Health Insurance Discussion

[TooMuchCredit]

If 2/3 pay income taxes, they're doing it through identity theft. On top of that, they are in the lowest tax bracket and after standard deductions, EIC, child credits, etc. they end up paying ZERO federal income tax and actually get a refund just like any low income worker. That means our tax dollars are actually paying them. The fact that they pay sales tax to the state they live in means nothing to me in another state, as their minimal contribution wouldn't even cover the local services they receive, let alone any of the burden they place on our federal tax system.

No they don't have to pay taxes through identity theft. Their employer has to withhold taxes. So they are paying in - federal and state and soc. sec and medicare. Now because they are illegal, they don't dare file a tax return because that is when they would be discovered.
So they don't get those refunds that legal workers making those wages would get.

Yeah, they don't make a great deal of income because they are doing jobs that most other people aren't willing to do.

That said, I do think people should come into this country legally. It's almost a separate issue from healthcare. If they get they get documented, it's not an issue. And I do see where it might be an incentive for them to do so if they are excluded from the system.

I just think it's a lie that "they get everything for free". And it's easy to make them a scapegoat.

[IBroke]

I find it bemusing that we can carry on a discussion about ILLEGAL aliens and never address the concept of removing them.

This country depends on them. So "let's get them all out by yersterday" simply doesn't work. Sad but if we take advantage of them by paying far less for jobs legal citizens wouldn't even consider for that hourly wage, we can't complain they are still here...

Somebody has to hire them and is making a profit, right?

[hereforinfo]

No they don't have to pay taxes through identity theft. Their employer has to withhold taxes. So they are paying in - federal and state and soc. sec and medicare. Now because they are illegal, they don't dare file a tax return because that is when they would be discovered.
So they don't get those refunds that legal workers making those wages would get.

Yeah, they don't make a great deal of income because they are doing jobs that most other people aren't willing to do.

That said, I do think people should come into this country legally. It's almost a separate issue from healthcare. If they get they get documented, it's not an issue. And I do see where it might be an incentive for them to do so if they are excluded from the system.

I just think it's a lie that "they get everything for free". And it's easy to make them a scapegoat.

Their employer can only withhold and pay taxes if they have a social security number. If that's the case the income is being reported to the IRS, they would have to file a return at some point. Unless their income is below the threshold, in which case they wouldn't have to pay taxes on it anyway. If they don't have a social security number, then they are paid under the table and there is no tax paid or withheld.

[OhioFiler]

This country depends on them. So "let's get them all out by yersterday" simply doesn't work. Sad but if we take advantage of them by paying far less for jobs legal citizens wouldn't even consider for that hourly wage, we can't complain they are still here...

Somebody has to hire them and is making a profit, right?

So I'm to understand that because they are working for less than some Americans will work for it's okay to skirt the law? Which other laws do you propose we ignore?

The unemployment rate is near 17% in this country. In some areas of agricultural California the rate in much higher. Are you trying to make me believe that Americans who are unemployed won't do the work the illegals do? I got an idea. Stop paying unemployment benefits and see how many Americans are willing to pick lettuce.

Anyone who accepts the premise that illegals are here to stay because there are too many or because they provide a valued service has no respect for our nation's laws.

[IBroke]

So I'm to understand that because they are working for less than some Americans will work for it's okay to skirt the law? Which other laws do you propose we ignore?

The unemployment rate is near 17% in this country. In some areas of agricultural California the rate in much higher. Are you trying to make me believe that Americans who are unemployed won't do the work the illegals do? I got an idea. Stop paying unemployment benefits and see how many Americans are willing to pick lettuce.

Anyone who accepts the premise that illegals are here to stay because there are too many or because they provide a valued service has no respect for our nation's laws.

I'm not saying it's OK - I'm just describing the "AS IS"-status and that it will probably stay that way. We all know it's wrong - but please tell me why nobody is fighting it? I tell you why: Because we - as a society - take advantage of them just as they do take advantage of us. It's a give and take. The "action" and so-called "border-patrols" are a joke itself. They should only DISPLAY to the public that this country is fighting illegal immigration. What a joke. If this topic would be important and would actually cause damages to our economy, don't you think we would be more involved?

Illegals are doing the work American citizens aren't keen on doing, at a rate American citizens couldn't survive on, allowing American companies to offer their products and services at competative prices and as a result, allowing American consumers to get these products cheaper. And why is this done? Because it's working. It's a win-win situation for many people involved and THAT'S why the government stays away from that issue.

If you want to have them out of the country by tomorrow, you will have to face the CONSEQUENCES.

Did it ever came to your mind that there are TWO SIDES of this story? Why can illegals work in this country in the first place? Because they are HIRED by companies who violate the law. Now WHY are they hired if it's illegal?

Back to the lettuce...:
The companies hiring illegals have only one thing in mind - and that's called PROFIT. True, we have millions of unemployed in this country but they simply won't and can't do the work at the same wage. That's an economical fact. And do you know what's going to happen once these jobs are performed by legal residents who are paid in such way that they can support their families - here in THIS country?

