The troubles just beginning…..
Europe will see net immigration of at least 77 million people in the coming decades, says Eurostat. https://t.co/OIZqh1BxUb
— Fjordman (@Fjordman1) July 4, 2016
And soon the country under the weight of it….
The Narrative Collapse on Immigration
The Narrative Collapse on Immigration Immigrants travel north through Mexico, June 2014. (Jose de Jesus Cortes/Reuters)
by MARK KRIKORIAN June 2, 2016 12:56 PM
The numbers of arrivals, legal and illegal alike, are rising, not falling. ‘The immigration crisis that has roiled American politics for decades has faded into history.”
That was the lede of a New York Times op-ed four years ago that neatly summarized the preferred narrative of supporters of amnesty and unlimited immigration. This was reinforced by a Pew study that found “More Mexicans Leaving Than Coming to the U.S.” (though it arrived at that headline only by counting the U.S.-citizen children of the immigrants as “Mexicans”).
The storyline was that mass immigration was a phase we’d now finished with. Thus any continued agitation about amnesty or border enforcement or job competition could only be naked racism.
The newest data from the Census Bureau show a surge in total immigration over the past two years. In 2014 and 2015, 3.1 million new foreign-born people moved here, or about 1.5 million per year. This is up from the 2.3 million in the prior two-year period, and 2.1 million in 2010–2011.
Fundamental transformation anyone?
New interactive maps (pictured left and right) allow you to find out what your area will look like in 2024 as projections from the ONS lays bare the impact of Britain’s open borders policy in every borough across England. London is set to be turned into a Megacity in eight years’ time, according to the statistics, with nearly 10 million people predicted to be living in the capital by 2024. The alarming population projections come on the eve of the final release of immigration statistics before the June 23 referendum.
Stupid/scheming/devious is as stupid/scheming/devious does…
Published: 23 May 2016 08:39 GMT+02:00
Merkel spent months spent negotiating the pact, which sees Turkey take back migrants who entered Europe illegally and send Syrian refugees from its own huge camps into Europe in exchange.
As well as the refugee exchange elements, the EU agreed to open further areas in the negotiation for Turkey’s entry into the club and to offer visa-free travel immediately to Turkish citizens.
But the deal is dependent on a Turkish President whose cracking down on political opposition and press freedom at home are becoming impossible to defend for the Chancellor.
Merkel finds herself caught between multiple fires. Left-wing critics have denounced the deal as illegal and a betrayal of refugees’ human rights, while right-wingers are angered by the idea of Europe and Germany being dependent on Erdogan.
No society is guaranteed perpetuity…..
By G. Perry
Addendum: In order to grasp just how destructive mass immigration, in concert with state-enforced multiculturalism, is to social capital take a look at this British poll. As you’ll notice, people living in Northern Ireland-the part of the UK which has been riven by sectarian conflict for over a century-trust their neighbors more than those living in a post-English London. Food for thought.
One of the chief misconceptions about my immigration views is that they’re born of willful intransigence. The conceit that my political philosophy was shaped years ago-true, to a large degree-and has been unyielding in the face of overwhelming evidence which logically refutes it-completely baseless-is surprisingly widespread among my critics. The truth is that I’m actually desperate to be persuaded, to be convinced that open borders is somehow a desirable-or even workable-state of affairs.
Admitting that you’re wrong, especially about sincerely, long-held convictions, can be psychically devastating for some individuals. One need only read David Horowitz’s disturbing memoir Radical Son to get a sense of how traumatic reevaluating your core ideological beliefs can be to a human being. That said, I am not by nature an ideologue. My identity and my sense of self worth are not wrapped up in the outcome of a particular domestic or international debate. Although not a consequentialist, I do accept reality as it is, which is why I find the intellectual defense of mass, 3rd world immigration to the West so utterly unconvincing.
I want to be persuaded that I’m wrong, but over the past 2 decades I’ve yet to encounter an even minimally persuasive argument explaining why I am. The most compelling defense of open borders I’ve heard was offered by Julian Castro, the son of a ’60s Chicana militant whose children have been able to profit from the political cachet of faux multiculturalism and our country’s drastically altered demographics. Empty suit though he is, at least he had a rudimentary understanding of the issue being discussed, unlike almost every open borders libertarian I’ve tried to engage on this subject. To cite just one example of the fundamental ignorance they’re operating from, the writer David Marcus routinely extols the beauty of Ellis Island immigration in cliched essays, despite being blissfully unaware of the fact that almost all non-white immigration was prohibited during this halcyon period of American history.
