Refugee Resettlement Watch noted another batch of targets a couple days ago including one unlucky city: New refugee seeding site: Youngstown, Ohio. That community is particularly unsuitable to be burdened by needy and/or hostile foreigners: it was plunged into a local depression by the closing of the major steel mill in 1977 and never recovered.
Because of its persistent economic misery, Youngstown was a major subject of the Atlantic magazine cover story of July/August 2015 about automation: A World without Work. The beginning of the lengthy, far-ranging piece was memorable for its description of how the once prosperous city was plunged into poverty:
1. Youngstown, U.S.A.
The end of work is still just a futuristic concept for most of the United States, but it is something like a moment in history for Youngstown, Ohio, one its residents can cite with precision: September 19, 1977.
For much of the 20th century, Youngstown’s steel mills delivered such great prosperity that the city was a model of the American dream, boasting a median income and a homeownership rate that were among the nation’s highest. But as manufacturing shifted abroad after World War II, Youngstown steel suffered, and on that gray September afternoon in 1977, Youngstown Sheet and Tube announced the shuttering of its Campbell Works mill. Within five years, the city lost 50,000 jobs and $1.3 billion in manufacturing wages. The effect was so severe that a term was coined to describe the fallout: regional depression.
￼Youngstown was transformed not only by an economic disruption but also by a psychological and cultural breakdown. Depression, spousal abuse, and suicide all became much more prevalent; the caseload of the area’s mental-health center tripled within a decade. The city built four prisons in the mid-1990s—a rare growth industry. One of the few downtown construction projects of that period was a museum dedicated to the defunct steel industry.
This winter, I traveled to Ohio to consider what would happen if technology permanently replaced a great deal of human work. I wasn’t seeking a tour of our automated future. I went because Youngstown has become a national metaphor for the decline of labor, a place where the middle class of the 20th century has become a museum exhibit.
“Youngstown’s story is America’s story, because it shows that when jobs go away, the cultural cohesion of a place is destroyed,” says John Russo, a professor of labor studies at Youngstown State University. “The cultural breakdown matters even more than the economic breakdown.”
But despite so much suffering and economic damage, the diversifier bunch has decided that Youngstown should take some refugees to do its part. The Catholic diocese is advocating the idea as a fine do-gooder project despite the added stress on the local community.
For diversity-promoting elites, Americans always come last.
Friday’s San Jose Mercury News featured a front-page story informing readers that illegal aliens living amongst us wish that they could be a part of the political process.
As we have noticed, illegal aliens are always complaining about the nation they invaded, despite the fact that they are enriched by the liberal government arguably more than the citizens. The illegal moochers receive an array of benefits funded by the unwilling taxpayer, including free-to-them healthcare, food stamps, subsidized housing, education for the kiddies, etc.
But that’s not enough — it’s never enough. They want to vote.
Illegal alien Mayela Razo, pictured below, complains that she cannot vote in the upcoming election, but hopes that the “Latino community” will “incite change” — or something like that. Readers see an English translation of her remarks in Spanish.
The Murky News apparently believes that illegal aliens participation in voter registration drives and get out the vote activities is a fine expression of civic engagement. Presumably the diverse persons being targeted will mostly vote against Donald Trump, who believes immigration anarchy must stop.
Mayela Razo can’t vote in the presidential election come November. But she’s making sure those who can cast a ballot do, even offering to drive friends and family members to the polls on election night.
It’s a privilege that Razo, who is undocumented, wishes she had.
“Although I can’t vote, I’m aware of what’s going on in the election season,” said the 54-year-old San Jose resident in Spanish, who participates in voter registration drives with the immigrant rights organization, SIREN.
“It’s of concern to me because I, too, live in this country,” she said. “I want the Latino community to vote and be conscious of the fact that they can incite change.”
This political season has unleashed an unprecedented level of activism among many undocumented residents, who say fear and uncertainty have spurred them to act. People like Razo are canvassing streets, championing social media campaigns and manning phone banks to mobilize voters ahead of the election.
Undocumented residents have become a potent weapon in a polarizing election where immigration has been a focal point. Nonprofits and activist groups are using their voices in voter registration drives to remind people about the importance of voting. Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and fellow Democrat Sen. Bernie Sanders incorporated undocumented residents in their campaigns to get out the Latino vote. And for undocumented residents, getting others to vote presents a unique opportunity to be part of a political process that could determine their future in the United States. As the election nears, their desire to act grows.
