El Hotel Vouchering Program (programa de vouchers para hoteles) ha proporcionado estancias de 28 días en hoteles a 7.875 familias migrantes con niños desde julio de 2023, según la alcaldía. El programa finalizará este mes, mientras la ciudad reduce refugios por la reducción del número de inmigrantes.

Este artículo se publicó originalmente en inglés el 28 de febrero. Traducido por Daniel Parra. Read the English version here.

Después de dos años, la ciudad pone fin a un programa que proporciona estancias breves en habitaciones de hotel a inmigrantes y solicitantes de asilo que necesitan refugio, la última medida de la alcaldía para reducir refugios.

El Hotel Vouchering Program (programa de vouchers para hoteles)  ha proporcionado estancias de 28 días en hoteles a familias inmigrantes con niños desde que se puso en marcha en julio de 2023, como City Limits informó por primera vez. En ese momento, el número de inmigrantes que llegaban al sistema de albergues para personas sin hogar estaba aumentando, y los vouchers se utilizaban para alojarlos si no había otras opciones disponibles, según dijeron anteriormente las autoridades. Después de 28 días, las familias podían buscar otra ubicación.

Su finalización, prevista para finales de marzo, se produce mientras la ciudad reduce otras partes de su respuesta a los migrantes. El alcalde Eric Adams anunció el 24 de febrero que el Hotel Roosevelt de Manhattan, que ha servido como centro de acogida y recursos para inmigrantes y solicitantes de asilo desde mayo de 2023, cerrará en junio.

En los últimos meses, la administración también ha cerrado docenas de albergues para inmigrantes en toda la ciudad, incluidas grandes carpas en Floyd Bennett Field y Randall’s Island y otro megaalbergue en Hall Street, Brooklyn. Las autoridades esperan cerrar un total de 53 refugios de aquí a junio.

La alcaldía dijo que una vez que se cierre el Centro de llegada en el Hotel Roosevelt, las funciones de admisión y los servicios de apoyo se integrarán en otras áreas del sistema, y a las familias que soliciten alojamiento se les seguirá ofreciendo una plaza.

Tanto el alcalde como los defensores afirmaron que la población que utiliza el programa de vouchers, y el censo general de inmigrantes en albergues, ha disminuido en los últimos meses, con aproximadamente 350 nuevas llegadas a la semana, frente a un máximo anterior de 4.000. A finales de enero había algo más de 46.000 inmigrantes en el sistema de albergues, según los datos de City Limits.

Según Kathryn Kliff, deLegal Aid Society, que ha estado recibiendo informes sobre el programa, al 15 de diciembre había 274 hogares en el programa de vouchers para hotel, y 230 hogares al 19 de enero. Al 24 de febrero, la cifra se redujo a 165 hogares, formados por unas 496 personas, según un portavoz de la alcaldía.

El programa, en el que la ciudad reserva bloques de habitaciones de hotel, ha sido utilizado por un total de 7.875 familias en los dos últimos años, según la alcaldía. Recientemente, por ejemplo, las familias con niños que vivían en el refugio Floyd Bennett Tent Shelter de East Brooklyn recibieron vales de hotel para 28 días tras el cierre de ese centro en enero.

El Departamento de Vivienda, Preservación y Desarrollo (HPD por sus siglas en inglés) supervisa el programa, que se utilizó como último recurso cuando la ciudad no tenía otras opciones de alojamiento. La Hotel Association of New York City (Asociación de Hoteles) —que en los últimos años ha recibido un importante volumen de contratos en materia de refugios para la ciudad— ejecutó el contrato de $76.6 millones de dólares, que se prorrogó una vez por un año más, hasta julio de 2025, según el alcaldía.

El programa se creó antes de que los inmigrantes adultos y las familias con niños que reingresaban en los albergues de la ciudad empezaran a recibir plazos de acogida de 30 y 60 días. A diferencia de otros albergues de la ciudad, estos hoteles a menudo carecían de servicios y opciones de comida sustanciales, dijeron los defensores.

“Nuestra experiencia es que a menudo es difícil llegar a esos clientes”, afirma Kliff. “Pero los clientes con los que hemos hablado [de ello], el gran problema siempre ha sido la falta de alimentos y servicios”.

Cuando City Limits informó por primera vez sobre el programa, las familias contaban que recibían toda la comida en una pequeña caja que contenía zumos, un par de botellas de agua, pequeñas cajas de leche, gelatinas, compotas y paquetes de Cheez-Its.

