A Good Start: President Trump looks to ban welfare for immigrants

This is a good and logical first step in reforming our broken welfare system.  Via Breitbart:

President Trump’s ban on allowing welfare-dependent legal immigrants to resettle permanently in the United States would likely save American taxpayers about $1,600 a year per immigrant.

As Breitbart News reported, the Trump administration is set to roll out a plan in the next month that bars foreign nationals who need government welfare in order to live from resettling in the U.S. Such a ban on welfare importation through immigration has been eyed by the Trump White House since February.

Such a plan would be a boon for American taxpayers, who currently spend about $57.4 billion a year on paying for the welfare, crime, and schooling costs of the country’s mass importation of 1.5 million new, mostly low skilled legal immigrants every year. In the last decade, the U.S. has imported more than 10 million foreign nationals and is on track to import the same amount in the coming decade if legal immigration controls are not implemented.

The National Academies of Science released a report two years ago, noting that state and local American taxpayers are billed about $1,600 each year per immigrant to pay for their welfare, where immigrant households consume 33 percent more cash welfare than American citizen households.

It’s nice to see the numbers so clearly laid out.  $57.4 Billion dollars a year on immigrants, who we’ve been told are a great strength to us as a nation.  If it isn’t clear by now the key strength of immigrants to our nation is cheap labor for corporations.  Period.  Usually when I think of strengths I don’t think of people leeching off a government they never put anything into.  Nowadays you’re called a monster or a racist for even saying that.  That’s the state we are in.  That number will only increase if we continue to add the equivalent population of New York City just in foreigners every decade to our country.  The math does not add up and it will not end well.  And that of course doesn’t include those immigrants having children in that time, which they often do at a higher birthrate.

The country needs to grow up and have an adult conversation about immigration in the United States.  It would amount to suicide if we continue our current immigration policies and our current welfare program.  It will not do us OR THE IMMIGRANTS any good if we drown trying to help every single soul on the planet that is in some kind of need.  Yes, many situations are sad.  But we need to stop acting like children about this.  The right has kowtowed to the left and their feelings-based decision making for too long.  The United States can do far more positive in the world if we ourselves as a nation are in good financial shape.  I’ve posted the below video before but it really is the perfect illustration to show how fruitless letting in unchecked numbers of immigrants is.

Google and tracking

The AP recently put out a story of Google’s shady practice of still tracking you even if you’ve turned location services off.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Google wants to know where you go so badly that it records your movements even when you explicitly tell it not to.

An Associated Press investigation found that many Google services on Android devices and iPhones store your location data even if you’ve used a privacy setting that says it will prevent Google from doing so.

Computer-science researchers at Princeton confirmed these findings at the AP’s request.

For the most part, Google is upfront about asking permission to use your location information. An app like Google Maps will remind you to allow access to location if you use it for navigating. If you agree to let it record your location over time, Google Maps will display that history for you in a “timeline” that maps out your daily movements.

Storing your minute-by-minute travels carries privacy risks and has been used by police to determine the location of suspects — such as a warrant that police in Raleigh, North Carolina, served on Google last year to find devices near a murder scene. So the company lets you “pause” a setting called Location History.

Google says that will prevent the company from remembering where you’ve been. Google’s support page on the subject states: “You can turn off Location History at any time. With Location History off, the places you go are no longer stored.”

That isn’t true. Even with Location History paused, some Google apps automatically store time-stamped location data without asking. (It’s possible, although laborious, to delete it .)

For example, Google stores a snapshot of where you are when you merely open its Maps app. Automatic daily weather updates on Android phones pinpoint roughly where you are. And some searches that have nothing to do with location, like “chocolate chip cookies,” or “kids science kits,” pinpoint your precise latitude and longitude — accurate to the square foot — and save it to your Google account.

The privacy issue affects some two billion users of devices that run Google’s Android operating software and hundreds of millions of worldwide iPhone users who rely on Google for maps or search.

Storing location data in violation of a user’s preferences is wrong, said Jonathan Mayer, a Princeton computer scientist and former chief technologist for the Federal Communications Commission’s enforcement bureau. A researcher from Mayer’s lab confirmed the AP’s findings on multiple Android devices; the AP conducted its own tests on several iPhones that found the same behavior.

“If you’re going to allow users to turn off something called ‘Location History,’ then all the places where you maintain location history should be turned off,” Mayer said. “That seems like a pretty straightforward position to have.”

This is a very shady though not altogether unsurprising trick by Google.  Entirely disingenuous.  Apparently if you read the fine print there are other places other than “Location History” that Google can track you.

Ideally there would be a third party option to Apple and Google (Android) running pretty much everything in the smartphone realm.  It looks like Android users are a little more at risk but you can turn off all settings in your account.  Go to myactivity.google.com and basically turn off everything.  You may be disgusted to see how much information they have on you.  The way Google circumvented a disabled Location History is by tracking you via “Web & App Activity” which you should pause if you don’t want to be tracked that way.  You’re honestly best off pausing all of those services.

