What a slap in the face,' for Maine's taxpayers and homeless

Debrah N. said:
Sorry but I don't understand what your question is.

Just to clarify what I said:
Vaugn’s comment which I said I’d heard someone else say a few years back in an article, was that ‘newcomers’ are often more hard working and inclined to start small business than the populations they settle into. And that was in a discussion about immigrants in Canada.

He went on to say that SOME PEOPLE CLAIM that they’re all criminals, etc. (......some are trying to make capital out of claiming these people are all criminals,.......)

Your assertion that he suggested that none of them are criminals, etc., was incorrect. He didn’t say that and I’m betting that he’d allow that some are criminals, some have illnesses, etc. His issue was declaring them ALL criminals, as some are inclined to do to make political points. And then he went on to say how if you make those sorts of claims or inferences about them all being criminals, often social media applauds the assertion.

As for Governor Healey of Massachusetts asking people to house ‘illegals’, the phrasing was actually ‘migrants’. That would suggest that the migrants have been approved for entry and therefore aren’t illegals.
Governor Healey asks residents to house migrant families amid growing shelter crisis
Click to expand...
My point was until he mentioned that, as an issue. No one posted that as part of the reason communities are complaining about the freebies being handed out. The quantity of immigrants both those claiming amnesty or the one not counted.

Now that the massive influx is causing economic hardship on cites nationwide, the media is finally acknowledging that there is as the democrats have begun to claim a "crisis"
 

I wish the issue wasn't all politicized and people writing about it like they are hysterically afraid. All the emotion makes it a lot harder to come to agreement about solutions. And the recent blaming of non-border states on political lines is quite shockingly disruptive of having a discussion. I'm pretty sure the billions that go to the customs and border force are federal funds from everyone's tax dollars. So presumably the facilities down by the border than are set up to house the inadmissables are paid for by all of us and not a burden on the border states alone?

I thought that a lot of the problem had been that people are allowed to stay in the U.S. until their court review of requesting asylum and that the courts were taking years to get to the cases. And I thought a few years ago there was a new law about expelling people to wait outside of the U.S. until their court case. Did that help the problem or not?
 
Knight said:
That almost sounds like you honestly believe none are criminal, none have disease & mixed in there are no terrorists. You didn't post a source to contradict media posts about criminal elements, disease & terrorists
Click to expand...

I wrote what I wrote, nothing more or less. If you listen to those saying these people are criminals, diseased, etc. you would know they don't differentiate either. Are you equally critical of them? I'm guessing not.
 

Knight said:
Does pointing out the reality of what some enter illegally manage to disply dominate the media or was pointing the minor amount of coverage really belong in ths discussion about how residents feel about the cost & care of illegals.
Click to expand...

Depending on what media you watch, the negative coverage might be dominant or not. For one candidate, it totally dominates. I'm sure there are some where it doesn't. I'm also sure that in the incredible number of people we're talking about, some are bad people. Just as some percentage of any populace will have both good and bad people.

But mostly it's worth mentioning because this type of commentary is being used to pamper the haters, to use trigger words to turn people against the migrants, and to ensure that no serious conversation can take place. It's a very obvious indoctrination, a manipulation of a group of people through rhetorical tricks.
 
HoneyNut said:
I wish the issue wasn't all politicized and people writing about it like they are hysterically afraid. All the emotion makes it a lot harder to come to agreement about solutions. And the recent blaming of non-border states on political lines is quite shockingly disruptive of having a discussion.
Click to expand...

100% This is entirely the point. Everyone has an opinion, but some have an opinion fueled by scare tactics employed by those who want their vote. Truth be damned. It's a campaign agenda, and doesn't have a lot to do with the truth. You can't have a conversation about it when one side is full of haters who don't much care about the big picture.

