Tough Morality Question: Is It Right For Illegal Aliens to...

[LeeTJ]

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

either way the answer is the same, w/ limited resources you have to have a priority list. should that list be based solely on money?? NO, should money be a consideration, Of Course. Should it be based solely on citizenship, NO, but can you ignore it, NO.

in her case she should not have been a priority and there is NOTHING sick about it, that's just how the world revolves.

Either way you completely miss the point once again.

I'll try one more time though...


If the question was posed without ANY OTHER information:

Should we save a teenage girls life if we can? Answer -> Of Course!

Then:

Should we save a poor mexican girls life with our limited resources? Answer -> Probably not.

Conclusion: I find it both sad and sick that the way the "system" (substitute: law, hospitals, or world if necessary) works currently forces us to make a decision on whether a teenage girl lives or dies based on money, resources, and nationality.

WRONG!! Your missing MY whole point. It's not the "system" that imposes limitations. It's a fact of NATURE and of LIFE that resources are limited. Do you believe that there are an UNLIMITED supply of transplantable organs and it's just the "SYSTEM" holding out on us??

Wrong! You are still missing the point completely. What I said has nothing to do with the supply of organs. Did you see the words I suggested you substitute if you were having trouble understanding? I think the word "system" might be throwing you.

Maybe I should use your words and try once more.

Conclusion: I find it both sad and sick that since it's a fact of NATURE and of LIFE that resources are limited. it currently forces us to make a decision on whether a teenage girl lives or dies based on money and nationality.

Is that helping you any?




I

No, because your question is no longer theoretical but rhetorical as there is absolutely nothing you can do about the nature of limited resources.

 

[rufruf44]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Unwelcome? Illegal immigrants do a lot more than cut the grass. Without them, costs of many things would go up. Houses and childcare are two big ones that come to mind.

They are unwelcome, otherwise they wouldn't be called illegal and there wouldn't be border patrols setup. There seems to be a hypocrisy to it almost. It's as if people are very much against illegals getting into the country, but the second that person is successful and they are here it's as if nobody cares about them anymore to remove them.

No, the hypocrisy is where most people are against illegal immigration, but they don't mind those same illegals to cut their grasses, clean the toilet or work other shitty job. Especially in small businesses, where they can't survive without the cheap labor. If you want to clean immigration problem, those ppl that employ illegals should be tossed in jail in the same time that the illegals being deported back to their country.
As for why isn't this girl being deported back as soon as she;s known to be an illegal? Besides the numerous waiver process that INS has dumped on the law book, which politician/public figure is stupid/brave enough to face the latinos and the pro-illegal outrage if they even dare to voice their opinion on that matter ?

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: LakAttack

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Exactly. Because once they are here, they are very much in demand as workers. Workers that make life better for most Americans. Why should we send them back? THAT costs the taxpayers money too. Do you want to fund millions of INS workers to patrol every new neighborhood development and restaurant? That costs money, and it will cost more when americans take over those jobs and demand a minimum wage and benefits.

Why don't you open your borders then entirely...?

I wish i knew. Small minded people ruled by fear dictate this policy.

Because the poor would swarm here in droves to sponge off the productive and the system would fall apart. The US would quickly turn into a third world nation.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: flavio
Conclusion: I find it both sad and sick that since it's a fact of NATURE and of LIFE that resources are limited. it currently forces us to make a decision on whether a teenage girl lives or dies based on money and nationality.

How can nature be sick? It is what it is. The universe is neither wrong nor right. It is. And we are simply a product of the universe.

 

[LakAttack]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: LakAttack

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Exactly. Because once they are here, they are very much in demand as workers. Workers that make life better for most Americans. Why should we send them back? THAT costs the taxpayers money too. Do you want to fund millions of INS workers to patrol every new neighborhood development and restaurant? That costs money, and it will cost more when americans take over those jobs and demand a minimum wage and benefits.

Why don't you open your borders then entirely...?

I wish i knew. Small minded people ruled by fear dictate this policy.

OK here's what happens if you open the border: millions of Mexicans flock north. Generally it will be the poorest least educated first since they have the most to gain by leaving Mexico. They all get social security cards. Given the fact that many are not educated instead of filling vacant positions as doctors and team leaders in NASA they fill up the minimum wage jobs. Then once they are filled the rest go unemployed since there is no more labor for them. Then they sit on their butt and collect government benefits. The country ends up crumbling as the benefits paid out grossly overshoot those paid in by the existing taxpayers.

