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.
The immigration laws we have are not unlike tax laws. They are old, layered and convoluted. If we could start from scratch, what would immigration look like?
No immigration
Allow immigration based on the needs of the US
Allow immigratoin based on family ties
Allow immigration based on lottery
Allow immigration by country quota
Allow immigration by ethnicity
Allow some refugees
Keep in mind that almost all of the above have been tried at some point or another. Our current system actually does it all, except for the first one.
The immigration laws we have are not unlike tax laws. They are old, layered and convoluted. If we could start from scratch, what would immigration look like?
No immigration
Allow immigration based on the needs of the US
Allow immigratoin based on family ties
Allow immigration based on lottery
Allow immigration by country quota
Allow immigration by ethnicity
Allow some refugees
Keep in mind that almost all of the above have been tried at some point or another. Our current system actually does it all, except for the first one.
Allow immigration based on the needs of the US
Allow immigration by country quota
Allow some refugees
I'd def favor 1st world countries for legal aliens or at least those people who already speak English. I'm talking most of Europe, Botswana, Jamaica, Japan, Phillipines and so on.
I'd tie immigration to employment levels and wage levels. If employment is high and wages are rising, we let more in. And vice-versa. And we could do it based on occupation. In other words, if we have a shortage of engineers, we let more engineers in.
Immigration laws are just fine, enforcement is the problem. Plus, we have corporations (Disney, IBM, Apple) who are actively subverting the premise of the C-Visa system.
Immigration laws are just fine, enforcement is the problem. Plus, we have corporations (Disney, IBM, Apple) who are actively subverting the premise of the C-Visa system.
It's funny how large corporations that write the laws find a way around them, ain't it?
Almost like they knew beforehand what they were going to do.
These:
Allow immigration based on the needs of the US
Allow immigration based on family ties
Allow immigration by country quota
Allow some refugees
You need to allow refugees because that's the humanitarian thing to do.
By country quota is more fair than making people gamble by entering a lottery. But how are you going to make that fair either?
Also country quotas would spread out the variety of cultures who enter the US. We shouldn't overwhelm the country with a majority of new people coming from one country or sharing a similar culture or language.
Family ties. Because, in a case like my own, if my British husband's son died, my husband should be able to get his grandson over here to live with us. Also, legal immigrants should be able to bring their aging parents here so they can care for them. Other reasons too, but this is common sense.
The needs of the US. This should be part of the formula but not all or most of it as it is now. For instance, if a legal immigrant has started a successful restaurant, I think they should be able to bring some of their grown friends or relatives who could cook in that cuisine--even if there are people here who could do the job.
These:
Allow immigration based on the needs of the US
Allow immigration based on family ties
Allow immigration by country quota
Allow some refugees
You need to allow refugees because that's the humanitarian thing to do.
By country quota is more fair than making people gamble by entering a lottery. But how are you going to make that fair either?
Also country quotas would spread out the variety of cultures who enter the US. We shouldn't overwhelm the country with a majority of new people coming from one country or sharing a similar culture or language.
Family ties. Because, in a case like my own, if my British husband's son died, my husband should be able to get his grandson over here to live with us. Also, legal immigrants should be able to bring their aging parents here so they can care for them. Other reasons too, but this is common sense.
The needs of the US. This should be part of the formula but not all or most of it as it is now. For instance, if a legal immigrant has started a successful restaurant, I think they should be able to bring some of their grown friends or relatives who could cook in that cuisine--even if there are people here who could do the job.
I agree with most of what you said but disagree on some other points. I am opposed to allowing immigrants to come here simply because they have family ties here. Our migration policies should be based on our needs as a nation and unless that family member has something particularly useful to bring to the table it's a no for me. Not only that but aging immigrants tend to be a burden to our society medically.
Your last sentence seems a bit strange to me. Friends is over the top to me. Allowing immigrants in simply for their cooking skills is over the top to me also especially since you admitted that there are already people here who can cook the same cuisine. Well, that's my two cents worth but as I said I do especially agree with your third paragraph regarding diversity.
The immigration laws we have are not unlike tax laws. They are old, layeredand convoluted. If we could start from scratch, what would immigration look like?.......
Well, that's properly written administrative code where one writes it so there are no loose ends, all conditions are considered, and each and every condition has a resolution to it......and each and every resolution has all questions answered.
Further, the thing about immigration is that it changes over time. Say another Philippines occurs where the US ends up with a massive colony that is US territory and therefore, the population are US people, but for some reason, it is undesirable to say they are US citizens and to grant them travel as that other citizens might enjoy. The immigration laws would have to change again.
Or say that above situation occurred and then a few years down the road, something happens to make those people very attractive indeed. The immigration laws would have to be changed....for the country's benefit.
Or it might just be a situation like in ancient Rome where Claudius (think it was him but it may have been one after him) suddenly declared everyone in the empire a citizen. Such was probably a great honor back then..........and it also increased his tax base.
Immigration is one of those things that one ought to realize needs to be flexible. One can't right the laws and then say, "Well, that's done!".
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.
