TOP 5 HIGHEST TAX STATES ARE BLUE STATES

Top 5 Highest Tax States Are Blue States

…And residents are fleeing these states en mases

Infowars.com – MARCH 5, 2019

The top five states with highest taxes in the nation are all Democratic “tax and spend” states.

And, not surprising, four out of the five have the most amount of people moving out of the state, according to a United Van Lines survey.

Data analyzed by the financial group 24/7 Wall St. reveals that the top five states with the highest tax burdens are:

5) Illinois
4) California
3) New Jersey
2) Connecticut
1) New York

And the top five states people are fleeing are:

5) Kansas
4) New York
3) Connecticut
2) Illinois
1) New Jersey

While not in the top 10, California still had nearly 55% of residents moving out compared to 45.6% of people moving in, according to the survey, which is slightly edged out by #10 Michigan.

Kansas, on the other hand, has above average taxes and, according to the survey, residents are leaving the state to take jobs elsewhere.

“These numbers reinforce what has become a well-entrenched trend of US residents moving from high-tax states to low tax states,” reported Mises.org. “In fact, among the top-ten states that the largest number of Americans have fled, seven of the ten are states which rank among the top 15 states for the worst tax burdens, according to the Tax Foundation’s most recent report on state and local taxation.”

Case in point, last month New Jersey moved to enact a “rain tax” on property owners by charging property owners a fee for their parking lots and driveways, or any other surface rainwater can’t penetrate.

The state is already prohibitively expensive for the middle class, and because more people have fled New Jersey than any other state in 2018, the rain tax will likely force even more people to leave.

Warren, Harris Add Reparations to 2020 Campaign Platforms

By

All Democrats have to do is not be insane. And they can’t do it.

Screen Shot 2019-02-21 at 6.10.33 PM

In an effort to pander to black voters, Sens. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), both presidential candidates, said they will back reparations for black Americans as part of their campaign platforms.

“We have to be honest that people in this country do not start from the same place or have access to the same opportunities,” Harris reportedly said. “I’m serious about taking an approach that would change policies and structures and make real investments in black communities.”

That statement followed a radio interview in which she explicitly agreed with the host when that “government reparations for black Americans were necessary to address the legacies of slavery and discrimination.”

Warren echoed a similar sentiment.

“Ms. Warren also said she supported reparations for black Americans impacted by slavery — a policy that experts say could cost several trillion dollars, and one that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and many top Democrats have not supported,” The New York Times said.

The report said that Warren “declined to giver further details” about her reparations plan.

These are the same candidates that also support a “Green New Deal,” which will also cost trillions of dollars at the expense of the American taxpayer.

But there are more questions surrounding reparations than exactly how much they would cost.

Mainly, who would pay them?

Would reparations be paid only by white people who have slave-owning lineages, like Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam of Virginia? Would I, as an Arab American whose family immigrated to the United States through Ellis Island, be required to pay for something in which my ancestors had no part?

Likewise, who exactly would receive them?

Would all blacks receive some form of reparations, regardless of whether their ancestors were slaves? What if someone is half black? Or a quarter? Is that person owed a fraction of the reparations of a fully black American?

And what about poor white people? There are millions of whites who “do not start from the same place or have access to the same opportunities,” as Harris argued. Will they be buried more deeply – will they have to become poorer –  simply to atone for the color of their skin? Is that justice?

Most importantly, would reparations help repair the cultural strife in this country, which is mostly promulgated by the mainstream press for ratings and Democrat politicians for votes? Wouldn’t the Harris/Warren plan cause more strife and racial tension?

Do these loons really believe that – in a perfect world – reparations would be paid and everyone would simply shake hands, walk away, and that the country will be more united than it has ever been?

These are practical questions that remained unanswered by politicians who are race-baiting for votes.

U.S. Taxpayers Fund Border Walls in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Middle East

Borders-Pakistan-Lebanon-Egypt-Libya-640x480

By John Binder

American taxpayers are continuing to fund border security measures and border walls in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, and Lebanon with President Trump’s signing of a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) spending bill.

