Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Would you like to see Immigration levels return to the 1924-1965 normal level?
Actually... I would love to see the world's population levels fall back to the 1924-1965 levels!!!
Most of today's problems would be solved if the global human population levels could be greatly shrunk. All countries should be encouraging their citizens to take birth control and to limit the size of their families.
I'm in the NO camp. Current levels are fine and could even take an increase. The distribution should change, though. Diversity visa should go away, numerical limits per country for skilled immigrants should go away. There should be programs for non-degree professions that are valuable and are in demand. The share of employment-based immigration should be greater than the family route, and the family route should probably be limited to immediate members.
The legacy Americans I work with are--on balance--lazier and dumber than the 1st-gen immigrants I work with, so I'm in favor of MORE skilled (and/or wealthy) immigrants. If you get a STEM degree and a job offer, automatic LPR status.
I see--what I can only assume are--immigrants slaving away in the fields all day around here too. While it makes me a bad person, I'm in favor of more temporary non-immigrant visas for farm labor to keep food prices low while keeping the lion's share of the social burden of supporting their families on their remittances and the local government wherever they are from.
DV lottery can go away. It is not a viable way for a skillful immigrant to come here, anyway. It's literally just a lottery.
Quota-based extended family immigration is also no bueno. There are massive backlogs for most countries for sibling/parent immigration, so it's not really a viable way to immigrate, family-based immigration should just be cut down to immediate dependents and spouses only. That won't change the number of immigrants much, but it will simplify the system and stop wasting a bunch of USCIS time intaking applications that won't be processed for a decade or more.
Those looking for the "right" number for immigration levels won't find it. Even the skill-based formula is unworkable. It's impossible to say how many of any skill set the country needs. As soon as you say we don't have enough lab technicians, somebody says if the pay was enough you'd have more of them. Remember that the country reached its pinnacle of technology during the Apollo project when there was virtually no immigration. Where did the whizbangs come from?
The right number of educated and/or wealthy is "more."
The right number of destitute and/or lazy is "less."
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyRider
Those looking for the "right" number for immigration levels won't find it. Even the skill-based formula is unworkable. It's impossible to say how many of any skill set the country needs. As soon as you say we don't have enough lab technicians, somebody says if the pay was enough you'd have more of them. Remember that the country reached its pinnacle of technology during the Apollo project when there was virtually no immigration. Where did the whizbangs come from?
Ha! As if!
The reason we made it to the moon is that we dedicated about 30% of federal government spending to getting there! Now NASA's funding levels are back to 0.5% of the federal budget.
Judging by my colleagues, if we restrict immigration, we'll need to triple how much we pay for advancements in science and tech. Or just let other countries surpass us, which is the more likely outcome.
Its not just a numbers issue. We are no longer a frontier country that needs people to settle west and work building the rail road or mining etc. We are a mature knowledge based monopsony with over 350 million people all trying to cut each others throats for a hand ful of jobs. Real estate costs are out of hand and any real access to resources is restricted by the govt or the elite who have accumulated said assets since the first 13 colonies were formed and held it in a small number of families.
We don't need more people unless they are basically albert enstine level, so maybe a couple hundred people a year? The under employment rate in the USA is staggering and the unemployment levels are not great.
You bring in immigrants when you cant fill jobs with locals, not when you want back door slavery.
The right number of educated and/or wealthy is "more."
The right number of destitute and/or lazy is "less."
Ha! As if!
The reason we made it to the moon is that we dedicated about 30% of federal government spending to getting there! Now NASA's funding levels are back to 0.5% of the federal budget.
Judging by my colleagues, if we restrict immigration, we'll need to triple how much we pay for advancements in science and tech. Or just let other countries surpass us, which is the more likely outcome.
So what do we do with all these engineers and doctors when companies/govt/etc want to conduct mass lay offs every year to enrich share holders/tax payers (ie filthy rich tax payers)?
There has to be a way to make scientific advancement free, like some kind of a sweat shop for engineers and scientists. Because that's not how you create a brain drain lol. Scientific advancement is EXPENSIVE, if we can no longer afford it then we will get surpassed. The only reason the USA gets away with flooding people in and low balling pay is because literally every other nation on the planet has fallen down on the job (other than maybe Switzerland or Germany which good luck emigrating there).
Those looking for the "right" number for immigration levels won't find it. Even the skill-based formula is unworkable. It's impossible to say how many of any skill set the country needs. As soon as you say we don't have enough lab technicians, somebody says if the pay was enough you'd have more of them. Remember that the country reached its pinnacle of technology during the Apollo project when there was virtually no immigration. Where did the whizbangs come from?
That's what all this boils down to, the rich don't want to pay more, they want as close to slave labor as possible.
Must be a reason the OP chose those years. Simple yes or no answer!
Bob is an elite and he sees that the American people are fed up with the elites strategy's of deflating wages. They like to blow smoke like the skills gap and all kinds of other nonsense. This is ALL about driving wages down.
Way back in the pioneer days (which 1924 was the tail end of) was a different situation. He knows that which is why this whole post is intellectually dishonest.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
