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, t

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.