Saturday, December 8, 2018

FRENCH REVOLUTION SPREADS TO BELGIUM AND NETHERLANDS - WALL STREET BRACES FOR THE WORST TO COME




"Vast popular hardship and suffering, on the 

one hand, and almost indescribable wealth 

and social indifference, on the other. Two 

parties of the corporate oligarchy, dedicated 

to war and political reaction. The impossible 

economic and political conditions must 

produce sooner rather than later the greatest 

social upheavals in American history."

"A series of recent polls in the US and Europe have shown a sharp growth of popular disgust with capitalism and support for socialism. In May of 2017, in a survey conducted by the Union of 
European Broadcasters of people aged 18 to 35, 
more than half said they would participate in a 
“large-scale uprising.” Nine out of 10 agreed with 
the statement, “Banks and money rule the world.”

 

Police Fight Yellow Vests at EU HQ as Protests Spread to Belgium, Netherlands




yellow
JAMES ARTHUR GEKIERE/AFP/Getty Images
2:21

BRUSSELS (AP) – Hundreds of yellow-vested protesters calling for the resignation of Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel marched on the European quarter of Brussels Saturday, as the movement that started in France made its mark in Belgium and the Netherlands.

Police used pepper spray and scuffled with a small group of protesters who tried to break through their barricade blocking access to the European Parliament and the European Union’s other main institutions.
The rallies, which started at different locations around the city and converged on the European quarter, have disrupted road and rail traffic on one of the busiest Christmas shopping days of the year.
Walking behind a banner reading “social winter is coming,” the protesters chanted “Macron, Michel resign.”
Dozens of people were searched at stations and police have warned people to stay away from the area.
Hundreds of police officers have been being mobilized in Brussels. Last week, yellow vest protesters last week clashed with police and torched two police vehicles. More than 70 people were detained

In the Dutch city of Rotterdam, a few hundred protesters in the high visibility vests that have become a symbol of the movement walked peacefully across the downtown Erasmus Bridge singing a song about the Netherlands and handing flowers to passers-by.
Sisters Beb and Ieneke Lambermont, aged 76 and 67 respectively, were among them.
“Our children are hard-working people but they have to pay taxes everywhere. You can’t get housing anymore. It is not going well in Dutch society,” Ieneke said. “The social welfare net we grew up with is gone,” she said.
“The government is not there for the people. It is there to protect its own interests,” she said.
Neither Belgium nor the Netherlands has proposed a hike in fuel tax — the catalyst for the massive and destructive demonstrations in France in recent weeks.
Instead, protesters Saturday appeared to hail at least in part from a populist movement that is angry at government policy in general and what it sees as the widening gulf between mainstream politicians and the voters who put them in power.

As Dow drops another 560 points

Wall Street Journal warns of stock “stampede”

By Nick Beams 
8 December 2018
The sell-off on Wall Street continued Friday, with the Dow ending the day down 560 points. The new plunge came amid rising concerns over the impact of the arrest of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou on the US-China trade conflict, slower global economic growth, and the intensification of class conflict as evidenced by events in France.
Reporting on the sell-off, the Wall Street Journal said the “retreat” away from US stocks “turned into a stampede Friday, with major indexes suffering declines of more than 4 percent for the week and their worst start to a December since 2008.”
The previous day the newspaper had played its part in trying to boost the markets, following a fall of 784 points in the Dow in the opening hours of trading, by publishing a front-page report that the US Federal Reserve was considering pulling back on interest rate rises next year. This led to an upturn, with the markets closing just 80 points down for the day.
On Friday, both the Dow and the S&P 500 indexes opened with slight gains, but then quickly moved into negative territory, with the Dow down by more than 660 points at one stage. Over the course of the week, the Dow finished down 4.5 percent, the S&P 500 4.6 percent lower and the Nasdaq off by 4.9 percent.
The larger fall in the Nasdaq reflects the sharp decline in tech stocks, which have been hard hit by the deepening US-China trade conflict because of the impact it could have on both the companies’ global supply chains and markets.
Reporting on the market downturn, the Financial Times pointed to the “bearish momentum” and the emergence of the so-called “death cross” in the graph of the S&P 500 index, as its 50-day moving average fell below its 200-day average.
Commenting on market sentiment to the Wall Street Journal, Erik Davidson, chief investment officer for Wells Fargo Private Bank, said: “The list of worries is very, very long these days. Investors are on pins and needles, worried about something at all times, whether it’s the China trade deal, Brexit, the inverted yield curve or monetary policy.”

The main factor in this week’s market downturn has been the issue of US-China economic relations and the prospect that the outcome of the talks between US President Trump and China’s President Xi Jinping, held on the sidelines of the G20 summit last Saturday night, is at best a temporary and very fragile ceasefire.
The Dow rose by 300 points on Monday following Trump’s positive tweets on the outcome of the discussions. But the upturn quickly went into reverse when divergent reports from US and Chinese authorities called that assessment into question, and the Dow plunged 800 points on Tuesday.
This was followed by a further 784 point drop on Thursday morning on the back of the news that Meng Wanzhou had been arrested during a layover at Vancouver international airport and that the US Justice Department was seeking her extradition to face charges related to the breach of US sanctions imposed on Iran.
Details of those charges were revealed in a court hearing yesterday at which it was alleged by Canadian authorities, acting on behalf of their US counterparts, that Meng had fraudulently covered up Huawei’s control of a company called Skycom that was doing business in Iran.
The Canadian prosecutor, John Gibb-Carsley, said Meng had misled financial authorities about the connection between Huawei and Skycom when US sanctions were in operation against Iran. Meng, he asserted, had said there was no connection, when in fact Huawei and Skycom were the same company. “This is the crux… of the alleged fraud,” he said.
Meng served on the board of Skycom, a Hong Kong-based company, for a period in 2008–2009. But Meng’s attorney, David Martin, said there was “no evidence” that Skycom was a subsidiary of Huawei during the time of the alleged sanctions breach. It had been a subsidiary, but had been sold in 2009, and the claim that Meng was engaged in fraud would be “hotly contested.”
The action against Meng and Huawei is the outcome of a long-running investigation by the US Justice Department and Gibb-Carsley said the warrant for Meng’s arrest was issued by a New York court on August 22 this year. It was executed at the Vancouver airport last Saturday at the very time Trump was in discussions with Xi.
There is uncertainty over who knew what while the talks were taking place and whether Trump had been advised. But the president’s national security adviser John Bolton, who was in overall charge of the US arrangements for the discussions, told National Public Radio on Thursday that he knew in advance of the request to Canada to detain Meng.
He said the conduct of Chinese companies, and especially technology companies, which the US claims steal intellectual property and carry out forced technology transfers from US companies doing business in China, was a key issue.
“Huawei is one company we’ve been concerned about,” he said. “There are others as well.”
The move against Huawei is a further indication that for key sections of the US political and national security establishment, the conflict with China is not primarily over trade, but rather the drive to prevent it from expanding its technological and industrial base.
This is why, for past seven months, tentative agreements to move towards a resolution of the trade conflicts have broken down almost as soon as they were made. Last May, a deal that China increase its imports from the US, which US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said had put the trade war “on hold,” was overturned a few days later.
Now, within just a few days of the latest Trump-Xi talks, any prospect of an agreement appears to have been blown out of the water. This is because the action against Meng and Huawei will confirm the view in Beijing that there is no basis for any agreement because the central US aim is to halt China’s development in crucial high-tech areas.
While the US-China conflict was the central reason for this week’s market turbulence, other significant factors have been at work.
The agreement reached yesterday at the meeting of OPEC to reduce oil production brought a rise in the price. Under most conditions this would have led to a rise on Wall Street, but not on this occasion because of concerns that the oversupply of oil in the past two months is the outcome of a slowing global economy.
There is also another, longer-term process at work. The rise in financial markets, and above the surge on Wall Street since the low point in March 2009—the longest bull market in history—has rested on the suppression of the class struggle by the trade union bureaucracy. But this is now breaking apart, as the ongoing “yellow vests’ demonstrations in France, taking place outside the control of and in opposition to the trade unions, coupled with the growing anger among US autoworkers over latest round of plant closures, make clear.


"It identifies socialism with proposals for mild social reform such as “Medicare for all,” raised and increasingly abandoned by a section of the Democratic Party. It cites Milton Friedman and Margaret Thatcher to promote the virtues of “economic freedom,” i.e., the unrestrained operation of the capitalist market, and  to denounce all social reforms, business regulations, tax increases or anything else that impinges on the oligarchy’s self-enrichment."

