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.
JG, i partially agree with what yuo are saying, but we are looking at it worng. The problem is not with illegals sapping the system. AAMOF, most of them do NOT come in unless their life depends on it simply because theya re afraid of being deported (whether they will be or not).
I saw a chinese guy in queens get run over while riding his bike. He picked up the bike, bleeding, bent wheel and all, and ran away before the paramedics could be called. I think he was an illegal that did not want to be found. Did he cost the med system anything? Not unless that got serious, in which case it cost us MORE that he did not get help immediately rather than waiting until it got worse!!!
The main problem we have here is simple. We do not enforce our own labor laws.
this logic is completely ridiculous. first of all, illegals do pose a great expense on our healthcare system. ive seen the financials of hospital systems that have gone bankrupt. im sure you are correct, many choose not to get care for fear of scrutiny. but many do get care and they know they get away with it. ive seen "community leaders" show up to bankruptcy meetings and attack any talk of complaining about treating illegals.
you are right, we should enforce the labor and immigration laws. we should stop them at the border and if they want to work, dont let them. however, that isnt realistic because of the political influence of illegal labor groups (immigrant groups). thats why you cant call social security to check out a ssn until after the person is hired. thats why for i-9 purposes you arent supposed to scrutinize a person's ID.
there is a lot of stuff wrong but your tactic to allow illegals to get healthcare because there are other issues is silly. attack the problem on all fronts. deny them healthcare, deny them entry and deny them labor.
BCJ, in all fairness, most slave ownerrs treated their slaves like valuable livestock. You had to keep them in good health or there was no real benefit from having them.
But, that being said, they were probably valued LESS than other livestock (on a one to one basis). A good steer was probably worth more than a good slave, so their ranking was not the greatest.
Only a truly abusive person treated their stock like it was disposable, but the fact that humans were treated/considered livestock was just horrible.
You do share the same view as anti-American white nationalists on this issue, which is odd for someone who is married to a minority.
i appreciate that you said flat out that ending slavery justified a war where so many americans died. i disagree. slavery existed for many years, however all the sudden it became unconscionable and anyone who allowed it should be butchered? seems extreme considering the history of slavery and slavery in the north. it was convenient for the north because their economy wasnt so based on agriculture. im sure that was more important than the morality of slavery.
while many white nationalists may agree with me that the civil war was unjustified, there are many people who arent white nationalists that agree with me. its a pretty straight forward logical position i am taking (in my opinion). im not justifying slavery but i feel that since its been around for so long, you dont just suddenly ban it and kill anyone who doesnt follow suit.
my wife being puerto rican shouldnt change the position that i value common sense, logic and American lives. i am opposed to slavery and wish it never happened. but i believe it could have been phased out without full scale war. i remember in grade school teachers taught about general sherman's scorched earth policy as if it was a great thing. now that liberal hatred for the south disgusts me and shows to me that the liberal hatred knows no limits.
i appreciate that you said flat out that ending slavery justified a war where so many americans died. i disagree. slavery existed for many years, however all the sudden it became unconscionable and anyone who allowed it should be butchered? seems extreme considering the history of slavery and slavery in the north. it was convenient for the north because their economy wasnt so based on agriculture. im sure that was more important than the morality of slavery.
It didn't "all the sudden [become] unconscionable and anyone who allowed it should be butchered." Abolition had roots in the previous century and had quickly grown; that is what led the Southern states to secede. They feared the direction of abolition because slavery was being phased out slowly. Lincoln didn't set out to make it illegal, he simply wanted to keep it limited to certain southern states. Importing of slaves had already been illegal for decades, because of the abolition movement, 50+ years before Lincoln took office. Slavery was already on its way out. It wasn't "all of the sudden".
