ADVERTISEMENT

OOTB's Political Thread . ..

Not really sure what your point is. I said the president will try to justify something. You've provided me with justification, which is what I was asking for. Maybe you interpreted my stance that the government shouldn't be able to do whatever they want for no reason as me being against the wall?
 
Some federal programs serve people in need, regardless of their immigration status. These programs include:

  • School meal programs (free or reduced-cost lunches)
  • Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)
  • Head Start
  • Various in-kind emergency services
I guess they allow any child to walk into a school, sit down and get whatever the rest get. I dunno.

If women are just handed the WIC stuff, food stamps or whatever, without any ID, they just show up and get whatever they ask for... that doesn't sound like how it works.

I can believe that showing up in an ER gets you medical attention.

I find it very hard to believe that people who cannot provide any proof of their residence (that they are a US citizen, or a state citizen) are just handed any freebie that others who have ID, and were even born here, have to jump through hoop after hoop just to get the minimum.

I assume you know some illegal immigrants who do this regularly? Or you have some proof of it.
 
Yeah, I'm sure they just let them starve to death and live in a cardboard box. There are all kinds of articles out there talking about how much illegals cost this country every year. Take care of the citizens first.

Or you can continue to give the middle finger to US citizens in order to prop up foreigners. That seems to be going so well. The immigrants will be the one to pay the price, not the rich people who want them in this country.
People die and starve to death in this country a lot. And, many of them were born here.

There are all kinds of articles? Okay. Thanks for explaining the process as to how it works.
 
Well... "a bit over the top" is almost accurate. From what you went on to describe, which sounds likely, they aren't sucking-up much at all. I'm not trying to say that excuses them from illegally coming here. It doesn't do that at all. But, there's sure as hell no dire emergency, or national threat from these people coming here. It's definitely not some plague, or threat to national security... not in any traditional sense.

No one pays their fair share by, at least, someone else's measure.

Ya, I dunno how much of a threat it is. Maybe it's a lot of money they cost us, maybe it's not a ton. I'm sure either of us could look up the cost, which would certainly be biased by the source we were getting the numbers from. And it would depend if we're talking just direct costs, or if we factor in impact on wages and things of that nature.

But my point is... Let's just put an abstract number to it: say every 1000 illegals costs you $50 a year. Maybe you're willing to pay $50 to have those 1000 come into the country. Hell, I might be willing to pay that too. But it's not right to force everyone to pay that if they don't want to.
 
Last edited:
Ya, I dunno how much of a threat it is. Maybe it's a lot of money they cost us, maybe it's not a ton. I'm sure either of us could look up the cost, which would certainly be biased by the source we were getting the numbers from. And it would depend if we're talking just direct costs, or if we factor in impact on wages and things of that nature.

But my point is... Let's just put an abstract number to it: say every 1000 illegals costs you $50 a year. Maybe you're willing to pay $50 to have those 1000 come into the country. Hell, I might be willing to pay that too. But it's not right to force everyone to pay that if they don't want to.
I'm not ecstatic. But, I also don't have kids, so I could be pissed about paying for public schools... but, I'm not.

This stupid wall is sure as hell not worth shutting-down the government over, and having hundreds of thousands of workers not be able to do their jobs and get paid.
 
I guess they allow any child to walk into a school, sit down and get whatever the rest get. I dunno.

If women are just handed the WIC stuff, food stamps or whatever, without any ID, they just show up and get whatever they ask for... that doesn't sound like how it works.

I can believe that showing up in an ER gets you medical attention.

I find it very hard to believe that people who cannot provide any proof of their residence (that they are a US citizen, or a state citizen) are just handed any freebie that others who have ID, and were even born here, have to jump through hoop after hoop just to get the minimum.

I assume you know some illegal immigrants who do this regularly? Or you have some proof of it.
https://www.disabilityapprovalguide.../can-illegal-immigrants-get-federal-benefits/
 
That doesn't prove, or provide proof, that people from Central America, or Mexico, or other Latin countries (except Cuba) are eligible for any kind of benefits.