America’s Thanksgivings

22 November 2018
In an effort to give a livelier and more in-depth picture of modern life, American novelists such as John Dos Passos—The 42nd Parallel (1930), 1919 (1932) and The Big Money (1936)—introduced “newsreel” sections including headlines, advertisements and popular songs. We hope the following selections will provide some sense of American reality on Thanksgiving Day 2018.
* * * * *
— “There aren’t many downsides to America’s humming economy.  (Wall Street Journal)
 “On his days off from his $7.50-an-hour job as a cook at the Chicken Hut restaurant in Riverdale, Ga. [Georgia] , Laugudria Screven Jr., 23, travels more than 25 miles across Atlanta to sell plasma. By offering up his arm to a technician’s needle twice a week at $50 a shot, he scrapes together enough to pay his $360 rent.

“Yet donating plasma takes a toll on Screven’s body, leaving him drowsy and weak. And even with the extra income, he says he sometimes can’t afford to eat more than once a day. Often he comes home to a refrigerator that contains little more than mustard, ketchup and peanut butter.
“‘I sell my blood to pay my bills,’ he said, rubbing his arm as he waited for a bus in East Point, Ga. ‘It’s kind of messed up. If I were paid a fair wage, I wouldn’t have to go through this.’” (Los Angeles Times)

— “Set on 40 acres in Newport, Rhode Island, Castle Hill Inn, a Relais & Châteaux property, provides guests with a classic New England Thanksgiving. Chef Lou Rossi—an alum of NYC’s three-Michelin-starred Per Se—showcases the local harvest with appetizers like Native littleneck clams, Matunuck oysters and chilled white shrimp, plus herb roasted Helger’s Farm turkey with sage gravy and cranberry sauce, and a selection of pies, pastries and tarts. The hotel also features a spa, the Retreat at Castle Hill by Farmaesthetics, and has a selection of romantic and rustic rooms and cottages available by the beach, overlooking the harbor, and on its namesake hill. [A room in the Superior Beach House is $1,091.45 a night including taxes and fees.] (Town & Country)
 “Hundreds of people in need lined Bleecker Street in downtown Utica[New York] to receive a free Thanksgiving day meal to make with their families. … This year roughly 700 meals were donated, an increase of about 200 from last year. In Utica 1 in 3 people are living in poverty, according to DataUSA.” (WKTV )
 “Despite a relatively good economy, local food pantries are seeing a double-digit increase in the number of hungry residents. Des Moines [Iowa] pantries normally expect about a 3.5 percent increase each month, compared to the previous year. But for the last six months, that increase has more than tripled in the metro area, said Rev. Sarai Schnucker Rice, executive director of the Des Moines Area Religious Council, which oversees the network of 14 local pantries.” (Des Moines Register)
 “Though major cities, such as Dayton [Ohio], are often thought of as having the most households facing hardship, several of the Gem City’s suburbs actually rival it. Thousands of families around the Miami Valley are not necessarily in poverty but are still struggling to get by financially, according to the United Way report.” (Dayton Daily News)
 “Three dynastic wealth families—the Waltons, the Kochs, and the Mars—have seen their wealth increase nearly 6,000 percent since 1982. Meanwhile, median household wealth over the same period went down by 3 percent. …
“The median family in the United States owns just over $80,000 in household wealth. The richest person in the United States (and the world), Jeff Bezos, has accumulated a fortune nearly 2 million times that amount. The Bezos fortune expanded by $78.5 billion just in the last year to $160 billion. Even at the recently increased wage of $15/hour, a full-time Amazon worker would need to toil for 2.5 million years to generate this much money.” (Institute for Policy Studies)
 “Gone are lucrative manufacturing positions [in Indianapolis, Indiana]that could elevate a family into the middle class, even without higher education. Those jobs were in city neighborhoods. They offered salaries high enough to pay for homes, send kids to college, and build up savings accounts. And there were tons of them. At their peaks, the General Motors stamping plant employed 5,600 people, Western Electric had 8,000 workers, and RCA had 8,200.

“But today, scattered brownfields—some with crumbling buildings, some vacant lots—are the only remnants of those once-bustling factories. …
“Stefanie Bell and Steven Pedrazoli—and their 8-year-old son, Chance—are living that new reality. Both parents have regularly worked, but the family is homeless. They’ve been living since April at Dayspring Center at 1537 Central Ave.

“Bell, 37, a server, has uncertain wages because she relies on tips and a $2.13 hourly wage that barely covers taxes. During some shifts, the money at Primanti Bros. restaurant downtown is good. During others, factoring in $3.50 for a round-trip IndyGo bus fare, it’s barely worth showing up. The night before meeting with IBJ, Bell made just $30 in tips, despite working 5 p.m. to close.” (Indianapolis Business Journal)
 “There are a lot of things in life you might expect to cost $150,000—just probably not a Thanksgiving dinner. And yet, that’s exactly what Old Homestead, a New York City steakhouse, is offering this year with what it bills as the most expensive Thanksgiving dinner in history, topping the record set by the $76,000 dinner the restaurant offered last year.
“This year’s dinner, which at a total price of $150,000 is nearly three times more than the average U.S. household income, comes complete with all of the world’s finest ingredients, as well as keys to a 2018 Maserati Levante nestled inside a $135-per-pound free-range, organic turkey sprinkled with gold flakes.” (Yahoo Finance)
 “Near where he slept on a Salinas [California] sidewalk Monday night, David Rodriguez, 39, regularly gets meals at Dorothy’s Kitchen in Salinas’ Chinatown. He has not gone to the nonprofit’s Thanksgiving festivity before, but he plans on going for the first time Thursday.
“Born and raised in the Salinas Valley, Rodriguez grew up going to his grandmother’s for Thanksgiving. Homeless since 2012, Rodriguez said he considers many others in Chinatown—a neighborhood often synonymous with poverty—like his family. The opportunity to share his childhood tradition with his new family would mean a lot to him, he said.”(The Californian)
 “The 8th Annual Readers’ Choice Survey from Business Jet Travelerprovides an interesting look into why people fly privately, what they want in their private jets, where they are going, who they fly with, their favorite aircraft and more. … First some good news. If flying privately and planning to fly privately are signs of a strong economy, readers are quite optimistic. While 45% of respondents said they flew about the same amount as the previous year, 22% said they flew more and 8% said they flew much more, compared to 14% who flew a bit less and 12% who flew much less. Looking ahead, 44% of the magazine’s readers said they will fly about the same during the next 12 months, 34% said they will fly a bit more and 11% will fly much more, compared to just 11% who predict they will fly less.” (Forbes)
 “Last August, Destini Johnson practically danced out of jail, after landing there for two months on drug charges. She bubbled with excitement about her new freedom and returning home to her parents in Muncie, Ind. She even talked about plans to find a job.
“Eight months later, Johnson, 27, lay in a coma, silent except for the beeping of machines. She looked small and pale, buried in a tangle of hospital bedsheets and tubes, after suffering a dozen or so strokes as a result of her latest opioid overdose.
“Her mother, Katiena Johnson, kept vigil at the intensive care unit at Ball Memorial Hospital in Muncie every day, fretting not only about whether her daughter would live, or how much brain damage she’d suffered, but also how to pay for the myriad costs resulting from the latest harrowing chapter of Destini’s opioid addiction. Katiena Johnson says her daughter is regaining consciousness and is out of the ICU.” (NPR)
 “We are especially reminded on Thanksgiving of how the virtue of gratitude enables us to recognize, even in adverse situations, the love of God in every person, every creature, and throughout nature. Let us be mindful of the reasons we are grateful for our lives, for those around us, and for our communities. We also commit to treating all with charity and mutual respect, spreading the spirit of Thanksgiving throughout our country and across the world.” (Donald J. Trump’s Presidential Proclamation on Thanksgiving Day,November 20, 2018)
 “MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN! AMERICA FIRST! …
“There are a lot of CRIMINALS in the [immigrant] Caravan. We will stop them. Catch and Detain! Judicial Activism, by people who know nothing about security and the safety of our citizens, is putting our country in great danger. Not good!” (Donald J. Trump’s tweets, November 21)
 “Some vehicles made it out in time the day the Camp Fire [in northern California] ignited. Others became grenades after being hit by flaming embers. The worst of it may have happened in a town called Paradise, approximate population 26,000. ‘I was driving down Neal Road, and the houses by the horse stables were already on fire—the side of the road was on fire as we were driving through,’ said David Cuen, a Paradise resident who I met at a tent encampment of Camp Fire survivors in a Walmart parking lot in Chico. Neal Road is one of only three roads from Paradise with access to Highway 99. It was one of the few ways out: ‘I look in my rear-view mirror, count back 10 cars, and the 10th or 15th car, it blew up. The flames had overwhelmed all the cars by it. And the cops were making people get in cars that had room. So, you’re talking four to five people in each car.’ Cuen spent the week after escaping the fire sharing a tent with his wife and her family.” (Slate)

Vast popular hardship and suffering, on the one hand, and almost indescribable wealth and social indifference, on the other. Two parties of the corporate oligarchy, dedicated to war and political reaction. The impossible economic and political conditions must produce sooner rather than later the greatest social upheavals in American history.

