Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Yamcha on June 22, 2017, 04:16:27 AM
-
President Trump announced Wednesday night that he will soon ask Congress to pass legislation banning immigrants from accessing public assistance within five years of entering the U.S.
“The time has come for new immigration rules that say ... those seeking immigration into our country must be able to support themselves financially and should not use welfare for a period of at least five years," Trump told a campaign-style rally in Grand Rapids, Iowa.
Trump's proposal would build on the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, which allows federal authorities to deport immigrants who become public dependents within five years of their arrival. Many of that law’s provisions were rolled back during the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations, but Trump's proposal would make more categories of federal benefits off-limits to immigrants.
Currently,states typically have the authority to determine eligibility for local public assistance programs.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/22/trump-in-iowa-president-calls-for-barring-immigrants-from-welfare-for-five-years.html (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/22/trump-in-iowa-president-calls-for-barring-immigrants-from-welfare-for-five-years.html)
-
In requesting these changes, the White House will cite a 2015 report from the Center for Immigration Studies that found 51 percent of households headed by an immigrant are using some form of public assistance, compared to 30 percent among non-immigrant families. That report has been disputed by critics who say it does not take into account the nuances of many immigrant families.
-
I tend to agree with Trump on this one.
No one cares what you think
-
F yes!
President Trump announced Wednesday night that he will soon ask Congress to pass legislation banning immigrants from accessing public assistance within five years of entering the U.S.
“The time has come for new immigration rules that say ... those seeking immigration into our country must be able to support themselves financially and should not use welfare for a period of at least five years," Trump told a campaign-style rally in Grand Rapids, Iowa.
Trump's proposal would build on the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, which allows federal authorities to deport immigrants who become public dependents within five years of their arrival. Many of that law’s provisions were rolled back during the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations, but Trump's proposal would make more categories of federal benefits off-limits to immigrants.
Currently,states typically have the authority to determine eligibility for local public assistance programs.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/22/trump-in-iowa-president-calls-for-barring-immigrants-from-welfare-for-five-years.html (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/22/trump-in-iowa-president-calls-for-barring-immigrants-from-welfare-for-five-years.html)
-
I think it's a good idea. Also I think drug testing and mandatory birth control should be requirements for all welfare approvals as well.
-
I think it's a good idea. Also I think drug testing and mandatory birth control should be requirements for all welfare approvals as well.
Will never happen. I doubt it's enforceable anyway.
-
Will never happen. I doubt it's enforceable anyway.
no one cares what you think
-
No one cares what you think
another brilliant contribution to the conversation
-
Raise the minimum wage to a livable wage and those mostly entry level workers won't need welfare to get by. I believe there is a requirement that immigrants must have a sponsor in order to enter the United States legally.
https://www.uscis.gov/tools/glossary/sponsor
-
Raise the minimum wage to a livable wage and those mostly entry level workers won't need welfare to get by. I believe there is a requirement that immigrants must have a sponsor in order to enter the United States legally.
https://www.uscis.gov/tools/glossary/sponsor
And you'll put a lot of people out of work in the process.
-
And you'll put a lot of people out of work in the process.
This is very possible. I'm looking for solutions to what seems like unsolvable problems.
Immigrants are going to immigrate regardless of travel bans and walls. Some will not meet the U.S. requirements to work in their previous home country professions, such as doctor's, lawyers and teachers. In the meantime, they have to find a way to survive plus do what is required to become licensed professioals.
As a side note, some U.S. practicing doctors today got their doctorates at universities in other countries where education is much less expensive, yet just as comprehensive.
-
A lot of folks look to the past to justify their opinions and suggest solutions. Guess what? The world will never experience 1949-1960 or other such landmark decades again. Reminisce all you want about the 'good ol' days' they will never come back. This in 2017. Get with the program.
-
Trump's proposed 5-year welfare ban for immigrants is already law
With a few exceptions, new immigrants already cannot access welfare programs during their first five years in the US, per a 1996 welfare reform law signed by President Bill Clinton.
Pressed repeatedly by CNN, a senior administration official did not dispute that the proposal is already in effect.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/22/politics/trump-immigrants-welfare-5-years/index.html
-
And you'll put a lot of people out of work in the process.
http://www.nelp.org/publication/raise-wages-kill-jobs-no-correlation-minimum-wage-increases-employment-levels/
-
another brilliant contribution to the conversation
"Impea fowty fie"
"Impea fowty fie"
Straw Man Watters - Getbig's pajama boy!
