Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Rules for Legal Immigrants

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Rules for Legal Immigrants

    The new rule targets the poor and uneducated:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/tr...cid=spartandhp

    'The Trump administration will penalize legal immigrants who rely on public programs, such as food stamps and government-subsidized housing, as part of a sweeping new policy to slow legal immigration into the United States and reduce the number of immigrants who are granted permanent legal status.'

    'The move will have the greatest impact on poor immigrants who are living in the country legally and are receiving public benefits from the government, forcing them to make a choice between accepting financial help and living and working in the country legally. It will probably not affect immigrants who already have green cards.'
    'The United States wants immigrants who can support themselves, according to the rule, not those who “depend on public resources to meet their needs,” according to the new rule.'


    'The regulation, which is scheduled to go into effect in 60 days, will provide the Trump administration a powerful new tool to narrow the demographic of people who come to live and work in the country.'

    'Immigration advocates have pledged to sue the administration in an attempt to block the new regulation from going into effect. Tens of thousands of people opposed the rule in a public comment period over the past several months.'

    'The regulation, also known as the public charge rule, was published in the federal register Monday morning with the following acknowledgment: “While some commenters provided support for the rule, the vast majority of commenters opposed the rule.”'

    So much for 'The New Colossus':
    Givemeyourtired,yourpoor,
    Yourhuddledmassesyearningto breathe free,
    Thewretchedrefuseof your teemingshore.
    Sendthese,thehomeless,tempest-tossed,to me:
    Iliftmy lampbesidethegoldendoor.

    It seems that under Trump it is now a crime to be poor...Steven Miller is a real creep.

    We are not now that strength which in old days
    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
    Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
    To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Massena View Post
    The new rule targets the poor and uneducated:
    Why do you pretend to care about poor people? The only reason you want them here to help elect democrats.

    {}

    "Any story sounds true until someone tells the other side and sets the record straight." -Proverbs 18:17

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Massena View Post
      The new rule targets the poor and uneducated:
      That is what the MSM wants people to believe.

      That 'new file's was part of the naturalization process in 96 when my wife and step daughter immigrated here. The point is, the government does not want people coming here that have to depend on US welfare until they get a green card. Until they get the green card they can not work. Notice how the MSM mentions that it doesn't apply to green card holders.

      That rule targets freeloaders, not the poor and uneducated.



      "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

      Comment


      • #4
        That's just a disingenuous lie. What Trump's new rule does is cut off states like California that allow illegals to enroll in federally subsidized welfare programs like Medicaid and SNAP.

        https://www.nilc.org/wp-content/uplo..._2006-1-11.pdf

        https://www.thenation.com/article/pa...um-depression/

        https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...ilies-n2161305

        Legal immigrants on such programs already have to justify their being on them.

        That we end welfare for almost all immigrants is a good idea. Besides, the US really doesn't need people who are illiterate and untrained for much of anything anyway in any case.

        Comment


        • #5
          https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/tr...cid=spartandhp

          'The Trump administration will make it harder for legal immigrants who rely on government benefit programs, such as food stamps and subsidized housing, to obtain permanent legal status as part of a far-reaching new policy aimed at altering the flow of legal immigration and reducing the number of poor immigrants.'

          Trump's new policy favors wealthier immigrants and is prejudicial to others based on personal wealth.
          We are not now that strength which in old days
          Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
          Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
          To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

          Comment


          • #6
            FWIW, when I was looking for immigration options out of the US, I basically had to either be a millionaire or fill some obscure job in order to qualify. If it's as hard getting out, why not make it as hard getting in? Based on what was presented it seems like it's still easier to get into the US than it is most other developed countries. Being financially independent is not a high bar to clear. The wealth requirements are much steeper for other countries. At least the ones I looked into. Again, unless you can fill some odd job.

            I think the bigger issue is the fact that Trump is already throwing out minorities who have been living here legally.
            "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
            - Benjamin Franklin

            The new right wing: hate Muslims, preaches tolerance for Nazis.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Massena View Post
              'The Trump administration will make it harder for legal immigrants who rely on government benefit programs, such as food stamps and subsidized housing, to obtain permanent legal status as part of a far-reaching new policy aimed at altering the flow of legal immigration and reducing the number of poor immigrants.'

              Trump's new policy favors wealthier immigrants and is prejudicial to others based on personal wealth.
              Again, it has been like this for at least 25 years, it doesn't favor wealthy immigrants.

              Would anyone in their right mind rent out their house, the renter not pay rent and the owner pay the renter to live in the house?

              "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TactiKill J. View Post
                I think the bigger issue is the fact that Trump is already throwing out minorities who have been living here legally.
                No, Trump has not been throwing out minorities that have been living here legally.

                "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Massena View Post
                  https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/tr...cid=spartandhp

                  'The Trump administration will make it harder for legal immigrants who rely on government benefit programs, such as food stamps and subsidized housing, to obtain permanent legal status as part of a far-reaching new policy aimed at altering the flow of legal immigration and reducing the number of poor immigrants.'