We will pay TWICE as much for the lettuce - because the companies are still going to get their profits.

I know that those people who have illegal aliens on top of their agenda also kling to their hard earned money - So be careful what you wish for. In this case, you can't have it both ways.

Your "Sledgehammer-All illegals out today" might work in a fantasy fairy-land - but NOT in REALITY.

[JRScott]

I find it bemusing that we can carry on a discussion about ILLEGAL aliens and never address the concept of removing them. It's as though we've accepted them ans the law means nothing.

Here's my plan for health care for illegals. If they are sick, treat them in a prison hospital.

I actually pointed out a few posts before this one of yours that we should seal our border

[JRScott]

This country depends on them. So "let's get them all out by yersterday" simply doesn't work. Sad but if we take advantage of them by paying far less for jobs legal citizens wouldn't even consider for that hourly wage, we can't complain they are still here...

Somebody has to hire them and is making a profit, right?

The country doesn't have to depend on them. If we didn't pay people to sit on their butts and do nothing then we wouldn't need them. Instead we've created a welfare state where we literally pay some of our citizens just to sit on their butts and do nothing.

[IBroke]

The country doesn't have to depend on them. If we didn't pay people to sit on their butts and do nothing then we wouldn't need them. Instead we've created a welfare state where we literally pay some of our citizens just to sit on their butts and do nothing.

In theory, that's true. But here's the problem:

First, not every unemployed is entitled to a welfare-check every month. Before you can collect from the "cookie-jar", you usually are required to have made regular contributions/deductions from your paycheck when you were still employed. If that's the case, these people are entitled to a certain monthly amount. Now how do you wan't to force them to work for less than welfare? And trust me, THAT'S the payscale where you find many of the jobs performed by illegal aliens. These families only send the head of the household across the border to work. He keeps his own expenses low and transfers the rest of the money across the border. The ironic part is that - even if he would be allowed to bring his family to the US - he couldn't afford the living expenses for them in this country from the money he's earning. And if Jose from Mexico can't manage that, you can be sure that Jack from CA couldn't, either.

Second, if you would be forcing unemployed people to perform these jobs, the work STILL has to provide them with a SUFFICIENT income. Ultimately, that would lead to a huge cost-increase to specific services and goods which would have to be passed on to us, the consumers - UNLESS the government jumps in to fill these gaps. But if the government gets involved - "socialism".

American labor is good labor - but it certainly isn't the cheapest. So again, replacing illegals will be expensive.

If the jobs in CA would provide a worker with a wage you could actually survive on - IN CALIFORNIA - I'm convinced they wouldn't be vacant for too long. But are $6 or more for a bag of lettuce really competative? I guess that's why the jobs are still open...

[justbroke]

I think maybe we have something. Why not have the people actually on unemployment insurance, actually do 10-20 hours during the weeks when they actually receive unemployment. Have them work on community projects. Almost like the CETA program from the 1980s. (CETA - Comprehensive Employment and Training Act)

[JRScott]

I think maybe we have something. Why not have the people actually on unemployment insurance, actually do 10-20 hours during the weeks when they actually receive unemployment. Have them work on community projects. Almost like the CETA program from the 1980s. (CETA - Comprehensive Employment and Training Act)

I believe anyone receiving any tax dollar funded assistance should be required to work a certain amount of community service each week. I don't care if its HUD, WIC, Unemployment, Food Stamps, etc. We should not be giving them a free ride.

[JRScott]

In theory, that's true. But here's the problem:

First, not every unemployed is entitled to a welfare-check every month. Before you can collect from the "cookie-jar", you usually are required to have made regular contributions/deductions from your paycheck when you were still employed. If that's the case, these people are entitled to a certain monthly amount. Now how do you wan't to force them to work for less than welfare? And trust me, THAT'S the payscale where you find many of the jobs performed by illegal aliens. These families only send the head of the household across the border to work. He keeps his own expenses low and transfers the rest of the money across the border. The ironic part is that - even if he would be allowed to bring his family to the US - he couldn't afford the living expenses for them in this country from the money he's earning. And if Jose from Mexico can't manage that, you can be sure that Jack from CA couldn't, either.

Second, if you would be forcing unemployed people to perform these jobs, the work STILL has to provide them with a SUFFICIENT income. Ultimately, that would lead to a huge cost-increase to specific services and goods which would have to be passed on to us, the consumers - UNLESS the government jumps in to fill these gaps. But if the government gets involved - "socialism".

American labor is good labor - but it certainly isn't the cheapest. So again, replacing illegals will be expensive.

If the jobs in CA would provide a worker with a wage you could actually survive on - IN CALIFORNIA - I'm convinced they wouldn't be vacant for too long. But are $6 or more for a bag of lettuce really competative? I guess that's why the jobs are still open...

If you remove the illegal immigrants and remove folks from the welfare lists, then folks will gravitate to jobs that will support them. If a job pays subpar then they will find no employees and will go out of business....that's the free market.

