America Last: Biden admin to increase refugee invader cap from 62500 to 125000 in 2022

[Anti Federalist]

Joe Biden Plans Bringing 10 Times as Many Refugees to U.S. Next Year

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...g-10-times-as-many-refugees-to-u-s-next-year/

John Binder 20 Sep 2021

President Joe Biden is planning to bring to the United States in Fiscal Year 2022 about 10 times as many refugees as he will have brought this year, the State Department confirmed on Monday.

In May, Biden announced he would raise the refugee resettlement cap to 62,500 refugees for Fiscal Year 2021 — more than four times the cap that former President Trump imposed for the year at about 15,000 refugees.

For Fiscal Year 2022, which begins October 1, Biden will set the cap at 125,000 refugees who can be resettled across the U.S. over the subsequent 12 months, a State Department notice to Congress confirmed.

The data projects that the Biden administration will have brought about 12,500 refugees to the U.S. by the end of Fiscal Year 2021.

The cap is merely a numerical limit and not a goal for the State Department to reach.

Specifically, the State Department will allocate the most refugee spots for Africans and foreign nationals from East and South Asia. About 10,000 spots will go to Europeans and foreign nationals in Central Asia, while 15,000 spots will be allocated to Latin Americans and those in the Caribbean.

In addition to increasing refugee resettlement, Biden rescinded an order that allowed states and localities to decide whether they wanted refugee resettlement in their communities. The order, signed by Trump, gave Americans veto power over the program that they, for decades, have been shut out of.

Over the last 20 years, nearly one million refugees have been resettled in the country. This is a number more than double that of residents living in Miami, Florida, and would be the equivalent of annually adding the population of Pensacola, Florida, to the country.

Refugee resettlement costs American taxpayers nearly $9 billion every five years, according to research, and each refugee costs taxpayers about $133,000 over the course of their lifetime. Within five years, an estimated 16 percent of all refugees admitted will need housing assistance paid for by taxpayers.

 

[TheCount]

It's enlightening that you think they're invaders even when they're explicitly accepted and legally allowed to be here.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Deju vu. A repeat of what was done to Europe. What a coincidence.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

It's enlightening that you think they're invaders even when they're explicitly accepted and legally allowed to be here.

Accepted by who? Are you emotionally or famially connected with people 8k miles away?

 

[Anti Federalist]

It's enlightening that you think they're invaders even when they're explicitly accepted and legally allowed to be here.

This government is the enemy of people.

It is facilitating demographic warfare against the people.

There are more than enough Quislings and traitors to provide cover.

 

[TheCount]

This government is the enemy of people.

It is facilitating demographic warfare against the people.

The people? Aren't these refugees also... the people?

 

[PAF]

This government is the enemy of people.

It is facilitating demographic warfare against the people.

There are more than enough Quislings and traitors to provide cover.

I don't see it that way at all. Again, you are blaming others for what you created.

 

[Okie RP fan]

It's enlightening that you think they're invaders even when they're explicitly accepted and legally allowed to be here.

This subject is always so fascinating to me within the libertarian sphere. And it's no wonder considering the whiplash one will receive by hearing the polar opposite takes on the subject of immigration, border control, etc.

I feel comfortable now in saying that I want a secured border (not walled) ala military outposts along them and not in other countries half the world away. I'm all for immigration, but there's a reason countries around the world like Japan, New Zealand, etc. have rigorous controls. For the examples I mentioned, they're small in land mass, or in some cases they wish to remain homogenous (east Asian countries). In the U.S., we have the land, but flooding our country with people's who do not share the same cultural beliefs, languages, etc. with us creates, let's just say potentially interesting situations. In short, I do not want tens of thousands of these people coming into this country in such a short period of time. I don't see what good can come of this.

Believe whatever you want to believe about him, but I will say Trump was onto something when he said "They're not sending their best." These are people who will likely end up in ghettos, slums, etc. and end up living on some type of welfare system as many illegal Mexicans have already been doing for decades. Now, does that mean all of them? Nope. But I'd bet a large chunk.

Does any of this make me anti-immigration? Nope. The situation is a bit more nuanced than that.

 

[TheCount]

In the U.S., we have the land, but flooding our country with people's who do not share the same cultural beliefs, languages, etc. with us creates, let's just say potentially interesting situations.

Such as?

In short, I do not want tens of thousands of these people coming into this country in such a short period of time. I don't see what good can come of this.

Tens of thousands of people is an issue? In a population of 330 million?

These are people who will likely end up in ghettos, slums, etc. and end up living on some type of welfare system as many illegal Mexicans have already been doing for decades.

Because government actively prevents illegal mexicans from working.

 

[PAF]

This subject is always so fascinating to me within the libertarian sphere. And it's no wonder considering the whiplash one will receive by hearing the polar opposite takes on the subject of immigration, border control, etc.

I feel comfortable now in saying that I want a secured border (not walled) ala military outposts along them and not in other countries half the world away. I'm all for immigration, but there's a reason countries around the world like Japan, New Zealand, etc. have rigorous controls. For the examples I mentioned, they're small in land mass, or in some cases they wish to remain homogenous (east Asian countries). In the U.S., we have the land, but flooding our country with people's who do not share the same cultural beliefs, languages, etc. with us creates, let's just say potentially interesting situations. In short, I do not want tens of thousands of these people coming into this country in such a short period of time. I don't see what good can come of this.

