Trump administration wants immigrants to take a test

[Swordsmyth]

Immigrants coming to the United States would generally fail this new rewritten test if they had a medical condition and no source of subsidized health insurance. The test also places a premium on an applicant’s income and assets. Applicants must make at least 250 percent of the federal poverty guidelines, which, in 2018, means $30,350 for a one-person household and $62,750 for a four-person household.

The rewritten Trump test would treat perfectly employed individuals as “public charges” by expanding the test to include additional benefits working-class Americans have access to if they meet a certain threshold. That includes the earned income tax credit (EITC), Medicare, and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)

The Trump test also focuses on whether the applicant would be a “public charge” by determining whether they have a medical condition with no form of health insurance, are currently receiving any government assistance, have recently received government assistance, or are currently not working or enrolled in school full-time. It gives the administration the authority to take into consideration any other factors “in the discretion of DHS,” essentially giving the government carte blanche to decide whether to pass or fail an applicant.
If an applicant “fails” a test, the administration could allow immigration officials to admit them to the country on the condition of a “public charge bond,” set at a minimum of $10,000.

More at: https://thinkprogress.org/trump-admi...-128ddf67348f/

[oyarde]

I am all for it , especially if I get to pick some questions .

[dannno]

2:08

That's right. It's time for your first $#@!in test. Ya, you thought I didn't have a $#@!in test in my class? Well $#@! you I've got a test. Keep takin the motherfuckin thing until you get a hundred percent IN THE BITCH.

[Zippyjuan]

Trump's grandfather and his mother would never have been allowed into the country by his guidelines. His grandfather was only 16, not accompanied by parents, and barely knew any English. His mother was also not accompanied by parents and came to join sisters already in the US. She turned 18 during the trip to the US. She was from Scotland and he was from Germany.

If the "Trump Rules" were in place back then, Trump himself would not be here.

[Valli6]

Sorry, I now see you were referring specifically to Trump's guidlelines

Regardless, back then immigrants were entitled to absolutely no welfare or benefits of any kind, so it's an extremely different situation. You can't compare the two.

Trump's grandfather and his mother would never have been allowed into the country by his guidelines. His grandfather was only 16, not accompanied by parents, and barely knew any English. His mother was also not accompanied by parents and came to join sisters already in the US. She turned 18 during the trip to the US. She was from Scotland and he was from Germany.

You're wrong. My grandfather came here, unaccompanied at the age of 11.

[Zippyjuan]

Sorry, I now see you were referring specifically to Trump's guidlelines

Regardless, back then immigrants were entitled to absolutely no welfare or benefits of any kind, so it's an extremely different situation. You can't compare the two.


You're wrong. My grandfather came here, unaccompanied at the age of 11.

Legal immigrants are not eligible for any Federal benefits the first five years they are legally in the country (Welfare/ SNAP, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc). Illegal immigrants are not eligible for any Federal benefits.

[Valli6]

Legal immigrants are not eligible for any Federal benefits the first five years they are legally in the country (Welfare/ SNAP, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc). Illegal immigrants are not eligible for any Federal benefits.

They are entitled to plenty of other things, place to stay, clothing, medical care, meals, entertainment, baby-sitting and - for cryin-out-loud - FREE LAWYERS! And that's just the first day they arrive!

[CaptUSA]

It's a strange distinction to draw between the undesirables born within the government's lines and those born outside them.

Are we able to get these same tests for people born here and export them if they fail?? Perhaps America will finally fix our trade deficit!

[Swordsmyth]

Trump's grandfather and his mother would never have been allowed into the country by his guidelines. His grandfather was only 16, not accompanied by parents, and barely knew any English. His mother was also not accompanied by parents and came to join sisters already in the US. She turned 18 during the trip to the US. She was from Scotland and he was from Germany.

If the "Trump Rules" were in place back then, Trump himself would not be here.

That is irrelevant.

Times change.

Even if conditions hadn't changed we can't change the past, if they were wrong back then we can't do anything about it now.

[Swordsmyth]

Legal immigrants are not eligible for any Federal benefits the first five years they are legally in the country (Welfare/ SNAP, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc).

Why should we give them any after five years zip?

Illegal immigrants are not eligible for any Federal benefits.

They cheat and get them immediately and leftist government workers help them to do it.