OK, my comment was a little flip, I admit. But the point is, Americans aren't lining up to do the work that illegals do. Without them, it wouldn't get done, at least not near the cost it is now. So while there may be a point to controlling the border somewhat, building a big wall a-la Pat Buchanan will have drastic negative effects on the US.

 

[BoberFett]

Where are all these illegals doing menial jobs? And why aren't they shoveling MY driveway and mowing MY lawn. Apparently I need to find me some of these supposed illegals to do some work for me so I can toss pennies at them while they work.

 

[alexruiz]

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: alexruiz

Originally posted by: dahunanIs the US the only one who can save her?

The Longer we take care of Mexicos problems the longer Mexico will remain a sh!tty place to live.

Log off and stay away from the TV.... radiation is dangerous for your few remaining brain cells..... I CHALLENGE you to tell me that you have been in Mexico, know the country WELL and know what you are talking about!! You only know what the mass media feeds you. Come on retarded, prove me that you know what you are saying.

Mexico has the 12 largest economy in the world..... but it has also one of the most polarized societies..... Wealth distribution is extremely unequal (a flaw of capitalism), and while the ipper and middle class have a good life, 85% of the country struggles every day. Some of those are really poor.......

The USA taking care of our problems???? Take the challenge, SHOW me, PROVE me how you are taking care of my problems......

and just how exactly are any of those problems that of the US??

and if mexico is such a great place to live, why are there soo many illegal immigrants in the US from mexico?? i don't have to go to mexico to know that that most of these illegal immigrants come from homes that are living in 3rd world conditions. prove to me that, what i've said is untrue. PROVE IT TO ME.

Your post is in FACT proving my statement... I don;t have to prove you anything, because you prove it yourdelf..... We are on the same page. I wrote "extremely unequal wealth distribution.... " "85% of the country population struggles to live.... millions are poor" The country is a good place to live, but for the poor, it is hell.... so they risk their lives because without skills thay can live decently jumping to the USA...... Unlike some other countries, who usually "export" the best that they have, we don't..... How many Mexican engineers, lawyers, doctors have you seen as illegal immigrants??? Our middle class is not fleeing the country, A handful at much. That should give a good indication of what you can achieve working hard and going to school. We are one of the few countries that "export" the worst that we have....

Read the post again, the answer is contained there....

 

[StageLeft]

OK, my comment was a little flip, I admit. But the point is, Americans aren't lining up to do the work that illegals do. Without them, it wouldn't get done, at least not near the cost it is now. So while there may be a point to controlling the border somewhat, building a big wall a-la Pat Buchanan will have drastic negative effects on the US.

It's true that the labor that some of these people do would cost more, but then you don't see most of us paying people to do yardwork (that's my resounding example) anyway. We do it ourselves. Richer people than I and office complexes, for instance, would end up paying more. And although that's the case, think of the money saved in cases like this one or in all of the other ways that illegals sap the money out of the system?

Weighing the pros and cons I'd think you would find that the US would be better off by keeping illegals out entirely. I think INS believes this as well and that is why a burger flipper is never going to be legally immigrated to the US except in special circumstances like religious persecution. Alternatively a PHD in physics will be. The reason is the former brings down the national skillset and productivity whereas the latter is above average, so the country wants it.

 

[dahunan]

Now, the Clinton administration and congressional leaders are preparing an additional $40 billion U.S. taxpayer backed loan guarantee for Mexico. The loan guarantee would back up the sale of $40 billion dollars worth of 3 to 5 year bonds through Wall Street. The proceeds of the $40 billion dollar bond sale would go to the Mexican government.

The Mexican government will use the proceeds of the $40 billion dollar bond sale [/b]to repay the $28 billion dollar[/b], 20% interest, short term bonds that are now due and use the remainder of the money at their own discretion.

If the Mexican government pays back the $40 billion dollars of bonds insured by the U.S. taxpayers the U.S. government will receive a fee between $6 billion and $8 billion.

Mexico has defaulted on past debts. In the early 1930's Mexico defaulted on its debt; in the mid 30's Mexico nationalized the petroleum industry, much of it owned by U.S. investors; and in 1982 Mexico again defaulted on its debt.


