Oh goody! More 'stimulus' surprises!
-
Oakman wrote:
a prepay option - dental insurance for instance
correct - the very reason benefits are severly limited. Vision coverage is similar.
Oakman wrote:
The only way the insurance company can stay in business is to charge slightly more than what the average guy collects in benefits in a year for a years coverage.
You're taking it too far. Major medical coverage is a hedge against catastrophe as is more specific contracts called, "dread disease" - typically coverage for cancer or heart attacks. You also have indemnity contracts such as you see advertised by the duck (AFLAK - not sure of the spelling), these pay a daily cash benefit under defined circumstances.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Oakman wrote: The only way the insurance company can stay in business is to charge slightly more than what the average guy collects in benefits in a year for a years coverage. You're taking it too far. Major medical coverage is a hedge against catastrophe as is more specific contracts called, "dread disease" - typically coverage for cancer or heart attacks.
I was still talking about office visit coverage. I guess I wasn't clear. Major medical, to me, is still what insurance is supposed to be about.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
You also have indemnity contracts such as you see advertised by the duck (AFLAK - not sure of the spelling), these pay a daily cash benefit under defined circumstances.
As an addition to healthcare, those are great, but I am not sure they should be used to replace a major medical policy - which you probably weren't implying.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
Sounds more to me like a job for the military. A governments job is to help the people in all aspects of their lives, a border / security issue is handled by the military under the supervision of government. It has much more responsibility then that. This isn't 1400, it isn't god eat dog. People should have a sense of togetherness and should have established a basic set of principles. One of those principles should be if you're sick, I don't care how much money you have, come here and get help.
EliottA wrote:
A governments job is to help the people in all aspects of their lives
All aspects of their lives? My government appointed butt-wiper is about 36 years behind on his dooties. (double pun. Wham!) A major part of the government's responsibility to the people is providing freedom. In the US that's life, liberty and the persuit of happiness. Government meddling and intervention encroaches on the last two, and occationally on the first.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
EliottA wrote:
It all comes down to this, if you need heart surgery or a bypass, and you don't have medical insurance (never mind battling with an insurer to get the money to get the surgery) how much money do you need to have *when you enter* the hospital, never mind how much you will need when you leave.
Utter tripe. A common misconception that has grown into an outright lie. Anyone who qualifies as poor in the US receives access to extensive medical care under the combined state and federal Medicaid programs. The only people who lack acces are those whose employers don't provide it and who choose to gable on not needing health care in order to spend their income elsewhere, and those between jobs who have not been unemployed long enough to qualify for medicaid, and are unable to fund temporary insurance. Anyone fitting the description above is most likely in that situation because of choices they made, not just because they are poor. The hospital I use is littered with signs explaining the availability of care to those who might not have the funds, and includes directions and contacts in the hospital.
EliottA wrote:
I vaguely recall during this summer 2 distinct incidents of people sitting in a waiting room, dying and then left there unattended for some couple of hours
No doubt. unfortunate instances happen in every country (how many died in France from lack of AC not long ago). Such instances are, fortunately, the exception in the US, and not the rule.
EliottA wrote:
hat shit NEVER happens in Montreal.
Bullshit. It may be rare, just as it is in the US, but it happens.
Rob Graham wrote:
EliottA wrote: hat sh*t NEVER happens in Montreal. bullsh*t. It may be rare, just as it is in the US, but it happens.
Apparently even Montreal has problems[^]
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
EliottA wrote:
Better to pay reasonable taxes then absurd charges at point of delivery.
But the kicker is in the word, "reasonable." Here in the states we've tried have have our cake and eat it, too. Mike gets to either pay high insurance premiums and have absolutely free chouce about his medical care or have his company pay almost-as-high premiums on their group plan and make some decisions about what is covered and what isn't. As long the requisite premiums have been paid, his healthcare is just as free at point of sale as yours is. Or he pays a little less in premiums and pays a small amount for his healthcare. Meanwhile we have a large, very large, illegal alien population that swells the ranks of our poor almost to doubling it. Pretty much all of poor get health coverage by going to the local hospital's emergency room which is required to treat everyone who comes through the door. So their healthcare is just as free at point of sale as yours. It's usually more of an assembly line process than Mikes, but it's pretty good and they do get some access to some of the best medical technology in the world. However, the government passed that law without any funding for it, so the hospitals must attempt to recover their costs by raising the price of everything for all of their other patients. That of course means that the insurance companies have to raise their rates to cover their costs, so Mike still ends up paying for the healthcare of the rather large underclass that exists. The folks who get screwed the worst under our system are those middle-class workers who don't have insurance at work. They can buy private policies but they are extremely expensive. I was lucky when I was contracting to be able to piggyback on my then-wife's policy. Otherwise my going rate would have had to go up by about $15.00 @ hour just to get decent healthcare coverage.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
The folks who get screwed the worst under our system are those middle-class workers who don't have insurance at work.