-
(https://i.redd.it/712rs9gax65z.jpg)
-
"Impea fowty fie"
"Impea fowty fie"
Straw Man Watters - Getbig's pajama boy!
no one cares what you think
-
great job posting a story showing how totally fucking ignorant The BLOATUS is on immigration
then again, I guess the same could be said for his followers
Does Trump have any other brilliant ideas that are already existing laws?
-
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-04-18/harvard-shock-study-each-1-minimum-wage-hike-causes-4-10-increase-restaurant-failure
-
President Trump announced Wednesday night that he will soon ask Congress to pass legislation banning immigrants from accessing public assistance within five years of entering the U.S.
“The time has come for new immigration rules that say ... those seeking immigration into our country must be able to support themselves financially and should not use welfare for a period of at least five years," Trump told a campaign-style rally in Grand Rapids, Iowa.
Trump's proposal would build on the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, which allows federal authorities to deport immigrants who become public dependents within five years of their arrival. Many of that law’s provisions were rolled back during the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations, but Trump's proposal would make more categories of federal benefits off-limits to immigrants.
Its already law. Jesus wake up, shows how ignorant his followers are.
Currently,states typically have the authority to determine eligibility for local public assistance programs.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/22/trump-in-iowa-president-calls-for-barring-immigrants-from-welfare-for-five-years.html (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06/22/trump-in-iowa-president-calls-for-barring-immigrants-from-welfare-for-five-years.html)
-
great job posting a story showing how totally fucking ignorant The BLOATUS is on immigration
then again, I guess the same could be said for his followers
Does Trump have any other brilliant ideas that are already existing laws?
No one cares what you think.....but we get a good laugh out of your stupidity
-
No one cares what you think.....but we get a good laugh out of your stupidity
no one cares what you think
-
no one cares what you think
Where's the Skeeter gimmick been? You forget your password?
"Impea fowty fie"
-
Where's the Skeeter gimmick been? You forget your password?
"Impea fowty fie"
no idea where he is
maybe he got tired of you PM'ng him begging to blow him
-
Where's the Skeeter gimmick been? You forget your password?
"Impea fowty fie"
trying to talk with something in your mouth?
-
No one cares what you think
QFT
-
Will never happen. I doubt it's enforceable anyway.
Exactly. Will never happen, but doesn't change the fact I think it is a good idea and would certainly benefit those on welfare and those paying for it.
-
No one cares what you think
Speak for yourself.
-
-
-
Someone neglected to advise Trump that his recently proposed ban on aliens collecting welfare benefits during their first 5 years here, has been in effect for over two decades.
SUMMARY OF IMMIGRANT ELIGIBILITY RESTRICTIONS UNDER CURRENT LAW
AS OF 2/25/2009
D. FEDERAL MEANS-TESTED PUBLIC BENEFITS TANF, MEDICAID, AND CHIP
FIVE YEAR BAN FOR QUALIFIED ALIENS WHO ENTERED THE COUNTRY ON OR AFTER 8/22/96
III. FEDERAL PUBLIC BENEFITS
Aliens who are not qualified aliens are ineligible for Federal Public Benefits.
A. EXAMPLES OF ALIENS WHO ARE NOT QUALIFIED ARE:
Non-immigrants (temporary residents)
Individuals here on time-limited visas to work, study, or travel.
Undocumented immigrants
Individuals who entered as temporary residents and overstayed their visas, or are engaged in activities forbidden by their visa, or who entered without a visa.
Others
Individuals who are given temporary administrative statuses (e.g. stay of deportation, voluntary departure) until they can formalize permanent status, or individuals paroled for less than one year, or individuals under deportation procedures.
https://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/summary-immigrant-eligibility-restrictions-under-current-law
-
Someone neglected to advise Trump that his recently proposed ban on aliens collecting welfare benefits during their first 5 years here, has been in effect for over two decades.
SUMMARY OF IMMIGRANT ELIGIBILITY RESTRICTIONS UNDER CURRENT LAW
AS OF 2/25/2009
D. FEDERAL MEANS-TESTED PUBLIC BENEFITS TANF, MEDICAID, AND CHIP
FIVE YEAR BAN FOR QUALIFIED ALIENS WHO ENTERED THE COUNTRY ON OR AFTER 8/22/96
III. FEDERAL PUBLIC BENEFITS
Aliens who are not qualified aliens are ineligible for Federal Public Benefits.
