[all]

[quote=briansd1][quote=briansd1]
Even with universal health care, illegals will live under the existing status quo — they will go to the emergency rooms. [/quote]

captcha, the above is what I said.

Illegals don’t have access to health care now, unless they go the the emergency room or pay out of pocket. That will not change with any kind of health care reform.

The illegal immigrant issue is no reason to block health care reform (which would not give any rights to illegals).[/quote]

Ah, I see. Eligible (legal residents) are covered and the ineligible are limited to the emergency system. The legal status is established at the time of insuring, not at the time the service is performed. The cost is reduced due to removal of part of the current flow from the emergency rooms.

[all]

[quote=briansd1][quote=briansd1]
Even with universal health care, illegals will live under the existing status quo — they will go to the emergency rooms. [/quote]

captcha, the above is what I said.

Illegals don’t have access to health care now, unless they go the the emergency room or pay out of pocket. That will not change with any kind of health care reform.

The illegal immigrant issue is no reason to block health care reform (which would not give any rights to illegals).[/quote]

Ah, I see. Eligible (legal residents) are covered and the ineligible are limited to the emergency system. The legal status is established at the time of insuring, not at the time the service is performed. The cost is reduced due to removal of part of the current flow from the emergency rooms.

[all]

[quote=briansd1][quote=briansd1]
Even with universal health care, illegals will live under the existing status quo — they will go to the emergency rooms. [/quote]

captcha, the above is what I said.

Illegals don’t have access to health care now, unless they go the the emergency room or pay out of pocket. That will not change with any kind of health care reform.

The illegal immigrant issue is no reason to block health care reform (which would not give any rights to illegals).[/quote]

Ah, I see. Eligible (legal residents) are covered and the ineligible are limited to the emergency system. The legal status is established at the time of insuring, not at the time the service is performed. The cost is reduced due to removal of part of the current flow from the emergency rooms.

[all]

[quote=briansd1][quote=briansd1]
Even with universal health care, illegals will live under the existing status quo — they will go to the emergency rooms. [/quote]

captcha, the above is what I said.

Illegals don’t have access to health care now, unless they go the the emergency room or pay out of pocket. That will not change with any kind of health care reform.

The illegal immigrant issue is no reason to block health care reform (which would not give any rights to illegals).[/quote]

Ah, I see. Eligible (legal residents) are covered and the ineligible are limited to the emergency system. The legal status is established at the time of insuring, not at the time the service is performed. The cost is reduced due to removal of part of the current flow from the emergency rooms.

[all]

[quote=briansd1][quote=briansd1]
Even with universal health care, illegals will live under the existing status quo — they will go to the emergency rooms. [/quote]

captcha, the above is what I said.

Illegals don’t have access to health care now, unless they go the the emergency room or pay out of pocket. That will not change with any kind of health care reform.

The illegal immigrant issue is no reason to block health care reform (which would not give any rights to illegals).[/quote]

Ah, I see. Eligible (legal residents) are covered and the ineligible are limited to the emergency system. The legal status is established at the time of insuring, not at the time the service is performed. The cost is reduced due to removal of part of the current flow from the emergency rooms.

[all]

[quote=flu][quote=captcha]It happened to a 60+ old nearly bankrupt real estate agent, who managed to stop the car, but not until after giving the media a chance to get some good shots.

The life experience says it is a stunt. Another ‘incident’ happened yesterday. Unsurprisingly, politicians were there to jump on the bandwagon. A guy walks in, says “Darrell Issa sends me” and goes to evening news when the NHTSA guy refuses to break the protocol for him.[/quote]

The NHTSA is a bureaucratic tool.. Toyota approved for the guy Issa sent…NHTSA was the one that objected.[/quote]

Right. But if NHTSA has a procedure in place you can’t attempt to break it and complain when you don’t succeed. Your request might appear reasonable on the surface, but someone else (or even you) could use your successful breach of the procedure as a proof that the existing procedures are not being enforced.

I expect seasoned politicians to be aware of that, hence my claim that the yesterday’s action was a publicity stunt (by Issa).

[all]

[quote=flu][quote=captcha]It happened to a 60+ old nearly bankrupt real estate agent, who managed to stop the car, but not until after giving the media a chance to get some good shots.

