As to the recent US election, I think many of the talking heads are missing the point. Independents have not converted to being Republicans. Folks like JD, Tulsi, RFK, Jr., and Ramaswamy banded together against a kind of machine that was trying to crush them using state authority. Media lied about Biden's health and a variety of other to…
As to the recent US election, I think many of the talking heads are missing the point. Independents have not converted to being Republicans. Folks like JD, Tulsi, RFK, Jr., and Ramaswamy banded together against a kind of machine that was trying to crush them using state authority. Media lied about Biden's health and a variety of other topics. The stories tend to focus on Trump himself.
Another concern was poor people who were getting less than new (illegal) immigrants. This was noticeable to them.. and they weren't happy. There's a resentment, appropriate or not that follows from ... "we have to obey the laws or go to jail.. they don't. We get some things from our government, they get more and better things." And when they ask "why"? There is no answer.
Makes sense. Mass immigration is generally a driver of populism. It is also an article of faith both for the left and for the capitalist true believer that borders should be as open as possible.
Well, everyone gets free Emergency Department visits, regardless of ability to pay. I also work in healthcare, in the ER, actually, so I'm well aware of people, regardless of their country of origin, who use the ER for all their medical care. They don't pay their ER bills and that's why ER visits are so expensive. So while yes, immigrants use the ER for healthcare, so do plenty of other people who are on social assistance programs. What is the value of a human life? I guess we each have to answer that ourselves.
In places with sales tax, anyone purchasing within the economy is paying taxes on goods.
So, do undocumented immigrants pay state and federal taxes? In most cases, probably not. But neither do servers who don't report their tips.
Everyone working in the US pays into social security, so actually this is funded in a large part by undocumented workers who pay into SSI but don't take from it.
I won't argue that the medical system is twisted, but what is most twisted to me is that when we spend billions on the dept of defense and more billions so that Israel can go on with their genocide, I think it frankly highlights that the US doesn't give a damn about health or human life.
In London, they are currently getting the majority of the social housing. There's quite a long list. You would have to be looking the other way not to see that some of the resentments people have are based on reality.
[edit: a reader writes to tell me that the social housing figure is disputed, along with most figures in this debate. This is worth bearing in mind here. There is a lot of heat flying around. But the general trend is evident.]
I know nothing about London. I don't think anti-immigrant sentiment in the US is based on much other than xenophobia. Border towns in the US do have higher crime rates, but that is a pretty specific context that doesn't actually affect the majority of the US population. Undocumented (and legal) immigrants, do represent a good way to whip up resentment though, to be sure. Mostly, those people are working difficult labor jobs that people in the US don't want to do.
So what precisely is the reality that the resentment is based upon? That's very unclear to me.
Well, I couldn't say anything about the situation in the US. From over here though, the discourse sounds very similar to that in Europe, on both sides of the fence. One side deals, at least sometimes, in apocalyptic and often abusive language to describe immigrants. The other side denies that the sheer scale of the current migration causes any problems at all. I am hoping this logjam will be broken, but they feed off each other. All I know is that, twenty years or so ago, when inward migration was at a much lower level, none of this was occurring. In my country, what is clear is that the current rate and scale of immigration is unsustainable and has no popular mandate behind it.
In an attempt to be as specific as possible, which I think is the best way to talk about these issues, I'll cite the data. Department of Homeland Security (that's a big brother name, isn't it) had 6.5million encounters at the US-Mexico border between Feb 2021 and Oct 2023. Of those, about 2.5 million were released into the US with notices to appear in court. So the numbers are greatly exaggerated by politicians who have much to gain by stoking fear.
By contrast, in the 1940's to 1960's, the Braceros program allowed for 5 million immigrants yearly for farm work.
So whether the US can handle the numbers of undocumented immigrants seems not to be that concerning to me.
Moreover, my problem with the overall media/political narrative (again, talking about the US context) is that it does not include the fact that migration has been happening because of US policies that for decades have destabilized Central and South America through banana republics, NAFTA, and through propping up dictatorships that have been incredibly destructive. I find it incredibly cynical to point blame at people legitimately seeking a better life from problems often directly caused by US intervention.
