1:22
Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” former “NBC Nightly News” anchor Tom Brokaw offered theories on as to why Republicans tend to be against immigration from Latin America.
Brokaw identified politics and racial aspects, but went on to add assimilation by Hispanics was a hurdle as well.
“A lot of this, we don’t want to talk about,” Brokaw explained. “But the fact is, on the Republican side, a lot of people see the rise of an extraordinary, important, new constituent in American politics, Hispanics, who will come here and all be Democrats. Also, I hear, when I push people a little harder, ‘Well, I don’t know whether I want brown grandbabies.’ I mean, that’s also a part of it.”
“It’s the intermarriage that is going on and the cultures that are conflicting with each other,” he continued. “I also happen to believe that the Hispanics should work harder at assimilation. That’s one of the things I’ve been saying for a long time. You know, they ought not to be just codified in their communities but make sure that all their kids are learning to speak English, and that they feel comfortable in the communities. And that’s going to take outreach on both sides, frankly.”
MULTI-CULTURALISM and the
creation of a one-party globalist country to serve the rich in America’s open
borders.
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/12/em-cadwaladr-impending-death-of.html
“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
Atlantic Magazine: Immigration is Fracturing America into Rival
Tribes
John Moore/Getty Images
Immigration is splitting the United
States into warring tribes, says an unusual article in the strongly
pro-migration Atlanticmagazine.
Almost Half Speak a Foreign Language in America's Largest
Cities | @CIS_org
MULTI-CULTURALISM and the
creation of a one-party globalist country to serve the rich in America’s open
borders.
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2017/12/em-cadwaladr-impending-death-of.html
“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
VIVA LA RAZA SUPREMACY? THEN VOTE DEMOCRAT! ILLEGALS
ARE!
ZOGY POLL ON MEX RACISM AND VIOLENCE….. Half the
murders in CA
are by Mex gangs, and 93% of murders in La
Raza-Occupied Los Angeles are by
Mexicans.
ZOGBY
“In Mexico,
a recent Zogby poll declared that the vast majority of Mexican citizens
hate Americans. [22.2] Mexico is a country saturated with racism, yet in
denial, having never endured the social development of a Civil Rights
movement like in the US--Blacks are harshly treated while foreign Whites are
often seen as the enemy. [22.3] In fact, racism as workplace
discrimination can be seen across the US anywhere the illegal alien
Latino works--the vast majority of the workforce is usually strictly Latino,
excluding Blacks, Whites, Asians, and others.”
Previous
generations of immigrants did not believe they were racially superior to
Americans. That is the view of La Raza Cosmica, by Jose Vasconcelos,
Mexico’s former education minister and a presidential candidate. According to
this book, republished in 1979 by the Department of Chicano Studies at Cal
State LA, students of Scandinavian, Dutch and English background are dullards,
blacks are ugly and inferior, and those “Mongols” with the slanted eyes lack
enterprise. The superior new “cosmic” race of Spaniards and Indians is replacing
them, and all Yankee “Anglos.” LLOYD
BILLINGSLEY/ FRONTPAGE mag
VIVA LA RAZA SUPREMACY? THEN VOTE DEMOCRAT! ILLEGALS
ARE!
ZOGY POLL ON MEX RACISM AND VIOLENCE….. Half the
murders in CA
are by Mex gangs, and 93% of murders in La
Raza-Occupied Los Angeles are by
Mexicans.
ZOGBY
“In Mexico,
a recent Zogby poll declared that the vast majority of Mexican citizens
hate Americans. [22.2] Mexico is a country saturated with racism, yet in
denial, having never endured the social development of a Civil Rights
movement like in the US--Blacks are harshly treated while foreign Whites are
often seen as the enemy. [22.3] In fact, racism as workplace
discrimination can be seen across the US anywhere the illegal alien
Latino works--the vast majority of the workforce is usually
strictly Latino, excluding Blacks, Whites, Asians, and others.”
