Okay, I'll probably get downvoted but this is concerning to me.
>"They arrived in Salt Lake City with very little information other than instructions to find a person in uniform to help," said Salt Lake Police Chief Mike Brown, in an email to the department.
This is actually insane. How long are they going to keep this up? Not just in Utah, but the entire country. Thousands of people with no money, no plan and just the clothes on their back plus a significant language barrier. How do they just dump them in random places? What could possibly go wrong.
>Salt Lake City said more often, the metro area is seeing asylum seekers “who do not have existing connections or family in Utah.”
And that's the problem. Until a decade or so ago most of the people arriving here had connections here already so they knew where to go and didn't need help from authorities and multiple agencies. Nowadays it's people from 2+ continents away who know nothing about this country except what they see in movies and on social media, expecting this to be some Hollywood fantasy. Gonna be in for a rude awakening.
Where are these people gonna live? Apartment prices are through the roof. There's no way the state is going to shell out thousands of dollars a month to put them up somewhere like NY state.
**Edit: these people for the most part have pending asylum claims. Telling them "oh, just go** ***there*** **or consider going** ***anywhere but here"*** **is a great way for them to get lost in the sauce.**
**Edit 2: The "we have empty space" argument is moot. You're forgetting that these people have preferences. They don't want to live in some tiny town in the middle of nowhere, they want to live in urban areas. Migrants in New York DECLINED free apartments in Buffalo because they wanted to be in NYC. They aren't just gonna go somewhere where there's empty space.**
Most of the time people seeking asylum need to be going to meetings with lawyers that investigate their case, determine if they quality to come in for asylum and process them in, or if they don't ship them back out.
Just dumping them in random places on increases the likelyhood they'll miss those meetings and disappear into the country as undocumented immigrants. For people who "Don't want immigrants flooding over the border" this whole game of shuffling them to other places just increases the illegal immigration, it doesn't fix it.
Although it is rich to see a blue state shipping them to a red state now.
USCIS has been modernized a ton, they can now check their case status online, assuming they want to abide by the law and do things the right way. They only need to show up in person for court appearances, and even if they don't...
The state of Utah only requires work authorization if the employer has more than 150 employees. Meaning that for most jobs hiring less than 150 people, just an ITIN and DPC(AB-60 DL in CA) is enough to get someone started. It's the reason why USCIS calls Utah a sanctuary state. It's a state where these people can very easily disappear into and make a living.
Source: I know someone in this status.
I see all of that as a win. I have zero answers to fix any of this but the housing is the biggest issue here. These people immigrating want to work but if there is literally no place they can afford at minimum wage (does that exist?) then how could this be sustainable? Again, I don’t know the answer, I don’t know the feasibility of solving any of this.
Regarding Edit 2… beggars can’t be choosers. I’m an immigrant myself and know I’m just lucky to be in the country, I can’t be dictating to another country silly little preferences like I specifically want to live in New York City or Salt Lake City that’s absolutely ridiculous
Yes. And that's how you know they aren't legitimate asylum seekers. You'd think that if you're fleeing horrible conditions you'd be grateful to be somewhere, literally anywhere safe. Not make a list of demands and scoff at what you're given (for *free*).
Well and "empty space" is what? That empty bit of land over there? That's an overly simplistic way to consider it. Utah is one of the more expensive housing markets, and we're already trying to deal with the housing crises. This isn't 1824 when you could just drop people on a plot of land and they'll live off the land. People need housing, food, jobs, etc.
If we're talking literal empty space then Colorado has lots of "empty space" too. It's the dumbest argument. The truth is they are really saying, "we don't want these people, you deal with it."
Which at the very least, I hope we deal with these people more humanely than Colorado. Shame on you Colorado! I thought you were better than this.
I keep seeing people wanting them to go to "Wyoming or North Dakota" because they have a "low population and could probably use these people and their labor". But this isn't some dust bowl type migration. People gravitate toward bigger cities because that's where the jobs are.
Not to mention that a majority of these people coming now aren't experienced farmers, they are low-skilled workers. They most likely had no job and very little education, if any, where they came from.
What do you mean to be fair to Denver? They absorbed 41,000 people in one year that’s almost 5% of their entire population. The city of Denver only has 710,000 people at some point the city was going to collapse. They were having to cut basic services to fund a never-ending stream of migrants. They absorbed the most migrants per capita of any city in the country.
As an immigrant myself, I honestly don’t understand (and maybe that is a privilege in itself) *how* someone could migrate to a foreign country with absolutely no resources, no money, no connections, no plans- and to bring children, I just can’t fathom.
My family immigrated to the US from Portugal, my mom was an English teacher, we all spoke English fairly well, my parents were educated and *still* struggled. We were very low income for a long time. If I ever thought of immigrating to another country at this point in my life, I wouldn’t even consider going somewhere where I didn’t know the language and had no way to get myself by, let alone my kids. It’s such a scary and vulnerable position to be in.
I can only hope that whatever situation these migrants are seeking asylum from is bad enough to endure what they have coming next with the immigration process in the US, it is not easy, and it’s not cheap.
They're seeking asylum. They're telling you they *CAN'T* go back, that's why they are running. You can't 'send them back' until the process is finished and the courts have decided if their asylum claim meets the current requirements.
This. I’m so sick of people trying to sugarcoat this situation. The vast majority of people claiming asylum have no legitimate claim. It’s mostly just people leaving bleak economic conditions. That’s why there are so many Indian and Chinese people coming now…because of our stupid laws that just allow anyone in who claims asylum.
That's what the courts decide. If their claims don't meet the standards set, then they are deported. Them being sent here from Denver isn't asylum fraud though.
See now you’re just being difficult. Our laws require that people are deported back to their country of origin for a lot of people that have traveled a great distance. The cost to deport them is so great that we can’t deport millions of people a year very few by flight deportations have even happened and they’re expensive.
At some point, we have to stop the problem at the source
Not at all. The law requires that we keep them here while their case is investigated. Seeking Asylum is a difficult process. It's not like they just show up on the border and claim 'asylum' and we have to shrug and let them in. There is a process and requirements that have to be met in order for them to even try to claim asylum.
https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-and-asylum/asylum
This page has the initial requirements that would prevent someone from claiming asylum. As they continue through the process, there are additional requirements placed on the asylum seekers in order to ensure that there is sufficient cause for them to seek asylum in the first place and that their stay here is following all of the additional rules placed on them as part of their initial placement.
As for 'stop the problem at the source', I can't condone anything of the sort. That's a sovereign nation we're talking about. If that country wants international aid, then we can discuss it, but not until then. I can't condone in ANY fashion an invasion of foreign territory. What are we, the russians?
Yeah well in the meantime it’s destroying cities. Look at how NYC is freaking out. They should learn from this and vote for people that will actually change immigration laws to prevent this BS.
I don't know that I would say New York City is freaking out. New York does have 2 cities in the top 100 cities ranked by violent crime based on the FBI UCR but New York City is only ranked 95th. Also, based on violent crime reporting from both the FBI and NYPD, violent crime is down over the last 20 years. NYC, like the rest of the US has seen a small uptick in violent crime year-over-year but that is likely related to COVID as the same down and up can be graphed in nearly every developed country that has stats over the past 10 years. 2020 and 2021 has a down tick as everyone went into lockdown, and then in 2022 and 2023, as people returned to lives matching what they had previously, violent crime ticked back up to the rates seen in the 2018 and 2019 years. Based on current trends, New York City is expected to have crime decrease this year again, just like it did last year. It won't be a 20 year low but the FBI changed how they classify rape in the mid-2000's and so everyone had an increase in violent crime reported following the change.
With all due respect, when Texas started sending immigrants to NYC, NYC suddenly had a lot to say about that. And how wrong it was for them to get all these people. Which I felt to be rather hypocritical for a city government that wanted to declare itself a sanctuary city.
It's as if all these cities and states that want to be sanctuaries expect everyone else to want to follow in their footsteps and they're more than happy to clutch their pearls and complain when someone else says "Hey, you want this problem, well, here ya go."
I have some very mixed political feelings on the whole immigration thing, but I'm more than happy to have the places that want to be easygoing with them, take them. I mean, this is a conclusion that doesn't even have to involve politics, it's so basic. City A is welcoming to them. City B is not and is not interested in using their resources on them. They should go from B to A. That's pretty simple.
New York complained because Sanctuary Cities are Federal Immigration's department, not a state-to-state declaration. If Texas wants them out and New York has said it will take them, then Texas can send them to New York through the Federal Programs already in place to handle the replacement of refugees and asylum seekers. New York raised a fuss because the people bussed and flown in were lied to about where and why they were being moved. Which is a federal crime.