I was in the hospital approximately 64 hours last fall for my heart attack. The bill was $107,000. However, since the insurance company had a contract with them, about $40,000 came right off the top. So those without insurance but have some assets are really stuck with picking up the tab of those who don't pay.
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
-
EliottA wrote:
A governments job is to help the people in all aspects of their lives
All aspects of their lives? My government appointed butt-wiper is about 36 years behind on his dooties. (double pun. Wham!) A major part of the government's responsibility to the people is providing freedom. In the US that's life, liberty and the persuit of happiness. Government meddling and intervention encroaches on the last two, and occationally on the first.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
BoneSoft wrote:
My government appointed butt-wiper is about 36 years behind on his dooties.
bull-duty. When you were in Asia, you were expected to get your own.
BoneSoft wrote:
In the US that's life, liberty and the persuit of happiness. Government meddling and intervention encroaches on the last two, and occationally on the first.
It's all Ike's fault. If he hadn't ordered the Interstates to be built, we'd all still be Jeffersonians.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
Oakman wrote:
The folks who get screwed the worst under our system are those middle-class workers who don't have insurance at work.
I was in the hospital approximately 64 hours last fall for my heart attack. The bill was $107,000. However, since the insurance company had a contract with them, about $40,000 came right off the top. So those without insurance but have some assets are really stuck with picking up the tab of those who don't pay.
"Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it." -- P.J. O'Rourke
-
Oakman wrote:
Strictly speaking most transactions are wealth redistribution. If I give my son a couple of hundred, that's wealth redistributions just as much as if some guy gets ahold of my bankcard and cleans out my checkinging account.
So you approve of this then? Let it be from my taxes instead of an additional cost for something I don't even use then.
Oakman wrote:
Part of the problem is that these days, some insurance is simply a prepay option - dental insurance for instance. Almost everybody that has it wants to collect on it, every year. The only way the insurance company can stay in business is to charge slightly more than what the average guy collects in benefits in a year for a years coverage. The old idea of insurance being a hedge against catastrophes just doesn't cut it any more.
Due to a 30% overhead and a mandate to pay profit to shareholders its no wonder. Medicare is 3% overhead. Now how is it that Insurance companies are more appropriate for "Paying" for care than our government through taxes? I'm not talking about providing care itself, just the payments. Medicare is a single payer system. We aren't talking about care. We're talking about payment systems.
This statement is false
Synaptrik wrote:
So you approve of this then?
Nope. What I approve of is using words and phrases correctly.
Synaptrik wrote:
Medicare is 3% overhead
I'm aware. It's one of those facts that really pisses some conservative off.
Synaptrik wrote:
Now how is it that Insurance companies are more appropriate for "Paying" for care than our government through taxes?
I think it's the opt-out feature that is appealing. When you are single, 21, and in good health you don't want to be the guy who pays in.
Synaptrik wrote:
We aren't talking about care. We're talking about payment systems
We've actually discussed both in this thread - sometimes without it being clear what we meant.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
Sounds more to me like a job for the military. A governments job is to help the people in all aspects of their lives, a border / security issue is handled by the military under the supervision of government. It has much more responsibility then that. This isn't 1400, it isn't god eat dog. People should have a sense of togetherness and should have established a basic set of principles. One of those principles should be if you're sick, I don't care how much money you have, come here and get help.
EliottA wrote:
A governments job is to help the people in all aspects of their lives
That is the most horrifying comment I have ever heard made. It was precisely such attititudes that made Hitler and Stalin possible. A government that has the power to give you everything you need has the power to take everything you have. Personal responsibility, the wherewithall to care for one's own needs on one's own way, is a necessary prerequisite for freedom.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
EliottA wrote:
A governments job is to help the people in all aspects of their lives
That is the most horrifying comment I have ever heard made. It was precisely such attititudes that made Hitler and Stalin possible. A government that has the power to give you everything you need has the power to take everything you have. Personal responsibility, the wherewithall to care for one's own needs on one's own way, is a necessary prerequisite for freedom.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
That is the most horrifying comment I have ever heard made. It was precisely such attititudes that made Hitler and Stalin possible.