Information on the Mexican Peso Bailout





Health Information for Travelers to Mexico and Central AmericaNationally, 52 percent of all recorded infant deaths in 1990 occurred during the postneonatal stage, when infants are most susceptible to infections and poor diet. Although perinatal complications accounted for 35 percent of all infant deaths in 1990, intestinal infections and influenza and pneumonia also remained important causes, representing 15 and 13 percent of infant deaths, respectively.



And FINALLY, The only Americans trying to sneak into Mexico ARE THOSE WANTED FOR CRIMES - LOL

 

"I'm divided on this issue. I sympathize with the plight of people like this but at the same time, they are breaking some hospitals with unrecoverable costs that make it difficult for everybody else."

That's all you're thinking of? I'm thinking of the lawsuit that is clearly coming the university's way. Not only will the immigrants get free donations, they get to sue for malpractice. I'm not sure I can blame them. Would the hospital have engaged in malpractice if it were American citizens? Concealing a fact that is detrimental to someone's health has no mationality boundary, in my opinion.

I see what you're saying, but I would ask the same question about a citizen who got that much publicity from the media. What makes that person any more important than other citizens with similar plights? Basically, it's about what sells. Immigrants are no exceptions.

I remember a young AT member from LA, CA (I think) posting about his dad, who's a doctor, facing the dilemma of treating an illegal immigrant. He couldn't afford to perform surgery (I think) on this immigrant without financial help from the government or private entities. So he was comtemplating bringing it to the public's awareness via media. I was thinking this might be the same case, but I doubt it. To me, it's really beyond their legal status. I wouldn't find it any different if it were a citizen who got that much publicity when other citizens were in line hoping to get saved.

 

[rufruf44]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Where are all these illegals doing menial jobs? And why aren't they shoveling MY driveway and mowing MY lawn. Apparently I need to find me some of these supposed illegals to do some work for me so I can toss pennies at them while they work.

If you live in Texas, California, Arizona, etc. Go to a mexican restaurant or chinese restaurant. Chances are you'll find at least an illegal working there. As well as your custodial service, and even the garbage man. A few months back, there's a public outcry in the Denver area because they round up all the airport employee that were illegals, and there's tons of them. Same thing happen in LA.

I guess Minnesota still haven't experience the massive influx of illegals crossing from the borders as those southern states.

 

[flavio]

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

either way the answer is the same, w/ limited resources you have to have a priority list. should that list be based solely on money?? NO, should money be a consideration, Of Course. Should it be based solely on citizenship, NO, but can you ignore it, NO.

in her case she should not have been a priority and there is NOTHING sick about it, that's just how the world revolves.

Either way you completely miss the point once again.

I'll try one more time though...


If the question was posed without ANY OTHER information:

Should we save a teenage girls life if we can? Answer -> Of Course!

Then:

Should we save a poor mexican girls life with our limited resources? Answer -> Probably not.

Conclusion: I find it both sad and sick that the way the "system" (substitute: law, hospitals, or world if necessary) works currently forces us to make a decision on whether a teenage girl lives or dies based on money, resources, and nationality.

WRONG!! Your missing MY whole point. It's not the "system" that imposes limitations. It's a fact of NATURE and of LIFE that resources are limited. Do you believe that there are an UNLIMITED supply of transplantable organs and it's just the "SYSTEM" holding out on us??

Wrong! You are still missing the point completely. What I said has nothing to do with the supply of organs. Did you see the words I suggested you substitute if you were having trouble understanding? I think the word "system" might be throwing you.

Maybe I should use your words and try once more.

Conclusion: I find it both sad and sick that since it's a fact of NATURE and of LIFE that resources are limited. it currently forces us to make a decision on whether a teenage girl lives or dies based on money and nationality.

Is that helping you any?




I

No, because your question is no longer theoretical but rhetorical as there is absolutely nothing you can do about the nature of limited resources.

I'll leave that to the others to debate and say that one thing you can do about limited resources is increase supply or decrease demand. Greater supply could come from an increased % of organ donors or more developement of artifical solutions. Demand could be lessened by better general health.

I'm hoping though that you now understand what I'm saying by it being sad and sick how we have to decide life or death even there's no solution at the moment.

 

[LeeTJ]

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

Originally posted by: flavio

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

either way the answer is the same, w/ limited resources you have to have a priority list. should that list be based solely on money?? NO, should money be a consideration, Of Course. Should it be based solely on citizenship, NO, but can you ignore it, NO.

in her case she should not have been a priority and there is NOTHING sick about it, that's just how the world revolves.

