It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kansas slashes food aid for children of illegal immigrants

page: 10
16
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2012 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by np6888
 


screw what a nutritionists says...( and a beautician)..lets all listen to np6888...that way we all look beautiful and lead a healthy life...

seems like you have it all figured out...
/facepalm




posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by whoocares
 


A beautician will yell you almost the same things I just did, especially about fastfood. If any of them tells you that there's no evidence that fastfood causes acne, then he/she hasn't understood everything. You won't find any experiment that proves it because let's say there's a study whether fastfood causes acne, and this study has a sample of people where 1/3rd is short and skinny(or doesn't have the ability to store fat much), 1/3rd is big and tall, and 1/3rd is fat, then you will not get a conclusive result, because the group that is fat will store the calories, the group that is big and tall will burn the calories, because they're big and therefore need more energy/have a higher metabolism. Only the group that is short and skinny will break out. Also, whether the participants exercise during the experiment will also be a factor. So as you can see, there are a lot of factors that can affect such an experiment, so you can't just take their words for it.

The rest of the stuff, is half of them I read, then experiment and "infer"(if the stuff I read can be verified through experiments of my own, which they can and are, then logically, if I find anything else through my own experiments, it also must be correct), and just general observations(and I'm confident that they're correct.
In fact, I've made observations that revolutionized the NBA, and I can prove that. If I'm wrong, well then, I will revise my conclusions. Unfortunately, in order to do that, I have to have people willing to experiment, as I cannot experiment everything by myself. Because of that, I can't say that I have everything figured out, though I would say that most of the gist is correct.)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by np6888
....... then experiment and "infer"(if the stuff I read can be verified through experiments of my own, which they can and are, then logically, if I find anything else through my own experiments, it also must be correct), and just general observations(and I'm confident that they're correct.

An experiment with a data set of ONE? You realize thats a bit narrow dont you? If anything you are proving how things affect YOU, not the general population.
Everyone is different.

If you feed someone a peanut, and it kills them, are you going to spend the rest of you life thinking peanuts are poison?
Perhaps that ONE person was allergic?



In fact, I've made observations that revolutionized the NBA, and I can prove that.......


OK, I'm curious. Please prove this.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by np6888
 



It's not a coincidence that most of the beautiful women(in both America and Asian countries) were either born in the 70's and 80's, when fastfood was absent.

Excuse me, np6888, but this statement above is absolutely false. Absolutely FALSE. I was born in the late 50s, and was in high school in the 70s, college in the 80s. No fast food?

You've got to be either kidding or completely out of touch. And your semonizing and turning everyone into elves is ludicrous. While I agree with eating less, and particularly less "processed" foods, a large portion (haha) of your "cause-effect" logic is nonsense.

I would prefer that this thread remain a discussion of domestic and foreign policy as it relates to the well-being of the citizen children living in the US.

Please stay on topic. If you'd like to describe your discoveries re elves and the NBA, this is a less-than-ideal thread in which to do so.

thanks



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by andrewh7
 

Why should American citizens be penalized for the actions of illegals? They knew what they were doing when they crossed the border illegally and the consequences that could happen as a result of their actions. It's unfortunate for the kids but the accountability for their bad decision making should rest on the parents and not US citizens. I may have felt differently if they did not come here demanding handouts and citizen rights that they have not worked for. The way that they have blatantly abused our system is cowardly and morally wrong and does not justify the burden that they have put on the citizens of this country. Illegals are costing billions of dollars to US taxpayers, states are going bankrupt, educational budgets are being slashed, etc................. It's also very hard to see illegals receive more benefits than a lot of our vets that have sacrificed everything for this country, this is major problem that needs to be addressed IMO.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by mtnshredder
......It's also very hard to see illegals receive more benefits than a lot of our vets that have sacrificed everything for this country, this is major problem that needs to be addressed IMO.



I understand that aspect very well (more than you know), unless you are a vet, then you know how much of a BS nightmare the VA is.

