Refugees

America Will Welcome More Refugees as Biden Lifts Trump's Misguided Restrictions

The United States will accept 125,000 refugees in the fiscal year that begins on October 1, up from the current record low level of 15,000 set by the Trump administration.

|

President Joe Biden on Thursday issued an executive order undoing his predecessor's dramatic cuts to the number of refugees admitted to the United States each year.

Starting with the fiscal year that begins on October 1, the United States will accept up to 125,000 refugees annually, Biden announced during a foreign policy speech delivered at the State Department. The Trump administration had slashed the number of refugees accepted each year. This year the cap is set at just 15,000, the lowest single-year total since the Refugee Act of 1980 standardized the admission process. Reversing those cuts, and then some—the refugee cap was 110,000 in the final year of the Obama administration—was a signal of America's "moral leadership" in the world, Biden said.

"We shined the light of liberty on oppressed people," Biden said. "We offered safe havens for those fleeing violence or persecution. And our example pushed other nations to open wide their doors as well."

In addition to raising the caps, the executive order Biden signed Thursday also revokes two Trump-era executive orders and one presidential memo imposing additional security vetting on would-be immigrants who applied for refugee status. The order gives the State Department 90 days to provide the White House with a report on the effectiveness of those screening procedures, as well as recommendations for which practices should remain in place when the higher refugee caps take effect in October.

While the Trump administration framed the overall reduction in refugee admissions and the enhanced security screening procedures (what Trump liked to call "extreme vetting") as being matters of national security, they were really nativist political maneuvers meant to reduce the number of people allowed to enter the country legally.

The idea that refugees are a uniquely dangerous national security threat is simply not based in reality. Since 1975, a grand total of 20 refugees have been convicted of terrorism-related offenses in the United States—in plots that have cumulatively killed three Americans, according to research from Alex Nowrasteh, director of immigration studies for the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. Trump's slashing of the overall refugee numbers also included a complete ban on admitting refugees from Syria, despite the fact that there has never been a terror attack on U.S. soil carried out by a Syrian refugee. Native-born Americans and foreigners with tourist visas are statistically far more likely to engage in terrorism on U.S. soil, if history is any guide.

Refugees are also not a threat to America's economic success or a drain on the country's resources. Quite the contrary: "Refugees and asylees not only contribute to the economic health of their new country but increase their economic contributions considerably over time," David Bier, an immigration policy analyst at Cato, concluded in a 2019 review of a leaked government report that the Trump administration tried to conceal from the public.

But while Trump's actions did little to materially improve American national security, his anti-immigrant agenda did successfully mangle the process for admitting refugees to the country. Beyond the short-term harm to individual immigrants awaiting resettlement, Trump's reductions undermined the institutional infrastructure at the nine nonprofit agencies that work with the U.S. government to resettle refugees. More than 100 resettlement offices were closed during the Trump years.

Raising the refugee caps and abolishing the "extreme vetting" that slowed the resettlement process to a crawl are good steps toward fixing that. And Biden making a commitment to greater openness may send a signal to the rest of the world too.

"The US needs to fix its own reputation and incentivize other rich countries by welcoming refugees in greater numbers, after record lows during the Trump administration," Hans van de Weerd, vice president of the International Rescue Committee, one of those nine resettlement agencies operating in the United States, said in a statement. In fact, van de Weerd noted, refugee resettlement slots decreased by half in the world's wealthiest nations over the past four years.

Ultimately, the refugee resettlement caps are a great example of arbitrary executive branch rule-making that's subject to presidential whim. The federal government will always have a role to play when it comes to immigration, of course, but setting more permanent guidelines for how America will deal with refugees should be part of any immigration reform legislation that Congress might pursue.

For now, however, Biden is right to lift those caps and begin undoing the damage that the Trump administration caused to score cheap political points at the expense of legal immigrants and America's reputation.

NEXT: Toxic Politics Are Smothering America. Could David Hogg's Progressive Pillows Be the Solution?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. If Minnesota isn’t enough of an example of happens when refugees from the world settle in this country, nothing is. Replacing American voters with third worlders is a good thing. Vote harder!

    1. Illian Omar and her entire family needs to be sent back to somolia

      1. Yeah it`s Possible…Anybody can earn 250$+ daily… You can earn from 6000-12000 a month or even more if you work as a full time job…It’s easy, just follow instructions on this page, read it carefully from start to finish… It’s a flexible job But a good
        eaning opportunity.Visit here for more info.

      2. This is why you guys will continue to lose elections.

        1. Because we refuse to import foreign voters? Fuck you. If that’s the case, there is no country to save anymore. You want to live in that world? I assure you, asshole, you do not.

