There was chaos at City Hall on Tuesday as protesters took over a meeting about Chicago's status as a sanctuary city. ... "Do you as a resident of the City of Chicago believe that we should remain a sanctuary city?" ... The crowd responded with boos and catcalls. The mostly African-American crowd jammed the City Council gallery, with hundreds more downstairs on the first floor held back by officers with bicycles. They're angry the city is spending tens of millions of dollars to shelter migrants, money they say should be going to help Chicagoans in poor neighborhoods.
Well, that's inconvenient for The Powers That Be. One group of useful idiots has realized that another group of useful idiots poses a danger to them, and is reacting. And in other news, MetLife has sold off a bunch of retail space in Water Tower Place in Chicongo for conversion into medical offices or "another type of use". What do you want to bet that old or dying malls in the U.S. start getting converted into immigrant housing?
Some of my cousins were whining about illegal immigration and I simply told them “this is what you voted for”. I would say the same to these people in Chicago. But the main issue is you keep voting for someone who will give you something. Maybe look into the concept of limited government or read some Adam Smith, Milton Friedman, or Thomas Sowell.
That's one of the main problems why the West is fucked. Once you've reached critical mass of welfare recipients vs productive people the system falls apart.
People on welfare are going to vote for more welfare which makes welfare more attractive which creates more welfare recipients who vote for more welfare.
I remember after the 2012 election Bill O’Reilly made some people mad for saying “we have now crossed the point where there are more people who want stuff than people who are productive”
Additionally, in the US at least, the welfare trap keeps a lot of potentially productive people on the fence and out of action because of how obtuse and out of date some of the restrictions are.
Which ends up even being even more undermining when combined with a totally broken and haphazard economy.
Not that I'd be one to promote or suggest even broader handouts, but there really needs to be less hand wringing over letting people on welfare actually save up their money in order to build up some financial security. The key should be on trying to get people to pull themselves off of the welfare, and a lot of people are only going to do that if they think they can safely survive a few trip ups.
Well, or you could eliminate it altogether obviously and let them sink or swim. I don't have a particularly strong argument against that option admittedly, though I'm not always a fan of taking things completely off the table wholesale unless they've proven to be truly cancerous.
Maybe something along those general lines yeah.
It probably has to be tailored or tiered somewhat based on the circumstances, IE if we're talking welfare based on income, welfare based on (potentially short term) disability, long term disability, etc.
I'm aware that the current system does branch that out into at least two different categories/departments, but even that was pretty dated, based on some research when I was curious about the actual federal bills/laws.
I don't remember how recently it was updated or what was entailed in said updates, but it looked like the majority of the groundwork was outlined back in the 80's, and a lot of the present specifics still seem designed after that fact.
The welfare trap is really so insidious that it really does feel intentionally designed to keep you down.
Like, you could want to be off it. But doing so would put you in a bad spot. Plenty of solid workers I know are stuck in the limbo of "If I work even a single more hour a week, I'd lose my benefits." Which means losing 100s of dollars in exchange for like $30 more on a paycheck. Not only taking away money for trying to improve their station, but actively penalizing doing anything but the barest minimum.
And I can't truly fault a man for choosing to work 20 hours, and get to spend a lot of time with his kids, thanks to those benefits rather than give it all up for the chance to work a full 40 and still earn less overall. Which of course means being stuck in poverty indefinitely because you are earning too little to ever save up.
Even more frustrating is that the actual leeches on the system are using that exact same setup just to be parasites, so any change or attempt to help one or remove the other will inversely effect the opposite side.
AKA once the demographics flip to less than 50% White + the few African immigrants who hate everyone that isn't a smart White European.
Universal suffrage is a terrible idea and anyone that still thinks otherwise is retarded. Women and welfare recipients don't need to be able to vote. They're just making things worse for everyone else.
Smitty, if those Chicagoans could read, they'd be very intrigued. chuckle
True. Some massive wishful thinking on my part but people who think it’s the governments job to take care of them will always go for the person who offers the most free stuff. That and the candidates who say that nothing is their fault due to the past
This implies the GOP opposes mass immigration. They don't.