MEXICANS SIMPLY DO NOT LIKE WORKING WITH THOSE
OUTSIDE OF “THE RACE”
One shop steward, Martha, denounces immigrants for poisoning the
atmosphere at the plant:
“[A]fter they’d [the
immigrant workers] been there a while, they kind of thought they owned it. And
there was more of them. You know, they kind of stay with their group, the family,
you know, like aunts and cousins. And just about all of them’s kin somehow, you
know? They started changing their attitude… You know, and it started causing
problems. We had quite a few fights in the break rooms. Then we had them
carried out to the parking lot, you know.”
PEW POLL: MEXICANS LOATH AMERICANS BUT AIM TO JUMP THE BORDER
ANYWAY…. THE LOOTING IS STILL GOOD!
Previous
generations of immigrants did not believe they were racially superior to
Americans. That is the view of La Raza Cosmica, by Jose Vasconcelos,
Mexico’s former education minister and a presidential candidate. According to this
book, republished in 1979 by the Department of Chicano Studies at Cal State LA,
students of Scandinavian, Dutch and English background are dullards, blacks are
ugly and inferior, and those “Mongols” with the slanted eyes lack enterprise.
The superior new “cosmic” race of Spaniards and Indians is replacing them, and
all Yankee “Anglos.” LLOYD BILLINGSLEY/ FRONTPAGE mag
CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR
What will America stand for in 2050?
The US should think long and hard about the high number of
Latino immigrants.
By Lawrence Harrison
It's not just a
short-run issue of immigrants competing with citizens for jobs as unemployment
approaches 10 percent or the number of uninsured straining the quality of
healthcare. Heavy immigration from Latin America threatens our cohesiveness as
a nation.
MEXICO WILL DOUBLE U.S.
POPULATION
By Tom Barrett
At the current rate of invasion (mostly through Mexico, but also
through Canada) the United States will be completely over run with illegal
aliens by the year 2025. I’m not talking about legal immigrants who follow US
law to become citizens. In less than 20 years, if we do not stop the invasion,
ILLEGAL aliens and their offspring will be the dominant population in the
United States.
THE AZTLAN INVASION & THE LA RAZA
FASCIST PARTY FOR MEXICAN SUPREMACY
“The
radicals seek nothing less than secession from the United States whether to
form their own sovereign state or to reunify with Mexico. Those who desire reunification
with Mexico are irredentists who seek to reclaim Mexico's "lost"
territories in the American Southwest.”
MULTICULTURALISM,
IMMIGRATION AND AZTLAN
By
Maria Hsia Chang Professor of Political Science, University of Nevada Reno
One
of the standard arguments invoked by those in favor of massive immigration into
the United States is that our country is founded on immigrants who have always
been successfully assimilated into America's mainstream culture and society. As
one commentator put it, "Assimilation evokes the misty past of Ellis
Island, through which millions entered, eventually seeing their descendants
become as American as George Washington."1 Nothing more vividly testifies
against that romantic faith in America's ability to continuously assimilate new
members than the events of October 16, 1994 in Los Angeles. On that day, 70,000
people marched beneath "a sea of Mexican flags" protesting
Proposition 187, a referendum measure that would deny many state benefits to
illegal immigrants and their children. Two weeks later, more protestors marched
down the street, this time carrying an American flag upside down. Both protests
point to a disturbing and rising phenomenon of Chicano separatism in the United
States — the product of a complex of forces, among which are multiculturalism
and a generous immigration policy combined with a lax border control. The
Problem Chicanos refer to "people of Mexican descent in the United
States" or "Mexican Americans in general." Today, there are
reasons to believe that Chicanos as a group are unlike previous immigrants in
that they are more likely to remain unassimilated and unintegrated, whether by
choice or circumstance — resulting in the formation of a separate quasi-nation
within the United States. More than that, there are Chicano political activists
who intend to marry cultural separateness with territorial and political
self-determination. The more moderate among them aspire to the cultural and
political autonomy of "home rule". The radicals seek nothing less than
secession from the United States whether to form their own sovereign state or
to reunify with Mexico. Those who desire reunification with Mexico are
irredentists who seek to reclaim Mexico's "lost" territories in the
American Southwest.
