Why can't Public Assistance increase?

[francoHFW]

If you don't know they've blocked a good SS card since Reagan and before, you are ignorant on the whole subject...

If they are not here legally, they don't get one.

Nobody outside of our country should be working here until our people have plenty of work first.

They're still ridiculously easy to make fakes of. That's why the illegals are here...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And we didn't track them all down at once, and put them in jail. Further, the vast majority of them were not caught because of some active manhunt. They were caught, either in the act, or through the commission of some other crime. We can't catch these 11 million "illegals" "in the act", as they are already here - the act is a fait accompli. As I have pointed out, repeatedly, the majority of them aren't committing other crimes, so we're not gonna get them that way. So, a manhunt is rather the only way to catch them. So? From whence do we get the resources to do that?

Nope. Wrong as usual.

Like I said, my idea would work, but it's not going to happen so.........

When Arizona passed their law, one of the stipulations was that people had to show their identification if a police (or agent) asked. You had to show you were here legally. You didn't even have to be committing a crime. If a police officer or agent noticed you had a hard time speaking the English language, they were able to ask for identification.

That was the key that scared their illegals out of the state.

Furthermore is we need to cut off state funding for those who issue illegals drivers licenses. We need the ability for landlords and real estate agents to be able to identify illegals and refuse them shelter.

There are a lot of things that would work.

 

[P@triot]

And we didn't track them all down at once, and put them in jail.

Again - you continue to make completely nonsensical arguments. We don't track down all illegal aliens at once either. We track them down day by day, person by person (except in the cases where they catch an entire van full or something similar). You won't to pretend that if we don't arrest 20 million illegal aliens on one day, it can't be done. We relentlessly do it day by day. And we implement policy that makes their life miserable to assist. For instance, you require proof of citizenship for any and all healthcare, government benefits, and social services. Guess what happens chief? They either go starving and without healthcare or they get caught seeking those things. Those that choose to go without are desperate and will make all kinds of mistakes that will help get them caught. It is a very simple process.

Further, the vast majority of them were not caught because of some active manhunt. They were caught, either in the act, or through the commission of some other crime.

Exactly! And that's what happens with illegal aliens. Do you have any idea how many illegal aliens were caught for a routine misdemeanor traffic stop?

As I have pointed out, repeatedly, the majority of them aren't committing other crimes, so we're not gonna get them that way. So, a manhunt is rather the only way to catch them. So? From whence do we get the resources to do that?

Another lie. As I just stated - tons are caught with routine misdemeanor traffic stops. Having expired plates. Running a red light. Failing to signal while changing lanes. Really simple stuff that ends with them getting caught. And as I've already stated - the resources come from the quarter of a billion dollars that we send to Mexico every year. We stop sending it and we inform them that we don't send it again until we've solved our illegal alien problem. Mexico would immediately begin to assist us as well because they are so desperate for that money. We would have so much money and resources to solve this problem it would be solved in the blink of an eye.

Again, you're talking about a single person.

Each illegal alien is a "singe person" chief. It's not a group discount rate.

Also, Ted Bundy wasn't an active case when he was caught. He was caught because he had a taillight out. Not because some manhunt tracked him down, and brought him to justice. Now, how do you do that with illegal immigrants?

Bingo! Ding! Ding! Ding! Winner, Winner, chicken dinner. You're slowly starting to catch on.

(By the way chief - though no really relevant to this discussion - Ted Bundy was always an "active case". They do not stop pursuing people for murder as their is no statute of limitations on it and he was also a fugitive from the law having escaped from a prison twice so the U.S. Marshals were "actively" pursuing him as well).

Again, it is the difference between the occasional single manhunt, and 11 million people. You don't seem to get the it is the scope that makes what you're suggesting unrealistic.

You don't seem to understand that we don't have to catch all 11 million at the same time on the same day. You just keep relentlessly pursing them and making their life a living hell while you do. Some would actually give up and go home just from that alone. You want another policy that would have amazing results? Offer an incentive to anyone who provides information leading to the arrest of an illegal alien. Something huge like "tax exemption for one year". There wouldn't be an illegal alien left in this country after that. This is so simple, only a liberal could find it an "overwhelming" problem to solve.