What then, in your opinion, is the reason so many of your countryfolk seem so upset about migration? Do you believe there is no reason for concern at all? Is it all just invented or stoked u? From what I have heard from many other sources, that seems like a highly unlikely scenario. But like I say, I'm not American.
Well, this is only data about immigration, not people's feelings. A feeling can be real but not necessarily based on truth.
Media was filled with the story of Laken Riley, a woman from Georgia killed by a migrant from South America, but that does not mean immigrants are more violent than US citizens. In fact, studies show they are less violent.
So it's pretty tempting to say that it is mostly due to xenophobia stoked by politicians for their own ends. Which saddens me, because I think hospitality toward the other is the core ethic of Judaism and Christianity, and a great deal of other religions, and because I traveled a lot when I was younger and received so much beautiful hospitality from people in other countries.
Well, I agree about the xenophobia. On the other hand, while I can't comment on the US, I can say that for twenty or so years in the UK people have been told that 'the figures' don't support their concerns about the impacts of immigration, but many of those figures have been massaged, hushed up or just inaccurate. We have had mass sexual abuse from grooming gangs, ongoing terror attacks and widespread crime - and some of 'the figures', where they are made available, do demonstrate that some ethnic groups are over-represented in certain criminal convictions - as well as a broader sense of social breakdown and growing ethnic and racial division. It is this, on the streets of ordinary towns and cities, that has fuelled the discontent. Certainly xenophobes have stoked it, but they didn't create it.
I agree about the importance of hospitality and indeed Christian love. But I also believe in having borders around countries, not least because I think security fosters hospitality, and insecurity creates more hatred and fear.
Yes, I think we depart significantly on the subject of borders. I don't really understand why you are so in favor, as they are just an extension of the nation state, and before that, empires, which surely you understand to be an arm of the Machine?
So why the apologetics for borders? I think more historically accurate and more true to nature are fuzzy boundaries and porous borders, both in nature and in human societies. Ecotones of ecosystems and such. In the Americas, the Haudenosaunee confederacy was a good example of distinct tribes with affiliation and porous borders. Historically in the United States, people on the southern border have also traveled back and forth for work without this being mediated by passports, visas, and the state. Frankly, it's not possible with an area as large as the Southern (or Northern) border of the US to be closed without a deep affiliation with the machine by walls, cameras, and drones. Why you would argue for such a closed border I can't really understand.
When I traveled some in West Africa, I got a bit of sense of this, as it was borderlands that were areas rich in trade, and often with a plurality of different people living together (mostly) harmoniously. More recently I think that has probably changed with fundamentalist islamic groups causing more violence.
Borders existed long before the nation-state. And no one complains about them when they're peaceful.
I think that when people talk about closed vs. open borders they're speaking in relative terms; very few people are arguing for completely open or closed borders.
As far as the U.S. being able to handle large numbers of immigrants, other things come into play. Where exactly are they going, and can those specific places handle the numbers? To what extent do they want to assimilate?
The Christian hospitality thing only goes so far, based on simple logic: you can only be hospitable to so many people given your specific situation. It's no different for cities, states and countries, and in any case there's no indication in Christ's teaching that he was talking about political entities anyways.
The guy to read on all this is the French writer Renaud Camus. He's been called a racist, a xenophobe, and a fascist for his views on the subject. But read what he actually writes on the subject for about ten minutes and you'll see that none of it is true. Talk about exaggeration and stoking hostility!
And it is, in fact, mostly the servants of the Machine, both "right" and "left" that push for open borders -- the cultural left and the technocratic right, as Augusto Del Noce called them way back in 1970.
I'm not especially attached to borders as such. I don't like militarised borders, big fences, passports, eyeball scans and all the rest of the Machine paraphernalia of the modern border crossing.
