7 ms·

I know a girl that had to leave the U.S. >24< years after her parents brought her there ( she was a baby ). The story ( as far as I can remember ) is that a fa

I know a girl that had to leave the U.S. >24< years after her parents brought her there ( she was a baby ). The story ( as far as I can remember ) is that a family of Germans moved to the U.S. with their 1 year old child. 24 years later the child graduated university and ... needs to apply for a green card or permanent VISA. US government refused, so she had to come back to Germany. I've never understood why U.S. is so protective in terms of citizenship. In most of the EU countries you get naturalized ( receive citizenship ) if you spend certain amount of time in the country and pass a test ( Germany I think it's 7 yrs ).

nickff 10y ago
The USA does have similar rules, but there are some restrictions based on what you can prove, and your status upon entry.
- 8611m 10y ago
  What are these rules that you refer to? I know a lot of people who could benefit from such rules having come to the United States legally and spending 10 years and has to leave because their visas were expiring.
  - nickff 10y ago
    I am not too familiar with the details, but the government website is informative, as is the Wikipedia article.[1][2] [1] https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-naturalization/continuous-residence-and-physical-presence-requirements-naturalization https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-nat... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization#.C2.A0United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization#.C2.A0United_St...
justinlardinois 10y ago
In the US you can begin the naturalization process after five years of permanent residency. A green card is what establishes permanent residency. (I don't think we have permanent visas, but I could be wrong.) I can only speculate how your friend was allowed to live in this country that long without ever obtaining permanent residency, but regardless, it's an example of the system failing, and that's a really terrible thing to happen to someone.
- drinchev 10y ago
  Well as far as I can remember the story, their parents were there with a working VISA ( extended through time ) and she got at one point ( I think at 18? ) a study VISA until it all expired after university.
  - parineum 10y ago
    Forgive me if this sounds harsh but shouldn't she have applied for a green card as soon as she turned 18? I don't know the ins and outs of immigration but that's because I'm a citizen. If I wasn't, I'd sure as hell know what I needed to do in order to stay in the only country I'd ever known as home.
    - tarikjn 10y ago
      It's not harsh, but your reply just proved the point of either how little Americans know about their immigration system or how it much nonsensical it is. According drinchev, I can assume that when his/her friend turned 18 she would have had to go through the process to apply for green card just as if she never lived in the US. I know someone who was in a similar situation, grew up in America, his parents were diplomats, when he turned 21 he could not longer be a dependent of his parents' status, and the amount of time he lived legally had no benefit in giving him eligibility to apply for a green card.
      - michaelbuddy 10y ago
        Brought over an immigrant myself. The fact is you MUST ensure you've done everything correctly. You don't trust, you verify. Diplomats should have known better. People who adopt from overseas need to know. You can't just do whatever you want in terms of bringing new bodies from foreign lands. That's the administrative reality and there's no reason to have exceptions when these people should have been responsible. If you don't have consequences, then people don't follow administrative rules. If you don't have administrative rules and laws, good luck having order, good luck managing. Good luck collecting taxes, good luck having a country. Why are we so quick to blame the USA, or blame our own country when these things actually aren't all that difficult. There are forms for everything. And where there are challenges, there are lawyers. Can't afford a lawyer or figure it out yourself? Guess what you just proved you're not prepared to bring over an immigrant regardless of their age.
vacri 10y ago
Perfectly understandable for the US to behave that way. After all, they have barely any living space, have trouble feeding the citizens they do have, nothing in the way of natural resources (mineral, agricultural, or other), a very weak economy, live in the shadow of an oppressive and warlike neighbour, and don't have so much as a statue welcoming migrants to their shores. Oh... wait a minute...
PhasmaFelis 10y ago
> I've never understood why U.S. is so protective in terms of citizenship. We've got a lot of racist assholes, basically. Particularly ironic for a country that was founded on immigration. These laws, and their heavy-handed enforcement, are mainly targeted at keeping out Mexicans. European and Asian immigrants are collateral damage, essentially. Europe, unfortunately, is starting to go the same way. I think it was Switzerland that denied citizenship to a couple of teenage Muslim girls because they didn't want to swim with boys in mandatory co-ed swim class. They've also banned minarets on mosques, apparently--I have no clue how they pretend to justify that. Xenophobia makes people do ridiculous things.