 

"A series of recent polls in the US and Europe have 

shown a sharp growth of popular disgust with 

capitalism and support for socialism. In May of 

2017, in a survey conducted by the Union of 

European Broadcasters of people aged 18 to 35, 

more than half said they would participate in a 

“large-scale uprising.” Nine out of 10 agreed with 

the statement, “Banks and money rule the world.”



AMERICA FACES REVOLUTION, CIVIL WAR II OR REVOLUTION AGAINST THE RULE BY BILLIONAIRES AND WALL STREET
"Vast popular hardship and suffering, on the one hand, and almost indescribable wealth and social indifference, on the other. Two parties of the corporate oligarchy, dedicated to war and political reaction. The impossible economic and political conditions must produce sooner rather than later the greatest social upheavals in American history."
 * 
"A series of recent polls in the US and Europe have shown a sharp growth of popular disgust with capitalism and support for socialism. In May of 
2017, in a survey conducted by the Union of European Broadcasters of people aged 18 to 35, more than half said they would participate in a 
“large-scale uprising.” Nine out of 10 agreed with the statement, “Banks and money rule the world.”


THE BILLIONAIRE CLASS WAGES WAR ON AMERICA!

"GOP estb. is using the $5 billion border-wall fight to hide up to four blue/white-

collar cheap-labor programs in lame-duck DHS budget. Donors are worried that

salaries are too damn high, & estb. media does not want to know." 

 

TOP EVIL CORPORATIONS LOOTING AMERICA

Goldman Sachs TRUMP CRONIES – CLINTON CRONIES
JPMorgan Chase OBAMA CRONIES
ExxonMobil
Halliburton BUSH CRIME FAMILY CRONIES
British American Tobacco
Dow Chemical
DuPont
Bayer
Microsoft
Google CLINTON CRONIES
Facebook OBAMA CRONIES
Amazon
Walmart

Democrats Reject Trump’s Amnesty Framework, Seek Alliance With GOP’s Business Wing… OTHER PARTNERS INCLUDE MEXICO, U.S. CHAMBER of COMMERCE, ALL BILLIONAIRES WHO HIRE FOREIGNERS ONLY!

http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/02/neil-munro-working-hard-to-keep-wages.html

 

AMNESTY IS ALL ABOUT KEEPING WAGES DEPRESSED.

IT REQUIRES ENDLESS HORDES OF HEAVY BREEDING MEXICANS JUMPING OUR BORDERS FOR WELFARE, NO ENFORCEMENT AND NO LEGAL NEED APPLY!

*

“Open border advocates, such as Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg, claim illegal aliens are a net benefit to California with little evidence to support such an assertion. As the CIS has documented, the vast majority of illegals are poor, uneducated, and with few skills. How does accepting millions of illegal aliens and then granting them access to dozens of welfare programs benefit California’s economy? If illegals were contributing to the economy in any meaningful way, CA, with its 2.6 million illegals, would be booming.” STEVE BALDWIN – AMERICAN SPECTATOR


Billionaires Demand Fast-Track Green Cards for 400,000 Visa Workers





Bezos sailed past Gates to top the Forbes billionaires list for the first time
GETTY IMAGES NORTH AMERICA/AFP/David Ryder, EMMANUEL DUNAND
 384
6:49

Internet billionaire Marc Benioff is urging the GOP Congress and President Donald Trump to fast-track 400,000 foreign visa-workers — plus 400,000 family members — to green cards, the U.S. job market, and the ballot box.


“This is good for our economy,” Benioff said in a Tuesday tweet that was applauded by Silicon Valley lobbyists. “We need to grow our workers to grow our economy.” 
Benioff’s comment is a tautology: Expanding the population by importing more than 800,000 people would obviously grow the nation’s economy, retail sales, government taxes, company profits, and Wall Street stock options. 
But Benioff’s cheap-labor importation plan would also shrink the income and careers sought by millions of American college graduates, many of whom will vote in 2020 for or against Trump. 

I strongly support HR392 eliminating the per country visa cap. This bill must happen. The high skill visa provision has overwhelming bi-partisan support because this is good for our economy. We need to grow our workers to grow our economy. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/392 

1,957 people are talking about this

The planned giveaway is in a pending House bill, dubbed H.R. 392. It is also hidden in the House version of the 2019 funding package for the Department of Homeland Security. If Trump accepts that funding package, he will help companies import more cheap visa-workers from India and China an inflict more economic and career damage to the nation’s professional-status workforce of at least 55 million American college-graduates.
The nation’s workforce now includes roughly 1.5 million foreign college-graduate contract-workers who are imported via the H-1B, L-1, OPT, O-1, J-1, and other visa programs. These outsourcing workers are not immigrants, but instead, they are contract workers hired for one to six years, at lower wages, to take jobs that would otherwise go to American graduates.

GOP Reps. are still pushing Rep. Yoder's middle-class outsourcing bill to put 600K Indian visa-workers & families on fast-track to US jobs/voting. It would help CEOs import more Indians for US college-grad jobs - w/o any benefit for US workers or even GOP. http://bit.ly/2QzuoDJ 

123 people are talking about this

This massive level of middle-class outsourcing has suppressed the wage growth needed by many American graduates to repay their college debts, get married, buy homes, and raise children. For example, the salaries for 21 million “professional and business services” employees rose by just roughly one percent after inflation from the second quarter of 2017 to the second quarter of 2018, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Their after-inflation pay was flat from 2o15 to 2016.
The Americans’ salary loss, however, would be a gain for the CEOs who see their profits rise and their stock options spike as middle-class salaries decline. 
The MyVisaJobs.com site shows that Benioff’s company asked for 1,063 H-1B visa workers in 2018, up from 880 in 2017. The site also shows job titles and work locations. 
Benioff also sought 1,071 green cards for his contract workers in from 2016 to 2018. 
The company’s stock price has doubled since Trump’s election, but Benioff and most of his employees have strongly supported Democrats, including Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election. For example, only 5.2 percent of employee donations to candidates went to GOP candidates in 2018. 
Now Benioff and his fellow executives as asking Trump to raise their stock portfolios by fast-tracking green cards to roughly 400,000 foreign contract-workers — plus 400,000 family members — who sidelined hundreds of thousands of American college graduates. 
Benioff’s support for the visa workers was echoed by Todd Schulte, who is the director of a pro-migration lobbying group. The Democratic-aligned group, FWD.us, was formed and funded by Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Microsoft’s Bill Gates and numerous other CEOs and investors who prefer to import visa-workers instead of hiring Americans.


Without irony, Schulte’s website declares that “We believe that when every person has the opportunity to achieve their full potential, our families, communities, and economy thrive.” 
Amazon is also urging Trump to approve the green-card giveaway. Amazon’s founder, Jeff Bezos, also runs the Washington Post and supported Clinton.

Amazon applauds @KevinYoder on the passage of his amendment to the @DHSgov appropriations bill, H.R. 392, that would remove the per-country limit on green cards. This is an important step towards green card reform, and Amazonians thank you for your leadership on this issue.

984 people are talking about this

In 2018, Amazon asked the government for almost 6,000 H-1B visa workers and almost 5,000 green cards. Facebook asked for almost 2,400 H-1B workers and 1,400 green cards. Those outsourcing requests add up to 15,000 white-collar jobs sought by U.S. graduates. 
Business lobbyists are trying to minimize publicity about their demand for a green-card giveaway and they are pressing GOP leaders behind closed doors to keep the giveaway in the 2019 DHS budget. 
But opposition is rising as Americans graduates have begun organizing to block the giveaway. For example, Protect US Workers helped defeat Rep. Kevin Yoder who used his authority as an appropriations chairman to insert the giveaway into the DHS budget. 


NEW COLUMN IS POSTED! PUSSY (HATS) WHIPPED - http://www.anncoulter.com 
Enjoyed helping send @RepKevinYoder packing.

