Question for "Medicare for all" supporters... Does that include illegal aliens?

Oh really? Then I guess you probably think that the person who wrote the following is a real idiot

Unless, of course, you think you can overstay your visa without being admitted.

How many "kinds" did you think there were?

 

Outside of tourists and guest workers? No, hardly any. We're multicultural, but don't have a big problem with illegals. Tourists and guest workers must have some kind of travel insurance if they want medical care. Having said that, all are treated for life-threatening conditions in our hospitals. The system will endeavour to recoup the expenses from you later, if you're not a citizen. Non-life-threatening conditions are not treated. If you are a foreign national and present to a hospital with a sprained ankle or the flu, you will be politely redirected to a private medical practice or home doctor service (which will obviously need to be paid for via your 'travellers insurance' or whatever).

 

Ah! That’s where you’re mistaken. There is a 180-day graced period on a visa exit requirement upon expiration. After that period, you become a removable illegal alien, ie no longer an admitted nonimigrant. Easy mistake. Glad to clear that up for you.

See above.

“Etc.” is not a legal cite.

 

You actually think you're bringing anything new to this discussion? You are in for a rude awakening

Pay attention!

One... more... time...

So what?

If you are being persecuted in your country, for example (this is just one example... I gave more to the other poster), the law says you belong here. Even if you entered illegally. Even if you have been residing in the U.S. illegally. You STILL belong. here. And it's not me saying it. It's the law!

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1158

My point: the blanket statement "illegal aliens don't belong here" is absolutely inaccurate. Some do... some don't. And you, just like the poster who originally made the statement, aren't even able to define what "belong here means"

 

These two statements would seem at odds with each other. You say your country could not afford to provide health care to foreign nationals and yet you say you have hardly any. Your country must live on a very tight budget.

 

We have hardly any foreign nationals who AREN'T either tourists or guest workers .. which I made quite clear. And we provide healthcare for neither group .. they must fund their own treatment via their personal insurances. It goes without saying that we don't treat the few illegals we do have.

 

So I can 'belong' in Japan then? I like that country, so I should be able to just move there, right? How about Norway? Or Finland? Or New Zealand? All of those prosperous, peaceful, clean, First World places are super attractive to me, so I feel I belong.

 

That is hilarious!!!!

An admitted non immigrant is a non-immigrant who was admitted into the country by Immigration. Easy as that! Take it from somebody with 10 years of Passenger Handling experience in an International Airport.

You ridiculed yourself by calling your own statement "idiotic". And now you further ridicule yourself by making up nonsense.

 

There is no need for that tone.

The rule of law is so what.

In which case you would NOT be an illegal alien. Providing you meet the requirements and follow the lawful process to access our very generous refugee and asylum systems.

A very narrow group of people qualify. They are as follows: "the applicant must establish that race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion was or will be at least one central reason for persecuting the applicant." You'll note "living in a shithole country" is not one of the qualifications. Cuban dissident arriving in Key West? Qualified. Bosnian Muslim being exterminated by Serbian Scorpions? Qualified. Stateless Burmese Muslim? Qualified. Dirt poor, shoeless fruit picker from Guatemala? Not qualified. The first three would NOT be illegal aliens, but rather bona fide refugess and/or asylees. The last is an illegal alien. The first three belong here. The last one doesn't.

Wrong.

I defined it for you in big boldface type. Not my problem that you refuse to acknowledge facts.

 

I don't know the laws in Japan. Only the laws of the U.S.

But you might belong there more than here so... power to you!

BTW, did you even understand what the post you responded to was about?.... I didn't think so. The Trump cult rarely understands what's going on.

 

If you're such and expert you'd know that the U.S. has treaties with every country with whom we have normalized relations regarding the admission of its citizens and vice versa. And that those treaties explicitly specify entry requirements, duration of stay, and visa requirements or visa waiver requirements. If a foreign national enters on a student visa, for example, and fails to depart within 180 days of the expiration date, that individual is no longer an admitted nonimmigrant, but an illegal alien and... you guessed it... DOESN'T BELONG HERE.

No. You called my statement idiotic. And you were wrong of course.

 

And Golem rarely makes a post without a fallacy. Can you name the one you used here? I'll bet you could if you tried really hard!

 

No idea what Trump Cultists do/think. I'm not American, and I'm most assuredly not a Trump fan.

 

Naw. Come on now, you have to pigeonhole yourself into a neat little box or Golem's head will explode.

 

Of course you wouldn't be. Because there is no such thing as "illegal aliens". Which is what I have said since the beginning.

But you would belong here! And you have failed to prove that they don't

 

What a load of nonsensical and irrelevant words you have put together!

If you come in through a tunnel carrying drugs... you don't belong here! Of course! but... so what? That doesn't mean you can make a blanket assumption that none of what the law calls "deportable aliens" (ie. those who did not entered through an authorized point of entry, or overstayed their visa, etc) don't belong here. And you are just throwing in nonsensical words to try to cover up the fact.

 

Uhm.... Truth!

Why do you insist. You don't even know what the word "fallacy" means! And you refuse to look it up. In that quote, you can say there is an insult. Or even an inaccuracy, if you want (which I would dispute). But not ever never in a million year... would anyone with the most minimal education in the discipline would say that in that phrase there could be a logical fallacy. Why? Because it's not even an argument! A "fallacy", in logic, is an inaccuracy in the construction of an argument. And, again, what you quoted is not even an argument!

You don't believe me? Look up what "fallacy" means in Logic. You have refused to do so again and again. But you should. So you can stop obliterating one of the major Areas of Philosophy. Of which you are so obviously ignorant about

 

Now you are actually trying to deny that nations have treaties regarding travel of their citizens. I think I understand your strategy now -- make up a bunch of ridiculous nonsense, present it as an argument, and hope your opponent finally gets exasperated and gives up trying to debate someone who pretends to speak English while really speaking Neptunian. It's a shame you can't just put together an argument, back it with facts, and discuss those facts in good faith in the context of a debate. That combined with your constant ad hominem is becoming tiresome. I wish you well.

 

LOL. A post full of fallacies trying to deny the use of fallacies. I can't, you've just, wow. Just wow.

I am going to recommend your new avatar:



Good day.

 

How would you refer to people coming into the US by sneaking across the border or people who over stay their visit?

 

So, anyone on NOT paying taxes would be excluded?

 

What the f...hell does that have to do with whether or not an immigrant "belongs here"? What treaty says anything about belonging or not belonging here?

You are desperately trying to change the subject. I can understand why, but be aware that it does not make you look any better.

 

Who? Me? Gee, I don't know.... I would probably call them Undocumented Americans. I believe the law calls them "Deportable Aliens".

 

So semantics? Got it. Well we can go with your's then. I like it, Deplorable Aliens!