Pirates of the Caribbean II: Welcome to Venezuela

Lawlessness abounds in socialist nations.  I don’t think bringing back piracy to the Caribbean was what they had in mind.  The Washington Post actually does a pretty good exposé on this.

There have been reports of piracy over the past 18 months near Honduras, Nicaragua, Haiti and St. Lucia. But nowhere has the surge been more notable, analysts say, than off the coast of Venezuela.

An economic crisis in the South American country has sent inflation soaring toward 1 million percent, making food and medicine scarce. Malnutrition is spreading; disease is rampant; water and power grids are failing from a lack of trained staff and spare parts. Police and military are abandoning their posts as their paychecks become nearly worthless. Under the socialist government of President Nicolás Maduro, repression and corruption have increased.

The conditions are compelling some Venezuelans to take desperate action.

One Venezuelan port official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to address official corruption, said that Venezuelan coast guard officers have been boarding anchored vessels and demanding money and food. He said commercial ships, in response, are increasingly anchoring farther off the coast, and turning off their motors and lights to avoid being seen at night.

It’s important to remember that this could happen to us.  Socialism is often times a slow creep.  It’s part of the reason there was such a huge outcry to Obamacare.  In the United States, health care is about 20% of the gross domestic product.  Thankfully, we’ve elected a President who recognizes this disaster and has tried to dismember it, or encourage Congress to do so.

Venezuela turned to socialism in 1998 with the election of Hugo Chavez.  He redistributed land to the poor and in 2007 took over many of the major oil projects.  Oil is half of the country’s GDP and accounts for nearly 100% of its exports.  Price control, a heavily government controlled economy, and plummeting oil prices have wrecked what should be a prosperous nation.  Venezuela has the largest oil reserves in the world.  There is no reason they should be floundering this badly, or having to cross into Colombia to buy simple necessities such as toilet paper and milk.

Forbes.com has a nice little slideshow here which highlights many other countries that have tried socialism and failed.  The dumbing down of the populace is one of the greatest injustices we have ever seen.  There should be absolutely no reason socialism and communism are as popular as they are, especially among millennials.  Via The Washington Times:

The majority of millennials would prefer to live in a socialist, communist or fascist nation rather than a capitalistic one, according to a new poll.

In the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation’s “Annual Report on U.S. Attitudes Toward Socialism,” 58 percent of the up-and-coming generation opted for one of the three systems, compared to 42 percent who said they were in favor of capitalism.

The most popular socioeconomic order was socialism, with 44 percent support. Communism and fascism received 7 percent support each.

Let that sink in.  This falls directly on us and our educational system.  This isn’t altogether surprising as the vast majority of academia consists of far left professors and administrators.  While immigration is our most glaring problem right now, reforming the education system is just as important though a much longer process.

Let us not forget the horrors of socialism.  Nationalizing major industries and redistributing wealth always leads to disaster.  The faster we can leave industry to the free markets and disband welfare and other government programs that force redistribution of wealth the safer and better off we will be.

11 yr old hacks replica election office website in 10 minutes

The website r00tz.org put on a challenge this weekend to hack a replica of the election office website.  An 11-yr old girl was able to hack it in 10 minutes.  r00tz.org is “A place where kids learn white-hat hacking to better the world”.  Gives you a nice warm fuzzy feeling inside that it can be hacked that easily, right?

The election security budget for 2018 was $380 million dollars.  It should give one pause when a little girl can hack an election website that could be in a swing state in 10 minutes.

The takeaway message is clear.  Ensuring a high level of election security is very hard.  Electronic voting, while no doubt easier to tally votes, is also several levels of magnitude harder to defend against cyber threats, both from without and within.  As if a Soros voting machine gave one a warm fuzzy feeling to begin with.

No.  Go back to paper ballots and require voter ID.  The Democrats are caught.  You can’t whinge on about MUH RUSSIA on the one hand and cry that voter ID is racist because reasons on the other and expect us to allow these contradicting views to continue.  Use it against them.  If Russia truly is as dangerous in election meddling as you’ve been crying about for over two years now, then buckle down and eliminate that chance with paper ballots and voter ID.  That’s it.

The mid-term elections are right around the corner and there will inevitably be some foul play afoot.  Consider even now the special election in Ohio last week.  This article from Breitbart goes into detail how Soros has tried to obstruct attempts of improving election security.  Sorry, but I have a hard time believing there are 170 registered voters in just ONE Ohio district over 116 YEARS OLD.  Are there even 170 116 year olds in all of America?  Something tells me those 116 year olds weren’t voting Republican.