It’s a phenomenon that’s largely driven by “Dreamers,” young adults brought to the U.S. illegally as children but raised as Americans. Continue reading this article
There is general alarm today from the mainstream press about the topic of voter fraud. The left media (which is to say most of it) doesn’t want voters to think the system is “rigged” as Donald Trump has charged, nor does the press want to be recognized for its supporting role of perpetrating fraud and thereby undermining representative government.
On Thursday, former Congressman and 2008 Presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo sounded off with a pretty good rant with his agreement that Democrat voter fraud is indeed widespread and common.
TOM TANCREDO: “In fact, talking about the possibility of widespread voter fraud — it is a distinct possibility. It happens everywhere. It happened in my own election, it’s happened in Colorado over and over again. We have counties here that turned in more votes, Democrat counties that turned in more votes than there were people living in those counties. It’s happened on numerous occasions. We’ve had illegal aliens voting, and when a Republican poll watcher tried to challenge that, they were thrown out of the of the voting office.
And that’s just here: its massive, it’s all over the country. Well you know, there’s very few prosecutions — well right, yeah, that’s true. It’s because they don’t prosecute. It’s like how many people in New York get a ticket for jaywalking? Well not many probably, but how many jaywalk? Thousands, right, it’s because nobody does prosecute that you’ve got massive voter fraud. The reason why they fight like crazy to stop the voter ID requirement of a driver’s license is because they want voter fraud. There is no other reason. You and I both know it’s BS to say, well those people — it’s racist and they’d be upset. Oh my god, they’d have to go to their safe place and their quiet place, and we’d have to get them counseling because they were asked for a voter ID. Hogwash.”
The current practice of networks holding their debate coverage outdoors may not continue in the next cycle because unplanned things can happen. On Wednesday, CNN talking heads were inundated by Trump supporters chanting “Lock her up!” — a popular cheer in Republican rallies over the last few months.
The Trump candidacy has uncorked voter dissatisfaction growing over decades of economic globalization for which there was no voice. Now that Donald Trump is expressing the popular rage, voters feel unleashed and vindicated.
Below, CNN’s elite political interpreters Dan Balz, Maeve Reston and John King tried to talk over Trump supporters behind them who suggested Clinton imprisonment.
An on-site CNN panel had difficulty on Wednesday discussing the 2016 electoral map and what both presidential candidates should do in their third debate later that night when a crowd in Las Vegas began relentlessly chanting “lock her up” for at least a minute straight.
In his convention acceptance speech, Trump remarked, “Of all my travels in this country, nothing has affected me more deeply than the time I have spent with the mothers and fathers who have lost their children to violence spilling across our border.”
On Wednesday, two moms, Agnes Gibboney and Laura Wilkerson, whose sons were murdered by illegal aliens appeared on Fox News to remind citizens of the importance of law and borders.
Ronald Da Silva (left, son of Agnes Gibboney) and Joshua Wilkerson (right) were both murdered by illegal aliens.
Laura Wilkerson’s case is particularly disturbing because when she says her son Joshua was tortured, that’s a shorthand way of saying how brutally he was beaten to death by a fellow high school student, an illegal alien from Belize. The young killer, Hermilo Moralez, would be a perfect Obama DREAMer if he hadn’t savagely murdered his classmate and been locked up since 2010.
BRIAN KILMEADE: A critical topic during tonight’s final debate will be illegal immigration, an issue that’s important to all Americans, has not come up yet by the way in a debate, but for our next guests it’s literally life-and-death. I’m talking about Laura Wilkerson and Agnes Gibboney; both had sons killed by illegal immigrants, and have taken action in their honor. They now advocate for the families of other victims through this organization, it’s called the Remembrance Project, and they join us right now.
Laura, Agnes, thanks so much. I want to find out about your sons, but I also want to find out why you see Donald Trump is a great hope for you. Agnes?
AGNES GIBBONEY: Because he was the only one that pointed out the big issues in this country the illegal immigration which is a tremendous problem in this country. A lot of our children or family members are being slaughtered by the illegal aliens who should never be in this country.
There’s not much attention being paid to America’s sieve-ish borders these days, what with the election frenzy going on 24/7. We unfortunately hear reports from the Mexico line of Border Patrol agents distracted by welcoming hordes of illegals instead of keeping jihadists out.
Illegals keep coming, particularly when Obama makes it so easy.
WASHINGTON—U.S. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Immigration and The National Interest, issued the following statement after the Obama Administration confirmed a clear increase in illegal immigration to the United States in FY 2016:
“Statistics published yesterday by the Department of Homeland Security finally admit what the American people have long known to be true: our southern border is not secure, and illegal immigration is surging. In FY 2016, 408,870 illegal aliens were apprehended at the southern border—up 23 percent from FY 2015. Of those apprehended, 59,692 were unaccompanied illegal alien juveniles (a 49 percent increase from FY 2015), and 77,674 were members of so-called “family units” (a 95 percent increase from FY 2015).