A. EXAMPLES OF ALIENS WHO ARE NOT QUALIFIED ARE:
Non-immigrants (temporary residents)
Individuals here on time-limited visas to work, study, or travel.
Undocumented immigrants
Individuals who entered as temporary residents and overstayed their visas, or are engaged in activities forbidden by their visa, or who entered without a visa.
Others
Individuals who are given temporary administrative statuses (e.g. stay of deportation, voluntary departure) until they can formalize permanent status, or individuals paroled for less than one year, or individuals under deportation procedures.
https://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/summary-immigrant-eligibility-restrictions-under-current-law
Yes - but when these animals drop anchor babies they all go on welfare - i see it daily.
-
Yes - but when these animals drop anchor babies they all go on welfare - i see it daily.
I agree that there are loopholes which allow for abuse of the system (law).
Oregon House votes to expand privacy for undocumented immigrants Tuesday, June 20, 2017
http://www.oregonir.org/tags/oregon-legislature
Oregon is the only state that has a law specifically limiting the extent to which state resources can be used to enforce federal immigration laws.
ORS 181.850
is a statute that limits the ways in which local law enforcement agents can investigate or inquire about a person’s immigration status.
Under ORS 181.850, state and local police are not allowed to enforce federal immigration law if a person is not involved in criminal activity.
Police may contact ICE if they have detained a person suspected of committing a crime or if a person is the subject of a federal warrant for a criminal violation of immigration law
-
Yes - but when these animals drop anchor babies they all go on welfare - i see it daily.
you're at the welfare office on a daily basis checking the citizenship of people applying for benefit for their kids?
-
Exactly. Will never happen, but doesn't change the fact I think it is a good idea and would certainly benefit those on welfare and those paying for it.
Mandatory birth control is not a good idea. A better way to accomplish what you want is to simply not expand benefits for someone who has a kid while on public assistance. But no way your party would ever support anything like that.
-
Someone neglected to advise Trump that his recently proposed ban on aliens collecting welfare benefits during their first 5 years here, has been in effect for over two decades.
SUMMARY OF IMMIGRANT ELIGIBILITY RESTRICTIONS UNDER CURRENT LAW
AS OF 2/25/2009
D. FEDERAL MEANS-TESTED PUBLIC BENEFITS TANF, MEDICAID, AND CHIP
FIVE YEAR BAN FOR QUALIFIED ALIENS WHO ENTERED THE COUNTRY ON OR AFTER 8/22/96
III. FEDERAL PUBLIC BENEFITS
Aliens who are not qualified aliens are ineligible for Federal Public Benefits.
A. EXAMPLES OF ALIENS WHO ARE NOT QUALIFIED ARE:
Non-immigrants (temporary residents)
Individuals here on time-limited visas to work, study, or travel.
Undocumented immigrants
Individuals who entered as temporary residents and overstayed their visas, or are engaged in activities forbidden by their visa, or who entered without a visa.
Others
Individuals who are given temporary administrative statuses (e.g. stay of deportation, voluntary departure) until they can formalize permanent status, or individuals paroled for less than one year, or individuals under deportation procedures.
https://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/summary-immigrant-eligibility-restrictions-under-current-law
I heard that the past two presidents expanded the number of loopholes, and Trump wants to close them.
-
Mandatory birth control is not a good idea. A better way to accomplish what you want is to simply not expand benefits for someone who has a kid while on public assistance. But no way your party would ever support anything like that.
What happens to kid, though?
-
What happens to kid, though?
Parent gets a job and takes care of the kid?
-
Parent gets a job and takes care of the kid?
Or failing that, we remove kid from parent?
-
I heard that the past two presidents expanded the number of loopholes, and Trump wants to close them.
where did you hear that
-
Or failing that, we remove kid from parent?
No.
-
No.
Make the child pay the price of neglect?
-
Make the child pay the price of neglect?
No. Make the parent take responsibility for their kid.
-
No. Make the parent take responsibility for their kid.
I wish they would -- the world would be a much better place.
But what's the threat against them for when they don't?
-
I wish they would -- the world would be a much better place.
But what's the threat against them for when they don't?
If a parent neglects their kid, they can be prosecuted and the kid can be taken away, put in foster care, sent a relative, adopted, etc.
-
If a parent neglects their kid, they can be prosecuted and the kid can be taken away, put in foster care, sent a relative, adopted, etc.
That means removing the kid from the parent, yeah.
