It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Stevenjames15
a reply to: carewemust
You do realize that the article you quoted from is considered a hate group? Their reporting is not deemed as factual and strictly opinion based or fake news. Please use facts when trying to debate.
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) SNAP Policy on Non-Citizen Eligibility Last Published: 03/24/2017 A person must be a U.S. citizen or an eligible, lawfully-present non-citizen to qualify for SNAP benefits. Non-citizens who are eligible based on their immigration status must also satisfy other SNAP eligibility requirements such as income and resource limits to receive SNAP benefits.
Non-citizens eligible with no waiting period The following non-citizens are eligible with no waiting period:
Qualified alien children under 18.
Refugees admitted under section 207 of INA (includes victims of severe forms of trafficking).
Victims of Trafficking under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000. Asylees under Section 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
Deportation withheld under 243(h) or 241(b)(3) of INA. Amerasian immigrants under 584 of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing and Related Programs Appropriations Act.
Cuban or Haitian entrants as defined in 501(e) of the Refugee Education Assistance Act of 1980.
Iraqi and Afghan special immigrants under Section 101(a)(27) of the INA.
Certain American Indians born abroad.
Members of Hmong or Highland Laotian tribes that helped the U.S. military during the Vietnam era, and who are legally living in the U.S., and their spouses or surviving spouses and unmarried dependent children.
Elderly individuals born on or before Aug. 22, 1931 and who lawfully resided in the U.S. on Aug. 22, 1996.
Lawful Permanent Residents in the U.S. and receiving government payments for disability or blindness.
Lawful Permanent Residents with a military connection (veteran, on active duty, or spouse or child of a veteran or active duty service member).
originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: TheJesuit
A person can emigrate to Somalia, no problem.
They will welcome you with open arms...then rob you blind and beat you to death the first night.
Finally there is no such thing as an "economic refugee" either in US law or International Law.
An economic migrant is someone who emigrates from one region to another to seek an improvement in living standards because the living conditions or job opportunities in the migrant's own region are not sufficient. The United Nations uses the term migrant worker. The term economic migrant is often confused with the term refugee, but economic migrants leave their country due to bad economic conditions, not due to fear of persecution on the basis of race, religion, or ethnicity. Economic migrants are free to apply for asylum and thus refugee status in the country they migrated to. However they will not be given refugee status, unless the economic situation in their home country has led to generalised violence or seriously disturbed public order.
this link covers asylyum shopping
Asylum shopping is the practice by asylum seekers of applying for asylum in several states or seeking to apply in a particular state after transiting other states. The phrase is used mostly[dubious – discuss] in the context of the European Union and the Schengen Area, but has been used by the Federal Court of Canada. One of the objectives of Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters is to prevent asylum shopping. The Dublin Convention stipulates that asylum seekers are returned to this country where their entry into the union was first recorded and where they were first fingerprinted. Another objective of this policy is to prevent asylum seekers in orbit, i.e., to prevent the continual transfer of asylum seekers between countries trying to get others to accept them. To avoid abuses, European law, the Dublin Regulation, requires that asylum seekers register their asylum claim in the first country they arrive in, and that the decision of the first EU country they apply in, is the final decision in all EU countries. However, among some asylum seekers, the fingerprinting and registration is vehemently resisted in countries that are not considered asylum-seeker friendly, as they often wish to apply for asylum in Germany and Sweden where benefits are more generous. Some asylum seekers report burning their fingers so they can evade the fingerprint record control in Italy and apply for asylum in a country of their choice. The fingerprint record, known as the Eurodac system, is used to intercept false or multiple asylum claims. In Ireland, two-thirds of failed asylum seekers were found to be already known to the British border authorities, a third of the time under a different nationality, such as Tanzanians claiming to be fleeing persecution in Somalia.
Japan Some countries, such as Japan, have opted for technological changes to increase profitability (for example, greater automation), and designed immigration laws specifically to prevent immigrants from coming to, and remaining within, the country. In 2007, minister Taro Aso described Japan as unique in being "one nation, one civilisation, one language, one culture and one race". In 2013, Japan accepted only six of 3,777 persons who applied for refugee status. United States In the United States, political debate on immigration has flared repeatedly. Some on the far-left of the political spectrum attribute anti-immigration rhetoric to an all-"white", under-educated, and parochial minority of the population, ill-educated about the relative advantages of immigration for the US economy and society. On the other hand, those on the far-right think that immigration threatens national identity, as well as cheapening labor and increasing dependence on welfare. The country has seen unprecedented growth of immigrants since its independence in 1776, most recently for those of Asian descent
and that is NY times theory of how it will end up but says were a pretty sweet deal even with the current laws compared to the bulk of other nations
The Future Is Probably Somewhere in the Middle Based on the current debate, any solution that Congress agrees on will probably fall somewhere between international models. It could follow some trends that are occurring worldwide. For example, in many countries, including Canada and Australia, there has been a shift away from exclusively merit-based systems to ones that also consider whether someone has a job offer — something currently done in the United States. For purposes of immigration, the United States could narrow its definition of family, which is wider than that of any other country, to exclude siblings or adult children who are married. Although current American policies around family-based migration are the most generous in the world, the results look much different in practice because of limits on the number of visas that can be granted in each category. “There is a certain mindlessness to family immigration when you take into account eligibility and time,” said Demetrios G. Papademetriou, co-founder of the Migration Policy Institute, a research organization. “Someone qualifies, but it may take 20 years before a visa is open to them.” “There is a major undisputed advantage to family immigration, chain migration; it’s become apparently a dirty word,” he said. “You have someone here who will show you the ropes, who will take you in that can set up employment for you. When it comes to immigrant integration, family is very important.” You could envision a merit-based system that incorporates characteristics of our current system. It could grant points to people who have family members in the United States, or who come from countries that are not highly represented in the current population. In that case, it might be desirable to pay attention to the weight each category is given and to adjust based on economic and social outcomes. “That is how you keep a point selection system,” Mr. Papademetriou said. “Everything else is just blind faith or politics. Our system that exists today is just politics.” While the sputtering negotiations are frustrating for many people, especially for those caught up in the system, academics agree that, in general, these decisions should not be rushed. “Immigration is social engineering,” said Mr. Gest, the George Mason University professor. “You’re building the population of the future.”
originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: TheJesuit
So in other words, lets blame other countries immigration polices in south America for all the bad immigration decisions that are being made in the USA at the moment. If you don't want them in your country, at least keep them as a family unit till they are deported.
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” (John Adams) ◊ Less than 1% of Mexico’s population are immigrants (1.1 million in 2016). Wikipedia.org ◊ 13% of the U.S population is immigrants (42 million in 2016). Migration Policy Institute, 4/14/16. Zong, Jie & Jeanne Batalova. “Frequently Reported Statistics on Immigrants and Immigration in the U.S.” ◊ 11.3 million of America’s immigrants are illegal, and 49% of those are from Mexico. Pew Research Center, 11/19/15. Krogstad, Jens & Jeffrey Passel. “5 facts about illegal immigration in the U.S.” ◊ Illegal Immigration costs the US $113 billion per year. Federation for American Immigration Reform 2010, Martin, Jack & Eric Ruark. “The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on United States Taxpayers” ◊ Mexico requires that immigrants carry a federal photo ID, and you can be arrested if you don’t have it in your possession. The U.S. has no such requirement. Wikipedia.org ◊ Mexico’s immigration policy allows refusing to accept immigrants if the government feels it would cause an imbalance of race or ethnicity, or simply if it feels that keeping them out of the country would be in their nation’s best interest. U.S. immigration policy has no such provisions. Mexico requires immigrant applicants to show how they could contribute to the country’s well-being, and to show that they will be able to support themselves. U.S. immigration policy has no such provisions. Mexico punishes illegal immigrants with a prison sentence of 2-10 years. The U.S. punishes illegal immigrants by deporting them. Mexico’s constitution prohibits non-citizens from participating in any part of the country’s politics, including demonstrations and publicly voicing their opinions. The U.S. Constitution does not have those restrictions. Mexico’s constitution allows for legal immigrants to be expelled from the country for no reason and without due process. The U.S. Constitution has no such provision. Mexico’s constitution denies equal employment rights to immigrants. The U.S. Constitution does not. Fact Real, 11/19/12. “Mexico vs. United States: Mexican Immigration Laws are Tougher” SUMMARY Mexico’s immigration policy is much more strict than that of the United States. For just that reason, Mexico’s policy increases the likelihood of immigrants successfully relocating and contributing to the progress of their new country as well as providing superior legal safeguards which prevent immigrants from becoming a divisive force within their new country.
article has 7 pages so not gonna quote more from that but other members can if they find gems in the article in question with entire pages of refrences and sources to digest
The number of immigrants in the United States from El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras rose by 25% from 2007 to 2015, in contrast to more modest growth of the country’s overall foreign-born population and a decline from neighboring Mexico. During these same years, the total U.S. immigrant population increased by 10%, while the number of U.S. Mexican immigrants decreased by 6%, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data.
from 2015 so old again and i got locked out of quoting all but the title as i had reached my free article limit but it seems to imply that usa is far more open then EU on immigrants which may have changed since 2015
For Immigrants, America Is Still More Welcoming Than Europe
originally posted by: Xcathdra
I raised the issue because under US law and international law its not a valid claim when trying to gain access to another country by claiming your a refugee / seeking asylum.
originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: burgerbuddy
Emotional sure.. A lot of central Americans "fleeing" to the US are fleeing poor economic conditions in their country though. I raised the issue because under US law and international law its not a valid claim when trying to gain access to another country by claiming your a refugee / seeking asylum.
So in other words your retarded logic
ongoing armed conflict (such as civil war)
An environmental disaster (such as earthquake or hurricane), or an epidemic
Other extraordinary and temporary conditions
Note on Seeking Asylum: Being granted and maintaining TPS status until a reasonable period before the filing of the asylum application is considered an extraordinary circumstance for the purposes of the one year filing deadline. In other words, having TPS status “stops the clock” on the requirement to file for asylum within one year of arriving in the United States, if the one-year clock has not already expired. See 8 CFR 208.4(a)(5)(iv).
originally posted by: Xcathdra
TPS is a separate designation from migrant / asylum / refugee. TPS also is temporary and is restricted to certain conditions in the country that are temporary
TPS status was not renewed for Honduras as of May 4th 2018. Honduran nationals inside the US have 18 months to return to their home country.
I am not aware of TPS being applied to a country based on economic reasons.While TPS is an attorney general opinion designation basing it on economic issues is not anywhere near a standard. If US law / international law dont recognize it the US is not going to establish it in a separate program. The abuse alone would create massive problems.