With Joe Biden’s border surge on, only the “experts” were surprised to learn that remittances increased to the countries that supply the illegal aliens to the U.S.

According to yesterday’s Mexico Daily Post: “Remittances to Mexico from abroad jumped 11.2% year on year in February while dropping from the prior month, according to data published by the country’s central bank on Monday, April 3rd. Remittances hit $4.3 billion in February, down from the $4.4 billion sent in January. The number of transactions, made mainly from the United States, increased in February by 10.9% year on year, while the average amount per transfer grew 0.3% to $375. In the first two months of 2023, remittances reached $8.9 billion, up 11.8% from the $7.8 billion posted in the year-earlier period. Remittances to Mexico from abroad hit a record high of $58.5 billion in 2022.”

This, to be honest, was kind of surprising, even to me, given that Mexico was not seen as a country that was supplying much of the ongoing border surge’s illegal alien count.

The Mexican government was enabling it, of course but the nationals involved tended to come from Central and South America, rather than Mexico itself. The country had been badly hit by COVID, meaning many people were thrown out of work there and needed to rely on relatives abroad to send a lifeline, which may explain some of it. It’s also true that not everyone who sends remittances to another country is an illegal alien — many legally present foreign nationals also send remittances to their families back home. But it’s also a fact that the more recently an immigrant has arrived here, the more likely he is to send remittances to relatives back home. Let’s just say that this new figure may raise questions about whether Mexico is being undercounted in Border Patrol data or signals that the migrant gains that were there, legal and illegal, had an outsized impact.

And if Mexico’s sendings of immigrants and illegal aliens had this impact, the bigger question is what the impact looks like for other countries, particularly those that dispatch the greatest numbers of illegal aliens to the U.S. border. Many don’t release proper data, but there are signs that the gains were gargantuan.

Just four months ago, Bloomberg News reported this: Remittances to Central America’s so-called ‘northern triangle’ (El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras) are on track to set a new record, breaking the one set in 2021. From January to September, remittances to the three countries totalled $25.49 billion, an increase of 16.5%, or $3.61 billion more than the figures between the same period of last year. The figures for the same period of 2021 were a 34.2% increase over the same period of 2020. Remittances this year are so far the second-largest in the past decade, and may surpass the total for 2021, based on data from central banks, and the executive secretariat of the Central American Monetary Council (SECMCA).

One can surmise that the gains in Colombia, Venezuela, and Ecuador are at least as high as Mexico’s. Remittances, according to the World Bank and other eggheads who study the matter, have their good and bad points.

For those who receive them, they are obvious lifelines. For those who don’t have money in their home countries and who would starve or grovel otherwise, getting a remittance is a blessing. If one of us had a relative in such conditions, sending the money would be the right thing to do. But there are some negatives, too. According to the IZA World of Labor think-tank, the illegal migration that brings the remittances can lead to labor shortages in the home country and bring in inflation and a consumption culture instead of an investment and savings culture brought on by work, as cash floods a country and there’s not enough local economy to support it. Ultimately, it can make a receiving country’s actual economy non-competitive in the global market, and we know there have been signs of that already in Central America.

Remittances also beef up the banking balance sheets of third-world countries, which reduces pressure on governments to improve their own home conditions by instituting policies that create jobs for locals. If the locals go to America for jobs, why would they need to balance their budgets or make life less hellish for local businesses so they can create jobs in the home country?

Remittances leave these governments with a lot of money to play around with and fewer potential protestors and dissidents to worry about. It’s no secret that badly run countries love remittances.

One potential source of the remittance cash, particularly as it applies to Mexico, though, can be seen in this report from The Economist, which stated that Mexico now receives more remittances than China: The surge owes much to stimulus in the United States, which put dollars back in pockets, as well as to the generosity of migrants, who have dug deep to help relatives in need. Yet bumper flows during the pandemic capped what had already been a decade of fast-rising remittance growth. Over ten years the sums sent home annually to countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have more than doubled, according to the World Bank. That is a swifter rate of increase than in any other region.

Stimulus cash? The shoveled-out cash here that “paid for” all the inflation we have now? The cash that had six ways to Sunday for fraud? Many states paid no attention to people’s legal status when they doled out all the stimulus checks, and others did, meaning legal immigrants got the checks for not working — and passed them on abroad. For America’s economy, which was supposed to benefit from this cash, well, it went to other countries instead.

What a sad coda to the wretched stimulus experience. Crummy third-world countries that can’t even create living conditions that their citizens want to live in got the benefit of the money. We got the inflation. Now we are getting more potential remitters with the border-surgers.

Something’s wrong with this picture, and from more than one viewpoint.

DISCLAIMER: The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by the various author’s articles on this Opinion piece or elsewhere online or in the newspaper where we have articles with the header “COLUMN/EDITORIAL & OPINION” do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints or official policies of the Publisher, Editor, Reporters or anybody else in the Staff of the Hemet and San Jacinto Chronicle Newspaper.

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Surprise, surprise: Migrant remittances to Mexico and Central America are soaring appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.