“El mayor problema que hemos tenido es la falta de servicios, y especialmente las ‘comidas’ que proporcionan. Es como una caja de bocadillos y se supone que debe durarle a la gente”, añadió Kliff.

Entre mayo y diciembre del año pasado, las familias acogidas al programa de vales recibieron tarjetas de débito de prepago en sustitución de las cajas de alimentos no perecederos, lo que les permitía comprar alimentos directamente. El programa piloto se convirtió en blanco de las críticas de los conservadores, y en noviembre el alcalde anunció su final.

Los defensores de las personas sin hogras dicen que su preocupación ahora, cuando la ciudad acelera el cierre de albergues, es mantener suficientes camas para satisfacer las necesidades. “Nuestra principal preocupación, como siempre, es que la ciudad conserve suficiente capacidad de alojamiento para garantizar que no se niegue una plaza a nadie que no tenga un lugar donde dormir por la noche”, afirma Dave Giffen, director ejecutivo de Coalition for the Homeless, en un correo electrónico. 

“Lo último que alguien en esta ciudad quiere ver es más gente relegadaa a dormir en nuestras calles. La alcaldía sigue asegurándonos que tiene camas suficientes, incluso en medio de todos los cierres, pero estamos vigilando la situación muy de cerca”, añadió.

Para ponerse en contacto con el reportero de esta noticia, escriba a Daniel@citylimits.org. Para ponerse en contacto con la editora, escriba a Jeanmarie@citylimits.org.

The post Alcaldía pondrá fin a las estancias de 28 días en hoteles para familias inmigrantes con niños appeared first on City Limits.

By DAMIAN J. TROISE, Associated Press Business Writer

NEW YORK (AP) — Stocks tumbled in morning trading on Wall Street Tuesday as a trade war between the U.S. and its key trading partners escalated, wiping out all the gains for the S&P 500 since Election Day.

The tariffs between the U.S., China, Canada, and Mexico has helped to extend a recent slump for U.S. stocks that was prompted by signs of weakness in the economy.

The S&P 500 fell 1.4%, weighed down by nearly every sector except real estate and utilities, which are typically considered relatively safer investments.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average shed 580 points, or 1.3%, as of 10:04 a.m. Eastern time. The Nasdaq composite fell 1.4%.

Markets in Europe fell sharply while stocks in Asia saw more modest declines.

The drops follow a steep sell-off Monday. Altogether, the decline has wiped out all of the markets’ gains since President Donald Trump’s election in November. Worries about tariffs raising consumer prices and reigniting inflation have been weighing on both the economy and Wall Street.

Imports from Canada and Mexico are now to be taxed at 25%, with Canadian energy products subject to 10% import duties. The 10% tariff that Trump placed on Chinese imports in February was doubled to 20%.

Retaliations were swift.

China responded to new U.S. tariffs by announcing it will impose additional tariffs of up to 15% on imports of key U.S. farm products, including chicken, pork, soy and beef, and expanded controls on doing business with key U.S. companies. Canada plans on slapping tariffs on more than $100 billion of American goods over the course of 21 days. Mexico also plans tariffs on goods imported from the U.S.

The tariffs are prompting warnings from retailers, including Target and Best Buy, as they report their latest financial results. Target slumped 4.9% despite beating Wall Street’s earnings forecasts. there will be “meaningful pressure” on its profits to start the year because of tariffs and other costs.

Best Buy plunged 13.9% after giving investors a weaker-than-expected earnings forecast and warning about tariff impacts.

By PAUL WISEMAN, Associated Press Economics Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — Tariffs are in the news at the moment. Here’s what they are and what you need to know about them:

Tariffs are a tax on imports

Tariffs are typically charged as a percentage of the price a buyer pays a foreign seller. In the United States, tariffs are collected by Customs and Border Protection agents at 328 ports of entry across the country.

U.S. tariff rates vary: They are generally 2.5% on passenger cars, for instance, and 6% on golf shoes. Tariffs can be lower for countries with which the United States has trade agreements. Before the U.S. began imposing 25% tariffs on good from Canada and Mexico as of Tuesday, most goods moved between the United States and those countries tariff-free because of President Donald Trump’s U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.

FILE – Trucks line up to enter a Port of Oakland shipping terminal on Nov. 10, 2021, in Oakland, Calif. (AP Photo/Noah Berger, File)

Mainstream economists are generally skeptical about tariffs, considering them an inefficient way for governments to raise revenue.

