18 Comments

I remember when American welcomed refugees…

America still beats every other country in terms of people allowed in. America takes in more immigrants than the next 4 countries combined.

Immigrants aren’t all or even mostly refugees, and the situation is probably changing for the worse under 47’s “guidance”.

Did a little research and in terms of immigrants by number (not per capita, then it’s around place 60 or 70) this is 100% true in terms of the number of immigrants currently living in the US. (People who have their birthplace in another country). In terms of 2024 the USA is still #1 in terms of number of immigrants taken but almost tied with second place. (Ukraine weirdly enough, probably some war weirdness there.) again if you look at per capita the USA is way down the list. Personally I feel per capita is a better way to measure, since the burden/benefit of the immigrants is born by the existing population.

Refugees are one thing we got international laws about them. Economic migrants are understandable. But there are proper procedures one just can cross into a country with out proper paperwork and expect nothing to happen, yeah sure the nice western countries may just sent you back. But as a Finn, I dare anyone to just waddle from here to russia,do tell me if you enjoy the experience. Now Nordics do have separate treaties regarding their citicens travel and EU another, but in general rules are same for every one.

Reasonable countries have rules. But some people like to call ALL rules “fascist.”

I do not think that word means what they think that word means.

You remember today? We’ve always welcomed refugees, but we’ve LONG had limitations and rules about immigrants. Unfortunately, we simply aren’t able to absorb an infinite number of lower-income, lower-education people, most of whom don’t speak our language, and often have whole families that need care. It’ll bankrupt us, then we’ll all be in the same boat they are trying to leave.

There have been a couple news reports and documentaries and dramatizations of this phenomenon. It happens all over, for all kinds of reasons. It seems overall a positive thing, and it’s getting harder for new diversity to come to the more expensive cities without a gold card or the right degree.

I mean, that’s true of the locals, too. In the old days, I think the port cities are where all the immigrants went, like New York, but now, pfft, even New Yorkers can’t afford New York.

I’m old enough to remember Vietnamese and Cuban refugees in the 1970’s. I have no idea how they ended up in a very small town in Southwest Oklahoma. They were very much in a fish out of water situation. The only thing I know of was that the town fathers were actively recruiting families to come live there in an effort to keep the school open. They didn’t stay long. The only jobs available would have been farming and ranching. That was all 50ish years ago. Following what Risky observes, it is increasingly expensive to live in any major metropolitan area in the U.S. If I were an immigrant I would be looking at a smaller city for my start.

I am not a farmer, but pretty sure farming is NOT the same everywhere. Some places get snow, some don’t. Some places get rain, some don’t. Some places have soil. some don’t. And that’s just three of the very important factors.

My Filipino ancestors traveled to a small town in the South too. Always wondered why there and not, like, a more mainstream town.

Not a judgement, they were doctor and nurses so they probably could’ve found work anywhere and were happy with their choice of location.

I assume the comic is going to explain this in more detail, but the answer to “why does a small town in the Midwest end up with so many disparate resettlement groups?” is obviously “because the rich political assholes who got to choose where to stick resettlement groups decided no one important cared about some small town in the Midwest, so random refugees could be stuck there without bothering anyone important.” It’s the modern-day version of the Trail of Tears, and it’s still happening.

I’m pretty sure Indian is not really a language. But I’m not sure if this was a mistake made by the author (whether on purpose or not) or by the character

Yeah, I’m guessing it’s something like that.

IMO- John doesn’t look like the bookish type.

Lots of non-bookish people will likely assume: French people speak French, Korean people speak Korean, so guys from India must speak “Indian”.
[Most people in India probably speak Hindi].

I think it’s probably a common mistake, with people who don’t look up foreign nations, + their main language(s), for fun.

Such as- there are probably a lot of people who think that Switzerland’s people…speak a language called, “Swiss”.

You know how it goes. :D

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.