3 ms·
Each queue is managed by country of origin. Last time I read about it, each country would get, at most, 7% of the available GCs. What is more fair? A guy fro
by dudul 6y ago
Each queue is managed by country of origin. Last time I read about it, each country would get, at most, 7% of the available GCs.
What is more fair? A guy from Island waiting 20 years because he is stuck behind 1 billion Indians? Or Indians waiting longer because more of their nationals are applying? Honestly, I don't know, but I know the 7% rule is justified. The idea is to avoid massive inbound diaspora that would be very hard for the country to absorbed culturally.
- throwaway3neu94 6y agoThe problem is not just the per country limit, but also that the total number of greencards available hasn't been updated in decades to keep up with the significant US and worldwide population growth, effectively reducing chances to get one. Also, EB1/2/3 wasn't supposed to do diversity, that's what the diversity lottery is for. Also, the limit could've been applied to visas instead of greencards. I don't see how keeping people in limbo inside the US for decades/lifetimes is reasonable. If they are here de facto permanently anyway, they should get a path to citizenship. A two-class society is wrong.