While the United States-Mexico border received only $1.3 billion for construction of a border wall at the overwhelmed southern border with soaring illegal immigration, foreign countries are getting help from American taxpayers to secure their borders.

The Republican-Democrat spending bill signed by Trump last week provides Pakistan with at least $15 million in U.S. taxpayer money for “border security programs” as well as funding for “cross border stabilization” between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

In total, the spending bill provides about $6 billion in American taxpayer money to finance foreign militaries, some of which can be used by Lebanon to “strengthen border security and combat terrorism.”

The spending bill provides about $112.5 million in U.S. taxpayer money for economic support for Egypt, including $10 million for scholarships for Egyptian students. Egypt’s military receives about $1.3 billion in the spending bill, some of which can be for border security programs.

Additionally, the spending bill includes:

Meanwhile, illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border has swelled in recent months. In December 2018, the last month for illegal border crossing totals, there were close to 51,000 border crossings. The month before, there were nearly 52,000 border crossings. Experts project there to be at least 606,000 crossings this year at the southern border, a level of illegal immigration that surpasses nearly every year of illegal immigration under President Obama.

GOP/Dem Deal Spends 40X as Much on Foreign Countries as Border Wall

See the source image

By John Binder

A Republican-Democrat spending bill being offered to President Trump spends nearly 40 times as much on foreign aid as it does on a wall to secure the United States-Mexico border.

Though Trump requested about $5.7 billion to fund a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, a spending package written by elected Republicans and Democrats funds just $1.3 billion for 55 miles of wall at the border.

Meanwhile, the deal spends nearly 40 times as much American taxpayer money on foreign aid as it does on a border wall. In total, about $50 billion is spent on foreign aid, including:

See the source image
  • $9.15 billion for international security assistance
  • $1.9 billion for foreign food and hunger programs
  • $3.1 billion for global health programs
  • $3 billion for international development assistance
  • $3.7 billion to support the economies of foreign countries
  • $4.4 billion for international disaster assistance
  • $3.8 billion for assistance for foreign refugees

The $1.3 billion for a border wall in the spending bill is a fraction of the total $14.9 billion budget that is awarded to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agency. The bulk of funding in the CBP budget goes towards funding “border security technology.”

70 PERCENT OF SCHOOL DISTRICT’S NEWEST STUDENTS ARE IMMIGRANTS

See the source image

Baltimore-area district flooded by students with unknown legal status

Seven of 10 new students in a Baltimore-Washington area school district are immigrants, their legal status unknown and their second language English, according to a series of new media reports about the impact of surging immigration on local communities.

A recent Baltimore Sun report said that of the 5,000 new students jamming Baltimore County schools in the past five years, 3,500 are “recent immigrants or children whose family speak another language.”

That has helped to double the percentage of students who speak English as a second language, part of a national trend.

And WBAL TV in Baltimore said that there has been a 130 percent surge of students enrolled in English for Speakers of Other Languages over the past 10 years, up 12 percent in the past year alone.

The Sun said that the addition of new and mostly immigrant students is enough to fill a new school every single year. It also said that the system does not know the legal status of the new students and that under a 1982 Supreme Court decision all students have to be accepted.

It has put great pressure on the system’s ESOL program and prompted the county, which surrounds Baltimore, to scramble to hire more teachers with second language skills.

Most are from Central America, but the Sun added that a sizable minority are from Nigeria.

It is a trend.

The Center for Immigration Studies recently found 700 immigrant-saturated school districts where half of the new students are from immigrant households.

In the Washington communities the percentages are even higher than in Baltimore County. CIS said that 78 percent of the students in Annandale and West Falls Church, Va. schools are from immigrant homes.

“The number of children from immigrant households in schools is now so high in some areas that it raises profound questions about assimilation. What’s more, immigration has added enormously to the number of public school students who are in poverty and the number who speak a foreign language. This cannot help but to create significant challenges for schools, often in areas already struggling to educate students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds,” said the CIS report.

 

WashPost Op-Ed: Girl’s Death Shows Americans Are a Threat to Migrants

See the source image

By Neil Munro

The death of a migrant girl shows that Americans are a threat to migrants, says Never Trump author Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post.