It's just incredible to think that no one was there to protect America from being gutted to death by NAFTA and open borders, but now we're discussing taking children from their parents for financial shortcomings.
-
That means removing the kid from the parent, yeah.
It's just incredible to think that no one was there to protect America from being gutted to death by NAFTA and open borders, but now we're discussing taking children from their parents for financial shortcomings.
That's what happens when a parent repeatedly neglects to care for a kid, social services gets involved, etc
I'm not talking about taking children from their parents for financial shortcomings. Are you?
-
That's what happens when a parent repeatedly neglects to care for a kid, social services gets involved, etc
I'm not talking about taking children from their parents for financial shortcomings. Are you?
In this case, yes. Things the child needs to have a proper, healthy life and that aren't obtainable without money.
-
My wife and I are in full agreement with this no expansion of benefits plan.
I'm very libertarian and am a strong advocate for personal responsibility.
Dude. You mention your political affiliation dang near every day. You are protesting too much. Nobody cares.
-
In this case, yes. Things the child needs to have a proper, healthy life and that aren't obtainable without money.
That's the parents' job to provide. We have a safety net for those who need help. But I have no problem with restricting benefits provided by that safety net.
What we have done by providing increased benefits to mothers who have additional kids while already on public assistance is embolden them to abuse the system. As my man crush (no homo) Lt. Col Allen West said, it should be a safety net, not a hammock.
-
That's the parents' job to provide. We have a safety net for those who need help. But I have no problem with restricting benefits provided by that safety net.
What we have done by providing increased benefits to mothers who have additional kids while already on public assistance is embolden them to abuse the system. As my man crush (no homo) Lt. Col Allen West said, it should be a safety net, not a hammock.
You don't want children to go without proper nutrition and other basics, do you? Just to set the record straight.
-
When to apply for emergency Medicaid for illegal immigrants
1. If you are a pregnant women who is an undocumented or illegal immigrant. Medicaid will provide you with short-term medical coverage.
2. If you were born in the US and belongs to an undocumented immigrant household. As long as your family satisfies the income requirements, you can qualify for emergency Medicaid coverage if you are 19 years and younger.
3. If you have to visit the emergency room for urgent medical treatment. Hospitals have social workers who can help you to apply for short term emergency Medicaid coverage.
http://www.emergencymedicaid.net/emergency-medicaid-for-illegal-immigrants
A 2007 medical article in the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that 99 percent of those who used Emergency Medicaid during a four-year period in North Carolina were thought to be illegal immigrants.
But while federal law generally bars illegal immigrants from being covered by Medicaid, a little-known part of the state-federal health insurance program for the poor pays about $2 billion a year for emergency treatment for a group of patients who, according to hospitals, mostly comprise illegal immigrants. Most of it goes to reimburse hospitals for delivering babies for women who show up in their emergency rooms, according to interviews with hospital officials and studies.
California hospitals get about half the $2 billion spent annually on Emergency Medicaid. The rest is spread mainly among a handful of states.
In 2011, for example:
New York spent $528 million on Emergency Medicaid for nearly 30,000 people.
Texas reported 240,000 claims costing $331 million. (One person could be responsible for multiple claims.)
Florida spent $214 million on 31,000 patients.
North Carolina spent $48 million on about 19,000 people.
Arizona spent $115 million. It couldn’t break out the number of people.
Illinois spent $25 million on the cost of care to nearly 2,000 people.
The federal government doesn’t require states to report how many people receive services through Emergency Medicaid payments to hospitals.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/how-undocumented-immigrants-sometimes-receive-medicaid-treatment/
-
When to apply for emergency Medicaid for illegal immigrants
1. If you are a pregnant women who is an undocumented or illegal immigrant. Medicaid will provide you with short-term medical coverage.
2. If you were born in the US and belongs to an undocumented immigrant household. As long as your family satisfies the income requirements, you can qualify for emergency Medicaid coverage if you are 19 years and younger.
3. If you have to visit the emergency room for urgent medical treatment. Hospitals have social workers who can help you to apply for short term emergency Medicaid coverage.
http://www.emergencymedicaid.net/emergency-medicaid-for-illegal-immigrants
A 2007 medical article in the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that 99 percent of those who used Emergency Medicaid during a four-year period in North Carolina were thought to be illegal immigrants.
But while federal law generally bars illegal immigrants from being covered by Medicaid, a little-known part of the state-federal health insurance program for the poor pays about $2 billion a year for emergency treatment for a group of patients who, according to hospitals, mostly comprise illegal immigrants. Most of it goes to reimburse hospitals for delivering babies for women who show up in their emergency rooms, according to interviews with hospital officials and studies.