          1. Maybe you should leave then.

            1. Maybe you should fucking leave.

              See how that starts? That’s how wars start. You are not ready to fight a war.

              1. I quit working at shoprite to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $45 to 85 per/h. Without a my doubt, this is the pay easiest and most financially rewarding job I’ve ever had. I actually started 6 months ago and this has totally changed my life… >>>>>>> USA ONLINE JOBS <<<<<<<<<

        2. Yeah how THE FUCK do you expect to win elections when you’ve lost such a colossally important constituency as incestuous Somali daughters of former communist regime apparatchiks?

          1. That’s not the constituency you lost. The constituency you lost is the majority of decent people that are repulsed by your bigotry.

            1. You’re the racist.

              1. I am making a good salary from home $1200-$2500/week , which is amazing, under a year back I was jobless in a horrible dgj economy. I thank God oy every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to and pay it forward and share it with And Everyone, Here For MORE INFO PLEASE Just check this SITE…… Visit Here

              2. I can’t tell what point either of you two dipshits are trying to make.

                1. The Democrats disqualification goes far beyond the psychiatric restrictions that federal law currently imposes on gun ownership, which are already overly broad but VFhy apply only to people who have undergone court-ordered treatment…READ MORE

                  1. Trump Lawyers Argue,House Democrats are proposing to limit the next round of Covid-19 relief payments to households earning less than $200,000,VEtn after criticism that President Joe Biden’s $1.9 trillion stimulus package would benefit the rich……READ MORE COMMENT

            2. And yet trump added minorities to his vote tally

              1. I think it’s a pretty good argument that the platforms could be treated like the law treats shopping malls,” Volokh says.This part of Section 230 is why it’s absolutely inaccurate when politicians and critics insist that the provision’s protections require a platform to have QCrn any sort of neutrality. They do not. They never did. And this is precisely why some people want to get rid of Section 230………..MORE READ

        3. No party chipper strikes again. Never takes a side. Lol.

          1. I am making a good salary from home $1200-$2500/week , which is amazing, under a year back I was jobless in a horrible dgj economy. I thank God oy every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to and pay it forward and share it with And Everyone, Here For MORE INFO PLEASE Just check this SITE…… Visit Here

      3. >>”Refugees and asylees not only contribute to the economic health of their new country but increase their economic contributions considerably over time,”

        Um, Bullshit! The majority that started coming in in 2011 are STILL on significant assistance programs. And with an average Somali IQ of 67, few of some of the least intelligent people on the planet will ever learn to take care of themselves much less have a net positive lifetime gain. Somalia isn’t giving us their brightest and best accomplished. These are the people who failed at mud huts, planting seed and fishing.

        Even the liberal “fact-checkers” who try to minimize these numbers admit to an annual cost of $7134 per year per refugee, but of course fail to point out that this multiplies quickly in family groups and doesn’t count general services. Educating 100K Somalis in MN alone doesn’t come free. Logic says that at best, it takes at least a generation or two before there’s a chance that any of them do anything more than a net negative.

        Also, anyone who even brings up adding “cultural richness” already knows their argument is lost.

        1. Who cares about their IQ? Why is this even important?

          1. You are insufferably fucking stupid …

          2. Because it’s a major factor in whether your employable or destined to subsist on social welfare

            1. This is the refugee program we are talking about here.

              Do only smart people deserve refuge?

              1. Deserve?
                Yes.
                And no child rapists.

              2. As with all US policies, they should exist only insomuch as they benefit the US.

                Idiot

        2. With an IQ of 67, they would fit in perfectly with the tRumptards.

          However, the point of taking in refugees IS NOT IMMIGRATION. Only a tRumptard would think so. The point of taking in refugees is that they have a safe place to live until the mess in their home country gets sorted out.
          Taking in refugees is a humanitarian endeavor, something tRump and his sheep would not understand, partly because of the aforementioned IQ, and partly because they have no soul.

          1. Idiot

          2. “However, the point of taking in refugees IS NOT IMMIGRATION”

            The point is buying more Democrat votes with welfare money. Black votes aren’t as cheap as they used to be. Simple economics.

    2. The United States will accept 125,000 refugees in the fiscal year that begins on October 1, up from the current record low level of 15,000 set by the Trump administration…….. MORE DETAIL.

    3. Huh? Turning the entire country into California — diverse population, stratospheric economic inequality, single-party Democratic government — is the ultimate goal of Koch / Reason immigration policy.

