CUT AND PASTE YOUTUBE LINKS
I Drove Around California For A Month. It Was A Disaster.
The result is that today there are upwards of 40 million illegal aliens in the country, with millions more crossing the border every year.
Like the gun data, the data on illegal aliens isn’t hard to understand. It’s pretty simple math. The phones alone that the Biden administration gives to illegals cost $360,000 every day while, in the aggregate, illegal aliens cost Americans $250 billion per year. To put that in perspective, the wall Trump wanted to build was estimated to have a price tag of under $25 billion.
For Decades, Democrats Have Been Ignoring Evidence And Facts
About 20 years ago, I read a piece about the North Miami police department eliminating the swimming requirement for the police. With a working knowledge of geography and having visited Miami many times, I thought this was a bit odd and kind of a bad idea. After all, North Miami has hundreds of miles of canals, lakes, and beaches. Predictably, the reason the requirement was being dropped was that “blacks are less likely than whites to know how to swim because of economic disparities between the groups…” In other words, the change was because not enough blacks were qualified to become police.
That was long before the cancer of wokeness had taken hold of much of America. I was dumbfounded. Nobody with a functioning brain would have looked at that situation and said we must eliminate a key element of the job requirements to let more members of “X group” join. But that’s what the people in charge decided. If someone with a functioning brain were actually in charge, he would have said something like, “If our goal is to have a more diverse workforce…” (a questionable assertion in the first place) “and not enough otherwise qualified black candidates can pass the swim test, maybe we should simply take those candidates who meet the other requirements and teach them how to swim.”
But that’s not what they did. And that is just another demonstration that Democrats aren’t actually serious people seeking to help the communities they represent. No, their goal was to cater to the “equity” crowd, even before it had a name. And they have continued to do so for the last two decades.
Image: Drowning by Blake Cheek (cropped). Unsplash license.
Take gun control. Democrats have been gun-grabbing for decades. They use every mass shooting as a lever to try and wrest guns out of American hands and eviscerate the Second Amendment. While it is certainly the case that gun violence is a problem in America, the reality is, it’s not the guns, it’s the criminals and the Democrats who pamper them.
There are 350 million people in the United States. Of those, there are 280 million adults, 90 million of whom say they own at least one of America’s 400 million guns, with an average of almost 5 guns each. And how frequently do those 90 million gun owners commit crimes with those guns? Not very often.
It’s estimated that more than 80% of gun crimes are committed by people who came into possession of their weapons illegally, which means that, conservatively, legal gun owners perpetrated only 20% of gun crimes. There are almost 100,000 shootings in the United States annually (not counting suicides). If we assume that 20% of those shootings were by legal gun owners, that would be 20,000 shootings. To put that in perspective, that would mean that .0002% of legal gun owners commit crimes with their weapons, or conversely, 99.9998% of legal gun owners never use their guns in crimes….
As a matter of fact, despite what the Democrat media tell you, “Good guys with guns” help stop between one-third and one-half of all active shooter incidents nationwide. But Democrats work continuously to take guns away from all of those apparently “violence eschewing” citizens while at the same time seeking to free actual violent criminals from jail or prison or not send them there in the first place—even as those they free are the ones who actually commit most of the crimes and the worst crimes, and it’s not even close.
Making matters worse, Democrats rarely seek to focus on the strong correlation between anti-depressants and violence, particularly with young people. They would rather preen in front of cameras and accuse Republicans of having blood on their hands than focus on the real issues that spill so much blood.
And there is indeed much blood on Democrats’ hands. In what must seem counterintuitive to them, more gun control results in more mass shooting deaths. California is a perfect example. As it’s become more difficult for law-abiding Californians to legally obtain guns over the decades, to the point where it’s actually almost impossible to exercise the right, the rate at which the state exceeds the rest of the country has skyrocketed:
From 2010 on, California’s per capita rate of mass public shootings was 43% higher than the rate in Texas and 29% higher than in the rest of the United States. Since 2020, the rate in California is 276% higher than in Texas and 100% higher than in the rest of the U.S.
That is partially because there are fewer of those “Good guys with guns.” In Los Angeles County, where one mass shooting already took place this year, there is one gun permit for every 5,660 adults, and in San Mateo County, where another mass shooting occurred, there is one permit for every 24,630 adults. By comparison, there is one permit holder for every nine people in the 43 right-to-carry states.