What was sudden was that as a result of the Civil War the slaves of the south were freed immediately, probably decades and a generation or two before it otherwise would have. The Southerners are the ones who saw the end of slavery coming and pushed the issue and had it end sooner than it probably would have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ
while many white nationalists may agree with me that the civil war was unjustified, there are many people who arent white nationalists that agree with me. its a pretty straight forward logical position i am taking (in my opinion). im not justifying slavery but i feel that since its been around for so long, you dont just suddenly ban it and kill anyone who doesnt follow suit.
Again, nobody "suddenly banned it". It was already illegal in free soil states in the North. Lincoln didn't ban it but wanted to keep it banned in the north and not allow it to spread from the states that already had it. And it was not Lincoln's policy to "kill anyone who didn't follow suit" - because there was no law to follow, for one thing, and Lincoln did not go after any Southerners at all with military force until AFTER the Southerners Rebelled and became aggressive to the US Army. Of course a good president wouldn't let his army sit there and take being attacked. It was time to fight and quash the rebels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainNJ
my wife being puerto rican shouldnt change the position that i value common sense, logic and American lives. i am opposed to slavery and wish it never happened. but i believe it could have been phased out without full scale war. i remember in grade school teachers taught about general sherman's scorched earth policy as if it was a great thing. now that liberal hatred for the south disgusts me and shows to me that the liberal hatred knows no limits.
I'm wondering where the common sense is in any of what you've written re the Civil War.
You believe slavery "could have been phased out without full scale war"? Then you agree with Lincoln and the North, who believed the same thing and were content to let things progress in that direction. It was the South who believed also that slavery was being phased out and rebelled and instigated full scale war to prevent slavery from being phased out.
The only "missing thing" when it comes to health care is denying illegals. I don't CARE what some hippo oath says...it doesn't apply when someone else has to pick up the bill.
Medicaid is out there..state aid is out there. Getting the very comfortable welfare recipient horse to take a sip out of the water when it interferes with with taking time out of their very busy schedule of smoking/drinking/whining/not being able to find the time to fill out some paperwork...different story.
Now let me ADD that there a three very different types of people who are in need (excluding illegals). There are those who don't wanna work and or/won't get out of bed for less than a $15/hr dollar job (no lie, contact me through pm and I'll give you the address of my business and you can come see for yourself...apparently making ZERO dollars an hour is better than insulting their 8th grade education with $15/hr...with a $50-$100 per day drug habit). Then there are those who can't work enough hours to put food on the table and don't have 7 kids they can't afford. Then there are those who could never make ends meet, no matter what, yet they keep on having kid on top of kid on top of kid on top of kid on top of kid...b/c more babies bring more "happiness" to that single- wide about to be taken away from them.....
The good and hard-working people who fall into hard times and get meshed together with the crap who LIKE their government homes/allowance/20 kids they could never afford to begin with..... are the ones who lose.
Until that line of delineation can be specified for each and every case, I have no sympathy for the "poor me's" who live off of tax-payers. Buy a condom. Get your lazy behind to the county court house and fill out the paperwork. Stop waiting for everyone else to do it FOR you and PAY your way.
But they won't, it's easier to wallow in "poor me" and "I joined myself a gang because my mamma didn't tell me who my baby-daddy be". And those MORONS attend a 180 MILLION dollar Abbott school..yet to open, but so pathetic in gesture and what a waste (New Brunswick HS). State of the art everything for gang-bangers, illegals and other morons. While the kids who have parents who care, have to deal with fishing through micro-fiche instead of smart boards, sweating in June heat due to lack of a/c while the gang bangers are wearing their hoodies and wool caps to keep warm in June, and at the NJ tax payers expense.
What about veterans who served in the war and got some sort of disability post discharge and are unable to find suitable employment where do they fall under? What about the widow(der) with 2 children who once had two incomes now only has one, or the middle income family that the wage earner was struck with a life threatening injury/disease and can no longer work meanwhile the medical bills are killing the whole family? Where do these average americans fit in with your ideas of people living off of tax payers dime?
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.
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.
