|
Calypso, et al.... Auto Insurance Law Calypso part Two Tessa, Tish and Calypso Wake Up, People! Ackstabbing Itches A Cell Phone Shock Memorial Lousy Looky-Loos The Continued War on Ridiculous Fees February 07 March 07 April 07 May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08
RSS 2.0![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Share! |
|
|
Illegal Immigration
A friend of mine sent this to me. Truer words have rarely been spoken. A lady I know wrote the best letter in the editorials in ages!!! It explains things better than all the baloney you hear on TV. You are Required to let me stay in your house. Why can't people see how ridiculous this is?! If you agree, pass it on (in English). Share it if you see the value of it. 35 comments from 13 users
1
posted by
jcmiamigonow
on Feb 26, 2007 at 09:57 PM
Right on. I've been trying to find the old story of illegals coming to the USA. One illegal came over then had his wife and kids to come. They then got on welfare and invited all thier cousins to come to the USA. They have free medical, food stamps and unemployment so we don't have to work. Soon all the people in Mexico are here so the legal workers in the USA have to go to Mexico to work. Soon there is no money for all the benifits the illegals are getting so they want to go back to Mexico so the workers there can supprot them.posted by
Don49ers
on Feb 27, 2007 at 07:53 AM
yeah it was cut and pasted, and it said so in the first line "A friend of mine sent this to me" posted by
dusty1215
on Feb 27, 2007 at 08:21 AM
This Spotlight examines the eligibility of immigrants for welfare as provided for in the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996. These rules were subsequently modified (see "Immigrants, Welfare Reform, and the Coming Reauthorization Vote" by Audrey Singer), but the significant changes made under the PRWORA make it worth examining in detail. The PRWORA was passed with bipartisan support under the Clinton administration, and dramatically reformed the nation's welfare system. A specific provision, Title IV, changed the eligibility of noncitizens for public assistance. In addition to income, eligibility for major federal benefits was linked to immigration status and whether the applicant arrived before Aug. 22, 1996, which was the date the law was enacted. Specifically, PRWORA provides for the following: posted by
ghostriter
on Feb 27, 2007 at 08:43 AM
Once again, cowards go by anonymous. If you look at the bold black letters heading the post, it clearly states that it was sent to me by a friend of mine. I had not seen it before, and thought it was fun, and that others would enjoy it. You are right, I did not know the "lady who wrote it"; I do, however, know the person who sent it to me. And BTW, I did change some of the words...I corrected the spelling. Get a name, and a sense of humor to go with it. Blind criticism is only annoying, not constructive. posted by
dusty1215
on Feb 27, 2007 at 08:49 AM
posted by
woofwoof
on Feb 27, 2007 at 09:00 AM
posted by
robbwillis
on Feb 27, 2007 at 09:24 AM
posted by
GotREALITY
on Feb 27, 2007 at 09:27 AM
posted by
dusty1215
on Feb 27, 2007 at 09:32 AM
posted by
dusty1215
on Feb 27, 2007 at 09:37 AM
The United States is considered a magnet for foreign talent. As cited in a report by the Institute of International Education (IIE), more than one-third of Nobel laureates from the United States are immigrants, and there are 62 patent applications for every 100 foreign PhD graduates in science and engineering (S&E) programs. Foreign students make the United States one of the most profitable educational destinations. For example, according to NAFSA: Association of International Educators, foreign students and their dependents contributed more than $13 billion to the US economy in 2004-2005. posted by
robbwillis
on Feb 27, 2007 at 09:44 AM
posted by
dusty1215
on Feb 27, 2007 at 09:47 AM
posted by
robbwillis