These people await a review for their asylum cases. While I've never claimed asylum, I have been through the process of moving from the UK to the US as a migrant, and let me tell you, it is not a five minute exercise. It's not easy to do or achieve. As such, I think that's where the major problem lies. The government need to find ways to process these people more quickly. What is happening now is slightly mad. No-one seems to want to talk about that, they're too outraged.
 
Knight said:
My point was until he mentioned that, as an issue. No one posted that as part of the reason communities are complaining about the freebies being handed out. The quantity of immigrants both those claiming amnesty or the one not counted.

Now that the massive influx is causing economic hardship on cites nationwide, the media is finally acknowledging that there is as the democrats have begun to claim a "crisis"
Click to expand...
Vaughn was simply adding an interesting point on what kind of people are being permitted to come in and settle. Just like I mentioned somewhere else about the Syrian family who arrived in Canada a few years ago and promptly started what has turned into a thriving business that hires other 'old stock' Canadians in a small Canadian community. I think in every discussion, it's important to remember that there are numerous sides to every situation. And hard working immigrants is one of those perspectives.
 
Knight said:
@VaughanJB

Off topic but curiosity got the better of me. In other posts you took the position you were an immigrant. Among other places immigrating for a period of 18 years to America. You didn't mention if you were poorly educated, I don't think you mentioned if you were employed. You for sure didn't mention if you entered illegally & sought amnesty.

So what's your story? Poor, uneducated, unemployed or something else?
Click to expand...

Ha! I won't bore you with my life story. But I was a migrant to the US, and a migrant to Germany and Australia. Of those, of course, Germany was one where I didn't speak the language. Some will claim "I always can find someone who speaks English", let me remind everyone that it does absolutely no good whatsoever when it comes to filling in forms, reading timetables, figuring out the legal process etc. Going to a country where you don't speak the language (I spoke no German at the time) is TOUGH. Living there is TOUGH. Really TOUGH.

Now, I applied to go to the US through normal channels. I was not an asylum seeker, so our paths will diverge there. I wasn't running from starvation, wars, or persecution. I was offered a job, and decided to take it. So my circumstances were very different. I have never applied for asylum or amnesty. The process for someone like me to get into the US is exhaustive. Criminal checks, Medical exams/reports, credit checks, background checks for immediate family members, etc. It takes months and months.

Actually, thinking about it, I had business in India (Mumbai), and getting the VISA to go there was a bloody nightmare.........
 
VaughanJB said:
one side is full of haters who don't much care about the big picture.
Click to expand...
Now, that's unfair. There are people who have concerns about who's entering the country and whether they've been properly vetted (the answer is no). For you to dub them "haters" (really?!) and state that they "don't care much about the big picture" is foolish and incorrect.

But I suspect I'll just get arguments, so that's all I have to say at this point.
 
@HoneyNut

Well you won't get a full and complete answer here because none of us are any where near immigration experts. And most are biased and informed or misinformed by varying degrees including myself.

There are many official .gov sites that have the actual laws, not peoples interpretation of those laws and rules including the link I posted above. Most appear not to want to make the effort to find out what they believe to be the facts actually are the facts. The most important of which is "are asylum seekers remaining in the US here illegally or not. Commonly expressed as "do they have papers."

There is also a contingent of migrants that ARE illegal and those are ones that arrive and disappear w/out applying for asylum. They should be sought out and returned to sender asap.

Trump instituted a rule under Title 42 which allowed the .gov to refuse entry generally to everyone based on health reasons......Covid. Biden kept that rule in place despite fierce opposition from "progressives" in his own party until it was overturned in court when they declared the pandemic over. That rule ended May 11, 2023 by court order.

Then the backlog of migrants which was building for years began rushing to the border. Another rule (CLP) not sure if it was a Trump or Biden rule, but Biden is defending the rule also mentioned in my above post required migrants to apply for asylum in the first safe country or use an app that was basically non-functional and remain in MX until processed. That rule was "stayed" meaning it couldn't be enforced. It's probably been appealed to a higher court, status unknown by me.

