More Immigration Leads to Better Nursing Home Care, Says New Paper
Immigrants have a proven ability to address a mounting need for the aging American population. Politicians crafting immigration policy ignore this at their own peril.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, worker shortages hit American nursing homes particularly hard. A survey conducted last year by the American Health Care Association/National Center for Assisted Living (AHCA/NCAL) found that 87 percent of nursing home providers were grappling with moderate to high staffing shortages. According to a January AHCA/NCAL analysis of labor data, nursing homes have lost 210,000 jobs since the pandemic began—"the worst job loss of any health care sector."
That decline presents an obvious problem since the number of Americans 65 and older is projected to reach 80 million by 2040. But a new National Bureau of Economic Research paper points to a promising solution: immigration.
The paper found "strong and consistent evidence that increased immigration leads to improved patient care," as well as a decline in hospitalizations corresponding with an increase in female immigrants. That's according to new research from Harvard University's David C. Grabowski, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Jonathan Gruber, and the University of Rochester's Brian McGarry. Their paper relies on a sample of over 16 million Medicare beneficiaries in 13,000 nursing homes.
"Collectively, these results suggest that immigrants increase the quality of care of older adults residing in nursing homes," they write.
Adverse outcomes decline during short-term stays—especially restraints, which fall by 7 percent for every one-unit increase in female immigrants per nursing home residents. During longer stays, the researchers report "a strong negative impact on use of restraints" and "a very large and significant reduction in inpatient psychiatric medications." Immigration does not meaningfully impact mortality rates, they write, but it does lead to "significant reductions in hospitalizations in the short run."
The researchers found that increased immigration can lead to better outcomes for older adults outside of nursing homes as well. A 10 percent increase in the female immigrant population equated to a 0.4 percent reduction in a metropolitan area's nursing home population— "consistent with the fact that immigrants also often work as home health or personal care aides, professions that allow older adults to remain in their home longer." Bolstering that claim, the researchers write, is a 2021 study that found "influxes of immigrants between 1980 and 2000 likely reduced the lifetime risk of an older adult becoming institutionalized by 10 percent."
Immigrants now make up 25 percent of direct care workers in home health care and 19 percent of direct care workers in nursing home care, outpacing their overall share of the American labor force, which stands at roughly 17 percent. The upshot of all this is that immigrants have a proven ability to address a mounting need. Politicians crafting immigration policy ignore this at their own peril.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
What this country needs is more young, buff, immigrants who will force me to submit to their patriarchal religion thru their manly strength.
Young….buff…. Sweaty….. yessssssss…….. make me submit daddy!!!
Fiona just has a kinky fetish.
It would be interesting to juxtapose her fetish with racism and pragmatism about immigration by say, questioning whether it would be a good idea to have more Chinese immigrants (documented/undocumented? Not even pretending anymore?) working nursing homes in the pandemic recovery.
I bet she still supports immigration retardedly, but not as retardedly as when she thinks about brown-skinned nurses with her cooch, like a racist.
Apparently there is no ill that more immigration will not cure.
Fiona and the leftist pretend that those crossing the border into the U.S. are high IQ, college educated individuals, who will if allowed, immediately start businesses, become gainfully employed, and contribute greatly to our nation's economy.
The truth is though, that most of those people arriving are low IQ, uneducated, military-aged young men, tatted up with gang symbols, and eagerly awaiting their new phone, and benefits card. They take housing, heath care, and tax dollars from Americans who have suffered greatly due to the governments' response to a virus which had a 99 percent survivability rate for the average healthy person.
Fiona and the "more immigration" crowd should move some of these young gang members into their homes so they can show them how accepting they are of the invasion of our country.
Does Fiona scribble these out while sitting in Koch's lap?
I just can't. This is getting ridiculous.
Immigration is the key to Fiona’s sexual satisfaction.
Any stats on how wonderful the health care systems of the places the immigrants leave is?
You mean leave geographically or leave temporally? Because 2019 is about as scientifically dishonest a starting point as possible to use to measure increases in nursing home care.
To say nothing about the dishonesty of extrapolating any such improvement to any given immigration policy.
They learned their start-date-cherry-picking from climate scientists.
