True that GP.

Amzazing, one of the Most Biggest and Well endowed School Systems in Johnson Country Ks. (Also, one of the wealthiest in The US), sent letters stating that there were problems with SS #s. Mass leavings and not to be heard from since. (Illegals).

U. Ks. just announced, want to raise Tuition to $4,800.00 for 15 Credit hours= 1 Semester!:(

So, almost $10,000 to attend a State U. not counting anything else.

Damn sometimes it is good to be old. Paid out of State Tuition and worked during the summer to pay for a School Year.!:cool:

How does one pay into the system without a SSN?

It is my understanding that duplicate or wrong SSN's are filed in a "to be filed" section where they are basically ignored. Apparently, that file has mushroomed.

This has been caused primarily due to false or duplicate SSN's filed by illegal aliens.

To obtain employment in the US, a worker must provide a SSN to the employer. That number is used to pay Social Security, taxes, etc.

Please see this congressional testimony, it has basically all you need to know:

http://www.utexas.edu/lbj/uscir/092994.html

Kev, while that might be true, there are Illegals who could give a damn about paying into SS! They make Americano $$$ send it back home and live like well to do people!

But, remember, the reason they are here is to work as for wages, most Americans wont work for that pay! They/We are to damn Good?:(

Prime example: Customer comes in the store today. Asked If I know of anyone hiring. Yes, Dollar General, Oh No, I mean Warehouse work.:rolleyes:

What the hell am I a Hiring Agency?:confused:

Tom, I'm not against them being here. I am against them being here illegally, running up bills in our public hospitals, taking up space in our prison system, etc. without anyone but the American people being held accountable.

Where I would like for the US to just send Mexico a bill for their contribution to our public problems, I don't find that likely.

I think we'd all agree that our current system is basically living a lie. There are lots of people -- American citizens really being hurt due to government inaction on this. I'm all for migrant workers, I agree that they serve a real need in our community, but we need to have a system through which immigration can be legal, controlled -- not in numbers, but in terms of who crosses the border, and self-funded.

Perhaps you failed to go to ssa.gov, a lovely website with all sorts of information about the social security system. It has basically all you need to know.

Look into items such as the "Tax ID number."

Are you referring to the ITIN? It is to allow voluntary compliance with the tax code.

http://policy.ssa.gov/erm/rules.nsf/...56d180066599a/$FILE/Rajivs_Khanna_pc.txt

Please be aware that to use this in place of a SSN to gain employment is also illegal.

according to this article, the SSA estimates that 3/4 of all illegal immigrant workers pay into SS and medicare. Whether or not you agree with the author's conclusion that the current viability of social security relies on this huge number ($56 billion, it seems), it seems an interesting point.

KT - what's your real point here? I have difficulty assigning your feelings to much more than rampant xenophobia - I've never heard of an American citizen being denied health care, etc because of illegal immigrants. I've only heard of American citizens becoming rich by utilizing immigrant workers.

It's a two-way road - if you're willing to assign such blame to the immigrants and 'Mexico' (as you put it), how do you feel about the citizens that are the enablers? Are these workers really such a 'drag' on the average American, when most are in the work force and earning a living? Not to even introduce the type of jobs being geared toward immigrant workers . . .

Also - how does this apply to in-state tuition at colleges? Doesn't the prospect of higher education help to alleviate the endemic problems that you associate with illegal immigration?

Here is a question
 

How can a person be a "legal" resident of a specific state, when they aren't a "legal" resident/immigrant of the country?

Re: Here is a question
 

You have just touched on the heart of the case, which makes sense. You are not a citizen, so you must pay out of state tuition (or whatever other international students pay).


Case opens on illegal immigrants' tuition break

BY KATHERINE LEAL UNMUTH

The Wichita Eagle


TOPEKA - Lawyers argued in federal court Tuesday whether a Kansas law granting in-state tuition to illegal immigrants is legal.

It is the first federal challenge to the law and is seen as a test case nationally on the issue. Eight other states have similar laws.