California hospitals get about half the $2 billion spent annually on Emergency Medicaid. The rest is spread mainly among a handful of states.
In 2011, for example:
New York spent $528 million on Emergency Medicaid for nearly 30,000 people.
Texas reported 240,000 claims costing $331 million. (One person could be responsible for multiple claims.)
Florida spent $214 million on 31,000 patients.
North Carolina spent $48 million on about 19,000 people.
Arizona spent $115 million. It couldn’t break out the number of people.
Illinois spent $25 million on the cost of care to nearly 2,000 people.
The federal government doesn’t require states to report how many people receive services through Emergency Medicaid payments to hospitals.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/how-undocumented-immigrants-sometimes-receive-medicaid-treatment/
good find but unfortunately the right wing on this board believes that PBS is Elitist Propaganda so they won't consider this information to be valid
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=627486.0
-
PBS has become a terrible joke, though, everyone must admit. They're a disgrace and a big part of the problem.
-
You don't want children to go without proper nutrition and other basics, do you? Just to set the record straight.
Of course not.
-
You're correct that nobody here cares to hear any conflicting views on issues.
This forum is so pro-Trump, if he took a step backwards you guys would be up his a-hole. :D
Of course I'm the rude one here for posting my political view points.
Those who post endless insults and ridicule others are the polite , thoughtful ones, right?
::)
-
Of course not.
I know you don't. Neither do I.
It's the highest of priorities and no doubt we'd both agree on that.
-
Mandatory birth control is not a good idea. A better way to accomplish what you want is to simply not expand benefits for someone who has a kid while on public assistance. But no way your party would ever support anything like that.
-Just a guess, but I suspect mandatory birth control will not fly with either party at this time. I don't see denying medical care to children will happen either. Everyone is given emergency medical care when needed. It is currently illegal for any hospital to deny emergency care. http://law.freeadvice.com/malpractice_law/hospital_malpractice/hospital-patients.htm
-
Haha, trump trying to pass a law that President Clinton already put in place. ::)
Doesn't matter though, the blind will still give trump the credit.
-
-Just a guess, but I suspect mandatory birth control will not fly with either party at this time.
why not mandatory vascetomies or sterilization ?
-
why not mandatory vascetomies or sterilization ?
Why not? Compulsory sterilization has been outlawed for some time (1942) in every state. Even so, men and women found guilty of certain crimes were offered sterilization as a condition of parole or a lighter sentence.
-
-Just a guess, but I suspect mandatory birth control will not fly with either party at this time. I don't see denying medical care to children will happen either. Everyone is given emergency medical care when needed. It is currently illegal for any hospital to deny emergency care. http://law.freeadvice.com/malpractice_law/hospital_malpractice/hospital-patients.htm
Lurker is the only one advocating mandatory birth control. That's never going to happen.
And I don't think anyone is suggesting we get rid of anti-patient dumping laws that require hospitals to treat anyone who shows up at the ER.
-
PBS has become a terrible joke, though, everyone must admit. They're a disgrace and a big part of the problem.
LOL - why must "everyone admit" that bullshit
they consistently rank very high as "most trusted" source of information
how about you share some examples of how they are a disgrace and a joke
-
Why not? Compulsory sterilization has been outlawed for some time (1942) in every state. Even so, men and women found guilty of certain crimes were offered sterilization as a condition of parole or a lighter sentence.
I guess you didn't catch my sarcasm (admittedly hard to catch in text)
-
I guess you didn't catch my sarcasm (admittedly hard to catch in text)
Sometimes, I'm just plain dense. Sorry.
Apparently, an upside down smiley conveys sarcasm. That choice is not available here
-
LOL - why must "everyone admit" that bullshit
they consistently rank very high as "most trusted" source of information
how about you share some examples of how they are a disgrace and a joke
Compared to what? ??? I don't know what that's worth, and neither do you.
Fact is that PBS is Corporate Media, Social Engineers who dare to call themselves Public Television. So it's a disgrace, and hypocritical to the core.
-
Compared to what? ??? I don't know what that's worth, and neither do you.
Fact is that PBS is Corporate Media, Social Engineers who dare to call themselves Public Television. So it's a disgrace, and hypocritical to the core.
