Final public charge rule

[azblk 338]

5 minutes ago, Unlockable said:

1. Nope. You asked the question about have I seen Africans from poor countries immigrating and I gave you personal experience.

2. It is not about discriminating. There is literally no logical way to even immigrate a fraction of the billions of people willing to cone here. It just can't happen. That is why there is immigration control which every county has.

3. It doesn't matter if immgrants consume a little or a lot. The point is, if there is a need to enforce a rule then they can do that. Whether It is 1 immigrant or 1 million using welfare, it is still a law and the government can enforce it.

 

 

1. I dont know if you are just being facetious or obtuse but with these new rule changes will make it much more harder for people who come from certain places to immigrate.

2. This is not about unwashed masses of africans/asians or latin americans getting on boats and coming over without any controls whatsoever, There has already been very controls on who can come over and now they have even been made more stricter. This is telling American citizens that they can not sponsor thier spouses, parents and family if they come from certain places unless you make so much money blah blah.

3. There is NO law that prohibits an immigrant that using welfare benefits that they QUALIFY for. There is already prohibitions of using welfare in the first 5 years of LPR status or until you become a citizen and they were working well.  I don't know how many things this administration has to do for you see that their goal on immigration is to severely curtail it or at least change where people are coming from. If you don't believe me believe Trump, he said it himself - " why don't we have more immigrants from Norway instead of from hole countries?". Everything they have done since taking power has been to make things tougher for immigrants.

[Crazy Cat 39,680]

9 minutes ago, azblk said:

There has already been very controls on who can come over and now they have even been made more stricter. This is telling American citizens that they can not sponsor thier spouses, parents and family if they come from certain places unless you make so much money blah blah.

There are no countries or regions listed in the public charge rule.......it seems to be equally applied over the entire world.....

[lonesurvivor 48]

Just now, missileman said:

There are no countries or regions listed in the public charge rule.......it seems to be equally applied over the entire world.....

The issue would be some countries are not as well off as others. Eg a person from canada uk sweden, australia etc would have an easier time to get the "positive" factor of making 25k a year (but as I read it now, is not necessary). Rather than someone who may come from a third world country where they do not make as much money at all. 

 

I do think the new rule will not be beneficial whatsoever to those from third world countries, and will show a lot of favourtisim to other first world or western countries. Whether this is specifically racist, well this is for people to debate. 

 

I just hope if the spouse in the US makes more than enough money to sponsor the individual, regardless of where in the world they are from, it will matter a lot more than the other factors. 

[azblk 338]

4 minutes ago, missileman said:

There are no countries or regions listed in the public charge rule.......it seems to be equally applied over the entire world.....

Yes but it is much easier for people in countries with stronger economies to overcome. Someone coming from Taiwan, Singapore or Japan will overcome this much easier than someone from India, Pakistan or Bangladesh.

[Diriangén 12]

1 hour ago, setsemas said:

Helpful information (also attached):

https://protectingimmigrantfamilies.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Lets-Talk-About-Public-Charge-Updated-August-2019.pdf

https://protectingimmigrantfamilies.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Getting-the-Help-You-Need-Updated-August-2019.pdf

Lets-Talk-About-Public-Charge-Updated-August-2019.pdf 222.98 kB · 0 downloads Getting-the-Help-You-Need-Updated-August-2019.pdf 124.83 kB · 0 downloads

More helpful information: https://protectingimmigrantfamilies.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/08.14.19-Public-Charge-Finalization-Webinar.pdf

08.14.19-Public-Charge-Finalization-Webinar.pdf

[Crazy Cat 39,680]

It all revolves around the probability of a SPECIFIC person becoming a public charge....nothing more....

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

1 hour ago, yuna628 said:

 

 

 

https://www.cato.org/blog/center-immigration-studies-exaggerates-immigrant-welfare-use

https://www.cato.org/blog/center-immigration-studies-overstates-immigrant-non-citizen-native-welfare-use

They don't actually as pointed out repeatedly to CIS over the years multiple times. But doesn't much matter at this point.

Those studies still show that Immigrants use services at a higher rate than native born USCs. It is not as much as CIS says it is but it is still more than. I may not agree with all of CISs studies but it has been proven over the years that for the most part they are right but their numbers are off. 

Edited August 14, 2019 by Cyberfx1024

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

11 minutes ago, setsemas said:

More helpful information: https://protectingimmigrantfamilies.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/08.14.19-Public-Charge-Finalization-Webinar.pdf

08.14.19-Public-Charge-Finalization-Webinar.pdfUnavailable

Thank you it was very informative and straight forward except for pages 18-20, 42-43 and then it just goes in to fear mongering. 

Edited August 14, 2019 by Cyberfx1024

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

1 minute ago, azblk said:

If the issue at hand is use of welfare by immigrants then let them make it illegal and let there be repercussions for the use of that welfare.

 

When you start making people inadmissible because your crystal ball told you that those people are more likely than others to become public charges is very problematic. 

 

That's what they are clarifying but according to you and a couple other people on here it is classist and racist. 

[geowrian 22,336]

18 minutes ago, setsemas said:

More helpful information: https://protectingimmigrantfamilies.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/08.14.19-Public-Charge-Finalization-Webinar.pdf

08.14.19-Public-Charge-Finalization-Webinar.pdfUnavailable

Great resource for the facts.

Not a fan of the obvious slant for the other items (and trust me, I'm no fan of the POTUS).

Edited August 14, 2019 by geowrian

[Crazy Cat 39,680]

11 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

Thank you it was very informative and straight forward except for pages 18-20, 42-43 and then it just goes in to fear mongering. 

I didn't really care for page 2 either......but there was some good info in the presentation, imo.

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

3 minutes ago, missileman said:

I didn't really care for page 2 either......but there was some good info in the presentation, imo.

I had to go back and look at that and I didn't like that page either. 

[Crazy Cat 39,680]

13 minutes ago, azblk said:

 

 

Come on, Man!!!   Really?

[Allaboutwaiting 2,500]

Nothing to download, easy to navigate; directly from the primary source. 

 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/10/10/2018-21106/inadmissibility-on-public-charge-grounds

[Unlockable 7,306]

This is getting out of hand. It is a bunch of back and forth and it is because people are seeing two different things.

 

The change does NOT target specific countries, regions, or people. It is based on individual cases like @missileman pointed out.

It will not make it harder for people to legally immigrate if they meet the requirements.

This is not a burden for the immigrant but more-so on the sponsoring US partner. 

Public charge denials have been happening well before this new change.