At the beginning of Sefer Shemot, attention is drawn to the tenses of the verbs used for describing the Jews’ relocation to Egypt:

Shemot 1:1

Now these are the names of the sons of Yisrael, “HaBa’im” (lit. who are coming—present tense) into Egypt with Yaakov; every man “Ba’u” (came—past tense) with his household.

Just a few verses later, we learn that Yosef’s entire generation had by then passed away. In order to calculate how many years the Jews had been in Egypt to this point, we note the following:

a)      When Yaakov first came to Egypt, he was 130—

Beraishit 47:9 “And Yaakov said unto Pharaoh: ‘The days of the years of my sojournings are a hundred and thirty years…”

b)      Yosef at this point is 37—

1.       He was 30 when he was appointed to be second-in-command to Pharoah—

Beraishit 41:46 “And Yosef was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh king of Egypt.–And Yosef went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went throughout all the land of Egypt.”

2.       7 years elapsed until Yaakov and the rest of the family relocated to Egypt—

Ibid. 45:6 “For these two years hath the famine been in the land; and there are yet five years, in which there shall be neither plowing nor harvest.”

c)       Yaakov dies at the age of 147—

Ibid. 28 “And Yaakov lived in the land of Egypt seventeen years; so the days of Yaakov, the years of his life, were a hundred forty and seven years.”

d)      Therefore, when Yaakov dies, Yosef is 54.

e)      Yosef, one of Yaakov’s youngest sons, dies at the age of 110, 46 years later—

Ibid. 50:22 “And Yosef dwelt in Egypt, he, and his father’s house; and Yosef lived a hundred and ten years.

f)       The new Pharoah begins his fulminations against the Jews only after the entire founding generation was no longer alive—

Shemot 1:6 “And Yosef died, and all his brethren, and all that generation.” (In light of “Identifying the True Redeemer” there was at least a single exception!)

g)      Assuming as many commentators do on Shemot 1:6, that as a result of Yosef’s heavy burdens of responsibility, he died before his siblings—Rabbeinu Bachaye, quoting Midrash Tidsheh, lists the ages of each of Yaakov’s sons: Reuven 125; Shimon 120; Levi 137; Yehuda 119; Dan 125; Naftali 133; Gad 125; Asher 123; Yissachar 122; Zevulum 114; Binyamin 109—a number of years elapsed between the death of Yosef and the passing of the last of his brothers.

h)      Therefore, the Jews lived in Egypt as a people: 17 years (the remainder of Yaakov’s life) + 56 years (Yosef’s life beyond that of his father) + ~10 years (until the last of the siblings die) = ~83 years.

So if after the Jews had been in Egypt for so many years, why isn’t the only verb used “Ba’u” (the past tense)? What might the present tense “HaBa’im” connote?

One Midrashic source suggests that just as Yaakov’s death triggered in Yosef’s brothers fears that had previously lain dormant (see “Revisting the Regrettable Past—To What End?” https://yaakovbieler.wordpress.com/2015/12/23/revisiting-the-regrettable-past-to-what-end/ ) their official treatment by the Egyptian government also changed to the point where their past residence in Egypt was rendered for all intents and purposes null and void:

Midrash Sechel Tov

If it had only written “Ba’u” (that came), it implies that they had already come. Therefore it is also written “HaBa’im” (that are coming), implying that they were just coming now, to teach that even though more than 70 years had passed between the time they came to Egypt and Yosef’s death, Pharoah had not collected from them taxes, and they were not considered a burden on Egypt (despite the fact that Yosef, on Pharoah’s orders, was treating them very well.) As soon as Yosef died, the Jews were viewed by Egypt as a burden, and it was as if they had first come to Egypt on that day.

One of the commentators, rather than explaining the tenses of the verbs from the perspective of the Egyptians, connects them from the perspective of the attitude of the Jews themselves:

Panim Yafot s.v. VeEileh Shemot Benai Yisrael VeChulai

There is reason to explain that although the Jews had already all come to Egypt to purchase food from Yosef, with the intent to return (to Canaan), why should their “coming” today be any different—even now their intention was to return, as it is written (Beraishit 47:4) “We have come to sojourn in Egypt,” and the Rabbis interpret (Yalkut Shimoni, Parashat BeShalach #243): They did not come to settle, but rather to sojourn because of the famine.” But once they uprooted their homes from the land of Yisrael, bringing their wives (and children), even though their intent was eventually to return, it was as if their intent was not to return. And from here is a support to the comment of RaDVaZ that is quoted by later decisors on Shulchan Aruch, Orech Chayim #496, Magen Avraham #7, to the effect that one who uproots his place of residence from the land of Yisrael together with his wife, it is as if he has no intention to return. For this reason the text states, “every man came with his household”—as is written in Yoma 2a: “His household”—this is his wife.

Panim Yafot’s comment parallels what we have called Yaakov’s chagrin as a result of the Jews in Egypt “taking hold” of the land that they had been given, rather than viewing themselves as merely temporary residents (see “Who is Holding Onto Whom?”)

But it seems to me that the perspective appearing in the commentary in the Stone Edition of the ArtScroll Chumash (ed. R. Nosson Scherman, R. Meir Zlotowitz, Mesorah Publications, New York, 1994), projecting how the “Egyptian in the street” felt about the Jews, can be well-understood in light of the events of the day:

…As long as he (Yosef) was alive, the Egyptians treated his brethren with great respect, but once he was gone, their attitude changed, and it was as if the nation was now coming to Egypt. (p. 292)

The commentary in the ArtScroll Chumash continues this approach in its comment on v. 9, quoting the Rav:

Shemot 1:9 “And he said unto his people: “Behold, the people of the children of Israel are too many and too mighty for us” (the implication being that they are not part of us.)

In this verse, R. Yosef Dov Soloveitchik finds one of the bases of historic anti-Semitism. He (Pharaoh) thought of the Egyptians as his people, but spoke of the Jews as outsiders, even though they had lived in Egypt for well over 100 years, and Yosef had enriched the country beyond belief. The Midrash comments on v. 1 that the Egyptians looked upon the Jews as people who were coming, no matter how long they were in Egypt, they were still newcomers. (p 293)

Finally, another commentary posits that the Egyptian attitude towards the Jewish minority made the enslavement of this people so much easier to put into effect:

Hadar Zekeinim s.v. HaBa’im Mitzrayma

Behold, they had already come! “HaBa’im” implies that they came at this point. But rather they viewed them as if they had come now in order to enslave them.

Even in countries that are made up primarily of immigrants, like the United States and modern-day Israel, let alone nations that have long traditions associated with their majority native populations, there have been tensions between “newly arrived” immigrants and the residents whose families have lived in these locations for a longer period of time. On the one hand, certainly in this age of multi-culturalism, minority populations strenuously attempt to maintain their ethnic and cultural identities in their new homes. But such tenacity is viewed by the natives with suspicion and fear. Will the minority be satisfied to live in its own enclave—but this may contribute to the added problems of unemployment and dissatisfaction. On the other hand, there are fears that the minority will assimilate too well and perhaps remake the society in their own image, thereby obliterating past traditions and ways of life. Because wars and seeking better economic conditions have informed human history for time immemorial, such tensions will probably never be resolved, and continue to significantly inform the evolution of civilizations. By virtue of Jews having to seek new homes so many times in their history, they have become particularly experienced in these wanderings and relocations, as well as the baggage that often accompanies them.