Leftists Call Migrants a “Strength,” Europe Calls Them a “Burden”

The Political Left in America likes to push the narrative that immigrants are good for our country. Yet, they ignore the clear differences between TYPES of immigrants.

Meanwhile, sensible Conservative Americans are fighting a messy battle to get stricter vetting policies for screening immigrants. All the while being called “racists” and “xenophobes” because they won’t embrace the Left’s lenient “standards” on immigration.

So who is right?

To answer that, we need only to look at the Migration Crisis in Europe. For decades, Europe has welcomed floods of migrants from the 3rd World. Many of these migrants can’t speak English when they arrive. And, even after living in Europe for decades, most of them never bother to learn.

Yet, swarms of Liberal Politicians AND Liberal voters in America want to open our borders in the same way. And of course, in the typical style of the left, they call such immigrants “refugees.” After all, only a heartless and morally corrupt Conservative would deny a “refugee,” asylum in their country right?

But if you look past the word games and emotional manipulation, mass 3rd World migration starts to look like a very bad deal for America. It could also prove a WORSE deal for other types of immigrants aspiring to come to our country. Here’s why…

“Created Equally” Does NOT Mean “Contributes Equally”

The American Constitution says “All men are created equal.” But this does NOT mean all people make equal contributions towards building a strong, free and peaceful society.

A society full of violent criminals is less free, less peaceful and less economically strong. Likewise, a society full of uneducated people is less economically valuable and therefore has less resources available for building and maintaining a strong and prosperous country.

This isn’t a mean-spirited “xenophobic” opinion. The facts are being born out right before our eyes in Europe, and in America. In a recent interview with Bild, Italian Foreign Minister Angelino Alfano admitted that Italy can’t cope with the “burden” of mass migration alone. He said that Italy has been “abandoned” by Europe in this matter.

People don’t usually call things a “burden,” or a “crisis” unless they really are such. They also don’t appeal to others for help unless they’re facing something which would weaken them if they had to face it alone.

The European migrant crisis IS a crisis because Europe has opened its borders to people are making little or NO contribution towards strengthening, stabilizing and prospering their economy and their culture. Europe got this way for a reason, and if we’re not smart, we’ll end up the same way…or worse.

There are hard statistics from the Center for Immigration Studies below which back this up. Pay attention to where I’ve highlighted the statements specifically relevant to this discussion…

  • Welfare use is high for both new arrivals and well-established immigrants. Of households headed by immigrants who have been in the country for more than two decades, 48% access welfare.
  • No single program explains immigrants’ higher overall welfare use. For example, not counting subsidized school lunch, welfare use is still 46% for immigrants and 28% for natives. Not counting Medicaid, welfare use is 44% for immigrants and 26% for natives.
  • Immigrant households have much higher use of food programs (40% vs. 22% for natives) and Medicaid (42% vs. 23%). Immigrant use of cash programs is somewhat higher than natives (12% vs. 10%) and use of housing programs is similar to natives.
  • Welfare use varies among immigrant groups. Households headed by immigrants from Central America and Mexico (73%), the Caribbean (51%), and Africa (48%) have the highest overall welfare use. Those from East Asia (32%), Europe (26%), and South Asia (17%) have the lowest.
  • Many immigrants struggle to support their children, and a large share of welfare is received on behalf of U.S.-born children. However, even immigrant households without children have significantly higher welfare use than native households without children — 30% vs. 20%.
  • The welfare system is designed to help low-income workers, especially those with children, and this describes many immigrant households. In 2012, 51% of immigrant households with one or more workers accessed one or more welfare programs, as did 28% of working native households.
  • The large share of immigrants with low levels of education and resulting low incomes partly explains their high use rates. In 2012, 76% of households headed by an immigrant who had not graduated high school used one or more welfare programs, as did 63% of households headed by an immigrant with only a high school education.
  • The high rates of immigrant welfare use are not entirely explained by their lower education levels. Households headed by college-educated immigrants have significantly higher welfare use than households headed by college-educated natives — 26% vs. 13%.
  • In the four top immigrant-receiving states, use of welfare by immigrant households is significantly higher than that of native households: California (55% vs. 30%), New York (59% vs. 33%), Texas (57% vs. 34%), and Florida (42% vs. 28%).
  • Illegal immigrants are included in the SIPP. In a forthcoming report, we will estimate welfare use for immigrants by legal status. However, it is clear that the overwhelming majority of immigrant households using welfare are headed by legal immigrants.
  • Most new legal immigrants are barred from welfare programs when they first arrive, and illegal immigrants are barred as well. But the ban applies to only some programs; most legal immigrants have been in the country long enough to qualify for at least some programs and the bar often does not apply to children; states often provide welfare to new immigrants on their own; naturalizing makes immigrants eligible for all programs; and, most important, immigrants (including illegal immigrants) can receive benefits on behalf of their U.S.-born children who are awarded U.S. citizenship at birth.
  • The heavy use of welfare by less-educated immigrants has three important policy implications: 1) prior research indicates that illegal immigrants are overwhelmingly less-educated, so allowing them to stay in the country creates significant welfare costs; 2) by admitting large numbers of less-educated immigrants to join their relatives, the legal immigration system brings in many immigrants who are likely to access the welfare system; and 3) proposals to allow in more less-educated immigrants to fill low-wage jobs would create significant welfare costs

If you read this carefully, you MUST admit that not all immigrants make equal contributions to our economy. Sure, they’re people just the same. But if you want to help people, you must have a safe, prosperous and thriving country to invite them to. Anyone who thinks that America can stay that way while taking on this kind of burden is a fool.