Yevgeniy Feyman is a much more informed interlocutor, yet I came away from his discussion at The Irish Exit this past week with my beliefs, vis-a-vis immigration, fundamentally unchanged. Although an expert in health care policy, Mr. Feyman has a keen interest in the subject of immigration, which he believes should be unfettered. Echoing many of the same arguments used by open borders advocate Bryan Caplan-whose work he referenced-he asserted that there is an ethical and utilitarian case for unrestricted immigration to the West, neither of which I found terribly convincing.
One of my main problems with the latter argument was his insistence upon using gross domestic product as a proxy for economic growth and wealth creation, something that is genuinely perplexing coming from an ostensible proponent of free markets. According to Feyman, economists have postulated a 60% growth in GDP if Western nations completely opened their borders, while a 140% increase would result from global immigration restrictions being completely removed. Even if we were to accept these fantastic claims, it’s far from certain that this would be a good thing for our economy. Even the thousands of largely illiterate, unskilled Somalis imported to the interior of this country collectively boost our GDP. However, I’m sure that serves as scant comfort to the taxpayers forced to support their intergenerational welfare.
NOTE: The quality and time between accepting large numbers of people is crucial in maintaining the civil society.
Not looking good for the Cameron (spin machine) government……nor for the British people in general who are forced to cough up their hard earned money for this farce.
Official stats say just 257,000 came from the EU sparking controversy among MPs
MINISTERS were last night accused of a migration “cover-up” — as it was claimed true figures may be more than double official stats.
Some 257,000 EU nationals were said to have arrived last year, but it emerged 630,000 registered to work. One expert said the Government appeared to be “deliberately keeping voters in the dark” to boost its chances in the In/Out referendum.
It also emerged that 257,000 EU nationals came in the year to September 2015.
But separate data showed 630,000 got a National Insurance number last year – including 170,000 Romanians.
Jonathan Portes, from UK in a Changing Europe, said: “Immigration may have been considerably understated.”
Yeah, subsidized slave labor that will not only invigorate the German economy, but maintain its socialist welfare state as well.
What a bunch of asshats.
The German government pressing ahead with plans to spend nearly half a billion Euros to ‘create’ 100,000 heavily subsidised jobs for unemployed migrants.
Desperate to better integrate the millions of migrants that have already arrived, and continue to roll into Europe in droves through the migrant crisis, socialist workforce minister Andrea Nahles has been working on the plan since last year. But now the so-called refugee jobs have been criticised by economists who say paying companies €450,000,000 to employ migrants is nothing more than a short term fix.
The German government is presently negotiating over the 2017 budget, but politicians are already calling for significant extra funding to be found for migrants in 2016.
Instead of requiring migrants to perform simple work in return for their state handouts, which includes housing, food, and pocket money, the new plan asks private companies to pay migrants €1 an hour for their labour, reports Welt. although exact plans have yet to be released, the wage would be likely topped up to the €8.50 minimum wage by government subsidy — a programme that is being called “occupational therapy” in Germany.
While German economists applauded efforts to integrate migrants into the job market as quickly as possible Marcel Fratzscher, head of the German Institute for Economic Research said “publicly funded job opportunities do not appear to be the right way to bring refugees to work”, reports Rheinische Post.
More here. H/T: Kumitonttu
YLE, state propaganda 1st, 2nd and 3rd, and always on the public dime.
Finland regularly measures high on the international scale for scholastic achievement, that achievement however will be short lived once the impact of having to deal with immigrants on a massive scale and with all the problems that it entails.
Many teachers wrote that they see the cultural differences as more of a blessing than a curse. They say that immigrant families should be better distributed throughout Finland specifically so they can enrich Finnish life with their presence in as many places as possible. One teacher respondent said it best:
“Diversity is good for all children – both the immigrants and the Finns.”
Schools are traditionally one of the most important venues for the integration of newcomers. Teachers with experience in instructing immigrant-background children in Finland say policies allowing immigrants to concentrate in certain areas are a bad idea.
