, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Trump’s mother immigrated to the USA in May of 1930, after the 1929 crash, when unemployment had already risen to around 10%, and a lot of rich people had gone bankrupt. In short, the US had no need of Trump’s mother as a domestic (maid) in 1930. Mary MacLeod was not persecuted.

Born into a huge family, she was simply one less hungry mouth for Britain to deal with during the depression and one more for the USA to deal with. The entire world is now paying the consequences of this failure in US immigration policy. By all common-sense logic, Trump is British and they need to take him back and leave him on his maternal island in the Outer Hebrides without transport, though Dounreay would do. Dounreay has a nice golf course and mansion near the beach and radioactive hot particles which wash upon the beach.

US legal immigrants are at the highest level ever: over 37,000,000 legal immigrants. For decades the US has let stay approximately 1 million legal immigrants per year but less than 10% have been refugees. Compare this to the average of 142,857 people per year who left Ireland during the Great Famine, many but not all of whom migrated to the USA. Lost in the recent immigration debate are not only those persecuted due to ethnicity, but also those who need political and religious asylum, like those who founded America did. If the USA continues to allow immigration, it should be only of the persecuted, along with the spouses of Americans. In recent decades, it appears that the USA lets immigrate everyone but the persecuted and the spouses of Americans must wait in line behind everyone else.

During the entire Irish Great Famine (Great Hunger) from 1845 to 1852, i.e. 7 years, only around 1 million of the Irish, in total, left Ireland, i.e. an average of 142,857 per year. 1 million who remained and died. They went not only to the US, but to Canada, Australia, and elsewhere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)

Recent US immigration cannot be compared to historic immigration. Current US immigration policy is an environmentally and socially unsustainable pyramid scheme, which is unjust.

In fact, Trump is the poster child for America’s disasterous immigration policy. Trump’s mother was allowed to immigrate from the UK in 1930, right after the stock market crash of 1929, when US unemployment was already hovering at around 10% and the rich had lost their money so that more maids – her stated profession- were clearly not needed. She apparently piggy-backed in upon a sister who migrated earlier. His grandfather Trump came to America to extract what he could out of it before going home to Germany a wealthy man to marry a German neighbor. The Trumps have an allergy to marrying Americans, it seems, as is the case for many economic migrants. They aren’t interested in America, only in what they can get out of it, i.e. exploitation. However, Germany realized that grandfather Trump was a draft dodger and sent him and his German wife, who was very pregnant with Trump’s father, back to the USA. Now see what this has done? Why didn’t Germany send grandfather Trump to jail and his father to an orphanage?

Trump and Nikki Haley are living proof of the underbelly of letting in economic migrants, as opposed to the political-religious asylum seekers who founded America. Even legitimate refugees carry a certain risk as there are good and bad in all groups. Meyer Lansky, for instance, was a legitimate refugee from pograms in the Russian Empire and became an infamous mobster leader of Murder, Inc. And, why was Russia never held accountable for these pograms?

Insanely, Affirmative Action/Minority Set Asides aren’t just for those whose ancestors suffered discrimation, which does include much earlier generations of Asian Americans, but new arrivals benefit, such as UN Ambassador Nikki Haley and her parents, and her friend-donor-possible kin Kris Pal Singh. NB that she calls him a family friend and he has claimed kin. He is reportedly from the same village as her father. This appears unbelievable until one considers the idea of family joining, sponsors, which we call “piggy-backing in”, which is how Trump’s mother came. Singh owns Holtec with its cheaply made, yet expensive, high level nuclear waste cans which will probably destroy the country if North Korea or an operating nuclear reactor-spent fuel pool don’t first. Affirmative Action/Minority contract Set Asides appear to have facilitated Singh gaining near monopoly status of spent nuclear fuel canisters-casks, despite an unacceptable poor quality product. And, he has even refused to provide critically important information about his product to the US government, in the context of a lawsuit on waste storage costs. Because he owns the company privately, information is hard to come by. He was even accused of bribing the TVA for contracts. Bribery and “minority” set-asides. Who can compete? If this was being done by an African American rather than India born and educated Kris P. Singh, at least there would be an element of poetic justice. But, unlike the UK, America’s never done anything bad to India to be punished in this way. Americans are paying for being naive.