At this point asylum seekers and illegals are overwhelming every aspect of the systems some of which were deliberately destroyed in order to delay, discourage, or hamper asylum seekers cases.

Factions in congress purposely fail to act (for decades) motivated by politics which call for the most disorder possible so they can lay the blame at the feet of others and/or they really do want cheap, easily abused labor to please their masters. Ggl child labor for the horrific details on that.

While I find the stunt of flying migrants under false pretenses to Martha's Vinyard abominable by playing w these people lives, the idea was a good one in that it opened the eyes to those in sanctuary cities of the volume of asylum seekers. These sanctuary cities have been taking in illegals and legal migrants for decades, but the volume is how it turned into a crisis for the entire country.

Folks in this thread that have very opposite views than mine I view as loving their country and just writing about what they honestly think is correct. They are not "haters" until proven individually by some action(not words) that prove that they "hate." Just as I hopefully am not labeled as a "hater" of my country because I may seem not "fazed" by what's going on.
 
Last edited:
Devi said:
Now, that's unfair. There are people who have concerns about who's entering the country and whether they've been properly vetted (the answer is no). For you to dub them "haters" (really?!) and state that they "don't care much about the big picture" is foolish and incorrect.

But I suspect I'll just get arguments, so that's all I have to say at this point.
Click to expand...

Arguments? What's the difference between "arguments" and "discussion", as in "Discussion Forum", which happens to be where we are?

In answer to your post, the people I'm describing know who they are. If it's not you, then fair play. I also have concerns, but any sensible concern is drowned out by the cacophony of indoctrinated haters. As I say, they know who they are.
 
Devi said:
It's a choice of words; semantics. You do know what I mean, right?
Click to expand...

I understand what semantics is, but I'm trying to contextualize your use of words. You wrote, "But I suspect I'll just get arguments, so that's all I have to say at this point." Are you meaning, "all I'll get is a discussion (as in an exchange of views)" or do you mean something more combative?
 
VaughanJB said:
I understand what semantics is, but I'm trying to contextualize your use of words. You wrote, "But I suspect I'll just get arguments, so that's all I have to say at this point." Are you meaning, "all I'll get is a discussion (as in an exchange of views)" or do you mean something more combative?
Click to expand...
Nah. The first one. I had said what I wanted to say, so didn't want to go on with it. That's all.

Sorry if it seemed combative to you.
 
I think it's unfair that their needs take precedence over the citizens of that town. I think it's unfair to give illegals benefits that U.S. citizens who are working people, especially those who can barely make ends meet, don't even have. I've heard of it (first hand by a friend who worked at welfare decades ago) and read about such stories. I read a story a couple of weeks ago about an elderly vet who says he lost his apartment because the building was being turned into a place to house the immigrants and it's tenants have been evicted. I read a similar story about another senior citizen. That begs the question: are these landlords getting incentives to do so?

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I am a very charitable person and I believe in helping those in need but take care of home first!
 
Last edited:
fuzzybuddy said:
They only reason people are "illegal" is because we make them 'illegal' by our immigration laws. We are the ones, who choose who is legal and illegal. Nobody is born with "Illegal" stamped on their forehead. Why is it that immigration is allowed from some troubled allied nations, but disallowed from nations we dislike? Aren't all men created equal?
Click to expand...
Great point. I lived in Miami for 18 years. Cuban immigrants were welcomed but Haitians were frequently turned back. It usually involves skin color.
 
OneEyedDiva said:
I think it's unfair that their needs take precedence over the citizens of that town. I think it's unfair to give illegals benefits that U.S. citizens who are working people, especially those who can barely make ends meet, don't even have. I've heard of it (first hand by a friend who worked at welfare decades ago) and read about such stories. I read a story a couple of weeks ago about an elderly vet who says he lost his apartment because the building was being turned into a place to house the immigrants and it's tenants have been evicted. I read a similar story about another senior citizen. That begs the question: are these landlords getting incentives to do so?

