Post by mg
On Tue, 4 Dec 2018 19:32:47 -0800 (PST), b flanier
Post by b flanier
The Cato Institute is a right-wing think tank....
Kinda shocked me also that they would come up with such.
As for your conclusion that Cato likes immigration for whatever
reason, I don't know. Your guess is as good (or better) than
As for their "defense" of welfare for immigrants, I did not
draw that conclusion from the report. What led you to that?
"Overall, immigrants are less likely to consume welfare benefits
and, when they do, they generally consume a lower dollar value
of benefits than native-born Americans. Immigrants who meet
the eligibility thresholds of age for the entitlement programs
or poverty for the means-tested welfare programs generally have
lower use rates and consume a lower dollar value relative to
The per capita cost of providing welfare to immigrants is
substantially less than the per capita cost of providing welfare
to native-born Americans."
The Gov is proposing an excellent new rule to govern eligibility of
aliens for admittance to the US. There are five more days to post a
"Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds"
Notice of proposed rulemaking.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposes to prescribe
how it determines whether an alien is inadmissible to the United
States under section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(INA) because he or she is likely at any time to become a public
charge. Aliens who seek adjustment of status or a visa, or who are
applicants for admission, must establish that they are not likely at
any time to become a public charge, unless Congress has expressly
exempted them from this ground of inadmissibility or has otherwise
permitted them to seek a waiver of inadmissibility. Moreover, DHS
proposes to require all aliens seeking an extension of stay or change
of status to demonstrate that they have not received, are not
currently receiving, nor are likely to receive, public benefits as
defined in the proposed rule."
Thank you President Trump.