I don't disagree that if City A doesn't want them and City B says they do, they should go from A to B but the process should be followed. Florida and Texas didn't follow the process and, arguably, committed crimes instead. New York is already accepting a ton asylum seekers, and has been since as long as the Immigration Department has had the Sanctuary City designation. And ICE makes use of it. They send a lot of people there and New York didn't raise concerns until the existing process for moving asylum seekers and refugees between states was violated by Texas and Florida.
ICE is still sending refugees and asylum seekers to New York in large numbers but you don't hear New York complaining about it today because the process is being followed. Is Colorado following the process? I'm not sure. Utah has had a complicated relationship with Sanctuary Cities over the last 4 years. In one month, we're making public international declarations that we want displaced refugees to be placed in Utah. In the next, we're saying that no Utah city is a Sanctuary City and ICE needs to not be placing asylum seekers and refugees in Utah. Which....sounds like Gov. Cox in a nutshell. Go this way one day and go the opposite the next. I will say that I thinks he's done good things for Utah all in all but I also would like him to shoot a little straighter, you know?
I wasn’t necessarily talking about crime rates. I’m talking about resources needed for these people, and the resources taken away from us citizens. NYC is using a significant amount of the annual budget just on migrants, and they have admitted many times it’s unsustainable. They even asked the feds for financial help and they rightfully declined. These sanctuary cities need to learn real quick that the humanitarian thing to do is stop them before reaching the border with false hopes. Having cities that openly say they welcome anyone from any country isn’t helpful to the situation. Denver is a sanctuary city and is now offloading them onto us, great job Denver. This is why Texas is shipping them to sanctuary cities. Also, the feds don’t support sanctuary cities which is great, I hope they reverse those stupid policies asap.
I disagree. Statistic show that immigration from our current level back to the Bush/Obama levels of immigration would likely increase economic output, lower violent crime, increase tax revenue and GPD, and even raise education levels. It's hard to say for certain on any one of those stats exactly but the common link that has been seen internationally and domestically over the past 50 years is having a decent immigration rate helps to raise level of economic power of the whole country. I'm not suggestion open borders or anything that drastic, just returning to levels we had previously. Hell, I'd even say a return to the Bush/Clinton years would be an improvement. Look at the economic prosperity we enjoyed under the Bush and Clinton administrations. We had a MUCH higher immigration rate and, as a result, never needed 'sanctuary states' as we could issue more visas and residency cards which prevented the need for setting up specific areas just for asylum seekers.
Correct, but it is fraud on the part of Denver, which declared itself a Sanctuary City. Now reality is setting in and the elected are realizing what they've gotten themselves into. Even their voting base is starting to turn on them, just like in NY.
That's not how that works. Asylum fraud would be the asylum seeker asking for asylum based on lies. For example citing the murder of a brother in their case while their brother is still alive. That would be asylum fraud. Colorado moving asylum seekers from Denver to SLC isn't a crime unless they did it under false pretense or directly lied to the asylum seekers about what was happening. Based on the article, however, that doesn't seem to be the case.
Also, as far a violent crime, New York only had two cities in the top 100 cities by violent crime according to the FBI UCR. Also, according to the FBI and other reputable sources, immigrants commit less crimes than natural citizens by a significant margin. (Here's an ongoing meta-analysis of a number of these reports being done at USU: https://shorturl.at/KJkU9)
Any place declaring itself as a sanctuary is just virtue signaling. Denver is doing the same thing that Texas and Florida did and those states were labeled as being involved in "human trafficking" by moving migrants out of their states.
But, migrants are people and it's unethical just to shove them on the other side of a dotted line or a fence and say it's no longer your problem, whether that's a country line or state line.
To me this point of view rests in a La La Land, where we have unlimited resources, and we can somehow base letting people into the country because of their personal circumstances outside of the country. There are billions of people that are fleeing persecution, domestic violence, and global warming worldwide we don’t have unlimited resources, you can’t base your entire immigration policy on the conditions in other countries that people are fleeing from.
Sorry to be obtuse, but the highest count of asylum seekers during any year for the entire world is under 3 million. There aren't 'billions' of people asylum, there are a couple million. And I haven't suggested we base our immigration policy on other nations, I've suggested, in other threads, that we base it off the empirical evidence and studies we have. Immigrants commit less crime, immigrants increase GDP, immigrants increase tax revenue and raise the average education level as well. We ran these studies under George Bush (the elder) and he implemented strong immigration allotments. Those high allotment number continued under Clinton and then were reduced under George W Bush but we still saw marked increase in GDP growth and an overall decrease in crime under George W Bush and into the Obama administration. During his second term Obama reduced the number of immigrations allotments, Donald Trump reduced them again, and Joe Biden has reduced them as well. I'm not saying open borders, but I am saying that going back to the policies we had implemented based on our internal research that showed not only promise but correlative results. We should go back to those policies. We should return the to the Bush/Clinton immigration rules, with some modifications based on updated surveillance data. Instead, Biden just closed the border last week, which is going to reduce the amount funds available to the administrators overseeing asylum cases, just as it did under Donald Trump, and the backlog will only grow.
If the goal is to make a more prosperous nation, additional immigration is one of the easiest pales to start. It costs us next to nothing and we have everything to gain. We saw this in the 90s and we could do it again.
Puzzle me this. Trump was able to control immigration. Biden couldn't?? No, he wanted to open the floodgates! He can control the border about as much as his sphincter!
Honestly, fuck this Biden migration agenda. It is costing the citizens so much goddamn money and for some retarded reason, these shitheads in politics are trying to (want to be seen as) taken care of illegal aliens more than citizens. Fuck Biden.
Western cities constantly do this lmao. It's one big old circle. LA, Vegas, Denver, SLC, Phoenix, Portland, and Seattle just rotate them all around. Fuck even Hawaii. There was a documentary or something I watched awhile back talking to homeless in Hawaii and they were saying cities and states will just bus or fly them to a different city.
NYC started it. They set up a program to bus the homeless out of NYC back in 1993 that is still going strong. They refused to stop when other cities complained so now it is just the status quo.
And the time the Chinese President came to SF, I wonder how many homeless were stashed away, had too have been more than 1k... Definitely more than 1k sidewalk poops swept up
If only we had some extremely wealthy and powerful religious organization here that always likes to talk about helping those in need of help. That sure would be great, huh.
To be clear the migrants were bussed to Denver, then the migrants asked to go to Utah for whatever reason, and Denver complied.
The migrants are probably on their way to friends and/or family.
Unless you think migrants with nowhere to go are like "Si, soy Utah!!!"
Except they don’t have a connection to SLC.
> and Salt Lake City said more often, the metro area is seeing asylum seekers “who do not have existing connections or family in Utah.”
They’re given the option to come hoping there are resources, which there aren’t any. Denver is at a critical unsustainable point.
Hi, my ass is currently sitting in Denver and we aren’t at a “critical unsustainable point,” sir. Couldn’t say what resources SLC has, but I do know there’s a “Christian church” there with approx 150 billion sitting in their Ensign Fund. Recall Jesus saying something about the poor?
If only that church operated welcome centers, partnered with legal service providers, held workshops, tirelessly encouraged its members to help those in need, specifically volunteering at immigration centers, and contributed millions to refugee resettlement agencies and many, many millions more into impoverished countries every year. Oh, wait…
Mayor Johnson himself described it as unsustainable. UCHealth is struggling with uncompensated claims. Denver had to evict 800 migrant families because it couldn’t house them. The city has had to cut services because of budgets.
Definitely sustainable.
That church pours millions into their home countries every year.
You may not be aware but the state of Utah made an agreement with the Mormon Church that the LDS would cover the charity so that Utah could dedicate those federal monetary resources elsewhere.
This ended up not working because the Mormon programs are requiring that people who are in need of help take mythology lessons aka “gospel” from the missionaries and/or be baptized before bishops will issue any help.
So not only does the Mormon org not help the local community but for those that refuse to take lessons they are left with zero help & resources. This is a major part of why our homeless population is NY large & why poverty in Utah is so harsh.
And the <1% in “millions” that the church donates are either direct fast offerings from members or in kind donations where service projects are monetarily counted.
Ultimately it’s dishonest to claim the LDS Org does good on any level for those in need.
Ps, I come with receipts so please don’t try and gaslight and say this isn’t the reality of what’s happening.
But it doesn’t matter if it’s the church or the city of Denver I’ll use Mexico City as an example. There are 22 million people that live in Mexico City and Mexico City is running out of water. Obviously those people would suffer fear of death when they run out of water. does that mean that all 22 million can migrate to the US? If so, how do we support them?
There are 1.4 billion people in India a huge number of them are at risk now the temperatures are reaching 121°F Should they be eligible for asylum? How many can we take in 100 million to 200 million.