Who learned it from the Amish.
Democrat governors did their part in 2020 to increase the number of available beds in nursing homes. With significant results.
Established employer and local demand would be the best way to craft immigration numbers. Doesn't mean that bottom up stuff is the decider but it's better for the overall legal numbers to be driven with a local recognition of demand rather than just some top down BS about what-should-be
The right people in charge!
Once again, no distinction made between legal and illegal immigration. So...bullshit.
"Show me your papers!"
Are you suggesting that immigrants be selectively allowed to work as a caregiver in a nursing home without being a licensed nurse or are you just completely retarded as to how the whole system works?
The legal immigration system in this country is beyond fucked. The pathway to legal citizenship takes decades when nothing goes wrong. Assuming you're not a Native American of some sort, I highly doubt your ancestors would have ever lived here had anything remotely close to the current set of rules been in place at the time. I believe that the people who cling to the current system do in fact hate immigrants. They just say they like legal immigration so they don't sound like the racist, xenophobic bastards that they are.
OK, so completely retarded as to how the whole system works, got it.
It's also hilarious how conservatives show their true colors when this subject comes up. They don't want liberty. They despise liberty. They want control. They want people controlled based upon where they were born, and they suddenly become huge proponents of occupational licensing being used to stop people from participating in the economy. Don't have immigration papers? Don't have a license? Starve or go home. You need papers to be part of this society.
"They despise liberty."
Well, not if it's the "right kind" of "liberty.
"Nice business license you got there. Hope everyone in the kitchen has their papers, or something might happen to it."
That’s where a lot of people part ways with libertarians and really start to like government permission.
Yes. Illegal immigration is zero cost. Let’s just force people to pay those costs while you and sarc deny them.
Of course now if you say you don't agree with welfare benefits it will show you are lying about your opponents argument. Have fun!
"Illegal immigration is zero cost."
Absolutely not. It has human costs as well as very high financial costs. We need a workable, manageable, and realistic immigration policy, which we haven't had since forever.
Pretty much the same can be said for welfare as it exists: too expensive, wasteful of resources, and, well, the list goes on. We need a totally different system (lets' start with going to a consumption tax instead of an income tax).
And don't get me started on Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security.
Of course, all of this is little more than a pipe dream.
No retard. They understand costs are involved. You deny reality.
they suddenly become huge proponents of occupational licensing being used to stop people from participating in the economy
You're the one who's asking for papers. I'm just pointing out that even if you weren't asking for immigration papers, you'd still be asking the native Jews for their papers. And giving the immigrants a break while continuing to ask the native Jews for papers is pretty fucked up.
A very few who oppose illegal immigration also oppose legal immigration, but they are very few and only useful to those who want to conflate the one with the other.
Fiona - the argument for most is about control of the borders, letting many in, but mostly about control. Nurses would be welcome.
Slight disagreement. For many the argument rightly, as a horse before a cart, is about cutting welfare. More immigrant nurses collecting more medicare/medicaid/SS dollars of geriatric patients today means fewer dollars to be paid out to those who've been paying in for several decades. It's not the immigrants' fault, legal or illegal, but the fact remains that cramming more bodies into the leviathan doesn't shrink the leviathan. No matter how much love Reason or anyone else has for cramming more foreign bodies into it.
Don’t know if it’s very few among conservatives or not. I’ll take your word for it.
The bigger problem among conservatives is all those who say they support legal immigration but don’t want to change immigration laws to accommodate more immigrants.
It doesn't matter what the immigration laws are if we don't have border security. First improve border security so that we can have reasonable control over who gets in, then we can talk about who and how many we let in.
“I dont know what conservatives think but here is what they think.” Mike.
You idiots purposefully deny the actual reality of the argument because you have no actual leg to stand on.
George W Bushs immigration reform included more work permits. Democrats voted no dumbass.
^ tell you'ure are wholly ignorant of the history of immigration laws without telling me directly.
Immigration limits have long been a democrat party staple and CONTINUE to be so.
Deportation of illegals his record levels under Democrat administration.
You are an NPC listening to too much NPR during the Trump years.