There’s much misinformation about who actually pays tariffs

Trump is a proponent of tariffs, insisting that they are paid for by foreign countries. In fact, it is importers — American companies — that pay tariffs, and the money goes to the U.S. Treasury. Those companies typically pass their higher costs on to their customers in the form of higher prices. That’s why economists say consumers usually end up footing the bill for tariffs.

Still, tariffs can hurt foreign countries by making their products pricier and harder to sell abroad. Foreign companies might have to cut prices — and sacrifice profits — to offset the tariffs and try to maintain their market share in the United States. Yang Zhou, an economist at Shanghai’s Fudan University, concluded in a study that Trump’s tariffs on Chinese goods inflicted more than three times as much damage to the Chinese economy as they did to the U.S. economy.

What has Trump said about tariffs?

Trump has said tariffs will create more factory jobs, shrink the federal deficit, lower food prices and allow the government to subsidize childcare.

“Tariffs are the greatest thing ever invented,’’ Trump said at a rally in Flint, Michigan, during his presidential campaign.

During his first term, Trump imposed tariffs with a flourish — targeting imported solar panels, steel, aluminum and pretty much everything from China.

“Tariff Man,” he called himself.

Trump is moving ahead with higher tariffs in his second term.

The United States in recent years has gradually retreated from its post-World War II role of promoting global free trade and lower tariffs. That’s generally a response to the loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs, widely attributed to unfettered tree trade and and China’s ascent as a manufacturing power.

Tariffs are intended mainly to protect domestic industries

By raising the price of imports, tariffs can protect home-grown manufacturers. They may also serve to punish foreign countries for unfair trade practices such as subsidizing their exporters or dumping products at unfairly low prices.

Before the federal income tax was established in 1913, tariffs were a major revenue source for the government. From 1790 to 1860, tariffs accounted for 90% of federal revenue, according to Douglas Irwin, a Dartmouth College economist who has studied the history of trade policy.

Tariffs fell out of favor as global trade grew after World War II. The government needed vastly bigger revenue streams to finance its operations.

In the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, the government collected around $80 billion in tariffs and fees, a trifle next to the $2.5 trillion that comes from individual income taxes and the $1.7 trillion from Social Security and Medicare taxes.

Still, Trump favors a budget policy that resembles what was in place in the 19th century.

Tariffs can also be used to pressure other countries on issues that may or may not be related to trade. In 2019, for example, Trump used the threat of tariffs as leverage to persuade Mexico to crack down on waves of Central American migrants crossing Mexican territory on their way to the United States.

Trump even sees tariffs as a way to prevent wars.

“I can do it with a phone call,’’ he said at an August rally in North Carolina.

If another country tries to start a war, he said he’d issue a threat:

“We’re going to charge you 100% tariffs. And all of a sudden, the president or prime minister or dictator or whoever the hell is running the country says to me, ‘Sir, we won’t go to war.’ ”

Economists generally consider tariffs self-defeating

Tariffs raise costs for companies and consumers that rely on imports. They’re also likely to provoke retaliation.

This combination of file photos shows, from left, U.S. President Donald Trump in Palm Beach, Fla., Feb. 7, 2025, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in Kyiv, Ukraine, June 10, 2023, China’s President Xi Jinping in Brasilia, Brazil, Nov. 20, 2024, and Mexico’s President in Mexico City, June 27, 2024. Claudia Sheinbaum (AP Photo)

The European Union, for example, punched back against Trump’s tariffs on steel and aluminum by taxing U.S. products, from bourbon to Harley-Davidson motorcycles. Likewise, China has responded to Trump’s trade war by slapping tariffs on American goods, including soybeans and pork in a calculated drive to hurt his supporters in farm country.

A study by economists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Zurich, Harvard and the World Bank concluded that Trump’s tariffs failed to restore jobs to the American heartland. The tariffs “neither raised nor lowered U.S. employment’’ where they were supposed to protect jobs, the study found.

Despite Trump’s 2018 taxes on imported steel, for example, the number of jobs at U.S. steel plants barely budged: They remained right around 140,000. By comparison, Walmart alone employs 1.6 million people in the United States.

Worse, the retaliatory taxes imposed by China and other nations on U.S. goods had “negative employment impacts,’’ especially for farmers, the study found. These retaliatory tariffs were only partly offset by billions in government aid that Trump doled out to farmers. The Trump tariffs also damaged companies that relied on targeted imports.

If Trump’s trade war fizzled as policy, though, it succeeded as politics. The study found that support for Trump and Republican congressional candidates rose in areas most exposed to the import tariffs — the industrial Midwest and manufacturing-heavy Southern states like North Carolina and Tennessee.