Border Patrol Agents Vow to Quit If Harris Wins

 
The illegal immigration crisis facing the U.S. has drastically worsened ever since Vice President Kamala Harris was appointed the incumbent administration’s “border czar” in 2021.

Terrorist threats are on the rise, violent migrant gangs are roaming the streets, small towns are being decimated by state-sanctioned immigrant dumpings, American children are being slain by migrants, and migrant children are being sex trafficked by gangs and cartels.

But according to reports, the crisis could deepen further if Harris were to win November’s election.

According to The New York Post, U.S. Border Patrol agents are “threatening” to resign in droves if Harris is elected president. “I’m not doing this sh** again … four years of hell,” one agent said. The Post noted that he is “nowhere near retirement,” but is “absolutely sure” that he would quit if Harris were to win in November. Another agent warned, “Lots of guys who can retire will go. If Trump wins, they’ll stay.”

One agent anticipated that his colleagues with five to 10 years of Border Patrol experience will try to find other jobs, while those who have served at least 20 years will simply walk away. “We will have another exodus just because we will have a bunch of 20-year agents saying ‘peace out,’” he said.

Another agent said that no one wants to work Border Patrol under the Biden-Harris administration because the administration undermines the job. “Under this administration, they’ve done everything they could to make our job as inefficient as possible. They can’t outwardly tell us not to do our job, but when you’re watching criminals come in and get released, it sucks,” he commented.

Border Patrol has been steadily hemorrhaging agents ever since President Joe Biden took office in January 2021. Over a quarter of agents, totaling more than 4,000, have quit, leaving the crucial agency with roughly 19,000 employees. On average, more than 1,200 Border Patrol agents have resigned per year under the policies of Biden and his “border czar,” Harris.

The National Border Patrol Council, the largest union representing Border Patrol agents, has been openly critical of Harris’ failure to address the surging border crisis and has warned that, as president, she would continue to do damage.

Late last month, when Harris visited Douglas, Arizona, for a campaign event, she made numerous claims regarding the nation’s southern border and its security, including taking credit for increasing overtime pay for Border Patrol agents. “This couldn’t be further from the truth. As with all things border-related, she was nowhere to be found when we needed her,” the National Border Patrol Council quickly responded.

The council continued, “Vice President Harris has ignored the border problem she created for over three years. She goes down there for 20 minutes for a photo op and decides to repeat some of the things the [National Border Patrol Council] has said before. But again, where has she been the last 3-1/2 years?”

When Trump himself visited Arizona on Sunday, the council formally endorsed him. Its president, Brandon Judd, said that Biden and Harris treat the U.S. border as “nothing more than an imaginary line in which crossing it illegally carries no penalty,” adding that the policies of Biden or Harris will make America into a nation “where lawlessness will reign, and where enforcement of laws will become a pastime.”

Trump, however, is “the polar opposite,” Judd said. “He has worked tirelessly and against great opposition to make this country safe, to make our neighborhoods safe, and most importantly, make our children safe,” he continued. Biden and Harris offer only “rhetoric,” the border patrol group president quipped, but “President Donald Trump, on the other hand, has accomplishments.”

https://www.dailysignal.com/2024/10/19/border-patrol-agents-vow-quit-harris-wins/

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

All my main blogs below:

http://jonjayray.com/covidwatch.html (COVID WATCH)

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

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

https://westpsychol.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH  -- new site)

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

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

http://jonjayray.com/select.html (SELECT POSTS)

http://jonjayray.com/short/short.html (Subject index to my blog posts)

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

CIA Shocker: Ukraine, Venezuela Have Highest Rates of Net In-Migration in the World. So, why do our migrant-friendly policies continue?

I recently came across a CIA report that was a shocker: Of the three countries with the highest net in-migration—that is, the highest proportion of migrants entering compared to those leaving-- in the world, Ukraine is first and Venezuela is third. Why are a war-torn country and an economic basket case leading expat refuges like the British Virgin Islands (number 4), the Caymans (5), and Monaco (7) in terms of in-migration? And, more importantly, why are our migrant-friendly policies for Ukrainians and Venezuelans still in effect?

Before I continue, as the CIA explains: “Net migration rate compares the difference between the number of persons entering and leaving a country during the year per 1,000 persons (based on midyear population)”. The higher the rate, the larger the number of proportional annual arrivals.
Ukraine

According to CIA estimates, Ukraine has a net migration rate of +36.5 per thousand population in 2024.