- bruceb 10y ago
  Heavy handed enforcement? If we had that we would not have 12m people here illegally. Wanting to keep national character is respecting culture. Switzerland is right to defend equality
  - PhasmaFelis 10y ago
    So, in your mind, "defending equality" means deporting people who don't respect the sanctity of swim class.
    - dragandj 10y ago
      Assuming that the story you've told actually happened. Yeah, two kids in a school didn't want to enter the pool, and they've sent them packing back to (where?) because of that. Have I understood well what you described?
      - PhasmaFelis 10y ago
        Do you not follow the news? It was all over a few months ago. Here: https://www.google.com/search?q=muslim+girls+denied+citizenship+because+of+swimming+lessons&oq=muslim+girls+denied+citizenship+because+of+swimming+lessons&gs_l=serp.3...8313.9814.0.10006.12.12.0.0.0.0.132.765.5j3.8.0....0...1.1.64.serp..4.0.0.r-pP2pez1jA https://www.google.com/search?q=muslim+girls+denied+citizens... As of the story breaking at the end of June, they had not yet been expelled from Switzerland, but we both know what "denied citizenship" means.
superuser2 10y ago
>I've never understood why U.S. is so protective in terms of citizenship. The American electorate believes unemployment is caused by an improper ratio of people to jobs, and it can be solved both by increasing the number of jobs and decreasing the number of people. In this theory, your friend's expulsion was a victory for the American who took over her job, and for the unemployed person who entered the labor market (if not directly, then via a domino effect). We are comparatively loose with immigration statuses that don't permit work. Tourist, student, etc. visas are relatively trivial to obtain. We have programs that allow work which doesn't compete with Americans, such as international performing arts groups on tour. We even have programs to fill jobs that Americans aren't available to fill (H1B for highly skilled labor, seasonal farm workers, etc). The moat is built around statuses that permit competition with Americans for jobs in general. It remains this way because Americans do not generally consider or believe Econ 101 ideas like that trade necessarily benefits both sides of the exchange (or they would not make it), more workers also means more consumers, cheaper labor => cheaper goods and services => higher standard of living, etc.
- ZoF 10y ago
  Yes, that stupid American electorate who can't understand basic economics. I really wish everyone could be as enlightened as yourself.
- Houshalter 10y ago
  >It remains this way because Americans do not generally consider or believe Econ 101 ideas It's not at all clear this violates "Econ 101". Supply and demand set prices, and wages are basically the price for labor. Increasing the supply of labor should necessarily decrease wages, and vice versa. Imagine the extreme, worst case scenario. If the US opened it's borders completely, and imported every poor worker in the entire world into its borders. Do you really believe that average American worker would be better off? That they could compete with that, and be able to demand a decent wage? >trade necessarily benefits both sides of the exchange True, but extremely misleading. E.g. f you move factories overseas for cheaper labor, the local workers lose out, even though other classes may gain. The benefits of trade are not distributed among the entire population. >cheaper labor => cheaper goods and services Sure, but if everyone is making proportionally less money, they can't afford the cheaper services, and on net they are poorer.
klipt 10y ago
> I've never understood why U.S. is so protective in terms of citizenship. In some ways it isn't: merely being born here grants citizenship. That's no longer the case in any EU country: Ireland repealed birthright citizenship years ago. It means that simply flying to the US on a tourist visa before your baby is born will grant it citizenship. But living in the US on a work visa for 18 years after your baby is born? That doesn't grant anything.
yodsanklai 10y ago
> I've never understood why U.S. is so protective in terms of citizenship. In most of the EU countries you get naturalized ( receive citizenship ) if you spend certain amount of time in the country and pass a test ( Germany I think it's 7 yrs ). I think it's more complicated than that. My gf has lived more than 10 years in France now and she has to renew her visa every year, they never granted her the 10 years visa, let alone citizenship (she was discouraged to apply for it...). On the other hand, I have a bunch of friends that obtained their US nationality quite easily. They started as illegal immigrants, got married, which gave them a green card and after a few years they obtained their citizenship. These are just anecdotes, just to say that it's not so clear that it's harder to get US citizenship.
shambala 10y ago
Because she is an illegal immigrant. Case closed.

nickff 10y ago

The USA does have similar rules, but there are some restrictions based on what you can prove, and your status upon entry.

