 |
|
Caligastia
|
|
Not exactly fair on the taxpayer, is it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Caligastia
|
|
Funny how you gave up on that thread so easily MZ.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JohnT
How so? One guy has to pay taxes on $700,000 of income which will bring in more than 20 guys paying taxes on $35,000 each. |
Then perhaps in that particular circumstance it works out tax-wise, but how many Americans are missing out on those jobs because of illegals?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mrmitchell
|
|
quote:
Then perhaps in that particular circumstance it works out tax-wise, but how many Americans are missing out on those jobs because of illegals? |
Illegals put in billions of dollars of work into the US economy and they rarely get paid equivalent to their work. It is a bargain for us lazy Americans.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mrmitchell
Illegals put in billions of dollars of work into the US economy and they rarely get paid equivalent to their work. It is a bargain for us lazy Americans. |
It is a bargain for the employers of the illegals. What makes you think the savings are being passed on to you?
Whatever is put into the US economy by illegals does not make up for the cost of the social services they use.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Master Zen
Funnier how you never once bothered actually present a valid argument. |
I did, but you chickened off. Post a response if you think you have a good answer.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Caligastia
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Master Zen
You did? Your argument was based on the most biased source imaginable and not once did you argue any of the half-dozen links I posted to repubable academic sources which you didn't even bother to read.
I have better things to do in life than argue nonsense for so long. |
None of the links you posted were relevant, and screaming "bias" is not rebuttal. Until you can come back with a decent response, I also have better things to do than argue.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jaguar
|
 |
Montgomery County, MD
Apr 2000
time: 00:20
|
|
Edit: Robert Byrd threadjack moved to its own thread. Ignore.
Last edited by Jaguar on 19-05-2005 at 04:17
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jaguar
Boris, Robert Byrd is still a racist. Give it up. He's a former member of the KKK, and he still uses the N word on national TV decades later. |
Yeah, you were claiming a while ago that he voted against Condi Rice's confirmation because she was black. I pointed out how that was a load of horseshit, since he had a) previously confirmed numerous black appointees, even Republican ones (Powell, Paige), and b) he had plenty of reasons (i.e. Iraq) for his dislike of Rice that had nothing to do with race.
I'm sure there's some racism in Byrd (there is in everyone, though). But his professional record on civil rights issues as of late has been pretty good. And the things that people cast against him (like your examples here) are BS. The KKK membership was 60 years ago, and as I've shown, the intent of his using "nigger" on TV in 2001 was not racist. Byrd looks to me like someone who has changed a lot over the years--sometimes slowly and/or reluctantly, though. I'd give him a lot more credit than I would someone like Helms, or Duke.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jaguar
|
|
Montgomery County, MD
Apr 2000
time: 00:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Yeah, you were claiming a while ago that he voted against Condi Rice's confirmation because she was black. I pointed out how that was a load of horseshit, since he had a) previously confirmed numerous black appointees, even Republican ones (Powell, Paige), and b) he had plenty of reasons (i.e. Iraq) for his dislike of Rice that had nothing to do with race.
I'm sure there's some racism in Byrd (there is in everyone, though). But his professional record on civil rights issues as of late has been pretty good. And the things that people cast against him (like your examples here) are BS. The KKK membership was 60 years ago, and as I've shown, the intent of his using "nigger" on TV in 2001 was not racist. Byrd looks to me like someone who has changed a lot over the years--sometimes slowly and/or reluctantly, though. I'd give him a lot more credit than I would someone like Helms, or Duke. |
See ye big thread.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
DinoDoc
|
 |
AECCP loves Democracy
Sep 1999
time: 23:20
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Master Zen
Prove it. And use a real academic source this time around and not an anti-immigration racist organization dubbing as a think-tank.  |
quote:
Mexicans go to Ariz. for medical help
By Dennis Wagner
USA TODAY
Foreigners' bills often aren't paid; financial aid may come for hospitals feeling pinch
BISBEE, Ariz. — Antonio Valenzuela Gomez, a retired factory worker who boasts 49 grandchildren, lifts his shirt to show the giant scar where American doctors cut into his chest a year ago.
Gomez, 79, was at his house in the dusty Mexican border town of Naco near here when his heart began to fail. There is no hospital in that part of Mexico, so family members loaded Gomez in a car and drove him a short distance to the U.S. checkpoint.
An ambulance arrived from the Arizona side and rushed Gomez 7 miles to Copper Queen Community Hospital here. Emergency room workers stabilized him and sent him 80 miles north to Tucson Medical Center, where heart surgery was performed.
Gomez, who spent three weeks in U.S. hospitals, thinks the bill was about $20,000 — likely a fraction of the actual cost. He offers gratitude along with small monthly payments that will never cover the expense. “They saved my life,” he says. “They treated me well.”
Along the border from Chula Vista, Calif., to Brownsville, Texas, U.S. hospitals serve as a medical safety net for undocumented immigrants and residents of northern Mexico. Each year, their care costs American medical centers, consumers and taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. During 2002, 38 Arizona medical centers surveyed by the Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association reported losses on foreign-national patients of $153 million.
After years of pressure from the health care industry, the federal government last week announced a plan to repay hospitals across the USA for up to 30% of the unpaid bills they rack up for such patients from now through 2008. The payback could total $1 billion. Arizona hospitals stand to receive $45 million a year.