Either way you completely miss the point once again.

I'll try one more time though...


If the question was posed without ANY OTHER information:

Should we save a teenage girls life if we can? Answer -> Of Course!

Then:

Should we save a poor mexican girls life with our limited resources? Answer -> Probably not.

Conclusion: I find it both sad and sick that the way the "system" (substitute: law, hospitals, or world if necessary) works currently forces us to make a decision on whether a teenage girl lives or dies based on money, resources, and nationality.

WRONG!! Your missing MY whole point. It's not the "system" that imposes limitations. It's a fact of NATURE and of LIFE that resources are limited. Do you believe that there are an UNLIMITED supply of transplantable organs and it's just the "SYSTEM" holding out on us??

Wrong! You are still missing the point completely. What I said has nothing to do with the supply of organs. Did you see the words I suggested you substitute if you were having trouble understanding? I think the word "system" might be throwing you.

Maybe I should use your words and try once more.

Conclusion: I find it both sad and sick that since it's a fact of NATURE and of LIFE that resources are limited. it currently forces us to make a decision on whether a teenage girl lives or dies based on money and nationality.

Is that helping you any?




I

No, because your question is no longer theoretical but rhetorical as there is absolutely nothing you can do about the nature of limited resources.

I'll leave that to the others to debate and say that one thing you can do about limited resources is increase supply or decrease demand. Greater supply could come from an increased % of organ donors or more developement of artifical solutions. Demand could be lessened by better general health.

I'm hoping though that you now understand what I'm saying by it being sad and sick how we have to decide life or death even there's no solution at the moment.

and my point is, the only time you can call a decision making process sick is if you have an alternative. i misunderstood you because i thought you were saying that it's sick because there is an alternative and they don't pursue it. now i'm understanding you as saying, there is NO alternative and it is sick.

My point remains, there is no alternative hence calling it sick is counterproductive and not valid.

 

[Tom]

As I already said I didn't want to get into an argument about semantics.

Those of you who feel that the exclusive definition of the word finite is that it is the exact opposite of infinite, I have no problem with your going on believing so.

Leaving that aside, I think most people will be able to understand the meaning of my earlier posts.

As far as the name calling and labeling, it's one way to tell people you aren't interested in their opinion, sorry you feel that way.

 

[LeeTJ]

Originally posted by: luvly
"I'm divided on this issue. I sympathize with the plight of people like this but at the same time, they are breaking some hospitals with unrecoverable costs that make it difficult for everybody else."

That's all you're thinking of? I'm thinking of the lawsuit that is clearly coming the university's way. Not only will the immigrants get free donations, they get to sue for malpractice. I'm not sure I can blame them. Would the hospital have engaged in malpractice if it were American citizens? Concealing a fact that is detrimental to someone's health has no mationality boundary, in my opinion.

I see what you're saying, but I would ask the same question about a citizen who got that much publicity from the media. What makes that person any more important than other citizens with similar plights? Basically, it's about what sells. Immigrants are no exceptions.

I remember a young AT member from LA, CA (I think) posting about his dad, who's a doctor, facing the dilemma of treating an illegal immigrant. He couldn't afford to perform surgery (I think) on this immigrant without financial help from the government or private entities. So he was comtemplating bringing it to the public's awareness via media. I was thinking this might be the same case, but I doubt it. To me, it's really beyond their legal status. I wouldn't find it any different if it were a citizen who got that much publicity when other citizens were in line hoping to get saved.

i read thru your post and i have NO idea what your position is. give illegals medical attention or no?? i like what alexruiz said, stabilize them and deport them.

 

[alexruiz]

Originally posted by: Skoorb[

OK here's what happens if you open the border: millions of Mexicans flock north. Generally it will be the poorest least educated first since they have the most to gain by leaving Mexico. They all get social security cards. Given the fact that many are not educated instead of filling vacant positions as doctors and team leaders in NASA they fill up the minimum wage jobs. Then once they are filled the rest go unemployed since there is no more labor for them. Then they sit on their butt and collect government benefits. The country ends up crumbling as the benefits paid out grossly overshoot those paid in by the existing taxpayers.

