5 ms·

“No More Lotteries” Trump Pushes for Merit-Based Immigration in US

21 points by superasn 9y ago

wand3r 9y ago
I agree with this concept although the article, the tweet and the president really did not give any additional useful information. I think it would be a positive thing to let us educated students stay in the country and allow people with skills, education and qualifications into America at an accelerated rate vs random. I suppose where I disagree with the president is in allowing refugees into the country as well. I think a merit based lottery system that allowed for additional humane immagration would be good
ggm 9y ago
I'm finding myself reflecting on the belief that the MIT/Harvard experience suggests you need a curve of capability, accepting only geniuses into college doesn't work out as well as you'd hope. I suspect that a future immigration policy based of a belief there is a single-line merit measure is going to have huge flaws. The more merit signals you adopt, the more likely it is you add complexity which is net cost, compared to a reasonably open-door policy. The problem (I think) is that people equate economic efficiency with socially just and equitable outcomes. The former (which is where merit is driving) doesn't actually deliver the latter.
- natalyarostova 9y ago
  The first can be relatively rigorously defined. The second is more of a shared feeling on morality. In any event, I don't see Harvard or MIT awarding lottery slots in their entering class to working class kids and minorities who scored 900 on their SAT (or more likely, didn't even take it).
- innagadadavida 9y ago
  Canada and some European countries have a merit based immigration, it seems to work better for them than the American system that they eschew. Immigration should be based on supply and demand - this is an objective measure and not based on someone’s arbitrary definition of fairness and social equity (they are different for everyone).
  - ggm 9y ago
    Interestingly, I am reminded from this of a labour union view that free movement of labour is actually more about cost of labour than the workers right to better pay. This leads to a view in statist left wing circles that its ok NOT to have free movement of labour, to defend the value of labour in high wage economies. I can't come at it myself, but it is almost 'two ends of the cicle meet' left-right agreement. You call it supply and demand, they call it exploitation of supply.
- bonesss 9y ago
  > I suspect that a future immigration policy based of a belief there is a single-line merit measure is going to have huge flaws. If I understand you correctly: this is accounted for in the Canadian system, at least, through a complex merit measurement. Multiple factors that are weighted according to desired immigration outcomes, and allow categorical exceptions (ie valid refugees or asylum seekers can have '100% merit' and be processed differently). This is how they regulate the justness and social outcomes. I think it's a more reasoned immigration system, to measure merit along multiple axes, but I think it goes a bit against the idealized 'American Dream', especially as espoused on the statue of liberty.

21 points by superasn 9y ago

I agree with this concept although the article, the tweet and the president really did not give any additional useful information. I think it would be a positive thing to let us educated students stay in the country and allow people with skills, education and qualifications into America at an accelerated rate vs random. I suppose where I disagree with the president is in allowing refugees into the country as well. I think a merit based lottery system that allowed for additional humane immagration would be good

ggm 9y ago

I'm finding myself reflecting on the belief that the MIT/Harvard experience suggests you need a curve of capability, accepting only geniuses into college doesn't work out as well as you'd hope. I suspect that a future immigration policy based of a belief there is a single-line merit measure is going to have huge flaws. The more merit signals you adopt, the more likely it is you add complexity which is net cost, compared to a reasonably open-door policy. The problem (I think) is that people equate economic efficiency with socially just and equitable outcomes. The former (which is where merit is driving) doesn't actually deliver the latter.

natalyarostova 9y ago
The first can be relatively rigorously defined. The second is more of a shared feeling on morality. In any event, I don't see Harvard or MIT awarding lottery slots in their entering class to working class kids and minorities who scored 900 on their SAT (or more likely, didn't even take it).
innagadadavida 9y ago
Canada and some European countries have a merit based immigration, it seems to work better for them than the American system that they eschew. Immigration should be based on supply and demand - this is an objective measure and not based on someone’s arbitrary definition of fairness and social equity (they are different for everyone).
- ggm 9y ago
  Interestingly, I am reminded from this of a labour union view that free movement of labour is actually more about cost of labour than the workers right to better pay. This leads to a view in statist left wing circles that its ok NOT to have free movement of labour, to defend the value of labour in high wage economies. I can't come at it myself, but it is almost 'two ends of the cicle meet' left-right agreement. You call it supply and demand, they call it exploitation of supply.
bonesss 9y ago
> I suspect that a future immigration policy based of a belief there is a single-line merit measure is going to have huge flaws. If I understand you correctly: this is accounted for in the Canadian system, at least, through a complex merit measurement. Multiple factors that are weighted according to desired immigration outcomes, and allow categorical exceptions (ie valid refugees or asylum seekers can have '100% merit' and be processed differently). This is how they regulate the justness and social outcomes. I think it's a more reasoned immigration system, to measure merit along multiple axes, but I think it goes a bit against the idealized 'American Dream', especially as espoused on the statue of liberty.