Whether it’s murder on a small scale or a large, this data would only matter if someone were actually interested in solving the problem and reducing the amount of bloodshed. Needless to say, Democrats rarely look at the data and then conclude that making it easier to allow law-abiding citizens to own weapons might actually help reduce said bloodshed.
Then there’s the border. The Democrat party, led by Liar in Chief Joe Biden, tells us that the American border is secure while Americans watch thousands of illegal immigrants stream across the border every single day. Those poor “asylum seekers” are given phones, have to promise to return to court to adjudicate their cases—sometimes in 5 or 10 years—and are sent on their merry ways. Of course, many of those never even bother to show up for court. And hundreds of thousands more are simply released without even being given a court date. To make things even more ridiculous, while they’re busy gaslighting the entire country, Democrats are shivving their single most solid constituency.
Of course, the border is not a new problem. In 1986, Ronald Reagan signed the Simpson-Mazzoli Act, which granted asylum to 2.7 million illegal aliens in return for securing the border. Democrats took the asylum and screwed Reagan and the nation on securing the border. Since then, no president other than Trump has had any interest in securing the border, and he was stymied at every single turn by Democrats and leftist judges. The result is that today there are upwards of 40 million illegal aliens in the country, with millions more crossing the border every year.
Like the gun data, the data on illegal aliens isn’t hard to understand. It’s pretty simple math. The phones alone that the Biden administration gives to illegals cost $360,000 every day while, in the aggregate, illegal aliens cost Americans $250 billion per year. To put that in perspective, the wall Trump wanted to build was estimated to have a price tag of under $25 billion.
And now, it’s only going to get worse with Biden ending the Trump era Title 42, which was the equivalent of trying to stop your car by dragging your feet on the ground, a la Fred Flintstone. But now that Title 42 is gone, Biden is sending 1,500 Army troops to help…let even more illegals in!
Whether it’s standing on shore as victims drown in Miami, not allowing armed citizens to protect themselves and their communities, or simply ignoring the costs associated with illegal immigration, it’s clear that Democrats aren’t serious people and don’t care about the average American. Given that Democrats demonstrate their disdain for citizens every single day, one wonders why anyone votes for them. Stockholm Syndrome, anyone?
Follow Vince on Twitter at ImperfectUSA
Gavin Newsom Eliminates Vote-by-Mail — for Farmworker Union Elections
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) signed a law Monday that will eliminate vote-by-mail in elections for union certification by farm workers, under a deal that will allow organizers to use a “card check” system instead.
Newsom, who owns a winery himself, signed the law, AB 113, under a deal he struck with unions last year under pressure from labor organizers and Democratic leaders, including Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).
Originally, Newsom sounded almost like Donald Trump as he objected to the vulnerability of vote-by-mail to fraud. He vetoed a bill last year to allow vote-by-mail in union elections because he said that he could not “support an untested mail-election process that lacks critical provisions to protect the integrity of the election.”
Farmworkers led a series of protests in response, including a march to the infamous French Laundry restaurant in Napa, where Newsom dined maskless with lobbyists right after issuing pandemic guidelines telling other Californians not to to to restaurants. Newsom relented and signed a bill allowing vote-by-mail and other provisions, under the understanding that the vote-by-mail provision would be repealed the following year.
One of those provisions is “card check,” which allows labor organizers to approach workers personally to sign a card or cast a ballot for union certification. It is a system that critics — including some liberal Democrats, like the late left-wing presidential nominee George McGovern — denounced as a violation of the secret ballot.
The bill limits the number of “card check” elections to 75, and gives the unions a Jan. 1, 2028 deadline to hold them.
California adopted automatic vote-by-mail in its regular elections in 2020, over the objections of Republicans.
Democrats have since attempted to mandate vote-by-mail nationwide, and have described restrictions on vote-by-mail as an attempt to deny Americans the right to vote, or even, in President Biden’s words, “Jim Crow 2.0.”
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the new biography, Rhoda: ‘Comrade Kadalie, You Are Out of Order’. He is also the author of the recent e-book, Neither Free nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
In truth, the Golden State is becoming a semi-feudal kingdom, with the nation’s widest gap between middle and upper incomes—72 percent, compared with the U.S. average of 57 percent—and its highest poverty rate. Roughly half of America’s homeless live in Los Angeles or San Francisco, which now has the highest property crime rate among major cities.
December 20, 2019
California Preening
The Golden State is on a path to high-tech feudalism, but there’s still time to change course.
