U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 Today, 12:42 PM
 
39,429 posts, read 20,549,653 times
Reputation: 12871

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by RememberMee View Post
You do not get it. A pregnant woman crossing Rio Grande will give birth to an American citizen. Now you call to discriminate American citizens based on immigration status of their parents instead of admitting that 240 years old document is antiquated and out of touch scrolls requiring a caste of wizard judges to decipher it according to judges liking and political preferences. Besides American pay structure, feeding the top 1%, requires public assistance to operate bottom decks of the parasitic pyramid. By effectively decimating already low living standards of immigrant workers Trump will bring bonafide third world next to you. There is plenty of misery in this world, no matter how rotten the Trump deal is, there will be plenty of people to sign up, they will just give that third world flair to the richest banana republic in the world.
No, you don't get it... Why do you think pregnant mom came here? Why don't you take pregnant mom and child in and support them. Oh that's right...

It's easy to have compassion when someone else is paying for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 03:23 PM
 
12,672 posts, read 3,966,121 times
Reputation: 3834
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
No, you don't get it... Why do you think pregnant mom came here? Why don't you take pregnant mom and child in and support them. Oh that's right...

It's easy to have compassion when someone else is paying for it.
Liberals are making cuckolds out of all Americans. But that's liberalism for you, essentially parasitism and imposition.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 03:26 PM
 
Location: Tyler, TX
714 posts, read 607,907 times
Reputation: 357
So, spend money going after people rather than cut the entitlements? Um...I know I kinda left the Republican fold a while ago, but this doesn’t sound like what I remember.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:07 PM
 
Location: too far from the sea
20,085 posts, read 19,074,901 times
Reputation: 34168
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoldenPineTree View Post
I don't know the specifics but I do know EO generally cannot make law (that's up to Congress), it just changes how laws are enforced. So, your guess is probably right. There is a law, somewhere, that was never enforced. Trump is now enforcing it. Good for him. We have a lot of good laws (and bad ones), if we just start enforcing them, we might make progress.
I am right because I sponsored my husband. The immigration process is long, expensive, convoluted, inefficient, and it keeps you on pins and needles for up to two years while they send letters to you when they feel like it to instruct you on what you need to do next. (more documents and another $1000, usually.)

I was required to guarantee that he would not receive any public benefits for five years. He was able to get his green card soon after he was finally given permission to enter the country--another mess of forms and more money to pay. He gained his work permit too. And there was that FIVE YEAR RULE about receiving no benefits. Sheesh, they were on our backs about everything, warning us that if we didn't dot our Is and cross our Ts, we'd have to start all over again. This is not a NEW LAW. FIVE YEARS until a legal immigrant can receive any type of government benefit.
__________________
my posts as moderator will be in red. Moderator: Health&Wellness~Genealogy. The Rules--read here>>> TOS. If someone attacks you, do not reply. Hit REPORT.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:51 PM
 
Location: too far from the sea
20,085 posts, read 19,074,901 times
Reputation: 34168
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama View Post
Parts of the rule are new. This is one of the many big changes:

'In the 1990s, the Clinton administration issued guidance effectively saying that only cash benefits like the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program could be considered when determining whether an immigrant was a "public charge.

The new regulation would require caseworkers to consider the use of government housing, food and medical assistance such as the widely-used Section 8 housing vouchers and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).'

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-is...al-immigrants/

"New rules could deny green cards to many immigrants who use Medicaid, food stamps, housing vouchers or other forms of public assistance."

https://www.local10.com/news/how-wil...-to-us-legally-

You can keep saying this isn't a NEW LAW, but that's misleading because the fierce opposition and lawsuits are because of the NEW PARTS of the rule.
I'm not sure whether you mean that they can't get green cards in the first place or that they will go after people who have been legally here for say, twenty years. (The link won't work for me.) The green card is issued when they enter the country. So they would take green cards away from legal immigrants who use food stamps or other forms of public assistance even if they've been here for years? The limit was always five years so they are extending the limits for these people to not be eligible for any help?
__________________
my posts as moderator will be in red. Moderator: Health&Wellness~Genealogy. The Rules--read here>>> TOS. If someone attacks you, do not reply. Hit REPORT.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 06:08 PM
 
9,602 posts, read 4,914,337 times
Reputation: 3906
Quote:
Originally Posted by in_newengland View Post
I'm not sure whether you mean that they can't get green cards in the first place or that they will go after people who have been legally here for say, twenty years. (The link won't work for me.) The green card is issued when they enter the country. So they would take green cards away from legal immigrants who use food stamps or other forms of public assistance even if they've been here for years? The limit was always five years so they are extending the limits for these people to not be eligible for any help?
I deleted the post because I can't get the links to work. I'll post again with working links to articles explaining the new parts of the rule. OK, this link works and explains some of what is new in the rule and why there are lawsuits to stop it:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/public-...igration-rule/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 06:15 PM
 
Location: too far from the sea
20,085 posts, read 19,074,901 times
Reputation: 34168
https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/12/polit...rge/index.html

The rule means many green card and visa applicants could be turned down if they have low incomes or little education, and have used benefits such as most forms of Medicaid, food stamps, and housing vouchers, because they'd be deemed more likely to need government assistance in the future.


This was already the law. They were required to prove that they had enough income or that an American citizen would sponsor/promise to support them for five years. That was for a marriage visa. For an employment visa, it was almost impossible because the sponsor/employer had to prove that no other American could do the job.

They were rejected because they were likely to need government assistance. So what's the change?

Another question: if they are applicants, then that means they live in another country and are applying to live here. So how on earth were they getting Medicaid and how were they getting housing assistance? If they weren't even HERE yet? How was some applicant living in Belgium, for instance, getting housing assistance here when they live in Belgium? Or Japan? Or the Philippines? They already HAVE a place to live and are already living in it. They are not allowed to live in the US--that's why they are applying.

None of this is making sense.
__________________
my posts as moderator will be in red. Moderator: Health&Wellness~Genealogy. The Rules--read here>>> TOS. If someone attacks you, do not reply. Hit REPORT.
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

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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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