8611m 10y ago
What are these rules that you refer to? I know a lot of people who could benefit from such rules having come to the United States legally and spending 10 years and has to leave because their visas were expiring.
- nickff 10y ago
  I am not too familiar with the details, but the government website is informative, as is the Wikipedia article.[1][2] [1] https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-naturalization/continuous-residence-and-physical-presence-requirements-naturalization https://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship/citizenship-through-nat... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization#.C2.A0United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization#.C2.A0United_St...

justinlardinois 10y ago

In the US you can begin the naturalization process after five years of permanent residency. A green card is what establishes permanent residency. (I don't think we have permanent visas, but I could be wrong.) I can only speculate how your friend was allowed to live in this country that long without ever obtaining permanent residency, but regardless, it's an example of the system failing, and that's a really terrible thing to happen to someone.

drinchev 10y ago
Well as far as I can remember the story, their parents were there with a working VISA ( extended through time ) and she got at one point ( I think at 18? ) a study VISA until it all expired after university.
- parineum 10y ago
  Forgive me if this sounds harsh but shouldn't she have applied for a green card as soon as she turned 18? I don't know the ins and outs of immigration but that's because I'm a citizen. If I wasn't, I'd sure as hell know what I needed to do in order to stay in the only country I'd ever known as home.
  - tarikjn 10y ago
    It's not harsh, but your reply just proved the point of either how little Americans know about their immigration system or how it much nonsensical it is. According drinchev, I can assume that when his/her friend turned 18 she would have had to go through the process to apply for green card just as if she never lived in the US. I know someone who was in a similar situation, grew up in America, his parents were diplomats, when he turned 21 he could not longer be a dependent of his parents' status, and the amount of time he lived legally had no benefit in giving him eligibility to apply for a green card.
    - michaelbuddy 10y ago
      Brought over an immigrant myself. The fact is you MUST ensure you've done everything correctly. You don't trust, you verify. Diplomats should have known better. People who adopt from overseas need to know. You can't just do whatever you want in terms of bringing new bodies from foreign lands. That's the administrative reality and there's no reason to have exceptions when these people should have been responsible. If you don't have consequences, then people don't follow administrative rules. If you don't have administrative rules and laws, good luck having order, good luck managing. Good luck collecting taxes, good luck having a country. Why are we so quick to blame the USA, or blame our own country when these things actually aren't all that difficult. There are forms for everything. And where there are challenges, there are lawyers. Can't afford a lawyer or figure it out yourself? Guess what you just proved you're not prepared to bring over an immigrant regardless of their age.

vacri 10y ago

Perfectly understandable for the US to behave that way. After all, they have barely any living space, have trouble feeding the citizens they do have, nothing in the way of natural resources (mineral, agricultural, or other), a very weak economy, live in the shadow of an oppressive and warlike neighbour, and don't have so much as a statue welcoming migrants to their shores. Oh... wait a minute...

PhasmaFelis 10y ago

> I've never understood why U.S. is so protective in terms of citizenship. We've got a lot of racist assholes, basically. Particularly ironic for a country that was founded on immigration. These laws, and their heavy-handed enforcement, are mainly targeted at keeping out Mexicans. European and Asian immigrants are collateral damage, essentially. Europe, unfortunately, is starting to go the same way. I think it was Switzerland that denied citizenship to a couple of teenage Muslim girls because they didn't want to swim with boys in mandatory co-ed swim class. They've also banned minarets on mosques, apparently--I have no clue how they pretend to justify that. Xenophobia makes people do ridiculous things.