“We are the modern equivalent of the ancient city-states of Athens and Sparta. California has the ideas of Athens and the power of Sparta,” declared then-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2007. “Not only can we lead California into the future . . . we can show the nation and the world how to get there.” When a movie star who once played Hercules says so who’s to disagree? The idea of California as a model, of course, precedes the former governor’s tenure. Now the state’s anti-Trump resistance—in its zeal on matters concerning climate, technology, gender, or race—believes that it knows how to create a just, affluent, and enlightened society. “The future depends on us,” Governor Gavin Newsom said at his inauguration. “And we will seize this moment.”
In truth, the Golden State is becoming a semi-feudal kingdom, with the nation’s widest gap between middle and upper incomes—72 percent, compared with the U.S. average of 57 percent—and its highest poverty rate. Roughly half of America’s homeless live in Los Angeles or San Francisco, which now has the highest property crime rate among major cities. California hasn’t yet become a full-scale dystopia, of course, but it’s heading in a troubling direction.
This didn’t have to happen. No place on earth has more going for it than the Golden State. Unlike the East Coast and Midwest, California benefited from comparatively late industrialization, with an economy based less on auto manufacturing and steel than on science-based fields like aerospace, software, and semiconductors. In the mid-twentieth century, the state also gained from the best aspects of progressive rule, culminating in an elite public university system, a massive water system reminiscent of the Roman Empire, and a vast infrastructure network of highways, ports, and bridges. The state was fortunate, too, in drawing people from around the U.S. and the world. The eighteenth-century French traveler J. Hector St. John de Crèvecœur described the American as “this new man,” and California—innovative, independent, and less bound by tradition or old prejudice—reflected that insight. Though remnants of this California still exist, its population is aging, less mobile, and more pessimistic, and its roads, schools, and universities are in decline.
In the second half of the twentieth century, California’s remarkably diverse economy spread prosperity from the coast into the state’s inland regions. Though pockets of severe poverty existed—urban barrios, south Los Angeles, the rural Central Valley—they were limited in scope. In fact, growth often favored suburban and exurban communities, where middle-class families, including minorities, settled after World War II.
In the last two decades, the state has adopted policies that undermine the basis for middle-class growth. State energy policies, for example, have made California’s gas and electricity prices among the steepest in the country. Since 2011, electricity prices have risen five times faster than the national average. Meantime, strict land-use controls have raised housing costs to the nation’s highest, while taxes—once average, considering California’s urban scale—now exceed those of virtually every state. At the same time, California’s economy has shed industrial diversity in favor of dependence on one industry: Big Tech. Just a decade before, the state’s largest firms included those in the aerospace, finance, energy, and service industries. Today’s 11 largest companies hail from the tech sector, while energy firms—excluding Chevron, which has moved much of its operations to Houston—have disappeared. Not a single top aerospace firm—the iconic industry of twentieth-century California—retains its headquarters here.
Though lionized in the press, this tech-oriented economy hasn’t resulted in that many middle- and high-paying job opportunities for Californians, particularly outside the Bay Area. Since 2008, notes Chapman University’s Marshall Toplansky, the state has created five times the number of low-paying, as opposed to high-wage, jobs. A remarkable 86 percent of new jobs paid below the median income, while almost half paid under $40,000. Moreover, California, including Silicon Valley, created fewer high-paying positions than the national average, and far less than prime competitors like Salt Lake City, Seattle, or Austin. Los Angeles County features the lowest pay of any of the nation’s 50 largest counties.
No state advertises its multicultural bona fides more than California, now a majority-minority state. This is evident at the University of California, where professors are required to prove their service to “people of color,” to the state’s high school curricula, with its new ethnic studies component. Much of California’s anti-Trump resistance has a racial context. State Attorney General Xavier Becerra has sued the administration numerous times over immigration policy while he helps ensure California’s distinction as a sanctuary for illegal immigrants. So far, more than 1 million illegal residents have received driver’s licenses, and they qualify for free health care, too. San Francisco now permits illegal immigrants to vote in local elections.
Such radical policies may make progressives feel better about themselves, though they seem less concerned about how these actions affect everyday people. California’s Latinos and African-Americans have seen good blue-collar jobs in manufacturing and energy vanish. According to one United Way study, over half of Latino households can barely pay their bills. “For Latinos,” notes long-time political consultant Mike Madrid, “the California Dream is becoming an unattainable fantasy.”