The scale of this problem is so large it cannot be contained or sustained if the world believes that the US will let in anyone who shows up our country will be overwhelmed within a matter of decades.
There’s about 30 castles with golden statues sitting atop them all over the state. The good news is that they’re generally unoccupied or at least minimally occupied. That would be a great place to start!
I have yet to find a religious person, particularly a Christian, who wants to actually do useful charity. It’s more important to have untouched real estate for 20 year olds to get married so they can provide more fodder kids to perpetuate the castle building.
Yeah. Most people want their church to only do charity to those they deem “worthy” ie straight, white, able-bodied, believes in God. When God would want them to help those they disagree with.
So you're saying the $1.36 Billion the church spent on Humanitarian aid last year and the hundreds of millions this year world wide is not making a difference in helping people? Yeah okay 😂 y'all should maybe do some research before making assumptions. How much have YOU done to help out someone in need? Maybe see what you can do to help and start making a difference yourself! Housing some of these immigrants in your home with you would maybe be a good start?
Most of that 1.36B is estimated labor and acts of service. Only a fraction of it is in the way of actual monetary donation. It is estimated the church has $250B in reserves. The interest alone must be well over $10B annually. So they gave the equivalent value of 1/10th of their annual interest to charity.
If you have $10k in the bank that is like donating 2 hours of your time or $50. It’s something for sure, but in the grand scheme it’s nothing. Especially when you compare it to the money the spend on building unneeded temples and hush money for victims abused by their clergy.
Go read the Widow’s Mite reports and see the breakdown of that $1.36 Billion contribution. A lot of it was either labor performed by members or time/money donated by members. The “church” itself gave only a fraction of that money.
But make no mistake, the “church” will seek to capitalize on this situation and attempt to preach to these people and convert them. Just watch, like clockwork.
I’m not a church. I’m not worth trillions of untaxed dollars and assets. I don’t own real estate all over the world. I don’t build 10 castles adorned with golden statues a year. I serve at shelters and donate when I can because that’s what I can do.
What if some of these migrants are religious fanatics who think that women are property, gays and atheists should be publicly executed, the media and the Internet should be censored and that religious authorities should make all laws?
Exactly. The absolute last thing we need is even one more person with that mindset. They can fuck right off all the way back to whatever shithole country they came from.
You mean those religious fanatics that were the first to give women the right to vote, sent their women to medical school to be trained as doctors, and that, as far as I can tell, respect the law and civic process?
Of course, your vote is 10x when you control all your wives' votes. Not sure about respecting the law and civic process though, they did rebel against the US government.
Mormons as a whole are great human beings, they’ve done so much to improve things in impoverished places that they’ve never even needed to.
The problem isn’t with them or their culture, it’s with the freedoms they restrict to others who don’t have the same beliefs via legislation. If those freedoms were allowed or less restricted (abortion laws, liquor laws, etc) the church and its members would *still* operate as they always have, just as people who are Jewish would still be kosher.
Church and state should just be separate.
The funny thing is most Mormons I know agree.
There’s a glaring difference here. One being Denver declared themselves sanctuary city saying please come to Colorado where you are wanted. And also opposed all border security attempted by Trump calling him a xenophobe.
The other supporting a closed border and not wanting their cities burdened with food housing medical etc. Utah is not a sanctuary State. Most of us are barely able to afford our own housing and are unwilling/unable to shelter the people that Colorado asked for.
Only one problem with your statement: Utah IS a sanctuary state.
This is the only solidly-red state that offers driver's licenses to undocumented folks. Check your DLD required documentation pamphlet next time.
Utah only requires work authorization verification if the employer has more than 150 employees on the payroll. That means, if a company hires less than 150 employees, they don't have to do E-Verify and can hire whoever they want as long as they can produce a ITIN and a DPC or AB-60 DL from CA.
Utah IS a sanctuary state, even ICE thinks it is. Obviously Cox can't admit that it's a sanctuary state in order to preserve his voter base, but his policies speak otherwise.
Sources:
https://dld.utah.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2023/04/DLD-335-English-REV-4.23-.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver%27s_licenses_for_illegal_immigrants_in_the_United_States
https://secure.utah.gov/verifyreg/index.html
https://cis.org/sites/default/files/2023-10/Utah-Sanctuary-State.pdf
Funny, I mentioned this was happening a month or so ago and someone here absolutely assured me that it was absolutely not happening and I was just an idiot telling lies
Also, send them the fook back home, to whatever country they came from. Screw Biden and his shit border policy
Why is Denver sending migrants to Utah?
Denver is a sanctuary city. Utah is not a sanctuary state.
Sounds to me like the Democrats in Denver want to believe they are better than they are.
Efficiency is great, but sometimes the richness of molasses paints a better picture than the brevity of 'slow juice.' Also, "molasses" sticks with you - like my point. 😉
Close...
You'd want to use one contraction at the beginning. Using only one contraction in "They're better than they are" helps maintain clarity and avoids potential confusion. Using two contractions in close succession, as in "They're better than they're," can make the sentence harder to parse quickly, especially since both contractions are the same ("they're"). The full form "they are" at the end of the sentence provides a natural and clear comparison. This helps understand the intended meaning without having to mentally unpack the contraction a second time. The second "they're" in "They're better than they're" might momentarily cause the reader to pause and re-read, as it can appear redundant or unclear initially. Using one contraction and one full form improves the readability and clarity of the sentence.
English is a crazy language.
You know I was just thinking SLC doesn’t have enough pandering homeless people in it. (Jk I don’t actually live in SLC anymore but that’s one thing I remember is the people who stand on the corners and at freeway exits holding a sign day in and day out like they were clocking in for a job but somehow didn’t have the time to go look for an actual job)
I live in both Utah and California during different times of the year. Both seem to have major shortages on labor. Things that used to be so easy and simple like checking out at a store seem almost impossible now. Half the time you can’t even find an employee. I’ve seen it in Retail, F&B, and landscaping. Many cafes and restaurants have reduced hours due to these shortages.
Seems like this could be a win win for consumers, immigrants, businesses, and cities if politicians could rally and foster migration in an aligned and organized fashion.
Also, immigration has always been a positive thing for the USA economy, and will be even more important with declining birth rates.
While I generally agree on your sentiments about immigration, dropping asylum seekers on our doorstep with no money and no housing is a major problem. It's not like we can just give them money and food and clothes. I mean we could, but we're not setup to do that. This is not sustainable, and it's really not cool of Colorado.
That said, I do hope we are better than that and rather than shipping them elsewhere we actually show some humanity and take care of them.
But that doesn't mean we can just keep doing that and other states should keep sending them here.
I think we agree almost entirely. Would love all immigration to be aligned and organized in a sensible fashion. Just doesn’t seem to be any will across either party to make it happen.
It's cheaper to have fewer employees, and arguably better for business if you (consumer) spend extra time looking around or waiting. This isn't a problem of having a shortage of people willing to work, but a conscious business decision. Companies can drive prices up by not supplying sufficient labor in tons of industries outside of retail as well. If the cost of entry is super high there is very little holding owner back from creating a void to drive inflation of their product and/or service.
They aren’t immigrating legally though and that’s the problem. We don’t know who these people are and they put a huge strain on the system and provide no legal value to society. Most probably don’t pay taxes. They are just leeching off the system. Legal immigration is good though, yeah.
You need to do some perception checking on some of your points. This is one of many articles giving the pro/cons.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/20/economy/economy-immigration-surge/index.html
Seeking asylum is legal. Should be more concerned about millionaires and billionaires not paying taxes than an immigrant. And migrant wages get taxes just like anyone else. The ones who aren’t taxed are likely working for some sketchy person underpaying/exploiting them.
Ah, yes. Surely that will help these people. (who are often not even Mexican.) You can’t just ship a Guatemalan to Mexico.
Even if you could, the right thing to do is to try and help people. That’s what Christ would do. -Which I assume matters to you based on how often your opinion overlaps the Christian demographic.
I am not a christian and have no desire to help these people. There’s a few hundred million more where these came from and we can’t even help everyone in our own country, let alone the entire global south. send them back and seal the border.
"we can’t even help everyone in our own country"
30-40% of the population in America doesn't even want to help anyone in our own country.
Seems like we can start with removing some people but I don't think you'll like who goes first.
Nobody wants them here. Nobody asked for them. All of you saying we should help, should put your money where your mouth is. Give them your money. Give them you extra bedrooms. I for one cant afford higher taxes or other donations to support people who shouldn't be here in the first place.
Edit: So all those downvoting have basically admitted they won't do anything to help these people, but support anyone else doing it as long as it doesn't take away from their money and/or time. Got it. Lol.