I do, however, believe in countries, or cultures, or communities, or whatever term you want to use. I think that a world of distinctive cultures, which have grown from particular people in particular places over time, is a vital thing, and I weep at how that world has been flattened and homogenised by modernity and globalisation.
I also oppose the modern push from our elites for mass migration and the transformation of historic nations into 'diverse' 'multicultures.' In my life time this has made my country/ies very much worse places to live in for everyone, and it has been an anti-democratic, top-down project. It is entirely part of the Machine's need to suck in cheap labour regardless of the consequences.
In actual fact I find myself conflicted about this subject. I don't want a world of big walls, nor a world with no distinctive nations in it. I don't like xenophobia or aggressive ethnic nationalism, but I don't like ideological left-multiculturalism either. I also recognise that people travel everywhere now and this can't be stopped.
I think the world of porous borders you describe was pretty much the norm before the age of fossil fuels - although it's worth noting the existence of walled towns and cities millennia ago; borders between kingdoms and cultures are very old things, because we are tribal animals. Still, I am struck by how we have only had passports for a hundred years. But we can't go back to that. I don't know what we go forward to instead.
Upsetting about immigration is an irony. How can they be no frontiers when it comes to capitalism and debt and then suddenly there's frontiers for people ?
A similar thing happened recently in a town in western Ohio near Cincinnati, I believe. They got almost as many immigrants as the population of the town itself.
I read both articles. The first one looks actually more like some random Joe's blog, but it says fairly similar things as the second link, which is actually a news article.
It seems to me that the problem is the temp agency that is taking advantage of its workers (including immigrants as well as local residents). Similarly with the mention of people being kicked out of their housing so that the housing could be filled with immigrants. From the article, it seems like what is happening is that many people are profiting off the refugees. But that's not the fault of the refugees.
I won't argue that it would be much better to include local residents in how an influx of people from another culture arrive in a small town. But most of the problems mentioned are not really the fault of the immigrants. Sewage smell from old pipes? That's the fault of immigrants? Temp agencies providing cheap labor? Also doesn't seem to be the fault of immigrants.
I'm also curious whether people are upset that Haitains or other immigrants aren't integrating into American culture, or that they are? There have been Amish communities around forever, who are very much not integrated culturally into American life, but I don't see a lot of people complaining about this. The data from 2024 is that there are 85,965 Amish people in Ohio. I don't really see a lot of people complaining about them. In fact, immigrant communities bring a new culture to a place, which one could, if one chose, see as a good thing, even if it does at times bring friction. Or are we worried that the heartland is going to lose its culture, and along with it, we have no more jello casseroles?
A side note to all of this is that Americans are addicted to cheap food which depends upon cheap labor. I live in Southern california where vegetables are grown year round, and have yet to see anyone besides latino people working in the fields. Until people are willing to pay much higher prices for food, there will always be immigrants willing to work the worst jobs to grow, harvest, and prepare that cheap food.
I live in an area with a fair number of Amish. While they don't assimilate, they do "get along well with others." Many of the groups currently immigrating do not. That's the difference.
In my area we have lots of Indian and Pakistani immigrants. They are great people and have not posed any sort of problem. We also have a lot of middle Easterners, in my particular area, Saudis. Whole different story.
I have relatives in Columbus, Ohio that tell of the problems there some people are having with Somali immigrants there. Not only do they not assimilate, they don't even get along well with their fellow Muslims from other countries.
The US government has an app that people use to circumvent the usual immigration application. They enter their name and are rewarded with a flight to an airport within the US, then set up with full welfare benefits, housing, and a free phone account. It is reported, documented, and witnessed that hundreds of thousands of people have been escorted into the country with this system.
Many of us are able to see the deception of the “news” agencies and have sought out alternative sources that report the truth. Start with questioning everything you have been told.
Same thing in the US. Free money, free lodging, free phones, get out of jail free. Absolutely criminal. Accusations of racism, sexism and zenophobia are the territory of the intellectually infirm.
again, are we talking about refugees, or undocumented immigrants. I think its helpful to be specific. I am intellectually infirm, and since I'm quite ignorant, I love to know the sources behind claims since I know very little about these things.
