Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ILLEGALS STRAINING SOCIAL SERVICES OR SIMPLY SCAPEGOATED ?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ILLEGALS STRAINING SOCIAL SERVICES OR SIMPLY SCAPEGOATED ?

    Excerpts from the article written by Conservative Republican, Shaun Kenney.

    Full article is here:

    http://www.shaunkenney.com/2005/11/t...mmigration.htm


    But let's stop for just a moment and reflect on what we're really saying here. Check off the arguments Howell makes against illegal immigrants. Why should we shoo them off? Why, the reason they must go is because (apart from the fact they are illegally here, a federal problem) they impose upon our social safety net! As Jim Bacon comments :

    [I]llegal immigration is a unavoidably a state/local problem when illegal immigrants apply for food stamps, seek medical care and attend overcrowded, fiscally stressed schools. These problems cannot be fobbed onto the federal government. The problems are inherently local, and they're real.[/]

    Do we hear that? Republicans. Arguing that people should be shooed off because they are adversely impacting our socialized safety net of food stamps, medical care, and public schools.

    Does anyone else see the problem here?

    Let's be brutally honest. The reason why these programs are failing isn't because of the impact of illegal immigration. They're failing because they are traditionally societal roles that are being hijacked by a government bent on stressing socialism rather than individualism.

    To fork over the failure of these institutions upon a convenient class of people isn't exactly what I would call just, though it certainly is a predictable repetition of history with respects to human nature.

    Setting aside the contradiction conservatives offer defending liberally-imposed social agendas, what we have here is an appeal to that old American fear of "the other". That when something doesn't go well, we find some group of people to blame. At first it was the British, then the French, then Indians, next the Irish, extending to Catholics, then to Slavs, then to African-Americans, and currently with anyone of Arab descent. History does indeed repeat.

    Now in an age where our open borders and socialized government system have been under threat, we are presented with illegal immigration. And it's not a stretch to say that when people speak of "illegal immigration," it's shorthand for Latin Americans crossing the Mexican border, and not grandma from the Ukraine stuffed into a duffle bag on the next Delta flight.

    Here is where the rubber meets the road. Conservativism in my mind (and a slight deviation from the definition Ken Cuccinelli gave this morning) operates on the principles of free markets, free people, and a free society. That comes with a price tag, starting with the rules necessary to make socieities free.

    If the concerns from the Howell bench stem from the impact illegal aliens have on our social programs, then what precisely is the problem then? As a conservative, I might suggest that the problem isn't so much the presence of illegal immigrants per se, but rather the presence of government, a presence conservatives are supposed to be fighting against.

    Seeing this, let's argue in hypotheticals. If the social programs these illegal aliens are supposedly straining to the breaking point ceased to exist tomorrow, would the opposition be so strong?

    Now one might argue yes, and I'll offer two generalized scenarios:

    (1) Yes Shaun, they should still be removed because they are here in the United States illegally.

    Then remove them, as is the federal governments responsibility to do so.

    (2) Yes Shaun, they should still be removed because they are filthy Mexicans.

    Then I say you're a racist, and deserve to be beaten to a **** pulp.

    So the argument boils down accordingly. The argument against illegal immigration is either (1) a decision policy makers in Washington - not Richmond - need to develop and enforce, or (2) one motivated purely on the fear of "the other" and based on race. Propping up decaying social programs and using illegal immigrants as the scapegoat is only making a bad situation terribly worse.

  • #2
    You wrote nice, very impressive post no one bothered to read to the end. Let me explane something to you, in case if you was going to school too much - America is only about money.Illegals are chip labor, notch above slave labor. Do the math.

    Comment


    • #3
      You wrote nice, very impressive post no one bothered to read to the end
      I didn't write posted above article.
      Conservative Republican blogger Shaun Kenney did.

      Let me explane something to you, in case if you was going to school too much - America is only about money.Illegals are chip labor, notch above slave labor. Do the math.
      Aside from Immigration concerns, if any MAN/WOMAN choses to & voluntarily agrees to do a construction or nanny work for whatever monetary compensation they can agree upon (no matter how low or high), what business is it of mine?

      Do you know what FREE MARKET ECONOMY means?
      Or are you rather supportive of Communist one?

      Comment


      • #4
        No need to get defensive, I am just explaining you why borders was open for so long. There is deep economical reason for illegal immigration and only economical forces can end it.Many countries adopt it as of now. You want you country prosper - put up with spiks.FREE MARKET ECONOMY in progress :-)

        Comment


        • #5
          No need to interpret simple questions as "getting defensive"

          Let me also remind you that the topic of this thread isn't "Why borders were open for so long".


          As to relation of prosperity to Free Market Economy - there is direct one.

          But we are talking about Adam Smith's FREE MARKET ECONOMY like in UK, US and etc., NOT a bogus, corrupted, phony - in fact tyrannical - "Free Market" economy systems like in Mexico and some other Third World countries that people are escaping from.