Whatever
their goals, what animates all of them is the dream of Aztlan. According to
legend, Aztlan was the ancestral homeland of the Aztecs which they left in
journeying southward to found Tenochtitlan, the center of their new
civilization, which is today's Mexico City. Today, the "Nation of
Aztlan" refers to the American southwestern states of California, Arizona,
Texas, New Mexico, portions of Nevada, Utah, Colorado, which Chicano
nationalists claim were stolen by the United States and must be reconquered (Reconquista)
and reclaimed for Mexico. The myth of Aztlan was revived by Chicano political
activists in the 1960s as a central symbol of Chicano nationalist ideology. In
1969, at the Chicano National Liberation Youth Conference in Denver, Rodolfo
"Corky" Gonzales put forth a political document entitled El Plan de
Aztlan (Spiritual Plan of Aztlan). The Plan is a clarion call to
Mexican-Americans to form a separate Chicano nation: In the spirit of a new
people that is conscious not only of its proud historial heritage, but also of
the brutal "gringo" invasion of our territories, we, the Chicano
inhabitants and civilizers of the nothern land of Aztlan from whence came our
forefathers ...declare that the call of our blood is...our inevitable
destiny.... Aztlan belongs to those who plant the seeds, water the fields, and
gather the crops, and not to the foreign Europeans. We do not recognize
capricious frontiers on the bronze continent.... Brotherhood unites us, and
love for our brothers makes us a people whose time has come .... With our heart
in our hands and our hands in the soil, we declare the independence of our
mestizo nation. We are a bronze people with a bronze culture. Before the world,
before all of North America, before all our brothers in the bronze continent, we
are a nation, we are a union of free pueblos, we are Aztlan.
How
Chicanos are Unlike Previous Immigrants Brent A. Nelson, writing in 1994,
observed that in the 1980s America's Southwest had begun to be transformed into
"a de facto nation" with its own culture, history, myth, geography,
religion, education, and language. Whatever evidence there is indicates that
Chicanos, as a group, are unlike previous waves of immigrants into the United
States. In the first place, many Chicanos do not consider themselves immigrants
at all because their people "have been here for 450 years" before the
English, French, or Dutch. Before California and the Southwest were seized by
the United States, they were the lands of Spain and Mexico. As late as 1780 the
Spanish crown laid claim to territories from Florida to California, and on the
far side of the Mississippi up to the Great Lakes and the Rockies. Mexico held
title to much of Spanish possessions in the United States until the Treaty of
Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the Mexican-American war in 1848. As a consequence,
Mexicans "never accepted the borders drawn up by the 1848 treaty."
That
history has created among Chicanos a feeling of resentment for being "a
conquered people," made part of the United States against their will and by
the force of arms. Their resentment is amply expressed by Voz Fronteriza, a
Chicano student publication,
which
referred to Border Patrol officers killed in the line of duty as "pigs
(migra)" trying to defend "the false frontier."
Chicanos
are also distinct from other immigrant groups because of the geographic
proximity of their native country. Their physical proximity to Mexico gives
Chicanos "the option of life in both Americas, in two places and in two
cultures, something earlier immigrants never had." Geographic proximity
and ease of transportation are augmented by the media. Radio and television
keep the spoken language alive and current so that Spanish, unlike the native
languages of previous immigrants into the United States, "shows no sign of
fading."
A
result of all that is the failure by Chicanos to be fully assimilated into the
larger American society and culture. As Earl Shorris, author of Latinos: A
Biography of the People, observed: "Latinos have been more resistant to
the melting pot than any other group. Their entry en masse into the United
States will test the limits of the American experiment...." The continuous
influx of Mexican immigrants into the United States serve to continuously renew
Chicano culture so that their sense of separateness will probably continue
"far into the future...." There are other reasons for the failure of
Chicano assimilation. Historically, a powerful force for assimilation was
upward social mobility: Immigrants into the United States became assimilated as
they rose in educational achievement and income. But today's post-industrial
American economy, with its narrower paths to upward mobility, is making it more
difficult for certain groups to improve their socioeconomic circumstances.