                  Trump's new policy favors wealthier immigrants and is prejudicial to others based on personal wealth.
                  That's what the TDS anti-Trump MSM is spinning it as. But, why shouldn't the US be selective about who gets to come? Why should we take masses of uneducated, poor, and untrained immigrants who will be little more than a burden on the US? We're not in the Industrial Age anymore and the US doesn't need a mass of cheap labor with strong backs and weak minds.

                  Invoking images of Ellis Island and immigration over a century ago doesn't change that one iota. That's nothing by an irrelevant appeal to history, antiquity, whatever. It's irrelevant.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/12/polit...ned/index.html
                    'On Monday, the Trump administration released a regulation that could reshape the legal immigrant population in the US.'
                    'The long-anticipated public charge rule makes it more difficult for immigrants who rely on government assistance like Medicaid, subsidized housing and food stamps to obtain legal status.'

                    'Monday's announcement falls in line with the administration's attempts to curb legal immigration, and favor wealthier and more educated immigrants.'

                    'The rule applies to people who are seeking to come to or trying to remain in the United States. Notably, it'll affect people who are trying to obtain lawful permanent status, otherwise known as a green card.
                    '


                    'The "public charge" provision dates back at least to the Immigration Act of 1882. Federal lawmakers at the time wanted to make sure that immigrants would be able to take care of themselves and not end up a public burden.'

                    'Under current regulations put in place in 1996, the term is defined as someone who is "primarily dependent" on government assistance, meaning it supplies more than half their income.'

                    'But it only counted cash benefits, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families or Supplemental Security Income from Social Security. The administration's new rule widens the definition of who is expected to be dependent on the government by including more benefit programs.'

                    'Immigration officials can take into account an applicant's financial resources, health, education, skills, family status and age. But few people are rejected on these relatively narrow grounds, experts said.'

                    '"It's totally changing the conception of what it means to be a public charge," said David Bier, immigration policy analyst at the libertarian CATO Institute.'

                    We are not now that strength which in old days
                    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                    Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                    To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Massena View Post
                      'Under current regulations put in place in 1996, the term is defined as someone who is "primarily dependent" on government assistance, meaning it supplies more than half their income.'

                      'But it only counted cash benefits, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families or Supplemental Security Income from Social Security. The administration's new rule widens the definition of who is expected to be dependent on the government by including more benefit programs.'

                      'Immigration officials can take into account an applicant's financial resources, health, education, skills, family status and age. But few people are rejected on these relatively narrow grounds, experts said.'
                      CNN twisting the story again. Dec 96 is when we started dealing with immigration. The immigration officials took finance (l had to supply a LES), heath (I had to supply proof of coverage), education (she had to provide a translated diploma), skills (she had to provide her last evaluation), and family status. The critical information and promise that the immigration people were looking for was that she and her daughter would not need government assistance. This was in San Diego county.

                      TAG already gave the reason why this is coming back up; California is helping immigrants receive federal assistance.

                      If the immigrant can not support themselves, they shouldn't be immigrating.

                      Again, no landlord would pay someone to live in his or her house.
                      "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Nichols View Post

                        CNN twisting the story again. Dec 96 is when we started dealing with immigration. The immigration officials took finance (l had to supply a LES), heath (I had to supply proof of coverage), education (she had to provide a translated diploma), skills (she had to provide her last evaluation), and family status. The critical information and promise that the immigration people were looking for was that she and her daughter would not need government assistance. This was in San Diego county.

                        TAG already gave the reason why this is coming back up; California is helping immigrants receive federal assistance.

                        If the immigrant can not support themselves, they shouldn't be immigrating.

                        Again, no landlord would pay someone to live in his or her house.
                        Perhaps you could explain how CNN is 'twisting the story'?
                        We are not now that strength which in old days
                        Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                        Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                        To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Massena View Post

                          Perhaps you could explain how CNN is 'twisting the story'?
                          I gave the long explanation above.

                          BLUF;

                          What CNN is twisting as "new" were the rules in 96 under Clinton.
                          "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Nichols View Post

                            I gave the long explanation above.

                            BLUF;

                            What CNN is twisting as "new" were the rules in 96 under Clinton.
                            So, then, CNN isn't 'twisting' the story on the new rules for legal immigration...
                            We are not now that strength which in old days
                            Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                            Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                            To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Nichols View Post

                              If the immigrant can not support themselves, they shouldn't be immigrating.
                              Then you're saying that the immigration 'trends' in the 19th and 20th century were all by people from Ireland, Germany, Italy, and Eastern Europe who could support themselves once they came to the United States?

                              Under the new rules being proposed my ancestors could not have come to the US, and I'm assuming that yours couldn't either. Italians and Germans, as well as those from eastern Europe couldn't speak English either...and I doubt sincerely that they were well off or self-supporting financially.
                              We are not now that strength which in old days
                              Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                              Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                              To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X