I'd relax there big guy, Stalin and Hitler's policies can't exactly be catagorized as "helping people in all aspects of their lives". They sought more to control then to help.
Stan Shannon wrote:
A government that has the power to give you everything you need has the power to take everything you have. Personal responsibility, the wherewithall to care for one's own needs on one's own way, is a necessary prerequisite for freedom.
That couldn't be more false. A government only has the power to do what the people governed allow it to do. The people created the government.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
That is the most horrifying comment I have ever heard made. It was precisely such attititudes that made Hitler and Stalin possible.
I'd relax there big guy, Stalin and Hitler's policies can't exactly be catagorized as "helping people in all aspects of their lives". They sought more to control then to help.
Stan Shannon wrote:
A government that has the power to give you everything you need has the power to take everything you have. Personal responsibility, the wherewithall to care for one's own needs on one's own way, is a necessary prerequisite for freedom.
That couldn't be more false. A government only has the power to do what the people governed allow it to do. The people created the government.
EliottA wrote:
I'd relax there big guy, Stalin and Hitler's policies can't exactly be catagorized as "helping people in all aspects of their lives". They sought more to control then to help.
There is no difference between the power to control and the power to help. There is no such thing as "good" political power and "bad" political power. The power to do good is indistinquishable from the power to do bad. They are exactly the same thing.
EliottA wrote:
A government only has the power to do what the people governed allow it to do. The people created the government.
That is pure nonsense. What you are describing is the ultimate example of trading freedom for security. Being cared for is for children, not free adults. Freedom and responsibility mean exactly the same thing. When you say you wish to be free, you are saying that you wish to be responsible for providing for your own needs. There is no other definition of freedom possible.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
-
EliottA wrote:
I'd relax there big guy, Stalin and Hitler's policies can't exactly be catagorized as "helping people in all aspects of their lives". They sought more to control then to help.
There is no difference between the power to control and the power to help. There is no such thing as "good" political power and "bad" political power. The power to do good is indistinquishable from the power to do bad. They are exactly the same thing.
EliottA wrote:
A government only has the power to do what the people governed allow it to do. The people created the government.
That is pure nonsense. What you are describing is the ultimate example of trading freedom for security. Being cared for is for children, not free adults. Freedom and responsibility mean exactly the same thing. When you say you wish to be free, you are saying that you wish to be responsible for providing for your own needs. There is no other definition of freedom possible.
Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.
Stan Shannon wrote:
There is no difference between the power to control and the power to help. There is no such thing as "good" political power and "bad" political power. The power to do good is indistinquishable from the power to do bad. They are exactly the same thing.
You're a little naive there. Power, like anything else comes in degrees. If you choose to see things in black and white then hell yes, the power to help if equitable to the power to control completely, even when compared pound to pound.
Stan Shannon wrote:
What you are describing is the ultimate example of trading freedom for security
No, what I am describing is the Government pooling resources of the people to help the health of the people as a whole. You can sit there and tout how I'm socialistic or communistic I am, but I live in a free and liberal country that enjoys the same rights you do, except I have free health care. Cross the border, have some. You'd be surprised how many of you do.
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
That is the most horrifying comment I have ever heard made. It was precisely such attititudes that made Hitler and Stalin possible.
I'd relax there big guy, Stalin and Hitler's policies can't exactly be catagorized as "helping people in all aspects of their lives". They sought more to control then to help.
Stan Shannon wrote:
A government that has the power to give you everything you need has the power to take everything you have. Personal responsibility, the wherewithall to care for one's own needs on one's own way, is a necessary prerequisite for freedom.
That couldn't be more false. A government only has the power to do what the people governed allow it to do. The people created the government.
EliottA wrote:
Stalin and Hitler's policies can't exactly be catagorized as "helping people in all aspects of their lives". They sought more to control then to help.
That's the point though. All they needed to be able to do that was for the people to think that they were being helped in all aspects, which gave dictators the power to do otherwise.
EliottA wrote:
That couldn't be more false. A government only has the power to do what the people governed allow it to do. The people created the government.