This is only half the story . The 408,870 does not include those illegal aliens who evaded detection and successfully entered the United States. Earlier this year, Brandon Judd, the President of the National Border Patrol Council, testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration and The National Interest that for every one illegal alien who is apprehended, another evades arrest. This statistic reportedly has been confirmed by DHS, but the Obama Administration refuses to release that information. Using that rate as a baseline, that means approximately 408,870 illegal aliens evaded detection, for a grand total of roughly 817,740 illegal entries into the United States last year. Continue reading this article
You can’t make this stuff up: the open borders Immigrationist-in-Chief is concerned that AI and other technology may eliminate jobs and suppress wages.
In the face of such technology, a pro-American President would prudently reduce the influx of immigrant workers who add to job elimination and wage suppression for citizens, but Obama is more concerned with importing dependable Democrat voters.
Below, the President sat down with Wired editor-in-chief Scott Dadich and MIT Media Lab director Joi Ito last week to discuss the challenges of artificial intelligence in the technological future.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: “[AI] promises to create a vastly more productive and efficient economy. If properly harnessed, it can generate enormous prosperity for people, opportunity for people. It can cure diseases that we haven’t seen before. It can make us safer because it eliminates inherent human error in a lot of work. But it also has some downsides that we’re gonna have to figure out in terms of, if not eliminating jobs, requiring people to think differently about their occupations. It could increase inequality and we’ve seen that in technology generally and globalization. It can suppress wages. And so we’re going to have to develop new social constructs in order to embrace fully and optimize this new technology.”
President Obama joined a chorus of those warning of the potential downsides of artificial intelligence.
In an interview with Wired Magazine, Obama spoke of redesigning the social compact and starting a conversation around fair wages. He cited teachers as being underpaid, and called for a reexamination of what we value, and what we’ll pay for.
Obama addressed basic income, a proposal for all citizens to receive a government stipend in order to meet their costs of living. The idea has gained recent support among some futurists and economists, given concerns over how technology will eliminate jobs and impact salaries in coming years.
“Whether a universal income is the right model — is it gonna be accepted by a broad base of people? — that’s a debate that we’ll be having over the next 10 or 20 years,” Obama said.
A 2013 Oxford study concluded that 47% of U.S. jobs are at risk of being handled by machines over perhaps a decade or two. Some experts fear we’re headed toward mass unemployment.
Truck drivers, cab drivers and deliveryman are the most prominent example of those at risk. The tech and car industries are currently pouring billions into self-driving vehicle technology. Continue reading this article
“This collapse that we saw the other day really had virtually nothing to do with her having pneumonia; this is much deeper than pneumonia. . . a friend who said she’s not steady on her feet, she frequently gets dizzy at home even when she climbs stairs — this is a friend who speaks to her — she has her legs elevated when she’s at home because of her circulation problems, Huma Abedin brings her cold water soaked towels to put on her her neck and her forehead, and Bill has been beside himself, begging her to get a real checkup. . . he begged her not to go [to the 9/11 memorial]. He said I’ll go in your place and she refused to do it. And then when she came home, he was absolutely furious at her for having gone and then collapsed and did exactly what he was afraid was going to happen which would collapse and public but she’s been doing it in private. . .
Even her friends don’t know exactly what’s wrong with her, but what they do know is that she faints frequently, not just once in a while. It could be circulation, it could be neurological. They don’t know but they do know that there’s something very seriously wrong with this woman.”
“That’s one of the stunning things that comes out in this. These are emails that are her senior staff and there are so many times when you know she is supposed to meet with somebody or talk with somebody, and Hillary simply says, well tell me when to call them and what to say. A lot of decisions are made without her input and it just shows that this is a very staff-driven organization. This is not somebody who is in a sense calling the shots. She’s relying on her staff what to say, when to say it and to set her policy.”
How much power would Huma and the jihadist Brotherhood have in a Clinton White House? In a “staff-driven organization,” probably way too much.
Obama’s tilt toward Islam could morph into a cliff with Hillary, since jihadists tend to vote Democrat and she has already announced her intention to pack a million muslim immigrants into her big anti-American strategy.
How Hillary’s health problems make her unfit for the presidency
Among all the recent WikiLeaks email dumps, perhaps the most important one of all has been overlooked by the mainstream media.