The life experience says it is a stunt. Another ‘incident’ happened yesterday. Unsurprisingly, politicians were there to jump on the bandwagon. A guy walks in, says “Darrell Issa sends me” and goes to evening news when the NHTSA guy refuses to break the protocol for him.[/quote]

The NHTSA is a bureaucratic tool.. Toyota approved for the guy Issa sent…NHTSA was the one that objected.[/quote]

Right. But if NHTSA has a procedure in place you can’t attempt to break it and complain when you don’t succeed. Your request might appear reasonable on the surface, but someone else (or even you) could use your successful breach of the procedure as a proof that the existing procedures are not being enforced.

I expect seasoned politicians to be aware of that, hence my claim that the yesterday’s action was a publicity stunt (by Issa).

[all]

[quote=flu][quote=captcha]It happened to a 60+ old nearly bankrupt real estate agent, who managed to stop the car, but not until after giving the media a chance to get some good shots.

The life experience says it is a stunt. Another ‘incident’ happened yesterday. Unsurprisingly, politicians were there to jump on the bandwagon. A guy walks in, says “Darrell Issa sends me” and goes to evening news when the NHTSA guy refuses to break the protocol for him.[/quote]

The NHTSA is a bureaucratic tool.. Toyota approved for the guy Issa sent…NHTSA was the one that objected.[/quote]

Right. But if NHTSA has a procedure in place you can’t attempt to break it and complain when you don’t succeed. Your request might appear reasonable on the surface, but someone else (or even you) could use your successful breach of the procedure as a proof that the existing procedures are not being enforced.

I expect seasoned politicians to be aware of that, hence my claim that the yesterday’s action was a publicity stunt (by Issa).

[all]

[quote=flu][quote=captcha]It happened to a 60+ old nearly bankrupt real estate agent, who managed to stop the car, but not until after giving the media a chance to get some good shots.

The life experience says it is a stunt. Another ‘incident’ happened yesterday. Unsurprisingly, politicians were there to jump on the bandwagon. A guy walks in, says “Darrell Issa sends me” and goes to evening news when the NHTSA guy refuses to break the protocol for him.[/quote]

The NHTSA is a bureaucratic tool.. Toyota approved for the guy Issa sent…NHTSA was the one that objected.[/quote]

Right. But if NHTSA has a procedure in place you can’t attempt to break it and complain when you don’t succeed. Your request might appear reasonable on the surface, but someone else (or even you) could use your successful breach of the procedure as a proof that the existing procedures are not being enforced.

I expect seasoned politicians to be aware of that, hence my claim that the yesterday’s action was a publicity stunt (by Issa).

[all]

[quote=flu][quote=captcha]It happened to a 60+ old nearly bankrupt real estate agent, who managed to stop the car, but not until after giving the media a chance to get some good shots.

The life experience says it is a stunt. Another ‘incident’ happened yesterday. Unsurprisingly, politicians were there to jump on the bandwagon. A guy walks in, says “Darrell Issa sends me” and goes to evening news when the NHTSA guy refuses to break the protocol for him.[/quote]

The NHTSA is a bureaucratic tool.. Toyota approved for the guy Issa sent…NHTSA was the one that objected.[/quote]

Right. But if NHTSA has a procedure in place you can’t attempt to break it and complain when you don’t succeed. Your request might appear reasonable on the surface, but someone else (or even you) could use your successful breach of the procedure as a proof that the existing procedures are not being enforced.

I expect seasoned politicians to be aware of that, hence my claim that the yesterday’s action was a publicity stunt (by Issa).

[all]

[quote=briansd1][quote=air_ogi]I would go with citizens and legal permanent residents along with anyone working here legally.[/quote]

I agree with you air_ogi.

People who claim one reason not to have universal health is because illegals will take advantage of the system.

Even with universal health care, illegals will live under the existing status quo — they will go to the emergency rooms.

Conservatives don’t want to say it… but they really want the system to reject ill patients who show up at the emergency room without the ability to pay.

As a developed, advanced country, do we have the stomach to turn away patients who will die on our streets. If that’s what conservatives want, then let them say it out loud.[/quote]

I thought you agree with air_ogi that illegals and legal visitors should get no service?

We can’t have a system where everyone has access to every procedure available. At some point you have to ration. And if the Democrats don’t want to factor in the legal status of the recipient they should say so.

The citizens have access to less care, so the illegals can have access to some (more?) care.