bruceb 10y ago
Heavy handed enforcement? If we had that we would not have 12m people here illegally. Wanting to keep national character is respecting culture. Switzerland is right to defend equality
- PhasmaFelis 10y ago
  So, in your mind, "defending equality" means deporting people who don't respect the sanctity of swim class.
  - dragandj 10y ago
    Assuming that the story you've told actually happened. Yeah, two kids in a school didn't want to enter the pool, and they've sent them packing back to (where?) because of that. Have I understood well what you described?
    - PhasmaFelis 10y ago
      Do you not follow the news? It was all over a few months ago. Here: https://www.google.com/search?q=muslim+girls+denied+citizenship+because+of+swimming+lessons&oq=muslim+girls+denied+citizenship+because+of+swimming+lessons&gs_l=serp.3...8313.9814.0.10006.12.12.0.0.0.0.132.765.5j3.8.0....0...1.1.64.serp..4.0.0.r-pP2pez1jA https://www.google.com/search?q=muslim+girls+denied+citizens... As of the story breaking at the end of June, they had not yet been expelled from Switzerland, but we both know what "denied citizenship" means.

superuser2 10y ago

>I've never understood why U.S. is so protective in terms of citizenship. The American electorate believes unemployment is caused by an improper ratio of people to jobs, and it can be solved both by increasing the number of jobs and decreasing the number of people. In this theory, your friend's expulsion was a victory for the American who took over her job, and for the unemployed person who entered the labor market (if not directly, then via a domino effect). We are comparatively loose with immigration statuses that don't permit work. Tourist, student, etc. visas are relatively trivial to obtain. We have programs that allow work which doesn't compete with Americans, such as international performing arts groups on tour. We even have programs to fill jobs that Americans aren't available to fill (H1B for highly skilled labor, seasonal farm workers, etc). The moat is built around statuses that permit competition with Americans for jobs in general. It remains this way because Americans do not generally consider or believe Econ 101 ideas like that trade necessarily benefits both sides of the exchange (or they would not make it), more workers also means more consumers, cheaper labor => cheaper goods and services => higher standard of living, etc.

ZoF 10y ago
Yes, that stupid American electorate who can't understand basic economics. I really wish everyone could be as enlightened as yourself.
Houshalter 10y ago
>It remains this way because Americans do not generally consider or believe Econ 101 ideas It's not at all clear this violates "Econ 101". Supply and demand set prices, and wages are basically the price for labor. Increasing the supply of labor should necessarily decrease wages, and vice versa. Imagine the extreme, worst case scenario. If the US opened it's borders completely, and imported every poor worker in the entire world into its borders. Do you really believe that average American worker would be better off? That they could compete with that, and be able to demand a decent wage? >trade necessarily benefits both sides of the exchange True, but extremely misleading. E.g. f you move factories overseas for cheaper labor, the local workers lose out, even though other classes may gain. The benefits of trade are not distributed among the entire population. >cheaper labor => cheaper goods and services Sure, but if everyone is making proportionally less money, they can't afford the cheaper services, and on net they are poorer.

klipt 10y ago

> I've never understood why U.S. is so protective in terms of citizenship. In some ways it isn't: merely being born here grants citizenship. That's no longer the case in any EU country: Ireland repealed birthright citizenship years ago. It means that simply flying to the US on a tourist visa before your baby is born will grant it citizenship. But living in the US on a work visa for 18 years after your baby is born? That doesn't grant anything.

yodsanklai 10y ago

> I've never understood why U.S. is so protective in terms of citizenship. In most of the EU countries you get naturalized ( receive citizenship ) if you spend certain amount of time in the country and pass a test ( Germany I think it's 7 yrs ). I think it's more complicated than that. My gf has lived more than 10 years in France now and she has to renew her visa every year, they never granted her the 10 years visa, let alone citizenship (she was discouraged to apply for it...). On the other hand, I have a bunch of friends that obtained their US nationality quite easily. They started as illegal immigrants, got married, which gave them a green card and after a few years they obtained their citizenship. These are just anecdotes, just to say that it's not so clear that it's harder to get US citizenship.

shambala 10y ago

Because she is an illegal immigrant. Case closed.