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.
Immigrants still come to America because they want to make it on their own. Sadly America doesn't always allow them to do so due to racial, ethnic, social, and economic barriers and prejudices. European immigrants of the 1880s to 1910s, like my grandparents, didn't face the same degree of prejudice as immigrants from more "foreign" places do today. Equating the experiences doesn't work. And the surge of immigrants back then is what led to the creation of many of the great charities--because even many of those Europeans needed support to make it here.
The bottom line is that immigrants are the life blood of America and it is in our long term interest to help new arrivals. Just as it is in our best interest to help the poor regardless of how long they or their family has been here--and regardless of whether they came here on their own volition or were kidnapped and brought here as slaves.
I'd like to see you say that with a straight face to an Irishman of 1890. Also back then prejudice was entirely legal, and there were no repercusssions to practicing it, no legal bodies or community organizations to help you fight it, and no bad publicity if you stated on your factory or boarding house or club "No Irish".
Besides that, I do believe immigrants are the vital lifeblood. The problem is the system should be welcoming more from a variety of countries. There are 250 plus countries in the world, and the people from all of them can offer much. The diversity visa program is too small. In effect, we've said ok come in as long as you can walk into America. That's not the best way to get the most vigorous mixing of ideas and genes is it?
Besides that, I do believe immigrants are the vital lifeblood. The problem is the system should be welcoming more from a variety of countries. There are 250 plus countries in the world, and the people from all of them can offer much. The diversity visa program is too small. In effect, we've said ok come in as long as you can walk into America. That's not the best way to get the most vigorous mixing of ideas and genes is it?
The door is still welcome to varieties, in a way. The green card lottery is still open to many countries. However, many people no longer want to come to the USA now that their economies are prospering. Even with Mexicans, it's been a net outward migration recently.
Also the services offered by the charities in the 1900s in no way match the kind of services offered today, but it was probably more morally suitable. Let the ones who have the willingness and the means be the ones to help.
The door is still welcome to varieties, in a way. The green card lottery is still open to many countries. However, many people no longer want to come to the USA now that their economies are prospering. Even with Mexicans, it's been a net outward migration recently.
Also the services offered by the charities in the 1900s in no way match the kind of services offered today, but it was probably more morally suitable. Let the ones who have the willingness and the means be the ones to help.
The green card lottery is open (diversity visa program), yes, but is very small compared to the actual immigration (legal plus illegal). While I understand the argument that the most motivated come here, so its a self-selecting process, people from all over Africa, for example, cannot get here as readily as people from latin America. The net result is that the actual immigration is skewed. Of course, if you consider only legal immigration, it is more balanced.
I'd like to see you say that with a straight face to an Irishman of 1890. Also back then prejudice was entirely legal, and there were no repercusssions to practicing it, no legal bodies or community organizations to help you fight it, and no bad publicity if you stated on your factory or boarding house or club "No Irish".
Besides that, I do believe immigrants are the vital lifeblood. The problem is the system should be welcoming more from a variety of countries. There are 250 plus countries in the world, and the people from all of them can offer much. The diversity visa program is too small. In effect, we've said ok come in as long as you can walk into America. That's not the best way to get the most vigorous mixing of ideas and genes is it?
The Irish immigrant of 1890 spoke English, had the same skin color, worshipped Jesus, and had a very similar cultural background as the people here. No way did he face the same systemic barriers that a dark skinned person with no English and a completely foreign style of dress and culture does today. Obviosly there was great prejudice against European immigrants (the company I work for had a formal No Jews hiring policy until the 1970s), but not to the extent of the systemic ingrained prejudice that more "foreign" immigrants face today.
I agree that we need to let in a far wider range of immigrants than we do. My grandparents wouldn't be allowed in today (and I'm proud to say that I'm quite sure they would have found a way in illegally). It's important to control the flow, but it should be a large and varied flow of new Americans. That has always been and will always be the way this country stays vital and strong.
I don't know. Based on what I've read in Images of America, encyclopedias and novels, the conditions that FOB Irish, Italians and Eastern European Jews faced back then were much more deplorable than what a Somali immigrant might face today. Aside from the lack of the aforementioned safety nets, they where confined to ghettos were there was a complete absence of basic sanitation. Worse, some of them were forced to fight to certain death in the civil war. Those were obvious signs of systemic prejudice that their judeo-christian monotheism could not protect them from. They seemed better off only in the sense that America back then had more jobs to offer for unskilled workers like that factory in Flatiron that burned down and killed dozens - this may have made a big difference in getting settled down. That and the full employment environment of WW2 and the subsequent postwar economic expansion may have helped with assimilation (ie, becoming more affluent).
One cannot compare quality of life today with that of 1890--everyone had a harder life, be they immigrant or daughter of the revolution. That's not relevant to the fact that those white European arrivistes had an easier path to "success" as defined at the time than many of today's immigrants do. While much of today's persecution and segregation is not condoned by law, it is just as strong and widespread--and even more so for those whose "otherness" is greater. And, as you pointed out, the success that some of those immigrants eventually attained was as much a product of the times as it was due to their ability to the grasp the opportunities presented to them.
I find the attitude that "my white European relatives came here over a hundred years ago and succeeded, so shame on you if you can't do the same today" incredibly naive and offensive. I thank my grandparents for having had the gumption and wherewithal to leave their oppressive countries and come here and make a new life. Not only am I the better for it but so is the entire country. I believe that it is the responsibility of every American to welcome new immigrants and to provide them with all of the guidance and support that they need to make a better life here--and in the process to make a better America.