[Swordsmyth]

It's a strange distinction to draw between the undesirables born within the government's lines and those born outside them.

Are we able to get these same tests for people born here and export them if they fail?? Perhaps America will finally fix our trade deficit!

Citizens have a right to be here and foreigners don't, we can't deport undesirable citizens but we can avoid letting in undesirable foreigners who will make our own problems worse.

[dannno]

Legal immigrants are not eligible for any Federal benefits the first five years they are legally in the country (Welfare/ SNAP, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc). Illegal immigrants are not eligible for any Federal benefits.

[CaptUSA]

Citizens have a right to be here and foreigners don't, we can't deport undesirable citizens but we can avoid letting in undesirable foreigners who will make our own problems worse.

Um, you realize governments don’t create rights, don’t have? They come from your creator. The constitution was meant to make sure this government wouldn’t interfere with the rights people already have.

You’re talking about a privilege. Those can be given and taken away at a whim.

[Swordsmyth]

Um, you realize governments don’t create rights, don’t have? They come from your creator. The constitution was meant to make sure this government wouldn’t interfere with the rights people already have.

You’re talking about a privilege. Those can be given and taken away at a whim.

A citizen has a right to live in his own country and it can't be revoked, the creation of the group creates the right of the group members to live in its territory, nobody has a right to live in a foreign country that doesn't want them.

[CaptUSA]

A citizen has a right to live in his own country and it can't be revoked, the creation of the group creates the right of the group members to live in its territory, nobody has a right to live in a foreign country that doesn't want them.

Got it. You are just as ignorant about rights as you are about economics. Thanks for making that clear.


This is a Trump voter, folks.

[Swordsmyth]

Got it. You are just as ignorant about rights as you are about economics. Thanks for making that clear.


This is a Trump voter, folks.

You are the ignorant one.
Groups exist, groups have to exist, groups always have existed sine there were enough people to form them, group members have rights as members of the group that outsiders don't have, the outsiders have their own groups where they have rights that members of the first group don't have.

[CaptUSA]

You are the ignorant one.
Groups exist, groups have to exist, groups always have existed sine there were enough people to form them, group members have rights as members of the group that outsiders don't have, the outsiders have their own groups where they have rights that members of the first group don't have.

Lol. That’s not how rights work. Not even close. Trump supporter folks. Remember that.

[Swordsmyth]

Lol. That’s not how rights work. Not even close. Trump supporter folks. Remember that.

Some rights don't work that way some do.
I have a right to be in my home and so do members of my family, outsiders don't have that right, it is the same with my country and my fellow citizens vs. foreigners.

It is hilarious watching you flaunt your ignorance like this.

[Swordsmyth]

This is a Trump voter, folks.

Actually I didn't vote for him last time and whether or not I vote for him next time hasn't been determined yet.

[Jamesiv1]

Legal immigrants are not eligible for any Federal benefits the first five years they are legally in the country (Welfare/ SNAP, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc). Illegal immigrants are not eligible for any Federal benefits.

The wall just got 10 feet higher.

[DamianTV]

Hmm...

If people are not given Rights from Govt, but rather their Creator, and Govts are created by people, would that make the People the Creator of Govts, and, in turn, again since Rights are granted by their Creator and People created Govt, can the People grant very specific Rights (really Privileges) to the Govts they create?

I am sort of testing the concept of Abstraction at both Macro and Micro scale, so I need to hear both sides to the argument... The idea is that things which work at the small scale also work on large and very large scale, abstracting back and forth between very small and very large, so I am curious.

[Swordsmyth]

Hmm...

If people are not given Rights from Govt, but rather their Creator, and Govts are created by people, would that make the People the Creator of Govts, and, in turn, again since Rights are granted by their Creator and People created Govt, can the People grant very specific Rights (really Privileges) to the Govts they create?

I am sort of testing the concept of Abstraction at both Macro and Micro scale, so I need to hear both sides to the argument... The idea is that things which work at the small scale also work on large and very large scale, abstracting back and forth between very small and very large, so I am curious.

We the People of the United States.......

[DamianTV]

We the People of the United States.......