Unionized factory jobs, which once provided a step up for the second generation
of past waves of immigrants, have been disappearing for decades. Instead of the
diamond-shaped economy of industrial America, the modern American economy is
shaped like an hourglass. There is a good number of jobs for unskilled people
at the bottom, a fair number of jobs for the highly educated at the top, but
comparatively few jobs for those in the middle without a college education or
special skills. To illustrate, a RAND Corporation study forecasts that 85 percent
of California's new jobs will require post-secondary education. For a variety
of reasons, the nationwide high-school dropout rate for Hispanics (the majority
of whom are Chicano) is 30 percent — three times the rate for whites and twice
the rate for blacks. Paradoxically, the dropout rate for Hispanics born in the
United States is even higher than for young immigrants. Among Chicanos,
high-school dropout rates actually rise between the second and third
generations. Their low educational achievement accounts for why Chicanos as a
group are poor despite being hardworking. In 1996, for the first time, Hispanic
poverty rate began to exceed that of American blacks. In 1995, household income
rose for every ethnic group except Hispanics, for whom it dropped 5 percent.
Latinos now make up a quarter of the nation's poor people, and are more than
three times as likely to be impoverished than whites. This decline in income
has taken place despite high rates of labor-force participation by Latino men,
and despite an emerging Latino middle class. In California, where Latinos now
approach one-third of the population, their education levels are far lower than
those of other immigrants, and they earn about half of what native-born
Californians earn. This means that, for the first time in the history of
American immigration, hard work is not leading to economic advancement because
immigrants in service jobs face unrelenting labor-market pressure from more
recently arrived immigrants who are eager to work for less. The narrowing of
the pathways of upward mobility has implications for the children of recent
Mexican immigrants. Their ascent into the middle-class mainstream will likely
be blocked and they will join children of earlier black and Puerto Rican
migrants as part of an expanded multiethnic underclass. Whereas first
generation immigrants compare their circumstances to the Mexico that they left
— and thereby feel immeasurably better off — their children and grandchildren
will compare themelves to other U.S. groups. Given their lower educational
achievement and income, that comparison will only lead to feelings of relative
deprivation and resentment. They are unlikely to be content as maids,
gardeners, or fruit pickers. Many young Latinos in the second and third generations
see themselves as locked in irremediable conflict with white society, and are
quick to deride successful Chicano students as "wannabes." For them,
to study hard is to "act white" and exhibit group disloyalty. That
attitude is part of the Chicano culture of resistance — a culture that actively
resists assimilation into mainstream America. That culture is created,
reinforced, and maintained by radical Chicano intellectuals, politicians, and
the many Chicano Studies programs in U.S. colleges and universities. As
examples, according to its editor, Elizabeth Martinez, the purpose of Five
Hundred Years of Chicano History, a book used in over 300 schools throughout
the West, is to "celebrate our resistance to being colonized and absorbed
by racist empire builders." The book calls the INS and the Border Patrol
"the Gestapo for Mexicans."
For
Rodolfo Acuna, author of Occupied America: The Chicano's Struggle Toward
Liberation, probably the most widely assigned text in U.S. Chicano Studies
programs, the Anglo-American invasion of Mexico was "as vicious as that of
Hitler's invasion of Poland and other Central European nations...." The
book also includes a map showing "the Mexican republic" in 1822
reaching up into Kansas and Oklahoma, and including within it Utah, Nevada, and
everything west and south of there
"This
is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the Mexican Militant. This is a
common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN, belonging to Mexicans, which is
taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and California through a LA Raza educational
program funded by American Tax Payers via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA
$800,000.00 in March of 2009!
Atlantic Magazine: Immigration is Fracturing America into Rival
Tribes
Immigration is splitting the United
States into warring tribes, says an unusual article in the strongly
pro-migration Atlanticmagazine.
The
causes of America’s resurgent tribalism are many. They include seismic
demographic change, which has led to predictions that whites will lose their
majority status within a few decades; declining social mobility and a growing
class divide; and media that reward expressions of outrage.
But
the mass immigration of 44.5 million people is the
primary cause of the three other factors — “declining social mobility and a
growing class divide; and media that reward expressions of outrage.”
