President Trump carries through with America First immigration policy


#1

.
See Trump Backs Slashing Legal Immigration With ‘Merit-Based’ System

”The RAISE Act, which Cotton and Perdue introduced in February, would scrap the current lottery system to get into the U.S. and instead institute a points-based system for earning a green card. Factors that would be taken into account include English language skills, education, high-paying job offers and age.”

It is encouraging that President Trump has started the needed conversation concerning immigration reform that puts the interests of American Citizens above the interests of our Washington Swamp Creatures ___ some of whom have sold their soul to unpatriotic domestic corporations which demand cheap illegal entrant labor to increase their profits, while other Washington Swamp Creatures have a desire to increase the democrat voting block by importing the poverty stricken populations of other countries into America who will immediately be dependent upon government cheese and thus, can be expected to sell their vote to receive it.

JWK

***American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.



#2

I’m no fan of the lottery system, but how does this at all conceptualize immigration accurately?

Employers see workers in two categories: Those they need, and those they don’t.

Why is the Government trying to determine who is useful? How does the Government know better how to do this than people in the economy?

When exactly, do bureaucrats know anything better than the rest of us?

> importing the poverty stricken populations of other countries into America

Cubans, Vietnamese, and Venezuelans all come to America like this, and they consistently vote Conservative.

Seems there’s a question of individual agency at work even in poor people.

Many people who’ve lived under socialism, know better than actual Americans to reject it, like my Czech-born mechanic.


#3

See: Report: Majority of Illegal Immigrant Households On Welfare

September 10, 2015

***"More than half of households headed by immigrants in the county illegally, or 62 percent, received welfare benefits in 2012, according to a report released by the Center for Immigration Studies.

In the same time period, 49 percent of households headed by legal immigrants received welfare benefits, while 30 percent of households headed by natives received the same."***

Do you have a problem with an America First immigration policy which is merit based and forbids “immigrants” from receiving government cheese for at least five years? Eh?

JWK


American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.



#4

This doesn’t answer my point. All three of the groups I brought up have more open access to our immigration system than most.

The result of this treatment has not been the support of liberal policies, but them choosing to support Republicans more often than Democrats.

Let me repeat: The Immigrant groups who have more legal access, more often support Conservatives than liberals.

Doesn’t that in of itself suggest, that the way we should fix illegal immigration, is by making more legal immigration possible? That is, after all, how Eisenhower did it.

There’s also a need to point out, that Social Engineering, which is what this “Credit system” of immigration does, isn’t exactly an American ideal:

> Trumpsters think the economy needs only scientists and inventors (preferably future Nobel Prize winners, I suppose), while Republican and Democratic anti-Trumpsters counter that the economy also needs some unskilled workers to pick crops in the hot sun and do menial work in luxury resorts, which Americans apparently don’t want to do.

> But what is this thing they call “the economy,” which has needs? Social engineers of all parties and persuasions talk as though an economy is some kind of mechanism to be centrally fine-tuned and overhauled occasionally according to a plan. Even those who style themselves free enterprisers display the central-planning mentality when it comes to immigration.

> Contrary to this establishment view, the economy is not a mechanism. It is, rather, hundreds of millions of American producers and consumers, who also happen to be embedded in a global marketplace. Why can’t they be trusted, without the direction of politicians, to decide for themselves what they need and to engage in social cooperation—that is, among other things, to trade goods and services—to obtain it?

> It is we whom the social engineers wish to manipulate. In the process they would cruelly keep poor people in perpetual misery and political oppression by locking them out of America. Why? Because the economy doesn’t need them.

> Like all central planners, the immigration planners exhibit what F. A. Hayek called “the pretense of knowledge.” Do these presumptuous frauds know what specific skills will be demanded in the future? To know that, they would have to know what products will be demanded in the future. But we don’t know what we’ll want because lots of things have not been invented yet. And we can’t predict who will invent them. People who today have few skills and who speak no English will be among those who make our lives better. Let them come here to make better lives for themselves. That’s their right, which is justification enough. But we will benefit too.