Yep, I helped fund these billboards and voted straight RED in FL. Yoder's love for foreign guestworker/Replacemnts sent him packing. No American should ever have to train their Foreign Replacements@NeilMunroDC @bseeker @Dawnnewyorker pic.twitter.com/WOnwxr3seY







View image on Twitter

33 people are talking about this

The American graduates are also using federal data to show U.S. legislators how many Americans’ middle-class jobs are being outsourced in their districts to the foreign workers. 


I clean homes for a living. These kind of policies undercuts my job because of cheap labor. The dems try to make excuses for their policies against American workers. They don’t care about Americans, they just care about non citizens. They need to be voted out on 2020.
Yep, been there, trained my foreign Replacements in '02. Awful experience. Went public with it, told Congress. The worst part was the disregard we got from our 2 Dem senators

My house testimony:http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa91679.000/hfa91679_0.HTM#104 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJlesZ9popA 

See Michael Emmons🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸's other Tweets

The managing director of Thiel Capital, Eric Weinstein, tweeted to Benioff to highlight his report which shows that the federal officials created the H-1B visa program to lower salaries paid to American technology experts:


The mass outsourcing also adding pressure to the lives of many American technology workers, many of whom have already lost jobs to cheaper contract-workers. An informal survey of tech workers shows that almost four-in-ten say they are depressed.
One of the leading advocates for the green-card giveaway is Leon Fresco, an immigration lawyer who helped Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer pass the disastrous 2013 “Gang of Eight” amnesty through the Senate. The bill was so unpopular that the GOP gained nine Senate seats in 2014, preventing Schumer from becoming Senate Majority Leader.
On December 6, Fresco suggested there is only a small chance that the giveaway will get into the final DHS bill:


Many Indian contract workers are lobbying to help pass the green-card bill:


In the United States, the establishment’s economic policy of using migration to boost economic growth shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the market with cheap white collar and blue collar foreign labor. That flood of outside labor spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor that blue collar and white collar employees offer.
The policy also drives up real estate prices, widens wealth gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least five million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with fentanyl addictions.
Immigration also pulls investment and wealth away from heartland states because coastal investors can more easily hire and supervise the large immigrant populations who prefer to live in the coastal states.





The stakes are high. Once the treaty is ratified, it will be exponentially harder to roll back internet censorship. Unless you want the tech giants’ right to censor to persist for another 20 years (that’s how long NAFTA lasted), now is the time to make your voice heard.



The Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via mass-immigration shifts wealth from young people towards older people, it floods the market with foreign laborspikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. It also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions.



But not everything is great for all Californians, with Breitbart News reporting that Silicon Valley has the highest income inequality in the nation and the U.S. News & World Report naming California as the worst state for “quality of life,” due to the high cost of living.

USMCA Entrenches Tech Companies’ Right To Censor


USMCA tech
3:58

President Trump hailed the trade agreement he signed with Mexico and Canada last week as “great for all our countries.” Perhaps he doesn’t know that the NAFTA-replacing trade agreement, USMCA, gives tech giants in Silicon Valley a special legal privilege to censor his own supporters — and anyone else they find “objectionable.”


Facebook, Twitter, Google, and YouTube all engaged in pre-election censorship against Republicans and Trump supporters. Yet they’ve managed to sneak a liability protection into President Trump’s trade bill that would make it even easier for them to censor their own users.
USMCA entrenches the tech giants’ legal protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which grant them legal immunity for user-generated content. This is an important part of the law that allows tech platforms to host a wide variety of speech with light-touch moderation.
But USMCA also entrenches tech companies’ right to censor without liability. Article 19.17 of the trade agreement gives tech companies immunity from any lawsuits arising from actions taken to “restrict material it considers to be harmful or objectionable.”
Section 230 has a similarly problematic provision, which needs to be amended by the next Congress if the censorship of the internet is to be stopped. But the new, even broader censorship provision, will make it nearly impossible for the tech giants’ privilege of legal immunity from any lawsuit that arises out of their censorship practices to be taken away.
Whereas Section 230 can be amended by the U.S. congress, USMCA is a trade agreement – once ratified by all three nations (the U.S., Canada, and Mexico), it will take further agreement from the three nations to amend it. And only one of those countries has a First Amendment. Canada, with its wide-ranging hate speech laws and far-left Prime Minister, would see little reason to make it harder for tech companies to censor “objectionable” content.
That said, USMCA isn’t ratified yet. It must first be approved by both Houses of Congress. Although President Trump has threatened a rapid cancellation of NAFTA to force Congress to approve its replacement, he faces legal obstacles to doing so.
And he might also be reluctant to do so when he learns that his own trade bill protects the very same tech censorship that he has publicly denounced.
In August, the President warned that “we will not tolerate political censorship, blacklisting, and rigged search results.”
Yet USMCA protects tech companies right to do exactly that — to bury any content they subjectively consider “objectionable” or “harmful.”
Despite attempts by Democrats and the corporate media to frame concerns about tech censorship as a “conspiracy theory,” internal research from Google leaked exclusively to Breitbart News earlier this year confirmed that tech platforms have indeed “shifted towards censorship.”
Although it’s too late for Trump to amend USMCA himself (he’s already signed it!), but so long as he delays cancelling NAFTA, he can give Congress time to make changes to the bill.
By January, Democrats will control the House of Representatives and the Senate will feature two new Republican senators, Marsha Blackburn and Josh Hawley, who are no friends of Silicon Valley tech giants. That will create a negotiating environment favorable to making broad changes to USMCA.
It’ll also provide a window for the grassroots to voice its concerns and pressure Congress to remove the pro-censorship provision from USMCA.
The stakes are high. Once the treaty is ratified, it will be exponentially harder to roll back internet censorship. Unless you want the tech giants’ right to censor to persist for another 20 years (that’s how long NAFTA lasted), now is the time to make your voice heard.
Allum Bokhari is the senior technology correspondent at Breitbart News. You can follow him on TwitterGab.ai and add him on Facebook. Email tips and suggestions to allumbokhari@protonmail.com.



Zuckerberg’s Investor Group Pushes for Pre-Election Amnesty


http://www.breitbart.com/2018-elections/2018/04/19/zuckerberg-lobby-joins-pre-election-amnesty-push/


Getty/Saul Loeb

by NEIL MUNRO19 Apr 201819

Silicon Valley investors, including Facebook owner Mark Zuckerberg, are joining the Koch network’s push for a quick amnesty that would also keep the issue of cheap-labor immigration out of the November election.

But the push by Zuckerberg’s FWD.us investor group quickly hit a roadblock Thursday when Majority Leader Rep. Kevin McCarthy denounced the “discharge petition” amnesty plan, which is fronted by California GOP Rep. Jeff Denham.
“I don’t believe discharge petitions are the way to legislate,” McCarthy said to The Hill. “I don’t believe members in the [GOP] conference believe that, either.”
McCarthy’s opposition — and the growing pressure for a quick exit by retiring House Speaker Paul Ryan — opens up room for GOP legislators to make the November election all about rising wages vs. cheap-labor immigration. Numerous polls show that more than 70 percent of Americans want companies to hire Americans before importing more cheap-labor immigrants, and numerous business groups say they need more imported labor as wages begin to rise.
But a quick Zuckerberg amnesty would prevent President Donald Trump or GOP leaders from running on an immigration reform platform in November — and would also deflate economic pressure that is delivering higher wages before the 2018 election. “It would be the dumbest thing possible for Republicans to do coming election which they already think they may lose — they would for sure lose with this,” said Rosemary Jenks, the director of governmental affairs at NumbersUSA. She continued: 
I don’t think they will [shift to immigration, but] … it would be a surefire way to keep the majority. People in Washington talk about [election-winning] ’70 percent issues’ … [and] this is it, this is the 70 percent issue.
Backed by Zuckerberg’s FWD.us, Denham is collecting GOP signatures for a resolution that would urge a so-called “Queen of the Hill” debate on the House floor. In that very rare form of debate, legislators could debate several alternative immigration bills, and the most popular proposal would be sent to the Senate
Those rules would almost guarantee a big win for Zuckerberg and his allies because nearly all Democrats and many business-first Republicans — including many who are retiring this year — will support a no-strings “Clean Dream Act” amnesty for at least 1.8 million younger ‘DACA’ illegals.
Denham claims to have 50 GOP legislators backing his resolution, but those GOP members have not signed the needed “discharge petition” which allows 218 cooperating legislators to force the debate despite opposition from the Speaker of the House. Many of Denham’s supporters don’t recognize the impact of Denham’s plan, said Jenks, and “when they find out, they are not going to be happy and will certainly not sign the discharge.”’
Denham’s office did not respond to questions from Breitbart News.
McCarthy’s quick opposition to Denham’s push is critical because he is the likely replacement for exiting House Speaker Paul Ryan. Without McCarthy’s support for the immigration push, few of the GOP legislators on Denham’s resolution will sign the needed discharge petition — even though many will use their support for the resolution to ingratiate themselves with their donors and pro-amnesty voters.
Denham’s resolution is getting expensive media support from the various donors who are working under cover of the Koch advocacy network, which has at least 550 business donors. On April 17. Daniel Garza, the president of the Koch-funded LIBRE Initiative, told Business Insider:
The American people deserve a government that is effective and efficient in solving our nation’s problems.
Congress and the White House have spent a lot of time talking about DACA, but today our elected officials have yet to approve a permanent legislative solution. The Dreamers are among our best and brightest. They are students, workers, and men and women risking their lives in the Armed Forces. Washington must come together and approve a bipartisan solution that provides certainty for Dreamers and security improvements along our border.
Zuckerberg’s FWD.us advocacy group is also providing direct support for the Denham push, and it touted Wednesday’s press conference where Denham was flanked by a few other cheap-labor Republicans — Texas Rep. Will Hurd, Colorado Rep. Mike Coffman and California Rep. David Valadao – as well as the Democratic head of the Hispanic ethnic lobby, new Mexico Democrat Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham.

