From Dear Leader's alma mater: http://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.ed...s-of-immigration-on-the-united-states-economy Conclusion Economists generally agree that the effects of immigration on the U.S. economy are broadly positive. Immigrants, whether high- or low-skilled, legal or illegal, are unlikely to replace native-born workers or reduce their wages over the long-term, though they may cause some short-term dislocations in labor markets. Indeed, the experience of the last few decades suggests that immigration may actually have significant long-term benefits for the native-born, pushing them into higher-paying occupations and raising the overall pace of innovation and productivity growth. Moreover, as baby boomers have begun moving into retirement in advanced economies around the world, immigration is helping to keep America comparatively young and reducing the burden of financing retirement benefits for a growing elderly population. While natives bear some upfront costs for the provision of public services to immigrants and their families, the evidence suggests a net positive return on the investment over the long term.
You seem not to understand we need immigrants and unlike what Trump thinks people from Norway don’t want to come to America in the numbers we need. So unless we get our birth rates up here in America, we need immigration to stave off decline.
Really? I live in an area that has more than its share of immigrants and refugees. And even when I lived in Maine, try living in a small town and having the government suddenly decide to dump several thousand refugees there from Somalia and Vietnam. And where they had/have the biggest conflict is with the French Canadian community the French-canadians learned the language, worked their arses off in the mills day and night, and want to know why their communities are being torn apart by people who collect welfare and their relatives just keep coming and coming (not including the Vietnamese in that group who tend to like to work and study and other positive things.) You know, today's immigrant is not necessarily your father's and grandfather's era immigrants. You have Hillary's number one go-to- muslim buddy Linda Sarsour, telling people that "their duty is not to assimilate." Whereas in the past, the newly arrived immigrants were often/usually more pro-American than the native born ones because they did not take things for granted. So, back to my question, how many are the Chinese and the Japanese taking and how much are the UN and liberals leaning on them to be "diverse" and compassionate. Oh, I see, they get a pass. This is about white guilt and who America "owes."
I see. So you are saying that Norway is not meeting the established allowable quota for immigrants to the U.S. Is that what you are saying?
So the president talks like every other American in the country. Ok, the real Americans. If he said it ,give the man another gold star fuk the #snowflakes where they breath, and everywhere else
First thing you need to do is to stop conflating immigrants with refugees. It might be hard because Fox and Friends doesn’t make the distinction but it is actually important to the discussion. As far as today’s immigrants not being as pro-American as my 2nd great grandfather (who was an immigrant along with my 2 G grandmother), maybe, maybe not. He had his hand broke by some anti immigrant types while standing in line to get a coal shoveling job. So I don’t know what his impression was. I’m guessing mixed. As to your question, I’m sure the Chinese are letting in as many immigrants as they need, which is nil. As to the refugee situation in Asia they should do a better job but they don’t have western values either.
I see. The UN and libs have excused them because they are not westerners. Got it. So, do you have some data showing how far short Norway fell from its immigration quota to the U.S. in recent years? I would like to examine that with you.