However - hypothetical situation -
Lets suppose your mother, or father...for some unknown reason flips out.
They kill someone.

Should society hold it against you because you are the child of a murderer?



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by mtnshredder
 



Why should American citizens be penalized for the actions of illegals

Precisely.
Those children are American citizens, by law.
I'm sorry to be critical, but you have a skewed view of the situation. Please look through the several links included in the thread which deal with the actual situation and what those parents of American citizens are contributing to the system. They (the links and information contained therein) may have a profound effect on your presumptions.


edit on 24-1-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by mtnshredder
 



Why should American citizens be penalized for the actions of illegals

Precisely.
Those children are American citizens, by law.
I'm sorry to be critical, but you have a skewed view of the situation. Please look through the several links included in the thread which deal with the actual situation and what those parents of American citizens are contributing to the system. They (the links and information contained therein) may have a profound effect on your presumptions.


edit on 24-1-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)


A skewed view? I've lived in Colorado, Ca and Arizona and think I have a pretty good idea of the impact illegals have had on these states. Presumptuous? No. The liabilities far out weigh their contributions.
Yes, the children born here are citizens by law. I highly doubt our forefathers that wrote the law, had in mind that millions of illegals would be coming here and having anchor babies for the sole purpose of getting a free ride at the cost of the taxpayer. If they had, I guarantee there would be no anchor babies today.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by mtnshredder
 


Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breath free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless,........

Oh no wait, f*** that, I dont want you now.

What is wrong with you dude?
This entire country (minus native americans) is comprised of immigrants.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Again, read the links.

The links that show the desperation of those who are coming here to have their babies in hopes of a better future...
that show how much they are paying, with no recourse to SS benefits later...to the tune of billions per year....that show that they know they have no hope of being supported in their elderly years by the very taxes being taken out of their paychecks weekly....
they only want for their children to have a foothold.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Yea their coming here for a better life, one that they haven't fought for, worked for and sacrificed for. If they really want a better life than maybe they should work on making their own country better and not freeloading on people that have done all the footwork for them, to me it's cowardly and immoral.

Why don't I see lines at the recruiters office as long as the welfare lines?

If you want something worth having you usually have to work hard and fight for it, thats what are forefathers did. The immigrants of old didn't come to this country begging for freebies and handouts, they worked hard for what we as a country have achieved. There's a big difference in the motives of yesterdays immigrants compared to todays immigrants. It's apples and oranges.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by mtnshredder
 


Just look at the links....and read some history. The indigenous peoples of Central America were slaughtered and oppressed....also the indigenous people of North America were slaughtered and oppressed;
do some research.
Read history.
Your argument is immature and inapplicable.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


I'm fully aware of Native American history. I am part Choctaw and my great grandmother was among those on the Trail of Tears.
America anually allows more immigrants a path to citizenship than any other country in the world. They need to get to the back of the line and immigrate legally.
Are you saying we should do away with our immigration laws and allow whoever wants citizenship a free pass? What about all the people that have gone thru the proper process to gain citizenship? Most legal immigrants that I have talked to, that have gone thru the process, find it insulting the demands a majority of the current illegals are making on this country. Why should they have bothered if it doesn't matter?
What part of the definition of "illegal" are you confused about anyway?



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 



do I have to keep telling you I am anti-Statist?



Statism is effectively the opposite of anarchism.


Okay, please give me a clearer picture of this anti-Statist stance.
Are you an anarchist?
I really don't understand, Horus. My apologies.
edit on 23-1-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)


Well, sure there are people who are against "Statism" who are anarchist, that would be the Noam Chomsky types. He is a self-described "anarcho-socialist-libertarian", which to me is contradictory, because socialism generally implies the Nanny State cradle to grave. I'm sure you must have heard of that.
Statism can be the fascist type. However, both Hitler and Mussolini type fascist governments were both out of the same leftist ideology, that is Totalitarianism, which word Mussolini coined.
Statism really means big government and socialism and communism imply centralized planning. Communism is especially so, but an advanced form of socialism.
The Police State can be considered Statism as well.
So, basically, I am for limited government and a conservative.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by vogon42
reply to post by mtnshredder
 


Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breath free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore,
Send these, the homeless,........
This entire country (minus native americans) is comprised of immigrants.
Oh no wait, f*** that, I dont want you now.