NOW and NEW: 50 Republicans join over 180 Republicans for the “Queen of the Hill” Rule to try to force a debate/series of votes for Dreamers.
Zuckerberg’s FWD.us group was founded a by a slew of information-technology investors who gain from cheap white-collar labor.
The group has endorsed multiple bills and amnesties which would raise the supply of white-collar labor and also block Donald Trump’s populist “Buy American, Hire American” policies, all of which will tend to raise Americans’ blue-collar wages and white-collar salaries. In February, FWD.us joined with many other business groups to help the Senate block Trump’s popular immigration reforms.
Since Trump’s election, the FWD.us group has used the relatively few college-grad ‘DACA’ illegals to shift the political focus from Trump’s very popular wages-for-Americans pitch. That diversionary tactic has worked, partly because most establishment reporters prefer to focus on the concerns of foreign migrants rather than the concerns of fellow Americans.
However, Republicans are facing a tough 2018 election and may decide to pick up the issue up the popular issue of immigration and wages, especially if McCarthy replacesHouse Speaker Paul Ryan before the election.
That shift to wages and immigration is made likelier by the spreading benefits of Trump’s anti-amnesty policies which is delivering higher wages and overtime to many employees, including black bakers in Chicago, Latino restaurant workers in Monterey, Calif., disabled people in Missouri, high-schoolers, the construction industry, Superbowl workers, the garment industry, and workers employed at small businesses.
Higher wages are strongly resisted by business groups, partly because they threaten to lower investors’ returns and stock values on Wall Street, including the founders of FWD.us.
Zuckerberg’s group has funded polls which tout the supposed popularity of immigration. These “Nation of Immigrants” polls pressure Americans to say they welcome migrants.
In contrast, polls which ask people to pick a priority, or to decide which options are fair, show that voters in the polling booth put a high priority on helping their families and fellow nationals get decent jobs in a high-tech, high-immigrationlow-wage economy.
Also, a series of 2018 polls and surveys show that GOP voters believe the immigration issue is far more important than celebrating tax cuts.
Four million Americans turn 18 each year and begin looking for good jobs in the free market. But the federal government inflates the supply of new labor by annually accepting roughly 1.1 million new legal immigrants, by providing work-permits to roughly 3 million resident foreigners, and by doing little to block the employment of roughly 8 million illegal immigrants.
The Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via mass-immigration shifts wealth from young people towards older people, it floods the market with foreign laborspikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees. It also drives up real estate priceswidens wealth-gaps, reduces high-tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high-tech careers, and sidelines at least 5 million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions.
In the July/August version of the Atlantic, columnist Peter Beinart wrote an article titled, “How the Democrats Lost Their Way on Immigration.”

“The next Democratic presidential candidate should say again and again that because Americans are one people, who must abide by one law, his or her goal is to reduce America’s undocumented population to zero.”

Peter Beinart, a frequent contributor to the New York TimesNew York Review of BooksHaaretz, and former editor of the New Republic, blames immigration for deteriorating social conditions for the American working class: The supposed “costs” of immigration, he says, “strain the very welfare state that liberals want to expand in order to help those native-born Americans with whom immigrants compete.”

llustration by Lincoln Agnew*


The myth, which liberals like myself find tempting, is that only the right has changed. In June 2015, we tell ourselves, Donald Trump rode down his golden escalator and pretty soon nativism, long a feature of conservative politics, had engulfed it. But that’s not the full story. If the right has grown more nationalistic, the left has grown less so. A decade ago, liberals publicly questioned immigration in ways that would shock many progressives today.

Listen to the audio version of this article:Download the Audm app for your iPhone to listen to more titles.In 2005, a left-leaning blogger wrote, “Illegal immigration wreaks havoc economically, socially, and culturally; makes a mockery of the rule of law; and is disgraceful just on basic fairness grounds alone.” In 2006, a liberal columnist wrote that “immigration reduces the wages of domestic workers who compete with immigrants” and that “the fiscal burden of low-wage immigrants is also pretty clear.” His conclusion: “We’ll need to reduce the inflow of low-skill immigrants.” That same year, a Democratic senator wrote, “When I see Mexican flags waved at pro-immigration demonstrations, I sometimes feel a flush of patriotic resentment. When I’m forced to use a translator to communicate with the guy fixing my car, I feel a certain frustration.”

The blogger was Glenn Greenwald. The columnist was Paul Krugman. The senator was Barack Obama.

Prominent liberals didn’t oppose immigration a decade ago. Most acknowledged its benefits to America’s economy and culture. They supported a path to citizenship for the undocumented. Still, they routinely asserted that low-skilled immigrants depressed the wages of low-skilled American workers and strained America’s welfare state. And they were far more likely than liberals today are to acknowledge that, as Krugman put it, “immigration is an intensely painful topic … because it places basic principles in conflict.”

Today, little of that ambivalence remains. In 2008, the Democratic platform called undocumented immigrants “our neighbors.” But it also warned, “We cannot continue to allow people to enter the United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked,” adding that “those who enter our country’s borders illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of the law.” By 2016, such language was gone. The party’s platform described America’s immigration system as a problem, but not illegal immigration itself. And it focused almost entirely on the forms of immigration enforcement that Democrats opposed. In its immigration section, the 2008 platform referred three times to people entering the country “illegally.” The immigration section of the 2016 platform didn’t use the word illegal, or any variation of it, at all.“A decade or two ago,” says Jason Furman, a former chairman of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers, “Democrats were divided on immigration. Now everyone agrees and is passionate and thinks very little about any potential downsides.” How did this come to be?

There are several explanations for liberals’ shift. The first is that they have changed because the reality on the ground has changed, particularly as regards illegal immigration. In the two decades preceding 2008, the United States experienced sharp growth in its undocumented population. Since then, the numbers have leveled off.