 

[Czernobog]

And we didn't track them all down at once, and put them in jail. Further, the vast majority of them were not caught because of some active manhunt. They were caught, either in the act, or through the commission of some other crime. We can't catch these 11 million "illegals" "in the act", as they are already here - the act is a fait accompli. As I have pointed out, repeatedly, the majority of them aren't committing other crimes, so we're not gonna get them that way. So, a manhunt is rather the only way to catch them. So? From whence do we get the resources to do that?

Nope. Wrong as usual.

Like I said, my idea would work, but it's not going to happen so.........

When Arizona passed their law, one of the stipulations was that people had to show their identification if a police (or agent) asked. You had to show you were here legally. You didn't even have to be committing a crime. If a police officer or agent noticed you had a hard time speaking the English language, they were able to ask for identification.

That was the key that scared their illegals out of the state.

Furthermore is we need to cut off state funding for those who issue illegals drivers licenses. We need the ability for landlords and real estate agents to be able to identify illegals and refuse them shelter.

There are a lot of things that would work.

LOL! I live in Arizona! So, it is your contention that there are no illegals here? Really?????

 

[francoHFW]

And we didn't track them all down at once, and put them in jail. Further, the vast majority of them were not caught because of some active manhunt. They were caught, either in the act, or through the commission of some other crime. We can't catch these 11 million "illegals" "in the act", as they are already here - the act is a fait accompli. As I have pointed out, repeatedly, the majority of them aren't committing other crimes, so we're not gonna get them that way. So, a manhunt is rather the only way to catch them. So? From whence do we get the resources to do that?

Nope. Wrong as usual.

Like I said, my idea would work, but it's not going to happen so.........

When Arizona passed their law, one of the stipulations was that people had to show their identification if a police (or agent) asked. You had to show you were here legally. You didn't even have to be committing a crime. If a police officer or agent noticed you had a hard time speaking the English language, they were able to ask for identification.

That was the key that scared their illegals out of the state.

Furthermore is we need to cut off state funding for those who issue illegals drivers licenses. We need the ability for landlords and real estate agents to be able to identify illegals and refuse them shelter.

There are a lot of things that would work.

The AZ law was also found unconstitutional. A harassment law, for dupes only. And didn't work. Only a good SS/ID card with a chip will work.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

LOL! I live in Arizona! So, it is your contention that there are no illegals here? Really?????

I didn't say that. What I said is that the results were very productive. Laws and a strong enough deterrent work. Why do we have all these illegals here? Because they know it's likely nothing will happen to them here. They can open up bank accounts illegally, they can get drivers licenses and jobs here as illegals, they can get apartments and even purchase homes illegally. And if they get caught crossing our borders illegally, they are just turned around and sent back with no penalty.

There is currently no real deterrent to being here illegally, and that's why we have so many here. If you make their lives a living hell to be here, they will go back to where they belong.

 

[Czernobog]

LOL! I live in Arizona! So, it is your contention that there are no illegals here? Really?????

I didn't say that. What I said is that the results were very productive. Laws and a strong enough deterrent work. Why do we have all these illegals here? Because they know it's likely nothing will happen to them here. They can open up bank accounts illegally, they can get drivers licenses and jobs here as illegals, they can get apartments and even purchase homes illegally. And if they get caught crossing our borders illegally, they are just turned around and sent back with no penalty.

There is currently no real deterrent to being here illegally, and that's why we have so many here. If you make their lives a living hell to be here, they will go back to where they belong.

Except they weren't. Having lived here since before those laws were attempted, I can tell you with a fair amount of certainty there was no mass exodus of "illegals" because of this law. All it did was infringe on the Constitution, piss a whole lot of people off, and cost us business, and money, as tourists, and companies decided to take their business elsewhere, rather than come to such a bigoted state.

Real effective law...

 

[paulitician]

We can increase it, but we should also increase requirements and accountability for those receiving it. Some sort of Community Service should be required. Those receiving the help, should give something back to the community. Such requirements have to be met in many other countries.

Also, the Government should take an active role in finding work for recipients. If they're able and refuse the work offered, their assistance should end. Many countries are doing that as well. That would eliminate the many recipients who claim they can't find work. So we can increase Public Assistance, but at the same time we need to increase requirements and accountability.