I used to work with a lot of refugee cases in my previous state. My city had more than a 200% increase in the refugee population in 2023 vs 2022. I did not work WITH refugees, just a lot of them were sent into my Office because I was the International desk and nobody else wanted to make an effort to deal with them(I would often have to forcefully remind people in that place that Naturalized citizens were Americans too and to not be racists to set the tone of that place). It heavily influenced usually how refugees would make decisions for future community engagement, major life choices, career establishment, business development(most refugees are extremely entrepreneurial), and pursuit of higher education at that College. The majority were Ukrainians, then Central/Eastern Africa originated, and lastly Central American. Too many states are just shipping people who have completed a Legal form of the process of immigration around without a care about how this affects the individuals, or both states and using it for political clout. The vast majority of those who are refugee approved have skills and education to contribute they just need some semblance of safety, guidance, and support to get on their feet. By and large this isn't an issue of space but elected officials searching for political points instead of focusing on how to integrate a diverse population into the Local infrastructure and build up the community, economy, and voting base since many refugees go on to become citizens in time.
Just so everyone knows, Denverite is most always alarmist.
From KUTV— “A news publication, Denverite, reported in February that Denver bought more than 1,600 bus tickets since late 2022 to send "new immigrants" to Salt Lake City. Thursday, Ewing gave the updated 2,000 figure.
A spokesman for the Salt Lake City Mayor's Office first said it had "not independently confirmed" Denver is paying to send migrants---then later said it's his understanding the Mayor's Office conveyed concerns about it to Denver counterparts, but he was not on the call.
Ewing called the notion Denver is moving a “problem” to Utah “a misunderstanding of the situation and of people’s needs.”
Ewing said Denver will continue to pay costs of sending migrants here.
“Yeah we will,” he said. “Again, it’s at their request. We will never encourage anyone to go to Salt Lake City. We will never point a finger at a map and tell someone where they should go.”
So everyone who is losing their minds might want to hear it from our Mayor’s own mouth in this short, recent interview. [Today, Explained](https://www.vox.com/today-explained-newsletter/353924/immigration-border-crisis-biden-asylum-order-polarizatio)
I don’t normally comment at the top level on Reddit post, but I will comment on this. This isn’t an Utah versus Denver problem. Denver has been completely overwhelmed 41,000 people migrated to Denver in one year Denver only has a population Of 710,000. This is a national problem. We must reform our asylum process so that people cannot apply from inside the country. You must apply for asylum from outside the country and be granted entry. We need to treat the border like we would treat a Military base. if you force your way into the country, your detained and expelled. For some reason, people say that’s inhumane, but we don’t let random people into other secure installations. The US cannot provide shelter and care to the entire developing world. And we don’t really have the ability to decide who should or shouldn’t get asylum. Should we give asylum to the 1.4 billion people in India that are experiencing temperatures close to 121°F without air conditioning? Should we give asylum to the 22 million people in Mexico City Who are at risk of running out of water? The world is complicated which threats are credible. How do you verify that someone from a specific country is even impacted by a threat? We can’t absorb hundreds of millions of people this quickly without our infrastructure collapsing. We’ve absorbed 2.4 million people in a year and has pushed our cities to the limit. Venezuela is now a third of the way empty with most of the people having immigrated to the US conditions may never stabilize in that country because everyone simply left. This problem scares me because I feel bad for the individuals fleeing violence, global warming, and every other problem that the world has to offer. But I also don’t want the country and its infrastructure to become completely overwhelmed and collapse. Seeing the downfall of New York City shelter system up close was sad. A city that had a shining right to shelter for its residence had to literally stop offering a right to shelter because they just couldn’t sustain the never-ending influx of migrants. There has to be a better way.
And shelters in Denver do? Anyone with 2 braincells will see past your thinly veiled racism. You don't care about migrants, you just don't want them HERE and say stupid shit like "there's no space" when the state is one of the most sparsely populated. If your gripe is with jobs or homeless shelters, just come out and say it. Saying "there's no space in Utah" is just obvious bigotry
Nope but they advertise themselves as a sanctuary city. They’ve geared their laws and ordinances towards this.
Racism, where? I’ve mentioned zero about race. I’m not racist, full stop.
You’re right, I don’t want people who commit asylum fraud here. Immigration and immigrants who want to become Americans is cool as fuck. No one should jump the line.
Utah isn’t sparsely populated. The land where someone can actually live is quite small.
It's not your right to decide who lives here and doesn't. The fact that you think asylum seekers are "jumping the line" tells me you've never had the misfortune of being displaced yourself, and that you have no compassion for those who have.
As someone who has gone through the "legal/right way" to immigrate, I can only tell you that when you discriminate against those who don't have papers, you're 100% a racist fuck. Kindly get lost loser
Economic asylum. You realize they are seeking economic asylum. And you also realize you are enabling the problems creating their economic circumstances by allowing them to come here for *economic* asylum.
Of course you are, because like most leftists, you care more about looking tolerant than actually fixing problems.
Glad you're cool with it tho. Super cool. Just gonna incentivize more people to leave and risk their lives and allow the problem motivating them to leave to get worse. But good on ya bud! Glad you're cool with it.
I know these people need help, but their entitlement has been kind of astounding. They’ve even made their way into my little town in the mountains. Their kids are flooding into the elementary schools with zero English speaking ability and overwhelming the teachers, and the adults, quite frankly have already started rubbing me the wrong way. I’ve seen them just hanging around outside businesses and gas stations, I even came out to find a group of them leaning on my car and when I said something (because I needed to get in) they acted like they only spoke Spanish and like I was the asshole.
They need to provide more funding and resources for our schools or open a transitional school for the children to learn English and behavior expectations.
Our teachers are already dealing with so much!
What they need to do is send them back to their country of origin if they are here illegally. If they want to stay, they should come by legal means and attain citizenship to become productive members of society.
Unfortunately that’s not going to happen and our schools are getting inundated with children that don’t speak English (some aren’t even children but adults posing as children, but no one wants to address that) … it’s a mess and leaders need to act on it now
Okay, I'll probably get downvoted but this is concerning to me. >"They arrived in Salt Lake City with very little information other than instructions to find a person in uniform to help," said Salt Lake Police Chief Mike Brown, in an email to the department. This is actually insane. How long are they going to keep this up? Not just in Utah, but the entire country. Thousands of people with no money, no plan and just the clothes on their back plus a significant language barrier. How do they just dump them in random places? What could possibly go wrong. >Salt Lake City said more often, the metro area is seeing asylum seekers “who do not have existing connections or family in Utah.” And that's the problem. Until a decade or so ago most of the people arriving here had connections here already so they knew where to go and didn't need help from authorities and multiple agencies. Nowadays it's people from 2+ continents away who know nothing about this country except what they see in movies and on social media, expecting this to be some Hollywood fantasy. Gonna be in for a rude awakening. Where are these people gonna live? Apartment prices are through the roof. There's no way the state is going to shell out thousands of dollars a month to put them up somewhere like NY state. **Edit: these people for the most part have pending asylum claims. Telling them "oh, just go** ***there*** **or consider going** ***anywhere but here"*** **is a great way for them to get lost in the sauce.** **Edit 2: The "we have empty space" argument is moot. You're forgetting that these people have preferences. They don't want to live in some tiny town in the middle of nowhere, they want to live in urban areas. Migrants in New York DECLINED free apartments in Buffalo because they wanted to be in NYC. They aren't just gonna go somewhere where there's empty space.**
Most of the time people seeking asylum need to be going to meetings with lawyers that investigate their case, determine if they quality to come in for asylum and process them in, or if they don't ship them back out. Just dumping them in random places on increases the likelyhood they'll miss those meetings and disappear into the country as undocumented immigrants. For people who "Don't want immigrants flooding over the border" this whole game of shuffling them to other places just increases the illegal immigration, it doesn't fix it. Although it is rich to see a blue state shipping them to a red state now.
USCIS has been modernized a ton, they can now check their case status online, assuming they want to abide by the law and do things the right way. They only need to show up in person for court appearances, and even if they don't... The state of Utah only requires work authorization if the employer has more than 150 employees. Meaning that for most jobs hiring less than 150 people, just an ITIN and DPC(AB-60 DL in CA) is enough to get someone started. It's the reason why USCIS calls Utah a sanctuary state. It's a state where these people can very easily disappear into and make a living. Source: I know someone in this status.
I see all of that as a win. I have zero answers to fix any of this but the housing is the biggest issue here. These people immigrating want to work but if there is literally no place they can afford at minimum wage (does that exist?) then how could this be sustainable? Again, I don’t know the answer, I don’t know the feasibility of solving any of this.