Those who complain of this unfair system get quickly accused of racism. Immigration today is totally different from immigration in the past in every way imagineable, including that it is so much easier. Modern communications mean that new immigrants are no longer forced to integrate into society to avoid isolation. Apparently because of their own racist caste system, people from India seem very adept at using affirmative action and accusing people of racism to get their way, even though they are mostly considered “white” in America. Officially they get to claim “minority” status, even though they are a huge and ever-growing chunk of the world population. The Chinese also get to claim “minority” status, even though they too are a huge and ever-growing chunk of the world population. Meanwhile, white and black Americans wonder why affirmative action isn’t working as well as it should. It’s clearly because new immigrants are using and abusing it. The timing in the 1960s suggests that this flood of Asian immigrants has been allowed in by sexist racists to undermine affirmative action for women and those Americans whose ancestors were slaves. If affirmative action were restricted to those whose ancestors were persecuted within the USA, then it would be more effective and the flow of Asian immigrants would likely be reduced.

As Martin Luther King pointed out shortly before he was assassinated, (see starting ca 22 min http://youtu.be/RMLyhshxQc8 ), and as is still the case today, after the Civil War the US government favored recently arrived immigrants over black people who have been in America for hundreds of years. Even he failed to mention that this land which was given away was stolen from American Indians.

If the US has room for 1 million per year new permanent residents, and it doesn’t, then it should be for the persecuted and possibly refugees, but certainly not economic or prestige migrants who have a home. If the US government is going to insist on letting in approximately one million immigrants per year, they should be the persecuted and refugees, however.

The United States of America was created by the forgotten type of immigrants who used to be called political and religious asylum seekers (banished or transshipped), many as indentured servants, along with forcibly transshipped slaves, a point which appears to be totally forgotten in immigration discussions, as does the fact that America was occupied already by indigenous peoples. It is worth noting, as well, that many of the banished and transshipped were Gaelic peoples, and much appears to have been ethnic cleansing- genocide. The Highland Clearances, for instance, and the Irish Famine appear to have been ethnic cleansing-genocide by the British government.

Contemporary examples of those who need asylum for religious and political reasons, which spring to mind, are Christians in the Middle East and North Africa, Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia, women who are persecuted for wearing western attire, those in trouble for criticizing their government and/or state sanctioned religions. These should be helped and not those migrating for economic or prestige purposes who often wish to bring their lifestyle with them.

There needs to be discussion of why mining and other resource extraction companies, agribusiness, and arms dealers are allowed to create more refugees. Refugees should not be permanent, unless they are of the political-religious or other persecuted asylum-seeking variety. Even then, fairness suggests that consultation take place with the remaining formally recognized American Indian (i.e. Native American) nations. The US has plenty of Americans who are refugees in their own land, especially after the recent hurricanes, as well.

Is it anti-Irish to wonder why the UK didn’t feed the Irish people rather than ship them out to North America, Australia, and elsewhere? To wonder why the descendants of the Irish of that generation are not welcomed back by Ireland, the pitiful excuse being that Ireland was part of Britain at the time? The area from which they mostly left has remained largely empty, yet Ireland will apparently fill it up with non-Irish. The same can be said of the Scots, banished from their lands by Britain so that there are around 5 times more Scots outside of Scotland as within. They have no right to return, either.

The US has plenty of talented and untalented people, many of whom are unemployed or underemployed. Over the last half century the country has become visibly crowded to the detriment of the environment and quality of life. Prior to this massive influx of mostly economic migrants Americans easily found employment, especially literate ones.

Since that time, Americans have watched in dismay as the jobs which have not gone overseas have gone to less qualified or equally qualified economic migrants from all over the world. Why weren’t they warned before they invested time and money in worthless education?

From the VOA:
US Pulls Out of UN Migrant and Refugee Pact
Last Updated: December 03, 2017 12:43 PM, VOA News

The United States has informed the United Nations that it will no longer participate in the Global Compact on Migration.

In a statement, U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said that the program was not consistent with American immigration policies.

“While we will continue to engage on a number of fronts at the United Nations, in this case, we simply cannot in good faith support a process that could undermine the sovereign right of the United States to enforce our immigration laws and secure our borders,” Tillerson said. “The United States supports international cooperation on migration issues, but it is the primary responsibility of sovereign states to help ensure that migration is safe, orderly, and legal.”

In 2016, the 193 members of the U.N. General Assembly unanimously adopted a non-binding political declaration, the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, pledging to uphold the rights of refugees, help them resettle and ensure they have access to education and jobs.

The U.S. mission to the U.N. said in a statement Saturday that the declaration “contains numerous provisions that are inconsistent with U.S. immigration and refugee policies and the Trump Administration’s immigration principles.”