According to a recent survey conducted by the national broadcaster Yle and the teachers’ union OAJ, teachers in Finnish schools with a foreign-language population of more than ten percent feel children’s immigration suffers if they do not have enough interaction with Finnish-speaking children and adults. For purposes of the study, foreign-language students included those whose mother tongue is something other than Finnish, Swedish or a Sami language.
Of the 455 experienced teachers that responded to the survey, just over 42 percent agreed with the statement: ”It is a problem if immigrants concentrate in certain areas and at certain schools”, while close to 44 percent somewhat agreed. In other words, 86 percent were in some sort of agreement, with fewer than 8 percent professing some degree of disagreement and just over 6 percent answering that they can’t say.
A total of 270 Finnish schools in which immigrants make up more than ten percent of the student body participated in the study. Of the teachers that responded to the survey, 38 percent have taught immigrant children for over 10 years, 26 percent between 5 and 10 years and over 26 percent between 2 and 5 years.
The primary reason teachers oppose the formation of immigrant enclaves in Finnish society is a linguistic one. Teachers have noted that the Finnish language skills of their pupils remains inadequate in neighbourhoods and schools that are too immigrant-heavy.
The teachers justify their stand with proof: if many students that speak the same language are in the same school, they speak their native language when they are together and don’t learn Finnish well enough.
If children find it difficult to study in the Finnish language, teachers relate that they sometimes forced to simplify the content of their teaching, leaving gaps.
Many of the teacher survey respondents expressed the desire that no more than one-third of their students would speak a foreign language. This, they say, would best facilitate optimal Finnish language retention among them.
At present, Finland has about fifty schools where the number of foreign-language students exceeds this one-third quota.
The teachers report that foreign-language students increase their work load in many ways.
“Settling disputes between the students requires more time, due to the lack of language skills,” one teacher says. “Working together with the parents who don’t speak Finnish is also time-consuming.”
Another related phenomenon is that if a school gathers a large amount of foreign-language students, the Finnish language parents in the neighbourhood may choose to send their children to a different school. Researchers and teachers have both noted this trend.
“Finnish parents start to avoid the school, even if it is the nearest one to where they live. There really is no reason for this,” replies a survey respondent.
They couldn’t care less, that’s why.
A UK think tank has today revealed that the British government is refusing to disclose figures related to recent immigration from the European Union, citing concerns over the Prime Minister’s EU membership “renegotiation” as a reason for withholding the statistics, and potentially confirming analysis by Breitbart London in August.
The National Institute of Economic and Social Research’s principal fellow Jonathan Portes reports that “there is a small but vocal minority who think that the government has been lying to us for years about the true scale of immigration” specifically referring to a question posed by Breitbart London over what Mr. Portes describes as the “increasing divergence between official immigration and population statistics and the administrative data held by the [Department for Work and Pensions] on the numbers of National Insurance numbers issued”.
In August of this year, I reported: “For the year to March 2015, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) reported that there were 53,000 new Romanian and Bulgarian immigrants – “a statistically significant increase and almost double the 28,000 in the previous 12 months”.
“Indeed such a rise is significant, but the question is – why are the National Insurance numbers (NINos) so different, at a total of 214,000 registrations of Romanians and Bulgarians (EU2) to the year ending June 2015.”
Concluding: “But as people are noticing, the discrepancy between EU2 countries immigration figures and the NINo figures are particularly striking. There were 917,000 registrations in the year to June 2015, an 62 per cent increase (352,000) on the previous year. A whopping 76 per cent of these (697,000) were from within the European Union.”
You read that right, three whole cities…….
By IAN DRURY, HOME AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 06:14 GMT, 14 October 2015 | UPDATED: 08:13 GMT, 14 October 2015
Lord Green of Deddington said Britain will be forced to build three cities the size of Birmingham within five years to cope with current levels of immigration
Britain will be forced to build three cities the size of Birmingham within five years to cope with current levels of immigration, experts warned last night.
Lord Green of Deddington, chairman of think-tank MigrationWatch UK, said the population could increase by a staggering 3million by 2020 – adding strain to the country’s creaking public services.
The prediction will heap pressure on Prime Minister David Cameron to take control of the borders as part of his renegotiation of Britain’s membership of the EU.
Immigration now tops the list of voters’ concerns in recent polls – with nearly 6 in 10 saying tackling immigration is among the most crucial issues facing the UK.
