Immigration Watch International (2): Why Are We Spending Millions Housing Illegal Migrants While Americans Go Homeless?

Sunday, July 16, 2023

Why Are We Spending Millions Housing Illegal Migrants While Americans Go Homeless?

While December's winter storm saw U.S. citizens frozen to death in their cars and fallen street side in snowbanks, our migrant-obsessed legislators sent another screw you to the American people in the form of beefed up assistance for illegal immigrants.

Year-round, millions of Americans are homeless or one paycheck away from being on the streets. Forty thousand veterans are homeless across the nation, and 40 percent of our homeless population is Black. So there is extra treachery in passing an omnibus spending bill that includes $800 million in grants to build shelters for foreigners and illegal aliens.

Theoretically, everyone deserves to have shelter and protection from the elements; yet it is not America's responsibility to house the world, particularly when our own homeless citizens have fought long and hard battles for access to clean and safe shelter.

It's time to call out the policies of President Biden, complicit legislators, and executives of so called "sanctuary cities" as the anti-American betrayal that they are.

According to economists at the University of Chicago, more than 500,000 Americans experience homelessness every day. But there are just over 300,000 beds for homeless Americans. That means just two out of three homeless people across the U.S. can find temporary housing; the remainder are literally unsheltered.

And yet, despite this crisis, homeless Americans are being displaced to house illegal migrants. Tensions flared last fall in New York City when homeless Black Americans were removed from their shelter to be replaced by illegal aliens. "I have no idea why we are being displaced for them. Why we are being moved and shuffled around?" One woman asked.

We have a housing crisis in this country, yet millions are being spent to house people who aren't American, while low income Americans go without. New York City has spent $600 million to house migrants, though its public housing residents live in squalor. "The city is going to put forth a ton of money for these people who aren't even citizens, but they forgot about the people who live in public housing right here," as one resident put it.

It's time to call this what it is: anti-Black racism committed by Democrats who for some reason have more compassion for people from other countries than their own fellow Americans.

https://www.newsweek.com/why-are-we-spending-millions-housing-illegal-migrants-while-americans-go-homeless-opinion-1770207

***********************************

My other blogs. Main ones below:

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE-TIED)

http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)

http://awesternheart.blogspot.com.au/ (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*******************************

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.

Why is "La Raza" the one Spanish term that is NEVER translated in the American mass media? Because translating it would make it a lot less respectable. It means "THE RACE" -- The mixed Hispanic "race" of Mexico. Racism is fine South of the Rio Grande only, apparently.

The "line" of this blog is that immigration should be SELECTIVE. That means that:

1). A national government should be in control of it. The U.S. and U.K. governments are not but the Australian government has shown that the government of a prosperous Western country can be. Up until its loss of office in 2007, the conservative Howard government had all but eliminated illegal immigration. The present Leftist government has however restarted the flow of illegals by repealing many of the Howard government regulations.

2). Selectivity should be based on "the content of a man's character, not on the color of his skin", as MLK said. To expand that a little: Immigrants should only be accepted if they as individuals seem likely to make a positive net contribution to the country. Many "refugees" would fail that test: Muslims and Africans particularly. Educational level should usually be a pretty fair proxy for the individual's likely value to the receiving country. There will, of course, be exceptions but it is nonetheless unlikely that a person who has not successfully completed High School will make a net positive contribution to a modern Western society.

3). Immigrants should be neither barred NOR ACCEPTED solely because they are of some particular ethnic origin. Blacks are vastly more likely to be criminal than are whites or Chinese, for instance, but some whites and some Chinese are criminal. It is the criminality that should matter, not the race.

4). The above ideas are not particularly blue-sky. They roughly describe the policies of the country where I live -- Australia. I am critical of Australian policy only insofar as the "refugee" category for admission is concerned. All governments have tended to admit as refugees many undesirables. It seems to me that more should be required of them before refugees are admitted -- for instance a higher level of education or a business background.

5). Perhaps the most amusing assertion in the immigration debate is that high-income countries like the USA and Britain NEED illegal immigrants to do low-paid menial work. "Who will pick our crops?" (etc.) is the cry. How odd it is then that Australians get all the normal services of a modern economy WITHOUT illegal immigrants! Yes: Before the pandemic, you usually COULD buy a lettuce in Australia for a dollar or thereabouts. And Australia IS a major exporter of primary products.

6). I am a libertarian conservative so I reject the "open door" policy favoured by many libertarians and many Leftists. Both those groups tend to have a love of simplistic generalizations that fail to deal with the complexity of the real world. It seems to me that if a person has the right to say whom he/she will have living with him/her in his/her own house, so a nation has the right to admit to living among them only those individuals whom they choose.

I can be reached on jonjayray@hotmail.com -- or leave a comment on any post. Abusive comments will be deleted.

Immigration Watch International (2)

Sunday, July 16, 2023

Why Are We Spending Millions Housing Illegal Migrants While Americans Go Homeless?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Background

Other blogs

Blog Archive

Contributors