The announcement of the U.S. withdrawal from the pact came just hours before the opening of a global conference on migration scheduled to begin Monday in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. The goal of the meeting is the negotiation of humane strategies for dealing with the more than 60 million people worldwide who have been forcibly displaced for a variety of reasons.

Foreign Policy magazine said the president’s decision to pull out of the negotiations “highlighted the enduring influence of Stephen Miller, the 32-year-old senior White House policy advisor who has championed the Trump administration’s efforts to sharply restrict immigration” to the U.S.

The magazine said White House Chief of Staff John Kelly and Attorney General Jeff Sessions “strongly backed a pullout.”

The U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, opposed the withdrawal, according to Foreign Policy. She believed the U.S. could influence the global negotiations on migration if it participated in the Mexico meeting, according to the magazine, but she was “ultimately overruled by the president.”

Haley issued a statement Saturday, saying “America is proud of our immigrant heritage and our long-standing moral leadership in providing support to migrant and refugee populations across the globe. . . But our decisions on immigration policies must always be made by Americans and Americans alone.”

She said, “We will decide how best to control our borders and who will be allowed to enter our country. The global approach in the New York Declaration is simply not compatible with U.S. sovereignty.”

Via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States
For the 8.8 million people they apparently mean from 1900 to 1910.
The United States admitted more legal immigrants from 1991 to 2000, between ten and eleven million, than in any previous decade… By comparison, the highest previous decade was the 1900s, when 8.8 million people arrived,…. Legal immigration to the U.S. increased from 250,000 in the 1930s, to 2.5 million in the 1950s, to 4.5 million in the 1970s, and to 7.3 million in the 1980s, before resting at about 10 million in the 1990s. Since 2000, legal immigrants to the United States number approximately 1,000,000 per year, of whom about 600,000 are Change of Status who already are in the U.S. Legal immigrants to the United States now are at their highest level ever, at just over 37,000,000 legal immigrants. Illegal immigration may be as high as 1,500,000 per year with a net of at least 700,000 illegal immigrants arriving every year.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States


America has also been diverse for a very long time. It has always been more diverse than most have admitted; was more diverse in the late 1800s; more diverse in the early 1900s; and if it wasn’t diverse enough there has been a population dumping from overpopulated countries over the last half century such that there can be no excuse for doubting the fact other than willful blindness. While there is some merit in the idea of immigrant lottery, winning a slot should be a very rare event and all expenses paid so as to give the poor a chance. There is no merit to merit-based immigration because there are plenty of talented people already in the USA. That leaves asylum seekers and refugees, for whom the US probably isn’t doing enough. Permanent immigration should be limited to the persecuted and to spouses of Americans. No more piggy-backing in of family members should be allowed either with the possible exception of care-giving purposes. Foreign students can still be welcomed but return home afterwards.

In the past there was the concept of melting pot. Earlier arrivals tended to be refugees and transportation was difficult and costly, and communications difficult. In stark contrast, less than 10% of legal US immigrants over the last decades have been refugees. The US has admitted so many legal immigrants who already have a home country and just want to immigrate, that Americans find themselves both unemployed and even unable to get entrance papers for their foreign spouses because the entire system is so knotted up due to people who have no need of being in the country that moving the case forward requires a good lawyer and one suspects bribery. Where are Americans supposed to go? Only recent immigrants and those from certain countries have right of return to their indigenous homeland(s). Where are Americans supposed to work? How to pay off the student loans for their degrees?

Furthermore, most Americans didn’t get the notification that their jobs could be taken by less qualified, equally qualified, or even better qualified immigrants. Where in the hell are they supposed to go? Look at the American Indians and see. Even those who are lucky enough to have right of return to an ancestral homeland or find another means to immigrate are treated as unwanted immigrants. Unwanted at home; unwanted abroad.

Why do Americans have no right to dream of a better life? Why do Americans have no right to dream of a life that was even as good as their parents? For too long politicians have pandered to idea of “growth machine” and immigration-based machine politics. For over 150 years politicians have seen more immigrants as more votes. And, the more people in a country the less each vote counts. But, why do they now exclude the needy and cater only to those who simply want to go to America?

For purposes of the 8(a) Business Development program, the following individuals are presumed socially disadvantaged (called “presumed groups”):
* Black Americans
* Hispanic Americans
* Native Americans
* Asian Pacific Americans
* Subcontinent Asian American

* https://www.sba.gov/contracting/government-contracting-programs/8a-business-development-program/eligibility-requirements/social-disadvantage-eligibility