2017
http://www.pbs.org/about/blogs/news/most-trusted-2016/
2013
http://www.pbs.org/about/blogs/news/pbs-and-member-stations-mark-10-years-as-americas-most-trusted-institution-and-an-excellent-use-of-tax-dollars/
2014
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2014/01/30/pbs-is-americas-most-trusted-tv-news-source-or-maybe-its-fox-news
Now, you believe they are a disgrace and a joke and you believe "we must all admit that"
how about providing something to support your belief
-
2017
http://www.pbs.org/about/blogs/news/most-trusted-2016/
2013
http://www.pbs.org/about/blogs/news/pbs-and-member-stations-mark-10-years-as-americas-most-trusted-institution-and-an-excellent-use-of-tax-dollars/
2014
https://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2014/01/30/pbs-is-americas-most-trusted-tv-news-source-or-maybe-its-fox-news
Now, you believe they are a disgrace and a joke and you believe "we must all admit that"
how about providing something to support your belief
Yes, the MSM is all too happy to tell us how great they are. I know that.
Once again, they are corporate messages using a false banner.
-
Yes, the MSM is all too happy to tell us how great they are. I know that.
Once again, they are corporate messages using a false banner.
and you're happy to call them a disgrace and a joke and insist we all agree yet you can't provide any examples of why we should believe it
-
Yes. I'm telling you that they're (yet another) example of corporations imposing their bullshit on society, and doing so while calling themselves "Public TV" and that's why they're disgraceful and a bad joke.
and you're happy to call them a disgrace and a joke and insist we all agree yet you can't provide any examples of why we should believe it
Let's see. Have you ever wondered why so many PBS shows narrate and make stories for the parasitical super-wealthy, past AND present? Royal Families, Industrial Barons, Political Dynasties -- Aristocrats of all sorts?
Why do you suppose that is, when our society has tried so hard to right itself from that influence? What could it be, to cause them to so desperately want to "humanize" these individuals and make them palatable, often so falsely?
Why would "Public Television" have an interest in doing that, I ask you. Do you believe they're "giving us what we want", as claimed by all of MSM?
-
Yes. I'm telling you that they're (yet another) example of corporations imposing their bullshit on society, and doing so while calling themselves "Public TV" and that's why they're disgraceful and a bad joke.
Let's see. Have you ever wondered why so many PBS shows narrate and make stories for the parasitical super-wealthy, past AND present? Royal Families, Industrial Barons, Political Dynasties -- Aristocrats of all sorts?
Why do you suppose that is, when our society has tried so hard to right itself from that influence? What could it be, to cause them to so desperately want to "humanize" these individuals and make them palatable, often so falsely?
Why would "Public Television" have an interest in doing that, I ask you. Do you believe they're "giving us what we want", as claimed by all of MSM?
are you referring to drama's that that have huge ratings
please tell me you're joking for fucks sake
-
are you referring to drama's that that have huge ratings
please tell me you're joking for fucks sake
Meaning that people will watch it rather than twiddle their thumbs?
Once again: Compared to WHAT?
-
Closest PBS has come to getting real, may have been Bill Moyers. But a pretty weak shot it was.
-
Why not? Compulsory sterilization has been outlawed for some time (1942) in every state. Even so, men and women found guilty of certain crimes were offered sterilization as a condition of parole or a lighter sentence.
It appears this might not be exactly the case. Per wikipedia:
The Oregon Board of Eugenics, later renamed the Board of Social Protection, existed until 1983 with the last forcible sterilization occurring in 1981.
148 female prisoners in two California institutions were sterilized between 2006 and 2010 in a supposedly voluntary program, but it was determined that the prisoners did not give consent to the procedures. In September 2014, California enacted Bill SB 1135 that bans sterilization in correctional facilities, unless the procedure shall be required in a medical emergency to preserve inmate's life.
The 27 states where sterilization laws remained on the books (though not all were still in use) in 1956 were: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin.
"In 2003, the N.C. General Assembly formally repealed the last involuntary sterilization law, replacing it with one that authorizes sterilization of individuals unable to give informed consent only in the case of medical necessity."
Also from July 1940 until December 1974, an estimated 6596 sterilization operations were performed in North Carolina.
-
Meaning that people will watch it rather than twiddle their thumbs?
Once again: Compared to WHAT?
I actually stunned as I read your response
It seems you've not only decided that PBS is a joke because they air extremely popular dramas about subject that you don't like but that you're also utterly clueless about their other programming.
Here is a short list of shows that have no parallel on commercial television
Frontline
NOVA
The News Hour
Nightly Business Report
BBC World News
Many other documentaries and shows done by local public television.
-
Raise the minimum wage to a livable wage and those mostly entry level workers won't need welfare to get by. I believe there is a requirement that immigrants must have a sponsor in order to enter the United States legally.
https://www.uscis.gov/tools/glossary/sponsor
Minimum wage jobs are for teenagers and people who made poor life decisions early in life. Seriously, I start my people out at $12.00 and hour which is above Davis Bacon wage for laborer. You don't even have to have skill to start working for me. I have guys clocking 55 hour weeks regularly and make a living.
-
Mandatory birth control is not a good idea. A better way to accomplish what you want is to simply not expand benefits for someone who has a kid while on public assistance. But no way your party would ever support anything like that.
For welfare enrollment it is a good idea. Not that either party will be on board for it like you say. But simply stating that benefits will not be expanded or continued if you give birth will not deter most. They already know they will be taken care of.
Re : vasectomies... not a good idea because that is mostly permanent. (Yes some still produce pregnancies and the reversal rate down the road - surgically - is high, but overall.. pretty permanent). Female birth control implants are a much better solution.
An x-ray tech here at work actually was court ordered to have a 4 implant put in her armpit after her 3rd divorce and 5th child. She is 24 years old.
-
Yes. I'm telling you that they're (yet another) example of corporations imposing their bullshit on society, and doing so while calling themselves "Public TV" and that's why they're disgraceful and a bad joke.
Let's see. Have you ever wondered why so many PBS shows narrate and make stories for the parasitical super-wealthy, past AND present? Royal Families, Industrial Barons, Political Dynasties -- Aristocrats of all sorts?
Why do you suppose that is, when our society has tried so hard to right itself from that influence? What could it be, to cause them to so desperately want to "humanize" these individuals and make them palatable, often so falsely?
Why would "Public Television" have an interest in doing that, I ask you. Do you believe they're "giving us what we want", as claimed by all of MSM?
Have you ever contributed to PBS? PBS relies on donations to survive.
Check this out.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/pbs-fires-back-at-trump’s-budget-elimination-costs-small-benefits-tangible/ar-BBycmIu?li=AA2qN5v&ocid=spartandhp
-
Minimum wage jobs are for teenagers and people who made poor life decisions early in life. Seriously, I start my people out at $12.00 and hour which is above Davis Bacon wage for laborer. You don't even have to have skill to start working for me. I have guys clocking 55 hour weeks regularly and make a living.
Do you pay overtime? Do you provide benefits, such as sick leave, health insurance and vacation. Your employees making $12 an hour working full time make about $25,000 a year or twice the FPL for a single person. Here is a link to the current cost of living in Portland, OR. Obviously cost of living varies from place to place. What is it were you are?
-
Do you pay overtime? Do you provide benefits, such as sick leave, health insurance and vacation. Your employees making $12 an hour working full time make about $25,000 a year or twice the FPL for a single person. Here is a link to the current cost of living in Portland, OR. Obviously cost of living varies from place to place. What is it were you are?
They get OT, ten days paid time off, all six major holidays and then some. I also pay half of their healthcare. I didn't see your link so I can't compare.
-
I actually stunned as I read your response
It seems you've not only decided that PBS is a joke because they air extremely popular dramas about subject that you don't like but that you're also utterly clueless about their other programming.
Here is a short list of shows that have no parallel on commercial television
Frontline
NOVA
The News Hour
Nightly Business Report
BBC World News
Many other documentaries and shows done by local public television.
To what degree? To say there aren't similar shows, or that they aren't as well done, or what do you mean?
-
Have you ever contributed to PBS? PBS relies on donations to survive.
Check this out.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/pbs-fires-back-at-trump’s-budget-elimination-costs-small-benefits-tangible/ar-BBycmIu?li=AA2qN5v&ocid=spartandhp
They rely on donations to keep the appearance that they're what they claim to be. To claim they are an authentic voice for the public, no matter how untrue that is.
-
For welfare enrollment it is a good idea. Not that either party will be on board for it like you say. But simply stating that benefits will not be expanded or continued if you give birth will not deter most. They already know they will be taken care of.
Re : vasectomies... not a good idea because that is mostly permanent. (Yes some still produce pregnancies and the reversal rate down the road - surgically - is high, but overall.. pretty permanent). Female birth control implants are a much better solution.
An x-ray tech here at work actually was court ordered to have a 4 implant put in her armpit after her 3rd divorce and 5th child. She is 24 years old.
I don't think mandatory birth control is a good idea for welfare enrollment, or pretty much anything else. Not sure how you even enforce it. Are they going to lock up the x-ray tech at your job if she refuses to get the implant? What happens if she gets pregnant anyway with the implant? This is a step away from forced sterilization.
-
They get OT, ten days paid time off, all six major holidays and then some. I also pay half of their healthcare. I didn't see your link so I can't compare.
I have to say that you seem like a really good employer. Sorry about the missing link. Here is another (couldn't find the first), https://www.expatistan.com/cost-of-living/portland
The benefits I had before I retired which you didn't mention offering were; earned sick leave at the rate of one day per month with unlimited accumulation (I used mine to cover state mandated family leave when my wife was ill), increasing vacation time with longevity, topping out at 4 weeks per year with an accumulated max of 350 hours, fully paid retirement benefits with the choice of a guaranteed annuity for life, a one time payout, or some combination thereof. Full-family quality medical coverage was paid at about 80% give or take.
I worked in education for a public employer. Because of union responsibilities and associated political involvement at both the state and national level, my employer allowed unlimited time off, all of which was reimbursed by the union with the exception of employer (HR) requested assistance, which my employer covered. I represented over 1,000 employees give or take. As you might imagine, I spent a lot of time, both on the clock and off helping my employer and fellow employees work though difficult HR related situations. This was challenging work. Legally my mandate was to represent the employee. Practically, I was a mediator. Actually, I was a trained professional mediator.
In no way do I want to leave any impression that my union work was a burden. I saw it as a service, both to my employer and to my fellow employees.
Advice: If you are not running a union shop and don't want to, offer the same or better compensation than union shops do. Precision Castparts in Oregon has managed to pull this off successfully for a very long time.
-
I don't think mandatory birth control is a good idea for welfare enrollment, or pretty much anything else. Not sure how you even enforce it. Are they going to lock up the x-ray tech at your job if she refuses to get the implant? What happens if she gets pregnant anyway with the implant? This is a step away from forced sterilization.
She already has the implant. 5 children and she doesn't have custody of any of them. DFCS were a constant visitor to her last with the last two before they were remove.
Basically you can't enforce it. I am not saying it is a possibility or even a future consideration, but for all involved it would be a good idea. No need to just profit from having more kids once you go on public assistance.
-
She already has the implant. 5 children and she doesn't have custody of any of them. DFCS were a constant visitor to her last with the last two before they were remove.
Basically you can't enforce it. I am not saying it is a possibility or even a future consideration, but for all involved it would be a good idea. No need to just profit from having more kids once you go on public assistance.
Agree.
-
She already has the implant. 5 children and she doesn't have custody of any of them. DFCS were a constant visitor to her last with the last two before they were remove.
Basically you can't enforce it. I am not saying it is a possibility or even a future consideration, but for all involved it would be a good idea. No need to just profit from having more kids once you go on public assistance.
So often, there is a failure to put these things in perspective because the worst of the worst is cited as examples Without doubt, this situation is deplorable as are many more. Heck, let's face it, the world is over populated and because of this over-population we can rationally make a great argument as to why we need birth control on a global scope, if the human race is going to survive.
Making babies is not difficult. We humans have been doing this since the dawn of time.
-
I sure ain't an expert regarding this topic, but has anyone given any consideration about the possibility that some of these immigrants should serve a few years active duty in the US Armed Forces before receiving any US benefits?
Having been in the military for a good number of years, I often find myself a bt 'suspicious' when it comes to those who never served ....
and somewhat more resentful when it comes to immigrants.
-
I sure ain't an expert regarding this topic, but has anyone given any consideration about the possibility that some of these immigrants should serve a few years active duty in the US Armed Forces before receiving any US benefits?
Having been in the military for a good number of years, I often find myself a bt 'suspicious' when it comes to those who never served ....
and somewhat more resentful when it comes to immigrants.
According to February 2008 data from the Department of Defense, more than 65,000 immigrants ( non citizens and naturalized citizens) were serving on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces. This represents approximately 5% of all active-duty personnel. ... The military benefits greatly from the service of its foreign-born.
September 8, 2016
Immigrants and Non-Citizens in the US Armed Forces - The Balance
https://www.thebalance.com/immigrants-in-the-us-armed-forces-3353965 (https://www.thebalance.com/immigrants-in-the-us-armed-forces-3353965)