The Course of Empire

Thomas Cole (1801-1848) was an English-born painter who emigrated to the United States as a teenager.  He painted a series of paintings called “The Course of Empire” and put out the first of five in 1834.  Cole took out newspaper ads for the series, and quoted a verse from Lord Byron’s Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage that summarizes its theme nicely:

There is the moral of all human tales;

‘Tis but the same rehearsal of the past.
First freedom and then Glory – when that fails,
Wealth, vice, corruption – barbarism at last.
And History, with all her volumes vast,
Hath but one page…

The paintings depict the rise and fall of some great civilization, depicted as a city along a river.  Throughout the five paintings you’ll notice the big boulder in the background, and the paintings are along different aspects of the river but the boulder remains in all of them.  Some see Greece, others Roman, and yet others the American Empire.  The series depicts the vicious cycle and serves as a strong visual warning of what may be ahead if we are not careful, if we can even control it at all.

The series begins with The Savage State.  There is very little going on; it is the great wilderness.  The frontier.  Pioneer life.  Some think Cole here is depicting Native American life.  He was known for his landscape paintings and surely was inspired by the American wilderness, having lived in Ohio.  The painting is largely dominated by nature, with man but a small piece of it.

The second painting in the series is The Arcadian or Pastoral State.  Things have built up a little bit.  This one probably resembles Greece the most.  Nature is still very much dominant here, but with some impressive structures constructed as well.  Notice the temple for worship with smoke billowing out of it from some sacrifice.  I highly suggest clicking on the links from the captions for a bigger version of each painting because there’s a lot of detail.  There are a lot more activities going on in this painting, even including a man sketching some apparent geometric problem or perhaps sketching a structure to build.  Things are beginning to develop.

The Consummation of Empire is the third painting in the series and represents the height of the empire.  A massive change has taken place, but notice we are looking at the same area with our boulder as our marker, albeit from a different viewpoint.  This is surely inspired by the Roman Empire at its height.  The sky is sunny and bright, temples and marble structures abound, the entire painting is bustling with activity and commerce, and technologically things have progressed quite a bit as well given the fountains, buildings, and vehicles.  There are ornate decorations everywhere, and there appears to be some kind of party or celebration going on.  Some think the ornate detail and overall decadence of the painting foreshadows the impending doom.  At this point nature has clearly taken a back seat to civilization with very little harmony, only dominance.

Destruction.  A similar viewpoint as the previous painting but pulled out a bit more.  Death and destruction.  The city is being sacked, warships are everywhere and the city has been set ablaze.  Some think the scene is inspired by the Vandal sack of Rome in 455.  The statue in particular stands out.  He seems to be plodding forward, but with the decapitated head perhaps suggesting an uncertain future.  Clearly this is the downfall of the civilization.  How it got there can be speculated on, or left to the imagination of the viewer.

The last piece is entitled Desolation.  A significant time has passed.  All we see are some remains of what was the once great Empire.  Nature has begun to work Her magic.

 

The collection as a whole is fantastic and really gives one pause.  Apply it to past civilizations or ours today, but learn from it.  I often wonder where we are in this cycle, or whether the cycle must inevitably end up the same way every time.  Perhaps we peaked in the 1950s, or with the moon landing.  Or perhaps we’re still ascending but with a few more bumps, trials, and tribulations along the way.  Either way, appreciate the time we are in, learn from the past, and do what we can to preserve and build up our great civilization for future generations.

Puppets

Either they’re passing around the same crappy joke, or the Cabal has forced them to deliver the same crappy joke.  It doesn’t look good either way.

Now, we know these are no-talent hacks.  They’ve always been no-talent hacks.  But this feels to me like it’s the latter, and the joke has been written in to all their routines to further an agenda.  It’s not reading into things too much to say that these late night comics are used to push a narrative.  That much is obvious at this point.  They’ve all sold their souls for money and fame and now must do the bidding of their masters.  Comedy has taken a turn for the worst ever since the buildup to the election.  And now we’re continually force-fed Amy Schumer and beaten over the head being told that she’s funny.  Political correctness has ruined any semblance of mainstream comedy.  But, there are still some talented people out there.  Give the poster of the video a shot, Owen Benjamin.  He’s great.

Where’s the benefit? Welfare usage by immigrants vs native households

A couple years ago the Center for Immigration Studies published this landmark study on welfare usage by immigrant households (both legal and illegal) as compared to native households.  Here are a few of the key findings from the study:

  • The average household headed by an immigrant (legal or illegal) costs taxpayers $6,234 in federal welfare benefits, which is 41 percent higher than the $4,431 received by the average native household.
  • The average immigrant household consumes 33 percent more cash welfare, 57 percent more food assistance, and 44 percent more Medicaid dollars than the average native household. Housing costs are about the same for both groups.
  • At $8,251, households headed by immigrants from Central America and Mexico have the highest welfare costs of any sending region — 86 percent higher than the costs of native households.
  • Illegal immigrant households cost an average of $5,692 (driven largely by the presence of U.S.-born children), while legal immigrant households cost $6,378.
  • The greater consumption of welfare dollars by immigrants can be explained in large part by their lower level of education and larger number of children compared to natives. Over 24 percent of immigrant households are headed by a high school dropout, compared to just 8 percent of native households. In addition, 13 percent of immigrant households have three or more children, vs. just 6 percent of native households.

