Anonymous wrote:The growth could have come almost entirely from the busloads of migrants that were sent here. It's certainly not coming from people moving from other parts of the country to DC on purpose, because the city still is losing people in that direction.

Those immigrants are saving our bacon! We need every one we can get.

Anonymous wrote:It’s going to continue to groe

Grow

It’s going to continue to groe

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would be interested in seeing how the demographics shift - i.e. young and single staying or DINKs staying in the city vs. older folks and families moving out. Telework is really changing things now that people, especially parents and those with establish/senior jobs, don't need to commute as much, if at all.

Real estate wise, seems like there is plentiful housing for single or DINKs while there is less housing for families, plus real estate for families is currently seeming stagnant vs. the burbs. In Hill East, rowhouses are sitting in the market and dropping prices, in the burbs and exurbs, SFHs are in heated bidding wars, at least in the NOVA burbs where we are looking for a SFH for under $950k. Crime also looks to be at play here in some areas of the city where people felt comfortable buying a few years ago, and now are preferring to avoid.

"Hill East" is just rebranded Northeast DC. Which is why things are sitting on the market. NE is reverting to baseline, and no amount of white-and-blackified flipped houses with 5 round green shrubs in front can change the entrenched culture.

I'm the PP and if you want to talk about crime, ok. Hill East is half SE, the ward itself extends to Navy Yard, and SE is where more of the Hill East shootings occur as of late; you'd know this if you knew the area but clearly you don't. By "entrenched culture," sounds racist, frankly.

culture =/= melanin in the skin. Culture means culture. Is spraying an entire group of people with bullets a valid method to demonstrate displeasure with a single person possibly standing in that group? Select Yes or No.

Some cultural traditions support an answer of "yes." Others support an answer of "no."

No mention was made of skin color in this exercise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The growth could have come almost entirely from the busloads of migrants that were sent here. It's certainly not coming from people moving from other parts of the country to DC on purpose, because the city still is losing people in that direction.

t

Ding ding ding.

Net tax base loss.

So what?

Immigrants need a place to live too! Why can’t it be DC?

We need to do more to fund services for the unfairly underprivileged District residents.

And “undocumented” immigrants need a place to live, too. It’s called their country of origin. In the US illegally? Deport them.

A good proportion of recent migrant arrivals - maybe even a majority - are not present illegally, but have applied for asylum and are awaiting a hearing. This is a right afforded by the refugee convention to which the US has been a signatory for three-quarters of a century.

No one cares about these refugee treaties and most other countries don't actually follow them. The US is the one of the few wealthy countries stupid enough to allow unfettered illegal immigration. The US does not have an obligation to save the world. Accepting large numbers of refugees and asylum seeker creates a significant risk of social instability and it will burden taxpayers. Charitable immigration for individual misfortune does not create a basis for a strong immigration system that will enhance the well-being and economic prosperity of the US.

Those treaties are the law of the land, friend. People should and do care about the law of the land. Not all countries are signatories to the refugee convention, but those which are generally abide by its provisions.

For Western European countries, this has implied the absorption of millions of refugees from Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, and various African countries. On a per capita basis, they absorb much higher numbers of asylum seekers and undocumented migrants than the US does.

Like any other sovereign nation, the US could de-ratify the refugee convention and free itself from the obligation to abide by it. This could be done via the same mechanism that the US became a signatory in the first place. I don’t think anyone - even Trump - thinks that is going to happen, however.

What has changed over the past few years is that Venezuela, Haiti, Cuba and - to a lesser extent - China have become increasingly unlivable for the middle class and routes have been forged through the Darien Gap to allow migrants to travel from Colombia to Panama and, from there, to the US border. That journey is still incredibly difficult, though. If you have the slightest interest in the issue, I’d recommend watching this video of an Englishman joining thousands of Venezuelans and other migrants along the route: https://youtu.be/aswvkdCpZYc

Before the Darien was opened, it was very difficult for Venezuelans, Haitians, and others not able to fly into Mexico to reach the US. Closing the Darien up again is not going to happen. So you are not going to see a drop in asylum numbers until the economies of Venezuela, Haiti, and Cuba stabilize.

Anonymous wrote:Someone who has an abusive boyfriend in a foreign county is allowed to claim refugee status here. That’s ridiculous and the law needs to change.

Any foreign national who enters US territory can apply for refugee status, but to obtain it applicants need to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution by state agents. This is adjudicated by US officials and US judges, if an initial rejection is appealed. Simply having an abusive boyfriend wouldn’t qualify unless state agents are complicit somehow.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The growth could have come almost entirely from the busloads of migrants that were sent here. It's certainly not coming from people moving from other parts of the country to DC on purpose, because the city still is losing people in that direction.

t

Ding ding ding.

Net tax base loss.

So what?

Immigrants need a place to live too! Why can’t it be DC?

We need to do more to fund services for the unfairly underprivileged District residents.

And “undocumented” immigrants need a place to live, too. It’s called their country of origin. In the US illegally? Deport them.

“undocumented” immigrants = "illegal" immigrants changing the terms doesn't change the fact that you are referring to people here without papers which is in fact illegal. For example: If I went into Canada without any documents or papers I would be there illegally or pretty much any county the same, I would be there against the laws and that would mean it's illegal. This is a fact. I'm not wrong just because people do not like the term doesn't make the term incorrect. You can fact check this.