An economically weak country can’t do a damn thing for ANYONE. Not for its citizens, and not for people who come there to “make a better life for themselves.” I don’t care what someone’s motives are for wanting to open our borders either. Motives don’t mean a damn thing unless we’re producing a tangible and SUSTAINABLE result. At best, “good” motives can make us APPEAR morally superior to people who don’t share our utopian ideals.

If that’s all we care about, maybe we should go ahead and keep pretending that all immigrants are “the same.” But “created equal,” does NOT mean “contributes equal.” And we’d be smart to clarify these cultural and economic qualities before we just invite anyone into our countries. Of course, the Left has other arguments. Here are a few of the most popular…

  1. Diversity is our strength.
  2. We’re a nation of immigrants.
  3. The poem on the Status of Liberty says…

Let’s dissect these one at a time…

Diversity is Not Our Strength, UNITY Is

Diversity makes life more interesting and exciting. But it’s NOT a strength. Strength comes from unity. The greatest problem facing the United States is that we’re divided. Not by class or by race, but by ideology. In fact, ideological divide has ALWAYS been our biggest problem in this country.

You can go right back to the days of the Civil War and the division between the Slave Masters and Abolitionists. Or, you can go back to the Pre-Revolutionary War days when the Patriots, who wanted America to become independent, were in opposition to the British Loyalists.

Today, it’s the Conservative Right vs the Liberal Left. More cultural diversity can’t solve an ideological divide. Only ideological unity can do that. Of course, you hear people on the Left and the Right say things like this…

“We need to focus on what unites us.”

I agree. But what would that be exactly? Generalized responses like “love,” or “tolerance,” or “compassion,” or “freedom,” won’t cut it. We need to get SPECIFIC. Otherwise, we’re just speaking in lofty abstractions which will never lead to workable solutions.

If you ask me, the only thing that can overcome divisive ideology is a unifying ideology. Take, for instance, the ideologies this country was based on. Ideologies which did NOT originally include rewarding people who aren’t making a contribution to our society, but who are living off of the people who do.

That’s simply not sustainable, or even fair, to people who ARE contributing. If you go back to the statistics above, its clear that unvetted “let em’ all in,” immigration policy is in direct opposition to that simple principle.

How about the “we’re a nation of immigrants…” argument?

We’re a Nation of “Immigrants” – But What KIND of Immigrants?

Saying “we’re a nation of immigrants,” is another vague, virtue-signaling generalization. It’s also logically fallacious since it commits the fallacy of equivocation. Not all immigrants are the same. The immigrants who built this nation….

  1. Came here BEFORE the welfare state.
  2. Came here to CONTRIBUTE to this country.
  3. Came from a nearly identical culture.

People who say “we’re a nation of immigrants,” are naively, and I suspect, dishonestly, trying to say that all immigrants are the same. Others will ask antagonistic questions like…

“How did YOUR parents get here?”

Anyone who asks this is pretending that the America of today is the same as the America of 400 years ago. The America of 400 years ago had NO welfare state, and much less competition for opportunity. The facts above prove that NOT all immigrants come here to contribute. Many of them come to consume, and the modern welfare state makes that possible.

If we try to help everyone, including those who are a burden on our economy, a day will come when we’ll be MUCH less capable of helping anyone. Of course, most of us won’t live to see that day. But our children will. THEY will pay the price for our convictions. People who push unvetted 3rd World immigration are heaping the burden of their OWN ideologies on the NEXT generation. Yet, they dare to call us heartless?

Bottom line, claiming that we’re a “nation of immigrants,” doesn’t tell the whole story. It’s just another dishonest way to blur the facts and manipulate people with accusations of being “anti-immigration.”

So how about that argument about the poem on the Status of Liberty?

Pretty Poems Make for Poor Political Policies

There’s a poem, written by Emma Lazarus, engraved on a bronze plaque inside The Statue of Liberty. A quote from that poem, says…

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…”

Virtue signaling Liberals and Naive Political Hacks in the Media, such as Jim Acosta from CNN, think this poem should be the standard by which we make our immigration policies. Plenty of wonderful poems have been written about Freedom and about Liberty. But our immigration policies must be grounded in common sense.