Beyond this, more than half (51%) of ALL IMMIGRANT-HEADED HOUSEHOLDS use at least one federal welfare program, compared to 30% for native households.  See below for additional figures from the study.  The results are conclusive and altogether not surprising for many who read here, but this information must be passed around for everyone to see.

Remember, we’re being sold this as if we will perish without immigration.  The reality is we’ll perish if we continue immigration at its current levels.  Immigrants cost more money than they produce, plain and simple.  The average immigrant household is a net negative to the American taxpayer.  The stats above already show that we have a big enough welfare problem with native households as it is.  Further, these are not your great-great-grandparents’ immigrants.  We’re constantly told this is a nation of immigrants, which is patently false, and that we’ve always been welcoming.  The reality is the immigrants who came to Ellis Island did not have welfare benefits to welcome them when they got off the ships.  The only reward once getting off the boat was the OPPORTUNITY to work.  That was the American Dream.  Today, the American Dream is to be on the public dole once they get here.

There’s something of a trend in the graph above that is also worrying, though not altogether surprising.  Since 1965 the type of immigrant that has come here has changed drastically.  During the initial wave of immigrants in the 19th century the vast majority of them were of European descent.  The vast majority of immigrants today (both legal and illegal) hail from Central and South America.  And as the graph above shows the immigrants from Central and South America cost the average taxpayer much more than other demographic groups.  Again, how is this a benefit to America and its citizens?  These are tough discussions, and make some people uncomfortable.  But a little discomfort is far preferable than to say nothing and watch the destruction occur without doing anything for fear of offending someone.

Here are some of the conclusions of the study:

This study implies that two competing narratives about immigration are both true. Immigrants do indeed have a strong attachment to the labor force, as immigration advocates often point out. At the same time, however, immigrants consume a large amount of welfare spending, just as critics claim. The reason that both narratives are true is that the American welfare system has become increasingly focused on buttressing low-wage workers rather than supporting non-workers. Put more simply, welfare and low-wage work go together. Just as natives with low levels of education and large numbers of children are apt to consume welfare, immigrants with those same characteristics are also likely to be on welfare. A strong work ethic does not change this reality.

In order to reduce the cost of immigrant welfare use, either the welfare system or the immigration system must change. The former option is sometimes described as “building a wall around the welfare state” to prevent new immigrants from accessing it. It is easier said than done. Loopholes and exceptions have weakened previous attempts to limit immigrant access to welfare.18 More importantly, Congress has no power to prevent the U.S.-born children of immigrants from using the same welfare programs that the children of natives do. No matter how strong the “wall around the welfare state” is built, it cannot stop immigrant parents from signing up their U.S.-born children for Medicaid, SNAP, free school lunch, etc., as long as native parents can do the same.

Only a full-scale rollback of the welfare state for both immigrants and natives would prevent immigrant families from consuming welfare dollars. Whatever one thinks of that proposal, it is not a policy change likely to occur in the near future.19 In fact, importing new clients of the welfare state likely makes it even harder to roll back.20 As long as the U.S. continues to admit large numbers of low-skill immigrants (legal or illegal), then immigrant welfare consumption will remain high.

I’ve said before it is simply not feasible to continue immigration as we are currently doing it and be a welfare state.  That is suicide.  There is no other word for it.  We need to drastically cut down on legal immigration, and make it easier to deport illegal aliens.  Anchor babies can become citizens automatically.  This needs to stop.  Chain migration will break the back of the country.

Unfortunately, the national deficit is an abstract enough concept that nobody ever really takes it seriously.  Because we do not feel the effects of it on our everyday lives (noticeably anyway) it doesn’t feel like it’s a serious problem to most people.  It should.  And the word needs to be spread.  If the national deficit is too abstract a concept, remind people that a constant stream of legal immigrants and illegal aliens means more housing.  When’s the last time you thought you were getting a great deal on rent?  Or that housing prices were too low?  Or how about traffic?  It sounds silly, but they need to drive too.  When’s the last time you thought California could handle more cars on the road?  Or use the liberal’s arguments against them.  You want higher wages for workers?  Well, less low-skilled labor in the workplace will reduce the supply and invariably raise the wages for the workers that are left.  We need to start shifting the argument.  We have the high ground, we just need to use it better.