But his pledge to cut net migration to the tens of thousands has been left in tatters after the number soared to a record 330,000 in the year to March – a rise of 40 per cent in one year.
Lord Green said that if net migration – the number of people coming into the country minus those leaving – and the natural population increase continued at today’s rates, it would mean a typical rise of around 600,000 a year.
Giving evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee, he said: ‘On current levels of net migration, we are going to have to build three cities the size of Birmingham within five years. That just can’t be done.’
Birmingham, the UK’s second largest city, has a population of just over 1million, according to the 2011 census.
Lord Green said it would be ‘very difficult’ for the Government to hit its 100,000 migration target but he opposed axing the figure, arguing that it ‘focused’ bureaucrats and public opinion.
Read more: h/t: Buck
And here in Finland the current government is spending record amounts of money on these fake refugees.
It’s third world Muslim immigration that threatens a “cohesive society”, not immigration generally. http://t.co/EgBqb3pDSz
— Pat Condell (@patcondell) October 6, 2015
— Peter Whittle (@prwhittle) October 6, 2015
Theresa May will warn the Tory conference that huge pressure is being placed on public services and infrastructure by economic migrants. She will say: ‘There are millions of people in poorer countries who would love to live in Britain, and there is a limit to the amount of immigration any country can and should take.’ Based on the current influx, Mrs May says the UK needs to build 210,000 homes every year and find 900,000 extra school places by 2024.
Mass immigration is making it impossible to build a cohesive society and is against Britain’s national interest, the Home Secretary will declare today.
Theresa May will warn the Tory conference that huge pressure is being placed on public services and infrastructure by economic migrants.
She will say: ‘There are millions of people in poorer countries who would love to live in Britain, and there is a limit to the amount of immigration any country can and should take.’
Based on the current influx, Mrs May says the UK needs to build 210,000 homes every year and find 900,000 extra school places by 2024.
She will also claim there are ‘thousands of people who have been forced out of the labour market, still unable to find a job’.
Her comments – the strongest by a senior minister in recent times – reinforce the need to get a grip on immigration at a time when some Cabinet ministers are seeking to water down the Tory pledge to cut net migration to tens of thousands.
Mrs May will also reveal that Britain has spent more than £4million processing asylum claims by EU citizens at no risk of persecution. Many of the claimants are from Spain, where millions of Britons take holidays, and Poland.
The claims have no chance of success but, under existing rules, applicants are entitled to a full interview.
The Home Secretary will tell the Tory conference in Manchester she is scrapping the ‘absurd’ rules, so claims by EU nationals will be inadmissible unless there are exceptional circumstances – for instance if they are victims of people trafficking.
As I reported yesterday, the migration of so called “asylum” seekers is a highly orchestrated black market business, Iranian and Syrian/Arab speaking groups control the routes of these welfare migrants coming from Iran, Afghanistan via Turkey and from Syria via Cyprus etc..
That Islamic State is also involved should not be a surprise to anyone, turning a buck for the jihad while they inundate the European continent with muslims in the tens and hundreds of thousands. For them, it’s a win win situation.
Vivienne Walt @vivwalt May 13, 2015
Migrants on a packed wooden boat wait to be rescued off the coast of Malta on May 3, 2015.
Migrants pay thousands of dollars to armed groups in Africa and the Middle East on their journey to Europe
The movement of migrants across the Middle East and Africa towards Europe has generated up to $323 million for the Islamic State in Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) and other jihadist groups, a new report has revealed.
Many of the migrants embark from Libya on unseaworthy boats which have foundered with thousands drowning and thousands being rescued by European navies. At least 170,000 refugees made the sea journey last year, and that number looks likely to increase this year, according to the European Union’s border-surveillance organization Frontex.
European Union and African officials are scrambling to find ways to stop the migration. On Wednesday the Guardian revealed a 19-page E.U. strategy report to crack down on the smugglers, which included air strikes on boats and possibly the use of troops in Libya.
But while E.U. officials anguish over the plight of people crossing the Mediterranean to get to Europe, the migration has proved an invaluable business opportunity for groups like ISIS. So valuable that international crime experts believe ISIS might have launched some attacks specifically in order to drive people to flee, and then profit from their flight. “They [ISIS] were looking desperately for new funds,” says Christian Nelleman, director of the Norwegian Center for Global Analysis, or RHIPTO, who co-authored this week’s report with the Geneva-based Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime, a consortium of organized-crime experts. “Unlike al-Qaeda, ISIS needs a totally different scale of funds because they run an army and provide social services,” he says.