Kris Kobach, a constitutional law professor from the University of Missouri-Kansas City, is challenging the law with the support of the Federation for American Immigration Reform. They filed suit on behalf of 24 out-of-state students and parents who feel the law discriminates against them.

Kobach argued that, according to a 1996 federal law, the state doesn't have the right to offer such a residency-based benefit to illegal immigrants when it is not offered to all U.S. citizens. Only the federal government can control immigration law, he said.

"The federal government has not thrown in the towel and said, 'Go ahead, states,' " Kobach said.

He also argued that offering the benefit to illegal immigrants places a heavier burden on the state, causing tuition rates to increase.

Last fall, 30 students in the state benefitted from the law. Those students were required to sign an affidavit stating they are pursuing legal status.

The state, represented by Michael Delaney, argued that the law is worded so that it is not based on residency. The law grants in-state tuition to any student who has attended a Kansas high school for at least three years and has graduated or holds a certificate from a Kansas high school.

He also said the plaintiff students have no standing to bring the case because they are not harmed and would pay out-of-state tuition regardless of the law. They also have no private right to request enforcement of immigration law, he said.

"There isn't any basis on which the plaintiffs are suffering an injury as a result of the law," Delaney said. "This is a classic case of an interest group that is concerned and seeks to become a sort of private attorney general."


Read The Rest Here

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This leads me back to the SSN issue again. Most illegals (not just Mexicans, but I do know of others) do share SSNs. My mother is a nurse for a small husband/wife clinic who's patients are primarily of a particular immigrant group. They track patients via SSN, and she said its not uncommon to have 5 or 6 people listed under the same SSN. It is a common practice because nothing is done to prevent it.

This site's goal is anything but to present an objective view of illegal immigration. I would seriously call into question the validity of any figures that they profess to be factual. I'll admit that I don't have anything to disprove them, however, this dot-org site has a very specific agenda, and those numbers seem to paint a rosey picture that may or may not be the case.

As for the figure you cite about 3/4 of all illegal immigrants paying into medicare, I find that claim to be dubious at best. 3/4 of immigrants, maybe, but illegal ones?

The testimony on this testimony before the Subcommittee on immigration, border security and claims provides some pretty compelling numbers though:

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache...ient=firefox-a

Pay particular attention to the data that is presented that shows how many illegals that do file get tax subsidies in excess of their liabilities -- in other words, they pay taxes, but they end up making a profit in doing so.

I do not suffer from xenophobia. I suffer from the belief that these illegal practices cause considerable harm to our economy. Further, I never alleged any American citizen was turned down for health care, etc. due to illegal immigrants. Of course, if you wanted to get technical about it, many public hospitals do attribute their closings or financial distress to the fact that they received many illegal aliens that did not pay for the services they received. I'm not sure how sound a statement that is, but I certainly have heard it enough times that I suspect there may be some substance to it.

Also, for every American that gets rich off this, there are taxes going unpaid insurance premiums not paid, other legal employers that are unable to compete due to unethical practices by their competition, etc. Most of this is described in the first link I posted.

I think the Mexican group is by far the largest illegal immigrant group, so assigning them the most blame, I believe is a fair practice. Also, I never said anything about employers. You are jumping to a conclusion here. Personally, I'd like to see employers of illegal aliens held to severe criminal and financial penalties. I'm not sure what the law is there now, but I believe that there are some pretty strong laws in place already. However, they are laxly enforced.

The connection exists, but it seems that our discussion has digressed a lot, hasn't it?

Universities are funded by citizens living in a certain state who pay taxes. If an individual's parents do not contribute to the state that pays for that school to exist, and they are breaking the law in the first place by being there, why should they be rewarded?

To me, it appears to be a case of people who disrespect the laws of our land being rewarded. I just don't appreciate being taken advantage of like that.

I'll agree with the site's lack of neutrality, it was merely the first I found - however, the data given was purported to come from the SSA, and showed up often in the google search. Take it for what you will, but it was specifically about illegal immigrants.

Unless you have a cite for these claims, I find them dubious at best - and until you can provide support for them, it inches closer to something less than academic interest. That was my point there, nothing more.