But this alone doesn’t explain the transformation. The number of undocumented people in the United States hasn’t gone down significantly, after all; it’s stayed roughly the same. So the economic concerns that Krugman raised a decade ago remain relevant today.What’s Wrong With the Democrats?A larger explanation is political. Between 2008 and 2016, Democrats became more and more confident that the country’s growing Latino population gave the party an electoral edge. To win the presidency, Democrats convinced themselves, they didn’t need to reassure white people skeptical of immigration so long as they turned out their Latino base. “The fastest-growing sector of the American electorate stampeded toward the Democrats this November,” Salon declared after Obama’s 2008 win. “If that pattern continues, the GOP is doomed to 40 years of wandering in a desert.”As the Democrats grew more reliant on Latino votes, they were more influenced by pro-immigrant activism. While Obama was running for reelection, immigrants’-rights advocates launched protests against the administration’s deportation practices; these protests culminated, in June 2012, in a sit-in at an Obama campaign office in Denver. Ten days later, the administration announced that it would defer the deportation of undocumented immigrants who had arrived in the U.S. before the age of 16 and met various other criteria. Obama, The New York Times noted, “was facing growing pressure from Latino leaders and Democrats who warned that because of his harsh immigration enforcement, his support was lagging among Latinos who could be crucial voters in his race for re-election.”
Alongside pressure from pro-immigrant activists came pressure from corporate America, especially the Democrat-aligned tech industry, which uses the H-1B visa program to import workers. In 2010, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, along with the CEOs of companies including Hewlett-Packard, Boeing, Disney, and News Corporation, formed New American Economy to advocate for business-friendly immigration policies. Three years later, Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates helped found FWD.us to promote a similar agenda.
This combination of Latino and corporate activism made it perilous for Democrats to discuss immigration’s costs, as Bernie Sanders learned the hard way. In July 2015, two months after officially announcing his candidacy for president, Sanders was interviewed by Ezra Klein, the editor in chief of Vox. Klein asked whether, in order to fight global poverty, the U.S. should consider “sharply raising the level of immigration we permit, even up to a level of open borders.” Sanders reacted with horror. “That’s a Koch brothers proposal,” he scoffed. He went on to insist that “right-wing people in this country would love … an open-border policy. Bring in all kinds of people, work for $2 or $3 an hour, that would be great for them. I don’t believe in that. I think we have to raise wages in this country.”
Progressive commentators routinely claim that there’s a near-consensus among economists on immigration’s benefits. There isn’t.Sanders came under immediate attack. Vox’s Dylan Matthews declared that his “fear of immigrant labor is ugly—and wrongheaded.” The president of FWD.us accused Sanders of “the sort of backward-looking thinking that progressives have rightly moved away from in the past years.” ThinkProgress published a blog post titled “Why Immigration Is the Hole in Bernie Sanders’ Progressive Agenda.” The senator, it argued, was supporting “the idea that immigrants coming to the U.S. are taking jobs and hurting the economy, a theory that has been proven incorrect.”Sanders stopped emphasizing immigration’s costs. By January 2016, FWD.us’s policy director noted with satisfaction that he had “evolved on this issue.”
But has the claim that “immigrants coming to the U.S. are taking jobs” actually been proved “incorrect”? A decade ago, liberals weren’t so sure. In 2006, Krugman wrote that America was experiencing “large increases in the number of low-skill workers relative to other inputs into production, so it’s inevitable that this means a fall in wages.”
It’s hard to imagine a prominent liberal columnist writing that sentence today. To the contrary, progressive commentators now routinely claim that there’s a near-consensus among economists on immigration’s benefits.(Illustration by Lincoln Agnew. Photos: AFP; Atta Kenare; Eric Lafforgue; Gamma-Rapho; Getty; Keystone-France; Koen van Weel; Lambert; Richard Baker / In Pictures / Corbis)There isn’t. According to a comprehensive new report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, “Groups comparable to … immigrants in terms of their skill may experience a wage reduction as a result of immigration-induced increases in labor supply.” But academics sometimes de-emphasize this wage reduction because, like liberal journalists and politicians, they face pressures to support immigration.
Many of the immigration scholars regularly cited in the press have worked for, or received funding from, pro-immigration businesses and associations. Consider, for instance, Giovanni Peri, an economist at UC Davis whose name pops up a lot in liberal commentary on the virtues of immigration. A 2015 New York Times Magazine essay titled “Debunking the Myth of the Job-Stealing Immigrant” declared that Peri, whom it called the “leading scholar” on how nations respond to immigration, had “shown that immigrants tend to complement—rather than compete against—the existing work force.” Peri is indeed a respected scholar. But Microsoft has funded some of his research into high-skilled immigration. And New American Economy paid to help him turn his research into a 2014 policy paper decrying limitations on the H-1B visa program. Such grants are more likely the result of his scholarship than their cause. Still, the prevalence of corporate funding can subtly influence which questions economists ask, and which ones they don’t. (Peri says grants like those from Microsoft and New American Economy are neither large nor crucial to his work, and that “they don’t determine … the direction of my academic research.”)Academics face cultural pressures too. In his book Exodus, Paul Collier, an economist at the University of Oxford, claims that in their “desperate [desire] not to give succor” to nativist bigots, “social scientists have strained every muscle to show that migration is good for everyone.” George Borjas of Harvard argues that since he began studying immigration in the 1980s, his fellow economists have grown far less tolerant of research that emphasizes its costs. There is, he told me, “a lot of self-censorship among young social scientists.” Because Borjas is an immigration skeptic, some might discount his perspective. But when I asked Donald Davis, a Columbia University economist who takes a more favorable view of immigration’s economic impact, about Borjas’s claim, he made a similar point. “George and I come out on different sides of policy on immigration,” Davis said, “but I agree that there are aspects of discussion in academia that don’t get sort of full view if you come to the wrong conclusion.”
None of this means that liberals should oppose immigration. Entry to the United States is, for starters, a boon to immigrants and to the family members back home to whom they send money. It should be valued on these moral grounds alone. But immigration benefits the economy, too. Because immigrants are more likely than native-born Americans to be of working age, they improve the ratio of workers to retirees, which helps keep programs like Social Security and Medicare solvent. Immigration has also been found to boost productivity, and the National Academies report finds that “natives’ incomes rise in aggregate as a result of immigration.”
The problem is that, although economists differ about the extent of the damage, immigration hurts the Americans with whom immigrants compete. And since more than a quarter of America’s recent immigrants lack even a high-school diploma or its equivalent, immigration particularly hurts the least-educated native workers, the very people who are already struggling the most. America’s immigration system, in other words, pits two of the groups liberals care about most—the native-born poor and the immigrant poor—against each other.
One way of mitigating this problem would be to scrap the current system, which allows immigrants living in the U.S. to bring certain close relatives to the country, in favor of what Donald Trump in February called a “merit based” approach that prioritizes highly skilled and educated workers. The problem with this idea, from a liberal perspective, is its cruelty. It denies many immigrants who are already here the ability to reunite with their loved ones. And it flouts the country’s best traditions. Would we remove from the Statue of Liberty the poem welcoming the “poor,” the “wretched,” and the “homeless”?
A better answer is to take some of the windfall that immigration brings to wealthier Americans and give it to those poorer Americans whom immigration harms. Borjas has suggested taxing the high-tech, agricultural, and service-sector companies that profit from cheap immigrant labor and using the money to compensate those Americans who are displaced by it.Unfortunately, while admitting poor immigrants makes redistributing wealth more necessary, it also makes it harder, at least in the short term. By some estimates, immigrants, who are poorer on average than native-born Americans and have larger families, receive more in government services than they pay in taxes. According to the National Academies report, immigrant-headed families with children are 15 percentage points more likely to rely on food assistance, and 12 points more likely to rely on Medicaid, than other families with children. In the long term, the United States will likely recoup much if not all of the money it spends on educating and caring for the children of immigrants. But in the meantime, these costs strain the very welfare state that liberals want to expand in order to help those native-born Americans with whom immigrants compete.
What’s more, studies by the Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam and others suggest that greater diversity makes Americans less charitable and less willing to redistribute wealth. People tend to  be less generous when large segments of society don’t look or talk like them. Surprisingly, Putnam’s research suggests that greater diversity doesn’t reduce trust and cooperation just among people of different races or ethnicities—it also reduces trust and cooperation among people of the same race and ethnicity.
Trump appears to sense this. His implicit message during the campaign was that if the government kept out Mexicans and Muslims, white, Christian Americans would not only grow richer and safer, they would also regain the sense of community that they identified with a bygone age. “At the bedrock of our politics will be a total allegiance to the United States of America,” he declared in his inaugural address, “and through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other.”Liberals must take seriously Americans’ yearning for social cohesion. To promote both mass immigration and greater economic redistribution, they must convince more native-born white Americans that immigrants will not weaken the bonds of national identity. This means dusting off a concept many on the left currently hate: assimilation.
Promoting assimilation need not mean expecting immigrants to abandon their culture. But it does mean breaking down the barriers that segregate them from the native-born. And it means celebrating America’s diversity less, and its unity more.
Writing last year in American Sociological Review, Ariela Schachter, a sociology professor at Washington University in St. Louis, examined the factors that influence how native-born whites view immigrants. Foremost among them is an immigrant’s legal status. Given that natives often assume Latinos are undocumented even when they aren’t, it follows that illegal immigration indirectly undermines the status of those Latinos who live in the U.S. legally. That’s why conservatives rail against government benefits for undocumented immigrants (even though the undocumented are already barred from receiving many of those benefits): They know Americans will be more reluctant to support government programs if they believe those programs to be benefiting people who have entered the country illegally.
Liberal immigration policy must work to ensure that immigrants do not occupy a separate legal caste. This means opposing the guest-worker programs—beloved by many Democrat-friendly tech companies, among other employers—that require immigrants to work in a particular job to remain in the U.S. Some scholars believe such programs drive down wages; they certainly inhibit assimilation. And, as Schachter’s research suggests, strengthening the bonds of identity between natives and immigrants is harder when natives and immigrants are not equal under the law.The next Democratic presidential candidate should say again and again that because Americans are one people, who must abide by one law, his or her goal is to reduce America’s undocumented population to zero. For liberals, the easy part of fulfilling that pledge is supporting a path to citizenship for the undocumented who have put down roots in the United States. The hard part, which Hillary Clinton largely ignored in her 2016 presidential run, is backing tough immigration enforcement so that path to citizenship doesn’t become a magnet that entices more immigrants to enter the U.S. illegally.
Enforcement need not mean tearing apart families, as Trump is doing with gusto. Liberals can propose that the government deal harshly not with the undocumented themselves but with their employers. Trump’s brutal policies already appear to be slowing illegal immigration. But making sure companies follow the law and verify the legal status of their employees would curtail it too: Migrants would presumably be less likely to come to the U.S. if they know they won’t be able to find work.
In 2014, the University of California listed the term melting pot as a “microaggression.” What if Hillary Clinton had called that absurd? Schachter’s research also shows that native-born whites feel a greater affinity toward immigrants who speak fluent English. That’s particularly significant because, according to the National Academies report, newer immigrants are learning English more slowly than their predecessors did. During the campaign, Clinton proposed increasing funding for adult English-language education. But she rarely talked about it. In fact, she ran an ad attacking Trump for saying, among other things, “This is a country where we speak English, not Spanish.” The immigration section of her website showed her surrounded by Spanish-language signs.Democrats should put immigrants’ learning English at the center of their immigration agenda. If more immigrants speak English fluently, native-born whites may well feel a stronger connection to them, and be more likely to support government policies that help them. Promoting English will also give Democrats a greater chance of attracting those native-born whites who consider growing diversity a threat. According to a preelection study by Adam Bonica, a Stanford political scientist, the single best predictor of whether a voter supported Trump was whether he or she agreed with the statement “People living in the U.S. should follow American customs and traditions.”
In her 2005 book, The Authoritarian Dynamic, which has been heralded for identifying the forces that powered Trump’s campaign, Karen Stenner, then a professor of politics at Princeton, wrote:
Exposure to difference, talking about difference, and applauding difference—the hallmarks of liberal democracy—are the surest ways to aggravate those who are innately intolerant, and to guarantee the increased expression of their predispositions in manifestly intolerant attitudes and behaviors. Paradoxically, then, it would seem that we can best limit intolerance of difference by parading, talking about, and applauding our sameness.
The next Democratic presidential nominee should commit those words to memory. There’s a reason Barack Obama’s declaration at the 2004 Democratic National Convention that “there is not a liberal America and a conservative America … There is not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there’s the United States of America” is among his most famous lines. Americans know that liberals celebrate diversity. They’re less sure that liberals celebrate unity. And Obama’s ability to effectively do the latter probably contributed to the fact that he—a black man with a Muslim-sounding name—twice won a higher percentage of the white vote than did Hillary Clinton.In 2014, the University of California listed melting pot as a term it considered a “microaggression.” What if Hillary Clinton had traveled to one of its campuses and called that absurd? What if she had challenged elite universities to celebrate not merely multiculturalism and globalization but Americanness? What if she had said more boldly that the slowing rate of English-language acquisition was a problem she was determined to solve? What if she had acknowledged the challenges that mass immigration brings, and then insisted that Americans could overcome those challenges by focusing not on what makes them different but on what makes them the same?
Some on the left would have howled. But I suspect that Clinton would be president today.

