• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Global Poverty Act

A

Anonymous

Guest
Texan said:
That's assuming us conservative white guys still have the right to vote after four years of Obama, Pelosi and Reid. And assuming that we have anything left to drive - or gas money. It might be hard to go vote after the Democrats take everything we've got.

I think when the Dems get control- they will have control for decades....They will bring in billions of "new" Democrat voters- and you and I will be "minorities.....We've seen how GW can disregard the US voter/populace/laws for the gain of his elitist buddies- the Dems will do the same 10 fold while passing new laws giving these illegals fasttrack to voting ability, making big business happy and at the same time building their Democrat party power base by getting more of these aliens to be allowed to vote...

An e-mail I received today from a fellow thats been running a battle against the immigration law violations.....They are now trying to change the immigration rules by several little bills stuck on to bigger bills.....


From: Roy Beck, President, NumbersUSA
Date: Sunday 17FEB08 4 p.m. EST


Congress needs to hear from you this week -- Stop the increases in foreign workers & amnesty

DEAR FRIENDS,

Just when you think the Big Business Lobbyists can't be any more callous ...

At the same time as reports that we may be in an economic recession and that the job market is getting more and more difficult for Americans, the magazines, newspapers and airwaves are filled with op-eds, editorials and articles quoting the business leaders and lobbyists saying we must import more foreign workers!

Both the Democratic and Republican leadership of U.S. House and Senate are right now conspiring to bring legislation to the floor to greatly expand the pool of foreign labor in this country -- even as they talk about the need for taxpayers to provide more unemployment compensation for all the Americans who are losing their jobs.

This kind of insanity is nothing new.

And it will never slow down unless we as a Lobby of the People mobilize in massive fashion to put an end to it.

Please go to your NumbersUSA Action Buffet corkboard and make sure you have taken all the actions we have provided you to stand up against this latest effort of the Big Business Lobby to depress wages and foist major new subsidies upon the taxpayers.

I have been working full-time on these immigration issues since 1991. The Big Business Lobby and its well-compensated friends in Congress always use every upturn in the economy to cry for more foreign labor because of perceived shortages. But they never change their tune when the economy turns down. In every period of rising unemployment, the Big Business Lobby continues to cry about terrible worker shortages and always brings in hundreds of thousands of foreign workers during recessions.

Your NumbersUSA Capitol Hill Team has talked to a number of people who have been in high level Hill meetings wh e re leaders of both Parties have expressed a desire during this time of economic turmoil to sneak through giant increases of H-1B visas for foreign tech workers, H-2B visas for foreign laborers, greencards for permanent foreign nurses and a five-year visa for 12-20 million illegal foreign workers and their dependents.

Friends, I know that all of this may seem too crazy to be true. But please believe me that that the worse our country's economic situation, the more your congressional leaders see a chance to give their corporate sponsors the huge foreign labor increases that the People's Lobby has been blocking the last several years.

Send your faxes immediately. Remember that Monday is a federal holiday. Wait to make your phone calls until Tuesday.

Congressional leaders hope you will be so busy worrying about your own jobs that you won't notice them giving away millions more through immigration increases.

T H ANKS,


P.S. Like many of you, I suspect, I have been knocked for a loop the last couple of weeks with a respiratory flu that dodged whatever my flu shot was about. I am re-emerging and thank my staff for keeping the alerts flowing to you with links for the various faxes and phone action notes that they've been making available to you to protect the country from the open-borders lobbies. Basically, what seems to have happened is that the emergence of McCain, Clinton and Obama as the almost guaranteed group from which our next President will come has convinced congressional leaders of both Parties that the American people are willing to allow a continuation of the Bush open-borders policies that have been so detrimental to American workers and American communities for eight years.
Frankly, the Members of Congress must be jolted back to some sensibility. On l y you can do that -- in conjunction with hundreds of thousands of others who make it clear that the American people have not let down their guard.

Please prove the lie of all the commentators who are now saying that the American people have changed their minds about immigration and are no longer interested in stopping the Big Business Lobby in replacing the American workforce with cheaper more compliant foreign labor.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Oldtimer
If you live in some areas like LA, Honolulu, and D.C. where rent on a rathole is several thousand dollars a month-and houses are priced in the millions- $68,000 for a family income doesn't go far...

sure it does... if you don't blow it on crack...