This is the only point I can really get behind - it's tough for me to unilaterally deny in-state benefits, though, because until widespread reform takes place, it feels like I'm hiding my head in the sand (the 'ostrich mentality'), if that makes any sense - I guess my point is that I see where you're coming from in a strictly legal sense on the whole, but it seems that there may be some strong benefits to this specific program.

I couldn't find that data anywhere, and I looked pretty hard. What search criterion were you using?

Quote:

Unless you have a cite for these claims, I find them dubious at best - and until you can provide support for them, it inches closer to something less than academic interest. That was my point there, nothing more.

The above referenced congressional testimony illustrated these claims extremely well, and in very specific and user friendly terms. It's a lot of info to cut and paste, so if you doubt the veracity of those claims, just check the site.

Quote:

This is the only point I can really get behind - it's tough for me to unilaterally deny in-state benefits, though, because until widespread reform takes place, it feels like I'm hiding my head in the sand (the 'ostrich mentality'), if that makes any sense - I guess my point is that I see where you're coming from in a strictly legal sense on the whole, but it seems that there may be some strong benefits to this specific program.

Our entire immigration policy exhibits the 'ostrich mentality'. I think we can both agree that there needs to be some substantial reform with concessions to and from both sides. The status quo is nothing more than a lot of blatant abuse with the occasional big bust (like Wal-Mart a couple of years ago with their janatorial contractor) just for show.

Here are some ideas that I think we could both get behind:

#1 -- Undocumented immigration must cease entirely, or at least as much as possible.

#2 -- Legal immigration should be available for the asking to any individual who wants to come here granted that immigrants pay taxes and whatever else the state deems necessary for them to be at least self-supporting.

#3 -- Employers should face strict criminal and financial penalties for carrying illegal immigrants (or anyone for that matter) in an "off the books" capacity.

As for education, it should only be available to people who have paid substantial taxes to support the institutions of higher-ed. On the other hand, I think that illegal aliens should be able to apply for student visas through their home government. The United States offers a great deal in the way of scholarship money to foriegn students. I see no reason to penalize foriegn students just because of their home address. If we offer scholarships to Mexican citizens, let them apply under the same set of rules that we would give to other Mexican citizens.

As for giving them in-state tuition, why? They're not legally residents of the state if they're not legally residents of the country.

As a Black Women told Me, they are here to do the work that no one else will do! She too is is fed up with the crap of give me!

Her first thing was The Members of Her Race who do not get off of asses as She Does and go to work instead of the Liquor store or Bar!

But, The Mexicans will do work for pitence that Whites and Blacks wont do.

Yes, while I admire them, they still are not legal and getting money that can go toward Americans who need it and desearve it. So, that said, put the dead beat asses to work or quit houseing and feeding them! Guess what, they will work!:rolleyes:

TOM EARP. GO BACK TO COLLEGE AND TAKE A LABOR MARKETS CLASS.

I will make this as simple as possible for you.

There is a job open in Kansas City, a metropolitan area with which you are familiar. The job is to sort though the garbage at a landfill with your toothbrush until you find all the used tampons, which you will place in a bin. The job title is TAMPON SELECTOR.

KC has been advertising for a TAMPON SELECTOR for over six months. No current KC residents will take this job.

An illegal immigrant from Canada takes this job of TAMPON SELECTOR.

Please explain to me how the Canadian TAMPON SELECTORis taking money that should be going to Americans. The job of TAMPON SELECTOR was unfilled by Americans because their reservation wage - the price at which they are willing to take a job - is higher than the wage being paid for TAMPON SELECTORS.

You can't say they are doing work nobody will do and then say they are taking dollars away from Americans. You're being contradictory.

GP, there are legal channels that this Canadian could have gone through to avoid being an illegal immigrant.

Obtaining a work visa for a job that an American wouldn't do in this instance might not be impossible, of course, I'm no immigration lawyer. I'll ask one the next time I talk to one whether one can get a work visa to be a tampon selector :)

To be fair, I reviewed the current process, and in general, it's so complex that it is recommended that immigrants employ immigration attorneys.

In any case, the law needs to be reformed, however, the current law, as unjust as it is should be enforced.