Immigration Brings Out the Social Engineers
Sheldon Richman@ Reason


#5

The only point is, do you have a problem with a merit based immigration policy which forbids immigrants from receiving government cheese for at least five years upon their entry?

JWK


American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.



#6

I asked my question first, so kindly answer it.

How do bureaucrats in Government know better than people and businesses in the economy as to which immigrants are useful?

How does this frame immigration accurately?


#7

By using common sense.

:rolleyes:

JWK


American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.



#8

How do Bureaucrats have more “common sense” than the people in the economy? How do they know better than average people what the economy needs?


#9

My question to you was, do you have a problem with a merit based immigration policy which forbids immigrants from receiving government cheese for at least five years upon their entry?

JWK

**
American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.**


#10

You didn’t answer mine.

This is what I asked originally:

" How does the Government know better how to do this than people in the economy?"

I did not ask you how the Government selects people. I asked you, how do bureaucrats know better than people in the economy which immigrants are useful?

Are we clear now? If so, answer please.

What process, what knowledge, do these bureaucrats have, that average people do not?


#11

Government is made up of “people” and they use common sense to determine which foreigners would be helpful to the economy. Let us review what one of our forefathers said with regard to this issue.

“**Mr. BURKE *thought it of importance to fill the country with useful men, such as farmers, mechanics, and manufacturers, and, therefore, would hold out every encouragement to them to emigrate to America. This class he would receive on liberal terms; and he was satisfied there would be room enough for them, and for their posterity, for five hundred years to come. There was another class of men, whom he did not think useful, and he did not care what impediments were thrown in their way; such as your European merchants, and factors of merchants, who come with a view of remaining so long as will enable them to acquire a fortune, and then they will leave the country, and carry off all their property with them. These people injure us more than they do us good, and, except in this last sentiment, I can compare them to nothing but leeches. They stick to us until they get their fill of our best blood, and then they fall off and leave us. I look upon the privilege of an American citizen to be an honorable one, and it ought not to be thrown away upon such people. There is another class also that I would interdict, that is, the convicts and criminals which they pour out of British jails. I wish sincerely some mode could be adopted to prevent the importation of such; but that, perhaps, is not in our power; the introduction of them ought to be considered as a high misdemeanor.” ***__Representative BURKE during our Nations` first debate on a RULE OF NATURALIZATION, FEB. 3RD, 1790

So, as it turns out, allowing the poverty stricken, poorly educated, low and unskilled foreigners who have invaded our borders to stay here should be considered as a “high misdemeanor” which happens to be an impeachable offense!

Now, my question to you was, do you have a problem with a merit based immigration policy which forbids immigrants from receiving government cheese for at least five years upon their entry?

JWK


American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.



#12

Your use of the phrase “people in the economy” is totally disingenuous; you are trying to paint this as bureaucrats versus the people. If the bureaucrats are grading potential immigrants on their self-sufficiency and language skills as dictated by legislation enacted by the people’s representatives then the bureaucrats are doing the business of the people. The open borders that you advocate is doing the business of corporations who want cheap labor. Chain migration of millions who are not self-sufficient, do not know the language and don’t want to learn it is not doing the business of the people.

Slim, maybe you should move to Europe as most of their leaders are in lockstep with your ideas. You can then soak in all the benefits of their economic, social and cultural advances that they are experiencing and that will only get better with time.


#13

Can’t be; right now, dairy farmers can’t get the workers they need.

Their workers are banned by law, despite a clear demand for their labor existing.

We also low-ball tech visas, and punish companies for hiring people on the wrong visa; something they only do in the first place because Government bottlenecks the right ones far below the level of demand.

So by what principle are we banning entry of people that business and employers within the economy have affirmed they needed?

> you are trying to paint this as bureaucrats versus the people.

Because it is. It is central planners vs market actors. By definition, that is what is happening here.

I keep bringing them up, as Dairy Farmers more than highlite the point.

They have a type of demand that doesn’t fit the system, so the system doesn’t allow it.

They need workers on a year-round, permanent basis, not a seasonal one, but seasonal is all our system offers for farm workers, as it was designed with crop farmer’s needs in mind.