What is wrong with you dude?


So if you had American parents but you were born in France, or say angola, would you consider yourself French or Angolan? Would it matter if your parents were only there temporarily? Suppose your parents just happened to be visiting a foreign country and oops Mom goes into labor early, are you French or American?

Our citizenship laws also consider long and short term domicile. You can be living and working in a foreign country and retain your American citizenship as long as you intend to keep America as your long term permanent domicile, that is as long as you intend to return to America.
A pregnant woman not domiciled in the US but coming over the border is likewise not a citizen, although she may wish to be domiciled there, the baby is born under circumstances of which the woman appears to wish to be domiciled in the US, but the woman herself is considered a foreign national. But considering that sneaking over the border is an illegal acttion, why have we allowed these people to break our laws and then give their children citizenship when people who apply for citizenship must show they do not and have not broken our laws while here on a visa?
I personally think that the laws need to be tighter in this regard to prevent abuse.

Also, when people come to the States and clearly do not wish to become citizens, but want the benefits of our country, why should we give their children citizenship?

I have to edit this post after finding that the US even gives tourists babies citizenship if the babies are born here. I think that is idiotic. It has to do with the 14th Amendmenat and not the original body of the Constitution. But I did find this..


•14th Amendment history seems to indicate that the Citizenship Clause was never intended to benefit illegal aliens nor legal foreign visitors temporarily present in the United States.


and this


•The U.S. Supreme Court has held that the U.S.-born children of permanent resident aliens are covered by the Citizenship Clause, but the Court has never decided whether the same rule applies to the children of aliens whose presence in the United States is temporary or illegal.


and this

•Of advanced economies, Canada and the United States are the only countries that grant automatic citizenship to children born to illegal aliens.

www.cis.org...


And here are more interesting statistics


Between 300,000 and 400,000 children are born to illegal immigrants in the United States every year. Put another way, as many as one out of 10 births in the United States is to an illegal immigrant mother.2 All of these children are considered by the executive branch of the U.S. government to be U.S. citizens who enjoy the same rights and are entitled to the same benefits as the children of U.S. citizens.
The population of U.S.-born children with illegal alien parents has expanded rapidly in recent years from 2.3 million in 2003 to 4 million in 2008; since these figures do not include children who are 18 years of age or older nor those who are married, the actual figure is somewhat larger.3



The two citizenship benefits that have drawn the most attention in the birthright citizenship debate are, first, food assistance and other welfare benefits to which a family of illegal aliens would not otherwise have access, and second, the ability of the child when he grows up to legalize his parents, and also to bring into the United States his foreign-born spouse and any foreign-born siblings.


Most benefits Americans would regard as “welfare” are not accessible to illegal immigrants. However, illegal immigrants can obtain welfare benefits such as Medicaid and food stamps on behalf of their U.S.-born children. Many of the welfare costs associated with illegal immigration, therefore, are due to the current birthright citizenship policy. Put another way, greater efforts at barring illegal aliens from federal welfare programs will not significantly reduce costs because their citizen children can continue to access the benefits. Nationwide, 40 percent of illegal alien-headed households receive some type of welfare.



So to put it into context, while it may seem cold to cut benefits such as these, one has to consider the staggering cost to the American taxpayer who can barely put food on their own tables, not to mention the fact that these same people are not eligible for the welfare the illegals are getting because their income bracket is higher.

edit on 24-1-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-1-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-1-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-1-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-1-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-1-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by apollo7keep
I agree with your points about how bad a situation it is for these people, and how they are coming to this country out of desperation. However, my question to you is why is it right for them to dump their problems onto U.S. citizens? If they were in such a destitute situation, I would think the only logical thing, if they cared about their family so much, would be to not have children in the first place! What right do they have to come to a foreign country, have a child, and then demand that every citizen of said foreign country takes care of their children? I hope other states follow Kansas' lead on this issue.