Again, if America is to remain the Land of Freedom and opportunity, it must remain prosperous, peaceful and culturally united. This means we must be smart about how we use our resources. We also have to make sure we’re inviting people in who want to learn the ONLY thing which can unite us: Our American Values and Ideologies.

Most 3rd World Migrants come from places which ARE falling apart because they don’t have such an ideology. To assume that they’ll simply come over here, and become a part of our culture is stupid. ESPECIALLY if they never bother to learn our language.

Of course, we should do everything we can to help people who cannot help themselves. I suspect these are the REAL “huddled masses” Emma Lazarus was talking about. Not people who are coming here to leach off of working Americans. After all, the poem does NOT say:

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to get sh&%t for free…”

Of course, the Left considers this ^ kind of talk “insensitive.” But what they don’t realize is how horribly uncaring THEY are being to these migrants. If they really wanted help people in poorer countries, they’d give money to overseas efforts which are designed to help these people thrive in their OWN homelands. Considering the value of the American dollar in comparison to the currencies of 3rd World Countries, even a “poor” American could buy a LOT of food, medicine and education for people in the 3rd World.

Why aren’t more Liberal politicians pushing for programs which make this kind of charity possible? Why are they more interested in bringing migrants over here and putting them on government welfare programs? I suspect its because…

Democrats Are Selling Out Working Americans to Buy Votes

Most 3rd World Immigrants vote Democrat. Is it any surprise that the Democrat party has been aggressively pushing immigration reform and amnesty for illegal immigrants? I suppose you can assume that they’re just “more compassionate” than Republicans.

But the voting habits of 3rd World Immigrants ought to make ANY intelligent person suspicious of the Democrats’ motives.

And that’s not all. Democrats are also notorious for pushing more government entitlement programs. Over the past several years, they’ve even pushed for illegal immigrants to get access to free health care, education and, you guessed it, the right to vote.

All the while trying to Conservative Americans into accepting these policies by calling us as “racists,” “xenophobes” and other juvenile names. If Democrats really care about people in 3rd World Countries, why don’t they focus on keeping America strong and prosperous? This way, we can ALL have plenty of money to send to citizens of 3rd World Countries, and they’ll get to prosper in THEIR HOMELANDS and in enjoy living in THEIR CULTURE.

Why aren’t the Democrats pushing for economic policies which would make this easier? Because the Democrats can’t turn 3rd World Migrants into voters if those migrants are living outside America’s borders. Again, if we want to help other people, America must remain safe, economically prosperous and culturally united.

The ONLY reason a political party would risk this for the sake of flooding our country with welfare dependent immigrants, is so they can turn those immigrants into economically dependent voters. Sorry Democrats. You’re gonna have to start winning elections with your ideas. Not by selling out Americans to import bought-and-paid-for voters from the 3rd World.

Now that we’ve got the Left’s “arguments,” off the table, let’s finish up with the REAL threat posed by unvetted 3rd World immigration…

Mass Migration vs Mass Invasion – What’s the Difference?

There are two ways to invade a country. One way is to use military force. The other way is to use mass migration. I’ve often been accused of being “paranoid,” for talking about mass migration this way. But the Islamic State is open and unapologetic about using it as a strategy for taking over other cultures.

This is NOT an opinion, it’s a simple fact of the Muslim culture. And is it smart to ignore this when we see the Islamic State taking over entire territories in Europe? On top of this, even migrants who don’t intend to take over our culture will end up doing exactly that.

All they have to do is breed faster than we are, and continue refusing to learn the language or to adopt the principles of the American Constitution.

Virtue signaling liberals like to say “Immigrants come here to create a better life for themselves.” I have no doubt that this is true. My question is, HOW are they going about it? And at whose expense are they building this “better life?” If Liberals want to take on this burden themselves, that would be fine with me. But those of us who are against mass unvetted 3rd World Migration don’t get to opt out of paying taxes.

We want America to have the prosperity to CONTINUE to be a blessing to the rest of the world. This is what it means to be a compassionate American. We will NOT be forced to go against these values simply because the Democrats need more voters to win elections.

And we definitely won’t be bullied by virtue-signaling Liberals, many of whom have never given a dollar to help someone LIVING in a 3rd World Country. Those who insists on opening our borders to droves of vetted, 3rd World Migrants, and thus weakening our ability to help people in the future, is a heartless, naive, morally narcissistic pig who is only interested in appearing virtuous by pushing this “let them all in” policy.

Is mass migration good for America? It depends on who you ask. If the immigrants end up voting for Democrats, which most of them do, it’ll no doubt be good for the megalomaniacs in that party. Or, if the immigrants who DO come here to work can be hired for slave wages and help fatten the pockets of the lobbyist who control the doting “Republicans,” I guess it’ll be good for them too.

But if we want America to have the strength, the prosperity and the stability to provide SUSTAINABLE opportunities to its citizens, including those who come from other countries, we MUST be smart about who we allow to pass our borders.

Facebook Comments