Take your pick, with an open border, there is no real difference. This is not hidden, the Dems have been bragging about it. A few dead people, and billions in squandered taxpayer money is merely so much collateral damage.
But it’s not an open border. DHS apprehended around 5million people in the time between Feb 2021 to Oct 2023. If you look at my comments you can find sources for info about immigration numbers. If you have alternative sources that say otherwise, please share, but otherwise it’s hard to have a conversation and it’s not really helping your cause because without offering data to the contrary you seem to be parroting GOP taking points.
Did the numbers include those who were not processed in any way? Can you explain why the administration has admitted known violent criminals and gang members? Can you explain why nations like Venezuala have emptied their prisons and shipped their troubles north? Can you explain why small towns all over America are deliberately destroyed by this administration through immigrant invasion?
In the U.S. they are often set up with subsidized housing, food subsidies, and job placements which are difficult to access if you're just from a long-standing poor family that's lived in the U.S. all along.
Can you give sources for this? Refugees definitely get the assistance you mention, but Sharon F. above said specifically that "illegal immigrants are getting assistance.
During Trump's first term when he first threatened to send immigrants to Democratically-run big cities it occurred to me that if it could play this right (low hopes), the one nearest me, sorely depopulated Detroit, could really turn that to its advantage. Of course that would take considerable resources, and there are already a lot of people there struggling to find food, housing, get a decent education, job training who ought to have priority. But if a surge of new resources were directed toward native Detroiters, many of those living north of 8 Mile currently voicing (and voting) immigration resentments, along with some who aren't, would be just as upset as they are about assistance going to newly arrived Venezuelans or Haitians.
As to the recent US election, I think many of the talking heads are missing the point. Independents have not converted to being Republicans. Folks like JD, Tulsi, RFK, Jr., and Ramaswamy banded together against a kind of machine that was trying to crush them using state authority. Media lied about Biden's health and a variety of other topics. The stories tend to focus on Trump himself.
Another concern was poor people who were getting less than new (illegal) immigrants. This was noticeable to them.. and they weren't happy. There's a resentment, appropriate or not that follows from ... "we have to obey the laws or go to jail.. they don't. We get some things from our government, they get more and better things." And when they ask "why"? There is no answer.
Makes sense. Mass immigration is generally a driver of populism. It is also an article of faith both for the left and for the capitalist true believer that borders should be as open as possible.
I'm not sure I understand this. What are immigrants getting that "poor people" are not?
Well, everyone gets free Emergency Department visits, regardless of ability to pay. I also work in healthcare, in the ER, actually, so I'm well aware of people, regardless of their country of origin, who use the ER for all their medical care. They don't pay their ER bills and that's why ER visits are so expensive. So while yes, immigrants use the ER for healthcare, so do plenty of other people who are on social assistance programs. What is the value of a human life? I guess we each have to answer that ourselves.
In places with sales tax, anyone purchasing within the economy is paying taxes on goods.
So, do undocumented immigrants pay state and federal taxes? In most cases, probably not. But neither do servers who don't report their tips.
Everyone working in the US pays into social security, so actually this is funded in a large part by undocumented workers who pay into SSI but don't take from it.
I won't argue that the medical system is twisted, but what is most twisted to me is that when we spend billions on the dept of defense and more billions so that Israel can go on with their genocide, I think it frankly highlights that the US doesn't give a damn about health or human life.
In London, they are currently getting the majority of the social housing. There's quite a long list. You would have to be looking the other way not to see that some of the resentments people have are based on reality.
[edit: a reader writes to tell me that the social housing figure is disputed, along with most figures in this debate. This is worth bearing in mind here. There is a lot of heat flying around. But the general trend is evident.]
I know nothing about London. I don't think anti-immigrant sentiment in the US is based on much other than xenophobia. Border towns in the US do have higher crime rates, but that is a pretty specific context that doesn't actually affect the majority of the US population. Undocumented (and legal) immigrants, do represent a good way to whip up resentment though, to be sure. Mostly, those people are working difficult labor jobs that people in the US don't want to do.