To put Ukraine’s net in-migration into context, the United States has the 38th highest net migration worldwide, with a net migration rate of +3 per 1,000 population, and the UK is 39th, with a net migration rate of +2.9 per thousand. The Cook Islands is dead-last, with a net migration rate of -25.1 per thousand.

According to a February report by the International Organization for Migration (IOM), more than 4.5 million Ukrainians have returned home, either from abroad or from internal displacement, since the Russian invasion of the country began in February 2022.

Ukraine still has a big upside when it comes to net in-migration, however. IOM explains that nearly 14 million Ukrainians—about a third of the country’s total population—fled their homes since the onset of fighting, and nearly 6.5 million Ukrainians remain refugees globally.

In 2022, the CIA placed Ukraine number 115 on its net-migration list, with a net migration rate of -.26 per thousand, and in 2023, it ranked number 116, with a net migration rate of -.27 per thousand. That outflow has apparently shifted despite the continued war.

CBS News reported in April that 236,000 Ukrainian nationals had been approved to come to the United States on “parole” under the Biden-Harris administration’s “Uniting for Ukraine” program, though interestingly only 187,000 of them had arrived through the end of March.

In addition, as per CBS: “Another 350,000 Ukrainians have arrived in the U.S. outside of the sponsorship process since the start of the Russian invasion, mainly through temporary visas, according to DHS.” Whether most of them intend to leave is anybody’s guess, but plainly a lot of formally displaced Ukrainians have deemed the country safe enough to return.
Venezuela

There are no such quasi-sunny IOM reports for Venezuela, however. The organization claims that:

    As of June 2024, more than 7,77 million Venezuelans are outside their country of origin, the second largest displacement in the world. Neighbouring countries are responding to the humanitarian and human mobility challenges presented by this situation with solidarity and hospitality, and have largely kept their doors open to Venezuelan migrants and refugees.

    The majority of migrants and refugees from Venezuela reside in the region (6,59 million as of June 2024). Among the largest host countries are Colombia (2,9 million), Peru (1,5 million), Brazil, Ecuador and Chile.

Notably absent from that IOM list of receiving countries is the United States.

In September 2023, DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas redesignated Venezuela for “temporary protected status” (TPS), potentially making an additional 472,000 nationals of the country here eligible for “temporary” status, over and above the 242,700 Venezuelans who already had TPS under an earlier, March 2021, designation of the country (also by Mayorkas).

Last September, shortly after that redesignation, I described how the first TPS designation for Venezuela had driven a massive wave of illegal migration from the country:

    According to CBP records, its immigration officers encountered 2,787 Venezuelan nationals at the Southwest border in all of FY 2020, and 2,274 others between October 2021 (the first month of FY 2022) and February 2022 (which ended eight days before that designation took effect). That’s 5,061 in total.

    Those pre-TPS encounter statistics are representative of illegal Venezuelan migration into the United States compared to prior years. In FY 2019, Border Patrol agents apprehended 2,202 Venezuelans at the Southwest border, while in FY 2018, agents caught just 62 Venezuelans entering illegally there.

    All of this is to say that there really weren’t that many Venezuelans coming here illegally before the country was first designated for TPS.

    Since then? Between March 2021 and October of that year, CBP encountered 46,404 illegal Venezuelan migrants, more than 187,700 in FY 2022, and 168,000-plus in just the first 10 months of FY 2023.

Note that in addition to TPS, the Biden-Harris administration also created two extra-statutory programs to funnel Venezuelan nationals (among others) with no visas and no right to enter into the United States – “CHNV Parole” and the “CBP One app interview scheme” – in January 2023.

According to the DHS Office of Homeland Security Statistics, through the end of June, more than 108,000 Venezuelans had been allowed to enter under CHNV Parole and an additional 144,500-plus of them had scheduled appointments at the Southwest border ports under the scheme using the CBP One app.

Despite those more than 252,500 parolees, Border Patrol agents still apprehended more than 297,000 other illegal Venezuelan border-crossers between February 2023 and the end of August 2024. It’s unknown how many of them were subsequently released, but if past administration releases are any guide, it’s safe to say more than a few were.

Accordingly, while the United States may not be housing as many Venezuelan migrants as Colombia is, we are giving Peru a run for its money.