ISIS’s sources of funding appear to have changed markedly since 2014. For much of last year, ISIS brought in funds from oil smuggling — a key reason why its fighters seized oil facilities in Syria and Iraq —with oil trading earning up to $3 million a day, according to U.N. estimates. But those earnings have crashed, perhaps by half, since last August, when the U.S. and its allies began bombing ISIS oil facilities, according to a Western intelligence report from last January, which was shared with TIME this week. The report estimates that ISIS needs between $523.5 million and $815.3 million a year to run its operations, including to pay its fighters, run social services, and buy weapons and ammunition.
About fifteen hundred years ago Europe underwent a turbulent age which has been named the Migration Period. Yet the population movements then were more limited than those facing Europe today. In both speed and sheer numbers, the current migration waves are far greater than those we associate with the fall of the (Western) Roman Empire.
It is completely unrealistic to solve basic problems through the international migration of billions of people. Most social problems of countries in the global South must be resolved locally. There is simply no other option.
If you appreciate this essay by Fjordman, please consider making a donation to him, using the button at the bottom of this post.
The New Migration Period
Subjects related to legal or illegal mass immigration fill the news in virtually every Western country these days. Sometimes it can be useful to look at the big picture, not just individual news stories.
Demographers estimate that the world’s population will grow by well over 70 million people during the year 2015. Let us say that the global population will increase by 73 million people in 2015. This corresponds to a global population growth of more than 6 million people per month, around 1.4 million people per week, nearly 200,000 per day, more than 8327 per hour, almost 139 per minute and 2.3 per second. If you spend 30 seconds on fetching a cold drink in the fridge, the planet’s population will increase with about 69 people during this time. If you spend half an hour on eating lunch, there will be 4164 more people on Earth after your lunch break.
It sounds generous if somebody suggests that we should accept 8,000 asylum seekers from countries with many social problems. However, consider the fact that this is the equivalent of the planet’s population growth in less than an hour. That is roughly the amount of time many of us spend daily on commuting to work or school.
Statistically speaking, much of the population growth will be concentrated in low-income families and in societies with many social problems. Technologically advanced nations such as Germany and Japan have very low birth rates. In contrast, Nigeria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Tanzania, Congo, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Mali, Yemen, Somalia, Kenya, Gambia, Mauritania, Senegal, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Bangladesh, Egypt, Iraq, Libya and the Philippines are experiencing a substantial population increase. Meanwhile, countries such as India, Pakistan, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Tanzania, Congo, Indonesia, Kenya, Sudan, Uganda, the Philippines and Egypt have many malnourished children.
The Neolithic Revolution began gradually in several different regions, starting with the Fertile Crescent in the Middle East 10-12,000 years ago. Prior to this we were all hunter-gatherers. The global population at the onset of the Neolithic Revolution is uncertain. It has been estimated at perhaps 5 million, possibly 15 million people. The lower estimate is roughly equivalent to the current population of Norway. The higher estimate corresponds to today’s population of Norway plus Sweden. This was the total number of human beings living on all continents minus Antarctica: Europe, Asia, Africa and Australia plus North America and South America. A single major city the size of Tokyo, Beijing, Seoul, Karachi, Mexico City, Lagos, Mumbai or Cairo now has more residents than there were people living on this entire planet before we started practicing agriculture.
The very first groups that began practicing agriculture and kept livestock did not automatically enjoy improved health because of this. They may actually have developed new illnesses. However, by growing their own food, they could gradually increase their numbers. During the past ten thousand years, while farming spread across the world, the number of people rose significantly. It is believed that the world’s total human population for the first time reached one billion people around the year 1800, at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. It took all of the Earth’s peoples since the Neanderthals hundreds of thousands of years to achieve this number. Since the Industrial Revolution, the global population has grown dramatically over the last two centuries. This trend still continues unabated, at least in many of the planet’s southern regions.
