This is from the Inscription on the Statue of Liberty by Emma Lazarus:
“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”
Undoubtedly, some of the most compassionate words ever spoken, the tired, the poor , the homeless and the temptest tost are invited to the Golden Door of America; please note Ms Lazarus deliberately and rightfully left out two groups from her invitation, the old and the infirm. The most compassionate immigration poliy and philosophy ever espoused, left out the old and the infirm.
That is the definition of Ruthless Compassion;the article below is from the Los Angeles Times, and show why there is a need for RuthlessCompassion in our Immigration Policy.
“By Alexandra Zavis and Anna Gorman February 16, 2010 | 6:30 p.m.
State officials say the cuts are painful but necessary, and there was no attempt to single out any population group in the proposed budget.”The fact that we have to close a $20-billion budget gap, on the heels of a $60-billion gap last year, means that we have had to make the difficult decision to propose curtailing or eliminating many state-only programs, and these fall into that category,” said H.D. Palmer, a spokesman for the Finance Department.When families petition to bring relatives to the U.S., they are required to sign affidavits agreeing to support them financially for up to 10 years.
- But many of these families have fallen on hard times. Affidavits are not required for people entering the country under various other programs.Federal benefits have been restored to some recent arrivals, but most are not eligible for supplemental security income, food stamps, transitional assistance for needy families or Medi-Cal until they have lived legally in the U.S. for five years. Exceptions are made for refugees and a few other categories. Only a few other states still provide cash or food aid to new, legal arrivals. Advocates for stricter immigration controls say that a waiting period to receive benefits is appropriate.”Five years is a legitimate time to ensure that people who have come here the right way are willing to assimilate and be loyal tax-paying Americans,” said Barbara Coe of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform. The proposed cuts include:*
Cash Assistance Program for Immigrants, serving about 8,500 low-income elderly and disabled people. The projected savings is $107.3 million.*
- California Food Assistance Program, which provides benefits to about 37,000 low-income immigrants, for savings of $56.2 million.*
- Calworks benefits for about 24,000 new legal immigrants, for savings of $22.5 million. The program provides cash, job training, child care and other services to help families transition from welfare to work.*
- Full-spectrum Medi-Cal services for 48,570 new legal immigrants and 65,000 undocumented people who tell the state they are known to immigration officials and their deportation is not being sought. The projected savings is $118 million. Pregnant women and children would still be covered.The Legislature last year rejected proposals to eliminate some of the same programs, but many recipients have seen their benefits reduced.UCLA professor of public health Alex Ortega said immigrants are frequently targeted in tough economic times because they can’t yet vote, do not speak English well and are often poor.“They have all the factors that contribute to being vulnerable,”
- Ortega said.Community activists say the budget proposals will leave many without a lifeline.“These are elderly, often frail individuals who rely on this support to buy their medicines, pay rent and eat a basic diet,” Hala Masri, a policy advocate for the Asian Pacific American Legal Center, said in an e-mail.
- Cho is so worried that he has considered returning to Korea. But he said, “I have no roots there . . . I am American now. “The $835 in aid the family receives each month doesn’t even cover rent.”
- After working 21 years at a U.S. military base in South Korea, Cho went back to school to learn how to repair computers. When that did not yield a job, he enrolled in English classes and became certified as a security guard. Then his son-in-law died of cancer. His daughter works long hours at a Chinese restaurant, so he took in his two grandchildren, 11 and 8.Cho now works part-time at a community center, advising other immigrants. His wife works for a program providing in-home care to the frail and disabled, but that too is slated for cuts.
- “I will have to find some other work,” Cho said, staring at his tea cup on a chilly morning in Koreatown. “What company would hire an old person like me?”
- The California Immigrant Policy Center argues in a new report that the savings from the proposed cuts would be offset by increased homelessness and costly emergency room use. “Not only are these cuts not fair, they are not smart,” said Reshma Shamasunder, who runs the advocacy group. “They are not going to save us money in the long run.”
Teddy Lechadores, 70, who emigrated legally from the Philippines in 2007, relies on Medi-Cal to pay for dialysis.
- He also sees doctors for his prostate cancer, diabetes and high blood pressure, and needs eight prescription medicines.“If I were in the Philippines I would have been dead now,” Lechadores said. He was laid off last month from a security guard job. He now makes $160 a week for doing maintenance and office workat the Pilipino Workers Center west of downtown. His bank account is overdrawn, he sleeps at the center and keeps most of his belongings in his 1996 Acura, which was damaged recently when someone rear-ended him.