“It’s a cruel irony that [President Donald] Trump has portrayed refugees as a threat to Americans. In fact, the reverse is true,” Rubin wrote in a column that slammed any barrier or regulatory curbs on the flow of economic migrants into the United States.

Rubin’s column was headlined “Horrifying indifference to children’s lives,” and it cited the death of seven-year Guatemalan girl, Jakelin Caal, who was brought over the New Mexico border by her father, Nery Gilberto Caal Cuz. The subheadline on the article declared: The Trump administration certainly is responsible for death of a child in its custody.”

See the source image

Fewer migrants will die while sneaking across the border if the federal government just provides a better welcome and easier asylum rules, Rubin argues:

With adequate border security and staffing, a sufficient number of immigration judges deployed to handle the caseload, reversal of the administration’s deliberately cruel policies … the current, intolerable situation should improve.

Rubin ignored the alternative policy of discouraging migration by careful enforcement of the nation’s laws against illegal migration and the employment of illegals.

Rubin also did not mention the thousands of illegal migrants who are rescued by the border patrol each year, nor the tens of thousands who are by border agents to file clearly fraudulent cases which are subsequently rejected by judges.

Capture

Also, Rubin did not mention the moral responsibility of the child’s father who brought her through the desert in an apparent effort to use the catch-and-release Flores loophole to get past border guards. The loophole was created by Judge Dolly Gee who has ordered border officials to release migrants after 20 days if they bring a child with them.

The AP reported that the father was an economic migrant:

Family members in Guatemala said Caal decided to migrate with his favorite child to earn money he could send back home. Jakelin’s mother and three siblings remained in San Antonio Secortez, a village of about 420 inhabitants.

Economic migrants are not eligible for asylum.

But Rubin posted a litany of complaints by open-borders groups, including the ACLU and America’s Voice, who argue that curbs on illegal migrant force migrants to take more dangerous routines through the scrubland into the United States. Rubin cited the ACLU’s complaints:

In 2017, migrant deaths increased even as the number of border crossings dramatically decreased. When the Trump administration pushes for the militarization of the border, including more border wall construction, they are driving people fleeing violence into the deadliest desert regions.

Rubin exemplifies the open-borders advocates who hide their views underneath a blizzard of nit-picking complaints about minor aspects of the nation’s popular border-control rules. For example, she quoted one activist’s complaints that the temporary holding centers along the border are characterized by “freezing temperatures, no beds, lights left on, no showers, not enough toilets or toilet paper, filthy conditions, horrible smell, inedible food and not enough clean water to drink, and [are] run by insulting and abusive agents.”

But Rubin declined to say if the United States has a right to protect its borders or to deport foreign migrants from the United States. She showed indifference to the huge economic and civic costs to ordinary Americans of cheap-labor migration into the nation’s blue-collar and middle-class workplaces,  neighborhoods, hospitals, welfare centers, and K-12 schools.

Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies, told Breitbart News:

The Democrats are using this [death] cynically as a cudgel against the very idea of immigration enforcement. It is shameless. It is really shameless.

The left is objectively in favor of open borders. They deny it if you ask them straight out, but they are opposed to any meaningful measure to enforce the borders. Any time there is a tragedy like this they immediately turn it into an excuse for weakening the borders — and say at the same when you point to an illegal immigrant criminal [as a reason] for tightening the borders, they charge you with acting irresponsibly.

The logical conclusion of the Democrats’ outrage over this is that there should be no border enforcement because any rules about border control will also create people who evade them, and it is an evasion of the laws that is the responsible (mechanism] for this tragedy. The only logical conclusion is that we must have open borders.

For example, Democrats are now describing the detention centers used to hold migrant parents together with their children prior to their release or asylum hearings as illegitimate “internment camps.”

Capture

This “internment” claim comes after Democrats decried the governments’ release of children to government-run shelters while their parents were detained prior to court hearings.

Nationwide, the U.S. establishment’s economic policy of using legal migration to boost economic growth shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the market with cheap white collar and blue collar foreign labor. That flood of outside labor spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor that blue collar and white collar employees.

