Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday August 16 2018, @09:57AM   Printer-friendly
from the What-would-Emma-Lazarus-say? dept.

CBS News reports:

The Trump administration is expected to issue a proposal in coming weeks that would make it harder for legal immigrants to become citizens or get green cards if they have ever used a range of popular public welfare programs, including Obamacare, four sources with knowledge of the plan told NBC News.

The move, which would not need congressional approval, is part of White House senior adviser Stephen Miller's plan to limit the number of migrants who obtain legal status in the U.S. each year.

[...] Though its effects could be far-reaching, the proposal to limit citizenship to immigrants who have not used public assistance does not appear to need congressional approval. As the Clinton administration did in 1999, the Trump administration would be redefining the term "public charge," which first emerged in immigration law in the 1800s in order to shield the U.S. from burdening too many immigrants who could not contribute to society.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:07PM (1 child)

    by VLM (445) on Thursday August 16 2018, @06:07PM (#722383)

    we're back to the start of the circle again

    Economics, especially at the end of a cycle, like now, is a "press your luck" game. The more you play god with peoples lives and force immigration and otherwise F with them, the longer it will be until the next phase of the natural cycle AND the longer and deeper the eventual recession will be, so some folks want the reboot now to minimize human suffering, whereas some folks have outstanding bets on the financial markets etc and F the people we're gonna run this into the ground so I can 'win'. Typical human fight over whats better for all of humanity vs whats better for one's own pocketbook.

    So... the specific strategy being discussed is you can goose the economy along a little longer into a much deeper and longer depression IF you weaponize immigrants to keep the wheels turning that little bit slower during a cycle. But its no long term solution, obviously.

    The real outcome of permanently lower standard of living is eventually the milk marketplace (from your example) absolutely inevitably stops. Its a market that is running now but is inherently not immortal and the end is coming up. To some extent its desecration of the dead to keep messing with the world to prop it up a little longer. Just shut it down now with some dignity rather than crashing the whole thing to keep it running a little longer. In a world of shrinking opportunity for all, no amount of scrambling will prevent the end of the milk market, but there are people trying to profit off it by turning human misery into revenue, which is the immigration game.

    Two interesting aspects of the immigration game never discussed in public; if these people are so profitable, why is their home country such an economic disaster? Surely you'd think if they're an endless pot of gold, they'd want to stay home. So surely they're a massive economic drain. And the second aspect is supposedly immigration boosts an economy, but in the future why would it be any better in the sense that OK take the fairy tale that "new where-evers" will be more profitable than the natives, well, why is that assumed to be permanent; surely if they assimilate their productivity would drop to that of the natives and you'd be back to where you started, the natives aren't profitable enough we need ever more immigrants?

    In that way immigrants are economic heroin; if its supposedly so great why don't all the dealers keep it and use it for themselves, and there's no rational argument why a long term ever increasing addiction would improve quality of life in the long term. A little pain killer under reasonable scientific control is often quite valuable, but uncontrolled addiction is another.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @04:04AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 17 2018, @04:04AM (#722688)

    Presumably because the nation states they are coming from lack sufficient physical and social infrastructure to allow them to value-add. Hard to be productive when you are ducking bullets or laid up in bed from poorly treated water.

    And in almost all the cases that are relevant to at least the USA's interests, it was their foreign policy failures and frankly war crimes that created the problems in the first place. Supporting brutal dictators, training death squads and arming insurgencies doesn't do wonders for stability, and its rather unfair to expect people to build a prosperous nation when a Superpower rolls over in its sleep and crushes their democratic government and installs a nightmare fashioned from their own paranoia.