5 ms·

Great article. I wonder if something like this could be used in the US to help bridge the partisan divide on immigration. A deal where we reduce immigration but

Great article. I wonder if something like this could be used in the US to help bridge the partisan divide on immigration. A deal where we reduce immigration but ask people to sponsor as some sort of civic duty. I think it might reduce anti-immigrant sentiment if Americans were in close contact with the struggles immigrants face. I also think a lot of the Trump voterbase feels that their culture is being wiped out by immigrants, a sponsor program may give them some feeling of control back.

zxcvvcxz 10y ago
> A deal where we reduce immigration but ask people to sponsor as some sort of civic duty. How about you can have all the immigration you want if you sponsor it? > I think it might reduce anti-immigrant sentiment if Americans were in close contact with the struggles immigrants face. I think it might reduce the pro-immigrant sentiment if (certain) Americans were in close contact with the struggles immigrants bring.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  > How about you can have all the immigration you want if you sponsor it? Pretty much all immigrant visa categories (and certainly the vast majority of actual visas granted) are sponsored, either employer or family, so, sure, just uncap all those categories and be done?
  - mkaziz 10y ago
    ^Yep. When I was sponsored, the US government basically told us that if we try and claim any public benefits for the next 5 years, they'd come after my sponsor for reimbursement. Sponsor had to show adequate financial resources to sponsor our family. This probably does not apply for refugees, but definitely does for family-based sponsorships.
    - verelo 10y ago
      Canada does the same thing. I'm a spousal sponsored immigrant and if I were to claim anything as such my partner is actually the one the govnernemnt holds responsible for funding it [from australia, so hardly the same category as a refugee]
- angry_octet 10y ago
  There is nothing like this little teaspoon of hate to brighten your day.
  - aanm1988 10y ago
    OH yeah, love it. Friend comes back from India and is talking about how people are scared because of the recent murders. Constantly hearing about how bad we are for taking American jobs or hurting your salaries. Now knowing if/when the new government will try and screw me. Listening to jerks talk about immigrants in broad terms, then claim without a shred of self-awareness that Trump is only anti-illegal immigrant.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
- aanm1988 10y ago
  > struggles immigrants bring I can't even begin to tell you all the struggles me and my immigrant friend have brought to all you americans. We sure are an awful bunch. Oh wait sorry. We are white Canadians who just came here for better tech jobs. Are we still awful or are we some of the "good ones"?
  - mkaziz 10y ago
    You should include a note in your next tax return for the feds to not use any of your taxes to pay for his road/social security/medicare/anything. I'm sure he'd prefer his roads to come only from blueblooded American taxes.
  - golergka 10y ago
    Is it bad or racist for a nation to prefer high-paid immigrants who generate more GDP?
  - golergka 10y ago
    Is it bad or racist for a nation to prefer high-paid immigrants who generate more GDP?
  - khedoros1 10y ago
    Depends, doesn't it? Your race and nationality aren't the important pieces of information. The cultural similarity is convenient, but not crucial. Similarly, shared language. Everything else being equal, the country can probably absorb more educated people with some money than it can uneducated people who are poor.
- PhasmaFelis 10y ago
  > How about you can have all the immigration you want if you sponsor it? That'd be great! If you could just please ask Congress to actually let us do that, we can get started right away. Sorry, was I supposed to say "Nooooo, I'm a lazy liberal NIMBY who demands change but won't contribute"?
  - throwaway0684 10y ago
    Alternatively, you and your political tribe could start winning the elections required to advance your agenda. Until that happens, don't pretend that it's the obligation of the Congressional majority to do anything but represent its constituents, who evidently favor policies that disagree with your worldview.
isaac_is_goat 10y ago
How does this make any sense whatsoever? "We want to stop anti-immigration sentiment, so let's force people to take these people into their homes." Insanity - this would only make it worse.
- mkaziz 10y ago
  GP didn't imply "force", he implied /encourage/ by calling it civic duty.
- dang 10y ago
  Please don't use quotation marks to make it look like you're quoting someone when you're not. That's not fair to the other person.
cperciva 10y ago
A deal where we reduce immigration but ask people to sponsor as some sort of civic duty. I'd suggest changing ask to allow, and remove any mention of "civic duty". The Canadian government didn't go out and ask families to take refugees into their homes -- Canadians applied for permission to take refugees into their homes. And wasn't a trivial process; the vetting of refugee sponsors was probably more detailed than the vetting of the refugees themselves, since the government wanted to make sure that sponsors were going to be able to take care of the refugees and were not going to try to exploit them. Even with the arduous process for groups to apply to sponsor refugees, the Canadian government had more applicants than their target number of refugees.
briandear 10y ago
The divide over immigration isn't over immigrants -- but illegal immigrants. Huge difference. The "anti-immigrant" meme is inaccurate. It's "anti-illegal immigrant." If someone were to refuse to pay taxes the Left would be livid; if someone refuses to respect the legal immigration process, the Left calls for amnesty. My wife is a naturalized citizen from Mexico -- it's insulting when people call for amnesty for illegal immigrants while US consulates all over the world have lines around the block for people to apply for immigrant visas. When we have military veterans that can't get decent care at the VA; I feel a huge resentment at a single dollar supporting illegal immigrants in any way. Refugees are quite another story: refugees commonly aren't illegally entering the country, but have gone through the proper processes. The Left supports the so-called "path to citizenship" only because the majority of illegal immigrants would vote Democrat if given the chance. Case in point: note the silence at the Obama administration changing the wet-foot-dry-foot policy for Cubans. Cubans historically vote Republican, so that policy shift illicited not a single protest from so-called "pro-immigrant" groups. A women with a felony convictions and a deportation order resulted in protesters blocking roads. Janet Reno deported Elian Gonzales back to Cuba and the Left supported that. Yet the complete opposite logic is used to support the admission of unaccompanied minors who arrive from Central American countries. The Democrat support for illegal immigration is nothing but playing to a particular constituency that they need in order to have any hope of winning elections. Cynical? You bet. Look at Lyndon Johnson's comments about black people as an example of that disingenuous "compassion" in action.
- fatbird 10y ago
  "The Left supports the so-called 'path to citizenship' only because the majority of illegal immigrants would vote Democrat if given the chance." Thanks for poisoning the well.
  - patrickg_zill 10y ago
    It's not a fully accurate statement. It doesn't take into account virtue signaling and self-hatred.
- UncleMeat 10y ago