[lrprn]

I believe anyone receiving any tax dollar funded assistance should be required to work a certain amount of community service each week. I don't care if its HUD, WIC, Unemployment, Food Stamps, etc. We should not be giving them a free ride.

There's huge fraud in non-taxpayer supported services as well. For example, privately-held auto and health insurance fraud is also rampant. Should we force everyone who buys insurance to provide some designated service as well because some abuse it?

On a practical, non-ideological front, if we require everyone who receives tax-funded assistance to give a certain number of hours a week towards community services, what do you suggest we do with people's under-school-age children without child care while they do this? How about folks with development disabilities who aren't capable of providing community services? How about those who work at low-income full-time jobs who need these services to fill in the gaps? Will everyone who receives tax-funded services have to be screened to determine if they can provide community services? This is more government, not less.

It's a fantasy to believe that everyone who gets tax-dollar-funded services is an able-bodied adult just sitting at home living off the dole. Are there some using these services who take advantage? Sure. Is it the majority? Absolutely not.

Let me know once you figure out a way to stop human beings from being untruthful and self-serving. It's the ONLY way fraud and abuse in ALL private and government services will stop.

[justbroke]

On a practical, non-ideological front, if we require everyone who receives tax-funded assistance to give a certain number of hours a week towards community services, what do you suggest we do with people's under-school-age children without child care while they do this?

I'm actually for giveback to the community uynder these programs. I suggest a waiver for people who cannot giveback, due to childcare issues and/or mobility issues.

My problem... I actually know a 31 year old person with absolutely no disabilities, on unemployment and food stamps. This person also has no children, never married, has a working vehicle, etc, etc.

My point on CETA was that it was an actual employment program, and that it does in fact provide jobs.

[JRScott]

There's huge fraud in non-taxpayer supported services as well. For example, privately-held auto and health insurance fraud is also rampant. Should we force everyone who buys insurance to provide some designated service as well because some abuse it?

On a practical, non-ideological front, if we require everyone who receives tax-funded assistance to give a certain number of hours a week towards community services, what do you suggest we do with people's under-school-age children without child care while they do this? How about folks with development disabilities who aren't capable of providing community services? How about those who work at low-income full-time jobs who need these services to fill in the gaps? Will everyone who receives tax-funded services have to be screened to determine if they can provide community services? This is more government, not less.

It's a fantasy to believe that everyone who gets tax-dollar-funded services is an able-bodied adult just sitting at home living off the dole. Are there some using these services who take advantage? Sure. Is it the majority? Absolutely not.

Let me know once you figure out a way to stop human beings from being untruthful and self-serving. It's the ONLY way fraud and abuse in ALL private and government services will stop.

what do you suggest we do with people's under-school-age children without child care while they do this? Same thing they do when they go out to eat and don't take the kids or go shopping, they can leave them with the other spouse, boyfriend/girlfriend, parents, grandparents, or hire a sitter.

How about folks with development disabilities who aren't capable of providing community services? If they truly are not capable of doing anything allow a waiver, but even the disabled can do many things even if its just helping file papers or go get lunch for folks at the courthouse. Plus it gives them a sense of accomplishment.


How about those who work at low-income full-time jobs who need these services to fill in the gaps? Assuming they are only working 40 hours a week a small community service assignment isn't going to hurt them. If they work say more than that then cut down the community service time at least they are working. Doesn't have to be a large commitment could be just 8 hours a week or something.

Will everyone who receives tax-funded services have to be screened to determine if they can provide community services? Supposidly they are being screened to get their services and that should include enough information on what service jobs they could do without drastically increasing paperwork. It would increase the load on the Magistrate or whoever assigns community service such that additional ones might be needed.

It's a fantasy to believe that everyone who gets tax-dollar-funded services is an able-bodied adult just sitting at home living off the dole. Are there some using these services who take advantage? Sure. Is it the majority? Absolutely not. While perhaps not a majority there is a large number of cases where folks actually could work. I think the system is largely broke especially where children are concerned, there are sadly a large number that see they can get a free ride and have children knowing that the government will basically keep them up and they will have to do nothing. That's not good policy and not good for the kids either.


All the current system does with its no pain approach is teach folks to raise up more generations dependent upon the same government aid and little to any personal responsibility to improve oneself. I see it a lot around here in rural America. There are generations of families that get into welfare and intentionally construe their lives to stay on it for free hand outs and that needs to stop.

[TooMuchCredit]

I do agree somewhat with some of what you saying in that people on public assistance keep popping out babies because that keeps the welfare check rolling in. Yet they don't know who the father is etc.

It might be harsh, but I almost think the only way to stop that is to have as a requirement to receiving any public assistance (with exceptions for those that truely are disabled and unable to work) you must sign something promising not to have any children while on public support. If you break that, a woman has to have her tubes tied and a man has to have a vasectomy. All of which are reversible so when you are back on your feet you can have kids - but you must also pay to have it reversed since you broke the promise in the first place. Now it will cost public $ to fund the initial operations, but it might stop the vicious cycle and cost less in the long run. If you are on public assistance and are able bodied, it is not the time to start or enlarge your family since you are unable to support even yourself.