So what precisely is the reality that the resentment is based upon? That's very unclear to me.
Well, I couldn't say anything about the situation in the US. From over here though, the discourse sounds very similar to that in Europe, on both sides of the fence. One side deals, at least sometimes, in apocalyptic and often abusive language to describe immigrants. The other side denies that the sheer scale of the current migration causes any problems at all. I am hoping this logjam will be broken, but they feed off each other. All I know is that, twenty years or so ago, when inward migration was at a much lower level, none of this was occurring. In my country, what is clear is that the current rate and scale of immigration is unsustainable and has no popular mandate behind it.
In an attempt to be as specific as possible, which I think is the best way to talk about these issues, I'll cite the data. Department of Homeland Security (that's a big brother name, isn't it) had 6.5million encounters at the US-Mexico border between Feb 2021 and Oct 2023. Of those, about 2.5 million were released into the US with notices to appear in court. So the numbers are greatly exaggerated by politicians who have much to gain by stoking fear.
By contrast, in the 1940's to 1960's, the Braceros program allowed for 5 million immigrants yearly for farm work.
So whether the US can handle the numbers of undocumented immigrants seems not to be that concerning to me.
Moreover, my problem with the overall media/political narrative (again, talking about the US context) is that it does not include the fact that migration has been happening because of US policies that for decades have destabilized Central and South America through banana republics, NAFTA, and through propping up dictatorships that have been incredibly destructive. I find it incredibly cynical to point blame at people legitimately seeking a better life from problems often directly caused by US intervention.
My source, by the way, is this: https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/breaking-down-the-immigration-figures/
What then, in your opinion, is the reason so many of your countryfolk seem so upset about migration? Do you believe there is no reason for concern at all? Is it all just invented or stoked u? From what I have heard from many other sources, that seems like a highly unlikely scenario. But like I say, I'm not American.
Well, this is only data about immigration, not people's feelings. A feeling can be real but not necessarily based on truth.
Media was filled with the story of Laken Riley, a woman from Georgia killed by a migrant from South America, but that does not mean immigrants are more violent than US citizens. In fact, studies show they are less violent.
So it's pretty tempting to say that it is mostly due to xenophobia stoked by politicians for their own ends. Which saddens me, because I think hospitality toward the other is the core ethic of Judaism and Christianity, and a great deal of other religions, and because I traveled a lot when I was younger and received so much beautiful hospitality from people in other countries.
Well, I agree about the xenophobia. On the other hand, while I can't comment on the US, I can say that for twenty or so years in the UK people have been told that 'the figures' don't support their concerns about the impacts of immigration, but many of those figures have been massaged, hushed up or just inaccurate. We have had mass sexual abuse from grooming gangs, ongoing terror attacks and widespread crime - and some of 'the figures', where they are made available, do demonstrate that some ethnic groups are over-represented in certain criminal convictions - as well as a broader sense of social breakdown and growing ethnic and racial division. It is this, on the streets of ordinary towns and cities, that has fuelled the discontent. Certainly xenophobes have stoked it, but they didn't create it.
I agree about the importance of hospitality and indeed Christian love. But I also believe in having borders around countries, not least because I think security fosters hospitality, and insecurity creates more hatred and fear.
Yes, I think we depart significantly on the subject of borders. I don't really understand why you are so in favor, as they are just an extension of the nation state, and before that, empires, which surely you understand to be an arm of the Machine?
So why the apologetics for borders? I think more historically accurate and more true to nature are fuzzy boundaries and porous borders, both in nature and in human societies. Ecotones of ecosystems and such. In the Americas, the Haudenosaunee confederacy was a good example of distinct tribes with affiliation and porous borders. Historically in the United States, people on the southern border have also traveled back and forth for work without this being mediated by passports, visas, and the state. Frankly, it's not possible with an area as large as the Southern (or Northern) border of the US to be closed without a deep affiliation with the machine by walls, cameras, and drones. Why you would argue for such a closed border I can't really understand.