In the coming three decades, Africa’s population could increase by more than one billion people. A single continent can thus increase by a larger number of people in 30 years than it took all continents combined hundreds of thousands of years to achieve before the year 1800. This increase will take place on the planet’s least technologically developed continent. In a mere 4 to 11 weeks, the number of human beings currently grows by more than the number of people living on the entire planet 10,000 years ago. In the Stone Age, the means of transport were primitive, and travel limited. Now, we have modern means of transport such as railways, trucks, motorized boats and intercontinental flights. Combined with a global population explosion, this has created the largest and fastest migration waves the Earth has ever witnessed since our species first came into existence.
We do not know the exact population figures of the Roman Empire nearly two thousand years ago. Estimates vary from around 40 million people to over 100 million people. A relatively common estimate is that the total population of the Roman Empire was about 60-80 million people.
By comparison, in 2013 the world’s population grew by 75 million people annually. Various estimates suggest a global population growth of between 70 and 80 million for 2015. This means that the world’s population is now adding another Roman Empire every single year, maybe more. Most of this increase is concentrated in dysfunctional countries and regions.
Two problems compounded one on top of the other.
Of course it hasn’t been about race, but about the survival of the West as we know it. Islam and the inundation of tens of millions of 3rd world migrants in Europe. Both problems while change the face of Europe forever if the trajectory isn’t changed soon, with many saying the tipping point having already been reached awhile ago.
That’s almost exactly the population of London, our capital city. Think about it. It’s an astonishing figure. Enough to fill Manchester United’s Old Trafford stadium more than 100 times over.
This is a direct result of Labour’s cynical, politically-motivated decision to tear up our border controls and ‘scour the world for immigrants’, in the memorable words of the odious Peter Mandelson.
And despite the Tories’ broken promise — which they knew perfectly well they couldn’t possibly honour — to reduce the flow of migrants to the ‘tens of thousands’, still they keep coming.
By RICHARD LITTLEJOHN FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 23:09 GMT, 27 August 2015 | UPDATED: 00:04 GMT, 28 August 2015
Eight million. Doesn’t sound much, especially if you say it quickly. Sting’s just sold his Central London pad for £19 million.
Even that’s no big deal. Yesterday we learned that there are now 715,000 paper millionaires in Britain, thanks to the relentless rise in property prices.
No wonder ITV scrapped Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?. These days the jackpot would be worth little more than the modern equivalent of a Blankety Blank cheque book and pen, just about enough to buy you a small shed overlooking the South Circular Road.
There are now 715,000 paper millionaires in Britain, thanks to the relentless rise in property prices. No wonder ITV scrapped Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?
When it comes to money, a million is increasingly meaningless. A round of drinks. The national debt is measured in trillions, not millions. The news bulletins bandy around billions every day, and we all just shrug.
But when it refers to people, not pounds, we really should sit up and take notice.
It has just been revealed that the number of people who were born abroad and are now living in Britain has hit a staggering 8.3 million.
Camer-moron’s promise is in tatters like the rest of his other promises as well. The price of voting in a statist political hack.
Despite giving a ‘no ifs no buts guarantee’ that net immigration would fall on his watch, David Cameron has overseen a huge increase since 2012
By TOM MCTAGUE, DEPUTY POLITICAL EDITOR FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 08:43 GMT, 27 August 2015 | UPDATED: 08:58 GMT, 27 August 2015
Net migration into Britain hit a record high last year, official figures revealed this morning.
In the 12 months to March, 330,000 more people arrived in the UK than left – smashing the previous record of 320,000 at the height of the Eastern European immigration boom under Tony Blair.
The revelation is a huge blow to David Cameron who gave a ‘no ifs no buts’ guarantee that he would slash net migration to below 100,000 a year.
Compared to the previous year, net migration has soared by 94,000, with 636,000 migrants moving to Britain and just 307,000 people leaving, the Office for National Statistics said.
More here. H/T: Buck
Because it’s so easy to understand and sensible.
Most Democrats up until a decade or so ago, were very much against illegal immigration, but since they saw potential voters in the raw numbers streaming across the border, they’ve numbed themselves to the concerns of the average voter whose jobs and wages are severely impacted by the influx of job seekers (which drives down wages) and welfare grabbers (which implodes the welfare state).
NOTE: Trump’s a newcomer to conservatism, but acts far more like it than any RINO I know of. And no, i’m not a Trump supporter (yet), Ted Cruz is my pick.