Really? The people don't have direct control of the military, the government does. If your statement were true, how would you explain genicidal governments in Africa, Hitler, Stalin, North Korea, North Viet Nam, Mao, USSR? People get fooled into accepting the wrong leaders, and some people never had a say at all. The people don't determine anything, the money does. How do you explain puppet governments?
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
EliottA wrote:
Stalin and Hitler's policies can't exactly be catagorized as "helping people in all aspects of their lives". They sought more to control then to help.
That's the point though. All they needed to be able to do that was for the people to think that they were being helped in all aspects, which gave dictators the power to do otherwise.
EliottA wrote:
That couldn't be more false. A government only has the power to do what the people governed allow it to do. The people created the government.
Really? The people don't have direct control of the military, the government does. If your statement were true, how would you explain genicidal governments in Africa, Hitler, Stalin, North Korea, North Viet Nam, Mao, USSR? People get fooled into accepting the wrong leaders, and some people never had a say at all. The people don't determine anything, the money does. How do you explain puppet governments?
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
By the neglect of the majority of people. Most people sit by saying they can't do anything. Someone alone can't do everything. Everyone together can do anything.
BoneSoft wrote:
All they needed to be able to do that was for the people to think that they were being helped in all aspects, which gave dictators the power to do otherwise.
That's not exactly what they did. We are going a little off topic with Hitler and Stalin though I think...
BoneSoft wrote:
People get fooled into accepting the wrong leaders(...)
And People have an option to stand together and make a change. Don't think it ever happened? How did that Castro guy come into power again..?
-
BoneSoft wrote:
My government appointed butt-wiper is about 36 years behind on his dooties.
bull-duty. When you were in Asia, you were expected to get your own.
BoneSoft wrote:
In the US that's life, liberty and the persuit of happiness. Government meddling and intervention encroaches on the last two, and occationally on the first.
It's all Ike's fault. If he hadn't ordered the Interstates to be built, we'd all still be Jeffersonians.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
When you were in Asia, you were expected to get your own.
A) how do you know that? B) that was kinda my point, that his statement was way off in left field. The government is responsible for all aspects of your life? There has to be a line somewhere. As soon as the government is responsible for my health, the government will tell me what I can and can't do, eat, drink, smoke, stand near, look at, etc. And they could dictate ANYTHING under the claim that they're protecting my mental health. Responsibility is power.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
By the neglect of the majority of people. Most people sit by saying they can't do anything. Someone alone can't do everything. Everyone together can do anything.
BoneSoft wrote:
All they needed to be able to do that was for the people to think that they were being helped in all aspects, which gave dictators the power to do otherwise.
That's not exactly what they did. We are going a little off topic with Hitler and Stalin though I think...
BoneSoft wrote:
People get fooled into accepting the wrong leaders(...)
And People have an option to stand together and make a change. Don't think it ever happened? How did that Castro guy come into power again..?
EliottA wrote:
And People have an option to stand together and make a change.
Sure. But it's never easy, painless or desirable to need to do that. How bad did things get before the French finally revolted? And how destructive was that revolt to the people and the nation? When the people rise up, a good portion of the people always die for doing so. It's apparenty hard enough to accomplish that it's rarely attempted. Otherwise most of the world would have a government that they like. As is, most don't. Getting to vote for which corrupt bastard is put in government is about as close as any of us ever come. And even then we wind up with some pretty restricted choices. Castro huh... There's a good example of how bad a revolt is for the people. And I don't think they're much better off for it either.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
EliottA wrote:
And People have an option to stand together and make a change.
Sure. But it's never easy, painless or desirable to need to do that. How bad did things get before the French finally revolted? And how destructive was that revolt to the people and the nation? When the people rise up, a good portion of the people always die for doing so. It's apparenty hard enough to accomplish that it's rarely attempted. Otherwise most of the world would have a government that they like. As is, most don't. Getting to vote for which corrupt bastard is put in government is about as close as any of us ever come. And even then we wind up with some pretty restricted choices. Castro huh... There's a good example of how bad a revolt is for the people. And I don't think they're much better off for it either.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
Hey, they have better health care then you do :omg: :omg: :omg:
BoneSoft wrote:
But it's never easy, painless or desirable to need to do that.
Canada did it without that much pain, and no where near a 'good portion' of the population died to get it's independence.