zxcvvcxz 10y ago

> A deal where we reduce immigration but ask people to sponsor as some sort of civic duty. How about you can have all the immigration you want if you sponsor it? > I think it might reduce anti-immigrant sentiment if Americans were in close contact with the struggles immigrants face. I think it might reduce the pro-immigrant sentiment if (certain) Americans were in close contact with the struggles immigrants bring.

dragonwriter 10y ago
> How about you can have all the immigration you want if you sponsor it? Pretty much all immigrant visa categories (and certainly the vast majority of actual visas granted) are sponsored, either employer or family, so, sure, just uncap all those categories and be done?
- mkaziz 10y ago
  ^Yep. When I was sponsored, the US government basically told us that if we try and claim any public benefits for the next 5 years, they'd come after my sponsor for reimbursement. Sponsor had to show adequate financial resources to sponsor our family. This probably does not apply for refugees, but definitely does for family-based sponsorships.
  - verelo 10y ago
    Canada does the same thing. I'm a spousal sponsored immigrant and if I were to claim anything as such my partner is actually the one the govnernemnt holds responsible for funding it [from australia, so hardly the same category as a refugee]
angry_octet 10y ago
There is nothing like this little teaspoon of hate to brighten your day.
- aanm1988 10y ago
  OH yeah, love it. Friend comes back from India and is talking about how people are scared because of the recent murders. Constantly hearing about how bad we are for taking American jobs or hurting your salaries. Now knowing if/when the new government will try and screw me. Listening to jerks talk about immigrants in broad terms, then claim without a shred of self-awareness that Trump is only anti-illegal immigrant.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
aanm1988 10y ago
> struggles immigrants bring I can't even begin to tell you all the struggles me and my immigrant friend have brought to all you americans. We sure are an awful bunch. Oh wait sorry. We are white Canadians who just came here for better tech jobs. Are we still awful or are we some of the "good ones"?
- mkaziz 10y ago
  You should include a note in your next tax return for the feds to not use any of your taxes to pay for his road/social security/medicare/anything. I'm sure he'd prefer his roads to come only from blueblooded American taxes.
- golergka 10y ago
  Is it bad or racist for a nation to prefer high-paid immigrants who generate more GDP?
- golergka 10y ago
  Is it bad or racist for a nation to prefer high-paid immigrants who generate more GDP?
- khedoros1 10y ago
  Depends, doesn't it? Your race and nationality aren't the important pieces of information. The cultural similarity is convenient, but not crucial. Similarly, shared language. Everything else being equal, the country can probably absorb more educated people with some money than it can uneducated people who are poor.
PhasmaFelis 10y ago
> How about you can have all the immigration you want if you sponsor it? That'd be great! If you could just please ask Congress to actually let us do that, we can get started right away. Sorry, was I supposed to say "Nooooo, I'm a lazy liberal NIMBY who demands change but won't contribute"?
- throwaway0684 10y ago
  Alternatively, you and your political tribe could start winning the elections required to advance your agenda. Until that happens, don't pretend that it's the obligation of the Congressional majority to do anything but represent its constituents, who evidently favor policies that disagree with your worldview.

