Pew: Dying Cities Need More Refugees/Immigrants

Editor:  I’m going to be gone for a few days, so trying to get a couple of posts up this morning for you before I dash!
Frankly I have never bought into this idea that we have to continue to import millions of people to America every year to prop up dying cities and the Chamber of Commerce.

Erie PA protest
Immigrants protest President Trump in Erie, PA (Erie is the star of this story).  

Does anyone ever ask what the longterm costs are of ‘welcoming’ third world poverty to impoverished cities?
There is all this talk (as in this latest from Pew) about how they fill houses and apartments that would have otherwise been vacant, and that they supply low wage workers for global corporations (can you say BIG MEAT!).
But, what are the costs to the federal taxpayer as you will see obliquely mentioned in this latest prescription? And, what are the costs to our uniquely American culture?

Maybe dying cities are dying for a reason!  Maybe we should let them die (the buggy whip analogy)!

But the assumption always is—-accckkk! We can’t let that happen!
So we have the Dems teamed up (these cities are all Democrat-run and “new Americans” vote for the D’s) with the big corporations and the Chamber of Commerce merchants begging for more refugees and immigrants of all strips!

I don’t have time to analyze the Leftwing Pew propaganda story.   Here is a bit of it,

Immigrants Prevented or Minimized Population Loss in a Fifth of U.S. Counties

Erie, Pennsylvania, has a population problem: Once a metropolis of almost 140,000, it has dropped below 100,000.
But Erie’s situation would be even worse without the stream of immigrants and refugees arriving to work in the city’s plastics and biofuels plants on Lake Erie.

Screenshot (959)
Lamis, the Democratic Mayor’s chief of staff. We would get a lot less federal funding!  That means that you, the federal taxpayer props up the immigrant population in Erie!

Without refugees and their children, the city’s population might have dropped as low as 80,000, said Renee Lamis, chief of staff for Democratic Mayor Joe Schember.
That would mean a lot less federal funding, a lot less tax dollars, a lot more difficulty filling job openings and a lot more deteriorating housing stock,” Lamis said.
[What a coincidence, see my post yesterday about federal funding to help immigrant victims of crime in Erie.—ed]
“We are a perfect example of a place in need of immigrants and refugees,” she added.
An influx of immigrants prevented or significantly softened population loss last year in more than 1 in 5 U.S. counties, including the one where Erie is located, according to a Stateline analysis of new census figures. Immigration either prevented population decline or cut it by at least 10% in those areas.

Continue here, there is much more.
And, for my friends in Minnesota (Willmar!) be sure to read on!
So do we just keep going adding population?
Will there ever be enough, or do we just keep expanding to keep landlords in business, and the foreign-owned meat packers in workers, and infrastructure (schools, roads, etc) needing to be built; and, our land, water and air (our beautiful environment) further degraded for the sake of an ever-expanding economy?
When is enough enough?

Spread the love

3 thoughts on “Pew: Dying Cities Need More Refugees/Immigrants

  1. Dying cities are dying because of liberal policies and politicians. Bringing in third worlders is not gonna’ change their death rate.
    Why don’t they go to San Fran, L.A. or Seattle and gather up some of the homeless, the vets, etc. and bring them to their “dying” cities instead?
    The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers including the Health Care System

  2. Philadelphia was once a dying city, then they refurbished….

Comments are closed.