 

[francoHFW]

LOL! I live in Arizona! So, it is your contention that there are no illegals here? Really?????

I didn't say that. What I said is that the results were very productive. Laws and a strong enough deterrent work. Why do we have all these illegals here? Because they know it's likely nothing will happen to them here. They can open up bank accounts illegally, they can get drivers licenses and jobs here as illegals, they can get apartments and even purchase homes illegally. And if they get caught crossing our borders illegally, they are just turned around and sent back with no penalty.

There is currently no real deterrent to being here illegally, and that's why we have so many here. If you make their lives a living hell to be here, they will go back to where they belong.

Unconstitutional.

 

[paulitician]

LOL! I live in Arizona! So, it is your contention that there are no illegals here? Really?????

I didn't say that. What I said is that the results were very productive. Laws and a strong enough deterrent work. Why do we have all these illegals here? Because they know it's likely nothing will happen to them here. They can open up bank accounts illegally, they can get drivers licenses and jobs here as illegals, they can get apartments and even purchase homes illegally. And if they get caught crossing our borders illegally, they are just turned around and sent back with no penalty.

There is currently no real deterrent to being here illegally, and that's why we have so many here. If you make their lives a living hell to be here, they will go back to where they belong.

Unconstitutional.

Say Whaaa?? You Communists/Progressives care about the Constitution now? When did that happen?

 

[francoHFW]

We can increase it, but we should also increase requirements and accountability for those receiving it. Some sort of Community Service should be required. Those receiving the help, should give something back to the community. Such requirements have to be met in many other countries.

Also, the Government should take an active role in finding work for recipients. If they're able and refuse the work offered, their assistance should end. Many countries are doing that as well. That would eliminate the many recipients who claim they can't find work. So we can increase Public Assistance, but at the same time we need to increase requirements and accountability.

The GOP blocks all that. Thanks. Most places already do your first paragraph. Unknown on the GOP propaganda service...

 

[francoHFW]

LOL! I live in Arizona! So, it is your contention that there are no illegals here? Really?????

I didn't say that. What I said is that the results were very productive. Laws and a strong enough deterrent work. Why do we have all these illegals here? Because they know it's likely nothing will happen to them here. They can open up bank accounts illegally, they can get drivers licenses and jobs here as illegals, they can get apartments and even purchase homes illegally. And if they get caught crossing our borders illegally, they are just turned around and sent back with no penalty.

There is currently no real deterrent to being here illegally, and that's why we have so many here. If you make their lives a living hell to be here, they will go back to where they belong.

Unconstitutional.

Say Whaaa?? You Communists/Progressives care about the Constitution now? When did that happen?

LOL! I live in Arizona! So, it is your contention that there are no illegals here? Really?????

I didn't say that. What I said is that the results were very productive. Laws and a strong enough deterrent work. Why do we have all these illegals here? Because they know it's likely nothing will happen to them here. They can open up bank accounts illegally, they can get drivers licenses and jobs here as illegals, they can get apartments and even purchase homes illegally. And if they get caught crossing our borders illegally, they are just turned around and sent back with no penalty.

There is currently no real deterrent to being here illegally, and that's why we have so many here. If you make their lives a living hell to be here, they will go back to where they belong.

Unconstitutional.

Say Whaaa?? You Communists/Progressives care about the Constitution now? When did that happen?

Hilariously ironic.

 

[P@triot]

We can increase it, but we should also increase requirements and accountability for those receiving it. Some sort of Community Service should be required. Those receiving the help, should give something back to the community. Such requirements have to be met in many other countries.

Also, the Government should take an active role in finding work for recipients. If they're able and refuse the work offered, their assistance should end. Many countries are doing that as well. That would eliminate the many recipients who claim they can't find work. So we can increase Public Assistance, but at the same time we need to increase requirements and accountability.

If we can pay people to sit at home, then we can pay them to go out in the community and start fixing roads, clean up garbage, repair public parks and playgrounds, etc.

 

[paulitician]

We can increase it, but we should also increase requirements and accountability for those receiving it. Some sort of Community Service should be required. Those receiving the help, should give something back to the community. Such requirements have to be met in many other countries.

Also, the Government should take an active role in finding work for recipients. If they're able and refuse the work offered, their assistance should end. Many countries are doing that as well. That would eliminate the many recipients who claim they can't find work. So we can increase Public Assistance, but at the same time we need to increase requirements and accountability.