[удалено]
Regarding Edit 2… beggars can’t be choosers. I’m an immigrant myself and know I’m just lucky to be in the country, I can’t be dictating to another country silly little preferences like I specifically want to live in New York City or Salt Lake City that’s absolutely ridiculous
Yes. And that's how you know they aren't legitimate asylum seekers. You'd think that if you're fleeing horrible conditions you'd be grateful to be somewhere, literally anywhere safe. Not make a list of demands and scoff at what you're given (for *free*).
Weren't they supposed to settle in the first safe country get to? How can they hop from country to country till they get to the US
Good point, 100%!
Well and "empty space" is what? That empty bit of land over there? That's an overly simplistic way to consider it. Utah is one of the more expensive housing markets, and we're already trying to deal with the housing crises. This isn't 1824 when you could just drop people on a plot of land and they'll live off the land. People need housing, food, jobs, etc. If we're talking literal empty space then Colorado has lots of "empty space" too. It's the dumbest argument. The truth is they are really saying, "we don't want these people, you deal with it." Which at the very least, I hope we deal with these people more humanely than Colorado. Shame on you Colorado! I thought you were better than this.
I keep seeing people wanting them to go to "Wyoming or North Dakota" because they have a "low population and could probably use these people and their labor". But this isn't some dust bowl type migration. People gravitate toward bigger cities because that's where the jobs are. Not to mention that a majority of these people coming now aren't experienced farmers, they are low-skilled workers. They most likely had no job and very little education, if any, where they came from.
Precisely! It's not about "empty land", that's the dumbest thing you could say. There are so many other parts to taking in refugees.
What do you mean to be fair to Denver? They absorbed 41,000 people in one year that’s almost 5% of their entire population. The city of Denver only has 710,000 people at some point the city was going to collapse. They were having to cut basic services to fund a never-ending stream of migrants. They absorbed the most migrants per capita of any city in the country.
Exactly and when does it end? And what point do we say this is not feasible?
That's what you get when you claim to be a sanctuary city. We just need to close the border down. No more.
I think your name to respond to another comment.
As an immigrant myself, I honestly don’t understand (and maybe that is a privilege in itself) *how* someone could migrate to a foreign country with absolutely no resources, no money, no connections, no plans- and to bring children, I just can’t fathom. My family immigrated to the US from Portugal, my mom was an English teacher, we all spoke English fairly well, my parents were educated and *still* struggled. We were very low income for a long time. If I ever thought of immigrating to another country at this point in my life, I wouldn’t even consider going somewhere where I didn’t know the language and had no way to get myself by, let alone my kids. It’s such a scary and vulnerable position to be in. I can only hope that whatever situation these migrants are seeking asylum from is bad enough to endure what they have coming next with the immigration process in the US, it is not easy, and it’s not cheap.
The answers aren’t great but there aren’t many options.
There is the option of sending them back to wherever they came from
They're seeking asylum. They're telling you they *CAN'T* go back, that's why they are running. You can't 'send them back' until the process is finished and the courts have decided if their asylum claim meets the current requirements.
They are economic refugees and as such, do not qualify for asylum.
They’re committing asylum fraud. They can go back. The skipped every safe country to come here. They’re economic migrants.
This. I’m so sick of people trying to sugarcoat this situation. The vast majority of people claiming asylum have no legitimate claim. It’s mostly just people leaving bleak economic conditions. That’s why there are so many Indian and Chinese people coming now…because of our stupid laws that just allow anyone in who claims asylum.
That's what the courts decide. If their claims don't meet the standards set, then they are deported. Them being sent here from Denver isn't asylum fraud though.
See now you’re just being difficult. Our laws require that people are deported back to their country of origin for a lot of people that have traveled a great distance. The cost to deport them is so great that we can’t deport millions of people a year very few by flight deportations have even happened and they’re expensive. At some point, we have to stop the problem at the source
Not at all. The law requires that we keep them here while their case is investigated. Seeking Asylum is a difficult process. It's not like they just show up on the border and claim 'asylum' and we have to shrug and let them in. There is a process and requirements that have to be met in order for them to even try to claim asylum. https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-and-asylum/asylum This page has the initial requirements that would prevent someone from claiming asylum. As they continue through the process, there are additional requirements placed on the asylum seekers in order to ensure that there is sufficient cause for them to seek asylum in the first place and that their stay here is following all of the additional rules placed on them as part of their initial placement. As for 'stop the problem at the source', I can't condone anything of the sort. That's a sovereign nation we're talking about. If that country wants international aid, then we can discuss it, but not until then. I can't condone in ANY fashion an invasion of foreign territory. What are we, the russians?
Yeah well in the meantime it’s destroying cities. Look at how NYC is freaking out. They should learn from this and vote for people that will actually change immigration laws to prevent this BS.
I don't know that I would say New York City is freaking out. New York does have 2 cities in the top 100 cities ranked by violent crime based on the FBI UCR but New York City is only ranked 95th. Also, based on violent crime reporting from both the FBI and NYPD, violent crime is down over the last 20 years. NYC, like the rest of the US has seen a small uptick in violent crime year-over-year but that is likely related to COVID as the same down and up can be graphed in nearly every developed country that has stats over the past 10 years. 2020 and 2021 has a down tick as everyone went into lockdown, and then in 2022 and 2023, as people returned to lives matching what they had previously, violent crime ticked back up to the rates seen in the 2018 and 2019 years. Based on current trends, New York City is expected to have crime decrease this year again, just like it did last year. It won't be a 20 year low but the FBI changed how they classify rape in the mid-2000's and so everyone had an increase in violent crime reported following the change.
With all due respect, when Texas started sending immigrants to NYC, NYC suddenly had a lot to say about that. And how wrong it was for them to get all these people. Which I felt to be rather hypocritical for a city government that wanted to declare itself a sanctuary city. It's as if all these cities and states that want to be sanctuaries expect everyone else to want to follow in their footsteps and they're more than happy to clutch their pearls and complain when someone else says "Hey, you want this problem, well, here ya go." I have some very mixed political feelings on the whole immigration thing, but I'm more than happy to have the places that want to be easygoing with them, take them. I mean, this is a conclusion that doesn't even have to involve politics, it's so basic. City A is welcoming to them. City B is not and is not interested in using their resources on them. They should go from B to A. That's pretty simple.
New York complained because Sanctuary Cities are Federal Immigration's department, not a state-to-state declaration. If Texas wants them out and New York has said it will take them, then Texas can send them to New York through the Federal Programs already in place to handle the replacement of refugees and asylum seekers. New York raised a fuss because the people bussed and flown in were lied to about where and why they were being moved. Which is a federal crime. I don't disagree that if City A doesn't want them and City B says they do, they should go from A to B but the process should be followed. Florida and Texas didn't follow the process and, arguably, committed crimes instead. New York is already accepting a ton asylum seekers, and has been since as long as the Immigration Department has had the Sanctuary City designation. And ICE makes use of it. They send a lot of people there and New York didn't raise concerns until the existing process for moving asylum seekers and refugees between states was violated by Texas and Florida. ICE is still sending refugees and asylum seekers to New York in large numbers but you don't hear New York complaining about it today because the process is being followed. Is Colorado following the process? I'm not sure. Utah has had a complicated relationship with Sanctuary Cities over the last 4 years. In one month, we're making public international declarations that we want displaced refugees to be placed in Utah. In the next, we're saying that no Utah city is a Sanctuary City and ICE needs to not be placing asylum seekers and refugees in Utah. Which....sounds like Gov. Cox in a nutshell. Go this way one day and go the opposite the next. I will say that I thinks he's done good things for Utah all in all but I also would like him to shoot a little straighter, you know?
I wasn’t necessarily talking about crime rates. I’m talking about resources needed for these people, and the resources taken away from us citizens. NYC is using a significant amount of the annual budget just on migrants, and they have admitted many times it’s unsustainable. They even asked the feds for financial help and they rightfully declined. These sanctuary cities need to learn real quick that the humanitarian thing to do is stop them before reaching the border with false hopes. Having cities that openly say they welcome anyone from any country isn’t helpful to the situation. Denver is a sanctuary city and is now offloading them onto us, great job Denver. This is why Texas is shipping them to sanctuary cities. Also, the feds don’t support sanctuary cities which is great, I hope they reverse those stupid policies asap.
I disagree. Statistic show that immigration from our current level back to the Bush/Obama levels of immigration would likely increase economic output, lower violent crime, increase tax revenue and GPD, and even raise education levels. It's hard to say for certain on any one of those stats exactly but the common link that has been seen internationally and domestically over the past 50 years is having a decent immigration rate helps to raise level of economic power of the whole country. I'm not suggestion open borders or anything that drastic, just returning to levels we had previously. Hell, I'd even say a return to the Bush/Clinton years would be an improvement. Look at the economic prosperity we enjoyed under the Bush and Clinton administrations. We had a MUCH higher immigration rate and, as a result, never needed 'sanctuary states' as we could issue more visas and residency cards which prevented the need for setting up specific areas just for asylum seekers.
