U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-05-2012, 12:26 AM
Status: "AndMunch" (set 11 days ago)
 
3,186 posts, read 5,191,084 times
Reputation: 989

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardA View Post
Over the weekend I saw several Dems try and say the tax in Obamacare is a penalty on "free riders". I thought that was an odd choice of words coming from Dems consider they affinity for illegals and Great Society programs.

Why don't Dems call illegals and those on welfare free riders?




Read more: Pelosi ready to defend Obamacare - UPI.com
Wow.

I'll say one thing, if the conservative agenda was fully achieved you guys probably wouldn't have anyone on welfare although it still would be needed. I'll tell you guys one thing, you haven't seen crime until welfare is eliminated. You think you'll be able to drive safetly back to your 3,500 sq ft home in your 760 BMW in a city with no welfare programs that are clearly needed?

As a democrat I don't want anyone on welfare, free riding, etc but that's just the way it is. If conservatives truly want to fulfill thier agenda then how about helping the little man out more by creating jobs instead of expecting them to be well-off just because you are. We believe everyone deserves a chance in our nation that's all. We do not want to have any poverty just as you guys do, but that's not realistic. To be fair I will say some people truly don't deserve to be on welfare or free riding when some people really may have a disability and they can't get assistance.

Last edited by BMORE; 07-05-2012 at 12:35 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-05-2012, 12:58 AM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,012,769 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
Illegal alien children born here would fall in that category...
You are inventing a category that does not exist. Even if the child born here is not a U.S. citizen, they would not be classified as an "illegal alien". The status of the child is not equated to that of the parents in any area of the law.

You are also trying to attribute that only U.S. citizens can have a U.S. citizen child under the 14th Amendment. It is not argued that Legal Permanent Residents, non-citizen foreign nationals, are not under the "jurisdiction of the United States". There isn't any circular logic I am applying in the discussion, but rather that you are trying to redefine principles and terminology with some very big holes left out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2012, 05:58 AM
 
12,870 posts, read 12,775,361 times
Reputation: 4446
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post



This is the ITIN application: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fw7.pdf

Can you tell me where it has information about where a child applicant will go to school?

Let's also be clear, an ITIN applicant, in particular a child, may not be an illegal alien or breaking any laws...
let's also be clear that this is a big issue for many reasons, and we clearly see ITIN lawbreakers fleecing the american taxpayers with impunity.

their children "may or may not be breaking any laws" but there seems to be no mechanism in place to stop them if they do, and that is a big concern for taxpaying citizens. (as shown in the previous link)

i also have a problem with lawbreakers having their medical expenses paid for by law-abiding taxpayer citizens. parents are supposed to set a good example for their children-if the parents are breaking laws at will what kind of example are they setting for their children????

it isn't fair to have 2 sets of rules in america, and particularly one that favors illegal immigrants lawbreakers-and it certainly isn't fair as a society to turn a blind eye on illegal behavior. there is a MORAL HAZARD being created here that is impossible to overlook in terms of having a stable structural base for our country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2012, 06:23 AM
 
14,307 posts, read 11,152,437 times
Reputation: 2130
Quote:
Originally Posted by BMOREBOY View Post
Wow.

I'll say one thing, if the conservative agenda was fully achieved you guys probably wouldn't have anyone on welfare although it still would be needed. I'll tell you guys one thing, you haven't seen crime until welfare is eliminated. You think you'll be able to drive safetly back to your 3,500 sq ft home in your 760 BMW in a city with no welfare programs that are clearly needed?

As a democrat I don't want anyone on welfare, free riding, etc but that's just the way it is. If conservatives truly want to fulfill thier agenda then how about helping the little man out more by creating jobs instead of expecting them to be well-off just because you are. We believe everyone deserves a chance in our nation that's all. We do not want to have any poverty just as you guys do, but that's not realistic. To be fair I will say some people truly don't deserve to be on welfare or free riding when some people really may have a disability and they can't get assistance.
Why are you making this a conservative issue? Shouldn't welfare fraud especially by illegal aliens be a concern to all of us? I don't oppose welfare for the truly needy but they need to be at the very least legal immigrants. Illegal aliens are coming to our country and giving birth on our soil and tapping into our welfare coffers. Are you ok with that?