Then the People have Rights, both at an individual level, and at a national level? Would that also mean (and yes, stretching here a bit) to collectively say "we dont want every immigrant that wants to come here"? Would the People have the Right to do such a thing? Again, extending, if one of the foundations of Rights is "I own myself", as a collective (and yes, being careful with that), would "The People" technically own the country? And same as Private Property Rights where if you own your Property like your house, you have a Right to say you may / may not smoke in my house, and that is MY Permission to grant. A homeowner would also a Right to say you may / may not enter my house. Abstracting to larger scale and extension, collectively you may / may not enter our Country?

Abstract to small scale, I think what has happened is a homeowner allowed a person to come into their house, and the invited person is now inviting other people to come into the homeowners house, even though they do not have the Right to do so. I believe that concept is why there is a major difference between Constitutional Rights and Civil Liberties, where the Rights protect the Individual and Civil Liberties protect the community as a whole.

Feel free to challenge the idea, but is that thinking rational?

[Swordsmyth]

Then the People have Rights, both at an individual level, and at a national level? Would that also mean (and yes, stretching here a bit) to collectively say "we dont want every immigrant that wants to come here"? Would the People have the Right to do such a thing? Again, extending, if one of the foundations of Rights is "I own myself", as a collective (and yes, being careful with that), would "The People" technically own the country? And same as Private Property Rights where if you own your Property like your house, you have a Right to say you may / may not smoke in my house, and that is MY Permission to grant. A homeowner would also a Right to say you may / may not enter my house. Abstracting to larger scale and extension, collectively you may / may not enter our Country?

Abstract to small scale, I think what has happened is a homeowner allowed a person to come into their house, and the invited person is now inviting other people to come into the homeowners house, even though they do not have the Right to do so. I believe that concept is why there is a major difference between Constitutional Rights and Civil Liberties, where the Rights protect the Individual and Civil Liberties protect the community as a whole.

Feel free to challenge the idea, but is that thinking rational?

I don't know exactly what you mean by the civil liberties part but the group property rights part is exactly right.

[oyarde]

I cannot speak for everyone of course but right now I am leaning towards deportation to canada if Danke cannot pass my test .

[Swordsmyth]

I cannot speak for everyone of course but right now I am leaning towards deportation to canada if Danke cannot pass my test .

Why not Mexico?

[oyarde]

Why not Mexico?

That would be inhumane , Danke has a low tolerance to sunlight , tainted water , cane sugar and they have no medical assistance for veterans.

[Swordsmyth]

That would be inhumane , Danke has a low tolerance to sunlight , tainted water , cane sugar and they have no medical assistance for veterans.

But it is it humane to Canada to send Danke there?

[DamianTV]

I don't know exactly what you mean by the civil liberties part but the group property rights part is exactly right.

Well, a Civil Liberty would say that when I am in your house and it is your property, I have a Liberty to use the bathroom, but do NOT have a Right to smoke in your house. I would have a Right to smoke in my own house, but not yours, as it would be your permission (Civil Liberty) to grant in that specific situation. What neither one of us would have a Right to do is to decree that the other may not smoke, ever.

Recognizing the difference between a Right and a Civil Liberty (Permission) is a very important concept to understand. Trouble with this understanding is that for most people, the Definition between Rights and Permissions has been heavily confused. Whether that Confusion is intentional or not, the consequences are the same. Rights end where the Equal Rights of others begin. So yes, a person you once invited into your house has Rights, but by coming into your house, where you are Sovereign, King, and there is NO higher authority, they choose to temporarily give up their own Rights and abide by your rules. Outside your house, you would have zero authority over what they do. You could say that based on their behavior outside your house that you will no longer allow them to come inside your house, but, being Sovereign over your own property, you do NOT need ANY reason to say "no, you may not come in". A "Civil Liberty" would be nothing more than a Permission you chose to grant, and have valid authority to revoke that Permission at any time. Can I have one of your beers? That is your Permission to grant, but most importantly, I should not think for a second that I have any authority to take your beer without your permission.

Ron explained a form of this as Entitlement.

Immigration I do not believe is a Right, but a Permission to be granted by the We the People, and we can pick and choose, and even cherry pick who we will allow to come into the country for what ever reason, if any, that we want. Also, this isnt directed specifically at you, just an in general reply.

[oyarde]

But it is it humane to Canada to send Danke there?

They will have to toughen up . Be good for them.