You have a good point here...... and confirms what I have posted before..... we 'export" the worst we have.... Some other countries lose their educated people.... we don't, because only the ones without skills want to leave.... (counterpoint: there are many....) So the only edition to your post would be "the vast majority will be the least educated..."

Thanks Skoorbie

 

[alexruiz]

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

BTW, your point of give her medical attention that deport her is interesting. i'm curious as to what you mean by medical condition tho?? should we just stabilize her condition or perform the transplant. in her case it seemed that we could of deported her w/o causing her death.

Good call.... I would say that the deport before the trasplant would have been the adequate. Now that she is in such condition, stabilize her and kick her out.... (tough, and even though she is my coNational, there are laws.....)

Alex

 

[LeeTJ]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
As I already said I didn't want to get into an argument about semantics.

Those of you who feel that the exclusive definition of the word finite is that it is the exact opposite of infinite, I have no problem with your going on believing so.

Leaving that aside, I think most people will be able to understand the meaning of my earlier posts.

As far as the name calling and labeling, it's one way to tell people you aren't interested in their opinion, sorry you feel that way.

WRONG. it's not OUR OPINION, that is the definition of the WORD. why don't you just admit you were wrong in the usage of the word and get on with it. None of us are given the option to change the definition of words to suit our needs whenever we want because if we did, there would be no possibility of communication.

Finite means Limited, Infinite means UNLIMTED, these are mutually exclusive words BY DEFINITION, if you have a problem with it, take it up w/ websters and get the definition changed, don't try to defend your undefendable postion with more ridiculous statements. IF you want to make a point, you have to make a point that people can understand. IF you want to change the definition of the words for your particular post, than STATE that definition so that the rest of us can have a chance at understanding your post. You did neither, use the definition as given, or state a redefinition of the word so that we can follow.

Now you accuse us of not being interested in your opinion, SHEESH, we don't understand you opinion, by understand i'm using the most basic definition of the word of "Comprehension".

 

[bolsen]

That's not the point. The point is that the same taxes you and I pay should go for everyone, American or not American, who happen to be in need and are probably also less fortunate than a lot of us.

Screw that dude. If you want to pay for everyone in this world, go ahead. Send your money. Hell, send more money because you know the gov isn't going to say no.

Personally, I don't want to have to pay a dollar more than I have to. I work hard for my money, I want to keep it.

They may be alot less fortunate than us, but does that mean they have a lesser ABILITY to become fortunate? Don't think so.

So as a result of this person sneaking in and getting this operation, you and I are paying for (3) operations. When we could have paid for just (1). Obviously, the hospitol is at fault here, but had she never been here, it would have never happend. Don't bandaid the problem... fix it. And to do that is to have never had her here in the first place. That being said, we'll have to bite the bullet on this one. But the fact remains that I do not support providing anyone to walk off the street and get medical attention BEFORE someone that does.

:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: rufruf44

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Where are all these illegals doing menial jobs? And why aren't they shoveling MY driveway and mowing MY lawn. Apparently I need to find me some of these supposed illegals to do some work for me so I can toss pennies at them while they work.

If you live in Texas, California, Arizona, etc. Go to a mexican restaurant or chinese restaurant. Chances are you'll find at least an illegal working there. As well as your custodial service, and even the garbage man. A few months back, there's a public outcry in the Denver area because they round up all the airport employee that were illegals, and there's tons of them. Same thing happen in LA.

I guess Minnesota still haven't experience the massive influx of illegals crossing from the borders as those southern states.

In which case I'm not benefiting from these wonderful cheap labor, so I sure as hell don't want to pay for their health care.

 

[LeeTJ]

Originally posted by: alexruiz

Originally posted by: LeeTJ

BTW, your point of give her medical attention that deport her is interesting. i'm curious as to what you mean by medical condition tho?? should we just stabilize her condition or perform the transplant. in her case it seemed that we could of deported her w/o causing her death.

Good call.... I would say that the deport before the trasplant would have been the adequate. Now that she is in such condition, stabilize her and kick her out.... (tough, and even though she is my coNational, there are laws.....)

Alex

Thank you, I think you've given the best answer possible. She should have been stablized and deported as soon as her legal status was made known. it should never have been a question of allocating limited resources. she should never have been on the list. the law is the law. She is here illegally, hence she has no legal rights and the first course of action is to stabilize her medical condition and deport her.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
As I already said I didn't want to get into an argument about semantics.