Same with the schools – the citizens’ classes will be larger and teachers per pupil fewer, so the illegal can have access to some (more?) education.

Then we can test if the citizens of the developed country will support such policy.

[all]

[quote=briansd1][quote=air_ogi]I would go with citizens and legal permanent residents along with anyone working here legally.[/quote]

I agree with you air_ogi.

People who claim one reason not to have universal health is because illegals will take advantage of the system.

Even with universal health care, illegals will live under the existing status quo — they will go to the emergency rooms.

Conservatives don’t want to say it… but they really want the system to reject ill patients who show up at the emergency room without the ability to pay.

As a developed, advanced country, do we have the stomach to turn away patients who will die on our streets. If that’s what conservatives want, then let them say it out loud.[/quote]

I thought you agree with air_ogi that illegals and legal visitors should get no service?

We can’t have a system where everyone has access to every procedure available. At some point you have to ration. And if the Democrats don’t want to factor in the legal status of the recipient they should say so.

The citizens have access to less care, so the illegals can have access to some (more?) care.

Same with the schools – the citizens’ classes will be larger and teachers per pupil fewer, so the illegal can have access to some (more?) education.

Then we can test if the citizens of the developed country will support such policy.

[all]

[quote=briansd1][quote=air_ogi]I would go with citizens and legal permanent residents along with anyone working here legally.[/quote]

I agree with you air_ogi.

People who claim one reason not to have universal health is because illegals will take advantage of the system.

Even with universal health care, illegals will live under the existing status quo — they will go to the emergency rooms.

Conservatives don’t want to say it… but they really want the system to reject ill patients who show up at the emergency room without the ability to pay.

As a developed, advanced country, do we have the stomach to turn away patients who will die on our streets. If that’s what conservatives want, then let them say it out loud.[/quote]

I thought you agree with air_ogi that illegals and legal visitors should get no service?

We can’t have a system where everyone has access to every procedure available. At some point you have to ration. And if the Democrats don’t want to factor in the legal status of the recipient they should say so.

The citizens have access to less care, so the illegals can have access to some (more?) care.

Same with the schools – the citizens’ classes will be larger and teachers per pupil fewer, so the illegal can have access to some (more?) education.

Then we can test if the citizens of the developed country will support such policy.

[all]

[quote=briansd1][quote=air_ogi]I would go with citizens and legal permanent residents along with anyone working here legally.[/quote]

I agree with you air_ogi.

People who claim one reason not to have universal health is because illegals will take advantage of the system.

Even with universal health care, illegals will live under the existing status quo — they will go to the emergency rooms.

Conservatives don’t want to say it… but they really want the system to reject ill patients who show up at the emergency room without the ability to pay.

As a developed, advanced country, do we have the stomach to turn away patients who will die on our streets. If that’s what conservatives want, then let them say it out loud.[/quote]

I thought you agree with air_ogi that illegals and legal visitors should get no service?

We can’t have a system where everyone has access to every procedure available. At some point you have to ration. And if the Democrats don’t want to factor in the legal status of the recipient they should say so.

The citizens have access to less care, so the illegals can have access to some (more?) care.

Same with the schools – the citizens’ classes will be larger and teachers per pupil fewer, so the illegal can have access to some (more?) education.

Then we can test if the citizens of the developed country will support such policy.

[all]

[quote=briansd1][quote=air_ogi]I would go with citizens and legal permanent residents along with anyone working here legally.[/quote]

I agree with you air_ogi.

People who claim one reason not to have universal health is because illegals will take advantage of the system.

Even with universal health care, illegals will live under the existing status quo — they will go to the emergency rooms.

Conservatives don’t want to say it… but they really want the system to reject ill patients who show up at the emergency room without the ability to pay.

As a developed, advanced country, do we have the stomach to turn away patients who will die on our streets. If that’s what conservatives want, then let them say it out loud.[/quote]

I thought you agree with air_ogi that illegals and legal visitors should get no service?

We can’t have a system where everyone has access to every procedure available. At some point you have to ration. And if the Democrats don’t want to factor in the legal status of the recipient they should say so.

The citizens have access to less care, so the illegals can have access to some (more?) care.

Same with the schools – the citizens’ classes will be larger and teachers per pupil fewer, so the illegal can have access to some (more?) education.

Then we can test if the citizens of the developed country will support such policy.

[Author]

Posts