The GOP blocks all that. Thanks. Most places already do your first paragraph. Unknown on the GOP propaganda service...

It's really just a matter of requirements and accountability. No one receiving assistance should be offended that they're required to give something back to the community. They should actually do it with pride and enthusiasm. Giving back is good for the soul.

And possibly the biggest problem is that Government writes the checks and gives $Billions away in Freebies, but doesn't take an active role in finding jobs for recipients. Assisting in finding work would be a very wise investment for Government. It would eliminate the several Thousands who claim they can't find jobs. If they're able-bodied and refuse work, their assistance should end.

 

[Czernobog]

We can increase it, but we should also increase requirements and accountability for those receiving it. Some sort of Community Service should be required. Those receiving the help, should give something back to the community. Such requirements have to be met in many other countries.

Also, the Government should take an active role in finding work for recipients. If they're able and refuse the work offered, their assistance should end. Many countries are doing that as well. That would eliminate the many recipients who claim they can't find work. So we can increase Public Assistance, but at the same time we need to increase requirements and accountability.

If we can pay people to sit at home, then we can pay them to go out in the community and start fixing roads, clean up garbage, repair public parks and playgrounds, etc.

Now, see? I don't have a problem with that. You see, you guys presume that when Progressives talk about increasing public assistance, we mean "paying people to sit on their asses". Why? There are plenty of public projects - food backs, etc - that are constantly looking for volunteers. I have no problem with making that a condition of public assistance. People who need the help get it, and projects that need bodies get them. Win, win.

 

[paulitician]

We can increase it, but we should also increase requirements and accountability for those receiving it. Some sort of Community Service should be required. Those receiving the help, should give something back to the community. Such requirements have to be met in many other countries.

Also, the Government should take an active role in finding work for recipients. If they're able and refuse the work offered, their assistance should end. Many countries are doing that as well. That would eliminate the many recipients who claim they can't find work. So we can increase Public Assistance, but at the same time we need to increase requirements and accountability.

If we can pay people to sit at home, then we can pay them to go out in the community and start fixing roads, clean up garbage, repair public parks and playgrounds, etc.

I agree. It's about giving something back to the community.

 

[paulitician]

We can increase it, but we should also increase requirements and accountability for those receiving it. Some sort of Community Service should be required. Those receiving the help, should give something back to the community. Such requirements have to be met in many other countries.

Also, the Government should take an active role in finding work for recipients. If they're able and refuse the work offered, their assistance should end. Many countries are doing that as well. That would eliminate the many recipients who claim they can't find work. So we can increase Public Assistance, but at the same time we need to increase requirements and accountability.

If we can pay people to sit at home, then we can pay them to go out in the community and start fixing roads, clean up garbage, repair public parks and playgrounds, etc.

Now, see? I don't have a problem with that. You see, you guys presume that when Progressives talk about increasing public assistance, we mean "paying people to sit on their asses". Why? There are plenty of public projects - food backs, etc - that are constantly looking for volunteers. I have no problem with making that a condition of public assistance. People who need the help get it, and projects that need bodies get them. Win, win.

Unfortunately, such requirements don't currently exist. It's been proven to work in other countries though. And Government should also start assisting in finding work for recipients. That would be a very wise investment for Government. Worth every penny spent.

If they're able-bodied and refuse work, their assistance should end. That would eliminate the several Thousands who claim they can't find jobs. That process has also been proven to work in other countries.

 

[Redfish]

Do you understand what the word "illegal" means?

If you "illegally" break the speed limit should the government give you amnesty? We have laws regarding immigration and entry into this country. People who break those laws should be held accountable, otherwise we no longer have a country.

How? How do you find them, round them up, and ship them out?

And what about the children they brought, who are now adults, living lives, having gone to school, joined the military, and started careers. They didn't choose to break the law. When I choose to break the speed limit I get a ticket. But you don't give a ticket to my five-year-old sitting in the back seat.

its true that the kids did not enter the country illegally, but their parents did. Sorry about that. The parents are responsible for taking care of their children. The parents broke the law and should be deported with their children. We are not running a charity home here in the USA. It is not our job to take care of every needy person on earth.

but if you feel that way you should take everything you own, all of your clothes, food, money, furniture, cars, etc and give it to some homeless person. That's exactly what you are asking this country to do-----------------practice what you preach or STFU.

