4 ms·

A fundamental question not being answered is: Who gets to come to America? Right now, our system massively favors immediate relatives and refugees, and only le

A fundamental question not being answered is: Who gets to come to America? Right now, our system massively favors immediate relatives and refugees, and only lets in a trickle of everyone else. If you are a person who wishes to move to the US, don't have relatives here, and are not a refugee -- then good luck, because you'll have a really hard time getting in. Stories of people who literally sell everything to get a chance to live here, like that of Claudia Mendoza, bring tears to ones' eyes: http://app.fwd.us/stories/429 http://app.fwd.us/stories/429 Now her husband was probably not among the 1% in his field. But he was hard-working person, valued by his colleagues, who added and contributed to our society. He and his family were kicked out of the country, for not winning the H-1B lottery. So to people who oppose skilled worker immigration, I have a question: Should only refugees and people with family relations be admitted? Should everyone else be completely blocked off? People who oppose skilled worker immigration are essentially advocating this.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
walterbell 12y ago
There's also 50,000 annual "diversity visa" immigrants from countries with low immigration rates to the US.
- winter_blue 12y ago
  For someone wishing to move to the U.S. the diversity lottery is a non-option, as the odds of winning it is a tiny fraction of 1%. Practically speaking, if you're not being persecuted, and don't have immediate relatives in the US -- you can only come as a skilled worker. It's the only route available to the vast majority of those who wish to come here. And the US is incredibly hostile to skilled workers by allocating a tiny number of visas for skilled workers. For comparison, Australia with 1/15th the US population lets in nearly as many skilled workers as the US does in a year -- i.e. approximately 15 times as many, per capita.
  - walterbell 12y ago
    > the odds of winning it is a tiny fraction of 1% The global percentage for 2014 was 1.45% to be selected, but an applicant's percentage can be higher/lower depending on the quota assigned to their country of origin and the number of applicants for that country. http://travel.state.gov/content/visas/english/immigrate/diversity-visa/dv2014-selected-entrants.html http://travel.state.gov/content/visas/english/immigrate/dive...
abecedarius 12y ago
I favor much-more-open borders for people who want to immigrate and become citizens. Any kind of guest-worker program, including the H1B system, I'm more skeptical about. It's understandable for capital to work to carve out selected holes in the fence to benefit themselves the most -- changing the laws isn't easy or cheap -- but that's not the change I'm excited to get behind. (I don't know what specific changes are being pushed right now, if any.)
- SwellJoe 12y ago
  This is my position, as well. Worker visas are effectively a modern indentured servitude. Foreign workers are much less likely to be a fluid commodity on the job market as US citizens can be, because they have their visa to worry about. I oppose borders, generally speaking, but I have a hard time swallowing the massive corporate empowerment represented by the worker visa process (bootstrapped startups also cannot effectively participate, either).

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

walterbell 12y ago

There's also 50,000 annual "diversity visa" immigrants from countries with low immigration rates to the US.

winter_blue 12y ago
For someone wishing to move to the U.S. the diversity lottery is a non-option, as the odds of winning it is a tiny fraction of 1%. Practically speaking, if you're not being persecuted, and don't have immediate relatives in the US -- you can only come as a skilled worker. It's the only route available to the vast majority of those who wish to come here. And the US is incredibly hostile to skilled workers by allocating a tiny number of visas for skilled workers. For comparison, Australia with 1/15th the US population lets in nearly as many skilled workers as the US does in a year -- i.e. approximately 15 times as many, per capita.
- walterbell 12y ago
  > the odds of winning it is a tiny fraction of 1% The global percentage for 2014 was 1.45% to be selected, but an applicant's percentage can be higher/lower depending on the quota assigned to their country of origin and the number of applicants for that country. http://travel.state.gov/content/visas/english/immigrate/diversity-visa/dv2014-selected-entrants.html http://travel.state.gov/content/visas/english/immigrate/dive...

abecedarius 12y ago

I favor much-more-open borders for people who want to immigrate and become citizens. Any kind of guest-worker program, including the H1B system, I'm more skeptical about. It's understandable for capital to work to carve out selected holes in the fence to benefit themselves the most -- changing the laws isn't easy or cheap -- but that's not the change I'm excited to get behind. (I don't know what specific changes are being pushed right now, if any.)

SwellJoe 12y ago
This is my position, as well. Worker visas are effectively a modern indentured servitude. Foreign workers are much less likely to be a fluid commodity on the job market as US citizens can be, because they have their visa to worry about. I oppose borders, generally speaking, but I have a hard time swallowing the massive corporate empowerment represented by the worker visa process (bootstrapped startups also cannot effectively participate, either).