Thread: Bush Signaling Shift in Stance on Immigration

While I really don't want to see any amnesty handed out I've been thinking about something.

What would all those illegals, if given amnesty and become citizens, think when they no longer get everything for free?

Originally Posted by ldydrake

While I really don't want to see any amnesty handed out I've been thinking about something.

What would all those illegals, if given amnesty and become citizens, think when they no longer get everything for free?

idydrake
I weighed that question for about a minute or two, also. Then it hit me like a tank:

We can then add their EXTENDED FAMILIES & FAMILIES OF FAMILIES to the welfare, special education, in-state tuition, medical, etc. services.

You and I will then be paying for 100 MILLION more of them. Sound good?

BTW, big business is slowly & consistantly getting rid of their pension & medical. Think they'll be paying for the 100 MILLION? I think not! I've been around this too long and even the "legals" rape our system while my family works our tushies off. Shoot, if one lives in a tri-state area, they know how to pull welfare from 2 states!!

NO AMNESTY!

Don't get me wrong, I really do not like illegals. I think they should all be kicked out, and their little dog Toto too!

Just wondered if they would be upset if/when they figured out they were having to share in paying for all illegals, including the non-"raza" illegals.

Originally Posted by ldydrake

Don't get me wrong, I really do not like illegals. I think they should all be kicked out, and their little dog Toto too!

Just wondered if they would be upset if/when they figured out they were having to share in paying for all illegals, including the non-"raza" illegals.

They wouldn't have to pay for anything as a high percentage would remain in a non taxable income bracket. They'd be "taking" and not giving much in return.

On the flip side of the coin, speaking only for myself, "if" that were the case, I would rather LEGAL Immigrants replacing the law breakers.

Important Note:
Any "forgiveness" in any form will be the remaining loophole solved that will END OUR SOVEREIGNTY. This is so much more than giving or taking..... This is about a "United American Hemisphere" and the elimination of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. This is about government intentionally ignoring the Rule of Law! Shredding our Constitution.

2nd

BTW, big business is slowly & consistantly getting rid of their pension & medical

.

Here's an article for you!!!!

http://www.cei.org/gencon/019,04606.cfm

Abolish Federal Pension Guarantee
Osorio Op-ed in The Atlanta Journal Constitution
by Ivan Osorio
June 15, 2005

Just as the squeaky wheel gets the grease, a government program gets Congress' attention by going deep in the red. And the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. has certainly gotten noticed. PBGC, the federal agency that insures private pension plans, recently assumed responsibility for the largest pension default in U.S. history—that of United Airlines—when it already faced a multibillion-dollar deficit.

Federal intervention into private pensions has created an atmosphere of moral hazard in which companies undertake, or continue, overly risky behavior.

Although the PBGC is a federal program, its funding comes not from tax revenues, but from fees collected from employers that sponsor insured pension plans. But the PBGC doesn't act like a private insurer; it has taken unfunded liabilities a private firm would never accept, and these costs are sure to fall on taxpayers. PBGC recently reported a deficit of more than $23 billion.

Over the past three years, the PBGC's liabilities have ballooned as the federal government seeks to help industries that it considers "too big to fail."

For troubled major carriers—also known as legacy carriers—relief from pension obligations is bankruptcy's most important benefit. Huge pension liabilities put the established major carriers at a competitive disadvantage against the low-cost carriers.

Decades of generous labor contracts have left many carriers saddled with billions in pension commitments. Airlines have for years provided their employees with defined-benefit pension plans, which pay out a fixed benefit regardless of the employee's contribution to the pension fund.

By contrast, many other sectors of the economy have moved largely to defined-contribution plans, such as 401(k) accounts, in which the employee invests into an individual investment fund.

These plans have proved successful—and are less expensive than the defined-benefit plan. So why do the latter persist in some industries?

Why should airlines trim their costs when federal assistance is waiting in the wings?

The best option for legacy carriers is to move from defined-benefit pension plans to defined-contribution retirement plans, such as 401(k) accounts, for their employees. Fortunately, some major carriers—including Northwest and Delta—have begun to consider this.

In a free air travel market, carriers would be allowed to succeed—or fail—on their own merits. The best thing government can do is to get out of the way.

Without the moral hazard of government help, America's airline industry may finally run smoothly, without squeaking along.

This was written in June, 2005. I believe, and I could be wrong, that there have been more failures since then. More for we taxpayers to cover. How come I didn't get a pension, and particularly one guaranteed by our gov't? Hmmm.

Important Note:

Any "forgiveness" in any form will be the remaining loophole solved that will END OUR SOVEREIGNTY. This is so much more than giving or taking..... This is about a "United American Hemisphere" and the elimination of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. This is about government intentionally ignoring the Rule of Law! Shredding our Constitution.

That is my thinking as well...and they will stop at nothing to get the camels nose under the tent. If the government legitimized any group of illegals, no matter how small their number, they are, by proxy, legitimizing ALL illegals.

The presidents "shift" says to me that he is very well aware of the public's vehement opposition to any kind of amnesty and that the Pence plan won't pass our smell test either. Deperate times call for desperate measures so he and the senate may still be able to get that camels nose under the tent by agreeing to a secure border first bill if it includes a specific timetable for the implementation of a subsequent guest-worker/"path to citizenship" program. Delayed or not, amnesty is amnesty and we must make sure these traitors are held in check.

Agreed, greyparrot,

And they've got to be pinned down so that if publicly they're against amnesty, they don't at the last second, vote for it. The lawBreakers must know we're keeping tabs.

Pence was just on Laura Ingraham's radio show a few minutes ago and said - blatantly - that IT'S NOT A PATH TO CITIZENSHIP. He completely side stepped the fine print about their being allowed to apply for permanent status! What a blatant liar

Then, oh this is rich, he said that according to the Pew group, "10 or so years ago migrants stayed only 2.5 years and NOW they stay an average of 7 or 8 years {#s are from memory}and they bring their families. So, Pence....this is the reason to "allow" them to be "forgiven?" Where, WHERE IS THE LOGIC in this statement??

2nd

Then, oh this is rich, he said that according to the Pew group, "10 or so years ago migrants stayed only 2.5 years and NOW they stay an average of 7 or 8 years {#s are from memory}and they bring their families. So, Pence....this is the reason to "allow" them to be "forgiven?" Where, WHERE IS THE LOGIC in this statement??

How can an interviewer allow him to get away with such lies...7-8 yrs...oh sure...and that's why we have generations here, interest in the DREAM act, etc.

Originally Posted by curiouspat

2nd

Then, oh this is rich, he said that according to the Pew group, "10 or so years ago migrants stayed only 2.5 years and NOW they stay an average of 7 or 8 years {#s are from memory}and they bring their families. So, Pence....this is the reason to "allow" them to be "forgiven?" Where, WHERE IS THE LOGIC in this statement??

How can an interviewer allow him to get away with such lies...7-8 yrs...oh sure...and that's why we have generations here, interest in the DREAM act, etc.

To be fair, PAT, she cut him off just as he got this ridiculous statement out of his mouth- - for a break. I was disappointed that she didn't go after him on the facts {that I heard}