The USA RIGHT-NOW accommodates more immigrants than any other nation in the world... Don't deceitfully pretend we have a locked up nation so you can push for a full on invasion.
What does "oppose legal immigration" mean? If you oppose legal immigration, that would mean that you do not want to allow any legal immigration. So you support annual immigration being set at zero.
Some have suggested it would be a good idea to "take a break" just temporarily with a moratorium for a few years on immigration. I don't know if that's the right approach, but it could be reasonable. However, it's decidedly extremely few conservatives that have suggested this.
Now, if you support permitting a level of immigration higher than zero, then you do not oppose legal immigration. You support legal immigration.
If you favor lower levels of immigration, this may fairly be described as "restrictionist," but open borders proponents (many of whom deny that they support open borders, but always support indefinite increases in immigration, as well as supporting illegal immigration) apply that term to anyone who does not support open borders.
Nonetheless, you will have simpletons and propagandists that try to equate "oppose/support legal immigration" with opposing or supporting the massive amounts of legal immigration that we currently have, increases above and beyond that level, and essentially unlimited immigration or open borders.
Currently, we have record high levels of immigration and record low levels of assimilation, with a fracturing culture, balkanizing society, and waning support for the basic founding values of freedom and liberty and decentralized self-government. The record high levels of immigration are not just nationally unprecedented, but world-historically unprecedented. Surveys consistently show that Americans support lower levels of immigration than what we currently have, and support prioritizing American employment interests over increasing immigration, and this support is highest among Black and Hispanic Americans (who skew more working class) and lowest among White Americans.
“massive amounts of legal immigration that we currently have”
Your perception that it is massive is your perception, and you have a right to it. Consider, however, that we objectively have a massive labor shortage in this country right now. It hardly seems possible a massive labor shortage could co-exist with “massive” legal immigration.
No, it's just an objective fact, as I explained, immigration levels are at unprecedented highs. Any measure is relative. You are free to argue that this is beneficial and warranted, of course, based on things like the labor market, being a massive amount doesn't necessarily mean otherwise.
It isn’t possible for a statement of that type to be objective. “Massive” is a subjective description.
“fracturing culture, balkanizing society, and waning support for the basic founding values of freedom and liberty and decentralized self-government”
That trend ain’t being driven by immigrants. It’s home grown.
My father’s father and mother were dirt-poor, ignorant farmers who came here from Europe. That first generation probably didn’t add much to this country, but, boy oh boy, among their sons were a genuine US Marine war hero, an inventor, a machinist who built parts of Apollo 11. That’s goddamn American as hell.
Immigrants who come from parts of the world that don't value freedom, liberty, and decentralized self-government, do indeed value those things less on average. This is basically a tautology, so there isn't much point in trying to deny it. Cultural values are just that, they are held by people, they don't spring from the land! Nice anecdotes, though. Of course, none of this is an insurmountable problem, this is why we want assimilation, and we could do a lot more to select for the types of people we want and of course improve incentives and culture within. Oftentimes today, the first generation are the hardworking contributors, and it falls off a cliff after that, with subsequent generations falling prey to the welfare state, victimhood culture, or other traps in today's society.
That is pure anti-individualistic bullshit. Any particular individual’s attitude toward traditional American concepts of liberty, etc. are not determined by where that individual came from.
To think of people in such a collectivist way is offensive to American individualist values.
Furthermore, any day I’ll take sitting down for a meal at a nice, authentic Thai restaurant or a taco joint over listening to some immigration restrictionist rant about how newcomers aren’t assimilating to his personal belief set fast enough.
It is NOT "his personal belief set"... It is the very DEFINITION of the USA.
Assimilation does not mean abandoning all aspects one your previous culture. It does mean learning English instead of demanding that American society accommodate your inability to speak English. If I immigrated to France, I'd expect to have to learn French. It does mean not embedding yourself in an ethnic enclave so that you never have to encounter people who are not similarly cultured, where they expect to be left alone and impose their own rules (Sharia law in Muslim enclaves).
Pretty sure American would love to learn about your culture, your foods, your holidays. But you have to learn about America's culture, holidays, etc.
