But in jeppy’s example, the father-guy is here far more recently than 5 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teacher Terry
perhaps this is a special program he is on?
Printable View
But in jeppy’s example, the father-guy is here far more recently than 5 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teacher Terry
perhaps this is a special program he is on?
I THINK we have the idiotic Obamacare situation under control. After several weeks of phone calls and various directives, we sent the final document that seems to satisfy the Obamabacare drones.Quote:
Originally Posted by iris lilies
DH has exactly the same income today that he had when he was covered by Obamacare 4 months ago: $0. So 4 months ago he was a-ok to have 0 income, but now he is not. We file income taxes jointly where all of the Obamacare subsidies are hammered out.
aye carumba, all we want is health insurance coverage until September 30. Then he will get Medicare coverage. How much subsidy we are ultimately allowed will be determined around April 15 of next year, and the subsidy is less of a concern than having health insurance coverage.
IL, lots of people are getting free stuff that they are not entitled to. I argued with her in a different thread not believing it. When I did research it appears that the other administrations just turned a blind eye. Now the law is being enforced.
Medicaid does not count as government support for new non-citizens, at least not in blue states. The states administer the program. In Massachusetts it is called MassHealth
Something that sounds like a chainsaw has been whining and groaning off and on for two days. They could have cut down a forest by now. Two layers of ear protection isn't working. Please take your f-ing instrument of torture and and go away,
I would consider any expenditures on behalf of immigrants as a wise investment, personally. At least they're not likely to hoard the money in offshore accounts.
Immigrants that come without a sponsor do deserve benefits to get established and it’s expected. The immigrants that are sponsored and someone signed a document stating that they will support them for x number of years and had to send paperwork showing that they can afford to do not deserve benefits. The sponsor has agreed to support them.
The daughter did agree to sponsor her parents but is not doing so. The formula is if over 50% of support is from her they can still get some government benefits, but for someone so sick most of his living expenses are medical not housing. The calculation does not take this into account but is one size fits all.
I can see supporting refugees, but these are economic migrants.
There is also some logic in extending higher education benefits to dreamers who will spend a lifetime contributing to the economy. Chain migration for older, sicker individuals is another story. I hope Trump succeeds in cracking down on this type of abuse of our immigration system.
Sponsorship law changed and was dropped in 1964. We immigrated in '61. I only learned of this change when I spent 1/2 day in the Holocaust Museum several years ago. I had no idea it was no longer required nor that the annual "quota" law had also been dropped. It took us 6y to immigrate!Quote:
Originally Posted by Teacher Terry
Sponsorship is alive and well. It was not dropped, it just is not being enforced consistently. They did deny Food Stamps to the couple, stating that the daughter sponsored them and should be feeding them for 5 years. Yet their more expensive medical treatment is at taxpayer expense.
Yes Yppej is correct. My son sponsored his fiancée 10 years ago and it was for 10 years. It appears it’s shorter now.