4 ms·

The US made Eric attempt to get a visa eight times before he was finally successful. We should be poaching the world's talent belligerently, strategically, hand

The US made Eric attempt to get a visa eight times before he was finally successful. We should be poaching the world's talent belligerently, strategically, handing out citizenship and saying thank you for choosing our country over others. Instead, the clowns in Washington DC make the best and brightest go through hell just to come here and contribute. Only either a malevolent or incompetent government would sabotage its own nation in such a manner. Were I briefly king, one of the first things I'd do is task the Federal Reserve to create a large 'steal the talent fund' (by another name) and set out on draining the world of as much talent as possible. I'd use clever funding programs to make it easier for the best to move to and transition to the US. A tiny bit of inflation in exchange for a massive long-term return. The rest of the world would in part pay - via the international holdings of dollars - for my program to steal their own best and brightest. Every graduate of a major US university gets automatic citizenship. The best scientists, engineers, doctors, and so on, I'd want all of them. I'd do almost anything it takes to get them to my shores. Half of everything America is in its wealth or accomplishments, spanning two centuries now, is owed to brave immigrants that chose to abandon a life elsewhere and seek opportunity here at great risk. It's hard to comprehend the enormity of the mistake that is the US immigration system. We don't even take a neutral approach, we take a make-it-difficult approach.

AFascistWorld 8y ago
Visa fraud is a big thing in China, if there's a way of easy visa, it's destined to be abused, won't be surprised that half of China would want to come to the US if given the chance.
photonios 8y ago
This sounds very similar to what I would do and I am not even American or in the states. I think America's greatest power comes from the ability to attract the best and brightest and giving them an environment to thrive in.
basetop 8y ago
We've always had a "make-it-difficult" approach. And as you pointed out, it's worked out really well for us. If you are using america's success as an example, then you are really arguing for highly limited immigration policy. The idea that america welcomed immigrants with open arms is historically false. As a matter of fact, for much of US history, we've highly limited or even banned immigration. From Benjamin Franklin ( on his anti-german immigration ) to the immigration bans in the 1800s ( mostly anti-irish and anti-chinese and much of 1900s ( quotas banning almost all immigration ). Your idea of giving every international college graduate citizenship sounds nice, but when we have a major underemployment problem in the US of college graduates, more graduates is going to cause further problems. https://www.forbes.com/sites/prestoncooper2/2018/06/08/underemployment-persists-throughout-college-graduates-careers https://www.forbes.com/sites/prestoncooper2/2018/06/08/under... I know we are that immigration is what caused america's greatness. But things are a lot more complicated than that. We became the largest economy and the greatest military power under extensive immigration bans. For example, the The Johnson-Reed Act of 1924 banned almost all immigration for much of the 20th century. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-act https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-a... I am for legal and vetted immigration but you are painting a false picture of the history of america and the reason for america's success. Also, china, japan, south korea, etc became wealthy nations little to no immigration. So the immigration and economic success argument is a lot more complex than people think.
sonnyblarney 8y ago
" We should be poaching the world's talent belligerently" - this is hard to identify. Sometimes not, but most often, yes. "Every graduate of a major US university gets automatic citizenship." This basically means Universities are in the business of selling cheap citizenship. So, no. Most importantly: " I'd do is task the Federal Reserve to create a large 'steal the talent fund'" Wow. I hope you don't mean that! There are 1000 initiatives the gov. wants to be involved , we just don't print money willy nilly!
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  I should add: yes, 'getting talent' is a good initiative, of course! And it should be facilitated by the government mostly in terms of 'smart immigration reform' - I don't think there needs to be a 'fund'. Private enterprise can definitely 'fund' that by hiring people. I think if the H1 programme we re-thought so that it was not abused - and there were some kind of 'path to citizenship' in some cases that would be ideal. So long as it's managed properly. I think the key here is 'intelligent policy' that works well with private enterprise, not a big spend.

AFascistWorld 8y ago

Visa fraud is a big thing in China, if there's a way of easy visa, it's destined to be abused, won't be surprised that half of China would want to come to the US if given the chance.

photonios 8y ago

This sounds very similar to what I would do and I am not even American or in the states. I think America's greatest power comes from the ability to attract the best and brightest and giving them an environment to thrive in.

basetop 8y ago

We've always had a "make-it-difficult" approach. And as you pointed out, it's worked out really well for us. If you are using america's success as an example, then you are really arguing for highly limited immigration policy. The idea that america welcomed immigrants with open arms is historically false. As a matter of fact, for much of US history, we've highly limited or even banned immigration. From Benjamin Franklin ( on his anti-german immigration ) to the immigration bans in the 1800s ( mostly anti-irish and anti-chinese and much of 1900s ( quotas banning almost all immigration ). Your idea of giving every international college graduate citizenship sounds nice, but when we have a major underemployment problem in the US of college graduates, more graduates is going to cause further problems. https://www.forbes.com/sites/prestoncooper2/2018/06/08/underemployment-persists-throughout-college-graduates-careers https://www.forbes.com/sites/prestoncooper2/2018/06/08/under... I know we are that immigration is what caused america's greatness. But things are a lot more complicated than that. We became the largest economy and the greatest military power under extensive immigration bans. For example, the The Johnson-Reed Act of 1924 banned almost all immigration for much of the 20th century. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-act https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/immigration-a... I am for legal and vetted immigration but you are painting a false picture of the history of america and the reason for america's success. Also, china, japan, south korea, etc became wealthy nations little to no immigration. So the immigration and economic success argument is a lot more complex than people think.

sonnyblarney 8y ago

" We should be poaching the world's talent belligerently" - this is hard to identify. Sometimes not, but most often, yes. "Every graduate of a major US university gets automatic citizenship." This basically means Universities are in the business of selling cheap citizenship. So, no. Most importantly: " I'd do is task the Federal Reserve to create a large 'steal the talent fund'" Wow. I hope you don't mean that! There are 1000 initiatives the gov. wants to be involved , we just don't print money willy nilly!

sonnyblarney 8y ago
I should add: yes, 'getting talent' is a good initiative, of course! And it should be facilitated by the government mostly in terms of 'smart immigration reform' - I don't think there needs to be a 'fund'. Private enterprise can definitely 'fund' that by hiring people. I think if the H1 programme we re-thought so that it was not abused - and there were some kind of 'path to citizenship' in some cases that would be ideal. So long as it's managed properly. I think the key here is 'intelligent policy' that works well with private enterprise, not a big spend.