Those of you who feel that the exclusive definition of the word finite is that it is the exact opposite of infinite, I have no problem with your going on believing so.

Leaving that aside, I think most people will be able to understand the meaning of my earlier posts.

As far as the name calling and labeling, it's one way to tell people you aren't interested in their opinion, sorry you feel that way.

You're still an idiot. Go back to school.

 

[BruinEd03]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
In my area here recently a building was constructed/renovated and now serves as a meeting place for Mexicans where they are given donuts and coffee. It was funded with tax dollars and many/most of these immigrants are illegal. It's a commonly known fact and all over the news recently, especially since tax dollars went towards this building. So these illegals now have a meeting place and consumables as well.

If I was an American I'd be really pissed at the situation you guys have with illegal immigrants. I mean it's just absolutely ridiculous. A building and coffee and donuts to people who will get paid under the table to do yard work is one thing, but crippling hospitals because they are giving attention to people who shouldn't be in the US in the first place. Man I'm surprised Americans aren't more pissed!

To play Devil's Advocate. How do you know illegal immigrants don't pay taxes. Many of them pay income taxes (using other people's SSN). Also every time they buy something from the store they pay taxes.

-Ed

 

[alexruiz]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Now, the Clinton administration and congressional leaders are preparing an additional $40 billion U.S. taxpayer backed loan guarantee for Mexico. The loan guarantee would back up the sale of $40 billion dollars worth of 3 to 5 year bonds through Wall Street. The proceeds of the $40 billion dollar bond sale would go to the Mexican government.

The Mexican government will use the proceeds of the $40 billion dollar bond sale [/b]to repay the $28 billion dollar[/b], 20% interest, short term bonds that are now due and use the remainder of the money at their own discretion.

If the Mexican government pays back the $40 billion dollars of bonds insured by the U.S. taxpayers the U.S. government will receive a fee between $6 billion and $8 billion.

Mexico has defaulted on past debts. In the early 1930's Mexico defaulted on its debt; in the mid 30's Mexico nationalized the petroleum industry, much of it owned by U.S. investors; and in 1982 Mexico again defaulted on its debt.


Information on the Mexican Peso Bailout


Health Information for Travelers to Mexico and Central AmericaNationally, 52 percent of all recorded infant deaths in 1990 occurred during the postneonatal stage, when infants are most susceptible to infections and poor diet. Although perinatal complications accounted for 35 percent of all infant deaths in 1990, intestinal infections and influenza and pneumonia also remained important causes, representing 15 and 13 percent of infant deaths, respectively.



And FINALLY, The only Americans trying to sneak into Mexico ARE THOSE WANTED FOR CRIMES - LOL

Some truth, some not.... but in general it just confirms what I have posted.... the information of 1995 is not valid, as the country was out of the huge recession of 1994. How about more recent information???

The health information is *sorry* full of myth and lies..... I posted before in another thread WHY the travelers should not drink our water, and it refers ONLY to the way you were raised.... I also get diarrhea drinking water in the USA from the tap..... and I already explained that the high concentration of chlorine kills my normal bacteria.....

Tropical place???? Persons in the a goverment dependency who write about foreign countries MUST be required to read extensively about such places, and even visit them if possible..... I am still looking to visit some tropical places in MY own country...... LOL

Alex

PS. there are some, but defining the country as tropical is stupid to say the least....

 

LeeTJ, I'm saying basically, health has no boundary in my opinion. Jesica is an exception to the rule, not a part of the rule. She doesn't represent the health care that an average illegal alien gets in the USA, just as most Americans who make it on the top news get the attention and get saved before the other Americans who are struggling with similar situations. The problem is not the immigrants. It's our health system. It's capitalism that gives Jesica the privilege that she has at the moment, because there are people willing to commit their time and give it publicity and donate. So I don't see the grounds for objection to the care she gets. Her nationality should and does not have relevance to the care she gets in a capitalist system, in my opinion.

On the other hand, when she's treated, if she's an illegal alien, she should be promptly deported to Mexico, in my opinion.

Skoorb, I'm surprised that such sympathy comes from you. Canada has a socialist system and means free healthcare for people. So do Western European countries. At the end, it seems that Canada and Western Europe suffers more from offering "free" healthcare, in spite of its quality, to any and all people more than the US does. And perhaps it's that concept of free healthcare that causes the degradation of health treatment and services.