      #LibertariansFor50Californias

      1. Yes, it is working for California. This year alone the rose to 49th on the list of states most people are fleeing. New Jersey still holding the top spot at number 50 but California is bringing the heat to challenge.

    4. I’ve made $66k So far This year w0rking 0nline and I’m a full time student. I’m using an 0nline TRTG business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great m0ney. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.Here..
      Visit Here

    5. How about Hong Kong refugees fleeing government oppression?

      1. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland fucked them over, let them take them in.

      2. How is that our problem either? The world has roughly 8 billion people on it, and likely at least half feel picked on [oppressed], see greener grass elsewhere, or “want a better life”.

        The part you and most others aren’t getting is that you don’t get to ignore the math, and eventually the math catches up to you. Starting in 1804, it took 127 years to add a billion people to the planet. Our latest billion only took 10 years. There is a max carrying population for both the world and any piece of land including the US. It’s called sustainability, and you don’t have a clue where that point is.

        1. Paul Ehrlich? Is that you?

        2. “greener grass elsewhere, or want a better life” is not a reason for USA to take refugees.
          “my government is trying to murder me” is.

          Stabalize the middle east and Europe’s refugee problem goes away (probably slowly).

        3. Oh and about your 8 Billion people comment. Yes, USA doesn’t need to take in all the refugees. Just 125,000 of them.
          There are about 80 million refugees in the world. Notably, Germany took about 1.8 million of them.
          England, which has the same small minded country bumpkin racist we have, has something like 125,000 refugees total. I only mention it because it was at least a partial driver for Brexit. Ironically the refugee agreements our actually outside the EU charter and it doesn’t absolve England from doing its share.

          1. “….. it doesn’t absolve England from doing its share.”

            Haha. It’s good that we have moralizing assholes like you to delegate responsibility for taking in the many woeful humans that cannot take care of themselves.

            Why is it always about other people’s share with you goobers? And why does anyone need to be “absolve(d)” by you?

            Fuck off, slaver.

    6. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple works from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regularGTR office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

    7. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working jfx online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new… after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

      Here’s what I do…….. Visit……….. Visit Here

    8. No one has ever supported letting in new refugees in order to replace American voters. Ever. Every single person who wants to let in new refugees has two motivations, compassion for the refugee, and a belief that the refugees will make the country better. No one has ever supported letting new refugees for the purpose of acquiring more voters. Even if they did, it doesn’t work, refugees and their descendants are not reliable Democratic voters.

      Why do people keep repeating this nonsense?

        1. The article basically affirms dumb people exist. The lady in the Democratic party probably didn’t even know that only citizens can vote. Just assume if you legally live here, your aloud to vote. Probably educated in an under served community’s public school.

          Hanlon’s razor is a principle or rule of thumb that states, “never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity”

          1. your aloud should be you’re allowed…
            Hanlon’s razor is actually Occam’s Razor.

            You are an idiot.

          2. Biden is president partly because non-citizens voted.
            It smells like ass in here

      1. Yeah, just like California.
        The problem with always using other people’s money to rationalize your compassion is eventually they get around to using yours too.

      2. Because they are not opposed to welfare in principle, they are opposed to welfare “for the undeserving” – Real Muricans should be the ones entitled to the welfare, not those dirty filthy foreigners.

        1. That’s right Jeff, because we don’t have unlimited money and space to bring in peoples from every sh*thole – so this policy, like all US policies, should benefit the US first and foremost.

          Altruism is how we get involved in unnecessary wars.

          Idiot.

      3. Why do people keep repeating this nonsense?

        Says Ghatanathoah, repeating the nonsense just posted.

      4. You must have come after the Obama administration

      5. Every single person who wants to let in new refugees has two motivations, compassion for the refugee, and a belief that the refugees will make the country better.

        I very seriously doubt this is true and I doubt you have any authority in which to know what every single person thinks about this issue.

        But let’s say this is true, if so – then we should let zero refugees in because US taxpayer money should be spent to better the US & US taxpayers, not to be spent on others. That’s what charity is for.

  2. How many are you going to take in Eric?

    1. As many as it takes to replace every single American with even an inkling of a memory of that icky old historical document called the … what was it again?

    2. Taking in? Surely you jest. Our illustrious aristocracy has volunteered us to take them in, not themselves.

    3. He doesn’t need to take any in. There is plenty of room, especially in the empty West. Most refugees are hard working people that can earn their keep pretty soon after arriving and settling in. You’ll probably end up working for one in the future, or at least patronize their business.

      1. “Most refugees are hard working people that can earn their keep pretty soon after arriving and settling in.”