And, what that link shows me is that our government has voted to allow the people mentioned in the details to have the benefits. You can't really blame the people for accepting what is being offered.

But, even the link doesn't prove that ILLEGAL immigrants are getting anything:

"The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) grants certain noncitizens in certain immigration categories the right to collect SSI. To qualify, that person must be blind or disabled and lawfully residing in the United States on August 22, 1996. Anyone lawfully admitted for permanent residence under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) with 40 U.S. work credits may also receive SSI.

Other noncitizens who may be eligible for SSI payments include:

  • Active duty members of the U.S. armed forces
  • Noncitizen members of federally recognized Indian tribes
  • Certain noncitizens admitted as Amerasian immigrants
  • Cuban/Haitian entrants admitted under the Refugee Education Assistance Act
  • Certain victims of severe human trafficking
  • Certain Iraqi or Afghan special immigrants who are admitted as lawful permanent residents"


So... I'm still not convinced that people cross the border and automatically get all the freebies.


ETA:

The link also says this:

"It’s true that certain agencies allow “qualified” aliens to qualify for certain federal aid programs, like SSI, TANF or SNAP. (For example: Domestic violence victims may qualify for Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program benefits, or SNAP). However, nearly every anecdotal report involving illegal immigrants accessing Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits each month is probably false."
 
Last edited:
49ou45b847c21.jpg



Think what you want about Rather (and I wish he would have used one of the countless examples of a Republican President doing this instead of all Dems), but in terms of historical accuracy, this is spot on.
 
Ya, I dunno how much of a threat it is. Maybe it's a lot of money they cost us, maybe it's not a ton. I'm sure either of us could look up the cost, which would certainly be biased by the source we were getting the numbers from. And it would depend if we're talking just direct costs, or if we factor in impact on wages and things of that nature.

But my point is... Let's just put an abstract number to it: say every 1000 illegals costs you $50 a year. Maybe you're willing to pay $50 to have those 1000 come into the country. Hell, I might be willing to pay that too. But it's not right to force everyone to pay that if they don't want to.

The problem with your second paragraph is that we live in a collective society. It will never be totally fair. Some of your taxes go towards things that you’ll never directly benefit from. It’s just how it works here.
 
49ou45b847c21.jpg



Think what you want about Rather (and I wish he would have used one of the countless examples of a Republican President doing this instead of all Dems), but in terms of historical accuracy, this is spot on.
That would take common sense, I’m sad to say that will not happen. The first order of business Monday should be congress passing a bill that keeps a shutdown like this from ever happening again.
 
The problem with your second paragraph is that we live in a collective society. It will never be totally fair. Some of your taxes go towards things that you’ll never directly benefit from. It’s just how it works here.

Yup. And I understand that I have to pay for things for other American citizens that I’ll never use. It’s part of being a citizen of the USA, we’re collective. Unfortunately for non-citizens, that doesn’t (or shouldn’t) extend to them.
 
Yup. And I understand that I have to pay for things for other American citizens that I’ll never use. It’s part of being a citizen of the USA, we’re collective. Unfortunately for non-citizens, that doesn’t (or shouldn’t) extend to them.

Yeah - 1000% different if I'm helping someone indirectly who is also paying taxes, contributing to our economy, etc. etc.

Leeches benefitting from my tax dollars angers me. I'll extend that to citizens who are on welfare or taking government handouts because they are lazy or can't learn to put on a freaking condom.
 
49ou45b847c21.jpg



Think what you want about Rather (and I wish he would have used one of the countless examples of a Republican President doing this instead of all Dems), but in terms of historical accuracy, this is spot on.

Rather must have missed the part where Obama EO'd us into a treaty without the approval of Congress. It's funny how he left that part out.
 
Rather must have missed the part where Obama EO'd us into a treaty without the approval of Congress. It's funny how he left that part out.

