WE CAN'T START TO REBUILD THE AMERICAN MIDDLE CLASS UNTIL WE PUSH MEXICO BACK OVER OUR OPEN BORDERS!.....“The cost of the Dream Act is far bigger than the Democrats or their media allies admit. Instead of covering 690,000 younger illegals now enrolled in former President Barack Obama’s 2012 “DACA” amnesty, the Dream Act would legalize at least 3.3 million illegals, according to a pro-immigration group, the Migration Policy Institute.”
The Washington Post is reporting that U.S. might not be able to follow in the U.K.’s footsteps in reclaiming its economic independence because of the nation’s demographic makeup, which is the result of four decades of record high green card issuances to foreign nationals.
In a piece entitled, “No, Brexit Isn’t A Good Sign For Trump,” Washington Post’s Kim Soffen writes:
“There are certainly similarities between the referendum and the [Trump] campaign. Both are largely driven by immigration… Both are nationalist movements. Both are an instance of the will of the people going against the wishes of the elite… And their demographic support looks quite similar too.”
Yet Soffen writes that Brexit may not be a harbinger for Donald Trump’s future electoral success because the U.S. does not have as many white voters as Britain does.
“Largely at issue here is demographics. The British electorate is overwhelmingly white – 87 percent of its population is, according to its 2011 census. That’s compared to the United States’ 74 percent in 2014. That difference is significant for what direction each country votes.”
Indeed, while establishment media has pushed the narrative that immigration is a much more significant issue in Europe than it is the U.S., the facts do not bear this out. The U.S. has accepted 10 million more migrants from outside its borders than the European Union has absorbed from outside its borders, even though the EU has 200 million more people than the United States. Indeed, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, minority babies now outnumber white babies in the United States.
Soffen reports that polling data suggests non-whites tended to support the globalist position over the nationalist policy.
“Just like more minority-dense areas in the United States, like cities, tend to vote Democrat, minority-dense areas in the United Kingdom tended to vote to stay in the EU. In London, where 60 percent of citizens are non-white according to the 2011 Census, 60 percent of votes went against Brexit, compared to 48 percent nationwide.”
“Since the U.S. is far more diverse than the U.K., Brexit’s predictive power is even weaker,” Soffen concludes.
The Washington Post suggests that in order to have nationalist policies, the U.S. has to have a large population of whites in its country. Perversely, the Washington Post is essentially arguing that foreign nationals do not seem to have a strong enough allegiance to their new country to support a nationalist agenda over a more global, internationalist agenda — an argument, which dramatically undercuts the Washington Post’s general narrative on immigration and contradicts a core theme of its humaninterestsstories, which seem designed to advance legislation that would expand U.S. immigration.
The demographic makeup the United States—which the Washington Post posits is the reason the U.S. could perhaps be incapable of voting in favor of reclaiming its national sovereignty—is the result of a Ted Kennedy-backed 1965 immigration rewrite, which opened up America’s borders to the world.
Kennedy’s immigration law lifted the immigration caps that had been place and opened up U.S. visas to migrants all across the globe.
While about nine in ten of the immigrants who came to the United States during the 19th and 20th century hailed from Europe, the 1965 law inverted that figure. Today about nine out of every ten new immigrants brought into the country on green cards come from non-Western countries in Latin America, Africa, Asia or the Middle East.
Following the law’s passage, 59 million immigrants entered the United States. Including their children, it added 72 million new residents to the U.S. population.
In 1965, according to Pew, the country was 84 percent white, 11 percent black, 4 percent Hispanic and less than 1 percent Asian– i.e. it had a white population that very similar in size to the white population of the U.K. today.
Unless Congress proposes legislation to curb the U.S. autopilot visa issuances, Pew projects that in forty years time as a result of large-scale immigration, “no racial or ethnic group will constitute a majority of the U.S. population,” as “whites are projected to become less than half of the U.S. population by 2055.” Therefore, by 2065, the nation would be 46 percent white, 24 percent Hispanic, 14 percent Asian and 13 percent black.
However, members of the globalist caucus in Washington including House Speaker Paul Ryan, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and President Barack Obama, have all pushed to accelerate this demographic transformation and have championed proposals to dramatically expand the nation’s record high immigration admissions.
Heritage: Amnestied Illegals Will Get $9.4T in Benefits; Increase Debt $6.3T'
what is the REAL cost of all that “CHEAP” Mexican labor? Add it up and then factor in the MEXICAN CRIME TIDAL WAVE and the fact that the MEXICAN now operate in 2,500 American cities!
OBAMA’S ASSAULT ON AMERICAN
MIDDLE CLASS IT CALLED “THE OPEN BORDERS PROJECT”
that enforcing the law and deporting all illegals would raise real low-skill
wages by about 20% to 40% within 6 years, providing immediate relief to the
oppressed low-skill citizens of our country. (See my notes.)
Allowing in more high-skill people and few low-skill people would have
long-term benefits that would eventually tower over this short-term
benefit. A more skilled population would increase the historical trend of
economic growth in this country. We might even become the richest per
capita country in the world.
LA RAZA-OCCUPATION and LOOTING in MEXIFORNIA…. shocking!
bear an enormous fiscal burden as a result of an illegal alien population
estimated at almost 3 million residents. The annual expenditure of state and
local tax dollars on services for that population is $25.3 billion. That total
amounts to a yearly burden of about $2,370 for a household headed by a U.S.