still there.

How much did it cost you? I have moved from AZ to CA and back to AZ and each move was about $2500-3000, not exactly affordable to someone who has $100 to their name, heck that won't even by them enough gas to get anywhere.

 

[illmatic630]

Republicans don't want to pass anything because they are afraid that it will cost them in November against the Tea Party. The far right doesn't want anything that resembles "amnesty"

 

[GoldenDomer]

How much did it cost you? I have moved from AZ to CA and back to AZ and each move was about $2500-3000, not exactly affordable to someone who has $100 to their name, heck that won't even by them enough gas to get anywhere.

Free actually, work paid!! If someone on here has $100 to their name, I suggest logging off the internet and getting a job.

 

[pkt77242]

Free actually, work paid!! If someone on here has $100 to their name, I suggest logging off the internet and getting a job.

We are talking about the guy with cancer that Bob helped, not someone on here. Are you paying attention?

 

[GoldenDomer]

We are talking about the guy with cancer that Bob helped, not someone on here. Are you paying attention?

Why? My comment about moving was directed toward Bob. Then you or someone else jumped in and said "What if he doesnt have money!?".

 

[Jebediah Springfield]

Race baiting. The Tea Party has absolutely nothing to do with race. The Tea Party evolved because a large number of people became disgusted with Democratic spending and establishment Republicans acting the same way.

Lol

 

[wizards8507]

Lol

What do you think, he's lying to you? I don't know about you, but I've never met a shy racist. If the Tea Party had anything to do with race, don't you think they might have, I don't know, said something racist by now? Or how about the fact that Ben Carson would be a top three candidate for president among the Tea Party if he showed any interest in running?

 

[GoldenDomer]

What do you think, he's lying to you? I don't know about you, but I've never met a shy racist. If the Tea Party had anything to do with race, don't you think they might have, I don't know, said something racist by now? Or how about the fact that Ben Carson would be a top three candidate for president among the Tea Party if he showed any interest in running?

Dr. Carson is my favorite candidate and has been since he made that speech at the National Prayer Breakfast! Hop on board the train.

 

[BobD]

Hmmmm.

Medical Tourism To France, Other Countries Surges Due To Costly U.S. Health Care « CBS San Francisco

 

[GoIrish41]

What do you think, he's lying to you? I don't know about you, but I've never met a shy racist. If the Tea Party had anything to do with race, don't you think they might have, I don't know, said something racist by now? Or how about the fact that Ben Carson would be a top three candidate for president among the Tea Party if he showed any interest in running?

https://www.google.com/search?q=tea....naacp.org%2Fpages%2Ftea-party-report;280;364