Clipmarks
Lexicafollowshare
9-15-2009 5:43 PM
338 views
Lexica says:
What's more important? Posturing over "no coverage for illegals!!!" or actually saving money and improving health care for all?

More:
What's more, employers currently have a clear economic incentive to hire undocumented immigrants: they don't require coverage. A plan that mandates insurance for native workers but not their illegal counterparts actually makes life harder on the blue-collar Americans competing for jobs (and railing against immigrants) because it means that hiring them will cost more than hiring a recent transplant from Mexico City….

But despite the potential economic upside, the right shouldn't stress: America won't insure its illegal immigrants any time soon. "The hard thing here is that the current state of perception on immigration is eroding our sense of social solidarity… People simply don't want money going to people on the other side of the tracks."
9 Comments   | Add a Comment
9-15-2009 8:16 PM
jay8h
How about deporting them?
9-16-2009 9:12 AM
kareval
I agree jay8h.. If illegals come here and go through the process of becoming legal, I don't have a problem with that,,..but to cover illegals...you got to be kidding me.
9-16-2009 9:48 AM
Spiritualmonkey
Did either of you even read the clip, much less the article?
9-16-2009 10:19 AM
bignosemousie
"People simply don't want money going to people on the other side of the tracks."
Eh? How much foreign aid does the US dole out? I don't think this stands as a bottom line on this issue.

This was an interesting article. I don't agree with all of it, but I had not heard this argument before.
9-16-2009 10:32 AM
Spiritualmonkey
Eh? How much foreign aid does the US dole out? I don't think this stands as a bottom line on this issue.

A huge amount of that foreign aid is given out as military aid, as well as credits to buy stuff from US corporations.

Spending money on the people next door who look & smell different, that's a different issue. White America has never liked social insurance for people of color.
9-16-2009 12:52 PM
Rustee
Right on time...the charge of racism.
9-16-2009 1:10 PM
Lexica
Do feel free to provide evidence to refute said claim. Rustee.

Otherwise, you're just indulging in "is not! is too! is not! is too!"

Bignosemousie, I think the writer was using the phrase "the other side of the tracks" in the sense of "the wrong side of town": the poor, "dangerous", "disreputable", "ghetto" side of the tracks.

Richer people have resisted aiding poorer people for about as long as people have existed. How many times have you heard people arguing that they don't want their hard-earned dollars going to some dirty, lazy, welfare bum who ought to get a damn job and stop sponging off hardworking honest people? I've heard that sentiment a lot. I think it's ugly, I think ...
9-16-2009 1:19 PM
ljsdesign
Richer people have resisted aiding poorer people for about as long as
people have existed. How many times have you heard people arguing that
they don't want their hard-earned dollars going to some dirty, lazy,
welfare bum who ought to get a damn job and stop sponging off
hardworking honest people? I've heard that sentiment a lot. I think
it's ugly, I think it's ignorant, and I think it comes from a place of
fear and anger, not compassion and respect for others.
If I hadn't already popped the clip I would have for this comment alone.
9-17-2009 7:46 PM
jay8h
I have a suggestion. If there are so many "poor people" out there that concerns you, why not start sending your money to them and help them. Why wait on the government to support them with someone else's money?
Login to Comment.  Not a member yet? Sign up
Embed This Clip In Your Site...

New from the makers of Clipmarks:  Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!

OK