Yet
the authors do not even suggest any changes whatsoever to the replacement-level
immigration which brings in one foreigner every year for every four Americans
who turn 18, which lowers wages, and
ensures an expanding array of rival languages and civic rules in the United
States:
In
2017, there were 85 cities in which a majority of residents spoke a foreign
language at home. These include:
- Hialeah, Fla. (95%);
- Laredo, Texas (92%);
- East Los Angeles, Calif. (90%)
- Elizabeth, N.J. (76%);
- Skokie, Ill. (56%);https://cis.org/Report/Almost-Half-Speak-Foreign-Language-Americas-Largest-Cities …
- Hialeah, Fla. (95%);
- Laredo, Texas (92%);
- East Los Angeles, Calif. (90%)
- Elizabeth, N.J. (76%);
- Skokie, Ill. (56%);https://cis.org/Report/Almost-Half-Speak-Foreign-Language-Americas-Largest-Cities …
Almost Half Speak a Foreign Language in America's Largest
Cities | @CIS_org
The
two Yale authors, professors Amy Chua and Jed Rubenfeld, describe the diversity
created by immigration:
All
of this has contributed to a climate in which every group in
America—minorities and whites; conservatives and liberals;
the working class and elites—feels under attack, pitted
against the others not just for jobs and spoils, but for the right to define
the nation’s identity. In these conditions, democracy devolves into a zero-sum
competition, one in which parties succeed by stoking voters’ fears and
appealing to their ugliest us-versus-them instincts.
Again,
the authors do not suggest any immigration changes that could lower public
fears over the elite’s determination to change the nation’s identity to suit
their elite interests.
Elite
groups openly acknowledge that immigration is the force which now drives
American politics — including the shocking election of real-estate developer
Donald Trump in 2016. As New
York Magazine says in a
review of Chua’s earlier book:
Perhaps
the most bitter of all contemporary political battles — and a Trump favorite —
is immigration, which behind the ideological posturing is a referendum on whose
tribe will control the country’s demographic future …
Similarly,
a new study by authors from
the University of Michigan argues that the nation’s tribal
polarization is driven by rising racial and ethnic conflict:
Race/ethnicity
now cleaves the parties more neatly than ever, and not simply because Democrats
and Republicans disagree in their attitudes about race itself. In fact, whites
are sorting out of the Democratic party at a significant rate while minorities
are standing pat. Figure 1 presents evidence in this regard using the American National Election Studies time-series data starting
from 1952. The growing racial gap between the two parties is evident. As the
share of Whites among self-identified Democrats is rapidly decreasing
(outpacing demographic changes in the country as a whole), the Republican Party
remains overwhelmingly White. Our conjecture is that it is these changes in
race and ethnicity that drive most of the affective polarization we have
witnessed over the last 30 years.
By
failing to identify immigration’s role in the problem, the two Yale authors are
left with a few recommendations so vague as to be useless.
They
urge that conservative Americans step up their efforts to persuade minorities
that they are equal — as if Americans have not been trying to do that
at enormous expense since the civil war, and as if immigration does not fuel
the ethnic politics which denies equality between Americans and immigrants.
The Atlantic authors do offer some cautious
criticism of the progressive left which has worked with business to impose and
preserve mass migration, even after the 2016 election:
For
its part, the left needs to rethink its scorched-earth approach to American
history and ideals. Exposing injustice, past and present, is important, but
there’s a world of difference between saying that America has repeatedly failed
to live up to its constitutional principles and saying that those principles
are lies or smoke screens for oppression.
But
neither of those two recommendations address what the Yale authors
admit is the primary cause of rising tribalism — the elite’s policy of
importing foreign workers and their tribes into
the United States.
Nor
did they provide readers even a cursory description of President Donald
Trump’s promised fix, his Four Pillars reforms.