on Feb 27, 2007 at 09:56 AM
posted by
dusty1215
on Feb 27, 2007 at 09:59 AM
posted by
robbwillis
on Feb 27, 2007 at 10:07 AM
posted by
dusty1215
on Feb 27, 2007 at 10:20 AM
posted by
robbwillis
on Feb 27, 2007 at 10:25 AM
posted by
ki6amd
on Feb 27, 2007 at 04:32 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Feb 27, 2007 at 04:44 PM
posted by
ki6amd
on Feb 27, 2007 at 08:07 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Feb 27, 2007 at 08:19 PM
I do not like that anyone gets medical care without going through the process to qualify. But that said..ER treatment sucks ass..and I would know..I do not have medical insurance either. I cited various things in my comments above. All verifiable. Like I said before..to say they 'take' from us means you have to admit the 'give' as well..the question lies in the how much is left after the math is done. I do not condone undocumenteds being here. I want tougher laws to punish the corporate morons that willingly hire them and take advantage of them. But I do not like kneejerk reactions and generalizations that they are all bad people sucking the life out of our country. Have a good evening. I have to finish an article which has a deadline in two hours. I hate deadlines :) posted by
tonyh
on Feb 27, 2007 at 08:45 PM
I say lock down the borders and jettison any (everyone) caught in the country illegally. Prosecute anyone employing, renting to, or doing doing business with anyone illegally in this country. All benefits, education, medical care, etc. should be denied to illegal aliens. The "automatic citizenship" because you were born here thing needs to be fixed also. Every other country sees it as the child is a citizen of the country where the parents hold citizenship. What's so wrong with that? Get them all, the heck out and make them apply through the right channels. Once everything is legal and square, they're welcome to be here. I really don't think that it's too much to ask. posted by
anonymous
on Feb 27, 2007 at 08:56 PM
tonyh, It is not to much to ask. It is called following the law of the land. It I were to go to Mexico, I would follow their laws to the best of my ability (or pay the consequence).
posted by
tonyh
on Feb 27, 2007 at 09:19 PM
posted by
woofwoof
on Feb 27, 2007 at 10:09 PM
Why has illegal immigration stopped....I just paused to put those words in Google... First, I get something about NAFTA, oh what a joke that is. The second one is about boycotting Bank of America * YEAH*....and down a little farther was this blogspot and the comments therein are interesting. It's been 14 years ago yesterday, since the first attack on the World Trade Center....because of slack immigration rules. It still comes down to what this costs US economically. It seems like a no brainer. Plus anon, has it pegged with that last line: If I were to go to Mexico, I would follow their laws to the best of my ability (or pay the consequence). posted by
randomfactor
on Feb 28, 2007 at 09:35 AM
Interesting piece in the LA Times today: http://www.latimes.com/news... (Subscription required, but it's free) Immigrants boost pay, not prison populations, new studies showImmigrants are less likely to go to prison than U.S.-born residents of the same ethnic group and they boost pay for natives, research says. By Teresa Watanabe, Times Staff WriterFebruary 28, 2007
posted by
robbwillis
on Feb 28, 2007 at 09:58 AM
That is interesting. One of the study's detractors said: "Immigrants, who make up one-third of California's labor force, could also be discouraging natives from moving to the state and taking advantage of higher-paying job opportunities." Like that's a bad thing...
It doesn't mention the immigrant's second generation's impact on crime and prisons, though. The kids that come out of families where the parents don't speak English face a tough time in school even with bilingual education. Many overcome, but those that can't or won't do get into trouble.