I've lived in all the places you listed..... and lived on a hell of alot less..

not far from the million dollar homes are slums.... even in Waipahu Hawaii...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
Oldtimer
If you live in some areas like LA, Honolulu, and D.C. where rent on a rathole is several thousand dollars a month-and houses are priced in the millions- $68,000 for a family income doesn't go far...

sure it does... if you don't blow it on crack...


I've lived in all the places you listed..... and lived on a hell of alot less..

not far from the million dollar homes are slums.... even in Waipahu Hawaii...

So you're saying that GW/Administration is wrong in giving government employed folks COLA's on top of their GS salaries to move to these areas- as this high cost of living in these areas is only a figment of their imagination... :???:

Must be more GW wasteful spending then- eh :???:
 

Steve

Well-known member
OLdTimer
So you're saying that GW/Administration is wrong in giving government employed folks COLA's on top of their GS salaries to move to these areas- as this high cost of living in these areas is only a figment of their imagination..

NO, had you read my post... and your own...

OldTimer
If you live in some areas like LA, Honolulu, and D.C. where rent on a rathole is several thousand dollars a month-and houses are priced in the millions- $68,000 for a family income doesn't go far...

you clearly said... $68,000 for a family income doesn't go far

now if you look at my response....
sure it does... if you don't blow it on crack...


I've lived in all the places you listed..... and lived on a hell of alot less..

not far from the million dollar homes are slums.... even in Waipahu Hawaii...

You will see that my response is accurate and correct...

the goverment doesn't have to help out the better off... they make choices... and if they choose to get a big screen TV instead of protecting their children.. then let them lose their million dollar house...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
and if they choose to get a big screen TV instead of protecting their children.. then let them lose their million dollar house...

Not many less than $68,000 family income folks living in million dollar houses ... :roll: Except anymore under GW's scandalous/corruption promoted banking policy- anything is possible :wink: :p

Or the other choice often made is to not get the children, what they consider too expensive preventive treatment, until the disease has manifested itself to emergency conditions and then the much larger emergency cost is laid on the folks that do have health care insurance and do pay their bills in the form of much higher insurance rates and health care costs..

Might be one of the reasons health care insurance rose 10.6% last year alone :shock:
 

Steve

Well-known member
OldTimer
Not many less than $68,000 family income folks living in million dollar houses ...

due to the historic inflation of homes values.. many middle calss people who bought over ten years ago find themselves in homes with assessed values in that range... especially in the areas you used as an example...
 

Steve

Well-known member
OldTimer
Or the other choice often made is to not get the children, what they consider too expensive preventive treatment,

most preventive treatments and insurance plans are not that expensive.. but when faced with a new SUV or a root canel.. the SUV sure looks shiney....

every one every day makes choices... at an income of over $68,000 the choice is difficult for most..

do I buy another playstation, or get my kid shots and an exam?

do we go to Disney World, or get Suzy a an MRI..

do I get health insurance or a golf membership?..

or do I vote liberal and let some other schmuck pay for it?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
OldTimer
Or the other choice often made is to not get the children, what they consider too expensive preventive treatment,

most preventive treatments and insurance plans are not that expensive.. but when faced with a new SUV or a root canel.. the SUV sure looks shiney....

every one every day makes choices... at an income of over $68,000 the choice is difficult for most..

do I buy another playstation, or get my kid shots and an exam?

do we go to Disney World, or get Suzy a an MRI..

do I get health insurance or a golf membership?..

or do I vote liberal and let some other schmuck pay for it?

You just don't get it do you--your the schmuck paying for it now- at 2-3 times what preventative care could reduce- thru your increased health care costs and health care insurance costs.... :???: :roll: :(
 

Steve

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
OldTimer
Or the other choice often made is to not get the children, what they consider too expensive preventive treatment,

most preventive treatments and insurance plans are not that expensive.. but when faced with a new SUV or a root canel.. the SUV sure looks shiney....

every one every day makes choices... at an income of over $68,000 the choice is difficult for most..

do I buy another playstation, or get my kid shots and an exam?

do we go to Disney World, or get Suzy a an MRI..

do I get health insurance or a golf membership?..

or do I vote liberal and let some other schmuck pay for it?