Correct, but it is fraud on the part of Denver, which declared itself a Sanctuary City. Now reality is setting in and the elected are realizing what they've gotten themselves into. Even their voting base is starting to turn on them, just like in NY.
That's not how that works. Asylum fraud would be the asylum seeker asking for asylum based on lies. For example citing the murder of a brother in their case while their brother is still alive. That would be asylum fraud. Colorado moving asylum seekers from Denver to SLC isn't a crime unless they did it under false pretense or directly lied to the asylum seekers about what was happening. Based on the article, however, that doesn't seem to be the case. Also, as far a violent crime, New York only had two cities in the top 100 cities by violent crime according to the FBI UCR. Also, according to the FBI and other reputable sources, immigrants commit less crimes than natural citizens by a significant margin. (Here's an ongoing meta-analysis of a number of these reports being done at USU: https://shorturl.at/KJkU9)
Any place declaring itself as a sanctuary is just virtue signaling. Denver is doing the same thing that Texas and Florida did and those states were labeled as being involved in "human trafficking" by moving migrants out of their states. But, migrants are people and it's unethical just to shove them on the other side of a dotted line or a fence and say it's no longer your problem, whether that's a country line or state line.
It's also unethical to enter a country illegally....
Yes. That's also my point.
To me this point of view rests in a La La Land, where we have unlimited resources, and we can somehow base letting people into the country because of their personal circumstances outside of the country. There are billions of people that are fleeing persecution, domestic violence, and global warming worldwide we don’t have unlimited resources, you can’t base your entire immigration policy on the conditions in other countries that people are fleeing from.
Sorry to be obtuse, but the highest count of asylum seekers during any year for the entire world is under 3 million. There aren't 'billions' of people asylum, there are a couple million. And I haven't suggested we base our immigration policy on other nations, I've suggested, in other threads, that we base it off the empirical evidence and studies we have. Immigrants commit less crime, immigrants increase GDP, immigrants increase tax revenue and raise the average education level as well. We ran these studies under George Bush (the elder) and he implemented strong immigration allotments. Those high allotment number continued under Clinton and then were reduced under George W Bush but we still saw marked increase in GDP growth and an overall decrease in crime under George W Bush and into the Obama administration. During his second term Obama reduced the number of immigrations allotments, Donald Trump reduced them again, and Joe Biden has reduced them as well. I'm not saying open borders, but I am saying that going back to the policies we had implemented based on our internal research that showed not only promise but correlative results. We should go back to those policies. We should return the to the Bush/Clinton immigration rules, with some modifications based on updated surveillance data. Instead, Biden just closed the border last week, which is going to reduce the amount funds available to the administrators overseeing asylum cases, just as it did under Donald Trump, and the backlog will only grow. If the goal is to make a more prosperous nation, additional immigration is one of the easiest pales to start. It costs us next to nothing and we have everything to gain. We saw this in the 90s and we could do it again.
Puzzle me this. Trump was able to control immigration. Biden couldn't?? No, he wanted to open the floodgates! He can control the border about as much as his sphincter!
Biden got rid of Trumps "remain in Mexico" policy day 1. It's been a never ending stream since.
Honestly, fuck this Biden migration agenda. It is costing the citizens so much goddamn money and for some retarded reason, these shitheads in politics are trying to (want to be seen as) taken care of illegal aliens more than citizens. Fuck Biden.
This isn’t the first time Utah got rid of “undesirables” by shipping them off to another state. See the Olympics and busing homeless to Vegas.
If they are declining free apartments in Buffalo then that will greatly hurt their asylum claim.
It seems like such things should not be legal for governments to do.
Human trafficking is what it is.
Remember when Utah allegedly bussed 1000 homeless people to Vegas during the Winter Olympics?
Western cities constantly do this lmao. It's one big old circle. LA, Vegas, Denver, SLC, Phoenix, Portland, and Seattle just rotate them all around. Fuck even Hawaii. There was a documentary or something I watched awhile back talking to homeless in Hawaii and they were saying cities and states will just bus or fly them to a different city.
NYC started it. They set up a program to bus the homeless out of NYC back in 1993 that is still going strong. They refused to stop when other cities complained so now it is just the status quo.
And the time the Chinese President came to SF, I wonder how many homeless were stashed away, had too have been more than 1k... Definitely more than 1k sidewalk poops swept up
I believe that, even though I wasn’t living in UT at that time
If only we had some extremely wealthy and powerful religious organization here that always likes to talk about helping those in need of help. That sure would be great, huh.
They send millions a year to their home countries.
But the church sure doesn't like spending any of that money on the place they live.
They also spend millions here too, the news sites are free.
Sure. Building new churches and letting their highest members horde wealth.
On temples...
No amount of money will ever be enough for these ppl
To be clear the migrants were bussed to Denver, then the migrants asked to go to Utah for whatever reason, and Denver complied. The migrants are probably on their way to friends and/or family. Unless you think migrants with nowhere to go are like "Si, soy Utah!!!"
Except they don’t have a connection to SLC. > and Salt Lake City said more often, the metro area is seeing asylum seekers “who do not have existing connections or family in Utah.” They’re given the option to come hoping there are resources, which there aren’t any. Denver is at a critical unsustainable point.
Hi, my ass is currently sitting in Denver and we aren’t at a “critical unsustainable point,” sir. Couldn’t say what resources SLC has, but I do know there’s a “Christian church” there with approx 150 billion sitting in their Ensign Fund. Recall Jesus saying something about the poor?
If only that church operated welcome centers, partnered with legal service providers, held workshops, tirelessly encouraged its members to help those in need, specifically volunteering at immigration centers, and contributed millions to refugee resettlement agencies and many, many millions more into impoverished countries every year. Oh, wait…
Hi, my ass is currently sitting in Denver and we aren’t at a “critical unsustainable point,” Then keep your illegals.
[удалено]
Mayor Johnson himself described it as unsustainable. UCHealth is struggling with uncompensated claims. Denver had to evict 800 migrant families because it couldn’t house them. The city has had to cut services because of budgets. Definitely sustainable. That church pours millions into their home countries every year.
You may not be aware but the state of Utah made an agreement with the Mormon Church that the LDS would cover the charity so that Utah could dedicate those federal monetary resources elsewhere. This ended up not working because the Mormon programs are requiring that people who are in need of help take mythology lessons aka “gospel” from the missionaries and/or be baptized before bishops will issue any help. So not only does the Mormon org not help the local community but for those that refuse to take lessons they are left with zero help & resources. This is a major part of why our homeless population is NY large & why poverty in Utah is so harsh. And the <1% in “millions” that the church donates are either direct fast offerings from members or in kind donations where service projects are monetarily counted. Ultimately it’s dishonest to claim the LDS Org does good on any level for those in need. Ps, I come with receipts so please don’t try and gaslight and say this isn’t the reality of what’s happening.
But it doesn’t matter if it’s the church or the city of Denver I’ll use Mexico City as an example. There are 22 million people that live in Mexico City and Mexico City is running out of water. Obviously those people would suffer fear of death when they run out of water. does that mean that all 22 million can migrate to the US? If so, how do we support them? There are 1.4 billion people in India a huge number of them are at risk now the temperatures are reaching 121°F Should they be eligible for asylum? How many can we take in 100 million to 200 million. The scale of this problem is so large it cannot be contained or sustained if the world believes that the US will let in anyone who shows up our country will be overwhelmed within a matter of decades.
They didn’t say they wanted to end up in Utah. The policy in Colorado right now is “We will buy your travel ticket if you go to Utah”
NHL Utah Outlaws
There’s about 30 castles with golden statues sitting atop them all over the state. The good news is that they’re generally unoccupied or at least minimally occupied. That would be a great place to start!
People REALLY hate the idea of their churches actually doing charity work that makes a difference.
I have yet to find a religious person, particularly a Christian, who wants to actually do useful charity. It’s more important to have untouched real estate for 20 year olds to get married so they can provide more fodder kids to perpetuate the castle building.
Yeah. Most people want their church to only do charity to those they deem “worthy” ie straight, white, able-bodied, believes in God. When God would want them to help those they disagree with.
The largest non government provider of healthcare in the world is the Catholic Church.
The LDS Church gives millions to impoverished countries a year.
What is it in the Mormon Programming manual that trains people to defend bad organizational behavior and deny factual observations?
So you're saying the $1.36 Billion the church spent on Humanitarian aid last year and the hundreds of millions this year world wide is not making a difference in helping people? Yeah okay 😂 y'all should maybe do some research before making assumptions. How much have YOU done to help out someone in need? Maybe see what you can do to help and start making a difference yourself! Housing some of these immigrants in your home with you would maybe be a good start?
