Archive | welfare RSS feed for this section

U.S. immigrants –43% on welfare after 20 years

8 Aug

 U.S. immigrants –43% on welfare after 20 years

Expanding legal immigration is a contentious issue for voters, the vast majority of whom tell pollsters that they want the levels either retained or decreased.

But most politicians want legal immigration expanded.

During his time in the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama backed bills that would have dramatically boosted legal immigration, potentially by hundreds of thousands a year. As president, he has called for the same thing.

“We need to provide our farms a legal way to hire workers that they rely on, and a path for those workers to earn legal status. And our laws should respect families following the rules — reuniting them more quickly instead of splitting them apart,” Mr. Obama said in a major speech on the subject in El Paso, Texas, in 2011.

His presumed Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, in June called for increasing legal immigration for students who study in high-tech fields and admitting unlimited family members of those who hold green cards.

“Our immigration system should help promote strong families as well — not keep them apart. Our nation benefits when moms and dads and their kids are all living together under the same roof,” Mr. Romney told the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials.

Mr. Camarota’s report took a broad look at the immigrant population and found that immigrants are contributing to major changes in American society, including that one-fourth of public school students now speak languages other than English at home.

It also found that immigrants as a population lead complex economic lives that aren’t easily put into one category or another.

Immigrants made up more than half of all farm workers, 41 percent of taxi drivers and 48 percent of maids and house cleaners, but they also represented about one-third of all computer programmers and 27 percent of doctors.

The statistics varied greatly by geography. In Massachusetts, native-led households averaged $89,000 in income while immigrant households averaged $66,000.

In Virginia, immigrant-led households averaged $93,000 in income, far outstripping native households’ $80,000 average. Likewise, immigrant families averaged a larger tax burden in Virginia — though they also had higher rates of use of welfare or Medicaid.

The center found that use of public benefits varied dramatically based on where immigrants originated.

Mexicans were most likely to use means-tested benefit programs, with 57 percent, while 6 percent of those from the United Kingdom did. The rate for native-born Americans is 23 percent.

Mr. Camarota said a key dividing line is educational attainment. Immigrants who have been in the U.S. 20 years and who have bachelor’s degrees or higher make slightly more than the average native-born American. But immigrants with only high school educations make less no matter how long they have been in the U.S.

“The fact is the less-educated in particular — they don’t do well over time,” he said. “It’s not reasonable to expect an immigrant who comes to America with only a high school education to close the gap with the native-born.”

Scholars debate whether the current wave of immigrants will assimilate differently from those in the 1800s and at the start of the 20th century.

George Borjas, a Harvard University professor, has argued that second-generation Americans — the children of today’s immigrants — will fall behind in wages by about 10 percent by 2030.

But in “Assimilation Tomorrow,” a report released in November, Dowell Myers and John Pitkin said immigrants of the 1990s eventually will attain high rates of home-ownership and 71 percent will become U.S. citizens by 2030.

Those authors said immigrants were set back by the recent recession but were still on track to follow the same assimilation path as previous waves of immigrants.

They also said a program to legalize the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. would be critical to helping assimilation.

(((Article written by the Washington Times)))


Patriots our government has sold out the American people, how, by opening the doors of our country to those people in 3rd world countries who are poor,uneducated,who could care less about America,our traditions,our way of life.

When 3rd world immigrants come to America, they continue to operate under the same ideology,same culture as they had when they lived in their countries of origin.  They DO NOT assimilate,they do not make any effort what so ever to become Americans, but they damn sure use our freedoms and live off ((WELFARE)) the hard earned tax dollars that Americans send to Washington D.C.

Patriots, don’t you think it is about time we tell those so called leaders of our country, those we elect to represent us ((LEGAL AMERICANS)) THAT WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH, WE ARE TIRED OF SUPPORTING ILLEGALS,GREEN CARD CARRIERS,MIGRANT WORKERS.


More information on this important issue

AMERICA-THE NEXT TIME YOU EAT OUT  3rd world diseases in America

Illegal Immigration Costs YOU AND I A STAGGERING . $113 Billion a Year


Illegal Aliens Seizing Our Country with Liberal Democratic Help


31 Jan

When Barack Obama was a United States Senator he help author the Global Poverty Act (S.2433, based on H.R. 1302

Details, nature and scope of legislation in the U.S. Senate that would rob Americans of their hard earned money and place us all under the BOOT of international SOCIALISM

We hard working Americans are already faced with

• Extortionate and confiscatory taxes wherever they turn on virtually everything they earn, purchase, or do, from the local level on up to the federal level;

• Myriad regulations, controls and arbitrary rules that hamper or obstruct their productivity and their lives;

• Footing the endless bills of earmarked pork barrel projects at home in the amount of billions;

• Footing the bill in the amount of the billions for bottomless altruist and “humanitarian” pork barrel projects abroad;

• Footing the bill for an ever-expanding and ever more costly welfare state to subsidize the ill, the retired, the aged, the young, etc.

• Being held hostage by, say, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and other hostile “oil-producing” countries, because our government has decided that snail darters, sea cows, and caribou have a greater right to live than have human beings;

• Paying more for food because mandated ethanol, which reports prove costs more in oil to produce than it “saves,” in the gas they buy is taking more crop acreage out of production;

When Barack Obama was a United States Senator he help author the Global Poverty Act (S.2433, based on H.R. 1302, passed by the House September 25, 2007), that legislation would deliver Americans into a state of indentured servitude as laborers for the United Nations.

Perhaps “indentured servitude” is too kind a term, for as horrendous a condition as it is, there is usually a time limit to such servitude.