          Comment


          • #6
            First, the impact on the costs of social programs is only PART of why large numbers of illegal aliens (or even low-skilled uneducated legal immigrants) are a problem.

            Let's say we do away with all social welfare programs, and people from anywhere in the world are free to come here at will. Now, what do you think that will do to the incomes and standard of living for Americans?

            But, ultimately, illegal immigration is not about economics. It is about the right of Americans to determine what they want their country to be, as embodied in the laws they pass. If Americans want to maintain an "American" culture, rather than being inundated by 50 million Poles (are there 50 million Poles?) Indians or Chinese, then that's THEIR decision.

            Comment


            • #7
              Only about 38 million Poles, but enough to take over a few large states.

              Comment


              • #8
                So , Aliba, welfare isn't the main (or impossible to solve) reason you oppose presence of illegal immigrants already here.

                Though it's contrary to what you stated dozens of times on your other posts, from now on can we assume that you have changed your mind?

                Comment


                • #9
                  illegal immigrants apply for food stamps
                  They are not eligible, at least in NY state.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    illegal immigramts do not qualify for welfare and food stamps because in order to get these ...they must have a social. Infact most of the people on wellfare and food stamps are US citizens, and US legal residents. so that not the problem....

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Are you "engaged" in reality? Illegal immigrants do receive social services either with a social security number received legitimately via a past visa status or with a number that was stolen.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        From above article:

                        Here is where the rubber meets the road. Conservativism in my mind (and a slight deviation from the definition Ken Cuccinelli gave this morning) operates on the principles of free markets, free people, and a free society. That comes with a price tag, starting with the rules necessary to make socieities free.

                        If the concerns from the Howell bench stem from the impact illegal aliens have on our social programs, then what precisely is the problem then? As a conservative, I might suggest that the problem isn't so much the presence of illegal immigrants per se, but rather the presence of government, a presence conservatives are supposed to be fighting against.

                        Seeing this, let's argue in hypotheticals. If the social programs these illegal aliens are supposedly straining to the breaking point ceased to exist tomorrow, would the opposition be so strong?

                        Now one might argue yes, and I'll offer two generalized scenarios:

                        (1) Yes Shaun, they should still be removed because they are here in the United States illegally.

                        Then remove them, as is the federal governments responsibility to do so.

                        (2) Yes Shaun, they should still be removed because they are filthy Mexicans.

                        Then I say you're a racist, and deserve to be beaten to a **** pulp.

                        So the argument boils down accordingly. The argument against illegal immigration is either (1) a decision policy makers in Washington - not Richmond - need to develop and enforce, or (2) one motivated purely on the fear of "the other" and based on race. Propping up decaying social programs and using illegal immigrants as the scapegoat is only making a bad situation terribly worse.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Illegal immigrants strain the social service system in many ways. Simply by applying, due to the sheer numbers, is straining the system in many areas. Resources (time, etc.) are being devoted to applications-applications of illegal immigrants for themselves and their USC children. Illegal immigrants are not technically eligible for food stamps but their USC children are. Just as their USC children are eligible for medicaid. Both subject to income guidelines, of course. If the employer doesn't want a paper trail, doesn't want to sign his name to an official document, one ends up with verification of income that is not correct and ends up making a person income eligible. Since a lot of states have a cross check with various systems it could be difficult to use another person's social unless they use their name and have other ID, etc. Fake green cards though, that's another story... fraught with many more problems. Many many people get benefits that technically they are not eligible for, due to some of the above problems, overworked employees, inadequate systems (partially due to application numbers multiplying so quickly), fraud, you name it. Of course, an illegal immigrant who is getting ready to give birth is eligible for emergency medicaid to cover delivery (if income eligible). Anyone checked the cost of a baby delivery lately?

                          That's just one area. Emergency resources dealing with housing assistance, emergency food, medical assistance, etc., etc., etc. have all been impacted.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            My d-i-c-k doesn't erect lately - so let's kick some illegal a-s-s now !!!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              antifascist brings to light a serious topic that should be huge consideration in regards to any type of amnesty consideration.

                              The federal government would then make it a state/local problem. Obviously certain states would be more impacted than others where there are a large influx of illegals/EWI. Those states are going to have to get the money from somewhere... whose pocket do u think they will pick

                              Yes Sugarpuff.. I agree that ENGAGED is totally not in reality along with a lot of other people in this country that illegals are not economically impacting the country. The Poster "SPRING" accurately explains how the system has been working.

                              Scapegoat ? Racisim For some maybe.. but
                              clearly the services are being strained. This cannot be denied! IRS has had to rewrite qualifications on many taxpayer programs when after the fact they realized that illegals were benefiting from them in large number that the government simply could not afford.

                              Scapegoat for others no. Many americans are just not comfortable with the idea of people getting into the country not inspected, wheter it be from asia by boat, polish latin america or canadia. Many americans are too culturally deprived / or cannot even distinquish to even know that "white skinned/light skinned aliens are not american in general unless they do not speak english well.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X