When I traveled some in West Africa, I got a bit of sense of this, as it was borderlands that were areas rich in trade, and often with a plurality of different people living together (mostly) harmoniously. More recently I think that has probably changed with fundamentalist islamic groups causing more violence.
Borders existed long before the nation-state. And no one complains about them when they're peaceful.
I think that when people talk about closed vs. open borders they're speaking in relative terms; very few people are arguing for completely open or closed borders.
As far as the U.S. being able to handle large numbers of immigrants, other things come into play. Where exactly are they going, and can those specific places handle the numbers? To what extent do they want to assimilate?
The Christian hospitality thing only goes so far, based on simple logic: you can only be hospitable to so many people given your specific situation. It's no different for cities, states and countries, and in any case there's no indication in Christ's teaching that he was talking about political entities anyways.
The guy to read on all this is the French writer Renaud Camus. He's been called a racist, a xenophobe, and a fascist for his views on the subject. But read what he actually writes on the subject for about ten minutes and you'll see that none of it is true. Talk about exaggeration and stoking hostility!
And it is, in fact, mostly the servants of the Machine, both "right" and "left" that push for open borders -- the cultural left and the technocratic right, as Augusto Del Noce called them way back in 1970.
I'm not especially attached to borders as such. I don't like militarised borders, big fences, passports, eyeball scans and all the rest of the Machine paraphernalia of the modern border crossing.
I do, however, believe in countries, or cultures, or communities, or whatever term you want to use. I think that a world of distinctive cultures, which have grown from particular people in particular places over time, is a vital thing, and I weep at how that world has been flattened and homogenised by modernity and globalisation.
I also oppose the modern push from our elites for mass migration and the transformation of historic nations into 'diverse' 'multicultures.' In my life time this has made my country/ies very much worse places to live in for everyone, and it has been an anti-democratic, top-down project. It is entirely part of the Machine's need to suck in cheap labour regardless of the consequences.
In actual fact I find myself conflicted about this subject. I don't want a world of big walls, nor a world with no distinctive nations in it. I don't like xenophobia or aggressive ethnic nationalism, but I don't like ideological left-multiculturalism either. I also recognise that people travel everywhere now and this can't be stopped.
I think the world of porous borders you describe was pretty much the norm before the age of fossil fuels - although it's worth noting the existence of walled towns and cities millennia ago; borders between kingdoms and cultures are very old things, because we are tribal animals. Still, I am struck by how we have only had passports for a hundred years. But we can't go back to that. I don't know what we go forward to instead.
Upsetting about immigration is an irony. How can they be no frontiers when it comes to capitalism and debt and then suddenly there's frontiers for people ?
Thanks for this, David. Well said. I think I've seen enough of these excuses now.
Pay no attention to the thousands of refugees drop-shipped into small towns, disrupting services, taking the jobs, etc.
do you want to give a source for this claim?
https://im1776.com/springfield-investigation/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/how-2000-haitian-migrants-changed-rust-belt-town-of-charleroi-pennsylvania/ar-AA1s3jjN
A similar thing happened recently in a town in western Ohio near Cincinnati, I believe. They got almost as many immigrants as the population of the town itself.
I read both articles. The first one looks actually more like some random Joe's blog, but it says fairly similar things as the second link, which is actually a news article.
It seems to me that the problem is the temp agency that is taking advantage of its workers (including immigrants as well as local residents). Similarly with the mention of people being kicked out of their housing so that the housing could be filled with immigrants. From the article, it seems like what is happening is that many people are profiting off the refugees. But that's not the fault of the refugees.
I won't argue that it would be much better to include local residents in how an influx of people from another culture arrive in a small town. But most of the problems mentioned are not really the fault of the immigrants. Sewage smell from old pipes? That's the fault of immigrants? Temp agencies providing cheap labor? Also doesn't seem to be the fault of immigrants.
I'm also curious whether people are upset that Haitains or other immigrants aren't integrating into American culture, or that they are? There have been Amish communities around forever, who are very much not integrated culturally into American life, but I don't see a lot of people complaining about this. The data from 2024 is that there are 85,965 Amish people in Ohio. I don't really see a lot of people complaining about them. In fact, immigrant communities bring a new culture to a place, which one could, if one chose, see as a good thing, even if it does at times bring friction. Or are we worried that the heartland is going to lose its culture, and along with it, we have no more jello casseroles?
A side note to all of this is that Americans are addicted to cheap food which depends upon cheap labor. I live in Southern california where vegetables are grown year round, and have yet to see anyone besides latino people working in the fields. Until people are willing to pay much higher prices for food, there will always be immigrants willing to work the worst jobs to grow, harvest, and prepare that cheap food.
You must have a PhD, as nobody else could miss the point so badly.
I have a PhD in ignorance. Would you like to tell me the point?
Read my original reply. That’s the point.
I live in an area with a fair number of Amish. While they don't assimilate, they do "get along well with others." Many of the groups currently immigrating do not. That's the difference.
In my area we have lots of Indian and Pakistani immigrants. They are great people and have not posed any sort of problem. We also have a lot of middle Easterners, in my particular area, Saudis. Whole different story.
I have relatives in Columbus, Ohio that tell of the problems there some people are having with Somali immigrants there. Not only do they not assimilate, they don't even get along well with their fellow Muslims from other countries.
I will say that this is certainly happening in Ireland, and it is causing growing discontent and some violent protest.
The US government has an app that people use to circumvent the usual immigration application. They enter their name and are rewarded with a flight to an airport within the US, then set up with full welfare benefits, housing, and a free phone account. It is reported, documented, and witnessed that hundreds of thousands of people have been escorted into the country with this system.
Many of us are able to see the deception of the “news” agencies and have sought out alternative sources that report the truth. Start with questioning everything you have been told.
I'd very much like to look at this app. where can I find it ?
CBP One App. Look it up on a smart phone if you have one.
Same thing in the US. Free money, free lodging, free phones, get out of jail free. Absolutely criminal. Accusations of racism, sexism and zenophobia are the territory of the intellectually infirm.
again, are we talking about refugees, or undocumented immigrants. I think its helpful to be specific. I am intellectually infirm, and since I'm quite ignorant, I love to know the sources behind claims since I know very little about these things.
Take your pick, with an open border, there is no real difference. This is not hidden, the Dems have been bragging about it. A few dead people, and billions in squandered taxpayer money is merely so much collateral damage.
But it’s not an open border. DHS apprehended around 5million people in the time between Feb 2021 to Oct 2023. If you look at my comments you can find sources for info about immigration numbers. If you have alternative sources that say otherwise, please share, but otherwise it’s hard to have a conversation and it’s not really helping your cause because without offering data to the contrary you seem to be parroting GOP taking points.
Did the numbers include those who were not processed in any way? Can you explain why the administration has admitted known violent criminals and gang members? Can you explain why nations like Venezuala have emptied their prisons and shipped their troubles north? Can you explain why small towns all over America are deliberately destroyed by this administration through immigrant invasion?
Laken Reilly is dead; that matters how?
In the U.S. they are often set up with subsidized housing, food subsidies, and job placements which are difficult to access if you're just from a long-standing poor family that's lived in the U.S. all along.
Can you give sources for this? Refugees definitely get the assistance you mention, but Sharon F. above said specifically that "illegal immigrants are getting assistance.
During Trump's first term when he first threatened to send immigrants to Democratically-run big cities it occurred to me that if it could play this right (low hopes), the one nearest me, sorely depopulated Detroit, could really turn that to its advantage. Of course that would take considerable resources, and there are already a lot of people there struggling to find food, housing, get a decent education, job training who ought to have priority. But if a surge of new resources were directed toward native Detroiters, many of those living north of 8 Mile currently voicing (and voting) immigration resentments, along with some who aren't, would be just as upset as they are about assistance going to newly arrived Venezuelans or Haitians.