4 ms·
For people from India or China, this is bad, agreed. But if the US didn't limit by country how would people from less populous countries be able get green card
by lostphilosopher 7y ago
For people from India or China, this is bad, agreed.
But if the US didn't limit by country how would people from less populous countries be able get green cards? Given the exponential size differences in play I'd expect many years to have 0 immigrants from <insert small country here> and that doesn't seem right either.
This isn't an argument for the current system. I'm just not sure what a system would look like that doesn't unfairly disadvantage someone.
- barry-cotter 7y agoWhy should people from less populous countries get special treatment? Treat everyone equally, set a quota for work visas every year and auction them all. If you make it ten years, paying tax the whole time you can get a Greek card. People are individuals, not representatives of their groups.
- matz1 7y agoDiversity
- mavelikara 7y agoThe only diversity I see being achieved due to the per-country limit is the diversity of passports. India, with it's many cultures and languages, is quite diverse. For example, see this thread here on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16538881 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16538881
- matz1 7y agoYes, diversity at least in country of origin or as you might say passport.
- mavelikara 7y agoFor skilled immigrants, why does it matter what passport they hold? I can understand the argument for and benefits of diversity of thought, of culture etc. But why passports? It makes as much sense as trying to insist that there must be equal number of right-handed, left-handed, and ambidextrous skilled immigrants.
- matz1 7y agoThere might as well be a preference for right-handed preference, if someone can convince enough people for it to be the law. As of current, that is what the congress prefer. They made the law. Indirectly it was the american public preference because it is the representative of american people.
- mavelikara 7y agoYes, that is what the current law states. The GPs question was why it was so. What did you mean to add to the discussion when you originally replied, "Diversity"?
- matz1 7y agoAs I replied, diversity in term of country of origin. If you then asking why is this is the case. Its because its simply the current preference of american public.
- mavelikara 7y ago> Its because its simply the current preference of american public. Yes, that much is obvious. The question, if it was not clear, was an attempt to understand why this is the preference. Note: This thread is already gone much pedantic IMO, but I give you the benefit of doubt that it is some miscommunication in language. If your point is "it is the way it is, and no explanation is owed to anyone", I will withdraw from the discussion because we don't have much to discuss.
- 7y ago
- SkyBelow 7y agoSeems similar to the concept of total population per capita representation instead of pipeline per capital representation in hiring goals.
- kevin_thibedeau 7y agoWhy should big states get the same number of senators as small states? Equality in all things leads to inequality through structural imbalances.
- jandrese 7y agoYou are just trading one inequality for another. I guess the argument for the current system is that it makes the process reasonable for people from small countries. If it were all one giant pool then the process would be an unworkable nightmare for everybody instead of just people in highly populated countries.
- vsskanth 7y ago> I'm just not sure what a system would look like that doesn't unfairly disadvantage someone. I imagine USA is a capitalist country, and since we are talking about high-skilled immigrants here, how about ranking these potential immigrants based on their last 5 years W2 income and handing out green cards to the top "x". I'm sure valuable people are paid more. I don't see how nationality needs to come into this. There is always a Diversity Visa lottery for people from less populous countries.
- tracker1 7y agoIs a medical doctor who lives in a country making half what a janitor makes in another country more, or less valuable?
- vsskanth 7y agoThe scope of my argument here is clearly based on past income in the US (that's why I mention W2 income). I'm fairly confident a medical doctor in the US is paid more than a janitor. Now, you can make an argument about whether a doctor in a rural area is more valuable than a software engineer in SF but there is an NIW (National Interest Waiver) category that can be utilized to grant residency. Funnily, in the current system, janitors and meat packers (from other countries) get their green cards earlier than doctors and engineers from India [1,2] [1] https://www.myvisajobs.com/GreenCard/SearchAll.aspx?ST=Certified&Y=2018&CI=1346571 https://www.myvisajobs.com/GreenCard/SearchAll.aspx?ST=Certi... [2] https://www.myvisajobs.com/GreenCard/SearchAll.aspx?ST=Certified&Y=2018&CI=250395 https://www.myvisajobs.com/GreenCard/SearchAll.aspx?ST=Certi...
- debacle 7y agoThe entire H1B system is farcical. It's a white collar migrant worker program. Eliminate the program, and increase the quotas to compensate. The path to citizenship for an educated, English speaking individual should be less impeded than it is now.
- mavelikara 7y agoTo understand why this is racist, imagine that this rule considered all of EU as a single country. I believe that this per-country limit would be scraped in no time if that were the case. My point is that "country of birth" is an arbitrary category formed to justify a racial discrimination.
- mikeash 7y agoEveryone would have the same wait time. What’s unfair about that? (Other than the fact that the wait time would probably still be way too high for everyone.)