If you immigrate to the US, it's not rude of the US to expect you to accept a "my house, my rules" situation. Burying yourselves in barrios makes you an "other" who happens to live in the US, that's not an immigrant, that's a parasite.
Let's first start enforcing the immigration laws we have on the books before changing those laws to something everyone also ignores.
Well, they are not wanting to change the immigration laws the way open borders wet dream progressives like Fiona and Shikha want them to, that's for certain.
Koch won't be satisfied until he gets some zero-dollar wages.
Where's OBL when you need her?
Wow, is there ANYTHING more immigration cant solve? Not according to Reason.
To a lefty, there is no bad thing in the world that isnt caused by climate change (+/- systemic racism) and no problem that cant be solved by more govt involvement and open borders.
open American borders – not seeing the call to open chinese or japanese borders
or any other country for that matter
#OpenBordersWillFixEverything
#FionaIsAParodyOfOBL
I though Fiona was Shikha running chatGPT scams.
This is worse than just "immigrants will fix *looks at paper full of problems, picks random one* THIS!"
Reason has literally picked a job sector WELL KNOWN for its low pay and shitty working conditions which has ALWAYS been responsible for perennial understaffing issues within said sector, and then flippantly said "just bring in people who are
less picky about low pay and shit working conditionsfrom elsewhere!"This may be one of the darkest pro-immigration arguments Reason has ever made.
This may be one of the darkest pro-immigration arguments Reason has ever made.
Did they ever run a story on Gerson Fuentes, the guy who allegedly raped the 10-yr.-old Ohio girl who had to go to Indiana to get an abortion?
Religion, but only if they keep importing Muslims.
But, but, but...Islam is a religion of peace!
Bro.....just stop its getting embarrassing.
The paper found "strong and consistent evidence that increased immigration leads to improved patient care," as well as a decline in hospitalizations corresponding with an increase in female immigrants.
Everyone's a biologist now.
By the way, this report might indicate why the sector could be so desperate for immigrant *checks notes* women to be brought in.
How do you solve the staffing issues caused by low pay and poor conditions?
Get immigrants to do it!
What is your suggested solution?
Let's hear yours first.
Well, to a real libertarian, that would be obvious on its face, but I'll spell it out here.
The perennial shortage of employees within a job sector with low pay and poor working conditions is a result of the invisible hand saying (slapping, really) "employees aren't interested in working here for low pay and poor working conditions, improve one, the other (or preferably both) and the market will respond accordingly".
That’s not really offering a solution. Where is the money to pay them more going to come from?
this is the first time i've ever seen a liberal ask where the money is going to come from
Where is the money to pay them more going to come from?
From the seven to nine figure incomes of executives and board members; instead of dividends and stock buybacks; from tax reductions; from price increases. I'm sure there's more I'm not thinking of.
Carousel? If there's no old people, there's no nursing homes, and no demand for these low-paying jobs that no one wants to do so we don't need to import workers for those nonexistent jobs.
Isn't Canada ahead of us there with MAiD?
OK, I’ll write “Carousel” up on the whiteboard. Remember everyone, this is a brainstorming exercise, so there are no bad answers!
How do you solve the staffing issues caused by low pay and poor conditions?
Is it "poor conditions" when your job gets converted from caring for the elderly to forcibly isolating them prison-guard style? On the one hand, low pay and poor conditions seems more systemic. On the other hand, the fact that the conditions could get much lower in the span of any given two weeks is also protracted (especially with handouts).
I would say, either way, calling for more immigrants as a solution seems very much like intentionally creating a violent social(ist) powder keg.
I would say, either way, calling for more immigrants as a solution seems very much like intentionally creating a violent social(ist) powder keg.
It's admitting that your job sector is a violent, socialist powder keg, and so the answer is importing more people used to living in a violent, socialist powder keg who would be better suited to the environment.
How much of that is a result of poor reimbursement from government programs? Maybe some of these places are just making do with the pennies they get from Medicare.
It might all be a result of poor reimbursement from the government. I can say as someone who worked in the healthcare industry for 20 years that it is very likely a systemic problem resulting from structures within the Medicare and Medicaid systems. That doesn't change the argument, it just makes it more complex to fix. And no, bringing in immigrants willing to work in the sector for lower pay and worse conditions is not the answer. Even if for optics alone.