Liberal's and other anti-American haters won't see it that way. If this survives the federal Courts I could see most states in the Union following suite.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 



So to put it into context, while it may seem cold to cut benefits such as these, one has to consider the staggering cost to the American taxpayer who can barely put food on their own tables, not to mention the fact that these same people are not eligible for the welfare the illegals are getting because their income bracket is higher.

Nicely done post, in terms of numbers and the actual law. Your inserted SOURCE INFO is accurate.

Nevertheless, the commentary you inserted at the end need to be addressed, and a couple of items you have conveniently overlooked brought to light.

First of all, any essay regarding undocumented immigrants that still uses the inflammatory and archaic phrase 'illegal aliens' MUST, immediately, be considered biased. Anyone schooled in diplomacy, and I'm not just talking about 'political correctness' has to recognize that this pejorative term is no different than any used to describe a group of people: there is no need for me to list those terms here.

Secondly, you have ignored the fact that these people's children are still citizens, for now. So if you are suggesting a retroactive 'punitive damage' of stripping them of their citizenship, you had best be prepared for those 4 million (your estimate) people to put up a fuss. If you are suggesting deporting them and their families, you are exiling American citizens. Period.

And thirdly, you are failing to acknowledge that the majority of those people who come here in advance of their child's imminent birth do want to be permanently domiciled here, if not granted immediate legal status, in the future, when their children achieve majority and can sponsor them (under current laws).

Meanwhile, MOST OF THEM are WORKING at menial jobs and receiving a paycheck. They are living within their means. A vast majority of them have received little education, at most to 8th grade; many have received none.

Some of them are sending money back to desperate family members with no other support; some of them are sending it back to allow for the completion of homes they are building (i.e. needing a roof for the modest house they've managed to construct).

But this fantasy that they are all working 'under the table', tax free, buying and selling houses and skedaddling with billions fraudulently, is just not so.

Their paychecks are subject to withheld taxes, just like yours and mine. Those taxes go toward Social Security that is being paid out NOW to eligible seniors. It is a myth that SS with-holdings are put into a personal account for the contributors future use.


They are not. They are the source of income for the checks that are being sent out right now. Every person paying US taxes via a paycheck right now is supporting the citizens receiving those benefits right now. It makes no different to the IRS and SS administration WHO paid it under WHAT number, the money rolls in all the same.

It's a two-way street, and one MUST recognized ALL of the effects of the actions they suggest.

An investigation by the Washington Post shows that undocumented workers pay billions of dollars each year in taxes from which they receive no substantial benefit, including Social Security taxes they will never be able to collect. While some may not pay taxes, most do so, and some do so gladly, feeling that they are benefiting from living and working in the US, even if in an undocumented status. The Internal Revenue Service does not report possible undocumented workers to the INS, in part because of privacy rules and in part because the agency wants to collect as much tax revenue as possible.
....
Undocumented immigrants pay other taxes as well, such as sales taxes and property taxes, which are factored into the cost of rent. Economists, however, believe that they use more in government services than they contribute in taxes. The conclusions drawn from this, however, are not uniform. While some believe undocumented immigrants are a financial burden on the government, others believe that they play an important part in the long-term economy of the US.
www.visalaw.com...

The Internal Revenue Service doesn't track a worker's immigration status, yet many illegal immigrants fearful of deportation won't risk the government attention that will come from filing a return even if they might qualify for a refund. Economist William Ford of Middle Tennessee State University says there are no firm figures on how many such taxpayers there are.