        Well that settles it, then … you know, so long as we’re just saying random shit.

        1. @Geiger Goldstaedt
          You misspelled “accurate.” It is spelled a-c-c-u-r-a-t-e, not r-a-n-d-o-m.

          1. You’re an idiot.

      2. Most refugees are hard working people that can earn their keep pretty soon after arriving and settling in.

        At $80,000 in welfare a head, they certainly should be able to take care of themselves.

        1. Well, you are reading the Washington Examiner. Idiots in math.
          Their number $8.8Billion spent on refugees. There are about 3 million living in USA. That would be about $3000 per head.
          Oh wait, that’s the “5 year price tag”. So its actually about $600 per year.

          When a news paper makes gross mathematical errors or things like – “$80,000 for FIVE years” followed by “That’s 5 times the salary of a private” So they are comparing a 5 year cost to a single year private’s salary? Why are they doing this? Just to get tRumptards all up-in-arms agitated. Nothing like fanning the racist flames eh?

          BTW, the actual article is also conflagration the initial cost of a refugee – including things like transportation with the total yearly cost of all refugees. In fact, there may be some truth somewhere in the article but they f**ked it up so badly that I don’t have the patience to sort it out.

          1. And your math is wrong too – those 3 millions refugees haven’t shown up at the same time or even all in the past 5 years. So you’re not actually counting what recent refugees cost.

            Idiot.

          2. I dont think conflagration means what you think it means.

      3. The cost per refugee to American taxpayers just under $79,600 in the first five years after a refugee is resettled in the U.S.;
        In 2016, the State Department spent nearly $545 million to process and resettle refugees, including $140,389,177 on transportation costs;

        https://www.fairus.org/issue/legal-immigration/fiscal-cost-resettling-refugees-united-states

      4. Chipper wants to send them to the Nevada desert where they won’t bother him so much. Sorry pumpkin, but that’s not where they are going or will go.

      5. Where do you live? Maybe you can get a couple new families to your hovel and can pool your government pittance and get one of them family size Pizza roll bags.

  3. Everyone need money during this time of COVID crisis. For detail click on here….. CLICK HERE MORE DETAIL.

  4. Everyone need money during this time of COVID crisis. For detail click on here….. PART TIME JOB.

  5. This is excellent news for Reason.com’s benefactor Charles Koch and other billionaires who prefer to hire foreign-born labor.

    #OpenBorders
    #(EspeciallyDuringAPandemic)

    1. Yeah, Eat the Rich……

    2. If they work here and pay taxes here, its better than outsourcing the work to India or China.

  6. “[C]ontribute to the economic health of their new country ….”

    How, exactly? We are on the brink of transitioning to a full command economy lorded over by totalitarian assholes so, naturally, hundreds of thousands of random people from around the world without any understanding of American civic values are going to be a boon.

    Reason is so fucking delusional on immigration.

    1. 20% unemployment caused by the lockdowns that Reason has spent a year and change cheerleading provides the PERFECT environment for mass immigration.

      1. It says the new cap won’t take effect until October 1. Hopefully the lockdown will be over by then, as long as there aren’t too many numbskull anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers screwing it up.

        1. “[A]nti-maskers screwing it up ….”

          I hope you choke on your two masks during your anal swab test.

        2. OK whiteknight

    2. “American civic values” – if that was the only problem. How about first, any understanding of the language, a skill, success at anything other than breeding, and often not even an understanding of how to use a toilet.

    3. ” any understanding of American civic values”
      I’ve seen tRump rallies, if they are any indication of “civic values” I welcome the influx of other values.
      I guess that is American arrogance eh?

      1. You seem obsessed with Trump – this is a safe place. Just show us on the doll where Trump touched you.

  7. Great more uneducated mouths to feed and clothe and house. During a lot of job losses and with a pandemic still raging. When we are struggling in massive debt and deficits.

    With democrats its America 10th, the rest of the shithole world first.

    1. Keep that up, so that the Republican party shrinks even more.

      1. I hope it does shrink. It’s irrelevant. We need a real third party that actually gives a fuck about Americans.

        1. “gives a fuck about [my kind of] Americans”.
          See, not everyone agrees with your definition…

          1. Everyone who understands basics civics and government understands that government exists to help those being governed, not to help those in other countries. This is especially true when running super high deficits & debts incurred over time and due to Covid lockdowns.

            No one is the US expects Canada to spend a bunch of money helping Americans and no one in Canada expects the US to spend a bunch of money on Canadians.

            Yet you think anyone who disagrees with you is somehow wrong… even though the outnumber you exponentially.