In the past, poorer Californians could count on education to help them move up. But today’s educators appear more interested in political indoctrination than results. Among the 50 states, California ranked 49th in the performance of low-income students. In wealthy San Francisco, test scores for black students are the worst of any California county. Many minority residents, especially African-Americans, are fleeing the state. In a recent UC Berkeley poll, 58 percent of black expressed interest in leaving California, a higher percentage than for any racial group, though approximately 45 percent of Asians and Latinos also considered moving out.
Perhaps the biggest demographic disaster is generational. For decades, California incubated youth culture, creating trends like beatniks, hippies, surfers, and Latino and Asian art, music, and cuisine. The state is a fountainhead of youthful wokeness and rebellion, but that may prove short-lived as millennials leave. From 2014 to 2018, notes demographer Wendell Cox, net domestic out-migration grew from 46,000 to 156,000. The exiles are increasingly in their family-formation years. In the 2010s, California suffered higher net declines in virtually every age category under 54, with the biggest rate of loss coming among the 35-to-44 cohort.
As families with children leave, and international migration slows to one-third of Texas’s level, the remaining population is rapidly aging. Since 2010, California’s fertility rate has dropped 60 percent, more than the national average; the state is now aging 50 percent more rapidly than the rest of the country. A growing number of tech firms and millennials have headed to the Intermountain West. Low rates of homeownership among younger people play a big role in this trend, with California millennials forced to rent, with little chance of buying their own home, while many of the state’s biggest metros lead the nation in long-term owners. California is increasingly a greying refuge for those who bought property when housing was affordable.
After Governor Schwarzenegger morphed into a progressive environmentalist, climate concerns began driving state policy. His successors have embraced California “leadership” on climate issues. Jerry Brown recently told a crowd in China that the rest of the world should follow California’s example. The state’s top Democrats, like state senate president pro tem Kevin DeLeon, Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti, and billionaire Democratic presidential candidate Tom Steyer, now compete for the green mantle.
Their policies have worsened conditions for many middle- and working-class Californians. Oblivious to these concerns, Greens ignore practical ideas—nuclear power, natural gas cars, job creation in affordable areas, home-based work—that could help reduce emissions without disrupting people’s lives. Ultra-green policies also work against the state’s proclaimed goal of building more than 3.5 million new housing units by 2025. In accordance with its efforts to reduce car use, the state mandates that most growth occurs in already-crowded coastal areas, where land prices are highest. But in cities like San Francisco, the cost of building one unit for a homeless person surpasses $700,000. California’s inland regions, though experiencing population gains, keep losing state funding for decrepit highways in favor of urban-centric, mass transit projects—yet transit use has stagnated, especially in greater Los Angeles.
The state, nevertheless, continues its pursuit of policies that would eliminate all fossil fuels and nuclear power—outpacing national or even Paris Accord levels and guaranteeing ever-rising energy prices. Mandating everything from electric cars to electric homes will only drive more working-class Californians into “energy poverty.” High energy prices also directly affect the manufacturing and logistics firms that employ blue-collar workers at decent wages. Business relocation expert Joe Vranich notes that industrial firms account for many of the 2,000 employers that left the state this decade. California’s industrial growth has fallen to the bottom tier of states; last year, it ranked 44th, with a rate of growth one-third to one-quarter that of prime competitors like Texas, Virginia, Arizona, Nevada, and Florida.
Similarly, the high energy prices tend to hit the interior counties that, besides being poorer, have far less temperate climates. Cities like Bakersfield, capital of the state’s once-vibrant oil industry, are particularly hard-hit. High energy prices will cost the region, northeast of the Los Angeles Basin, 14,000 generally high-paid jobs, even as the state continues to import oil from Saudi Arabia.
California’s leaders apply climate change to excuse virtually every failure of state policy. During the California drought, Brown and his minions blamed the “climate” for the dry period, refusing to take responsibility for insufficient water storage that would have helped farmers. When the rains returned and reservoirs filled, this argument was forgotten, and little effort has been made to conserve water for next time. Likewise, Newsom and his supporters in the media have blamed recent fires on changes in the global climate, but the disaster had as much to do with green mandates against controlled burns and brush clearance than anything occurring on a planetary scale. Brown joined greens and others in blocking such sensible policies.