I've said it before and I'll say it again. I am a very charitable person and I believe in helping those in need but take care of home first!
Click to expand...
If it's the same story i just researched the residents knew the nursing home was for sale sometime in 2022 and were told to move out. Finally the NH was sold to a charity, Homes for Homeless, and they were given 6 more weeks to move at which time the remaining residents were booted August, 2023.

Homes for Homeless isn't rated by Charity Navigator which I find highly suspicious. I'm not sure what their intentions were when buying the NH, but the optics are pretty horrible.
 
againstthegrain said:
If it's the same story i just researched the residents knew the nursing home was for sale sometime in 2022 and were told to move out. Finally the NH was sold to a charity, Homes for Homeless, and they were given 6 more weeks to move at which time the remaining residents were booted.

Homes for Homeless isn't rated by Charity Navigator which I find highly suspicious. I'm not sure what their intentions were when buying the NH, but the optics are pretty horrible.
Click to expand...
iIt's not the same story. The man lived in an apartment building.
 
Devi said:
Now, that's unfair. There are people who have concerns about who's entering the country and whether they've been properly vetted (the answer is no). For you to dub them "haters" (really?!) and state that they "don't care much about the big picture" is foolish and incorrect.

But I suspect I'll just get arguments, so that's all I have to say at this point.
Click to expand...
The problem arises when everyone is tarred with the same 'criminal/drug dealer/rapist/....' brush. Some of the folks who are coming are just families who are fleeing from terrible countries with out of control violence and they're trying to find a safe place for their families. I think right now for example, Ecuador which used to be a model of stability has been taken over by a criminal element that makes life dangerous for everyone.

And the folks who are being allowed to stay are most likely being checked out because it's not in any governments best interest to not do so. While those who don't meet standards are being sent back to wherever they say they came from. Probably the problem is that the USA is seen as the land of opportunity to so many, that all the checks are difficult to keep up with. So there's a back log.

How Ecuador went from being Latin America's model of stability to a nation in crisis
 
CallMeKate said:
Once again we seem to be confusing immigration (which is wonderful and part of America's fiber) with tens of thousands of ILLEGAL people, some on the FBI terrorist watch list pouring over the border. Doesn't "illegal" mean anything to people? I'll be honest and admit I'm having a LOT of trouble with this confusion... I'm not grasping why the confusion exists. We welcome immigrants and always have. This border thing isn't even the same subject.
Click to expand...
exactly
where exactly do many think these folks will work.... it is ILLEGAL to hire them some will get w temp work permit ...............but otherwise businesses would be breaking the law,
if business owners are Citizens and taxpayers there will be held responsible for breaking the law fined heavily and perhaps lose their business that MUST be ok with those who simply refuse to see these people could follow the process to come here legally .....
 
HoneyNut said:
I wish the issue wasn't all politicized and people writing about it like they are hysterically afraid. All the emotion makes it a lot harder to come to agreement about solutions. And the recent blaming of non-border states on political lines is quite shockingly disruptive of having a discussion. I'm pretty sure the billions that go to the customs and border force are federal funds from everyone's tax dollars. So presumably the facilities down by the border than are set up to house the inadmissables are paid for by all of us and not a burden on the border states alone?

I thought that a lot of the problem had been that people are allowed to stay in the U.S. until their court review of requesting asylum and that the courts were taking years to get to the cases. And I thought a few years ago there was a new law about expelling people to wait outside of the U.S. until their court case. Did that help the problem or not?
Click to expand...
yes it was working until the current administration decided to let the remain in mexico policy expire. Not only do they stay for years and then do not attend their own hearings ..... 80-90% do not qualify for asylum.
 
I have no answer. But there are people concerned about their housing situation, myself included. If we can help some, we need to help all. This affordable housing crap is nothing but two words that mean nothing.

I heard that Governor Newsom idiot saying affordable housing a few weeks ago. But he allows rent increases and utility increases. He doesn't care about the people.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top