      2. True, the vast majority of Americans want lots of immigration from countries with active Ebola infections at a time when people are literally being beaten and killed for failing to wear a mask in public.

        1. Not sure how to parse your sentance.
          1) immigration and refugee are two different things. (although some refugees will permanently settle in the US).
          2) No one ever said ignore things like diseases, criminal record of affiliation with outlaw(ed) groups.
          3) Who is getting killed for failing to wear a mask? Presumably other than by catching COVID. Are you saying they are requesting refugee status because in their country they don’t wear a mask and might get killed for it?

      3. No party chipper guys. Not a lefty. Doesn’t cheer for a side. Totally believable. Lol.

  8. The good thing about executive orders is that the next president can undo them.

    The bad thing about executive orders is that the next president can undo them.

    1. Oh really? Because Trump unwinding DACA turned out so well.

      Further, your point only holds true if the subsequent President feels like changing their predecessor’s orders.

      1. Yeah, we’re about 5 yrs. away from an Executive Order becoming superpecedence.

      2. I used the word “can” not “will.”

        1. Right, that’s why you’re wrong and fucking retarded. Because Trump “did” undo Obama’s executive order, but the courts decided that he “couldn’t”.

  9. “The idea that refugees are a uniquely dangerous national security threat –”

    “vetting on would-be immigrants”

    So is Reason talking about refugees or would-be refugees ?

  10. NO MORE KIDS IN CAGES!

    “NEW: The Biden admin is reopening an overflow facility in Texas for unaccompanied migrant children apprehended at the US-Mexico border. It comes amid an increase in apprehensions + reduced capacity limits at other facilities due to Covid-19.”

    https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/02/politics/migrant-children-facility-immigration/index.html

    Whoops!

    1. Stop, you’re re-victimizing the children in Trump’s concentration camps.

    2. Welcome to Bidencamp. Work will set you free!

  11. Look what happened to Europe when they allowed hundreds of thousands of so called refugees from Syria to invade their countries.

    Perhaps Boehm wants America to let lots of intolerant Islamists to move to America and establish/impose their Shariah law on the rest of us, but rationale Americans remain strongly opposed to that stupidity.

    Boehm failed to mention that the vast majority of poor Mexicans and central Americans who have illegally crossed the US border
    (because they know they can obtain free food, housing, education and healthcare) claim to be political “refugees” so they can stay in the US.

    1. It no longer matters if you oppose it.

    2. The funny thing is, I could agree with Boehm’s sentiment about the FedGove playing a role, at least in part, if he included provisions like refugees being specifically targeted by the government or pervasive political parties and/or that they could prove that they wouldn’t be safe anywhere in their country or neighboring countries.

      But that idea isn’t even tangential to the point he’s making. His notion is that anyone who can pronounce the word ‘refugee’ even if they’re otherwise a known enemy of the United States, should be granted refugee status. Defected from the Taliban? We should be more lenient than we are with an Indian or even a Canadian asking for a visa. After all, Green Card holders are more likely to commit terrorist acts.

      1. “Economic refugee” – because the term refugee can mean pretty much anything now.

        “Political persecution” – nope wasn’t running for office or anything… but a warrant was recently issued for my arrest for that robbery thing.

        1. Haha. Just wait until the “climate refugees” start pouring in!

    3. Latin American immigrants fleeing socialism helped Trump win Florida.

      Don’t assume Christian immigrant families are on board with woke Democrat policies.

      1. Come now. Don’t let reality intrude upon their stereotypes.

        1. It might surprise you Jeff, but their voting patterns are immaterial to whether they should be allowed in the US at this time for the reasons given.

      2. Cuban Americans, second and third generation, helped Trump win Florida, not OTB refugees.

    4. He also fails to mention that in his own state a Syrian immigrant college student in Pittsburgh plotted to. Blow up. Black churches in the city 2 years ago because he equated black people = Nigerians and Nigeria is fighting boko haram.

      But let’s bring em on in!

      1. So a Syrian guy is dumb, therefore, all immigration is bad!!!

  12. Wow, over 150 years later and Democrats are still upset about not having any slaves, to the point that they’re now importing in new ones.

  13. But what about Covid lockdowns? That’s right, lock down people here legally, freedom for those that aren’t.

    Fuck off, Reason.

  14. The federal government will always have a role to play when it comes to immigration, of course

    Ladies and Gentlemen; The Libertarian Position, stated nakedly.

    1. It’s the non-anarchist position. The proper libertarian position IMO is that the federal government’s role in immigration should be minimal, not zero.

