patrick.net

India is a Third World country. Is he going after the H1Bs, then?

MolotovCocktail says

India is a Third World country. Is he going after the H1Bs, then?

As best he can. Only, repeat Only, Congress can end H1-Bs, the best he can do is throw the book at them, starting with the $100k app fee.

The counter Jesuit rug pull. Leo is going to have his knickers in a twist.

Guess they should have been nicer to Trump at Fordham.

Fuck all foreigners seeking to work and live in the US; they can visit Disney World and go the fuck back from whence they came.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/ambushed-friday-november-28-2025

The assassinations ignited a powder keg of political fury. Yesterday, President Trump had a lot to say about it, both on- and offline, including that he will ‘permanently pause’ (not sure what that means) all migration from third-world countries. Here’s the first half of Trump’s Truth Social post (in the even spicier second half, he called Minnesota Governor Tim Walz “retarded” and mentioned Ilhan Omar’s brother):




“Frankly, the whole Afghanistan situation was a mess. It should have never happened. We would have got out with strength and decency and precision,” Trump said in a fiery presser (wherein he called the reporter a ‘stupid person’).

Patrick says

We also had significantly higher birth rates during those years. The real tragedy is that Americans didn’t value having children. So now we get unbridled immigration instead.

PeopleUnited says

Patrick says

We also had significantly higher birth rates during those years. The real tragedy is that Americans didn’t value having children. So now we get unbridled immigration instead.

The only reason is because it became ever more difficult to do so. If you don’t believe that then ask yourself why the government gives so much financial support to these “immigrants”.

Glock-n-Load says

The only reason is because it became ever more difficult to do so.

You mean it is harder to impregnate and change diapers after 1970?

Nope. But birth control, abortion, and the attitude towards children (blessing vs burden) did change.

PeopleUnited says

Glock-n-Load says

The only reason is because it became ever more difficult to do so.

You mean it is harder to impregnate and change diapers after 1970?

Nope. But birth control, abortion, and the attitude towards children (blessing vs burden) did change.

That heritage American stock weren’t interested in 2 parent incomes with large families. And aren’t the type to want to live under the heel of government in order to get freebies. Think about this. AND you didn’t answer my question.

Patrick says

Yep:

Severely restricted immigration, AND about 2/3 of the world little to no imports beyond fruits, nuts, spices, coffee, and cocoa (Communist and Turd World "Non-Aligned") with strong tariffs or other restrictions. Caterpillar and Ford out, only Cinnamon and Coffee in.

Secret to success. Free Trade is fine with Australia, UK, etc. It's not fine with Turd World 19th Century Cheap Labor.

Big difference between a carpet factory in Australia run by machinists and 100 whipped orphans from Pakistan weaving on the floor.

Glock-n-Load says

That heritage American stock weren’t interested in 2 parent incomes with large families. And aren’t the type to want to live under the heel of government in order to get freebies.

The writer above is implying that the American economy changed fundamentally by 1970 to the point where native born Americans rebelled against the oligarchs by having less children. But I’ll allow gnl to elaborate on this implication.

Spell it out for me.

What? It’s your idea. I don’t speak for you. It’s your idea!

I already said what I noticed, birth control pills, abortion and a general view of children as a burden rather than a blessing. Now everyone wants to complain about excessive immigration, but there are over 60 million dead/murdered babies, let alone those that were never born due to birth control which allowed promiscuity without consequences. All the while births declined and immigration increased to make up for it. If those babies grew up there would be less/little room for immigrants. If those babies grew up, they would be working and contributing to culture and economy. Instead those jobs were filled by “new Americans”.

If you want to claim a conspiracy to reduce birth rates that’s your right to elaborate on.

That might not be negative migration.
It's also accountable by a high birth rate and low, but still positive migration.
I'm pretty sure the US has never had negative migration.

258d13dd says

'm pretty sure the US has never had negative migration.

It did in 2025. -- GO TRUMP ! ! !

When AI and robots very soon eliminate more jobs, we should be happy with negative migration.

PeopleUnited says

The real tragedy is that Americans didn’t value having children.

American women, specially the liberal ones, have been brainwashed into not valuing children...it didn't happen organically, it was engineered.

gabbar says

PeopleUnited says

The real tragedy is that Americans didn’t value having children.

American women, specially the liberal ones, have been brainwashed into not valuing children...it didn't happen organically, it was engineered.

It's a similar trend with the minority/immigrant women that I've seen too but for a different reason.

Their earlier years were in non-western countries so the average woman of that generation are not liberals, in fact many are traditionalists and were not influenced nor care much about the feminist dogma western women of that generation are exposed to all their lives.

But understandably, they want their kids including female kids, to have the "things" they did not have or more of whatever they have. But deep down, often not admitted, they are trying to achieve these things through their children. This is the primary reason for them.

And why not, opportunities are endless in the west compared to where they came from so they push hard for them starting with expensive preschools, kumon tutorings, music lessons, sports, scouts, other trendy extracurricular lessons of all kinds throughout childhood, then colleges and the beginning of adulthood and careers when more of the same is pursued. SUCCESS !

By this point, they are in their early to mid 30s, may or may not have become childless liberal feminists but for many, that constant strive for material wealth and status is permamently instilled as the primary means of success.

It probably did not help that the "engineered"
thing(s) affected their strives along the way.