Hospitals are required by law to treat all emergency patients, regardless of nationality or legal status.
Jim Dickson, chief executive officer at Copper Queen hospital, says he is happy to care for anyone who is sick or injured. But about 15% of his patients are poor Mexican nationals, and financial losses have been excruciating for a little hospital in Bisbee (population 6,000).
“We had super-deficits the last two years,” says Dickson, who solved his budget crisis by laying off about 35 of the hospital's 130 employees and eliminating medical services such as the long-term care center. “This has had a very negative impact on our hospital.”
Arizona has been particularly burdened since the mid-1990s, when U.S. border crackdowns in Texas and California began funneling illegal immigrants and drug smugglers to the state's 350-mile border with Mexico. Last year, Arizona accounted for 52% of the 1.1 million illegals captured by Border Patrol agents in the Southwest.
Arizona's 5.7 million population includes an estimated 500,000 undocumented immigrants. The nationwide total is about 11 million, the Pew Hispanic Center estimates.
University Medical Center, a non-profit hospital in Tucson, will spend an estimated $12 million this year on unreimbursed emergency care for foreign nationals, hospital president Greg Pivirotto says. “It's a drain that hurts your ability to render care.”
Because UMC has the only trauma center near the southern Arizona border, it treats severely injured patients who require expensive care. The hospital counted about 5,000 emergency patients in April, including 100 foreigners.
“It's a fairly small percentage, but it's a huge cost,” Pivirotto says.
Hospitals use international collection companies to pursue payments. Some patients such as Gomez pay as much as they can. But most costs go uncollected.
Although public attention has focused on unpaid medical care for illegal immigrants, Pivirotto says four-fifths of the foreign nationals in his hospital entered the USA with legitimate paperwork — visas, 72-hour passes or “compassionate entry” permits granted in medical emergencies.
The percentage is likely higher at places like Copper Queen hospital, located in this hillside mining town. To the south, Naco overflows with would-be immigrants, smugglers and others clogged at the border. Dickson, the hospital administrator, says Naco's true population is triple the official count of 7,500. Four Border Patrol agents guarded the border here a decade ago. Today, there are 550.
But Naco still has no hospital, and local clinics lack radiology labs, emergency rooms and basic equipment.
“Even the federale who gets shot, he comes here,” Dickson says. “The mayor, el presidente, will tell you that they count on us for care, because we're their local hospital.”
Francisco Murrieta, an aide to Naco Mayor Vicente Torres, confirms that townsfolk rely on the Bisbee hospital when serious injuries or illnesses strike.
“If somebody has a big medical need, they want the best attention,” he says.
Dickson says he sympathizes with his southern neighbors and tries to help by contributing medical gear to Naco's health clinics.
“I smuggled a defibrillator across the border in an ambulance because they had no way of measuring your heart,” he says. “We gave them an ambulance because they were transporting patients in the backs of cars.”
Dickson says some pregnant women from Naco used to cross the border after going into labor, obtaining the best medical care plus citizenship for a newborn child.
That's no longer a problem because financial losses forced Copper Queen to close its maternity ward. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Master Zen
|
 |
of naughty
Jan 2003
time: 23:20
|
|
What I find most misleading about the arguments of the anti-immigrationists is how they present their data solely as an immediate cost-benefit scenario and never as an inter-generational issue. This would be akin to refusing an investment on the grounds that it will not pay itself off immediately. Precisely because of this, I think the big mistake these people make (deliberately of course) is that they choose to view the issue as a cost, not as an investment.
Let's put it this way. From a purely immediate cost-benefit analysis, the cost of illiegal immigration regarding public services like education and health might very well be higher (though not significantly so) than the immediate benefit of consumer cost reduction and producer benefits.
The deficit in this equation is minimal. Most studies I've read show it at about 1% of the total federal budget deficit, in other words, hardly the main culprit of the deficit (blame defense for having the biggest budget burden... oh wait, Righties never blame defense).
Now we look upon this form another perspective: an intergenerational point of view. By law, any children born in the US are legal citizens. Thus, the ensuing offspring of an immigrant family will be legal citizens. They produce a net gain to the economy since they are legally obtaining public services and are contributing to the economy with higher wages than their illegal parents, and consuming a much higher proportion of that wage, both relatively and absolutely in the US economy. Morseo most studies show that 2nd generation immigrants are far less likely to send back money to their country of origin or if they do, in far lesser amounts. The economy has therefore gained a new productive citizen which was not tabulated into the cost-benefit analysis because it was limited to a single-generational model. Even children who obtained education illegaly benefit the country since the positive marginal effect of each extra year of education reflects itself in their expected wages and these children have much better opportunites at eventually becoming legal citizens.
Last but not least you have the opportunity cost which NO anti-immigrationist will ever dare mention. What is this? Take adult immigrants, and even most underage ones. Practically all of them have obtained some degree of education, very likely a primary one and perhaps a few years of secondary. Let's just leave it at primary here. These people are working in the US, benefiting the US economy as consumers, yet the US didn't pay a cent for their education, Mexico did. Why isn't therefore, the opportunity cost of getting people in the country with free education ever tabulated in immigration cost-benefit analysis? Because it suddenly swings the balance into a benefit.
How you like them apples? 
-MZ
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-05-2005 23:59
|