Slavery would be the more accurate term in this instance, for what Congress is considering is servitude by Americans in perpetuity, in exchange for nothing but the privilege of laboring to “save” the world without thanks or reward, of filling the alleged needs of others, of performing unlimited “community service” for the offense of merely existing.

The not-so-peculiar and odd thing about H.R. 1302 was that it passed the House by voice vote.

This is a stratagem adopted by legislators who fear that a bill is so outrageous that it is better that no record be kept of those who endorsed it.

S.2433 was passed from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in the same manner – by voice vote, without public hearings, to protect the identities of the guilty. It will probably be introduced to the Senate for a similar, anonymous voice vote — by Harry Reid.

There is a double irony in this behavior. First, S.2433 was a bipartisan-sponsored bill.

This underscores the fact that there is no fundamental difference between the Democratic and Republican Parties (LEADERSHIP)

Second, it is a piece of legislation which, given the altruist, collectivist premises behind it, one would have thought its creators should have trumpeted boastfully. But it is being handled by corrupt, guilty, fearful sneaks who haven’t the courage of their own malice.

The bill’s co-sponsor is Republican Senator Richard Lugar of Indiana, who sits on the Foreign Relations Committee.

Its other co-sponsors was at the time Senator Joseph Biden, Maria Cantwell, Chris Dodd, Dick Durbin, Russ Feingold, Dianne Feinstein, Charles Hagel, and Robert Mendez, all Democrats.

The bill was the subject of a strong editorial in Investor’s Business Daily of February 28, 2008, “Obama’s 0.7% Solution For Poverty Gets Pass from Senate Republicans.”

According to IBD, the bipartisan bill would require the president “to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the U.S. foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.”

The “Millennium Development Goalrefers to a United Nations declaration adopted by the U.N. Millennium Assembly and Summit in 2000 that calls for “the eradication of poverty” by “redistribution (of) wealth and land,” cancellation of “the debts of developing countries” and “a fair distribution of the earth’s resources.”

The IBD reports that “The Millennium project is monitored by Jeffrey D. Sachs, a Columbia University economist.

In 2005 he presented then-U.N. secretary general Kofi Annan with a 3,000-page report based on the research of 265 so-called poverty specialists. “Sachs’ document criticized the U.S. for giving only $16.5 billion a year in global anti-poverty aid.

He argued that we should spend an additional $30 billion a year in order to reach the 0.7% target that the U.N. set for the U.S. in 2000….Sachs said that the only way to force the U.S. to commit that much

money is by a global tax, such as a tax on fossil fuels [oil, coal, natural gas].”

The tax would be imposed not only on their production, but on their use, as well. Among other consequences, Americans would be impoverished for the purpose of reducing poverty abroad by 0.7 percent of the U.S.’s gross domestic product.

The Millennium declaration, reports IBD, also calls for a “currency transfer tax,” a “tax on the rental value of land and natural resources,” a “royalty on worldwide fossil energy production – oil, natural gas, coal,” “fees for the commercial use of the oceans, fees for airplane use of the skies, fees for use of the electromagnetic spectrum, fees on foreign exchange transactions, and a tax on the carbon content of fuels.”

The U.N. has assumed that it governs the earth, and wishes to penalize the most productive country on it for, well, being the most productive. If you never quite understood the nature and purpose of the “unification” and “global amity” plans described by Rand in Atlas Shrugged, this plan is its real world counterpart.

In practical terms, the Millennium declaration is a prescription for not only perpetuating the “global poverty” it purports to eradicate, but also for impoverishing everyone, and for perpetuating that condition, as well.

But the Obama bill would do more than allow the U.N. to tax American citizens.

It is more than a matter of legality or illegality. For all practical purposes, it surrenders U.S. political sovereignty and independence to the U.N., an organization most of whose members are actively hostile to the U.S. Has the U.S. ever approved a tax on its citizens imposed by the U.N.?

If it has, by what authority? Note that the wording of the Obama bill would require “the president to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy” — which assumes that the office of president is just another mode of tyranny or arbitrary power, no different from the “presidency” of any random tin pot dictatorship or regime.

TREASON- Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution states: “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

It would be interesting to see if this definition could be applied to the PAST actions of Senators Obama, Lugar, Reid and the rest of the supporters of S. 2433 (and also the sponsors and supporters of H.R. 1302).

Given that the U.N. has never disguised its hostility for the U.S., and that the enemies of the U.S. are legion in the U.N.’s membership, could passage of this bill by Congress constitute giving “aid and comfort” to our enemies, and “adhering” to their purposes and ends?

For that is what the bill amounts to: giving our enemies the right to conquer, loot, and subjugate this country and its citizens.


Gary Gatehouse Comments
Ladies and Gentlemen of America,hard working legal Americans all, Patriots

If you listened to Bracka Hussein Obama Jr’s speech  (May 19th,2011), you should understand where he is coming from.  You have to go no further to understand than the Global Poverty Act (S.2433, based on H.R. 1302 in which Obama helped author.

What Obama said  about helping Middle Eastern countries become mainstream countries and helping them with their so called  Arab Spring, saying America will help them equates to just one thing, we hard working Americans will foot the bill to help Obama’s Muslim brothers and sisters. We Americans have been thrown under the bus by Obama and his Socialist minions in congress, we are nothing more to them a way to pay for their agenda of global socialism. 

Obama and many in congress have and will use the United Nations to impose international taxes on America, they will stop at nothing to destroy America and it’s allies, we heard that today.

Glenn Beck said “we must be able to identify EVIL”  ladies and gentlemen Bracka Hussein Obama Jr and his many minions are evil, they are hell bent on putting America under the boot of Socialism/Communism!


When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”