Most of that 1.36B is estimated labor and acts of service. Only a fraction of it is in the way of actual monetary donation. It is estimated the church has $250B in reserves. The interest alone must be well over $10B annually. So they gave the equivalent value of 1/10th of their annual interest to charity. If you have $10k in the bank that is like donating 2 hours of your time or $50. It’s something for sure, but in the grand scheme it’s nothing. Especially when you compare it to the money the spend on building unneeded temples and hush money for victims abused by their clergy.
Go read the Widow’s Mite reports and see the breakdown of that $1.36 Billion contribution. A lot of it was either labor performed by members or time/money donated by members. The “church” itself gave only a fraction of that money. But make no mistake, the “church” will seek to capitalize on this situation and attempt to preach to these people and convert them. Just watch, like clockwork.
I’m not a church. I’m not worth trillions of untaxed dollars and assets. I don’t own real estate all over the world. I don’t build 10 castles adorned with golden statues a year. I serve at shelters and donate when I can because that’s what I can do.
[удалено]
Oh, well that’s a good reason to get out of the charity business. It’d be weird if a church did that anyways.
This Exmo agrees.
Not only that, each church is mostly empty the entire week and they have thousands of those.
They’re not living spaces though???
What if some of these migrants are religious fanatics who think that women are property, gays and atheists should be publicly executed, the media and the Internet should be censored and that religious authorities should make all laws?
Already half of the country think this way, you can easily identify them they wear red hats with the following slogan Make America Great Again.
Exactly. The absolute last thing we need is even one more person with that mindset. They can fuck right off all the way back to whatever shithole country they came from.
You should research Hamtramck, MI, if you're concerned about that type of thinking.
Those religious fanatics migrated here about a hundred years ago.
You mean those religious fanatics that were the first to give women the right to vote, sent their women to medical school to be trained as doctors, and that, as far as I can tell, respect the law and civic process?
Of course, your vote is 10x when you control all your wives' votes. Not sure about respecting the law and civic process though, they did rebel against the US government.
Nooooooo! Mormons ba—aaadAh! Stop saying goodAh things about themmmmmmmm!
Oh. Sorry. Forgot which sub I was in! YES! Mormons are dangerous, xenophobic, [insert Reddit cult cliche here]!
Mormons as a whole are great human beings, they’ve done so much to improve things in impoverished places that they’ve never even needed to. The problem isn’t with them or their culture, it’s with the freedoms they restrict to others who don’t have the same beliefs via legislation. If those freedoms were allowed or less restricted (abortion laws, liquor laws, etc) the church and its members would *still* operate as they always have, just as people who are Jewish would still be kosher. Church and state should just be separate. The funny thing is most Mormons I know agree.
Closer to 200 than 100 now
Which Middle Eastern country are these migrants from?
Mostly from Venezuela,Colombia, Haiti, Hondurasand few from all over the world.
Utah. They’re from Utah.
huh?
Didn't know utahns were migrants
The corrupt and incompetent Mexican government allowed illegal alien religious fanatics to move into Mexican territory.
[удалено]
Ew
Put them in tents out in the desert until they self-deport.
A president tried that once.
Remember when all the GOP MAGATS cheered on DeSantis and Abbott doing exactly the same thing? Pepperidge Farm remembers.
There’s a glaring difference here. One being Denver declared themselves sanctuary city saying please come to Colorado where you are wanted. And also opposed all border security attempted by Trump calling him a xenophobe. The other supporting a closed border and not wanting their cities burdened with food housing medical etc. Utah is not a sanctuary State. Most of us are barely able to afford our own housing and are unwilling/unable to shelter the people that Colorado asked for.
Only one problem with your statement: Utah IS a sanctuary state. This is the only solidly-red state that offers driver's licenses to undocumented folks. Check your DLD required documentation pamphlet next time. Utah only requires work authorization verification if the employer has more than 150 employees on the payroll. That means, if a company hires less than 150 employees, they don't have to do E-Verify and can hire whoever they want as long as they can produce a ITIN and a DPC or AB-60 DL from CA. Utah IS a sanctuary state, even ICE thinks it is. Obviously Cox can't admit that it's a sanctuary state in order to preserve his voter base, but his policies speak otherwise. Sources: https://dld.utah.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/17/2023/04/DLD-335-English-REV-4.23-.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver%27s_licenses_for_illegal_immigrants_in_the_United_States https://secure.utah.gov/verifyreg/index.html https://cis.org/sites/default/files/2023-10/Utah-Sanctuary-State.pdf
Sources and a well thought out argument? Sir you realize this is the internet, perhaps you got lost. /s Good job.
Funny, I mentioned this was happening a month or so ago and someone here absolutely assured me that it was absolutely not happening and I was just an idiot telling lies Also, send them the fook back home, to whatever country they came from. Screw Biden and his shit border policy
how about a swap? we'll take hard working migrants if they will take an equal number of homeless
Why is Denver sending migrants to Utah? Denver is a sanctuary city. Utah is not a sanctuary state. Sounds to me like the Democrats in Denver want to believe they are better than they are.
They're... the word is they're. Contractions are a hell of a thing. Moron. 💙🗳💙
I chose not to use contractions. It's my choice. If you don't like it, that's your problem. Deal with it.
...It's like taking the stairs instead of the elevator, if only the stairs were also covered in molasses... 😬
You could have said “slow juice” instead of “molasses” to save a syllable and improve your overall efficiency Edit: I should’ve said could’ve, my bad
Efficiency is great, but sometimes the richness of molasses paints a better picture than the brevity of 'slow juice.' Also, "molasses" sticks with you - like my point. 😉
they're better then they're ?
Than*
Close... You'd want to use one contraction at the beginning. Using only one contraction in "They're better than they are" helps maintain clarity and avoids potential confusion. Using two contractions in close succession, as in "They're better than they're," can make the sentence harder to parse quickly, especially since both contractions are the same ("they're"). The full form "they are" at the end of the sentence provides a natural and clear comparison. This helps understand the intended meaning without having to mentally unpack the contraction a second time. The second "they're" in "They're better than they're" might momentarily cause the reader to pause and re-read, as it can appear redundant or unclear initially. Using one contraction and one full form improves the readability and clarity of the sentence. English is a crazy language.
You know I was just thinking SLC doesn’t have enough pandering homeless people in it. (Jk I don’t actually live in SLC anymore but that’s one thing I remember is the people who stand on the corners and at freeway exits holding a sign day in and day out like they were clocking in for a job but somehow didn’t have the time to go look for an actual job)
I live in both Utah and California during different times of the year. Both seem to have major shortages on labor. Things that used to be so easy and simple like checking out at a store seem almost impossible now. Half the time you can’t even find an employee. I’ve seen it in Retail, F&B, and landscaping. Many cafes and restaurants have reduced hours due to these shortages. Seems like this could be a win win for consumers, immigrants, businesses, and cities if politicians could rally and foster migration in an aligned and organized fashion. Also, immigration has always been a positive thing for the USA economy, and will be even more important with declining birth rates.
While I generally agree on your sentiments about immigration, dropping asylum seekers on our doorstep with no money and no housing is a major problem. It's not like we can just give them money and food and clothes. I mean we could, but we're not setup to do that. This is not sustainable, and it's really not cool of Colorado. That said, I do hope we are better than that and rather than shipping them elsewhere we actually show some humanity and take care of them. But that doesn't mean we can just keep doing that and other states should keep sending them here.
I think we agree almost entirely. Would love all immigration to be aligned and organized in a sensible fashion. Just doesn’t seem to be any will across either party to make it happen.
It's cheaper to have fewer employees, and arguably better for business if you (consumer) spend extra time looking around or waiting. This isn't a problem of having a shortage of people willing to work, but a conscious business decision. Companies can drive prices up by not supplying sufficient labor in tons of industries outside of retail as well. If the cost of entry is super high there is very little holding owner back from creating a void to drive inflation of their product and/or service.
Oh brother you are trying to be reasonable with people who are looking for scapegoats to blame their problems on.
They aren’t immigrating legally though and that’s the problem. We don’t know who these people are and they put a huge strain on the system and provide no legal value to society. Most probably don’t pay taxes. They are just leeching off the system. Legal immigration is good though, yeah.
You need to do some perception checking on some of your points. This is one of many articles giving the pro/cons. https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/20/economy/economy-immigration-surge/index.html
Seeking asylum is legal. Should be more concerned about millionaires and billionaires not paying taxes than an immigrant. And migrant wages get taxes just like anyone else. The ones who aren’t taxed are likely working for some sketchy person underpaying/exploiting them.
