The Quote Below—More Misinformation from the Media
“The number of displaced people worldwide has reached 122 million — the largest on record. Of this group, 38 million are categorized as refugees . . . . Twenty percent more refugees will need resettlement in 2025 than in 2024, yet pathways to safety in the West are narrowing rapidly.
“President-elect Donald Trump’s second term might usher in an era of cruelty. Trump has vowed to start mass deportations of undocumented immigrants in the U.S. and scale back
“Anti-refugee sentiments have been fueling the rise of far-right parties, and Trump’s second term will see these movements in full bloom.
“Far-right parties that were previously regarded as untouchable for their racist and antisemitic rhetoric now sweep European elections. In the past year, the Freedom Party came first in the Austrian elections; the Alternative for Germany won its first state election and is poised to do well in German federal elections in 2025; and Marine Le Pen’s National Rally won the European Parliament elections in France. These parties made refugee admission their top issue and flaunted hard-line policies to reduce immigration. . . .
“Refugee resettlement is likely on the chopping block for the incoming administration. When Trump first took office, he reduced President Barack Obama’s cap of 110,000 refugee admissions for 2017 to 50,000. The Trump administration further decreased the cap every year until setting it at 15,000 for 2021 — a record low. Biden’s administration, predictably, moved in the opposite direction, raising the ceiling. It is now set at 125,000 for 2025, but Trump will likely start cutting it again. . . .
“There is a solution that meets this historic moment: expand domestic infrastructure in processing and housing asylum seekers while their cases undergo review, thereby creating thousands of jobs and growing local economies, especially near the border. This solution upholds laws on asylum and saves the lives of the most vulnerable.
“Trump’s administration is likely to do the opposite. The United States and the World’s Wealthiest Countries Have Turned Their Backs on Refugees, Vladimir Hamed-Troyansky, Miami Herald [Link]
Fact Check of Above Quote: Mass immigration advocates have found the pretexts of refugee resettlement and asylum useful to their agendas. In times past, these categories involved individuals who faced a personal threat of persecution from their governments. Today, immigration advocates have significantly shifted that definition to include just about anyone around the globe who is less than happy with where he is living. The advocates maintain that we must take them all in out of moral obligation because we are “rich.”
The fact is, we have already been too generous in our admissions of immigrants, who now number 52 million, or one out of every seven U.S. residents. We are not so rich that we can continue on this path without serious social and economic problems. The reality is that most Americans aren’t rich, and many are falling behind economically. One reason is that mass immigration is pulling down their wages. Immigration, however, does help to enrich rich people. Some examples are those who run the “charities” that settle refugees and asylum seekers in the U.S.
Typically, these organizations receive most or a large share of their funding from the federal government (i.e., American taxpayers). Their executives make hefty salaries, as they steer the refugees and asylees into American communities. Their charity consists having those communities pick up the social service tab for the newcomers. Once again, the taxpayers take a hit while the charity managers boast of their generosity.
To serve genuine refugees and asylees, a better strategy than bringing them here is to resettle them as close as possible to their native countries. This is more cost effective than resettlement in the U.S., and it allows them to live in a more congenial cultural environment.
The charities tell us that we as Americans should be more generous. Perhaps they could set an example by using their own money to practice their charity.