That said, I’ll cut IOM a break for not including the United States on its list of neighboring countries that are harboring Venezuelan nationals, because this country isn’t anywhere near Venezuela.

In fact, by my estimation, Venezuelans must cross through six countries on their way here (Colombia, Panama, Costa Rica, Honduras, Guatemala, and Mexico), all of which grant some form of asylum. It’s doubtful than many departing Venezuelans are taking advantage of those countries’ largesse, though, now that the United States has flung its doors open.

So, why does Venezuela have such a high estimated net migration rate? The Washington Post offered some answers in June:

    Three hundred thousand Venezuelans have returned to the South American nation, the government of authoritarian President Nicolás Maduro reported in January, more than 30,000 of them with the help of a repatriation program called Return to the Motherland.

    The dollarization of Venezuela’s economy has brought a boom in imported food and new restaurants, making the capital more appealing. But outside an elite bubble, the country is still beset by power shortages, insufficient running water, political instability and an inflation rate that reached 234 percent in 2022.

    Nonetheless, Venezuelans who have returned say it was the best option for them.

Note that Venezuela has had a high net-migration rate for quite a while. According to the CIA, the country had the third highest level of net migration in the world in both 2022 (14.22 new arrivals on balance per thousand) and in 2023 (13.55). The latest numbers are just continuing that trend.
Why Are the Administration’s Migrant Policies Continuing?

The CIA compiles such statistics to inform Washington decisionmakers, but DHS and the White House haven’t gotten the message from Langley about net migration into either Venezuela or Ukraine yet as they continue their migrant-friendly policies for nationals of those countries.

Looking at administration migrant programs like TPS, CHNV, and CBP One, you’d think there’s a huge flood of people out of Venezuela, not a line to get into the country. The same is true to a lesser degree of Ukraine, which is still in the midst of conflict while enjoying its high net-migration rate. Why does the CIA compute net migration figures if the administration ignores them? That may be the bigger question.

https://cis.org/Arthur/CIA-Shocker-Ukraine-Venezuela-Have-Highest-Rates-Net-InMigration-World

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

All my main blogs below:

http://jonjayray.com/covidwatch.html (COVID WATCH)

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

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

https://westpsychol.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH  -- new site)

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

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

http://jonjayray.com/select.html (SELECT POSTS)

http://jonjayray.com/short/short.html (Subject index to my blog posts)

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

500K+ School-Age Migrant Children Have Arrived Since 2022

On October 5, Reuters published a little-noticed article that includes a stunning factoid: “More than half a million school-age migrant children have arrived in the U.S. since 2022”. When your property taxes go up, or your kid falls behind, or your local school district struggles to find “English as a second language” (ESL) teachers, you’ll know why.

The Total Figures

Reuters cites to “records collected by Syracuse University”, and usually when the alma mater of Joe Biden and Jim Brown is cited in connection with immigration stats, they were first compiled by the school’s Transaction Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC).

I have gone searching for the actual numbers on the TRAC website, however, and have been unable to find them. That said, the figure Reuters cites is – if anything – a little low.

According to DHS’s Office of Homeland Security Statistics (OHSS), more than 325,000 unaccompanied alien children (UACs) were transferred by CBP to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) between October 2021 (the first month of FY 2022) and the end of June 2024, the vast majority to be released to “sponsors” in the United States.

Between the UACs and the kids in FMUs who have been released, likely somewhere between 700,000 and a million school-aged migrant children have entered illegally in the past three fiscal years.

That figure does not include migrant children in family units (FMUs) who crossed illegally with adults and are now attending school here. Between FY 2022 and August 2024, more than 1.646 million FMU migrants have been apprehended at the Southwest border by Border Patrol agents. CBP, however, does not differentiate between adults and children in its FMU encounter figures.

Between the UACs and the kids in FMUs who have been released, however, likely somewhere between 700,000 and more than 1 million school-aged migrant children have entered illegally in the past three fiscal years.

To put that figure into context, New York City – the nation’s largest school district – had an enrollment in 2019 of just fewer than 985,000 pupils, while number 2 – the Los Angeles Unified School District – had fewer than 634,000 enrolled students that year, according to the Census Bureau.

The half million newcomer students as reported by Reuters would be in third place, well ahead of Chicago (378,199 pupils), if they were all combined in one school district. But of course, they’re not all in one school district; they’re spread all over the country.

The Issues

To understand why that diffuse population of migrant children is an issue, here’s the full quote from Reuters, which can be found in paragraph 4 of that article:

More than half a million school-age migrant children have arrived in the U.S. since 2022, according to immigration court records collected by Syracuse University, exacerbating overcrowding in some classrooms; compounding teacher and budget shortfalls; forcing teachers to grapple with language barriers and inflaming social tensions in places unaccustomed to educating immigrant students.

Education being what it is these days, the Reuters report includes quotes from local teachers and administrators who put the best face on the challenges they face after the outlet polled more than 10,000 school districts – 75 of which, across 23 states, actually responded.

The parents plainly knew that they were breaking the law, but given how little the Biden-Harris administration did to prevent them from coming here illegally, they likely viewed it all as a welcome invitation.

That said, 42 of those districts said that they’d had to hire more ESL teachers, 15 reported issues communicating with parents, 17 asked for more state funding to help cover costs (12 received it, but in one New Jersey school district, “it still wasn’t enough to hire an ESL supervisor”).

Textbooks in native languages, of course, are an issue as is staffing: 49 of the 75 school districts claimed that their teachers were only “partially trained” (31), “not well trained” (8), or not trained at all (2) in meeting the needs of migrant students.

Education is far and away the largest expense for most local governments, accounting for an estimated $800 billion of their costs in 2021, and property taxes are their largest source of income (counties and cities brought in an estimated $800 billion in assessments that year, as well).

Most property tax assessments are done on an annual or multi-year basis, and consequently that’s how school budgets are usually determined, as well. For that reason, most districts were wholly unprepared for the surge in migrant students that they have received.

The Blame

None of this should be viewed as blaming the migrant children themselves cum students. Some – and likely a significant number – of those UACs were nearing the age of 18 when they arrived, but few if any of their younger peers or the children in FMUs made the individual decisions to come here illegally.

Nor, however, can you really put all the blame the parents of those children. They plainly knew that they were breaking the law, but given how little the Biden-Harris administration did to prevent them from coming here illegally, they likely viewed it all as a welcome invitation.

It will take years – and probably hundreds of billions of dollars in federal, state, and local spending – for schools to accommodate the 500,000 to 1 million migrant children who have entered the United States since the start of FY 2022. In the interim, expect your taxes to rise and your local schools (and teachers and pupils) to struggle.

https://cis.org/Arthur/Reuters-500K-SchoolAge-Migrant-Children-Have-Arrived-2022

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

All my main blogs below:

http://jonjayray.com/covidwatch.html (COVID WATCH)

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

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

https://westpsychol.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH  -- new site)

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

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

http://jonjayray.com/select.html (SELECT POSTS)

http://jonjayray.com/short/short.html (Subject index to my blog posts)

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

How FEMA Got into the Illegal Immigrant Business

In the midst of the last major budget crisis in Washington, Democrats diverted money and the legal authority to put the nation’s disaster relief agency into the business of caring for the millions of illegal immigrants who crossed the border on the Biden-Harris administration’s watch. And now both parties seem to be trying to obfuscate the truth.

White House spokeswoman Karine-Jean Pierre took the lead in trying to suggest it was a "conspiracy theory" to suggest the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was using its resources to aid illegal aliens. Republicans countered with surprise and shock that FEMA had routed $640.9 million in grants to nonprofits aiding immigrants, many of whom have crossed into the U.S. illegally.

But the truth is both parties signed off on a budget deal earlier this year that increased funding for the new mission authorized in 2023 for FEMA, which is now reeling from a double-barreled hurricane crisis that has led to frustration over alleged missteps by the agency as millions of stranded and needy Americans in the Southeast await help.

“FEMA, as well as this whole Biden administration has is here to protect Americans, our citizens, and hurricane Helene has put a tremendous burden on us, but, get this, follow these funds that have been directed at anything but Americans: $110 million in FEMA funds went to the emergency food and shelter program to assist migrants,” Congressman Ralph Norman, R-S.C., told the "Just the News, No Noise" TV show Monday.

Norman partly blamed the broken budget process in Congress for giving funds to FEMA  for immigrants rather than American citizens suffering from a disaster.

“If we don't get back to regular order, John, then there's no hope for ever having a fiscal sanity plan in place,” he said. "They, the Democrats, play us like a drum waiting to the end of the year."

FEMA has disputed the Republican characterizations in recent days that disaster relief money was diverted to fund illegal immigrants, instead pointing out that Congress appropriated funding for the immigrant programs separately during the budget process.

"This is false. No money is being diverted from disaster response needs. FEMA’s disaster response efforts and individual assistance is funded through the Disaster Relief Fund, which is a dedicated fund for disaster efforts. Disaster Relief Fund money has not been diverted to other, non-disaster related efforts,” FEMA said in its Hurricane Helene Frequently Asked Questions page.

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre also denied that FEMA resources were going to illegal migrants at a press conference last week despite her own statements at the podium two years earlier touting the opposite.

“Funding is also available through FEMA’s Emergency Food and Shelter program to eligible local governments and not-for-profit organizations upon request to support humanitarian relief for migrants,” Jean-Pierre said of FEMA efforts to alleviate the immigration crisis.  

A Democrat-run Congress that year later created the Shelter and Services Program (SSP) was to replace a similar program formerly run by DHS, which was directed to transfer $800 million of its appropriations in 2023 to the emergency management department. Though FEMA is a subagency of DHS, it represented a transfer of the core responsibility for illegal and legal immigrant support to the agency dedicated to disaster relief.

The funding was to stand up the new program which would “support sheltering and related activities provided by non-Federal entities, including facility improvements and construction, in support of relieving overcrowding in short-term holding facilities of U.S. Customs and Border Protection,” according to the Congressional Research Service.

By 2024, the program was well established at the agency when Republicans and Democrats alike voted to fund it to the tune of $650 million with the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2024—a minibus bill passed by the House and Senate in March, both with significant Republican support, and sent to President Joe Biden’s desk.

Now, Republicans have placed the program under a spotlight after widespread flooding and damage from Hurricane Helene left several southeastern regions devastated and tens of thousands of citizens without basic resources. But, so far, few who originally supported the bill have owned up to their role in passing the budget stopgaps last year funding the very programs being placed under the spotlight.

A group of Senators who did not vote for the funding measure led by James Lankford of Oklahoma, wrote a letter to President Biden last week raising concerns about how FEMA’s immigration responsibilities could be impacting its disaster readiness.

“FEMA’s continued entanglement in DHS’s efforts to respond to the border crisis could impact its readiness and emergency response mission,” a group of Republican lawmakers wrote to Biden last week. “Rather than ensuring FEMA is ready to respond to hurricanes and other emergencies, FEMA has been pulled into a border crisis mission.”

“FEMA’s mission is ‘helping people before, during, and after disasters,’ not helping DHS clean up the impact of your Administration’s reckless border policies,” they added.

The letter was also signed by GOP Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri, Rand Paul of Kentucky, and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin.

Frustration started growing among conservatives after FEMA announced that it did not have enough funds to get through the remainder of hurricane season and amid allegations that the agency was slowing down or outright obstructing private relief efforts in flood-stricken Appalachia.

“We are meeting the immediate needs with the money that we have. We are expecting another hurricane hitting,” DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said last week. “FEMA does not have the funds to make it through the season.”

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., said after Mayorkas’ announcement that whistleblowers approached his office after the hurricane and claimed that FEMA misappropriated funds related to disaster relief. The agency vehemently denied those allegations. In a letter last week, Gaetz claimed the whistleblowers told him that FEMA has serious mismanagement issues and used taxpayer funds marked for disaster relief on non-disaster-relief programs that housed and supported illegal immigrants on the country's southern border.

Additionally, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, who is sponsoring private efforts to deliver aid to hurricane victims, criticized the federal response to Hurricane Helene, claiming that the government was blocking flights trying to bring Starlink internet connection devices and other aid to hurricane victims, after a source told Musk the airspace was shut down.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg disputed these reports and said “no one is shutting down the airspace and FAA doesn’t block legitimate rescue and recovery flights,” Just the News reported.

https://justthenews.com/government/congress/how-fema-got-migrant-business-and-who-covering-it?

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

All my main blogs below:

http://jonjayray.com/covidwatch.html (COVID WATCH)

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

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

https://westpsychol.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH  -- new site)

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

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

http://jonjayray.com/select.html (SELECT POSTS)

http://jonjayray.com/short/short.html (Subject index to my blog posts)

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

Uncontrolled immigration is the hottest topic of our age. And hurling accusations of racism won't change that

Will it ever be possible to have an honest conversation in this country about mass immigration? There are some who would prefer us not to.

On Tuesday the Office for National Statistics (ONS) revealed that in the year to June 2023 the population of the United Kingdom grew by 1 per cent, or 662,400, to 68.2 million people.

This astounding annual increase, the largest since records began, was driven entirely by net migration. In fact, the resident population of the UK fell by 16,300 over this period because there were more deaths than births.

How did our State broadcaster, the BBC, deal with these extraordinary facts? Well, it reported on Tuesday’s BBC1 News at Six that the record rise in population was driven ‘mainly’ by net immigration, although in truth it was exclusively so.

BBC Home Editor Mark Easton gave us the benefit of his thoughts. Whilst acknowledging that the population would have fallen without immigration, he looked forward with foreboding to what will happen if Tory visa rules curb the influx of immigrants.

In other words, what worries Mark isn’t the reality of mass migration but the prospect of the UK population declining if it abates. The implication was that this country needs large numbers of immigrants.

It’s all academic in any case since, despite those tighter visa rules belatedly introduced by the last Tory government, legal immigration seems likely to remain at very high levels – higher than this country experienced before Brexit.
Migrants wave to a smuggler's boat in an attempt to cross the English Channel near Dunkirk, northern France

According to the statistically impeccable Migration Watch – an organisation ignored by the BBC because it opposes mass immigration – annual net migration of 600,000 is projected to lead to an increase in our population of 20 million by the mid to late 2040s. That’s 40 cities the size of Bristol!

Even if growth turned out to be half this amount, the pressure on schools, public services such as hospitals, and housing would be immense. I don’t believe this is what most British people, including immigrants settled here, want.

Then there is social cohesion, already fraying as some immigrant communities fail to assimilate. Just look at the origins of the people coming here (85 per cent from outside the EU) in the 12 months to June 2023.

How can so many people from different societies easily assimilate in a country that is already culturally fragmented?

All these are legal immigrants, encouraged to come here by universities, the NHS, or businesses. The number of illegal immigrants includes, but far surpasses, those who have come across the English Channel in recent years.

A new study at Oxford University reckons that there could be as many as 745,000 illegal immigrants living here, more than one in every 100 people in Britain. By contrast, France and Germany (a more populous country than the UK) are estimated to have 300,000 and 700,000 illegal immigrants respectively.

This Government hasn’t grasped the severity of the situation or the concerns of the majority of people. Sir Keir Starmer and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper metronomically repeat their intention to ‘smash the gangs’ – i.e. stop illegal immigration – without producing any measures likely to achieve such an outcome.

Meanwhile, although Starmer says somewhat breezily that legal net migration should come down, he hasn’t come up with a single policy that might give us a shred of confidence that he will manage to achieve that.

This brings me to another dishonesty. No one in this Government ever connects the dire shortage of new housing in this country with immigration levels that are out of control.

Sir Keir Starmer never makes a link. Nor does Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London. Nor does Deputy PM Angela Rayner, who is spearheading Labour’s plan to build 150,000 new homes a year. Labour is stamping on local opposition and denigrates so-called ‘Nimbys’ as it plans to despoil swathes of England with new homes.

This is my question. If the population is gently declining, as those ONS figures suggest, why do we need so many new houses and all the ancillary infrastructure of schools, roads, GP surgeries, pylons and so forth? There is one obvious answer. Mass immigration.

I accept that this isn’t the only cause. If there weren’t a single immigrant entering the country, we would still need more homes. Households are declining in size for a number of reasons. More people are living alone, or as couples, than was the case half a century ago.

Nonetheless, immigration is a major factor in housing demand – responsible for at least 40 per cent of new homes, according to Migration Watch and the Right-leaning Centre for Policy Studies.

Imagine a young person, who may be of a Left-wing persuasion, unable to rent or buy a flat. Because there is a fashionable fatwa against connecting high levels of immigration with the shortage of housing, such a person may blame the capitalist system.

And so the cry goes out from Whitehall: ‘Build more houses!’ But the sensible and honest cry should be: ‘Bring immigration under control’.

Will it ever happen? There are many vested interests dependent on mass immigration – universities; the NHS; businesses craving cheap labour – and it will take a strong and determined government to stand up to them. We don’t have one of those.

Moreover, Labour is largely in thrall to modish metropolitan opinion that still claims it is racist to oppose immigration. Such people have succeeded in keeping a lid on an honest and informed debate for years.

But no longer, I think. Uncontrolled immigration will be the hottest political topic for the next 20 years, as more and more people seek to escape the poverty and lawlessness of their unhappy homelands.

The party that fails to control mass migration is doomed. That almost certainly means Labour. As for the Conservatives, having failed in government will they now fail in opposition?

Of the two remaining candidates to get through, surprisingly, to the final round of the Tory leadership contest – Robert Jenrick and Kemi Badenoch – only the former appears resolutely committed to restricting immigration.

Reform UK could have an opening. For all his many faults, Nigel Farage understands that people have had enough. His challenge, which he has so far just about met, is to oppose mass immigration without sounding racist. His appointment of Zia Yusuf, a Muslim multi-millionaire, as party chairman was shrewd.

Will we ever have an honest debate about immigration? Those who would rather we didn’t will continue to hurl accusations of racism to stifle discussion. But they’ll no longer be able to suppress the biggest issue of our age.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13942059/Uncontrolled-immigration-hottest-topic-age-hurling-accusations-racism-wont-change-that.html

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

All my main blogs below:

http://jonjayray.com/covidwatch.html (COVID WATCH)

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

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

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

https://westpsychol.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH  -- new site)

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

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

http://jonjayray.com/select.html (SELECT POSTS)

http://jonjayray.com/short/short.html (Subject index to my blog posts)

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

Kamala Harris skirts questions on ‘historic flood’ of migrants three times, whiffs on economic policy answer in tense ‘60 Minutes’ interview

Kamala Harris whiffed on an attempt to explain how she’d help boost small businesses and repeatedly deflected when asked about the “historic flood” of migrants crossing illegally into the US since she’s been vice president in a  “60 Minutes” interview that aired Monday.

Harris, 59, was unable to describe how her fiscal policies would work in “the real world,” including passing both chambers of what is likely to be a divided Congress, after CBS News correspondent Bill Whitaker accused her of being unrealistic.

“My plan is about saying that when you invest in small businesses, you invest in the middle class and you strengthen America’s economy,” Harris told Whitaker during the sit-down.
60 Minutes clip of their Kamala Harris interview 5
A CBS correspondent pressed Vice President Kamala Harris in a “60 Minutes” interview on specifics about her plan to invest in small businesses. CBS

“Small businesses are part of the backbone of America’s economy,” she restated.

“Pardon me, Madam Vice President, the question was, ‘How are you going to pay for it?'” Whitaker interrupted.

“Well, one of the things I’m gonna make sure,” Harris began, blinking repeatedly in apparent surprise at the questioner’s pushback, “that the richest among us — who can afford it — pay their fair share in taxes.”

“It is not right that teachers and nurses and firefighters are paying a higher tax rate than billionaires and the biggest corporations. And I plan on making that fair,” she went on.

“But we’re dealing with the real world here,” Whitaker interjected. “How are you going to get this through Congress?”

“You know, when you talk quietly with a lot of folks in Congress, they know exactly what I’m talking about ’cause their constituents know exactly what I’m talking about,” the vice president said before repeating herself yet again. “Their constituents are those firefighters and teachers and nurses.”

Harris’ economic agenda — which includes increasing the amount in tax deductions offered for startups to $50,000 — is estimated to add $3.5 trillion to the national debt, according to a nonpartisan analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget released Monday, even while raising taxes on corporations, the ultra-wealthy and others to the tune of $4.25 trillion.

Billionaires and other high-income earners also do not pay lower tax rates than teachers, nurses or firefighters, according to analyses by both the US Treasury Department and the Congressional Budget Office.

The top 1% income bracket shoulders 46% of the nation’s tax burden at a current taxation rate of 37%, according to economists.

The average tax rate for teachers, nurses and firefighters based on those occupations’ median income is 22% — but could be as low as 12% for married couples and heads of households.
Democratic presidential nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris waves before boarding Air Force Two after assessing the Hurricane Helene recovery response in North Carolina on October 5, 2024 in Charlotte, North Carolina. 5

In an early clip released of the sit-down with CBS’ Bill Whitaker that will air at 8 p.m. Monday, Harris, 59, was unable to explain how her fiscal policies would work in “the real world.” Getty Images

Critics have harped on Harris’ word salads during her time in office, which have earned her comparisons to Julia Louis-Dreyfus’ vacuous character Selina Meyer in HBO’s “Veep.”

Often, the vice president resorts to repetition when asked to clarify her positions — most recently in an interview last week with MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle, when Harris used the word “holistic” three times in 23 seconds.

Harris, who has embraced President Biden’s recent “crackdown” on illegal immigration, sidestepped when asked by Whitaker why the administration didn’t aim to stem illegal border crossings years earlier.

The vice president blamed Congress for not taking up legislation to “actually fix” the border crisis.

https://nypost.com/2024/10/07/us-news/cbs-correspondent-presses-kamala-harris-on-specifics-of-50k-small-business-plan-were-dealing-with-the-real-world/

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

All my main blogs below:

http://jonjayray.com/covidwatch.html (COVID WATCH)

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

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

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

https://westpsychol.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH  -- new site)

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

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

http://jonjayray.com/select.html (SELECT POSTS)

http://jonjayray.com/short/short.html (Subject index to my blog posts)

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

Dire immigration warning as overseas arrivals soar in Australia

The Albanese government's immigration targets for the last financial year could be exceeded by as much as 100,000 people.

Corinna Economic Advisory's Saul Eslake forecast the 2023-23 financial year intake would be 495,000 people, 'if not more', reported The Australian.

The government had settled on a net overseas migration (NOM) intake target of 395,000 for the same period, down from 518,000 the previous year.

Abdul Rizvi, former immigration department deputy secretary, estimated the number would be around 450,000 to 475,000 people and added that Australia's robust jobs market was keeping people here and attracting those from overseas.

'Especially people in Europe and China and in Southeast Asia, where the labour market has weakened more quickly than in Australia,' Mr Rizvi said.

'What we had was a higher-than-expected return of Australian citizens, and we also had a higher-than-expected net arrival of Kiwis.'

The government has already revised their numbers twice.

In last year's May budget it forecast the number of foreigners moving to the country would drop to 315,000 in the 12 months to June under new measures it introduced - though this was revised to 375,000 in December and 395,000 earlier this year.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton previously said the influx of new residents vying for places to live was why property prices remain at record highs.

'This is why Australians can't afford to buy a home, it's why the rents have gone through the roof and it's why we find ourselves in a position that we do today with people living without secure accommodation,' he said.

Minister for Employment Affairs Murray Watt said migration had slowed under the government's measures it had introduced progressively over the last two years.

'We recognise that we need to make sure that the numbers of migrants that we have coming to Australia is sustainable, and that's exactly why we've taken a range of actions to bring that number down,' he said.

Mr Eslake said the makeup of migrants coming to Australia was as important as the overall numbers and that the Coalition was correct to call for more construction workers to be allowed in.

Dozens of building companies have collapsed in recent months courtesy of a surge in material and labour costs.

It is one of the reasons the Master Builders Association estimates Australia will not meet a target of 1.2million new homes built over the next five years to ease the housing crisis.

Mr Rizvi said along with the nation's low unemployment rate - 4.1 per cent, compared to 6 per cent in the EU and 5.2 per cent in China - attracting new immigrants, there was also a slower-than-anticipated decline in foreign student numbers.

He also said the conditions for working holiday visa holders had 'not really tightened at all'.

'Arrivals have not declined as they [the government] expected, departures have not increased as they expected.'

Official immigration figures for the 12 months to July will not be released until later this year.

Looking ahead to the target for this financial year of a net overseas migration intake of 260,000 people, Mr Rizvi said it too would likely be well exceeded unless the government quickly introduced more measures.

NOM is the difference between arrivals to Australia and departures from Australia and includes both migrants and Australians.

Migrant arrivals to Australia are counted in NOM if they are in Australia for a total of 12 months or more during a 16-month period.

Temporary visa holders are the largest contributing group to migrant numbers and most temporary visa categories are demand-driven  and not capped.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13934653/Australia-immigration-politics-Albanese.html

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

All my main blogs below:

http://jonjayray.com/covidwatch.html (COVID WATCH)

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

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

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

https://westpsychol.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH  -- new site)

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

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

http://jonjayray.com/select.html (SELECT POSTS)

http://jonjayray.com/short/short.html (Subject index to my blog posts)

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