I had to laugh at your comment that just because someone is a conservative they must live in a 3500 sq ft home and drive an expensive car. Only the elite do that and many of them are Democrats also. Welfare fraud by citizens and illegal aliens who through their anchors are able to drain our tax coffers both need to be addressed. Eliminating birthright citizenship for babies born from illegal aliens is a must IMO. That in turn will increase the availability of funds to help our own truly needy and poor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2012, 08:46 AM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,012,769 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridasandy View Post
let's also be clear that this is a big issue for many reasons, and we clearly see ITIN lawbreakers fleecing the american taxpayers with impunity.

their children "may or may not be breaking any laws" but there seems to be no mechanism in place to stop them if they do, and that is a big concern for taxpaying citizens. (as shown in the previous link)

i also have a problem with lawbreakers having their medical expenses paid for by law-abiding taxpayer citizens. parents are supposed to set a good example for their children-if the parents are breaking laws at will what kind of example are they setting for their children????

it isn't fair to have 2 sets of rules in america, and particularly one that favors illegal immigrants lawbreakers-and it certainly isn't fair as a society to turn a blind eye on illegal behavior. there is a MORAL HAZARD being created here that is impossible to overlook in terms of having a stable structural base for our country.
You are diverging the topic to bring anything about ITIN applicants into a discussion about illegal aliens and welfare. An ITIN does not always equate to being an illegal alien, working without authorization in the United States, illegal presence, or any other "lawbreaking". They may not even be present in the United States.

My comment towards the story is that it sounds entirely fishy for someone processing ITIN applications to flag "fraud" as occurring, when there isn't even that data listed on the single-page form...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2012, 09:20 AM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,712,641 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
You are inventing a category that does not exist. Even if the child born here is not a U.S. citizen, they would not be classified as an "illegal alien". The status of the child is not equated to that of the parents in any area of the law.
Inventing a category? The status of the child is equated, Plyler v Doe; you confuse yourself as usual with the fact that they are not the product of their own unlawful conduct. This doesn't change the fact or their status that they are here illegally and are still considered illegal. They can still be deported.

Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
You are also trying to attribute that only U.S. citizens can have a U.S. citizen child under the 14th Amendment. It is not argued that Legal Permanent Residents, non-citizen foreign nationals, are not under the "jurisdiction of the United States". There isn't any circular logic I am applying in the discussion, but rather that you are trying to redefine principles and terminology with some very big holes left out.
Again, you might try going back and re-reading, then re-comprehending the entirety of the discussion as you seem to be interjecting things that you haven't fully grasped.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2012, 02:10 PM
 
12,870 posts, read 12,775,361 times
Reputation: 4446
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
You are diverging the topic to bring anything about ITIN applicants into a discussion about illegal aliens and welfare. An ITIN does not always equate to being an illegal alien, working without authorization in the United States, illegal presence, or any other "lawbreaking". They may not even be present in the United States.

My comment towards the story is that it sounds entirely fishy for someone processing ITIN applications to flag "fraud" as occurring, when there isn't even that data listed on the single-page form...
here is the article regarding the IRS agent, who actually called the inspector general's office:

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/n...tin-fraud.html


why would you be surprised that fraud is ignored in this country, when all you have to do is look at our current administration. here's a story on obama's illegal immigrant uncle who was just granted a driver's license, even while living in the country illegally:



'Uncle Obama' wins a driver's license for working illegally


By Jeremy Beck, Monday, April 9, 2012, 10:15 AM EDT - posted on NumbersUSA

An April 3 story in the Boston Herald, "Uncle Obama on the roads again," reported that Onyango Obama, the president's uncle and a Kenyan national who has been living and working illegally in the U.S. since 1963 - even after he was ordered deported in 1992 - "scored his limited [driver's] license yesterday from the Registry’s Wilmington branch, after convincing a hearing officer that life without wheels would have posed an undue hardship on his livelihood as a liquor-store manager. Obama bolstered his case with a letter from his employer."