Again...that's not the issue. You can do that with any President...Republican, Dem, Whig, Federalist, Democratic-Republican, Green, Bull Moose, etc. etc. All of them have done something that skated Congress.

The point is that if you want billions upon billions in funding for your major reform you campaigned on you have to work with Congress to get it done.

Stop with the "well XYZ did this" on a completely different and irrelevant issue so Trump can do this, it's annoying.
 
Again...that's not the issue. You can do that with any President...Republican, Dem, Whig, Federalist, Democratic-Republican, Green, Bull Moose, etc. etc. All of them have done something that skated Congress.

The point is that if you want billions upon billions in funding for your major reform you campaigned on you have to work with Congress to get it done.

Stop with the "well XYZ did this" on a completely different and irrelevant issue so Trump can do this, it's annoying.

That just isn't true. The Paris Accord cost us a lot of money before we pulled out. I'm not saying that it should happen. I'm just saying that Rather is either a hypocrite, or he's retarded.
 
Uh huh. My values remain consistant no matter who is in office. It's why sometimes I agree with Trump, and other times I don't. I also realize that every decision isn't made in a vacuum.

Out of curiosity, what do you disagree with Trump about?
 
That would take common sense, I’m sad to say that will not happen. The first order of business Monday should be congress passing a bill that keeps a shutdown like this from ever happening again.
What exactly could you pass to keep this from happening again? Are you suggesting that Congress should be able to spend whatever it wants without oversight?
 
The outflow of money to Mexico.

I’m not suggesting it would stop the outflow. But it would simulate some of the economic activity if the money was spent here. I’m not sure it’s constitutional though. Haven’t given it much thought.
 
I’m not suggesting it would stop the outflow. But it would simulate some of the economic activity if the money was spent here. I’m not sure it’s constitutional though. Haven’t given it much thought.
I'm not sure what you're getting at. Obviously it helps if the money is spent here, but taxing wires isn't going to keep the money here when there are multiple ways to send money.
 
I'm not sure what you're getting at. Obviously it helps if the money is spent here, but taxing wires isn't going to keep the money here when there are multiple ways to send money.
It’s not about keeping money in the states, but replicating the impact as if it were. If it stays here it’s spent on goods which are taxed. So by taxing wires, you’re still capturing those taxes that would otherwise not be spent here.
 
I guess now we’re gonna find out there’s a national emergency that requires the wall being built. Another caravan is on the way! Btw noone ever answered on where that first caravan is now. Can we assume they’re already in the us committing terror acts and raping white girls since there was no wall to keep them out?

But these caravans always end up at border crossings. WTF does a wall have to do with keeping them out?

CC
 
It’s not about keeping money in the states, but replicating the impact as if it were. If it stays here it’s spent on goods which are taxed. So by taxing wires, you’re still capturing those taxes that would otherwise not be spent here.
What I'm saying is they won't use wires at that point. It's a useless tax.
 
It’s not about keeping money in the states, but replicating the impact as if it were. If it stays here it’s spent on goods which are taxed. So by taxing wires, you’re still capturing those taxes that would otherwise not be spent here.

It's amazing that when I use this argument in favor of lower corporate taxes, this same guy told me that I was stupid.
 
It’s not about keeping money in the states, but replicating the impact as if it were. If it stays here it’s spent on goods which are taxed. So by taxing wires, you’re still capturing those taxes that would otherwise not be spent here.

So that makes the government whole on that money. But that money is still almost certainly being spent on foreign businesses, not domestically as it would have otherwise been. So essentially the public sector still gets their cut (as they always do), the private sector be damned.
 
So that makes the government whole on that money. But that money is still almost certainly being spent on foreign businesses, not domestically as it would have otherwise been. So essentially the public sector still gets their cut (as they always do), the private sector be damned.
Just another reason we need a consumption tax
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hark_The_Sound_2010
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT