Trump Administration Considers Penalizing Immigrants for Using Gov. Benefits

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

Wow, this seems really fucked up. I'm all for having strong borders, curtailing smuggling of goods and people, deporting illegal immigrants who have committed additional crimes...

But I have also admittedly bristled at much of the rhetoric used by others who supported the same. When I heard people say that this movement against illegal immigrants was a smokescreen for a greater movement against all (including legal) immigrants I was too quick to dismiss it. It simply didn't make sense, yet here we are. I'm afraid that the only justification for this is xenophobia or racism.

I'm really hoping this doesn't come to pass. Am I missing something? Can someone justify this? I understand being selective about who we accept into this country, but I don't think a blanket denial of anyone who might become a "public charge" is the right way to go. That is far too vague, and rife for abuse.



https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201804&RIN=1615-AA22

 

[M3t4tr0n]

Make Xenophobia Great Again

 

[abiG]

I'm really hoping this doesn't come to pass. Am I missing something?

Why and yes.

 

[elfeliz]

it was always about immigration as a whole. they want to limit the amount of non whites coming in. laura ingraham did a segment on this not too long ago

 

[JDragon]

TS sounds surprised...?

 

[jimmas99]

Well what you are missing (or starting to realize) is that Trumpism is a white identity movement . And in that context this is not surprising.
You can see what is coming from the dog whistles of the state propaganda channel below.




Remember when it was only "illigal immigrants" they had a propblem with? Well they are shifting the goal posts

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

it was always about immigration as a whole. they want to limit the amount of non whites coming in. laura ingraham did a segment on this not too long ago

You're right. I'm a LEO by trade so I'm very much for enforcing the laws on our books. When I hear things related to that I guess I take it at face value. But to me keeping out legal immigrants is anti-American. Of course I knew the alt-right types wanted to "make America white again" but I guess I didn't really expect to see legislation pushed forward to achieve that at the expense of legal immigrants. I was naive, which I don't usually think is the case for me, but to be clear I was never a supporter of Trump or this movement.

Why and yes.

Care to expound on that?

For my part I don't think it's a good idea to just blanket prevent immigration. The wording is very vague and will essentially allow for DHS to blanket deny any immigrants they want. Beyond that, many immigrants will need some assistance when first moving to a new country, even if they have many marketable skills and a good work ethic. Look in the article: this woman's parents needed assistance when her mother was pregnant, because her mother couldn't work in her factory job at the time, and now she is a physician. Why shouldn't people who immigrate here legally be given all of the benefits other citizens receive?

 

[Rygu]

So is it just non-white immigrants who would be punished, or all immigrants?

 

[abiG]

Care to expound on that?

For my part I don't think it's a good idea to just blanket prevent immigration. The wording is very vague and will essentially allow for DHS to blanket deny any immigrants they want. Beyond that, many immigrants will need some assistance when first moving to a new country, even if they have many marketable skills and a good work ethic. Look in the article: this woman's parents needed assistance when her mother was pregnant, because her mother couldn't work in her factory job at the time, and now she is a physician. Why shouldn't people who immigrate here legally be given all of the benefits other citizens receive?

There are thousands of American children eating out of dumpsters and sleeping on the streets.

Fake liberals are fucked!

 

[Trotsky]

There are thousands of American children eating out of dumpsters and sleeping on the streets.

Fake liberals are fucked!

And yet it's only the left that wants to do anything about that through actual policy aimed at helping the poor and displaced. The right will continue to only use it as a red herring and then swiftly move to further exacerbate the problem for profit at the first chance they get. But that won't change your "both sides" argument in the slightest.

I don't know how a troll account as obvious as yours has lasted so long.

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

There are thousands of American children eating out of dumpsters and sleeping on the streets.

Fake liberals are fucked!

Lmao it's only liberals who are pushing for policies to help these children. Is the right putting forward welfare programs for starving American children that I'm not aware of?

By the way, people who immigrate here legally ARE Americans. Why are you against them getting assistance?

 

[HockeyBjj]

We should be bringing people in who can help our economy and society, not people who are a burden to it

We have enough Americans that need help that they are not adequately getting

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

We should be bringing people in who can help our economy and society, not people who are a burden to it

We have enough Americans that need help that they are not adequately getting

You don't think it's possible for someone to need a little assistance when moving to an entirely new country and then still be a net positive on the economy and society?

 

[Trotsky]

You don't think it's possible for someone to need a little assistance when moving to an entirely new country and then still be a net positive on the economy and society?

@HockeyBjj I would point to the St. Louis Bosnian population for evidence of this. They were largely government-dependent at first, but then saved the city's economy and reinvigorated all of South City. Post-industrial metro areas like STL, Cleveland, and Detroit could really benefit from immigrant influx.

 

[dormammu]

Punish everyone for that!

 

[BangersAndSmash]

Wow, this seems really fucked up. I'm all for having strong borders, curtailing smuggling of goods and people, deporting illegal immigrants who have committed additional crimes...

But I have also admittedly bristled at much of the rhetoric used by others who supported the same. When I heard people say that this movement against illegal immigrants was a smokescreen for a greater movement against all (including legal) immigrants I was too quick to dismiss it. It simply didn't make sense, yet here we are. I'm afraid that the only justification for this is xenophobia or racism.

I'm really hoping this doesn't come to pass. Am I missing something? Can someone justify this? I understand being selective about who we accept into this country, but I don't think a blanket denial of anyone who might become a "public charge" is the right way to go. That is far too vague, and rife for abuse.



https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201804&RIN=1615-AA22

There is no real justification. It's a naked power play to greatly reduce immigration which would slow the tide of the demographic shift that is signaling the end of the republican party.

 

[panamaican]

This isn't even going to be done legislatively. I've been against illegal immigration for a very long time and think it needs to cracked down on (although I think a wall isn't a great idea). But it's been very obvious under this administration that many of these people don't have an issue with illegal immigrants. They have an issue with all immigrants that don't come from Western Europe. It's left me in a position where I'm frequently arguing against certain types of immigration regulation because it's a short road from application against illegals to application against legals.

This would punish legal immigrants for using the system that are legally a part of. The inclusion of healthcare in the list of things that could jeopardize your immigration status is insane. The ACA provides healthcare subsidies for families of 4 making over $90k.

That's brutal. A immigrant and a citizen making almost $100k/yr with 2 kids would qualify for a subsidy. Then if they use that subsidy, the immigrant spouse would be at risk of losing his/her legal status. So, the family basically has to choose between the healthcare subsidy that the government says they're legally entitled to or having their family broken up.

It's unconscionable.

 

[Rygu]

There is no real justification. It's a naked power play to greatly reduce immigration which would slow the tide of the demographic shift that is signaling the end of the republican party.

So it's like how the DNC wants open borders so they can tally up more votes but in reverse?

 

[EradiatedHaggis]

Yall should go read up why Ellis Island was nicknamed "The Isle of Tears"..."About 20 percent of the immigrants who arrived at Ellis Island were detained for one reason or another. Of this 20 percent, two percent were turned away for good.Immigrants had to pass many tests. In addition to medical and mental examinations, they also had to show they would not become a burden on society.

In order to do this, immigrants had to prove they had the skill or the strength to support themselves in America. They were questioned in detail about previous occupations and moral beliefs. Additionally, all immigrants had to show some amount of money to prove they were not destitute. How much money each immigrant was expected to have was left to the discretion of each inspector."

That is what WHITE immigrants had to go through...but its racist to do even less to non-whites.

 

[Kindacrazy]

Wow, this seems really fucked up. I'm all for having strong borders, curtailing smuggling of goods and people, deporting illegal immigrants who have committed additional crimes...

But I have also admittedly bristled at much of the rhetoric used by others who supported the same. When I heard people say that this movement against illegal immigrants was a smokescreen for a greater movement against all (including legal) immigrants I was too quick to dismiss it. It simply didn't make sense, yet here we are. I'm afraid that the only justification for this is xenophobia or racism.

I'm really hoping this doesn't come to pass. Am I missing something? Can someone justify this? I understand being selective about who we accept into this country, but I don't think a blanket denial of anyone who might become a "public charge" is the right way to go. That is far too vague, and rife for abuse.



https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=201804&RIN=1615-AA22

I know in Canada they have a serious problem with immigrants, primarily from Asia bringing in old family members that require huge amounts of medical treatment which strains the Canadian system badly. Its such a stupid policy that I originally thought that it must have been initiated by a right wingers as a way to destroy the public healthcare system.

Its a complicated issue.