Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But it's not going to magically fix the homelessness problem in CA cities. I live in Boise, and in the years since Martin v. Boise (2018) we have not experienced a large increase in visible homelessness. By that I mean encampments in parks, sidewalks, greenbelts, and other public spaces. Whereas many west coast cities misinterpreted Martin v. Boise to mean there could be no enforcement whatsoever if shelter space is inadequate. I.e. folks could set up huge tents with furniture and heaters and huge piles of stuff blocking the public way.
Here in Boise, even after 2018, the PD doesn't permit camping in parks, or obstructing the public right of way with huge piles of belongings. And the PD works with shelters to get people inside, and can apply pressure to accept shelter if beds are available. The constitutional right to sleep doesn't mean allowing people to live however they want in public. There is an active enforcement component.
Even if the SCOTUS overturns Martin v. Boise (or greatly narrows it), CA cities will need to take concrete steps to address the problem. Build a lot more shelter space (e.g. what Reno has done). Establish standards and enforcement around what's acceptable in public. And build a lot more housing to stop the pipeline of people falling into homelessness to begin with.
Migrants staying at the Big Apple’s controversial tent shelter at Floyd Bennett Field have started going door to door in nearby neighborhoods begging residents for cash, food and clothes, furious locals told The Post Friday.
David Fitzgerald, 62, said he has noticed an influx of asylum seeker families showing up on his doorstep in Brooklyn’s Marine Park neighborhood in recent weeks asking for spare change — sparking safety fears among some of his neighbors.
“There’s definitely an invasion of immigrants from Floyd Bennett Field in our neighborhood and I see them sitting outside stores … outside the mall and going around to all the houses in the neighborhood, knocking on the door looking for money,” the retiree said.
The author called it, and I paraphrase, one of the most purposeless mass movements of people in history, and yet explains well the personal and even spiritual growth experienced by many of the miners. He likens the struggle to get there, largely on foot, from Skagway through the Chilkoot Pass and then, after climbing the pass down the Yukon River to the climb of Everest. It seems an apt comparison.
The current rush to the cities of the U.S. is similar except there is guaranteed lucre at the end of the migration; at our expense. Has anyone emphasized the "rights" of U.S. citizens? Why do "migrants" have rights to our parks and schools? At least in the Yukon, you had to stake a claim. No one guaranteed they would find gold. It they didn't they were on their own to sustain themselves in the Yukon wilderness or find their way back home.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,477 posts, read 12,496,511 times
Reputation: 10442
Where is the "No" button?
Coming here for jobs, because their spouse beats them, because of local gangs, etc., is not a recognized legal route into this country per our laws.
If they cannot pass the requirements to immigrate legally and cannot or won't support themselves when they come here, then don't come here.
We and other countries send aid and many millions of dollars to third-world countries every year. We've built factories in their countries so they can have jobs. Etc. There's absolutely no reason to spend even more to support those who come here illegally.
Now MX wants the US to pay MX $20 billion to stop the illegals? Trump had it right when he'd threatened to withhold the $$ that we send to some of those countries because of their failures in halting the tide of illegals and because they would not take back their criminals and gang members that were caught here. Trump threatened and they backed down. We need that kind of leadership again.
Where is the "No" button?
***********
Now MX wants the US to pay MX $20 billion to stop the illegals? Trump had it right when he'd threatened to withhold the $$ that we send to some of those countries because of their failures in halting the tide of illegals and because they would not take back their criminals and gang members that were caught here. Trump threatened and they backed down. We need that kind of leadership again.
I deliberately left Trump out of the OP since I wanted this thread to be about Illegal Immigration but I don't disagree.
My choice was "other". Migrants presenting themselves at a legal port of entry claiming asylum should have to wait outside our country until their cases can be verified and even at that we must set limits on how many legitimate cases we allow in.
I'm also for strengthening the law that they must apply for asylum from any countries they pass through before they get to our border. They should not be allowed to apply for asylum once they entered our country illegally either. Laws can be changed and they should be in the case of our asylum policies.
Illegal aliens must be deported as they make themselves known. No amnesties ever again.
No) Go back, get in line like I did choice is missing.
Like you and many others. I had a Korean friend who came in legally, her family. It took 10 years and they had to meet many stipulations in addition to the wait.
We looked into foreign adoption, but gave up. To bring the child in, we had to PROVE we had the income to support the child, PROVE we would health insurance immediately available for the child, among other requirements - we should have just had someone sneak a child through the border, and I am betting that many do come in that way, and some kidnapped for easier entrance having a child with them.
They can seek asylum in Mexico, but they must PASS a background check and get a JOB, no welfare, and I doubt even once they drop anchor babies there that those babies get them set up on welfare.
We can't take care of the people we have now. Over 1.5 million homeless, and many suffering in poverty. They talk about jobs, but the reason some are open is that they do not pay enough for someone to live on, it isn't that our citizens don't want to do the jobs, but that they cannot afford to do those jobs and survive with out public assistance. Illegals have anchor babies to bring in public assistance, 4 or 5 bring in a nice check, plus they get priority for subsidized housing since they have children. Heck, they were having sex in the hallways of the $500 a night hotel, so I am sure they are already getting their public assistance dollars.
Nope, send them home. Put up a sing "NO VACANCY". National Guard on the border until it can be secured. Then, begin detaining and deporting, something Biden took from us.
Both of my children suffered in a school system where English As A Second Language was a priority. My husband, friends and neighbors lost their jobs in a small town and were replaced in a manufacturing facility by illegal aliens carpooling in from a nearby city. They did this in 3 waves, and there were very few jobs in the small town. I heard they may now close after several years, karma in action.
Send them home, and keep them out. They do not assimilate into our population, and form 3rd world neighborhoods, and bring all of what they left to my doorstep!
We looked into foreign adoption, but gave up. To bring the child in, we had to PROVE we had the income to support the child, PROVE we would health insurance immediately available for the child, among other requirements - we should have just had someone sneak a child through the border, and I am betting that many do come in that way, and some kidnapped for easier entrance having a child with them.
!
Yes, you should have got the child here illegally. The system doesn't work, and many people take matter in their own hands. The world favors the bold people that take actions. A result of your legal inaction was you were deprived of the opportunity to raise the child.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnywhereElse
Send them home, and keep them out. They do not assimilate into our population, and form 3rd world neighborhoods, and bring all of what they left to my doorstep!
Americans first!
I was at a park in California on Saturday. There was no parking anywhere, and I was wondering what was going on. As my child went to his tennis class, I saw huge crowds of mostly Latinos clustered around 2 fields. I figured it was kids' soccer. Tennis drills were boring to watch so I walked over to the fields, and I waded through the parents and saw huge RUGBY games being played by the predominately Latino children. I saw a Grey bearded Irish looking guy enthusiastically coaching one of the youth teams. To me this looked a lot like assimilation. Here on C-D, it is a lot of negatively but in the real world it isn't the way it would seem if you went off the comments here.
What a weird poll. ALL the options are "they are welcome"? Don't think so! You can see the results...
There's no such thing as "come, but not get support." That's built into our society. In this case, unfortunately...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