Nursing home industry advocate: Senator, we need to make adjustments to the Medicare and Medicaid compensation fee and payment structures. The nursing home sector is one of the most difficult sectors in healthcare to be financially sustainable. Profit margins are razor thin, and with employment being the biggest cost center, the industry is having a difficult time attracting workers. It's a Faustian bargain: Increase worker pay, go out of business. Keep worker pay sustainable, lose the workers.
Senator: Look, there's an easy answer to your industry woes... *shoves Reason magazine into the hands of the Nursing home industry advocate* and it's right here inside these pages. Hire more immigrants. Now my secretary will see you out.
And no, bringing in immigrants willing to work in the sector for lower pay and worse conditions is not the answer.
The people who created the minimum wage did so because blacks were migrating from the South and working for lower pay than whites. The solution was to create a floor on the price of labor, with the stated intent being to deprive undesirables from being able to get a job. At least they were honest about the economics of it back then.
Sarc demands tax payers increase spending. Hmm.
Sure, maybe they take care of old folks, but then every single one of them, without exception, votes Democrat.
You see, they leave their socialist hellhole countries because they want to spread the very traits that made them leave the place to the new place where they are going.
It's true. I heard it here.
If they tended to vote Republican, Democrats would be manning the parapets to keep them from coming and Republicans would be holding the doors open.
So I tend to expect them to be Democrat voters, pulling the lever for D's with one hand while they have the other hand in taxpayers' pockets.
Anything to justify open borders there, Fiona. BTW, have you opened your own home to them and put your money where your mouth is?
Not if the immigrants are unskilled or MS13 members.
Once unskilled, always unskilled. An nobody ever leaves gangs.
Being murdered for leaving is a disincentive.
Ask a Scientologist.
sarc, the US is currently a welfare state that borrows trillions a year. That is unsustainable. Bringing in more people that will feed at the government trough won’t make things better. Many of the currently unskilled won’t get out of that situation. I’m fine with loose borders once all govt welfare is eliminated. Until then, import capable folks.
There is a lot of opposing "facts" when it comes to what resources are consumed by immigrants vs what they contribute. Or as Mark Twain said, figures don't lie but liars figure. Based upon what I've seen there is still a net gain from immigration. As in they produce more than they consume. That doesn't mean they don't consume. It means they produce more.
Productive ones do. Are these the unskilled immigrants that you previously referenced or are we shifting topics?
Did you start out skilled?
I had American parents paying for food, shelter, clothing and utilities while I got skilled.
When I have worked abroad I went there skilled. Those countries would not have wanted nor taken me had I not shown up with knowledge and experience in my field. I also spoke the languages in those countries
You could have had American parents who were leaches.
They weren’t. You don’t win the pony.
What's the difference between multigenerational welfare and immigrants, economically?
Multigenerational welfare families are piles of shit. Productive immigrants are great.
Sarc, illegals are a drain on the economy. Case closed.
I think a lot of anti-immigrant people share the same fallacious thinking as those who rail against "the rich" as if it's some amorphous group. In fact rich people get poor and poor people get rich. New immigrants get old. Unskilled people gain skills. Gangbangers grow up. New generations assimilate.
The nation is almost $32T in debt. Much of that spending is due to the many forms of welfare. I’m a libertarian that denounces all forms of government welfare. If someone can come here and make it without me being coerced into subsidizing their existence, then I am good with that. If someone else wants to pay the tab privately, I’m good with that too. That is not the reality in which we live.
Immigrants grow the debt, but they also grow the pie.
Productive immigrants grow the pie. Have worked with quite a few and they are awesome.
Most unproductive people learn to be productive. Be them immigrants or teenagers. It appears that one of your premises is that unskilled immigrants remain that way, while only natives acquire skills.
The US is not a jobs skills charity for other countries. Let them level up where they are then have them come here when they can produce.
My premise is I’m not interested in being forced to fund the lifestyles, hopes and dreams of people not living under my roof. I do it enough already. Importing more of what I don’t want is not a positive for me.