Believe whatever you want to believe about him, but I will say Trump was onto something when he said "They're not sending their best." These are people who will likely end up in ghettos, slums, etc. and end up living on some type of welfare system as many illegal Mexicans have already been doing for decades. Now, does that mean all of them? Nope. But I'd bet a large chunk.

Does any of this make me anti-immigration? Nope. The situation is a bit more nuanced than that.

Statists love to blame the "other side" for what they create together.

If as much energy went into "Stop the Incentives", as was the call was for more border security, Walls, MIC holding facilities, DHS and Border Control, Green Cards and a "path to Citizenship" which enables government programs, eVerify soon to National/International ID For All, taking Private Property from individuals/business via Government Eminent Domain, insisting that immigrants sign up in order to pay "fair share" federal taxes, we would not be at this juncture.

But, it is now the country that repuGs and leftists created together.

Left Jack Boot, Right Jack Boot, march in lock step.

"Undocumented" workers cannot go to the local government office and tell the kind old lady behind the desk: "I want something". Because the kind old lady would say, "sir, you have no ID/documentation, please step aside you are holding up the line".

 

[69360]

That's fine. Just don't give them anything for free.

 

[Okie RP fan]

Such as?
Look at what's been happening in many European countries with the influx of Muslim populations. Rapes, gangs, burglaries have all dramatically increased and there are pockets forming in some cities that have become unwalkable for the, let's say "native" populations.



Tens of thousands of people is an issue? In a population of 330 million?
Maybe, maybe not. I'm sure a lot of people in Europe were asking similar things. Europe is slowly having its entire cultural history and heritage ripped up as immigrants take over. We can go into another debate about how history does this, etc. but it's just a bit sad to me and something that I'm not interesting in seeing here right now unless there's an actual need for it. And I don't know there's a need for tens of thousands of immigrants coming into our country during this societal upheaval/schism we're going through.



Because government actively prevents illegal mexicans from working.
I'm not saying that. I am saying, however, that our systems are in place for illegal immigrants to use and I'll take the Ron Paul stance that we could help curb illegal immigration by taking some of these structures away.

In bold.

Edit: I should add something to clarify: When I said I'd like to see the military on the border, I'd prefer that over them being in thousands of bases elsewhere. At least here they'd be defending our actual borders. Otherwise, I'd appreciate dis-incentivizing programs and policies that help push them over here.

I'd also like for our path to citizenship to be much shorter, simpler, and more conducive to encouraging people to use that path as opposed to just walking over.

 

[tod evans]

It's enlightening that you think they're invaders even when they're explicitly accepted and legally allowed to be here.

Justify this;

Specifically, the State Department will allocate the most refugee spots for Africans and foreign nationals from East and South Asia. About 10,000 spots will go to Europeans and foreign nationals in Central Asia, while 15,000 spots will be allocated to Latin Americans and those in the Caribbean.

 

[phill4paul]

"Undocumented" workers cannot go to the local government office and tell the kind old lady behind the desk: "I want something". Because the kind old lady would say, "sir, you have no ID/documentation, please step aside you are holding up the line".

But they can walk in and say our child was just born on U.S. soil and that makes it a citizen. Now, since we are the guardians give us all the free shit in our child's name.

 

[69360]

But they can walk in and say our child was just born on U.S. soil and that makes it a citizen. Now, since we are the guardians give us all the free $#@! in our child's name.

Yeah they can. What are you going to do? The child is a citizen under our current system. It would be better for everyone if the parents were here legally on a green card, working and paying into the system. That is why I don't really have a problem with all the far right secure the border crap, but also would support legal immigration for all who want it. You take away the incentive for commiting a crime to get into the US and then benefitting finacially from it. The lack of free shit will only attract those who want our way of life and not a free ride.

 

[TheCount]

Justify this;

Justify what?

 

[PAF]

But they can walk in and say our child was just born on U.S. soil and that makes it a citizen. Now, since we are the guardians give us all the free $#@! in our child's name.

It would be moot. If the parents couldn’t get free things, they wouldn’t make the trip in the first place, unless it was to work.

Ask yourself, would you and your spouse leave everything behind, travel 2,000 miles by foot, knowing that you would not get anything for free? You’d either have to feed yourself, or go somewhere else.

 

[Snowball]

I don't see it that way at all. Again, you are blaming others for what you created.

[MENTION=3169]Anti Federalist[/MENTION] did not create anything concerning this.

You should show more respect when you rattle on your keyboard, captain entropy.

 

[PAF]

[MENTION=3169]Anti Federalist[/MENTION] did not create anything concerning this.

You should show more respect when you rattle on your keyboard, captain entropy.

Read Post #10 - the NEW “republican” platform of the late 20th Century to present, Mr. Take One For The Team.

 

[BSWPaulsen]

[MENTION=3169]Anti Federalist[/MENTION] did not create anything concerning this.

You should show more respect when you rattle on your keyboard, captain entropy.

Interesting use of entropy. Inertia was what came to my mind, but perhaps both are applicable.