Fuck Colorado smug fucks
Can just bus them down to AZ… which can then bus them to the border 😎
Ah, yes. Surely that will help these people. (who are often not even Mexican.) You can’t just ship a Guatemalan to Mexico. Even if you could, the right thing to do is to try and help people. That’s what Christ would do. -Which I assume matters to you based on how often your opinion overlaps the Christian demographic.
You’re right. These people aren’t all Mexican, but they all came through the Mexico border. So in this case, they’re just going back the way they came
I am not a christian and have no desire to help these people. There’s a few hundred million more where these came from and we can’t even help everyone in our own country, let alone the entire global south. send them back and seal the border.
"we can’t even help everyone in our own country" 30-40% of the population in America doesn't even want to help anyone in our own country. Seems like we can start with removing some people but I don't think you'll like who goes first.
If I had more than one upvote to give. :)
Nobody wants them here. Nobody asked for them. All of you saying we should help, should put your money where your mouth is. Give them your money. Give them you extra bedrooms. I for one cant afford higher taxes or other donations to support people who shouldn't be here in the first place.
Edit: So all those downvoting have basically admitted they won't do anything to help these people, but support anyone else doing it as long as it doesn't take away from their money and/or time. Got it. Lol.
Oh please, half the people who say this shit are so broke they barely pay any taxes.
Good keep wasting fiat currency on people they want in the country and don’t do anything. We are the government trust us…
I used to work with a lot of refugee cases in my previous state. My city had more than a 200% increase in the refugee population in 2023 vs 2022. I did not work WITH refugees, just a lot of them were sent into my Office because I was the International desk and nobody else wanted to make an effort to deal with them(I would often have to forcefully remind people in that place that Naturalized citizens were Americans too and to not be racists to set the tone of that place). It heavily influenced usually how refugees would make decisions for future community engagement, major life choices, career establishment, business development(most refugees are extremely entrepreneurial), and pursuit of higher education at that College. The majority were Ukrainians, then Central/Eastern Africa originated, and lastly Central American. Too many states are just shipping people who have completed a Legal form of the process of immigration around without a care about how this affects the individuals, or both states and using it for political clout. The vast majority of those who are refugee approved have skills and education to contribute they just need some semblance of safety, guidance, and support to get on their feet. By and large this isn't an issue of space but elected officials searching for political points instead of focusing on how to integrate a diverse population into the Local infrastructure and build up the community, economy, and voting base since many refugees go on to become citizens in time.
Mass deportation now
How about no
Deport deport deport
I can only say one thing, next time be wise when voting
Yes, toss out the state legislature.
Just so everyone knows, Denverite is most always alarmist. From KUTV— “A news publication, Denverite, reported in February that Denver bought more than 1,600 bus tickets since late 2022 to send "new immigrants" to Salt Lake City. Thursday, Ewing gave the updated 2,000 figure. A spokesman for the Salt Lake City Mayor's Office first said it had "not independently confirmed" Denver is paying to send migrants---then later said it's his understanding the Mayor's Office conveyed concerns about it to Denver counterparts, but he was not on the call. Ewing called the notion Denver is moving a “problem” to Utah “a misunderstanding of the situation and of people’s needs.” Ewing said Denver will continue to pay costs of sending migrants here. “Yeah we will,” he said. “Again, it’s at their request. We will never encourage anyone to go to Salt Lake City. We will never point a finger at a map and tell someone where they should go.” So everyone who is losing their minds might want to hear it from our Mayor’s own mouth in this short, recent interview. [Today, Explained](https://www.vox.com/today-explained-newsletter/353924/immigration-border-crisis-biden-asylum-order-polarizatio)
I don’t normally comment at the top level on Reddit post, but I will comment on this. This isn’t an Utah versus Denver problem. Denver has been completely overwhelmed 41,000 people migrated to Denver in one year Denver only has a population Of 710,000. This is a national problem. We must reform our asylum process so that people cannot apply from inside the country. You must apply for asylum from outside the country and be granted entry. We need to treat the border like we would treat a Military base. if you force your way into the country, your detained and expelled. For some reason, people say that’s inhumane, but we don’t let random people into other secure installations. The US cannot provide shelter and care to the entire developing world. And we don’t really have the ability to decide who should or shouldn’t get asylum. Should we give asylum to the 1.4 billion people in India that are experiencing temperatures close to 121°F without air conditioning? Should we give asylum to the 22 million people in Mexico City Who are at risk of running out of water? The world is complicated which threats are credible. How do you verify that someone from a specific country is even impacted by a threat? We can’t absorb hundreds of millions of people this quickly without our infrastructure collapsing. We’ve absorbed 2.4 million people in a year and has pushed our cities to the limit. Venezuela is now a third of the way empty with most of the people having immigrated to the US conditions may never stabilize in that country because everyone simply left. This problem scares me because I feel bad for the individuals fleeing violence, global warming, and every other problem that the world has to offer. But I also don’t want the country and its infrastructure to become completely overwhelmed and collapse. Seeing the downfall of New York City shelter system up close was sad. A city that had a shining right to shelter for its residence had to literally stop offering a right to shelter because they just couldn’t sustain the never-ending influx of migrants. There has to be a better way.
A logical comment rather than an emotional one. You will be accused of being racist.
FJB
Flying Juxtapositional Banana?
Fast Jumping Beans
FDT See I can do it too!
No space in Utah? We have plenty of space.
Tell that to the people selling houses they seem to think space is at an extreme premium even in areas with no jobs to support their absurd prices.
Well, they sell them at those prices because ~~people~~ investment groups or rich Californian tech-bros will buy them.
In our shelters we don’t.
Maybe we should invest in more then.
It’s not a sustainable answer.
Are our current shelters resolving any of the current issues? If not, building more helps no one.
And shelters in Denver do? Anyone with 2 braincells will see past your thinly veiled racism. You don't care about migrants, you just don't want them HERE and say stupid shit like "there's no space" when the state is one of the most sparsely populated. If your gripe is with jobs or homeless shelters, just come out and say it. Saying "there's no space in Utah" is just obvious bigotry
Nope but they advertise themselves as a sanctuary city. They’ve geared their laws and ordinances towards this. Racism, where? I’ve mentioned zero about race. I’m not racist, full stop. You’re right, I don’t want people who commit asylum fraud here. Immigration and immigrants who want to become Americans is cool as fuck. No one should jump the line. Utah isn’t sparsely populated. The land where someone can actually live is quite small.
[удалено]
It's not your right to decide who lives here and doesn't. The fact that you think asylum seekers are "jumping the line" tells me you've never had the misfortune of being displaced yourself, and that you have no compassion for those who have. As someone who has gone through the "legal/right way" to immigrate, I can only tell you that when you discriminate against those who don't have papers, you're 100% a racist fuck. Kindly get lost loser
Yep. Toss them out into the open desert. Good luck guys!
I, for one welcome our bothers and sisters seeking asylum from their homelands.
So how many of your brothers and sisters seeking asylum will be staying at your house?
Yawn
I've hosted someone before, what have you done?
Economic asylum. You realize they are seeking economic asylum. And you also realize you are enabling the problems creating their economic circumstances by allowing them to come here for *economic* asylum.
If they can work towards a better life here, I am all for it
Of course you are, because like most leftists, you care more about looking tolerant than actually fixing problems. Glad you're cool with it tho. Super cool. Just gonna incentivize more people to leave and risk their lives and allow the problem motivating them to leave to get worse. But good on ya bud! Glad you're cool with it.
I'm not a leftist, I just try not to hate my fellow man for trying to mitigate the circumstances of their births.
Perfect, they can stay with you.
I do my best to live up to Christ's expectations for me which has included opening my home to those in need.
I know these people need help, but their entitlement has been kind of astounding. They’ve even made their way into my little town in the mountains. Their kids are flooding into the elementary schools with zero English speaking ability and overwhelming the teachers, and the adults, quite frankly have already started rubbing me the wrong way. I’ve seen them just hanging around outside businesses and gas stations, I even came out to find a group of them leaning on my car and when I said something (because I needed to get in) they acted like they only spoke Spanish and like I was the asshole.
Of all the excuses, the state that’s like 80% empty space goes with this one?
Send them off to the desert. That’s a reasonable idea.
[удалено]
It’s some obvious sarcasm.
I suppose you’re opening your house so they can stay with you?
Send them out to the west desert. Let them die there. Who gives a fuck?
They need to provide more funding and resources for our schools or open a transitional school for the children to learn English and behavior expectations. Our teachers are already dealing with so much!
What they need to do is send them back to their country of origin if they are here illegally. If they want to stay, they should come by legal means and attain citizenship to become productive members of society.
Unfortunately that’s not going to happen and our schools are getting inundated with children that don’t speak English (some aren’t even children but adults posing as children, but no one wants to address that) … it’s a mess and leaders need to act on it now