You just don't get it do you--your the schmuck paying for it now- at 2-3 times what preventative care could reduce- thru your increased health care costs and health care insurance costs.... :???: :roll: :(

I live in one of the most conservative counties in one of the most liberal states.. I get it...

but maybe you could explain to me how making me paying more is going to help make irresponsible people more responsible?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
OldTimer

most preventive treatments and insurance plans are not that expensive.. but when faced with a new SUV or a root canel.. the SUV sure looks shiney....

every one every day makes choices... at an income of over $68,000 the choice is difficult for most..

do I buy another playstation, or get my kid shots and an exam?

do we go to Disney World, or get Suzy a an MRI..

do I get health insurance or a golf membership?..

or do I vote liberal and let some other schmuck pay for it?

You just don't get it do you--your the schmuck paying for it now- at 2-3 times what preventative care could reduce- thru your increased health care costs and health care insurance costs.... :???: :roll: :(

I live in one of the most conservative counties in one of the most liberal states.. I get it...

but maybe you could explain to me how making me paying more is going to help make irresponsible people more responsible?

According to the AMA-If these 4 million uninsured kids had insurance- they (their parents) would be much more likely to seek early treatment or be under preventative treatment- keeping them from having to be hospitalized for long periods when they get so bad they have to seek emergency help- or having emergency surgery- or having an expensive root canel, when if treated months ago a filling would have sufficed...

And you and I wouldn't be the schmucks paying these increased treatments costs thru our health care costs like we are now....
 

Steve

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
Oldtimer said:
You just don't get it do you--your the schmuck paying for it now- at 2-3 times what preventative care could reduce- thru your increased health care costs and health care insurance costs.... :???: :roll: :(

I live in one of the most conservative counties in one of the most liberal states.. I get it...

but maybe you could explain to me how making me paying more is going to help make irresponsible people more responsible?

According to the AMA-If these 4 million uninsured kids had insurance- they (their parents) would be much more likely to seek early treatment or be under preventative treatment- keeping them from having to be hospitalized for long periods when they get so bad they have to seek emergency help- or having emergency surgery- or having an expensive root canal, when if treated months ago a filling would have sufficed...

And you and I wouldn't be the schmucks paying these increased treatments costs thru our health care costs like we are now....

Your wrong.. the liberals make rules to force US to pay for the un-insured and the "under" insured.. and what they can't get dumped on the insurance companies,.. they do in out right taxes...

BTW who is paying for Schip now?... the parents of the children?... or US? ...or your retirement fund?

I'll give you a hint...

http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/ssact/title21/2104.htm
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
We pay $1 now- or $10 down the road in increased health care and insurance costs....I choose the $1 now to keep the problem from magnifying and as small as can be....
 

Steve

Well-known member
OldTimer
We pay $1 now- or $10 down the road in increased health care and insurance costs....I choose the $1 now to keep the problem from magnifying and as small as can be....

if it was only a buck...or even $10,.. I would be with you...

But I have a problem with people such as me and you funding some one with an income in excess of $68,000 to forgo health insurance for their children so the Government can fund it by robbing SS...

and to top it off most income is not counted towards the eligibility limit...

Maybe We Should Rename It the Government-Paid Health Plan for Paris Hilton’s Kids

It looks like SCHIP expansion opponents owe an apology to fellow Wide Open blogger Jeff and all the other libs and leftists who support it.

You see, we apparently haven’t been telling the truth when we’ve claimed that families with incomes as high as $80,000 a year could qualify under the program.

We were wrong, and we are sorry.

You see, depending on what type of income is involved, the threshold is much higher. It may even be true that in all but a few states, there is no upper limit.

Democracy Project’s Bruce Kesler made the point earlier today (HT Michelle Malkin) as he investigated California’s SCHIP program (bolds are mine):

I just phoned California’s SCHIP program, Healthy Families, and found that my family could qualify.

This is the scenario I laid out:

* Husband, age 62 (which I’ll be in 2-years), collecting early Social Security; Wife, age 41;
* Two minor dependent children, ages 2 and 7;
* ….. Mutual fund capital gains of $50,000 and ordinary dividends of $30,000;
* Earned income of $2289 a month by wife at job without medical benefits.

….. Thus, even though having substantial liquid assets, saved through a lifetime of scrimping in order to fund retirement, I would qualify for California’s Healthy Families SCHIP program. Assets and unearned income (e.g., Social Security, capital gains, ordinary dividends) do not count against SCHIP qualification.