isaac_is_goat 10y ago

How does this make any sense whatsoever? "We want to stop anti-immigration sentiment, so let's force people to take these people into their homes." Insanity - this would only make it worse.

mkaziz 10y ago
GP didn't imply "force", he implied /encourage/ by calling it civic duty.
dang 10y ago
Please don't use quotation marks to make it look like you're quoting someone when you're not. That's not fair to the other person.

cperciva 10y ago

A deal where we reduce immigration but ask people to sponsor as some sort of civic duty. I'd suggest changing ask to allow, and remove any mention of "civic duty". The Canadian government didn't go out and ask families to take refugees into their homes -- Canadians applied for permission to take refugees into their homes. And wasn't a trivial process; the vetting of refugee sponsors was probably more detailed than the vetting of the refugees themselves, since the government wanted to make sure that sponsors were going to be able to take care of the refugees and were not going to try to exploit them. Even with the arduous process for groups to apply to sponsor refugees, the Canadian government had more applicants than their target number of refugees.

briandear 10y ago

The divide over immigration isn't over immigrants -- but illegal immigrants. Huge difference. The "anti-immigrant" meme is inaccurate. It's "anti-illegal immigrant." If someone were to refuse to pay taxes the Left would be livid; if someone refuses to respect the legal immigration process, the Left calls for amnesty. My wife is a naturalized citizen from Mexico -- it's insulting when people call for amnesty for illegal immigrants while US consulates all over the world have lines around the block for people to apply for immigrant visas. When we have military veterans that can't get decent care at the VA; I feel a huge resentment at a single dollar supporting illegal immigrants in any way. Refugees are quite another story: refugees commonly aren't illegally entering the country, but have gone through the proper processes. The Left supports the so-called "path to citizenship" only because the majority of illegal immigrants would vote Democrat if given the chance. Case in point: note the silence at the Obama administration changing the wet-foot-dry-foot policy for Cubans. Cubans historically vote Republican, so that policy shift illicited not a single protest from so-called "pro-immigrant" groups. A women with a felony convictions and a deportation order resulted in protesters blocking roads. Janet Reno deported Elian Gonzales back to Cuba and the Left supported that. Yet the complete opposite logic is used to support the admission of unaccompanied minors who arrive from Central American countries. The Democrat support for illegal immigration is nothing but playing to a particular constituency that they need in order to have any hope of winning elections. Cynical? You bet. Look at Lyndon Johnson's comments about black people as an example of that disingenuous "compassion" in action.

fatbird 10y ago
"The Left supports the so-called 'path to citizenship' only because the majority of illegal immigrants would vote Democrat if given the chance." Thanks for poisoning the well.
- patrickg_zill 10y ago
  It's not a fully accurate statement. It doesn't take into account virtue signaling and self-hatred.
UncleMeat 10y ago