I agree Chumby, plus illegals are, well, illegal.
Not obese woman from Central America with eight kids and no daddy...come on corn pop..time to deport all illegals now..and fine any US company hiring one $100K . that would stop all this crap in a few weeks.
Other than place of birth, what’s the difference between unskilled immigrants and native trailer trash?
If you are suggesting non-productive people get voted off the island, I’ll ask where do you think you’ll be sent?
Watch it, or you'll get the "mean girls" treatment.
We're stuck with the native trailer trash because they're Americans. We could choose to stop subsidizing their reproduction.
I certainly wish we would.
You mean other than the fact that you aren't advocating on behalf of the trailer trash and are, instead, invoking them derisively like the opposite side of the same partisan coin you claim to oppose?
Because, unlike you're racist partisan hackery, everybody else talking about cutting the welfare state wants it cut, for everyone, first.
One is an American citizen, and the other is not. It’s the law. If you want to eliminate sovereign borders, change the constitution.
Now stop playing Groomer Jeffy sophist games about open borders. No one is buying.
Facts evolve you say?
"Based upon what I’ve seen there is still a net gain from immigration. As in they produce more than they consume. That doesn’t mean they don’t consume. It means they produce more."
The question isn't whether to say yes or no to "immigration" as a whole. The question is, is there a better possible policy than what we have now? As the person you're responding to explained, there is.
Furthermore, to determine what is the best policy, you have to simply ask: Best for whom? Talking about a "net gain" is just a propaganda talking point that you fell for. Whose gain, exactly? And whose loss, if any?
Economically, our mass immigration policy amounts to "just another income redistribution program:" it transfers $500 billion a year away from the American working class. And that money is primarily transferred to the wealthy few. With that understanding, it is easy to see why government policy departs so dramatically from the will of the people on this more than any other issue. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/trump-clinton-immigration-economy-unemployment-jobs-214216/
Not only will unrestricted immigration fix the nursing home worker shortage, it's also a great floor wax, dessert topping, and part of this nutritious breakfast! It's also carbon-neutral, completely organic and biodegradable, whitens your teeth, kills roaches and fleas, and makes your whole home sparkle and smell fresh as a daisy.
Why don't we just get all 8B people to plant themselves here in the good old US of A and signed up for all these jobs that Americans won't do? Since every immigrant is net positive, think of the benefits we'll get from that move!
This may come as a shock, but they don’t all want to come here. Even many who would like to come here and work for a while want to go back eventually.
So…… just 2 billion then?
What is your limit? Have you ever thought about it?
People who complain about immigrants are disciples of Malthus in a way. He predicted that population growth would outstrip the world's ability to produce food, and the result would be starvation. He failed to consider human ingenuity. At the time he came up with his theory, over 90% of the world lived in abject poverty. Now we've got close to ten times as many people, and less than 10% live in abject poverty. Obviously he was wrong.
The opponents of immigration point to what is consumed and say "See? There's not going to be enough for everyone!" Like Malthus they fail to take into account what these new people add to the economy and to society. They deliberately overlook goods and services produced, businesses that are created, new ideas and inventions that are created, and all the other positives that come with more people.
As counter-intuitive as it may be, often the answer to problems caused by more people is more people.
No, I'm worried that unchecked immigration will outstrip my ability to pay the taxes required to support them.
Driving the news: Legal U.S. residency is no longer required to obtain state and local government benefits, professional licenses or business permits under a law that took effect July 1.
The 2021 law signed by Gov. Jared Polis makes available state benefits, including dental care, mental health counseling and family services. It also expands eligibility for property tax, rent and utility subsidies.
The estimated cost for expanding eligibility to immigrants is $12 million a year, according to a legislative analysis.
*looks at when the last time a legislative analysis on projected costs of a program were ever in line with reality*
I mean, jfc.
About time Mexicans get equal access to social programs. They do all the work.
And the ignorance of sarc, including racism, is put right in front.
If that were how it worked out, I'd be on your side. The problem is, I'm paying for the meth addict's healthcare AND the illegal immigrants healthcare too, now.
Not really. A accumulating national debt is paying for it, and most of that debt isn’t going to immigrants. It’s going to the elderly.