In it, Neera Tanden, Hillary Clinton’s longtime political guru, warned campaign manager John Podesta not to raise the question of primary opponent Bernie Sanders’ health because it would draw unwanted attention to the hidden truth about Hillary’s health.
“Hard to think of anything more counter-productive than demanding Bernie’s medical records,” Mr. Tanden emailed Mr. Podesta, according to an email obtained by WikiLeaks from Mr. Podesta’s personal inbox.
Until the publication of my new book, “Guilty As Sin,” the truth about Hillary’s health has been her campaign’s closest guarded secret.
Her physician, Dr. Lisa Bardack, has said that Hillary is fit as a fiddle, but according to my sources in the White House, that is not what President Obama and his senior adviser, Valerie Jarrett, believe.
Mr. Obama and Ms. Jarrett have been so worried about Hillary’s health that they recently offered to arrange a secret medical checkup for her at the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center.
Hillary declined their offer because she feared a leak to the media would prove fatal to her presidential campaign. Instead, she has been secretly visiting the New York-Presbyterian Hospital, where she arrives through a private entrance out of public sight and where she can rely on her doctors not to speak to the media.
Sources close to Hillary tell me that her doctors have discovered she suffers from arrhythmia (an abnormal heart beat) and a leaking heart valve. They have recommended that she consider having valve replacement surgery, but Hillary has refused because she does not want to risk the negative political fallout from stories about such a serious operation.
In addition to the arrhythmia and leaking heart valve, Hillary suffers from chronic low blood pressure, insufficient blood flow, a tendency to form life-threatening blood clots, and troubling side effects from her medications.
Her doctors have prescribed Coumadin, a blood thinner, and a beta blocker to treat her condition. However, these medications make her drowsy and tired, lower her blood pressure, and have led to frequent bouts of light-headedness and fainting spells.
Hillary has suffered at least five fainting spells that the public is aware of, including the most recent one at the 15th anniversary memorial service of 9/11. Continue reading this article
Sunday’s report from television’s oldest news magazine show went all out to present the administration position on Syrian refugees: not to worry, little citizens, big Obama government will vet the future Democrats very thoroughly to keep out suicide bombers and headchoppers!
Below, a Syrian refugee camp. Millions of Syrians have been displaced during the civil war in their nation.
What if President Franklin Roosevelt had said during WWII that not all Nazis are stone cold killers so America should admit carefully screened Nazis as immigrants? Of course that Democrat did not endanger America by welcoming members of an enemy group: there were no Nazi visas during WWII.
Bill Whitaker reports on the Syrian refugee crisis and follows Syrian families from Jordan through the vetting process to their new homes in the U.S
Last September, President Obama announced his goal of resettling 10,000 Syrian refugees in the United States. A year later, almost 13,000 have been admitted, and more are coming.
Donald Trump has said that tens-of-thousands of Syrians — mostly young men — are entering the U.S. and we don’t know who they are, because we have no system to vet them. He has said many times he wants to stop all Syrians from entering the country.
He’s not alone. A majority of U.S. governors have called for a halt to the refugee program too. The Syrians who are finding refuge in the U.S. now find themselves at the center of a heated debate, pitting our American tradition of altruism against our fear of terrorism.
If you didn’t visit the City of Light back when it was European, it’s apparently too late now. Open borders to the Islamic world have filled the streets with violent foreigners who are not remotely civilized: they urinate in public, litter, camp on the sidewalks, engage in riots — transforming the city a post-apocalyptic catastrophe.
A few decades ago, Paris was famed for its street bistros, like Le Dome Cafe, a popular gathering spot for intellectuals, shown below.
For a recent picture of how far Paris has sunk because of allowing masses of historic Islamic enemies to enter as immigrants, see the video report from Generation Europa (Facebook):
The great city has been culturally disemboweled and turned into a compliant flophouse for the enemies of western civilization. The French have already surrendered and the barbarians are picking over the corpse.
Don’t think America will be able to avoid the Islam poison under such a sustained barrage of enemy immigrants. We don’t have no-go zones now, but they are a predictable outcome if Hillary achieves her globalist dream.
Here’s another view of the Paris capitulation after viewing the video above:
The Paris you know or remember from adverts or brochures no longer exists. While no part of Paris looks like the romantic Cliches in Hollywood movies, some districts now resemble post-apocalyptic scenes of a dystopian thriller. This footage, taken with a hidden camera by an anonymous Frenchman in the Avenue de Flandres, 19th Arrondissement, near the Stalingrad Metro Station in Paris as well as areas in close proximity, shows the devastating effects of uncontrolled illegal mass immigration of young African males into Europe.