Few climate advocates ever seem to ask if their policies actually help the planet. Indeed, California’s green policy, as one paper demonstrates, may be increasing total greenhouse-gas emissions by pushing people and industries to states with less mild climates. In the past decade, the state ranked 40th in per-capita reductions, and its global carbon footprint is minimal. Renewable energy may be expensive and unreliable, but state policy nevertheless enriches the green-energy investments of tech leaders, even when their efforts—like the Google-backed Ivanpah solar farm—fail to deliver affordable, reliable energy.
It’s not so surprising, given these enthusiasms, that progressive politicians like Garcetti—who leads a city with paralyzing traffic congestion, rampant inequality, a huge rat infestation, and proliferating homeless camps—would rather talk about becoming chair of the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group.
Reality is asserting itself, though. Tech firms already show signs of restlessness with the current regulatory regime and appear to be shifting employment to other states, notably Texas, Tennessee, Nevada, Colorado, and Arizona. Economic-modeling firm Emsi estimates that several states—Idaho, Tennessee, Washington, and Utah—are growing their tech employment faster than California. The state is losing momentum in professional and technical services—the largest high-wage sector—and now stands roughly in the middle of the pack behind other western states such as Texas, Tennessee, and Florida. And Assembly Bill 5, the state law regulating certain forms of contract labor, reclassifies part-time workers. Aimed initially at ride-sharing giants Uber and Lyft, the legislation also extends to independent contractors in industries from media to trucking.
At some point, as even Brown noted, the ultra-high capital gains returns will fall and, combined with the costs of an expanding welfare state, could leave the state in fiscal chaos. Big Tech could stumble, a possibility made more real by the recent $100 billion drop in the value of privately held “unicorn” companies, including WeWork. If the tech economy slows, a rift could develop between two of the state’s biggest forces—unions and the green establishment—over future levels of taxation. More than two-thirds of California cities don’t have any funds set aside for retiree health care and other retirement expenses. The state also confronts $1 trillion in pension debt, according to former Democratic state senator Joe Nation. U.S. News & Report ranks California, despite the tech boom, 42nd in fiscal health among the states.
The good news: some Californians are waking up. A recent PPIC poll found that increasing proportions of Californians believe that the state is headed in the wrong direction—a figure that exceeds 55 percent in the inland areas. And voters dislike the state legislature even more than they dislike Donald Trump. Newsom’s approval rating stands at 43 percent, placing him toward the bottom among the nation’s governors. A conservative-led campaign to recall him is unlikely to succeed, but surveys reveal growing opposition to the new tax hikes proposed by the legislature. There’s a growing concern about the state’s expanding homeless population.
And a rebellion against the state’s energy policies is already under way. Recently, 110 cities, with total population exceeding 8 million, have demanded changes in California’s drive to prevent new natural gas hookups. The state’s Chamber of Commerce and the three most prominent ethnic chambers—African-American, Latino, and Asian-Pacific—have joined this effort.
Californians need less bombast and progressive pretense from their leaders and more attention to policies that could counteract the economic and demographic tides threatening the state. On its current course, California increasingly resembles a model of what the late Taichi Sakaiya called “high-tech feudalism,” with a small population of wealthy residents and a growing mass of modern-day serfs. Delusion and preening ultimately have limits, as more Californians are beginning to recognize. As the 2020s beckon, the time for the state to change course is now.
Joel Kotkin is the presidential fellow in urban futures at Chapman University and executive director of the Center for Opportunity Urbanism. His latest book is The Human City: Urbanism for the Rest of Us. His book on the return to feudalism will be released next year.
Survey: 7 in 10 Parents Make Financial Sacrifices to Help Their Adult Children
A strong majority of parents in the United States report making financial sacrifices to help their adult children, especially as they “[start] their careers in tumultuous period of inflation and rising interest rates,” according to a recent survey from Bankrate.
Approximately 7 in 10 report making financial sacrifices for their children, and nearly one third of that group (31 percent) say help is significant, KARE11 reported of the April poll on Tuesday.
The survey found that half of parents (51 percent) say they have sacrificed emergency savings as well as debt payoff efforts (49 percent). Forty-three percent say they have given up some of their retirement savings.
The survey found that lower income households are more likely to sacrifice emergency savings to help their adult children.
“In households with an income under $50,000, 58 percent say they sacrificed their emergency savings for their children, compared to 46 percent of parents with a household income of $100,000 or more,” according to the survey report.
Ted Rossman, a senior industry analyst at Bankrate told the outlet that while there is nothing wrong with parents helping children transition into adulthood, their help must come with a strategy.
