Geo, I'm seeing a theme among your arguments. If I can summarize, it sounds like you are frustrated about government subsidies going towards people who aren't paying back into the system in the form of taxes.
At least, that's what I assume is your major problem with illegal aliens, and that it's not a racial or xenophobic issue.
I think we can both call it a problem when the government sets up an entitlement system for taxpayers, and it also happens to benefit those who don't pay taxes. It's frustrating because it raises the costs of the system to provide these benefits, but those who are legitimately paying into it have to carry the burden of those costs. So bottom line is, I understand your feedback and appreciate that point of view.
What I'm hoping to do, though, is separate the issue of inappropriate access of benefits, with the availability of these benefits to those who are legitimate citizens, including those who are already paying taxes, but who have been cast out of the health care system due to a pre-existing condition. It would also include those who pay taxes, but who are having problems paying their inverted mortgages in this down economy, and still afford the rising costs of health care.
Health care reform is about addressing those problems, so let's agree to that.
The thing that would be consistent with allieving your frustration would be if health care reform also closed the loopholes that were allowing access to services like Medicaid to non-taxpayers. Agreed?
If so, here's my point:
Because health care reform did not close the loopholes, you seem to be against it. However, I don't think that's entirely consistent. While it would have made you happy to close the loopholes, the main goal of the bill was to provide better access to affordable health care to actual taxpayers, and it succeeded in doing that. It would be one thing to oppose the bill if it expanded care to non-taxpayers, but it did not do that. It merely maintained the status quo, while expanding the coverage to more legitimate people. So for that reason, you should not be opposing it.
As for your last comment about amnesty, I find it curious why you wouldn't be in total support of it. After all, if you are frustrated with non-taxpayers taking advantage of a system that the taxpayers are funding, then why not make all the non-taxpayers official citizens, and make them liable to IRS audits? That's what amnesty would essentially do.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