- “I’m down to nothing,” he said as he looked through his Medi-Cal forms on a recent afternoon. “Medi-Cal is very, very important.”
First, California has no control over Immigration, that is Federally controlled, why California would step in, as a state, and grant benefits to immigrants living here beggars understanding.
One of the reasons California faces a 21 Billion deficit and is cutting schools, releasing criminals and closing parks is that it stepped into supplying benefits to immigrants over 65, here under Federal aegis.
That said, did you see the ages of the immigrants? ” “What company would hire an old person like me?”
Mr. Cho from Korea is 70 YEARS OLD, and has been here FOUR years, which means he came to the United States, legally,at the age of 66.
I submit that is an immigration policy of compassionate madness. American workers retire at 65, and yet our immigration policy expects Mr. Cho to come to America, find work, and produce enough equity to support him in his declining years.
It does not take an actuarial expert to know that is insanity. Mr. Cho cannot produce enough in four years, to pay for his medical bills; to base policy on that assumption is lunacy. To ask young Americans to bear the burden of carrying Mr. Cho is grossly unfair, unethical, and immoral.
Mr.Lechadores is 70, arrived in the United States in 2007, which means he was 67 and sick when he arrived. Now he needs dialysis. He was 67 years old, with BAD kidneys, and we let him LEGALLY into the country.
Immigration is no longer charity, not with California facing a 21Billion deficit, and the United States facing a 12 TRILLION dollar deficit. It is a Zero Sum game.
To give to Mr. Cho and Mr. Lechadores, we must take away from the education of children, the care for veterans, shelters for homeless,retirements of American citizens.
In 2010, America is a Titanic Lifeboat, full of survivors in a cold, pitch black sea; if we let on any others, we will swamp. If we do let on any others, they must be young and able to row.
An immigration policy of RUTHLESS COMPASSION means this; NO ONE OVER 50 WILL BE ALLOWED TO ENTER THE UNITED STATES, a flat out decree. No exceptions, no citizenship, no entry,no legal status, to anyone over 50.
This is harsh, it means there will be no family reunions. All I can say, is that there will be no family reunions. If you are over 50, you cannot be a legal immigrant residing in the United States. Over 50, you will not produce enough to row the boat.
Since 1970, this nation, the United States has expended enormous sums of money, time and social pressure in combatting smoking among its population. Smokers can no longer smoke in classrooms, offices, restaurants. This was done to limit medical costs, heart attacks,lung cancer among the American population. Savings have ensued. Yet, yet, the United States has a current immigration policy which allows smokers, smokers from the age of 12, to immigrate to America.
In China, South Korea, Philippines, Greece, France they smoke, constantly, since the age of 12. How can we let them into this country at 66, when they have been smoking since 12? That does NOT lower medical costs, all the money saved by limited smoking among Americans is lost by allowing Smokers into the nation. It makes no sense.
Is it too much to ask for non smoking immigrants?
This maybe considered cruel, no relatives of American citizens would be allowed to settle here if they were over 50. The old rules are no longer viable, how do I know that? Well, I have 12 TRILLION witnesses to testify in my behalf, the old ways need to be changed. If we are not cruel now, we may have to be very brutal later, as in rationing medical services for Americans.
America has a wave of Baby Boomers about to enter God’s Waiting Room, it makes no sense to add foreign born elderly to that wave; it is too much to ask of America’s young people; we have enough aging Baby Boomers, we do not need to import more.
This exclusion of the old and the infirm is a mass benefit which outweighs the individual loss. If exceptions must be made,for political refugees, and scientists, then they must be signed off by the Secretary of State. As for the others, I hope they enjoy Canada.
We cannot afford immigrants with pre existing conditions. The middle class of this nation has been drained of wealth to support a cock eyed system; we need to replenish our wealth and energy, To begin to do that, we should exclude the old and the infirm.
The financial benefits will be enormous and will redound to the benefit ofeducating of all the young immigrants we will have to integrate. Under 5o, we will hold up our lamp, over 50, we will close the door.
BLOG 1 in the Immigration Series: http://gerrymaxeyworkshop.com/blogging/?p=3923
The next blog on this subject will examine what effect the worldwide policy of GENDERCIDE should have on our immigration policy.
ARNOLD STANG, the real Governor of California.