“Definitely don’t give more than you can afford to lose, and consider setting strict parameters,” Rossman said. “Maybe you really want to help your kid through a tough spot, but you don’t want to be a blank check either. So, maybe set some really specific guidelines in terms of how much money, what it’s going to be used for, how long that’s going to go on because it can’t be indefinite.”
RELATED: Atlanta Fed Pres.: We’ve Done “Easiest Part” on Reducing Inflation, “Now, It’s Going to Take Some Time”:
One parent of a 26-year-old daughter who is a working professional with a master’s degree told the outlet that everyday costs are too expensive not to help.
“Your parenting doesn’t end at a certain age. It just doesn’t disappear,” parent James Christopher Ryan said. “When you have a child, it changes as we get older and our relationships evolve. So, to me, parenting ends when I die. It just doesn’t end at 18, 21, 26, 32. It just doesn’t.”
The survey also found that each generation has varying ideas about when a young adult should begin paying their own bills. Older generations believe young adults should begin paying their bills “far earlier” that younger generations, the survey report states.
“While Gen Zers believe people should begin paying for their car payment at 22 years old, for example, baby boomers believe they should begin paying at 20 years old. Gen Zers and baby boomers also highly disagree on car insurance (22 years old on average versus 19 years old on average) and cell phone bills (21 years old on average versus 19 years old on average),” according to the survey report.
The survey found that on average, American adults think people should start paying their own bills at 20 years old for their credit cards, subscription services, cell phone, car insurance, and car payment — “the youngest average ages for bill payments.”
“They also believe people should pay both their own health insurance and student loans starting at 23 years old on average — the oldest average ages for bill payments,” according to the survey.
Bankrate commissioned YouGov to conducted the survey. The survey was conducted with 2,346 U.S. adults between March 14-16, 2023, among whom 773 are parents with children 18 years old and older.
WATCH: Atlanta Fed Pres.: I “Probably” Wouldn’t Cut Rates Even if There’s a Recession, Won’t Be Thinking About Cuts Until “Well into 2024”:
California, in Deficit, Considers Unemployment Benefits for ‘Undocumented’ Workers
The California state legislature is considering a bill that would grant unemployed workers who are illegally in the country access to unemployment benefits — even though the state is running a massive budget deficit.
As Breitbart News reported earlier this week, California’s fiscus has fallen in the space of one year from a surplus of $100 billion, partly based on federal cash for coronavirus relief, to a staggering deficit of $32 billion.
In his revised budget, Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) cautioned legislators to maintain “prudence.” But under SB 227, “excluded” workers who are in the country illegally would be able to receive $300 per week in benefits.
As Fox News reported, proponents say migrant workers “deserve” the benefits, despite entering the U.S. unlawfully:
In March, the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors unanimously adopted a resolution supporting the statewide bill.
“We cannot take people’s money, take people’s taxes, take people’s labor and then deny them the very benefits and rights that they deserve and that they have earned,” Supervisor Shamann Walton said at a protest before the board met.
Payroll taxes on illegal immigrants contribute $485 million a year to the state’s Unemployment Insurance system, according to the Safety Net for All Coalition, a group of over 120 organizations across California seeking to expand welfare programs for undocumented workers. The weekly checks plus administrative expenses in the proposed legislation [are] estimated to cost $356 million in state funds.
California’s unemployment insurance program is already controversial, having lost $30 billion in fraudulent claims during the pandemic. The state recently defaulted on a federal loan to cover a shortfall in benefits.
Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the new biography, Rhoda: ‘Comrade Kadalie, You Are Out of Order’. He is also the author of the recent e-book, Neither Free nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.
Even Democrats are starting to notice. New York City mayor Eric Adams—who once said that "New York City is, and has always been, a city of immigrants" and pledged that his government would "reflect that"—now says there is "no room" in his city for migrants.
Another line they cut into: Illegals get free public housing as impoverished Americans wait
Want some perspective on why so many blue sanctuary cities have so many homeless encampments hovering around?
Try the reality that illegal immigrants are routinely given free public housing by the U.S., based on the fact that they are uneducated, unskilled, and largely unemployable. Those are the criteria, and now importing poverty has never been easier. Shockingly, this comes as millions of poor Americans are out in the cold awaiting that housing that the original law was intended to help.
Try the reality that illegal immigrants are routinely given free public housing by the U.S., based on the fact that they are uneducated, unskilled, and largely unemployable. Those are the criteria, and now importing poverty has never been easier. Shockingly, this comes as millions of poor Americans are out in the cold awaiting that housing that the original law was intended to help.