The cheap labor policy widens wealth gaps, reduces high tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high tech careers, and sidelines at least five million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with fentanyl addictions.

Immigration also steers investment and wealth away from towns in heartland states because coastal investors can more easily hire and supervise the large immigrant populations who prefer to live in coastal cities. In turn, that investment flow drives up coastal real-estate prices, pricing poor U.S. Latinos and blacks out of prosperous cities, such as Berkeley and Oakland.

GOP Senators Introduce “WALL Act” — Request $25 Billion for Trump Border Wall

 

On Thursday several GOP Senators introduced the “Wall Act” to fund President Trump’s border wall with Mexico.

Senator’s Ted Cruz, John Kennedy, James Inhofe and Mike Rounds introduced the new law that will pay for itself.

The GOP senators say they can fund the bill by cutting off benefits to illegal immigrants in the US.

Capture

Capture

Capture

It’s time to build the Trump wall.

Republican senators have introduced legislation to fully fund President Trump’s request of $25 billion for the U.S.-Mexico border wall.

“The WALL Act would fully fund the border wall by closing existing loopholes that provide illegal immigrants with federal benefits and tax credits, without affecting the benefits and tax credits used by Americans,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said in a statement on Thursday.

To pay for the border wall, the Republicans propose to crack down on benefits for undocumented immigrants, including requiring that parents have a Social Security number to claim refundable tax credits, requiring any welfare applicants to prove they are a citizen and increasing minimum fines on individuals who cross the border illegally or overstay visas.

“If you want to receive food stamps and other benefits, then you should prove your citizenship. If you cross the border illegally or overstay your visit to this country, then you should pay a stiff penalty,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) added.

In addition to Kennedy and Cruz, the bill was introduced by Sens. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Mike Rounds (R-S.D.).

HONDURAN MIGRANT GIVES BIRTH IN US HOSPITAL LESS THAN 24-HRS AFTER JUMPING BORDER FENCE

Honduran Migrant Gives Birth In US Hospital Less Than 24-Hrs After Jumping Border Fence

American taxpayers will be hit with the hefty hospital bill and be forced to pay for her anchor baby’s entire life

Information Liberation – DECEMBER 6, 2018

American taxpayers will be hit with the hefty hospital bill and be forced to pay for her anchor baby’s entire life.

From The Daily Mail:

A 19-year-old Honduran woman who wanted to give birth to her second child in the United States had a son within 24 hours of climbing the border wall.

Maryury Elizabeth Serrano-Hernandez, 19, went into labor November 27, less than 24 hours after she climbed over the border fence in Tijuana with her husband, 20, and two-year-old son.

null

‘With the faith in God, I always said my son will be born there [in the United States] because he will be born there,’ Serrano-Hernandez told Univision.

She is believed to be the first member of the migrant caravan to give birth after crossing to the U.S. to seek asylum.

Serrano-Hernandez and her family were detained by agents from the Imperial Beach Station in San Diego County on November 26.

A spokesperson with the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol agency told DailyMail.com: ‘The woman, who was eight months pregnant, began complaining of abdominal pain Tuesday and was immediately transported to a local hospital by Border Patrol agents.’

null

[…]Serrano-Hernandez and her family started their journey to America in mid-October when the first wave of the massive caravan set out from Honduras and lingered in Guatemala before the Mexican government caved in and let scores of Central American migrants walk through its southern border. She was already heavily pregnant at this point.

[…]Last week, Ortiz and his pregnant wife decided it was the perfect time to climb the border wall.

They climbed over a fence and safely touched American soil. The three Hondurans walked up a dirt hill before they were met by border patrol agents from a nearby station.

Ortiz, who is wearing an ankle monitor, recalled the agents asked them to return back to Tijuana but he and his wife declined the immigration officers’ request, turning themselves in.

Our border control consists of politely asking people who illegally invaded our country to please leave.

When they say no, we take them in and put them straight on welfare.

Screen Shot 2018-12-06 at 11.22.07 AM

This is the immigration system the Democrats and many Koch-puppet Republicans are fighting to protect (and expand).

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