Asylum seekers are here legally. Otherwise they would've been deported during their intake session.

The people crossing the border are actually using the process afforded by current U.S. laws to remain in the country, pending a court date. These laws have been on the books for a lot longer than you or I have been alive. So a migrant who claims asylum and is released into the U.S. is "legal." Full stop.

The real difference between now and 10 years ago is that all these people have TikTok, which gives them step-by-step instructions on how to claim asylum in the U.S. Previous generations of border crossers from Mexico usually didn't declare asylum; instead, they just preferred to evade CBP and remain in the U.S. without any legal authorization (i.e., "illegal immigration").

I grew up in California in the 80s and it was well known that there was a tacit agreement between CBP and seasonal Mexican border crossers who came to work on the California farms during planting and harvest seasons. No need to declare asylum when you intend to leave at the end of the season. No cartel coyotes either. Everyone just pretended to ignore each other as long as no one caused trouble. It was a gift to wealthy farming families that supported Reagan.

Did you ever watch the movie Moscow on the Hudson with Robin Williams? It came out in the early 1980s. He plays a Soviet musician who comes to tour the U.S. with the Russian circus. While shopping in Macy's in NYC, he decides to run away from his KGB minders and defects to the United States, claiming political asylum to NYPD officers. The people crossing the border and claiming asylum are doing the exact same thing as Robin Williams's character in that film. These laws have been around for a long time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The growth could have come almost entirely from the busloads of migrants that were sent here. It's certainly not coming from people moving from other parts of the country to DC on purpose, because the city still is losing people in that direction.

t

Ding ding ding.

Net tax base loss.

So what?

Immigrants need a place to live too! Why can’t it be DC?

We need to do more to fund services for the unfairly underprivileged District residents.

And “undocumented” immigrants need a place to live, too. It’s called their country of origin. In the US illegally? Deport them.

“undocumented” immigrants = "illegal" immigrants changing the terms doesn't change the fact that you are referring to people here without papers which is in fact illegal. For example: If I went into Canada without any documents or papers I would be there illegally or pretty much any county the same, I would be there against the laws and that would mean it's illegal. This is a fact. I'm not wrong just because people do not like the term doesn't make the term incorrect. You can fact check this.

Does the “illegal immigration” blowhard on this thread actually live in DC? If so, for how long? I’d like to know the bonafides of the a$$hole, because it’s not how the overwhelming majority of us think.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The growth could have come almost entirely from the busloads of migrants that were sent here. It's certainly not coming from people moving from other parts of the country to DC on purpose, because the city still is losing people in that direction.

t

Ding ding ding.

Net tax base loss.

So what?

Immigrants need a place to live too! Why can’t it be DC?

We need to do more to fund services for the unfairly underprivileged District residents.

And “undocumented” immigrants need a place to live, too. It’s called their country of origin. In the US illegally? Deport them.

+100 I don't know when the LAW became "offensive" work to change the law if you don't like but not enforcing the laws on the books is absolutely ridiculous. Just look where it's got us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The growth could have come almost entirely from the busloads of migrants that were sent here. It's certainly not coming from people moving from other parts of the country to DC on purpose, because the city still is losing people in that direction.

t

Ding ding ding.

Net tax base loss.

So what?

Immigrants need a place to live too! Why can’t it be DC?

We need to do more to fund services for the unfairly underprivileged District residents.

And “undocumented” immigrants need a place to live, too. It’s called their country of origin. In the US illegally? Deport them.

A good proportion of recent migrant arrivals - maybe even a majority - are not present illegally, but have applied for asylum and are awaiting a hearing. This is a right afforded by the refugee convention to which the US has been a signatory for three-quarters of a century.

No one cares about these refugee treaties and most other countries don't actually follow them. The US is the one of the few wealthy countries stupid enough to allow unfettered illegal immigration. The US does not have an obligation to save the world. Accepting large numbers of refugees and asylum seeker creates a significant risk of social instability and it will burden taxpayers. Charitable immigration for individual misfortune does not create a basis for a strong immigration system that will enhance the well-being and economic prosperity of the US.

Someone who has an abusive boyfriend in a foreign county is allowed to claim refugee status here. That’s ridiculous and the law needs to change.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The growth could have come almost entirely from the busloads of migrants that were sent here. It's certainly not coming from people moving from other parts of the country to DC on purpose, because the city still is losing people in that direction.

t

Ding ding ding.

Net tax base loss.

So what?

Immigrants need a place to live too! Why can’t it be DC?

We need to do more to fund services for the unfairly underprivileged District residents.

And “undocumented” immigrants need a place to live, too. It’s called their country of origin. In the US illegally? Deport them.

A good proportion of recent migrant arrivals - maybe even a majority - are not present illegally, but have applied for asylum and are awaiting a hearing. This is a right afforded by the refugee convention to which the US has been a signatory for three-quarters of a century.

Get back to us when the increase is more than a rounding error on an census estimate, and when domestic migration isn't a net negative.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The growth could have come almost entirely from the busloads of migrants that were sent here. It's certainly not coming from people moving from other parts of the country to DC on purpose, because the city still is losing people in that direction.

t

Ding ding ding.

Net tax base loss.

So what?

Immigrants need a place to live too! Why can’t it be DC?

We need to do more to fund services for the unfairly underprivileged District residents.

And “undocumented” immigrants need a place to live, too. It’s called their country of origin. In the US illegally? Deport them.