Speaking of The LA Times, anyone watch Frontline last night? posted by
dusty1215
on Feb 28, 2007 at 10:16 AM
Most countries had it and have changed the laws. The majority now require at least ONE parent to be a resident of the country, if the child is an orphan they will always be allowed to become a citizen..which of course makes sense to me. A fairly decent site that runs through many of the Euro countries laws is here. Wiki was very good and I was going blind well into the middle of the night going through all their info. There are two terms used to describe citizenship aka Nationality, per wiki: Nationality most often derives from place of birth (i.e. jus soli) and, in some cases, ethnicity (i.e. jus sanguinis). Here is my sadly incomplete list: Belarus Czechoslovakia Canada Austria-if the child lives continuously there for 10 years Poland-if the child is stateless South Africa Germany if the child lived continuously in the country for 8 years Philipines..under certain conditions Belgium if the child is stateless England..with certain criteria Italy..if the child or his parents are stateless Ireland Netherlands under certain conditions France..if stateless Greece Stateless is a term which wiki defines thusly: Someone who is not a citizen or subject of any state. Pretty vague don't ya think? Also, the countries which want continuous residence in actuality do not give 'automatic citizenship by being born there..unless you stay there for a set duration of time...which seemed to me pretty vague and useless. Sorry I couldn't go more indepth with it Robb. But you apparently were correct that most countries have changed their laws and no longer offer what we do here in the U.S. posted by
randomfactor
on Feb 28, 2007 at 10:19 AM
Well, Robb, I guess his point is that Americans from other states may be indirectly disadvantaged (through the loss of opportunities) and it wouldn't show inside California. . I would suspect there's a lot that can be questioned about this study--but it seems a good place to start. posted by
robbwillis
on Feb 28, 2007 at 10:42 AM
Dusty, Thanks for the birthright research. Interesting to see what countries still have no qualifications at all. The United States needs them more than most since we're such a magnet. Some of those countries have trouble keeping people in instead of out.
The Frontline was #2 in their four-part series on journalism. The LA Times went from family ownership to the pubicly-owned Tribune. Although the LA Times makes a $200 million profit on $1 billion in revenue, it's under pressure to satisfy Wall Street now and the Tribune keeps cutting staff. Two editors have been fired for refusing to downsize any more. With 75% of original reporting coming from newspapers, having them in trouble is troubling.
Random, I think the guy complaining about immigration from other states being curtailed because of illegal immigration ignores, as usual, the over-population of this state. I don't care where the extra bodies are coming from.
posted by
dusty1215
on Feb 28, 2007 at 11:07 AM
Sorry I couldn't slog through every country Robb..my back was killing me and it was getting very late. posted by
raychopra
on Mar 17, 2007 at 09:11 PM
posted by
tonyh
on Mar 17, 2007 at 10:00 PM
Legal is OK. I'm cool with that. I've got a colleague from India whose visa is such that he's having a problem changing positions within the same company. I, and a couple of others are helping him work through the situation. He's an Engineer, trying to make the transition from Quality Engineering to Development Engineering, within the same Company. This guy is a talent and he's doing his part to be in America the right way. Even though he wants to maintain his Indian Citizenship, for now, I think he belongs here. We're working on it. It'll take a few months, but I'm sure that we'll be able to help him fix things. I have a problem with people who hold duel citizenship, keep all of their (liberal) assets in another country, but come here for free medical treatment because they can claim indigence, and the treatment is much better. I've known people from other countries (including India) who do this. I turn them in, whenever I hear about it, because it's wrong. I worked for a guy whose Parents owned 12 hardware stores in India and lived very well there, held duel citizenship and came here for free medical treatment. They'd come and stay with their Son for a couple of months and take care of all of their medical needs, then go home to India. After about ten years of this, I got sick and tired of it and turned them in for it. Illegal is quite different. They need to go home and apply through the correct channels..........................Period! posted by
anonymous
on Mar 17, 2007 at 11:17 PM
I don't believe that anyone has a problem with those people that immigrate legally. They have paid their fees, complied with the law, undergone background checks, and waited patiently in line (for many years usually) in order to enjoy the freedoms that the native born take all too forgranted. The issue that alarms me is the granting of blanket amnesty to those that are flooding into this country illegally. That which is given free has no value. Where do their loyalties lie. It doesn't take a great leap of imagination to realize that they are gaining in political clout and once they have achieved the right to vote (as if they don't already) they may promote, initiate, and vote for legislation favorable to a foreign power, i.e. Mexico, against the interests of their host country, the United States of America. Annon 42 posted by
raychopra
on Mar 19, 2007 at 04:13 PM
I am with you tonyh, People who misuse the system no matter if they are Legal or Illegal need to be reported. i am glad there is someone who has the courage to stand up & do something not like lot of who just keep on complianing on hese things. You have my support my friend.
1
Our readers recommend: |