They'll catch the vapors about 'muh open borders' to stoke the base, then turn around and act like one million legal immigrants is sustainable.
I want a party that will facilitate negative numbers on the flow of foreigners.
Me too.
I want a party that will sink refugee boats and enforce the borders with lethal force; I want the kind of party that would get a moratorium on legal immigration as a compromise measure.
No arguments there, but they keep voting democrat which is a party that openly encourages open borders. GOP talks about closed borders but then does the opposite
It's cool. I have at least one cousin that lives off the government. You don't get to pick your family, and a lot of people are on that gravy train these days.
Now that they have achieved victory the leftist coalition is fracturing over divvying up the spoils.
It's bloody fascinating to watch but at the same time you definitely don't want to get in the way when the mob decides it's your turn.
I'm just happy these nimby leftists virtue signaling about illegals are getting a taste of their own medicine. Suddenly it's not so racist to want to live in an area not full of foreigners leeching off the taxpayer isn't it.
Blacks everywhere are learning the lesson that blacks in Compton, CA learned: migrants from central and south America hate American blacks, don't hide it, and are perfectly willing to run black residents out of neighborhoods with extreme violence.
Compton used to be overwhelmingly majority black. It is now overwhelmingly Hispanic.
WTF, I love beaners now?
Objection, your honor: arguing facts without evidence.
Nowhere did I say that. If I had my way everyone who came here post 1965 Immigration Act would be deported, all 43 plus million of them.
What about "Hispanic of any race?"
Good point though.
I used to do a lot of travel work that landed me across the Fwy from Compton. It hasn't been black in forever.
I drove through there, you know "by accident' sticking to the center of the roads looking for a liquor store. But I've been a lot of desperate places looking for a liquor store. A lot of places don't let 'em in nice neighborhoods.
They do, they just have to repackage them for upper middle class tastes. Instead of Joe's Liquor on the corner, there's a Specs, or Beverages & More, or Costco liquor.
They are in more places than they used to be. Dallas, for instance, used to restrict which neighborhoods they could be in, roughly preventing them from setting up shop in the nicest areas. They would be right on the edges of such areas, cuz there's customers within.
They were also nicer; you're right about that.
Other states I have been to have no blue laws whatsoever, and you can buy liquor on any corner or in the grocery store. And yet some others have state-run liquor stores.
I’ve seen this and my only saving Grace was being fluent in Spanish.
"Gibs me dat. Don't gibs him dat."
Malls have gigantic parking lots. Perfect for conversion into housing for van dwellers and people living in their cars. I saw a movie once where people were living like this, it was called Soylent Green.
Native blacks are going to get their asses kicked. They've had it too soft dealing with timid hwytes, asians and milquetoast LEO. They won't know what hit them.
I'm off to stock up on popcorn.
Kinda like what happened between the Bloods/Crips and the Latin Kings during the Summer of Love.
They've long been trying to repurpose malls. I can see it. But it generally would require a lot of work, which has always been the issue. It's easy to turn a mall into a paintball range. It's expensive to turn it into housing. So a lot of these ideas get stuck in financial non-viability. You can probably reuse the skeleton of a mall, but it wouldn't be good enough housing for our -immigratns- asylum seekers who deserve at least a 3 star hotel.
I don't read it that way. I see the black community is mad that gibs are going to the migrants instead of them.
Well, that is the danger. Same as if a pig went to the slop trough one morning and there was no slop.
Those useful idiots will turn around and continue voting for the dems propogating this.
THEY B TAKIN OUR GIBS!
The social workers who harvest their ballots are still voting D, though.
And in, uh, "totally unrelated" news the police publicly seized eric adams cell phones.
https://nypost.com/2023/11/10/metro/eric-adams-had-cell-phones-ipad-seized-by-fbi-as-part-of-corruption-investigation/amp/
You may remember eric adams as the politician who gave the long speeches on soending money in the black community rather than the flood of immigrants.