Here’s another one,
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3771724-biden-administration-approves-washington-state-request-to-offer-health-insurance-to-undocumented-immigrants/
My state’s commie governor is going to make us pay to provide healthcare for illegals.
People who ignore costs and the welfare state are just misrepresenting their ignorance on the subject and can't defend it against actual analysis, so they make up motivations of their opponents. See sarc.
Yeah, he’s almost as bad as Groomer Jeffy when it comes to illegals.
The opponents of immigration point to what is consumed and say “See? There’s not going to be enough for everyone!”
No, they point to immigrants pouring in and literally taking welfare money from us and we say "see, this is a scam on the working class"
All you have to do is look to Europe to see what they're talking about.
See the difference? hope this helps.
*Looks around*
I'm not in Europe.
but you do understand how to compare and contrast similar things in life and in the world right?
Europe is experiencing a mass immigration of welfare people and it is cauusing social breakdowns and the fomenting of a resentful underclass throughout many countries in europe, as well as a massive drain on the public finances.
Americans can easily look to Erurope and consider that maybe that will happen here if they just open the floodgates of immiigration for millions of welfare recipients.
But you know that. you're being obtuse the way you do.
Those countries are the economic equivalent of American states, with mostly homogeneous populations. While this country is supposed to be the melting pot.
But you know that. you’re being obtuse the way you do.
I like people who see debate as us against ignorance, instead of me against you.
I that respect I don't like you very much.
you fight with everyone on this board all the time. Maybe it's time to look at who might be the cause of that.
Also, it's ignorant indeed to think american economy and society would somehow not have any similar effects due to similar mass immiigration of welfare recipients the way Europe is experiencing now. That is definitely ignorant.
To dismiss all the people with those concerns as simply "ignorant" is just weak thinking and smug.
That’s ok, everyone here hates you almost universally.
Put the 40 down for a moment and realize that "Europe" is an example and a comparison. Europe actually has it harder than us with respect to immigration. While we deal primarily with Central Americans who tend to be Roman Catholic (Christian sect), Europe has a set of immigrants who are radically different in culture than the local populace. They tend to be Muslim, and have a vastly different set of mores from the locals regarding sex, women, etc.
“I’m a dumbass who thinks every projection of a budget shortfall, not matter how accurate and no matter how severe, or insignificant, is synonymous with Malthusianism.” – sarcasmic
“For 80 yrs. I’ve supported lying to Americans to take their taxes support a Ponzi scheme (principally, there are plenty of other overt Ponzi schemes like the ACA that aren’t as old) and rather than admit it’s (they’re) a Ponzi scheme and do something because there won’t be enough Americans to keep it (them) afloat, I’d rather lie to immigrants and make them buy in too.” – sarcasmic
Another stirring meeting of Libertarians For Authoritarian, Bigoted, And Cruel Immigration Policies And Practices, convened at a faux libertarian blog overrun by disaffected clingers and sponsored by the Federalist Society, the Freedom Caucus, Stormfront, and Incels R Us.
Yes, Artie, keep on projecting.
How many immigrants are you hosting in your residence?
Doesn’t he live in a halfway house for the borderline retarded?
You tellem big booty! On my island of Martha's Vineyard we welcome immigrants. We have 70% the land mass of Gaza which houses 2million poor POC. We will gladly take 1M poor Palestinians next year. Obama and Diamond have large estates there..
Regarding last summer's drop off by the facist DeSantis, the 50 or so didn't want to stay. They asked us to move them to shelters in Boston. really they did...
https://twitter.com/6Voodoo/status/1629170228801200135?t=Yj3TOq6tlJFwhY-ANs0zFg&s=19
Perhaps all these trains are derailing because the tracks were laid by the Chinese and the Irish... just a thought.
In Ohio, they're more likely to have been laid by Hungarians, Greeks, and Czechs.
No. Most likely laid by unionized workers.
Legal immigration should be loose fast and easy but with caveats.
Any violent crime is an automatic deportation out. And for 10 years you cant avail yourself of any social welfare programs or money including earned income credit.