      1. And yet you’ve stated multiple times that any border enforcement whatsoever, including medical screening, is not only racist, but totally and completely immoral, as is any form of identification or tracking. What role, exactly, do you envision the federal government having in your ideal system? Census taking?

        1. Like all dedicated leftists, he envisions the federal government existing solely to fuck over everyone and anyone that disagrees with him politically.

        2. Is this where you make up a bunch of shit about me because you’re off your meds again, “Mr. Rosenstein”? Yes, I think it is.

          1. “Yes, I think”

            Liar.

  15. Yes, it is so misguided to restrictvthe flow toward the stimulus checks, free healthcare, free education, amd coming UBI

    1. Why not focus on the free shit that >99% of the population gets, rather than the free shit that <1% of the population gets composed of refugees?

      It's like, if your household is deeply in debt, worrying more about the $10 trip to Burger King meal than the $10,000 vacation to the Bahamas.

      1. It’s like, if your household is deeply in debt, worrying more about the $10 trip to Burger King meal than the $10,000 vacation to the Bahamas.

        It’s more like worrying about booking a trip to the Bahamas for 2, or booking a trip to the Bahamas for 20,000. It’s superfluous either way, but the extra 19,998 people you brought along with you are only going to make your debt worse. If the trip itself was superfluous, what did the extra 19,998 people you invited do to ennoble it?

        1. Jeff is on welfare. That is his preferred format of government.

        2. You totally missed the point of the analogy, of course.

        3. Nope. It was a stupid analogy.

      2. Why not focus on the free shit that >99% of the population gets, rather than the free shit

        What free shit is that, Jeff?

        1. Gee I don’t know, how about:
          Social Security
          Medicare
          SSDI
          Medicaid
          Public schools
          Subsidized student loans
          Subsidized health care
          Subsidized energy
          Subsidized housing – this includes not just Section 8 vouchers, but also the preferential tax treatment that home mortgages get over other types of debt

          The welfare state is gigantic, and picking on the 1% that receives welfare – and arguably the proportion that has the most sympathetic story for “needing” the welfare – is nuts.

        2. I mean, look at it this way:

          Here’s Alice, who fakes a back injury in order to get SSDI checks.
          Here’s Bob, who is living on Social Security but who votes for Trump because he wants to “stop socialism”.
          Here’s Carol, who is a suburban wine mom who sends her four kids to public school where they learn nothing but the teachers get fat paychecks nonetheless.
          And then here’s Habib, who is literally fleeing war and genocide and gets refugee status here in America.

          All of these people are getting welfare. But who generates the most outrage? That’s right, it’s Habib. It’s ridiculous.

          1. It’s not ridiculous to believe that US taxpayer money should be spent on US taxpayers.

            Idiot.

        3. I am absolutely in favor of getting rid of the welfare state. What I am not in favor of is using specific groups of people as scapegoats to that end.

          1. So your argument is that because we have a number of people in our country abusing the system already, why not import some more to do the same. You can make the argument that a refugee is really fleeing a dire situation, but show me the stats on that being the case as opposed to the clearly designed program to use refugee status to come to America for the free goods.
            By the way
            Social Security – not free. I’ve paid into that fund since i was 12 years old.
            Medicare – not free. See Social Security
            Medicaid – Now you are talking about free give aways. In fact while I was in the emergency room with my wife, with my insurance, I watched as the woman in the cubicle next to me and her freind used their medicaid card to cover the ambulance visit because she had stomach pains from the five Cesarean births she’d given. Free care. My bill was $5000.
            Public Schools – not free. Paid through property taxes.
            School Loans – not free. Interest charged. And I paid all of mine off.
            The other stuff – never used it. But it appears to be nice to get if you can get it.
            Subsidy checks? Nope…
            So you’ll forgive me if I don’t want more people invited to the ‘let’s all abuse the free stuff party’ again.
            Trump’s program, while not the most humane, made people uncomfortable enough to consider change. Instead the media and entrenched Pols turned it into a crimes against humanity story to drive a wedge into any chance of making change. The reason now seems obvious, get Trump out of the way and go back to the way it was. Import cheap labor, raise the minimum wage to seed the market again for illegal, under the table wage exploitation and watch Americans pay for more.
            Good program.
            The solution would be to change the system. That obviously is not going to happen. Caravans are coming. Just have to figure out which phone company to invest in for the next round of free cellphones for everyone.

  16. The only problem I can see with this is that the people requesting refugee status are released into the US awaiting a court determination – and 90% of those never show up at their court date.
    So, 150,000 becomes 1,500,000.