"The real question is how many of them pay more than they owe. There are undoubtedly hundreds of thousands of people in that situation," Ford said.

www.usatoday.com...
While slighty dated, the above articles still hold true.


edit on 25-1-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-1-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 08:27 AM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 



So, basically, I am for limited government and a conservative.

no kidding.
Just call yourself that while you continue your learning curve, then. A young Republican extreme right-winger, who is proclaiming knowledge and warping the debate without having properly investigated the complexities of the situation,
while at the same time denigrating human beings, citizens, with an inherent right to dignity, to something more like mildew -- brainless, noxious, and unpleasant in all ways. I don't mean to be rude, Horus, but really, it doesn't reflect well on you, or the party-line that you promote, to be publicly spreading propaganda like this.

I suggest for just one week, you do yourself a favor, and turn OFF the Rush Limbaugh show completely. Listen instead to National Public Radio, especially "Talk of the Nation" with Neil Conan. While some say NPR is too liberal, they at least refrain from blatant rabble-rousing and discuss things with experts and people who call in with respectful dialogue.

You'll learn a lot about the other side of the coin.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   
One thing to keep in mind here, is that no one wishes to see anyone suffer or struggle no matter who they are or what color they are or where they are from. People get upset though when un-documented immigrants cut to the front of the line by breaking the laws and get rewarded, whereas our own citizens are falling through the cracks, struggling, suffer and get denied the help they so deperately need.

One story comes to mind of an 87 year old woman who was my Mom's roomate when she was in the hospital. She was crying and upset because she was denied help with medical because she made 2.00 over the poverty limit! Many of our elderly have to choose between food or life saving medicines while undocumented immigrants don't have to worry about a thing. This is neither fair nor right.

I have known many undocumented immigrants who had anchor babies and recieved food stamps and cheap housing and free medical for thier children. They only recieved these benefits because they had a child here after breaking the law. They are rewarded. How about all the citizens who have their babies here? They have to pay for their medical and what-not.

I have seen with my own eyes how citizens were turned away for jobs they were well quaified for, while the un-documented were hired instead. How about all those citizens who need to provide for their families? What about the millions who come here with respect and go through the proper chanels? How do you think they feel?

Thousands of our citizens have been killed by undocumented immigrants with previous arrests. I'm sure that many of them have anchor babies.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 

You have a very condescending and demeaning tone of post to the people that don't see eye to eye with your point of view. Maybe you should heed the advice in your signature. Because we don't share your views does not make us ignorant to the issue being discussed.
I have worked with hispanics shoulder to shoulder on a day to day basis for 30+ yrs. many of them are good friends to me. I've heard enough to write a book on the subject and have listened to both sides of the argument. Working in the construction industry and knowing many of the book keepers, my wife included. I've seen the payrolls and heard the problems first hand. They constantly have SS# that don't match and although single, they claim max dependents so they do not pay the tax rate they should be, very little taxes are taken out, not to mention the billions of dollars that ARE paid to them under the table, sent to Mexico and not recycled back into the American economy. If I could go to a country and pay taxes I'll never see back but yet make at least 10 times the amount I could make in my own country, I would be a happy camper saying tax away, it's a no brainer. I lost a painting business due to the fact I could not compete with their pricing and still maintain a legal business paying comp, ins, lisc, etc. I also lost my house among other things as a result.
Many of them have bought vehicles and homes and when the economy gets bad they head to Mexico with the vehicles that can't be repossessed and leave homes they're upside down in. Guess who gets left holding the ball? Me and You. Meanwhile they can go to Mexico and live much better than the American citizens that are losing everything they own.
California has the highest rate of illegals in the country but yet they receive a $1.50 back in federal funds for every $1.00 paid. This money goes right back to the illegals that are receiving gov benefits. This is a huge burden to the American taxpayer and Ca. is pretty much bankrupt. I don't see any fairness to this, do you?
About those homes you mentioned "without the roof", they intentionally do not finish their homes in Mexico, they do not pay property taxes on unfinished homes, I have been told this by many. Thats why you see two story homes with a tarp for a roof.
As much as I would love to have equality to all human beings, I don't feel I should be footing the bill for those that want to take advantage and abuse my generosity without making the same sacrifices that I have made for them.
Food for thought.




edit on 25-1-2012 by mtnshredder because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-1-2012 by mtnshredder because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join