The Irish immigrant of 1890 spoke English, had the same skin color, worshipped Jesus, and had a very similar cultural background as the people here. No way did he face the same systemic barriers that a dark skinned person with no English and a completely foreign style of dress and culture does today. Obviously there was great prejudice against European immigrants (the company I work for had a formal No Jews hiring policy until the 1970s), but not to the extent of the systemic ingrained prejudice that more "foreign" immigrants face today.
I agree that we need to let in a far wider range of immigrants than we do. My grandparents wouldn't be allowed in today (and I'm proud to say that I'm quite sure they would have found a way in illegally). It's important to control the flow, but it should be a large and varied flow of new Americans. That has always been and will always be the way this country stays vital and strong.
I get what you are saying but the wrong type of Jesus (Catholic vs. Protestant) had people at each others throats and murdering each other for years, and try telling a white, anglo-saxon, in-power protestant (and in the 1890s the anglo protestants were still actually anglo-saxon protestant) that an Irish laborer from County Cork had the same cultural background as him you'd be ejected by the butler from the gentlemen's club forthwith. Google "irish not considered white in 19th century" and you might be surprised.
Is it not amazing how some of these threads start out about one thing and entirely evolve into something else?
In anycase very interesting debate.
First off I too want to start this by wishing the OP lots of luck with one day finding a beautifull place to live that they can afford and be proud of!
With the immigration, absolutely everyone no matter where they are from is entitled to be here. I do believe that for the most part immigrants should be coming in the right way which is by legal status. We have rules for a reason and in order to keep criminal behavior to a minima,l we need to know who these people are and where they reside.
As far as old school immigrants I believe you can put the italians in the same catagory as the irish where they "were not considered to be true whites" and very much looked down by many of the other european imigrants that had white skin. I wasnt there so I really cant say if the prejudices that these people faced were less severe or more severe as the imigrants today. I do agree with the person that pointed out at least there are certain laws that do prevent legal discrimination in todays day and age.
As far as President Obama is concerned, I believe he has reallly tried to strive for a better tomorrow, but has fallen short with alot. dont quote me on the exact numbers, but I believe his goal was to to create 5 million new jobs, and has taken the credit for creating at least 2 million of them. I have read many reports that say in actuality he only created about 300, 000. If that is true, that is one heck of a difference.
One more thing if Obama or anyone else out there tells you we are out of the recession because jobs are increasing and home sales are picking up, they are full of s***. Yes maybe a few people have gone back to work and select markets of real estate has gone up, but there are still hoards and hoards of people on the unemployment line or about to get kicked out of their homes. US is in far more debt than ever before, and even the saviest investors cant turn profits like they did 15 years ago.
I still believe this is the greatest nation in the world and we will prevail. However its gonna take many more years to get it back to being in decent shape.
As far as old school immigrants I believe you can put the italians in the same catagory as the irish where they "were not considered to be true whites" and very much looked down by many of the other european imigrants that had white skin. I wasnt there so I really cant say if the prejudices that these people faced were less severe or more severe as the imigrants today. I do agree with the person that pointed out at least there are certain laws that do prevent legal discrimination in todays day and age.
Not only were Italians, Irish and Jews looked down upon and not considered to be true whites, they were blatantly denied the rights and privilages that provided for a decent standard of living even by the standards of those days. Would a business back then have put out a sign saying "No WASPS Need Apply?". Would the schools back then have banned the King James bible from classrooms? Or have a law passed that mandates whites not to marry non whites? So not sure I beleive the statement that life was hard for everyone. At least in terms of laws, norms and structures, immigrants had it much worse.
But it is indeed true that the path to assimilation and prosperity is harder for immigrants to attain today. Some would argue though that this is more the result of circumstances (ie, lack of jobs for the unskilled, obscene cost of getting an education, technology, competition from other countries etc.) than institutionalized discrimination against immigrants. Not saying discrimination is not a major factor but rather macroeconomic forces are probably playing a bigger role.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northeastcouple
As far as President Obama is concerned, I believe he has reallly tried to strive for a better tomorrow, but has fallen short with alot. dont quote me on the exact numbers, but I believe his goal was to to create 5 million new jobs, and has taken the credit for creating at least 2 million of them. I have read many reports that say in actuality he only created about 300, 000. If that is true, that is one heck of a difference.
The other thing to consider is that a good economy is not just about job creation, but also wealth creation. Other presidents have tried to create jobs by inflating the economy, with disastrous consequences. I like Obama's policy on energy (except when it comes to coal) and if carried out could provide for the wealth this country needs to generate in the decades to come.
I don't know. Based on what I've read in Images of America, encyclopedias and novels, the conditions that FOB Irish, Italians and Eastern European Jews faced back then were much more deplorable than what a Somali immigrant might face today.
I suggest everyone make a trip to the Tenament Museum on the Lower East Side of Manhattan. Compared to how they lived then, low-income people today live in castles. Imagine living with 5 people in a crummy "apartment" with no ventilation or fans (forget air conditioning) on a 100 degree day. Then you walk outside and the streets are so packed with people you can barely move. Sanitation? Are you kidding?
Getting back to the OP, I don't believe the purpose of Section 8 is for poor people to be able to get a nice house in Putnam County. Now if you work hard, save money and educate your children, maybe your children will be able to buy a house in Putnam County, perhaps with an extra bedroom for you.
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.
