29 ms·

It sounded fine up until this line: > he proposed moving away from the current system that favours applicants with family ties to the US If a citizen is in th

It sounded fine up until this line: > he proposed moving away from the current system that favours applicants with family ties to the US If a citizen is in the country and they want to bring their family over, that should be their right.

Supermancho 7y ago
> If a citizen is in the country and they want to bring their family over, that should be their right. I do not agree. What constitutes family is arbitrary, but there are generally allowances (in most countries) for spouses and children who are still minors (eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_nationality_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_nationality_law). The allowances for spouses and children are not ubiquitous around the world. The Clinton administration had a bit of trouble figuring out custom rules to what constituted "family". How many generations? What about anyone married to them and then from there on. It's legally logical to assume there's no connection between my French citizenship (received as an adult) and my brother (who is an adult).
- klipt 7y ago
  US immigration law already has strict quotas for siblings. The backlog for sibling greencards stretches back decades. So sponsorship is possible in theory, but little used in practice. The main sponsorship that's currently easier in the US than other countries is parents of citizens, who are considered immediate relatives and are not subject to quota.
briandear 7y ago
Except Europe, Canada, the UK, Australia, China and almost every other country in the world would disagree. Immediate family is one thing, however US immigration family preference means that a illiterate cousin of an applicant has priority over a highly accomplished person with no family in the US. Spouse and minor children, certainly, and Trump’s proposal is in line with Europe and Canada in the regard. In fact, his proposal is more like Canadian immigration policy. Honestly, Trump could propose single payer healthcare or universal pre-K and the anti-Trump crowd would oppose it. A helpful exercise for people of both parties is to ask if you would agree with a given policy if “your guy” had said it.
- schnevets 7y ago
  It seems like a very outdated part of America's immigration philosophy, but it is such a fundamental part of American culture, that I'm shocked it has recently been relabeled and scorned as "chain migration". Sure, "Talented Doctor Immigrant" migrates to the US and sponsors "Illiterate Cousin", but IC finds a less skilled role, and still has the familial support of TDI. In fact, oftentimes, this takes the form of small business loans. It's basically how every ethnic community in the US flourished, from German migrants settling the midwest to recent immigrant-fueled boons like the Indian population in Edison, NJ. The system may be a little outdated in the globalized world, but it's a source of labor that mitigates the risk of antisocial consequences (IC turns to crime, is exploited at work, becomes a burden on the government, etc). I don't entirely agree that it's the "right" of a new immigrant, but eliminating it could have far greater consequences on the future of American than it may seem.
- BubRoss 7y ago
  It isn't a terrible idea to at least be skeptical of someone who, when factoring in frequency and reach, is likely the most prolific liar in human history.
mc32 7y ago
Why is that a “right”? I move to Japan, can I bring my brother, second cousin over? That’s a non-sequitur.
Glyptodon 7y ago
I agree only if family is restricted to spouse and minor (unmarried) children, and maybe grandparents above the age of 50.
CompanionCuuube 7y ago
In college admissions, this is called a "legacy admission".

Supermancho 7y ago

> If a citizen is in the country and they want to bring their family over, that should be their right. I do not agree. What constitutes family is arbitrary, but there are generally allowances (in most countries) for spouses and children who are still minors (eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_nationality_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_nationality_law). The allowances for spouses and children are not ubiquitous around the world. The Clinton administration had a bit of trouble figuring out custom rules to what constituted "family". How many generations? What about anyone married to them and then from there on. It's legally logical to assume there's no connection between my French citizenship (received as an adult) and my brother (who is an adult).

klipt 7y ago
US immigration law already has strict quotas for siblings. The backlog for sibling greencards stretches back decades. So sponsorship is possible in theory, but little used in practice. The main sponsorship that's currently easier in the US than other countries is parents of citizens, who are considered immediate relatives and are not subject to quota.

briandear 7y ago

Except Europe, Canada, the UK, Australia, China and almost every other country in the world would disagree. Immediate family is one thing, however US immigration family preference means that a illiterate cousin of an applicant has priority over a highly accomplished person with no family in the US. Spouse and minor children, certainly, and Trump’s proposal is in line with Europe and Canada in the regard. In fact, his proposal is more like Canadian immigration policy. Honestly, Trump could propose single payer healthcare or universal pre-K and the anti-Trump crowd would oppose it. A helpful exercise for people of both parties is to ask if you would agree with a given policy if “your guy” had said it.

schnevets 7y ago
It seems like a very outdated part of America's immigration philosophy, but it is such a fundamental part of American culture, that I'm shocked it has recently been relabeled and scorned as "chain migration". Sure, "Talented Doctor Immigrant" migrates to the US and sponsors "Illiterate Cousin", but IC finds a less skilled role, and still has the familial support of TDI. In fact, oftentimes, this takes the form of small business loans. It's basically how every ethnic community in the US flourished, from German migrants settling the midwest to recent immigrant-fueled boons like the Indian population in Edison, NJ. The system may be a little outdated in the globalized world, but it's a source of labor that mitigates the risk of antisocial consequences (IC turns to crime, is exploited at work, becomes a burden on the government, etc). I don't entirely agree that it's the "right" of a new immigrant, but eliminating it could have far greater consequences on the future of American than it may seem.
BubRoss 7y ago
It isn't a terrible idea to at least be skeptical of someone who, when factoring in frequency and reach, is likely the most prolific liar in human history.

mc32 7y ago

Why is that a “right”? I move to Japan, can I bring my brother, second cousin over? That’s a non-sequitur.

Glyptodon 7y ago

I agree only if family is restricted to spouse and minor (unmarried) children, and maybe grandparents above the age of 50.

CompanionCuuube 7y ago

In college admissions, this is called a "legacy admission".