Don’t get me wrong, as a liberal Democrat I think Donald Trump would be a disaster as president.
On the other hand, I must say that I was impressed by the level of detail in his recently released immigration policy paper.
As Mark Krikorian has written, Trump’s position “clearly has advanced the immigration debate.”
What I find significant, and surprising, is that his illegal alien policy paper is so detailed, and so appropriate, particularly on some of the financial specifics of immigration policy that no one else has even mentioned.
His earlier, frankly ridiculous, boast that he would build a wall on the southern border and get Mexico to pay for it has morphed into a sensible approach that would get it paid for by Mexican and other illegal aliens. Among his specific suggestions:
It’s an issue that will resonate with the majority of Americans, from all ethnicities, including those Mexicans and other Latinos who became proud Americans the legal way.
I’ve been writing for a while that the Republican Party needed to go with immigration populism.
JFK won Macomb County, Michigan in 1960 by 75 percent. In 1980, Reagan won it by 66 percent. This heart of ‘Reagan Democrat’ country was closely split by Gore and Bush and Bush and Kerry… until Obama won it 53 to 45 in 2008 and by 51 to 47 in 2012.
The Republican Party doesn’t need to worry about the Latino vote nearly as much as it should be worrying about its inability to connect with white working class Americans. The pro-amnesty GOP establishment’s electoral vision of a party of corporations and minority voters already exists.
It’s called the Democratic Party.
The Republican Party’s fate in 2016 will be decided in places like Macomb County. It will be decided by white men and women earning $20,000 to $50,000 a year. It will be decided by working families struggling to get by and searching for answers from a government that keeps betraying them.
For the first time in, well ever, it’s actually happening. Republicans are embracing the peculiar idea that they might want to win working class votes. It’s not just Trump. Scott Walker was really the first out of the gate. And while Trump’s plan is good… sometimes it seems like he doesn’t know what’s in it.
Bush hack Perino melts down over sensible legislation (abiding by legislation already on the books) as only a RINO can.
by IAN HANCHETT 17 Aug 2015
Senator Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) 80% declared that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s immigration plan is “a mainstream plan to do what politicians have been promising to do for 30 years” on Monday’s “Kelly File” on the Fox News Channel.
Sessions said of the plan, which he consulted with Trump on, “Basically, Shannon, it’s just a mainstream plan to do what politicians have been promising to do for 30 years, and haven’t done. These are things like, you have, end the jobs magnet by not allowing people who are here legally to get jobs. You strengthen border enforcement. You stop the visa overstays. Almost half, maybe more now, of illegal entries into the United States are people who come on visas and overstay.
These are things that he talks about in his plan that are bread and butter, basic, and need to be done. And if we do them, we’ll be surprised how dramatically we can reduce the illegality. And in addition to that, we need to create an immigration system that serves the interests of the American people. People are hurting today, wages are down. Jobs are down. So, we’ve got to be concerned about them, and making sure that Americans are given the opportunity to get valuable jobs first.”
Sessions was then asked if he believes Trump’s ideas can get passed by Congress. He responded, “you don’t have to pass a lot of laws. Some smart legislation would help, no doubt about it. And I think if a president is elected on the promise to fix this border, and illegality, the American people will insist that reasonable laws get passed. But, basically, utilizing existing law, we can make huge differences, and reduce this illegality, and create a system that serves the national interest. President Obama is just flat-out refusing to enforce basic law, that’s been on the books, sometimes, for a decade.”
And the collection of Leftist race baiting, discrimination hawkers (miscreants and malcontents) will shout ”self-hating immigrant”!
Truth be told, I can attest to the very same sentiments (in varying amounts) offered by Deeana Lehtinen. I came to Finland from the States, not for economic reasons (Finland was at the cusp of a major recession at the time) but because of my wife and her extended family.
No one talked about ”multiculturalism” at the time, it was more or less the melting pot ethic, learn the language, find work, learn the customs and traditions, and if of one’s own choosing, celebrate your ethnic heritage if you care to do so. Immigration was managed, and integration leading to assimilation the desired goal.
What in the world is wrong with that?
Creating angst and envy they rule by ”divide and rule”, pitting one sector of society against the other in terms of prized privilege, and only to be dumped later on when a new group takes the cherished prize.
What takes place is a reversion back to the balkanization of society, pre-modern nation state tribalism, with the lords and ladies of multiculturalism ruling over us. What’s happening in Finland now, was percolating throughout the EU first.
I moved from Romania to Finland a few years ago. Recently, I read a lot of media about discrimination and racism. Does anyone any longer make sense here?
I have traveled a lot and I can certainly say, that in Finland, you can not speak about discrimination or racism. Maybe some of Finns are tired, frustrated and even angry because domestically, each new entrant or minority does what it wants. This is a natural reaction, and not discrimination.
Despite the background everyone in Finland has more rights than almost anywhere else. Sometimes I feel like that is an advantage to belong to a minority, because you’ll get more rights than ordinary Finns. For Finns this creates counter-reactions.
My husband commutes a long distance to work and works a lot, so that we have what an ordinary person needs in life. I am an immigrant and I am wholeheartedly grateful to the Finnish State. And, like me, there are also others who understand that Finland is a paradise compared to other countries.
However, no one asks us anything. All kinds of crazies are presented in the media.
Those talking about discrimination are often the ones who take advantage of the generosity of Finland. Those, who do not want to be employed and pay tax and who forget that, in their own country they did not have anything, and have a good life offered to them here.
In Finland there is security, integrity, justice, and good social services. Everyone receives daily food and a roof over their heads. For us immigrants, the Finnish government provides free education and a lot of help to adjust here. Our children will go to one of the best schools in the world.
Isn’t it a little ungrateful to talk about discrimination in a place like this? When I came to Finland, I found it difficult to make friends and to adapt, and sometimes it’s still the case. However, it is not discrimination. The Finns are shy, retreating, distant and sometimes cold, but no one should say that they are discriminatory.
Immigrants often long for their own country so much that they will remember only the romantic and decorated things from their homeland and not why they left. Although sometimes we miss our home country, it is not reasonable or correct to try to make Finland a new Afghanistan, Iran, Greece, Romania, Russia and so on.
Although I love my country, I wouldn’t like Finland to become the new Romania. We came to Finland because it is for us and our children a better place than our home country .
If there is discrimination and racism here, why go anywhere else? I hope that Finns will not allow this good country to be changed into something else.
I also hope that the media will do a better research and ask the opinions of everyone, not just the chronically dissatisfied. When you only allow one sided views on certain matters to be understood, even for someone who would never have thought of before, that there is discrimination, then they begin to think that its’s pretty bad here after all.
I think it’s wrong to offer such an image based on nothing, because it gives a distorted image. I wrote this because I want to remind other immigrants to be realistic and grateful.
10 good reasons to reject refugees coming to the West
By: Nicolai Sennels, psychologist
1) Accommodating refugees outside the West – preferably close to their home country – is much more compassionate, since we can help many more people for the same money.
2) By accepting refugees who come to the West, we support cynical and criminal human smugglers. These smugglers typically lie about travel safty and about the chances for money and asylum. Besides, they often ruin the families by charging unreasonably high prices for their illegal service.
3) By accepting refugees coming to the West with the help of criminals (human smugglers), we spend our budget for refugees on the people who can afford to pay these criminals.That leaves less money to help the poor refugees not able to pay for the criminals’ service.
4) Many families can only afford to send one family member to the West. Often young men are chosen, leaving the rest of the family with one bread winner less.
5) Refugees come from completely other climate and culture. Moving to a completely other society with a culture that in many ways are opposite to the refugees’ culture, is stressful, thus adding to their psychological traumas from war and being separated from their families.
6) Accommodating refugees inside our own countries is very expensive, and leaves less money for our own children, elderly and sick. We should help people in danger, but in a way that burdens the people who pay for this help – the tax payers – least possible.
7) Refugees as a group are very criminal. Accommodating them inside our own societies, we expose our own citizens to a higher risk of being victims of especially theft, robbery and rape.
8) Many refugees can or will not return to their country of origin and therefore stays in our countries. This results in an ever growing burden on society and tax payers.
9) The fact that third-world refugees, especially Muslims, integrate very poorly adds to the segregation of our societies, resulting in parallel societies. These areas are a burden to society as they have a higher crime rate, and tend to produce a high amount of Islamic fundamentalists with an aggressive and anti-democratic mindset.
10) Islamic State and other terror groups openly admit, that they send terrorists disquised as refugees to non-Muslim countries.