Oh, my ass. First of all, I'm not talking about kid kids. I'm talking about the kids who were brought here a decade, two decades ago. For all intents, and purposes, the grew up American. They went to school, got educations, for careers, and contribute to the revenue of this nation. What do you propose we do with them?

Your second ignorant comment I'm not even going to dignify with a response.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

If those kids (now adults) were born here then they are citizens. So they are not at issue in this discussion. We can debate whether its right that kids born here of illegals should be granted citizenship, but for now that's the law.

My second comment is merely taking your stated position to its ridiculous conclusion, which is something you libs never do because it reveals the flaws in your ideology.

Again, not talking about the ones born here. I'm talking about the one's who were babies, or toddlers, now grown, and living their lives.

If they were born somewhere else, they are illegal aliens and should be deported. There is no statute of limitations on illegal entry to this country.

I get it that you feel sorry for them, so do I. But that's not the point, either we have immigration laws or we don't.

If, as you say, they are now adults, why haven't they applied for legal citizenship in the 15 or 20 or more years that they have been here? Why haven't they taken the steps to legalize their presence here?

 

[Czernobog]

How? How do you find them, round them up, and ship them out?

And what about the children they brought, who are now adults, living lives, having gone to school, joined the military, and started careers. They didn't choose to break the law. When I choose to break the speed limit I get a ticket. But you don't give a ticket to my five-year-old sitting in the back seat.

its true that the kids did not enter the country illegally, but their parents did. Sorry about that. The parents are responsible for taking care of their children. The parents broke the law and should be deported with their children. We are not running a charity home here in the USA. It is not our job to take care of every needy person on earth.

but if you feel that way you should take everything you own, all of your clothes, food, money, furniture, cars, etc and give it to some homeless person. That's exactly what you are asking this country to do-----------------practice what you preach or STFU.

Oh, my ass. First of all, I'm not talking about kid kids. I'm talking about the kids who were brought here a decade, two decades ago. For all intents, and purposes, the grew up American. They went to school, got educations, for careers, and contribute to the revenue of this nation. What do you propose we do with them?

Your second ignorant comment I'm not even going to dignify with a response.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

If those kids (now adults) were born here then they are citizens. So they are not at issue in this discussion. We can debate whether its right that kids born here of illegals should be granted citizenship, but for now that's the law.

My second comment is merely taking your stated position to its ridiculous conclusion, which is something you libs never do because it reveals the flaws in your ideology.

Again, not talking about the ones born here. I'm talking about the one's who were babies, or toddlers, now grown, and living their lives.

If they were born somewhere else, they are illegal aliens and should be deported. There is no statute of limitations on illegal entry to this country.

I get it that you feel sorry for them, so do I. But that's not the point, either we have immigration laws or we don't.

If, as you say, they are now adults, why haven't they applied for legal citizenship in the 15 or 20 or more years that they have been here? Why haven't they taken the steps to legalize their presence here?

Well, you see, that's kind of the problem with the laws as they currently stand. I walk into the nearest immigration office, and say, "Hi. I'm here illegally, and would like to fix that please," what do you think happens next? Do they hand me an application, and walk m through the process of gaining legal status, or do they shove me in a cell, and process my deportation, uprooting me from everything I have ever known, and ship me off to some country that I have no connection with, and no desire to live in?

This was kind of the point of the Dream Act. To give those, now adult, kids a way to fix a problem they didn't create, and you guys rather shat all over that idea.

 

[BlueGin]

We can increase it, but we should also increase requirements and accountability for those receiving it. Some sort of Community Service should be required. Those receiving the help, should give something back to the community. Such requirements have to be met in many other countries.

Also, the Government should take an active role in finding work for recipients. If they're able and refuse the work offered, their assistance should end. Many countries are doing that as well. That would eliminate the many recipients who claim they can't find work. So we can increase Public Assistance, but at the same time we need to increase requirements and accountability.

Many states require proof of employment for EBT/SNAP etc. Also for folks getting unemployment... Proof of weekly job interviews to keep receiving benefits.