REVOLUTION STIRS IN AMERICA

It will more likely come on the heels of economic dislocation and dwindling wealth to redistribute.”


"Between 2002 and 2015 annual earnings for the bottom 90 percent of Americans rose by only 4.5 percent, while earnings for the top 1 percent grew by 22.7 percent, according to the Economic Policy Institute. Under the Obama administration, more than 90 percent of income gains since the so-called “recovery” began have gone to the top one percent."
*
 “Our entire crony capitalist system, Democrat and Republican alike, has become a kleptocracy approaching par with third-world hell-holes. This is the way a great country is raided by its elite.” ---- Karen McQuillan THEAMERICAN THINKER.com


"A defining expression of this crisis is the dominance of financial speculation and 
parasitism, to the point where a arrow international financial aristocracy plunders society’s resources in order to further enrich itself."



THE BILLIONAIRES’S GLOBALIST DEMOCRAT PARTY FOR WIDER OPEN BORDERS

 

THE TRUE COST OF ALL THAT “CHEAP” LABOR IS PASSED ALONG TO THE MIDDLE CLASS.

 

"This doesn't include the costs of illegal immigration to society, which provides health care, housing, education, child care, and legal services to illegal aliens.  Even though immigration advocates claim that illegal aliens do indeed pay taxes, the dollar amount pales in comparison to the cost of the many services they receive."

 

https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-globalist-democrat-party-for-wider_29.html

 

Meanwhile, despite the highest taxes in the nation, California is $1.3 trillion in debt – unemployment is at a staggering 11%.  California's wacko giveaways to illegals include in-state tuition, amounting to $25 million of financial aid.  Nearly a million illegals have California driver's licenses.  L.A. County has 144% more registered voters than there are residents of legal voting age.  Clearly, illegals are illegally voting
While the original goal of the protests, to end a hike on fuel taxes, was met by Macron earlier this week, the Yellow Vest movement has burgeoned into what some have deemed as a true populist movement.


BANKSTERS AND BILLIONAIRES PREPARE FOR THE WORST.
REVOLUTION IS IN LOOMING AND WILL MARCH RIGHT DOWN WALL STREET FIRST. 

"A series of recent polls in the US and Europe have shown a sharp growth of popular disgust with capitalism and support for socialism. In May of 2017, in a survey conducted by the Union of European Broadcasters of people aged 18 to 35, more than half said they would participate in a “large-scale uprising.” Nine out of 10 agreed with the statement, “Banks and money rule the world.”

*
"The ruling class was particularly terrified by the teachers’ walkouts earlier this year because the biggest strikes were organized by rank-and-file educators in a rebellion against the unions, reflecting the weakening grip of the pro-corporate organizations that have suppressed the class struggle for decades."
*“The yearly income of a typical US household dropped by a massive 12 percent, or $6,400, in the six years between 2007 and 2013. This is just one of the findings of the 2013 Federal Reserve Survey of Consumer Finances released Thursday, which documents a sharp decline in working class living standards and a further concentration of wealth in the hands of the rich and the super-rich.”
*
"The American phenomenon of record stock values fueling an ever greater concentration of wealth at the very top of society, while the economy is starved of productive investment, the social infrastructure crumbles, and working class living standards are driven down by entrenched unemployment, wage-cutting and government austerity policies, is part of a broader global process."

*"A defining expression of this crisis is the dominance of financial speculation and parasitism, to the point where a narrow international financial aristocracy plunders society’s resources in order to further enrich itself."




‘Great Violence’ in Paris Anticipated as Police Staff Join Macron Protests



GettyImages-1067241638
Getty Images
5:49


The French government expects the Gilets Jaunes (Yellow Vest) protests in Paris this weekend could be more violent than ever, despite President Emmanuel Macron buckling on fuel tax hikes.

The Élysée Palace, seat of President Emmanuel Macron, announced to French media they are expecting “great violence” on Saturday as Yellow Vest protestors have announced “Act IV” of their nearly four-week-long protest against the Macron regime that was initially sparked by a rise in fuel taxes, franceinfo reports.
According to the Élysée, they expect “a hard core of several thousand people” to arrive in Paris on Saturday with the intent to “break and kill.”

