Amnesty bill to spike rents, housing costs

[Counselor706]

The Democrats’ amnesty bill quietly invites three million chain-migration arrivals into the U.S. workforce, likely forcing Americans to pay higher rents.

“It’s a huge deal,” said Jessica Vaughan, the director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies.

The chain-migration arrivals “will go to where [their migrant relatives] are concentrated, and many are already living in a high-cost-of-living area — Prince William County, and Prince George’s County in Maryland, for example,” she said.

"There clearly will be a very large demand for housing, and particularly for low-income housing which we already have a massive shortage of,” said Rosemary Jenks, the director of government relations at NumbersUSA. “So yeah, this is going to exacerbate every social problem that we have.”

Source

 

[ll74]

What a mess of an article. You have to dig through two sublinks to even get to the meat and bones of this.

Here's a much more straight forwarded discussion on the topic, without all the "but the Dems want to give away the world for free" bullshit on top:

https://www.fwd.us/news/green-card-recapture/

In reality - the legislation is meant to fix a badly broken system that restricts green cards based on stupid math. By correcting the problem, it frees up already allocated green cards for a large number of people in the backlog.

In 1990, Congress established a numerical limit on the number of green cards1 that can be issued in the family- and employment-based immigration categories each year.2 In some years, for various reasons, the full number of available green cards in a certain category are not issued, even though people are waiting to receive them.3 Congress intended for all allotted green cards to eventually be issued, and established a process for any unused green cards to “roll over” from one category to another the following year.

 

[pecksniff]

Haven't you learned by now never to cite to Breitbart?

 

[Rightguide]

Haven't you learned by now never to cite to Breitbart?

Nothing wrong with Breitbart, other than your boundless prejudice. There is a link to a WSJ article in the story, dummy.

 

[pecksniff]

Nothing wrong with Breitbart, other than your boundless prejudice. There is a link to a WSJ article in the story, dummy.

Like WSJ is any better?

 

[ll74]

Nothing wrong with Breitbart, other than your boundless prejudice. There is a link to a WSJ article in the story, dummy.

Breitbart consistently presents opinion pieces without providing the reader.with the source data. They don't want their readers to see what they are giving analysis on. Most bullshit rw.news.orgs do this on purpose. If you can see what they are analyzing, you might have a differing opinion

 

[CornusKousa]

Oh look, peck and Comrade74 got nothing but ad hom.

Let me muster my best totally NOT shocked look