Thus, the tent cities, and by coincidence, the worst of these emerging shantytowns are in blue sanctuary cities loaded with illegal immigrants - Orange County, San Francisco, San Diego, Seattle, New York...Is there a connection? At a minimum, it's worth looking at. MONICA SHOWALTER
J.D. Vance: GOP Must Call Out Illegal Immigration as ‘Economic Warfare’ Against Working Americans
The end of Title 42 brought a record number of migrants to the southern border, including an Afghan terrorist caught trying to sneak into California and a child who died in the custody of Health and Human Services—the second minor who has perished on the Biden administration's watch.
Sounds like a humanitarian tragedy, a policy disaster, a political nightmare. But not if you hear the Biden administration tell it! Speaking at a swanky fundraiser in Atlanta on Friday as this scene was playing out, Vice President Kamala Harris—President Joe Biden named her border czar, remember?—declared that things down south are "going rather smoothly."
We'd hate to hear what "bumpy" looks like. President Biden, meanwhile—he's on vacation in Rehoboth Beach—said that things at the border are going "much better than you all expected." Low bar.
Elections have consequences, and the situation on the southern border is a direct result of policies Biden and Harris put in place on their first day in office. Border wall construction came to a halt, and among other things the Biden administration put an end to the "Remain in Mexico" policy that required asylum seekers to wait in a third country until their claims were adjudicated.
Our colleague Joe Simonson was in the border city of Brownsville, Texas, last week, and he saw the situation firsthand. Some holding facilities reached more than 200 percent capacity over the weekend. Conditions in at least one of those facilities was so poor that a 17-year-old child from Honduras died, and the Biden administration has cut most of the migrants loose. It's the administration's only answer.
Even Democrats are starting to notice. New York City mayor Eric Adams—who once said that "New York City is, and has always been, a city of immigrants" and pledged that his government would "reflect that"—now says there is "no room" in his city for migrants.
Adams is converting public school gyms and shuttered prisons into shelters for aliens arriving by the hundreds. "No city should be going through this," Adams said.
No country should, either.
CAN'T MAKE ENDS MEEET? THE INVASION OF 50 MILLION ILLEGALS SERVED TO DEPRESS YOUR WAGES? BECOME AN ILLEGAL AND VOTE FOR WIDER OPEN BORDERS!
20 Facts That Prove American Families Are Being Completly Crushed By Rising Prices
Report: Homeless Americans Kicked Out of NY Hotel to Make Room for Migrants
Homeless Americans are reportedly being kicked out of hotels in New York as New York City buses border crossers and illegal aliens to neighboring counties to put them up, for free, in hotels that are enjoying lucrative contracts.
According to the New York Post, two homeless couples were recently told they would have to find another place to stay by executives at the Ramada Inn in Yonkers which sits in Westchester County, New York — where New York City Eric Adams (D) has started busing migrants.
“I don’t got no place to go,” one of the homeless Americans told the Post. “I don’t have any family here. I don’t know nobody. and I’m disabled. Come on, it’s not fair.”
One of the couples has an 18-month-old baby and must now find another place to stay after spending $150 per night at the hotel for the last two weeks.
“The migrants’ are not having to pay out of their own pocket, and I’m having to pay out of my own pocket — and then I have to leave whenever [hotel executives] say,” the mother told the Post.
Another homeless American booted from the hotel said he was born in the United States and, thus, should get priority ahead of those new arrivals who just arrived in the U.S. days ago via the southern border.
he evictions are occurring as Adams has started busing border crossers and illegal aliens to Westchester County and Orange County, both of which sit above Manhattan. Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) suggested this week that New Yorkers may soon see migrants living in tents across the city.
“You’re gonna start seeing people living in tents — not just on the border, but on the streets of New York,” Hochul said, stating that the state is “bursting at the seams” due to illegal immigration.
Homeless Americans are not the only ones to be kicked out of hotels in New York to make room for border crossers and illegal aliens. Late last week, reports circulated that 20 homeless veterans were kicked out of the Crossroads Hotel in Newburgh, New York, so that migrants could get their rooms.
Likewise, Americans with wedding plans have said their guests have had their hotel rooms canceled at the hotel at the same time that the property started taking in border crossers and illegal aliens.