So because they don’t fit the mold, they get screwed. It’s the well-laid plans vs the needs of ordinary people

The new system doesn’t promise to be any better, because they will still prohibit labor that is low skilled and lowly educated; precisely the demographic of most dairy farm workers.

> If the bureaucrats are grading potential immigrants on their self-sufficiency and language skills

Why do language skills matter?

That can matter during naturalization, but if someone wants to hire them even if ingles isn’t something they speak fluently, that’s the employer’s prerogative.

If they don’t care, and want to hire them anyway, why is the Government threatening to block entry on that issue? The logic is backwards.

> The open borders that you advocate is doing the business of corporations who want cheap labor.

Japan literally has to trick foreigners by the 1,000s in order to get them to fill critical shortages in work that have been emptying for decades.

Here, people are running to our door step to fill them, and we turn them away? Why?

Nevermind that for decades, the exclusive objective of our immigration policy was to import low-skilled labor. Manpower drives to fill labor-intensive professions to prevent shortages.

These decades like the 1950s, gave us our highest points of prosperity.

> Chain migration of millions who are not self-sufficient, do not know the language and don’t want to learn it is not doing the business of the people.

Not “the people”, I’m talking about people. One person at a time. One person you have to disqualify at a time for entry, not as a group.

I don’t subordinate individual rights to a collective like you’re doing here, based on an economic argument you don’t seem capable of even articulating to me.

> You can then soak in all the benefits of their economic, social and cultural advances that they are experiencing and that will only get better with time.

Again your logic is backwards.

If benefits are an issue; remove them. Build a wall around the benefits, I’m all for doing that.

Blaming the immigrants for something that is our Gov’t fault is pure sophistry.


#14

That is precisely the same logic Liberals use for job-training programs.

“We’ll use common sense to decide what skills to train people in”

37 programs later, people still prefer private-sector programs that teach them relevant skill sets the gov’t programs eschew.

Liberals also say this about business subsidies

“We’ll use common sense to decide which businesses to throw Government support behind”

40 years of Ex-im bank later, still just cronyism behind a thin-veil.

So no John, I don’t buy it.

Either you articulate what precisely this “common sense” is, that allows Bureaucrats to decide better than employers themselves as to which workers are useful, or you are simply just another Smith’s Man of System, pretending to make plans that are “obvious” to you, but clear bunk to any of us who actually see that the Gov’t never gets these “guesses” right.


#15

We are talking about a common sense immigration policy which addresses the devastating effects which unbridled immigration has inflicted upon the Citizens of the United States.

Let us take a look at the destructive social and economic consequences in just one county in California inflicted upon its citizens in 1995 when this massive invasion of our borders began to accelerate. CLICK HERE and scroll to page 93 for testimony given by JOAN ZINSER before the COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, DECEMBER 13, 1995

Good morning Chairman Smith and other honorable members of the Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims. I am Joan Zinser, Deputy Director of the San Diego County Department of Social Services. I direct the department’s Income Maintenance Bureau, which has responsibility for AFDC, Food Stamps and Medicaid eligibility determinations. I am here today to tell you about the effects of illegal immigration on the County’s assistance programs, and to present information regarding impacts on other county-funded services.

**Impacts on San Diego County **

In 1993, illegal aliens in San Diego County were estimated to be 7.9% of the population, or a total of almost 220,000 illegal aliens in a county with a population of slightly over 2 1/2 million. A 1993 Calffornia State Senate report estimated that the State, local governments - primarily the County - and schools incurred $304 million in costs to provide services to illegal aliens. These costs were offset by only $60 million in taxes generated by illegal aliens - leaving a net impact of $244 million.

Welfare Costs.

When a child is a US citizen, AFDC can be granted for the child but not the parent, if the parent is an undocumented immigrant. In 1992 there were 6,414 children born to undocumented immigrant parents in San Diego County hospitals. Each year, the illegal alien parents of nearly 2000 “citizen children” apply for and receive AFDC in San Diego County. The cumulative total of these “citizen child” cases continues to rise each year.

Public assistance is intended to support the citizen child, but is paid to the illegal alien parent and is, no doubt, used by the parent to support the entire family. Costs for providing AFDC to “citizen children” cases in San Diego totaled $37 million in 1993 for approximately 5430 AFDC cases.

Additional costs are incurred in Child Welfare Services. Combining costs for Out-of-Home and Family Maintenance services to families of illegal aliens results in an additional cost of $1.7 million.

Medicaid and Other Health-Related- Costs.

Medicaid services are an increasingly large portion of the costs involved in illegal immigration. In 1992, Medicaid paid for 6,414 births illegal alien mothers. Although studies have shown that illegal aliens use fewer Medicaid services than do the age-equivalent members of the general population, significant costs remain. Delivery costs are greater for babies with mothers lacking adequate prenatal care and many medical conditions are treated more cost-effectively in their early stages. Infectious diseases are also a major concern of the County. San Diego County has historically carried large costs because of illegal aliens with these problems. Costs associated with providing emergency and pregnancy related needs to illegal aliens are paid for under “restricted Medi-Cal benefits.” During the 1992 calendar year, an estimated $37 million was paid for “restricted Medi-Cal benefits.” Other costs, including uncompensated care in hospitals, community clinics, and other health services elevated the 1993 total costs to over $50 million.

Criminal justice.
A recent 90-day pilot project involved having INS Agents present in the county jails to interview those suspected of being an undocumented immigrant. Approximately 20% of the persons booked into the jails during that pilot were identified as being illegal aliens. With annual bookings of approximatel 105,000 persons a year, it is estimated that up to 21,000 were illegal aliens.

According to the San Diego County District Attorney, 8,521 felony crimes were committed by illegal aliens between 1987 and 1992. Illegal aliens commit an estimated 22% of felony crimes committed in the county. The number of misdemeanors committed during the same period in San Diego County by illegal aliens is estimated to be 17,000. In 1993, approximately 15. 1 % of the costs -accrued in dealing with crimes were spent on illegal aliens. Costs for illegal aliens to the legal system totaled $151 million in the County of San Diego for 1993.

Education.

Recently, a video of students crossing the border and getting on a school bus in San Diego County in order to receive free education was shown nationwide. Locally, we have worked to make sure that this situation does not recur, but education of the children of illegal aliens is also a significant CDSt. It is estimated that $60 million was spent in San Diego County in 1993 for education of illegal aliens.


And, more recently see:

Illegal aliens cost California billions
2004
”Illegal immigration costs the taxpayers of California — which has the highest number of illegal aliens nationwide — $10.5 billion a year for education, health care and incarceration, according to a study released yesterday.”

Also see: Testimony about “51 Florida Hospitals in trouble” due to illegal aliens expenses:

Jun 10, 2008

”No need to editorialize. Here is a sampling of the sort of facts the politicians and pro-illegal lobby want you to ignore, yet expect you to continue to bear the burden of. Is it any wonder scores of hospitals in border states and elsewhere have shut down or closed their ER units!!!”

Then take a look at Texas Faces Rising Cost For Illegal Immigrant Care

Aug 19, 2010

Texas spent at least $250 million in the past year for medical care and imprisonment of illegal immigrants and other non-citizens.

And how about this: The Fiscal Cost of Unlawful Immigrants and Amnesty to the U.S. Taxpayer

May 6, 2013

”In 2010, the average unlawful immigrant household received around $24,721 in government benefits and services while paying some $10,334 in taxes. This generated an average annual fiscal deficit (benefits received minus taxes paid) of around $14,387 per household. This cost had to be borne by U.S. taxpayers. Amnesty would provide unlawful households with access to over 80 means-tested welfare programs, Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare. The fiscal deficit for each household would soar.”

And how about the tens of thousands of criminal aliens released into our nation’s population? See: Judicial Watch: 165,900 Criminal Aliens into US Population Through April 2014

Mar 2015

”Nearly 166,000 convicted criminal illegal aliens were released by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) as of April, 2014. This is the analysis of 76 pages of DHS documents obtained by Judicial Watch via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. The criminal illegal aliens include rapists, murderers and kidnappers.”


Tell me, do you really object to a merit based immigration policy which weeds out foreigners which common sense indicates will be destructive to the general welfare of the United States and detrimental her taxpaying citizens?

JWK


American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.



#16

No, you’re talking about the effects of having a dysfunctional bureaucracy, that encourages a black market in labor.

If we had legal immigration that was at least in the ball park of what the economy was demanding (ergo, the natural rate of immigration, a thing most economists agree exists), most of the problems you want addressed would cease.

Most people would operate above board, people wouldn’t congregate overwhelmingly in areas that allow them to escape prosecution, immigrants wouldn’t be pressured to stay in lower-class economic life styles, oh and and hey! Just like the Venezuelans, the Cubans, and Vietnamese, you might just see more than half think “those conservatives got a point”, and vote for us, when they bother to do so.

Because humans, to include immigrants, have this surprising thing called agency, which allows them to entertain this other thing called arguments.

Making arguments to appeal to agency? Worked for the Canadian Conservatives, who turned the tables on their own liberals through immigrants, and not by promising more “goodies” , but simply through making their own immigration system easier to handle.


#17

What I’m talking about and asking you is, do you object to a merit based immigration policy which weeds out foreigners which common sense indicates will be destructive to the general welfare of the United States and detrimental her taxpaying citizens?

JWK


American citizens are sick and tired of being made into tax-slaves to finance a maternity ward for the poverty stricken populations of other countries who invade America’s borders to give birth.



#18

Because central planners always have common sense enough to know what products and services you should produce and buy and what resources you should be using to do it! /end sarcasm

It boggles my mind that these same folks are appalled by Obamacare while complaining about “cheap labor.” Real free-market competition is what Republicans and conservatives supposedly want, yet I keep seeing complaints about cheap immigrant labor. Cheaper inputs allows prices to fall as producers compete. If cheap labor somehow managed to actually drive down the wages of citizens, the products will be commensurately cheaper – presuming they’re allowed to fall by the bureaucrats who represent “the people.”

JWK, This America First thing drives up the cost of living while limiting trade opportunities for the American people.


#19

Part of an America First immigration policy would not make America citizens into tax slaves to support the economic needs of millions of foreigners who have invaded our borders.

While you applaud cheap foreign labor, it seems you close your eyes to the devastating effects which “cheap” unbridled immigration inflicts upon American citizens.

Trump’s support for a merit based immigration policy would confront some of the devastating effects which un-restricted immigration has inflicted upon American citizens.

Tell me, do you have a problem with a merit based immigration policy which forbids immigrants from receiving government cheese for at least five years?

JWK


There was a time not too long ago in New York when the able-bodied were ashamed to accept home relief, a program created by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1931 when he was Governor. Now, New York City and many other major cities are infested with countless government cheese factions, including recent immigrants, who not only demand welfare, but use it to buy beer, wine, drugs, sex, and Lotto tickets.



#20

History shows us America first = high immigration rate. We’ve always enjoyed our highest points of prosperity when foreign-born people comprise a high ratio of our population.

The 1920s immigration flood set off prosperity, so did the wave 30 years before that, and in the 1840s.

You can’t ignore facts John.

> would not make America citizens into tax slaves to support the economic needs of millions of foreigners

Empty rhetoric next to the result from Cubans and Vietnamese immigrants. Treat them like people, they act like people. It’s equally empty next to the experience of the Canadians… whose system BTW, Trump said he wanted to imitate. I’m just not confident he’ll go all the way. It’s more likely he’ll create a hybrid that will keep much of the dysfunction built-in, while also failing to address the issues even the Canadians have.

> While you applaud cheap foreign labor, it seems you close your eyes to the devastating effects which “cheap” unbridled immigration

It’s the same as automation: cheaper goods, lower cost of living.

It’s the same as outsourcing: cheaper goods, lower cost of living.

Economists praise high immigration rate; economically, there is never a reason to not want it.

If Gov’t policy is an issue because it gives people too many subsidies, then gov’t policy should be changed. Blaming the immigrant for a fault in the system they did nothing to set up is mere sophistry, it is not conservative, nor is defending bureaucracy.