Yellow vests (Gilets jaunes) protesters block the road leading to the Frontignan oil depot in the south of France, as they demonstrate against the rise in fuel prices and the cost of living on December 3, 2018 / PASCAL GUYOT/AFP/Getty Images)
The government is taking the situation so seriously that they have ordered a general mobilisation of every police officer nationwide for Saturday including doubling the number of officers in Paris.
Rumours had also circulated on social media of the possibility that Macron has ordered the French military to be present in Paris on Saturday with some posting images and videos of what appear to be armoured personnel carriers being pre-deployed. The planned presence of armoured vehicles, a first since 2005, was later confirmed by the government.
The security for the public transit systems in the French capital will also be totally mobilised with the Paris public transport company RATP already planning to divert or cancel dozens of buses and other forms of public transit going to the Champs-Élysées, the Opera, and several other areas of the city.
On top of the regular police forces and Gendarmes,  around 500 officers of the Directorate for Combating Irregular Immigration (SDLII) will be called upon and the Department of Local Security in Greater Paris (DSPAP) has also said their entire staff will be available to help.
The U.S. embassy in France has also put out a demonstration alert for Saturday’s protests saying, “Demonstrations may become violent, resulting in damage to property, including overturning vehicles and setting them on fire. Police responses may include water cannons and/or tear gas.”
The embassy recommended that Americans and others should avoid the protest areas, “shelter in place if in the areas affected,” and notify family for their safety.
While police have been called on to help quell the expected violence in the French capital, many are showing signs of sympathy to the Yellow Vests and their demands.
The Police Union Vigi Ministère de l’Intérieur has not only expressed support for the Yellow Vest movement but has called on members to go on an indefinite strike starting on Saturday, and join the Yellow Vests.


Policemen stand next to their vehicles near the Arc de Triomphe during a protest of Yellow vests (Gilets jaunes) against rising oil prices and living costs, on December 1, 2018 in Paris / ALAIN JOCARD/AFP/Getty Images
“It is time to organise legally and to be in solidarity with them, for the benefit of all,” the union said and added, “We know that we will have wounded and we fear to have dead among us.”
The strike will not affect active-duty officers, who are not allowed to strike by law but will impact support and administrative staff.
“Without the technical assistance and cooks, the companies of CRS [riot police] can be immobilised. Without the administrative assistants, services can be closed. Without the state workers, the maintenance of buildings and vehicles can no longer be done,” the union said.

Riot Police stand near a metro station after charching high school students of the Lycee Professionnel Jean-Pierre Timbaud protesting against French government Education reforms on December 3, 2018 in the north of Paris’ suburb of Aubervilliers. / THOMAS SAMSON/AFP/Getty Images
While last weekend saw intense amounts of violence within Paris, vandalism has continued in the last several days, including in the department of Puy-de-Dôme where 95 per cent of all the motorway speed cameras have now been destroyed.
Vandalism and destruction have also been directed at tax collection offices across the country in recent weeks.
On Tuesday night, a tax office in the commune of Riom in central France was firebombed and only a day before a treasury office in Saint-Andiol, located near Avignon, was also firebombed.
Over the last three weeks, other tax offices have also been targetted, including the office in Limoges where a tractor was rammed into the front of the building to block the entrance and in the city of Cahors were Yellow Vests blocked entrance into the tax building and wrote “stop  the racket” and “Merry Christmas and Good Taxes” on the walls.
With 67 per cent of the French believing that taxes are “too excessive,” tax collectors say they are now becoming fearful for their safety. In Poitiers last week, 200 tax collector staff were forced to flee the Yellow Vest protestors with one remarking, “The crowd screamed ‘fascists! collaborators!’ What is the next step? The guillotine? The scaffold?”
The tax officials are not the only ones fearing for their safety according to a source close to the presidency who said that all non-essential ministerial staff have been told to stay home on Saturday. “Everyone is scared. Fear for the stability of the institutions, for the continuity of the State, for the French, for our lives, for France,” the source said.
President Macron has already been confronted in public by Yellow Vest members while visiting the commune of Puy-en-Velay earlier this week. When the French leader attempted to greet the Yellow Vests he was met with shouts of “Démission!” or “Resign!” and was chased by Yellow Vests as his convoy attempted to leave the area.

While the original goal of the protests, to end a hike on fuel taxes, was met by Macron earlier this week, the Yellow Vest movement has burgeoned into what some have deemed as a true populist movement.
Breitbart London spoke to French author Renaud Camus and he claimed that the protests were borne of a much deeper problem in France.
“The problem is that the protesters themselves are so far too close to the picture, too much inside it, to realise that their fight is part of the general struggle against global replacementism, Davocracy,” Camus said, referring to the globalist elites who meet at the World Economic Forum every year in Davos, Switzerland.
He also noted that the protestors were “exemplified by the fact that practically all protesters belong to the indigenous, colonised, invaded, conquered people, the ‘natural’ French people.”
In the face of the past violence and expectation of more this weekend, 72 per cent of French still remain supporters of the Yellow Vest movement.


Fearing ‘Act IV’ of Unrest, France to Close Eiffel Tower, Louvre, at Weekend


BY REUTERS
December 7, 2018 Updated: December 7, 2018

PARIS—France will close the Eiffel Tower and other tourism landmarks in Paris and draft in thousands more security forces on Dec. 8, to stave off another wave of violent protests in the country over living costs.
With protesters from the “yellow vest” movement calling on social media for “Act IV”—a fourth weekend of protest—Prime Minister Edouard Philippe said 89,000 police nationwide would be deployed to stop a repeat of last Saturday’s mayhem across France.
About 8,000 of these would be deployed in Paris where rioters torched cars and looted shops off the famed Champs Elysees boulevard, and defaced the Arc de Triomphe with graffiti directed at President Emmanuel Macron.
Seeking to regain the initiative after weeks of civil unrest, the government appeared ready to offer concessions.
Philippe told the Senate he was open to new measures to help the lowest-paid workers while Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said he was prepared to accelerate tax cuts for households and that he wanted workers’ bonuses to be tax-free.
“I am ready to look at all measures that will help raise the pay of those on the minimum wage without doing excessive damage to our competitiveness and businesses,” Philippe told the parliament’s upper house.
The rush of sweeteners to soothe public anger began with Philippe’s climb-down on fuel tax hikes, the first major U-turn of Macron’s presidency.
Yet, five days after the worst rioting central Paris has seen since 1968, all signs are that the government has failed to quell the revolt.
A repeat of last Saturday’s violence in Paris’s city center would deal a blow to the economy and raise doubts over the government’s survival.

Maintaining Order

Philippe said the state would do all it could to maintain order. Six first division football matches have been canceled.
Authorities in Paris ordered dozens of museums, tourism sites, shops and restaurants to close on Saturday, including the Eiffel Tower and Louvre.
Local officials in 15 areas around the capital were also asked to remove anything in the streets that could be used as projectiles.
“We are facing people who are not here to protest, but to smash and we want to have the means to not give them a free rein,” Philippe told TF1 television’s evening news program.

A burning car is seen
A burning car is seen in the street as youths and high-school students clash with police during a demonstration against the French government’s reform plan in Marseille, France, on December 6, 2018. (Jean-Paul Pelissier/Reuters)
As well as increased police numbers, twelve armored vehicles belonging to the gendarmerie would be used, the first time in a French city since 2005 when riots broke out in the capital’s suburbs.
There is concern about far-right, anarchist and anti-capitalist groups like the Black Bloc, which have piggybacked off the ‘yellow vest’ movement.
The government is also considering using troops currently deployed on anti-terrorism patrols to protect public buildings.
Other towns across the country, including Bordeaux, ordered pre-emptive measures over concerns that protesters may opt to rally regionally rather than face tightened security in Paris.
On Facebook and across social media, protesters called for “Act IV”.
“France is fed up!! We will be there in bigger numbers, stronger, standing up for French people. Meet in Paris on Dec. 8,” read one group’s banner.

Concessions

The protests, named after the fluorescent safety jackets French motorists have to keep in their cars, erupted in November over the squeeze on household budgets caused by fuel taxes. Demonstrations swiftly grew into a broad, sometimes-violent rebellion against Macron, with no formal leader.
Their demands are diverse and include lower taxes, higher salaries, cheaper energy costs, better retirement provisions and even Macron’s resignation.
Reversing course on next year’s fuel-tax hikes have left a gaping 4 billion euro hole in the government’s 2019 budget which it is now searching for ways to plug.
Citing unnamed sources, Les Echos business daily said the government was considering delaying corporate tax easing planned next year or putting off an increase in the minimum wage.
The unrest has exposed the deep-seated resentment among non-city dwellers that Macron, whose popularity is now at about 20 percent, is out-of-touch with the hard-pressed middle class and blue-collar workers. They see the 40-year-old former investment banker as closer to big business.
Trouble is also brewing elsewhere for Macron. Teenage students on Thursday blocked access to more than 200 high schools across the country and clashed with security forces. About 700 students were arrested, French media reported.
Farmers and truckers are also threatening blockages and strikes from Sunday.
By Richard Lough and Marine Pennetier

No comments: