Can someone summarize? Apparently I’ve read too many free articles this month.
What was said was:
The Trump administration is considering a plan to weed out would-be immigrants who are likely to require public assistance, as well as to deport — when possible — immigrants already living in the United States who depend on taxpayer help
As we know, there already is no “line” to wait in for poorer immigrants that the can cut. The plan* under consideration, mind you*, is a preferential option against the poor, something totally antithetical to Catholic social justice.
Remind me again where in Catholicism is it mandated that I have to pay exorbitant taxes into an inefficient welfare system?
Not saying it is good, but there is plenty of precedence for this. Read up on Ellis Island
wow man, come on. You basically want to deport poor people?
No, I want to prevent them from becoming naturalized citizens in the first place.
I read that this would affect children who are citizens but who’s parents are undocumented. I don’t know what an undocumented immigrant needs to do to be eligible for public assistance but my understanding is it’s rare. So basically he is going after a very vulnerable minority to make himself look strong. Sounds about right .
There are already existing laws about immigrants getting welfare benefits. This is not necessary.
Because draining the welfare system is a bad idea? Because you should have some marketable skills before coming into the country? :shrug:
Because according to Leftists, poverty is the cause of crime, thus the suggested policy is being proactive about fighting crime.
So, we are only to help the poor who have “marketable skills”
And who makes that judgement as to what constitutes marketable skills?
Not sure about deporting people already here, but yes, prospective immigrants need to be able to support themselves and prove that before being let in. I think our system already tries to make sure of that, so I’m not sure what additional good this would do on that front.
I don’t know, but the Social Security Administration makes that determination all the time, in every single SSD case, thousands of times per year. So I guess some people at least think they know.
A sponsoring employer of course. Or you can put your money where your mouth is and offer voluntary assistance for immigrants instead of voting to make me do it.
Catholic social doctrine mandates a preferential option for the poor, but not specifics, which is why I said what I did, not what you addressed.
Yes pretty much suits him.
Trump has said he wants to do away with the work visa program. Considering the last week or so, I fully expect him to make good on that promise.
Except we can make the argument that this helps impoverished Americans given the lack of foreign labor bidding down their work and draining the welfare system. So unless you can explain to me why we should prefer foreigners over Americans, you cannot claim that.
I did list an alternative.
I sponsored my ex-wife. Does that count? Can I have an opinion on American immigration now?