As always with the mainstream media, the Boston Herald didn't note the irony that Onyango Obama was working illegally. The Herald did not remind its readers that it had, in a previous story, described Obama's employer as being in "total shock" that Obama was working illegally. There was no follow-up quote from Obama's employer, who has apparently been allowed to keep his illegal hire instead of opening up the job to a U.S. citizen or legal immigrant worker.

don't you think americans have a right to be disgusted with people who choose to ignore the laws of our country?

is a country better off when it chooses to ignore its laws??????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2012, 07:41 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,012,769 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridasandy View Post
here is the article regarding the IRS agent, who actually called the inspector general's office:

https://www.numbersusa.com/content/n...tin-fraud.html


why would you be surprised that fraud is ignored in this country, when all you have to do is look at our current administration. here's a story on obama's illegal immigrant uncle who was just granted a driver's license, even while living in the country illegally:
One topic at a time please...

Where is the fraud in the ITIN applications used as an example here? That the "school" the children will be attending "doesn't exist" (maybe with "dozens" of children on ITINs, it is in the process of being set up)? How does that impact whether the ITIN application is processed? Look at the W-7 form again if you need to.

Both children and adults that are in the lengthy process of legally immigrating can have ITINs. It doesn't provide work-authorization, but they may not be working or not even present in the United States. An ITIN exists for a reason (look over the application again), this "investigative reporting" is just speculating (if the children are improperly claimed on a tax form, that is the fraud, not from the correct data on the ITIN application).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2012, 08:17 PM
 
Location: Jacurutu
5,302 posts, read 4,012,769 times
Reputation: 601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
Inventing a category? The status of the child is equated, Plyler v Doe; you confuse yourself as usual with the fact that they are not the product of their own unlawful conduct. This doesn't change the fact or their status that they are here illegally and are still considered illegal. They can still be deported...
Plyer v. Doe only addressed children not legally admitted to the United States, not those that are born here. If you are arguing that illegal aliens have no allegiance to the United States to be under its jurisdiction, legal residents, also foreign nationals, may not fully have allegiance either. But their children born here are considered as U.S. citizens. Them bringing in their child illegally (instead on properly sponsoring for some reason), the child is an illegal alien, and fits Plyer v. Doe (which did not address status of the parents, but that the child was brought in illegally, beyond his or her control).

The parents can naturalize in those circumstances, and file for an N-600 to take the child from being an illegal alien to U.S. citizenship too, which you still haven't addressed...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liquid Reigns View Post
...Again, you might try going back and re-reading, then re-comprehending the entirety of the discussion as you seem to be interjecting things that you haven't fully grasped.
I followed the start of the topic when it was in P&OC, and feel that I am understanding the discussion, let's just continue from here...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-05-2012, 09:40 PM
 
Location: California
2,477 posts, read 1,712,641 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by IBMMuseum View Post
Plyer v. Doe only addressed children not legally admitted to the United States, not those that are born here. If you are arguing that illegal aliens have no allegiance to the United States to be under its jurisdiction, legal residents, also foreign nationals, may not fully have allegiance either. But their children born here are considered as U.S. citizens. Them bringing in their child illegally (instead on properly sponsoring for some reason), the child is an illegal alien, and fits Plyer v. Doe (which did not address status of the parents, but that the child was brought in illegally, beyond his or her control).

The parents can naturalize in those circumstances, and file for an N-600 to take the child from being an illegal alien to U.S. citizenship too, which you still haven't addressed...



I followed the start of the topic when it was in P&OC, and feel that I am understanding the discussion, let's just continue from here...
The question was: The status of the child is not equated to that of the parents in any area of the law. I showed it was with the words of Brennan. Now, does that discount the fact that the children born here are what are in question? I don't think so, the children follow the status of the parent(s). They (the parents) are either here legally (with the authorization of our gov't) and their children born here should be assumed citizens while parents here illegally are not here with the authorization of our gov't and their children should not be assumed citizens.

Obviously legal residents do as they are here with the authorization of our gov't, per precedent as set in WKA. Foreign nationals would depend on the visa they are on, immigrant vs non-immigrant. We've gone over all this before. Now, the entirety of the argument was about children born here from illegal alien parents being called US Citizens simply by place of birth. I showed that simple birth within the US isn't proof enough that children are automatic citizens, you have come in and are now attempting to take this way beyond the original point. I don't care about the N-600 argument you are making as it doesn't pertain to the point. If you wish to continue from here, start a new thread as this is now way beyond the original intent of the OP and we can discuss it there.

Last edited by Liquid Reigns; 07-05-2012 at 09:48 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Illegal Immigration
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top