4 ms·

(I have no horse in this race; living in Europe, the idea of a visa seems a bit anachronistic, really.) I can understand why visas might seem obsolete from a E

by tsally 17y ago

(I have no horse in this race; living in Europe, the idea of a visa seems a bit anachronistic, really.) I can understand why visas might seem obsolete from a European perspective, but from an American perspective regulation is a necessity. Per year we already accept the highest number of permanent residents in the world. In 2008 we naturalized a record number of people. And most importantly, per year we grant the highest number of people political asylum. These numbers, combined with the fact that unemployment in the US is the highest it's been since the early 1940s, makes accepting large number of immigrants impossible. I'm not defending this bill or the current system; I know there are areas that need improvement. But fundamentally the US needs some sort of visa system.

jseliger 17y ago
"And most importantly, per year we grant the highest number of people political asylum. These numbers, combined with the fact that unemployment in the US is the highest it's been since the early 1940s, makes accepting large number of immigrants impossible." This claim is specious: the high-end immigrants who are likely to start tech companies and earn PhDs are enormously employable and likely to employ others. If you want more employment, bring in people who are likely to make jobs; notice the high number of tech startups with founders who are immigrants or the children of immigrants. Still, I doubt that these visas are going to have any noticeable impact on unemployment because the rate at which they'll be granted isn't going to be high enough. As for immigration more generally, see James Fallows' comments here: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/201001/american-decline http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/201001/american-decline . Allowing immigration is one of the relatively few things that America does right.
Yrlec 17y ago
I still think you are able to accept more people into the country. In 2007 the Swedish city Södertälje (with about 80 000 cititzens) accepted more Iraqi refugees than the US & Canada combined: http://www.sweden.se/eng/Home/Work/Life-in-Sweden/A-multicultural-society/Reading/Sodertalje/ http://www.sweden.se/eng/Home/Work/Life-in-Sweden/A-multicul...

by tsally 17y ago

jseliger 17y ago

"And most importantly, per year we grant the highest number of people political asylum. These numbers, combined with the fact that unemployment in the US is the highest it's been since the early 1940s, makes accepting large number of immigrants impossible." This claim is specious: the high-end immigrants who are likely to start tech companies and earn PhDs are enormously employable and likely to employ others. If you want more employment, bring in people who are likely to make jobs; notice the high number of tech startups with founders who are immigrants or the children of immigrants. Still, I doubt that these visas are going to have any noticeable impact on unemployment because the rate at which they'll be granted isn't going to be high enough. As for immigration more generally, see James Fallows' comments here: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/201001/american-decline http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/201001/american-decline . Allowing immigration is one of the relatively few things that America does right.

Yrlec 17y ago

I still think you are able to accept more people into the country. In 2007 the Swedish city Södertälje (with about 80 000 cititzens) accepted more Iraqi refugees than the US & Canada combined: http://www.sweden.se/eng/Home/Work/Life-in-Sweden/A-multicultural-society/Reading/Sodertalje/ http://www.sweden.se/eng/Home/Work/Life-in-Sweden/A-multicul...