Iāve made this observation numerous times that asylum is an inherently subjective process as is based upon someoneās claims none of which can be empirically verified. Regarding US citizens seeking asylum elsewhere the fact is everyone of them could be rejected outright. Hereās why:
The grounds upon which a person can claim asylum are narrow. Criteria for who may claim asylum vary by country, but generally the United States is not considered dangerous enough to warrant asylum.
The United States makes for an interesting case because persecution does not exist equally across the country. Someone can move between states and find different levels of legal and social acceptance. Given the patchwork, most American asylum claims fail.
You did not answer the questionā¦I will make it more clear
What countries do they pass, that will give them a fighting chance to live a better life than where they left??
That is a good pointā¦but it is fairly obvious why they choose the USA. There are more opportunities here then other countries. This is something that we used to be proud of.
We need the influx of people coming hereā¦we just need to streamline the process along with making sure those with sketchy backgrounds (Felony level) are not allowed to get in.
Why have we not done that? Why do we not prosecute those employers that hire the ones that are not vetted?
It is estimated about $25 billion comes into SS coffers from undocumented workers.
Then there is the billions of dollars those same workers pay in state and local taxes.
Here is an ideaā¦insist pubs and dems craft an immigration law that actually works?
If theyāre working, they give made up SSNs (because they donāt have real ones), and their employers withhold FICA taxes (because thatās the law). Because they donāt have real SSNs, thereās no way for them to collect. Itās free money for Uncle Sam.