Related: Migrants Refuse to Leave NYC Hotel, Demand Taxpayers Give Them “Permanent Homes”
@datainput via StoryfulJohn Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
New York City Begins Turning Public School
Gyms into Migrant Shelters
The sanctuary city of New York City has started transforming public school gyms into migrant shelters for newly arrived adult border crossers and illegal aliens.
Since the spring of 2022, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) and other governors have bused over 60,000 border crossers and illegal aliens to New York City.
Flashback — NYC Mayor Eric Adams: “Stop Sending” Migrant Buses! “We Have Our Own Issues Here”
Mayor Eric Adams / FacebookIn response, Mayor Eric Adams (D) has opened nearly 100 so-called “emergency shelters,” though the majority are luxury hotels to which the city has given lucrative contracts to house newly arrived migrants.
Related: Migrants REFUSE to Leave NYC Hotel, Demand Taxpayers Give Them “Permanent Homes”
@datainput via StoryfulNow, Adams has started turning public school gymnasiums into migrant shelters that will house hundreds of adult border crossers and illegal aliens, according to ABC7 New York.
Public school gyms, such as PS 188 in Coney Island and PS 17 in Williamsburg, will each house adult migrants despite there being school children in remarkably close proximity. PS 188, in particular, already has nearly 100 migrants staying in its gym.
“I don’t think it’s a good idea because it’s inside of a school,” a parent of a PS 188 student told local media, while a student’s sister said, “God forbid a kid goes missing. What’s Eric Adams going to say? I’m sorry? No, something needs to be done.”
Adams plans to fill a former school in Staten Island with at least 300 border crossers and illegal aliens. He is also gearing up to turn PS 172 in Sunset Park and PS 189 in Crown Heights into migrant shelters.
The cost of New York City’s insistence to provide expansive housing and care to newly arrived border crossers and illegal aliens comes at the expense of New Yorkers, who are set to foot a four-billion-dollar bill.
Already, every day, New Yorkers are being charged five million dollars.
Flashback: Sanctuary NYC Dem Mayor Complains Asylum Seekers Will “Impact Every Area of Life”
Mayor Eric Adams / FacebookJohn Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
Newly sworn-in Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson (D) welcomed border crossers and illegal aliens to the sanctuary city in his inaugural address on Monday just as black Chicagoans protest illegal immigration flooding their neighborhoods.
Since August 2022, thousands of border crossers and illegal aliens have inundated Chicago — many arriving with illnesses like COVID-19 and without any ties to the city — spurring former Mayor Lori Lightfoot to declare a state of emergency last week.
Already, Chicago officials have opened police stations and abandoned schools to border crossers and illegal aliens, paid for by local taxpayers. Despite Lightfoot saying the city is at a “breaking point,” Johnson said there is more than enough room for border crossers and illegal aliens.
“We don’t want our story to be told that we were unable to house the unhoused or provide safe harbor for those who are seeking refuge here because enough room for everyone in the city of Chicago, whether you are seeking asylum or you are looking for a fully funded neighborhood,” Johnson said in his address.
The remarks sharply break from black Chicagoans who wield significant political power. Late last week, many attended a town hall meeting at the former South Shore High School where city officials want to house potentially hundreds of migrants.
“Looking at the numbers coming out of city hall and the state of Illinois, upwards of $150 million for six months,” one resident explained:
We believe that $150 million would have been, in some way, eligible to come into our community to help our crime problem, help our economic problem, and help with our housing issues. And as we’re all aware, black people are the largest number of homeless in Chicago so if you’re going to help anyone, help the current black homeless first. [Emphasis added]
At the town hall, one black Chicagoan held a sign that read “BUILD THE WALL 2024,” a sign of support for closing the United States-Mexico border to illegal immigration rather than President Joe Biden’s current approach of releasing tens of thousands of border crossers and illegal aliens into American communities every month.
Chicago residents are so fed up with illegal immigration that a group has filed a lawsuit against the city to stop them from housing border crossers and illegal aliens in the South Shore neighborhood.
“It is a slap in the face that we as citizens of the United States of America do not have the resources and support but you’re going to bring people who are not citizens here in our community, in our buildings that we pay taxes for that you took away from us,” one Chicago resident told local media.
“… at the end of the day, if Chicago can’t take care of its own, why should they take care of others? If the resources are given to others, why can’t the resources be given to us?” another Chicago resident asked.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Email him at jbinder@breitbart.com. Follow him on Twitter here.
Exclusive – J.D. Vance: GOP Must Call Out Illegal Immigration as ‘Economic Warfare’ Against Working Americans
No comments:
Post a Comment