Yes, the exercise was theoretical, because Bruce is two years away from 62, and his wife is two years away from re-entering the workforce. But when that happens, their kids and (if I’m interpreting correctly) the couple themselves would be SCHIP-eligible under current law, even before considering the expanded nonsense the President Bush just vetoed.

For those keeping score, Kesler’s income as described would be:

* $80,000 in investment returns — not considered income by SCHIP.
* Social Security benefits of at least $12,000 a year (probably more) — not considered income by SCHIP.
* Roughly $27,000 in wages earned by Mrs. Kesler — the only item of the three considered income by SCHIP.

That’s at least $119,000 in income (27 + 12 + 80); yet the Keslers qualify (though Mr. Kesler has quite eloquently stated why he won’t apply).

In California, then, it appears (based on Democracy Project’s inquiry) that there’s nothing stopping a trust fund baby, if their ONLY income comes from investment returns (i.e., it’s “unearned”), from qualifying for SCHIP! Paris Hilton and Nicole Ritchie could sit at home and stop boring us with their TV show, appearances, and commercials, have babies by any number of entourage members, and join in the SCHIP party. Is this a great country or what?

Seriously folks, 46 states and the District of Columbia (HT Democracy Project) do not have an asset test for SCHIP (see “UPDATE for mind-boggling detail” below). It seems likely that they, like California, as Kesler has just shown, don’t include “unearned” income either. Such laxity in regards to assets and “unearned” income may also be present in some or all of these states’ much larger Medicaid programs.

This is nuts.

How about we fix what’s broken in SCHIP and Medicaid before embarking headlong on an ill-advised expansion? President Bush was right to veto SCHIP; the minority in Congress will be right should they sustain it.

Meanwhile, I hope Jeff and other SCHIP advocates accept our sincere apologies for underestimating just how messed up the existing system that is supposed to be delivering health care to the poor really is.

If it was only for the poor children... I could easily support it.. but as many of US see... it is not about just children.... it is a liberal step towards socialism...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Well- Steve, I think GW's refusal to give in to funding kids health insurance- and refusing to keep his campaign promise of doing something about health care costs and health insurance costs- is going to get you many more years of much more socialism and liberal programs than SCHIPS could ever be to you.....
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Well- Steve, I think GW's refusal to give in to funding kids health insurance- and refusing to keep his campaign promise of doing something about health care costs and health insurance costs- is going to get you many more years of much more socialism and liberal programs than SCHIPS could ever be to you.....

Actually it is more attributed to pessimistic socialist whiners who beg the government to rob the successful. Does that sound like anyone we know?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
One of the most conservative economists I've ever read- Ben Stein- says that it is the duty of of the superrich and elite- as a civilized nation- to take care of the sick, the elderly, and troops that these superrich elitist old men send to fight their foreign wars so they can profiteer...And then to take care of those maimed and disabled soldiers when they come home....

He has proposed putting a surcharge on the income tax of the top 10% of the nation- and use it to fund health care costs for those that can't afford it, guarantee the elderly a quality ability to live, raise the wages of our soldiers and sailors, and guarantee them the top quality equipment they need and have not been getting- and insure they have care when they come home with broken bodies and minds......

He claims that our current worship of the ultrarich elitists- while turning our backs on our sick, disabled, and elderly is why many foreign nations look on us with contempt....

I watched some foreign correspondents discussing the Senate hearings on baseball and Clemons the other day....They were all wondering why the US Senate was spending days on this issue, when so many much more serious issues faced the nation.....
One foreign commentator summed it up quite well--MONEY...All the money in baseball...But then added that the using drugs to cheat scandal did not surprise him - as that is now the motto of the United States- cheat, deceive, lie, or do anything to succeed as long as you can get away with it..He said it is the standard currently being set by the US government and US business world- so with as much money involved as baseball its only natural....
The consensus of the forum tho was---What is this teaching the future generations :???:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Well Red Robin- its not only Montana- its many of the rural states and urban centers (like NY) that are having a problem with the excessive high costs of health care and health care insurance.....Especially when the cost of health care insurance rose by 10.6% last year alone....

But.

At some point the states have to step up. These states like NY and CA bring this high cost of living upon themselves with higher taxes and crazy standards such as EPA gasoline standards. If you can not live in a state on $68,000 then you need to do something within the state to fix the problem or move! Don't ask us to send you money because you let your state get out of hand.
 

Latest posts

Top