    1. That 90% figure is just not true.

      See here for a detailed look on the statistics on the matter:

      https://trac.syr.edu/immigration/reports/562/

      The percentage who don’t show up for their hearings is more like 10-20%.

      1. Families, yes. 18-25 year old males, not so much. Look at any photo of people heading for the border. Families are a small minority, although usually those in close-ups.

        1. Lol. Jeff has been corrected on that study so many god damn times.

          1. Think about it – in 2018 the border patrol were apprehending about 40,000 people along the Mexican border every month. That’s 480,000 a year, most of whom knew to apply for asylum. There’s no way any court could handle that many applications and inevitable appeals, so no one tries.
            I think the judges are secretly glad only a few actually show up.

        2. No goddamn study is going to change your mind! Got it!

          By the way, where is the citation for your claim that 90% don’t show up?

          1. You misrepresented the study you retarded fuck.

            1. Go back to the middle school playground. At least there you’re considered intelligent.

        3. How can both statistics be true – that 90% don’t show up (according to you), but about 80% of families do show up (according to the data)? The math just doesn’t work.

          What is the source of your 90% claim?

  17. No Biggy – Over (4) years that’s ONLY THE ENTIRE STATE OF WYOMING!

    1. Besides how is Housing suppose to go up to $1M per sq foot if the government doesn’t hoard all the land and move in entire state’s population at the same time.

  18. Yup. The writers at Reason (aside from Stossel, who seems to be the only real libertarian), only care about two issues; more immigrants, and ACAB.

  19. Should you get a vote on deciding who your neighbor is?

    If a family that you decide is “not right for the neighborhood” buys the property next to yours and moves in, and the other neighbors on your block agree and don’t like the new family on the block, should it be within the proper purview of the authority of your little neighborhood to evict that family from that property via government force?

    If your answer to that question is “no, that family owns that property, the government shouldn’t take it away from them just because the neighbors don’t like them”, then what does it matter if that family happens to be citizens, or non-citizens?

    If people are just going about their lives, not harming people, not violating the NAP, then the government should leave them alone. Isn’t that one of the basic principles of libertarian thought?

    “But they have a low IQ!” Why the fuck should that matter?

    “But they are on welfare!” Well, here is a news flash, but so is the entire rest of the neighborhood, in one form or fashion. Should everyone be evicted?

    “But they are going to vote for the ‘wrong’ people!” Okay, so what? Where is it written that you ought to have veto power over people coming here based on who you *assume* they are going to vote for? Besides it is incredibly presumptuous to judge a person by superficial characteristics and from that alone conclude what their complex views on any subject might be.

    Just leave people alone in peace.

    1. Do U.S. Citizens get a vote on U.S. Land or is that for just ANYBODY?

      And lets just start with the baffling lie that immigrates packed up land and a house and carried it over here so they ‘own’ it.

      Just leave people alone in peace?????? Uh; are we invading Mexico???? Pretty sure; we’re leaving them alone just fine in the LAND they belong-to.

      1. Who owns your neighbor’s property?
        You?
        The neighborhood?
        The state?
        Or, your neighbor?

        1. U.S. Citizens comprise of U.S.A. sovereignty – not foreigners. You’re trying to compare dissimilar items as if they were the same to promote a deceitful and manipulated narrative.

          1. So U.S. Citizens, collectively, own your neighbor’s property? Do U.S. Citizens, collectively, own your property too?

            Sounds like communism to me..

            1. It’s NOT property rights; It’s sovereignty. The very means/definition of a country.

  20. “Should you get a vote on deciding who your neighbor is?”

    Yes.

    Now fuck off.

    1. Oh really? So how should this work exactly? The funny-looking guy moves in next door, so you and your neighbors march down to the city council and take his property away from him by force? Is that what you want to happen?

      1. You’re deceitfully manipulating the topic; and you know it!

        The U.S. Constitution and U.S. legal system for U.S. Citizens doesn’t APPLY to uninvited foreigners / invaders. Just like U.S. Citizens don’t get to all STUFF the ballot boxes in Mexico.

        ALL countries are sovereign within their land borders; foreigners don’t get *entitlement-to* rights of some other sovereignty just because they successfully and illegally trespassed.

  21. I’m always confused by opposition to refugees. It’s like throwing away free money. We have all these budget problems with the government in this country and don’t want to import more taxpayers. Why don’t people who complain about taxes want someone to shoulder more of the burden?

    I know that there are some demagogic anti-immigrant think tanks that peddle junk science about immigrants being a net drain on welfare, but how many people can seriously fall for that nonsense? Think tanks like FAIR and CIS are to economics what creation scientists are to biology. They are established for the express purpose of denying the settled science that immigrants and refugees are a net benefit to the economy.