If it weren’t for the somewhat working infrastructure, the scene might as well have been the setting of movie shooting – or a slum in Mogadishu. The streets are littered in garbage, the sidewalks are blocked with trash, junk and mattresses, thousands of African men claim the streets as their own – they sleep and live in tents like homeless people. Continue reading this article
A few decades back, when the globalization honchos decided to pack up whole American industries and move them to cheap labor havens in Asia and Mexico, the oligarchs promised that US workers would be retrained for jobs in the new tech industry. Few at that time saw the rise of robots able to replace human workers, but now we are living it.
Thursday’s Wall Street Journal front-paged an article detailing the history of what happened in the tech/employment world, including how few employees are employed in today’s billion-dollar technology companies. It is better researched than many automation stories one sees.
Below, the dispiriting job-loss graph appeared with the Journal’s headline in the paper edition: “Tech Boom Creates Too Few Jobs.”
Unfortunately there’s no mention in the article that as a result of automation, robots and advanced software, America doesn’t need to import immigrant workers for jobs that will soon disappear. In 2013, an Oxford University study was published that concluded nearly half of US employment is at risk of being replaced by smart machines within 20 years. The Gartner tech consultants predicted in 2014 that one-third of jobs will be replaced by automation and software by 2025. The clock is ticking and the machines are getting more capable of replacing humans all the time.
The discontent driving Donald Trump’s campaign stems partly from the dashed employment promises of the late 1990s; $7-an-hour robots
The technology revolution has delivered Google searches, Facebook friends, iPhone apps, Twitter rants and shopping for almost anything on Amazon, all in the past decade and a half.
What it hasn’t delivered are many jobs. Google’s Alphabet Inc. and Facebook Inc. had at the end of last year a total of 74,505 employees, about one-third fewer than Microsoft Corp. even though their combined stock-market value is twice as big. Photo-sharing service Instagram had 13 employees when it was acquired for $1 billion by Facebook in 2012.
Hiring in the computer and chip sectors dove after companies shifted hardware production outside the U.S., and the newest tech giants needed relatively few workers. The number of technology startups fizzled. Growth in productivity and wages slowed, and income inequality rose as machines replaced routine, low- and middle-income, human-powered work.
This outcome is a far cry from what many political leaders, tech entrepreneurs and economists predicted about a generation ago. In 2000, President Bill Clinton said in his last State of the Union address: “America will lead the world toward shared peace and prosperity and the far frontiers of science and technology.” His economic team trumpeted “the ferment of rapid technological change” as one of the U.S. economy’s “principal engines” of growth.
The tech-powered disappointment is subtler than the anger caused by the crushing impact of China’s import invasion and the perceived failures of government institutions like the Federal Reserve in guiding the economy. Instead, it stems from the idea that Americans expected larger economic gains from these amazing new machines and the companies that created them, not a widening between the haves and have-nots.
“There is a growing sense of frustration that people haven’t seen the progress that their parents and grandparents did,” says Erik Brynjolfsson, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist whose work has chronicled how technology widens the income gap between rich and poor. “That frustration spills into the political arena.” Continue reading this article
Sadly, California voters must re-decide an issue that was thought settled in 1998 when 61 percent of voters rejected bilingual education via Prop 227. Now the usual suspects have conjured up a rewrite, hoping that voters have forgotten the common sense of teaching all children, regardless of ethnic tribe, to speak English in America.
So it wasn’t a case of meanie conservatives insisting on English: the immigrants actually wanted to assimilate and help build a better future for their kids.
But now bilingual is back. Too many people want to Mexicanize America by making Spanish equal to English. The New York Times remarked in an article today that “job postings across California routinely require applicants to speak Spanish” (“This city is 78 percent Latino, and the face of a new California”). That’s the way things go when a nation has open borders facing an aggressive third world.
The San Jose Mercury News had a front-pager on Wednesday, implying that the proposition is something of a yawner, with not much interest.
SAN JOSE — When Palo Alto software entrepreneur Ron Unz led a campaign to ban bilingual education 18 years ago, California erupted in an acrimonious debate that drew national attention, with proponents expressing fears about the decline of English and opponents charging racism and predicting an educational Armageddon.
But today, in a sign of the Golden State’s dramatically changing demographics and politics, the campaign to roll back the “English-only” Proposition 227 seems low-key and uncontroversial, overshadowed by a bevy of hot-button ballot initiatives and the emotionally charged presidential race.
Through Proposition 58 on the November ballot, bilingual education proponents seek to permit public schools to teach in languages other than English, without securing explicit parental permission, as is now required. Continue reading this article
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.