BoneSoft wrote:
It's apparenty hard enough to accomplish that it's rarely attempted. Otherwise most of the world would have a government that they like.
Most of the world never tried it, a good portion of those that did, enjoy the government they have. -Canada -United States of America -Cuba (yes, most Cubans are happy with their government, despite the high profile refugees bound to America) -France There are others.
-
Hey, they have better health care then you do :omg: :omg: :omg:
BoneSoft wrote:
But it's never easy, painless or desirable to need to do that.
Canada did it without that much pain, and no where near a 'good portion' of the population died to get it's independence.
BoneSoft wrote:
It's apparenty hard enough to accomplish that it's rarely attempted. Otherwise most of the world would have a government that they like.
Most of the world never tried it, a good portion of those that did, enjoy the government they have. -Canada -United States of America -Cuba (yes, most Cubans are happy with their government, despite the high profile refugees bound to America) -France There are others.
EliottA wrote:
Hey, they have better health care then you do
This[^] paints a different picture. But I don't know that much about it. I'll take your word for it for now. As for Canada, I suppose there are always exceptions to the rule. Point taken.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
-
Synaptrik wrote:
So you approve of this then?
Nope. What I approve of is using words and phrases correctly.
Synaptrik wrote:
Medicare is 3% overhead
I'm aware. It's one of those facts that really pisses some conservative off.
Synaptrik wrote:
Now how is it that Insurance companies are more appropriate for "Paying" for care than our government through taxes?
I think it's the opt-out feature that is appealing. When you are single, 21, and in good health you don't want to be the guy who pays in.
Synaptrik wrote:
We aren't talking about care. We're talking about payment systems
We've actually discussed both in this thread - sometimes without it being clear what we meant.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Well, being 40 and responsible.... Auto Insurance: 100 a month for 15 years. Never a need to file. 18,000. This should be an escrow account, but I don't get any benefit. Its the guy whose Hummer was rearended by an uninsured that receives that benefit. That's just Auto. Health is much more expensive, and its always cited as part of compensation and why my salary needs to be lower. Never filed a claim. Let me correct that, I used it once. Sprained my ankle, doc hit it with a rubber hammer and said its sprained, stay off of it, it would have been better if it was broken. 10 dollar co-pay to boot. Guess all that insurance that I paid wasn't enough for that visit. (yes I'm being facetious). Insurance is not any better than Universal Health Care. It is not a suitable replacement.
This statement is false
-
Oakman wrote:
When you were in Asia, you were expected to get your own.
A) how do you know that? B) that was kinda my point, that his statement was way off in left field. The government is responsible for all aspects of your life? There has to be a line somewhere. As soon as the government is responsible for my health, the government will tell me what I can and can't do, eat, drink, smoke, stand near, look at, etc. And they could dictate ANYTHING under the claim that they're protecting my mental health. Responsibility is power.
Visit BoneSoft.com for code generation tools (XML & XSD -> C#, VB, etc...) and some free developer tools as well.
BoneSoft wrote:
A) how do you know that?
Because I was in Asia, too - just about 2000 miles southwest of you.
BoneSoft wrote:
And they could dictate ANYTHING under the claim that they're protecting my mental health. Responsibility is power.
"Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do and how you do it." ~ Rudolph Giuliani I forget. Is he a Republicrat or a Demmican? "Sometimes it is said that man cannot be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?" ~ Thomas Jefferson That last guy actually called himself a Democrat-Republican. The words must have meant something different back then.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
-
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Oakman wrote: The only way the insurance company can stay in business is to charge slightly more than what the average guy collects in benefits in a year for a years coverage. You're taking it too far. Major medical coverage is a hedge against catastrophe as is more specific contracts called, "dread disease" - typically coverage for cancer or heart attacks.
I was still talking about office visit coverage. I guess I wasn't clear. Major medical, to me, is still what insurance is supposed to be about.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
You also have indemnity contracts such as you see advertised by the duck (AFLAK - not sure of the spelling), these pay a daily cash benefit under defined circumstances.
As an addition to healthcare, those are great, but I am not sure they should be used to replace a major medical policy - which you probably weren't implying.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Algoraphobia: An exaggerated fear of the outside world rooted in the belief that one might spontaneously combust due to global warming.
Oakman wrote:
Major medical, to me, is still what insurance is supposed to be about
yep
Oakman wrote:
As an addition to healthcare, those are great
yep == good discussion - enjoyed it.
Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.