Show up and work. And we will be glad to have you.
the problem with unfettered LEGAL immigration is that the USA then becomes a giant welfare center for the rest of the world. this is exactly what's happening to Europe right now and it isnt pretty.
also they should fast track the entry of any applicant with the caveat that Iimmigration is doing a thorough background check on you might gett sent home/
Also bring back the declaration that you have never been part of the communist party and i's auto dq if so. No fucking communists.
Even better, pass a constitutional amendment criminalizing the practice of Marxism. Which would end the democrat party.
Secure borders are a prerequisite for that.
indeed
Sometimes using salvage parts (broken down nation parts) to fix my car just doesn't pan out either. Especially when the parts don't fit (wrong ideology) or are already broken (illegal/criminal entry).
But apparently according to Reason; getting MORE parts is far more important than actually keeping a Car/Nation that runs.
But wait, there's more!
Lol. You win the pony.
https://twitter.com/CompositeGuy_/status/1627769270422720518?t=z6Y7yheZ_hzPmGHS5z_yww&s=19
*THREAD*
People make the claim that refugees want to work and that immigration is a boon for the economy
Let's take a look at the data regarding asylum seekers and broader immigration trends for European economies
[Links, thread]
In the first clip, with Jaba The Hut's boyfriend, I like the idea of Afghanistan and Iranian refugees turning up on British shores by boat.
Did they sail around Europe, march through the EU entirely and just sail across the Channel, or march through Russia and down the Nordic Peninsula to sail the last bit to the UK and *then* demand asylum?
Or are these the unidentifiables and undesirables that the other EU and Nordic countries have taken a hard pass on and are telling "Best of luck!" as they kick them out to sea in the UK's direction?
Well, the UK doesn't seem to object too much to the Muslim underage sex grooming groups that exist there. Towns like Rotherdam, Derby, Newscastle, Oxford, Machester studiously "look to the other way" lest they be accused of racism or Islamophobia. So maybe those other Eurpoean countries just let them keep on traveling right through on their way to the pedo-friendly confines of the UK's immigrant communities.
Just what/how well are these people trained?Education levels and standards are much lower in third world nations,especially in health care fields.Two examples from my own experience-I work in a profession that requires a board exam for licensure(no,not doing nails or massages).One of these immigrants wanted to take the board exam,but was caught trying to get someone to pose as her and take the exam for her.Another time a foreign trained nurse asked me how fast she could give a potassium chloride injection.Those in the medical professions will know that that is a scary question from someone who is supposedly a trained nurse(nurse from the Philippines this one was)
Seems like the more you make immigration legit, legal, and doable the more easier you can screen for things like this.
The only way to make screening of immigrants possible is with much better border security and immigration enforcement. If people who fear they won't pass the screening can simply walk around our ports of entry, then what our rules are will continue to be irrelevant.
The only way immigration can work is to get rid of the the democrats. Democrats like you.
How are we supposed to vet these immigrants? We have no clue to what their backgrounds. My experience as a nurse surveyor in long term health care facilities verifies the staffing shortages( the government pays young females to stay home, why work?). The residents had many complaints about staff who they couldn’t understand and treated them roughly.
or speak other languages in front of them-very rude.
robots will take over soon in nursing homes. just a matter of time.
not all immigrants are desired. obese moms with eight kids from El Salvador with no daddy isn't what we want or need. And we need to look at intelligence in terms of immigration. A simple IQ test would suffice. Say over 90 as an adult or you don't get in....that would create a society we need. Regardless of the country percentages. If 90% of folks with the highest IQ scores are from Korea and Norway..no problem.
I'd like to see migration from the Scandanavian countries and say Japan/Korea....good genes and good brains...can't go wrong.
By the way, I will lay odds that a large # of reasons bot posts are produced by immigrants... or would-be immigrants.
“immigrants… or would-be immigrants”
So, pretty much anybody.
Google paying a splendid earnings from domestic 6,850 USD a week, this is awesome a 12 months beyond I was laid-off in a totally horrible financial system. “w many thank you google every day for blessing the ones oa-11 guidelines and presently it’s miles my responsibility to pay and percentage it with all and Sunday.
.
.
Proper right here I started————————>>> GOOGLE WORK