Moreover,
neither author acknowledges the basic reality that their peers in the
elite do want tribalism to overthrow Americans’ shared, non-racial, civic
culture, which the elites prefer to dismiss as merely a “white” culture. Chua
indirectly admits this goal in her 2018 book, Political Tribes: Group Instinct and the Fate of Nations,
as the New York Magazinereviewer
describes:
Better-educated
whites, who dominate the country’s political and cultural institutions and are
the main beneficiaries of the globalized economy, have adopted as their
“tribal” identity a sort of post-national cosmopolitanism, defined against what
they regard as the provincial culture of poor whites …
it
seems inevitable that American whites will lose their majority status sometime
around the middle of the current century. More cosmopolitan whites tend to view
this prospect with indifference or even excitement.
it
is clear to many thoughtful liberal scholars and journalists that
immigration-driven cultural change has greatly contributed to right-wing
populism. On the other, they view slowing the pace of immigration as a complete
non-starter. As they see it, the only option is to double down on the status
quo and hope that the storm passes—even if this approach risks triggering a
crisis for open societies, such as the one we are arguably living through
today. It is as though these thinkers are convinced that … that conservatives
who worry about the pace of cultural change must be crushed rather than
accommodated.
For
example, Bloomberg writer Noah Smith welcomes the government-imposed foreign
populations because it means that Americans cannot expect the millions of
foreigners in their midst to follow Americans’ collective civic rules about how
people are supposed to behave. Smith claims:
Diversity
provides a backstop defense against the natural tendencies of homogenization
and conformity … A country with institutions strong enough not to have to rely
on homogeneity will be the strongest country imaginable.
But
the civic culture destroyed by diversity includes shared expectations of civic
equality within freedom, of Internet-enabled free speech and organization, and
of debates over facts not feelings. The civic rules help Americans prevent
their elite from segregating themselves into “oligarchical socialism,” globalist
virtue-signaling, elite colleges and gated communities, stock-market wealth,
and technological power over political debate.
Smith
does admit his experiment with imposed civic variety may prove disastrous
to American people:
I
believe that there is a chance our experiment might fail. That building a free
society from people of all races, religions, and national origins might in fact
prove too hard a task …
But
no matter the risk to 300 million non-elite Americans, Smith insists “the
America experiment [with diversity] must continue.”
Smith
counters polite criticism of his diversity-first argument by describing his
critics as racists, so exemplifying the tribalism which Smith uses and which
the two Atlantic authors
claim to oppose:
1/Tucker
Carlson's question - "How is diversity our strength?" was not asked
in good faith, but for purposes of racist demagoguery.
But I will try to answer it in good faith, because it's an important question in its own right.https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1038222675322318850 …
But I will try to answer it in good faith, because it's an important question in its own right.https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1038222675322318850 …
Tom
Jawetz is the vice-president for immigration policy at the Democrats’ primary
think-tank, the Center for American Progress. He argues that immigration
is about the treatment of all people worldwide, not about Americans’ concerns.
That radically universal view demotes his moral duty to his fellow Americans
down to the same level as his moral duty to distant peoples of Singapore,
Lichtenstein, Nepal or Indonesia.
Conversations
about #migration are about something so
much more fundamental. They are about how we value other human beings. They are
about whether we stand by our universal principles. @MJRodriguesEU #GlobalCompactMigration
So
of course, ordinary Americans — of all colors and classes and variations — are
collectively pushing back against their hostile or uncaring elite. New York Magazine insists on
defining them see as “whites,” but the members of Trump’s multi-colored coalition have:
defined
their tribal identity in opposition to the [elite] Establishment, which they
perceive as a distant, occupying foreign power, indifferent to their interests
and intent on elevating minorities and foreigners to pride of place within
“their” country.
Four
million young Americans will join the workforce this year, but the federal
government will also import 1.1 million legal immigrants, and allow an
army of at least 2 million visa-workers to work U.S. jobs, alongside
asylum-claiming migrants and illegal aliens.
Overall,
the Washington-imposed economic policy of economic growth via immigration
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 offered by blue-collar and white-collar employees.
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 5 million marginalized Americans and their families,
including many who are now struggling with opioid addictions.
Immigration also pulls investment and wealth away from heartland states because
investment flows towards the large immigrant populations living in the coastal
states.
No comments:
Post a Comment