Originally Posted by Braineack
because I don't like government assistant? just because I suggested new citiziens shouldnt get any, doesnt mean I didn't also include existing citizens.
Sink or swim bitches...or is that swim here and then sink after you get here?
How about this for a broad, initial game plan:
1. Every one that is here should be legal in some way shape or form. I'm not talking complete amnesty, but a realistic immigration policy (and sufficient services to process and support that policy). Anyone that doesn't find their path through that policy has to go...period.
2. Now that we're all supposed to be here, decide what type of support anyone is supposed to be receiving, and offer it to all. If Joe Bob gets food stamps when he's so poor, for so long, so does Jose Beto...
The idea that we shouldn't help anyone just because they just joined the party is ridiculous (I know this isn't what you're saying Scott). When someone walks into my shindig I first decide if they should be there, then I hand them a cup and point them towards the keg.
Now the idea of whether and to what extent government assistance should be offered is another deal entirely, and separate from the immigration debate.
Yes crime, entitlements, and economic impact are all connected to the immigrant situation, but they are not the pivotal issues. We need to consider the effect on those issues in crafting an effective policy, but the policy should be made as an end unto itself, not as a means for the estimated effect on those factors the media (and Braineack) have pumped up such a great deal.