You forget that Obama declared a national emergency because of the “Bird Flu” which was HARDLY a “national emergency,” and Bush 43 declared one because of 9/11 and even Carter declared one when the Iranians took all those hostages in the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. It’s not like the use of a national emergency has never been invoked before by BOTH parties. At least THIS is an ACTUAL national emergency when thousands of Central Americans are trying (and in some cases, succeeding) to flood across the border into the U.S. illegally. That’s an INVASION.
That would mean giving our land to Mexico. These are Indian reservations.
Quit twisting my words.
We have an underclass in labor because labor is overregulated, and makes doing business legally too costly. No one can deny this. We fix the problem by deregulating, and allowing these people an access point to work here legally.
I don’t care if at that point jobs dry up in particular industry, because if someone from the 3rd world, with a 3rd world education, can compete with you in what you’re doing, then you need to be doing something of higher value.
Something your far better American education prepares you for. Something we spent tax money on.
And yeah, I do direct this at myself, as someone whose competed, and lost jobs to immigrants. So I’m also going to direct it at you.
More value in our work, not “protection” from competition.
If you don’t see the difference between declaring a national emergency over a bi-partisan issue, and seizing emergency powers to force through a controversial policy over the opposition of half the country, then I don’t know what to say.
Actually, I do not what to say. Enjoy your President Ocasio-Cortez shitshow.
Nonsense, of course. There’s not a single thing “controversial” about wanting to seal our border against a foreign invasion by uneducated, poor, often disease-ridden people who just WANT to come here and suck at this government’s overly-generous teat. The only “controversy” about it is that the left is desperate to bring in new voters to replace their fading fortunes among Americans…especially black Americans.
Which is irrelevant, since since the national emergency declaration is about using an existing power.
Can she even spell “president?”…
Setting new standards for abuse of existing power is expansion of power.
Conservatives understood this when it was Obama engaging in ever increasing forms of executive abuse. Now that it’s your guy, of course you’ve forgotten.
Really? When has that ever happened? Is it happening right now? Corporations are getting deregulated some, perhaps, but not individuals. So when my labor gets deregulated, when my tax burden becomes some kind of reasonable, when I am eligible for as much assistance as an illegal and can get 9 stitches in the ER without getting a bankrupting bill (padded with ~$4000 dollars in fraudulent charges) like an illegal, then maybe we can talk about immigration reform.
IDK, has Trump done something?
Seems the left is whining about something he did on that.
Illegals aren’t eligible for much assistance, so you’re already there.
To what end? That would mean you would have to accept a life where you have constantly poor credit history, and are probably running from bill collectors.
You could do that, but why would you want to? The Cons seem to outweigh the Pros here.
Now, I’m all for putting a wall around welfare, and as George W. Bush showed, you can do that, and have it be effective. We just needed more of it.
But you can’t use welfare as an excuse to manipulate labor supply.
The labor market was here first, its trends are very old, and immutable. The Demand doesn’t go away because the law changed, and if you put the two at odds, the Demand will organize skills and capital to defeat our border defenses.
And it will defeat them, as our defenses are largely static, while a market is malleable, and free to evolve and exploit things at will.
We’ll never throw enough public money to defeat the private economy driving it. And I don’t get why we would even want to try. It’s chasing after symptoms, not causes. It’s taking the least effective, most costly path, while you hand the state more power and assets.
None of which allies itself with principles of limited government.
Hogwash. The power is the power, not the use thereof.
By the way, are you suggesting that the Dems sportingly refrain from abusing power (constitutional or not) until the Repubs do? If so, hogwash again. They’ll use anything and everything (and have done so) whenever they thought they could get away with it (and due to crookedness in Federal law enforcement and legal system, they often have).
BS, AS! 65% of illegal households are receiving SOME sort of welfare assistance…and that doesn’t even touch on their “free” use of highways, schools, hospitals, universities, etc.
Both sides have traditionally refrained from abuse of power, with obvious exceptions. Over the last few decades, as politics has become more partisan and destructive, there has been an escalation of willingness to abuse powers. These are just political facts. Trump represents the latest and most abusive government yet.
You don’t consider equality before the law to be a desirable end? I knew that, but nice to have you on record.