A 13-year-old Honduran girl who spent two months at the government’s largest emergency shelter for migrant children said she was put on suicide watch and was eating only popsicles and juice because the food smelled so foul. At another site, a 17-year-old Salvadoran girl said she had to wear the same clothes and underwear for two weeks and spent most days in bed.

At a third facility in Texas, a 16-year-old Honduran boy said he had not met with a case manager for more than three weeks to see whether he could go live with his sister in New Orleans.

“I am desperate. I wouldn’t mind being here for 20 or 30 days if I knew that I was going to be released soon. But because the process hasn’t started and because I had no idea what’s happening or when the process will start, that makes me feel very, very anxious. I don’t know when this will end,” he said.

More than a dozen immigrant children described similar conditions and desperation to get out of large-scale emergency care facilities set up by the Biden administration at places like convention centers and military bases to address a record rise in the number of children crossing the U.S.-Mexico border.

The children were interviewed by immigrant advocates from March to June, and their accounts were filed late Monday with a federal court in Los Angeles that oversees a longstanding settlement governing custody conditions for children who cross the border alone.

Advocates have said for weeks that President Joe Biden’s administration is taking too long to release children to relatives in the United States and that conditions at some of the unlicensed emergency facilities are inadequate and distressing. The Obama and Trump administrations also faced challenges addressing the care of unaccompanied migrant children.

The Biden administration said significant improvements have been made, including redoubling efforts to swiftly reunify kids with their families or move them to licensed long-term care facilities. That has resulted in a drop in the number of children in emergency shelters, from a high of about 14,500 in April to fewer than 8,000 children now, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the agency in charge of their care.

At the Fort Bliss Army Base in El Paso, Texas, the administration’s largest emergency shelter, the number of children has dropped from about 4,800 to 1,600. Activities like exercise classes and weekly meetings with case managers are now available, along with a library on site that children can visit anytime, the department said.

In their accounts, the children — who are not named in the court filings — describe waiting for weeks or more than a month in facilities with little to do, minimal education and no knowledge of when they will be allowed to leave.

At Fort Bliss, the Honduran girl on suicide watch said she could hardly sleep at night because the lights were always on and she found herself sleeping during the day. She said the food was horrible, including soggy salad and foul-smelling bread, so she resorted to eating only popsicles and juice.

She said that while on suicide watch, pens and pencils were taken from her and guards observed her every move — measures meant to protect her from harming herself.

She said she was told if she tried to escape, she would spend a longer time in detention. When she filed her account, she said she had been at the facility for nearly 60 days and didn’t know when she could go live in New Mexico with her uncle, who told her that he had completed the paperwork for her release.

“I have been here for a really long time. I really want to leave,” she said.

Record arrivals of unaccompanied migrant children have tested the Biden administration, which has picked up nearly 60,000 of them from February to May, many of them from Central America.

The government opened more than a dozen emergency intake sites this spring to respond quickly to overcrowding at Customs and Border Protection facilities, one of which was holding 4,000 people in a space intended for 250 and keeping many for weeks, far past a three-day limit.

At the emergency sites, children were expected to remain for a week or two until they could be reunited with relatives in the United States or sent to more stable locations, such as state-licensed long-term facilities or foster care.

More than 2,100 children were housed at emergency facilities for over 40 days and more than 2,600 for 21 to 40 days at the end of May, according to the government’s June report to the court. About a third of transitional foster care beds remained empty, as did nearly 600 beds at licensed shelters, the report said.

In their court filing this week, advocates who say children are languishing in the massive, tent-like structures questioned why the government is keeping so many in those unlicensed shelters rather than placing them in licensed facilities or with foster families.

After this many months, that “remains a complete mystery to us,” said Leecia Welch, senior director of legal advocacy and child welfare at the National Center for Youth Law and one of the lawyers for children in the federal case. “And it’s not for lack of asking the question. We’re simply not getting an answer.”

A hearing is scheduled for next week with the federal judge overseeing the case.

All emergency shelters are required to provide clean, comfortable sleeping spaces, toiletries, laundry and access to medical and mental health services, according to the Department of Health and Human Services. Kids also can confidentially submit feedback in comment boxes.

The government contends it shut down any sites that did not meet those standards and are closing more as the need decreases.

But advocates fear more children could end up at the unlicensed emergency sites because Texas Gov. Greg Abbott has ordered the closure of federally funded shelters that house migrant kids in that state. The Biden administration has threatened to take legal action if the Republican governor carries out the order. More than half of migrant children sheltered by the U.S. government in licensed facilities are in Texas.

At a facility in Houston that has since closed, the 17-year-old from El Salvador she couldn’t shower for eight days and was told to turn her underwear inside out because there was no laundry. She said children were limited on when they could use the bathroom and that she would cry at night.

“We spent most of the day in our beds at Houston because there was nothing else to do,” she said. “I felt very desperate.”

Find your latest news here at the Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle

The post Migrant youth describe desperation to leave large shelters appeared first on The Hemet & San Jacinto Chronicle.