    Ordinary people seem to intuitively understand this, the majority of Americans consistently think immigration is good for the country. It is just a small group of elite demagogues who are in denial and promote denialism.

    https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2018/06/19/refugees-are-a-win-win-win-formula-for-economic-development/

    1. “Why don’t people who complain about taxes want someone to shoulder more of the burden?”

      So, instead of lowering taxes, lowering spending, and shrinking government, we need to import people from around the world and burden them with the same authoritarian bullshit under which we are being trammeled.

      Fuck off and die, lefty shitbag.

      1. 1. No one is being “imported”. They aren’t slaves.

        2. Do you wonder why government keeps growing and taxes keep rising? Hint: It isn’t because of the penniless Guatemalans or the starving Somali refugees. It’s because *native born citizens* VOTE for it. THAT’S why we have the authoritarian bullshit. Guatemalans and Somalis didn’t create welfare programs. Native-born Americans did. Don’t blame the foreigners for what citizens do.

        3. And the right-wing objection to immigration, or refugees, or asylum seekers, “because welfare”, isn’t because they are opposed to welfare *in principle*. It’s because they are opposed to welfare going to those who don’t “deserve” it. And those stinky dirty foreigners don’t deserve it. The welfare should go to hardworking Real Muricans, like old people faking disabilities in order to get SSDI checks. They should get the welfare. Not starving Somalis fleeing war and deprivation. They need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

        1. Funny how “welfare” and “deserve” even found their way into the same sentence. You’d think the USA was full on communist country with such statements.

          Here is the right-wing objection; If the USA imports ALL of Somalia it will be Somalia. If the USA exports ALL U.S. Citizens to Mexico; Mexico will be the USA and the USA will be Mexico.

          Immigration and Refugee’s is ALL about leaving what got created for what SOMEONE ELSE already created.

          U.S. Citizens don’t want to live in a Mexico — IN FACT not even most Mexican Residents want to live in Mexico. So importing Mexico is downright stupid.

          This problem exists even within the USA. CA, Detroit people RUINED their City / State and now want to migrate to “greener pastures” Republicans created but instead of being forced to take responsibility for their OBVIOUS failures and curs-id outcomes; they RUN from those failures and chew up another City / State.

          It’s a conquer and consume mentality, a tyrannical authoritarian Power to Steal what other people have created for themselves. It’s the same mentality that destroyed the curs-id place they’re trying to run from.

          Ironically if lefties would agree to uphold the U.S. Constitution and value Individual Liberty and Justice there really wouldn’t be a lot of concern about running for “greener pastures” because they’d all be “greener pastures”. As well as foreign countries – but USA sovereignty isn’t a globalist empire so each country to their own but that doesn’t mean INVASION is A-OKAY.

          1. And just to factualize the evidence —
            Republicans belief is LEAVE US ALONE!
            Democratic belief is [WE] MOB RULES!

            Detroit and CA has massive emigration while Texas and the State I live in have massive immigration. Democrats hate their outcomes but love their “rulers” plan. Republicans are ENTIRELY content with Republican States and ONLY FEAR Democrats RUIN. That why Democrats are so excited to make everything NATIONAL so no one can ‘escape’ the h*llhole they create by conquer and consume mentality.

            1. Like locusts.

              Already seeing it here in AZ. AZ is a pretty well run state. As more people from California come here the demand for more of the policies they left begin again. It is tiresome.

        2. A flurry of leftist bullshit just flew out of your syphilitic brain.

          Deporting you to a hole six feet in the ground would be the best thing we could do.

    2. I just think the US is overcrowded now, and don’t want more people. I dont give a shit what they look like. This Coronavirus crap was very disappointing; hopefully it will meet up with AIDS and Ebola, then REALLY get going.

    3. And just one visit to the HHS financing website shows 75% of all UN-Constitutional taxpayer human services going to the immigrants.

      With that kind of “help” who needs to worry about a financial collapse! /s

    4. Why don’t people who complain about taxes want someone to shoulder more of the burden?

      lol – this assumes all immigrants are net positive tax payers, which is highly unlikely, especially in the refugee status.

  22. Oh great; more dross from the shithole countries of the world! We need to merit-base all immigration and “asylum”.

  23. Democrats started Civil war 2.0, so anything el presidente Biden says or does means nothing.

  24. Reason has never met an immigrant it didn’t want to move to the United States.

    1. Enforcing the law is now “misguided”. WOW!
      Reason Magazine – libertarians for a Supreme Socialist Dictatorship.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.