Funny thing is, hispanics go to the hospital and get treatment no questions asked (it is, after all, somrhow RACIST to ask non whites to pay for health services), and the hospital bills the united states government which pays, no questions asked, and taxes me 87%. The hospitals use the emtaala mandates as an excuse to Jack up prices on the only people that they are allowed to actually directly bill (working white men), and pad those bills with ridiculous amounts of fraud.
But Dave? That says nothing of how many types they qualify for, or the $ amount they receive.
I’ve already posted a chart showing what types they can use. According to the rules, they qualify for the least of anyone.
Now, certain States might be more liberal with their own State-level programs. But if so, it’s because their own voters OK’d it.
What you’re describing isn’t legal, so the law is moot here.
It isn’t legal to run up fraudulent charges, and compensating hospitals that incur them, is not an illegal qualifying for welfare. Most of those charges are run up by uninsured natives to begin with. Did you mean to describe something else?
Hospitals are one of the #1 places where illegals are caught. Because they’re serious about being reimbursed.
Do you mean free clinics, that do outreach to the poor? Or hospitals in Blue States that use State-level programs to subsidize “disproportionate share” centers?
Or tax exemptions, that again, are meant to help hospitals with unreimbursed care, and is not welfare?
Which is yet another way we subsidize unreimbursed costs at Hospitals. And yeah, not for it. But it’s not welfare. And it’s not directed at illegals.
It’s covering emergency care, you would be subsidized by it if you went in needing your arm stitched up, and then stiffed the bill.
To avoid the consequences of stiffing that bill, you would live pretty much in the dark. Fragmented or poor credit history, never letting on where you live. Probably faking your identity more than a couple times.
And again, if you had a choice, why would you want to live that way?
Hahahahaha. Hospitals are giant corporate medicaid fraud schemes, now. It is virtually the entire business model. That’s why they’re all being gobbled up under massive corporate umbrellas, it’s guaranteed free government cheese for the corporate rats. And illegals aren’t going to report any fraud, are they? Especially when it benefits them, too.
Can’t agree more, but I’d like you to consider this:
How does a hospital look at a patient, who has no insurance, and is not here legally, after you’ve stabilized them, and they’re now just sitting in your ward, absorbing resources?
You can’t transfer them to another hospital; because of their lack of insurance.
You won’t qualify for most funding to offset their costs, not even charitable donations, because they’re illegal.
Thus what hospitals have resorted to doing, is “medical repatriation”. Where they sign over an illegal over to a hospital in the country they’re from, and let them handle any further costs.
In places where funding is even more tight, illegals will avoid going to hospitals, because they know that they’ll just get reported.
This is particularly true for people who need long-term or post-acute care.
You apparently STILL don’t get the point, AS. Why should people here ILLEGALLY “qualify” for a single dime of welfare assistance??? They’ve contributed NOTHING to this country by coming here illegally. What you’re advocating is making America’s middle class tax slaves to support a bunch of criminal aliens and that’s simply WRONG…and it is a CRIME to sneak into this country without permission.
And WHERE did you ever get the idea that providing illegals “free” medical care is NOT a form of welfare?
Funny, but I don’t recall Trump trying to disarm American citizens…
The rub is that some of these people have American spouses or children. That’s typically how.
Other things like Emergency care, are because we don’t like the idea of letting people die tragically.
Uninsured people who live irresponsible lives filled with drugs/poor eating habits don’t deserve that care anymore than illegals do in my book, but I’m not looking to stop someone in the Emergency Room from treating them.
People who are here illegally GOT here illegally for the most part. Oh, I realize a few came here as tourists or students or for vacation and then simply decided to stay, but by in large, they snuck in. Only about 40% of illegals are visa “overstays.” The remainder got here by totally illegal means and are therefore illegal. I don’t give a tinker’s dam that they are married to a citizen. Once they got here illegally, they REMAIN illegal unless they take steps to legalize themselves. BTW, the 14th Amendment does NOT automatically grant citizenship to any baby dropped on American soil if the parents are aliens–legal or otherwise. The lefties making this claim keep forgetting the “…subject to the jurisdiction thereof” part of that clause and an illegal is subject to the jurisdiction of their home country…not ours.