Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

cato.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 115 posts

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#11

Post by tombert »

pton_xd wrote: post #4

Conclusion: "The administration should loosen all the restrictions that it has imposed above and beyond what Congress has required, and Congress should overhaul the system to open legal immigration for any person willing to work to contribute to the success of the United States." In other words, we should "promptly admit a majority of the 158 million who told Gallup that they would want to come," according to the 201…

The Cato institute has actually written a lot of stuff about why they believe that admitting in more immigrants would be beneficial to the US.

A quick search came up with this [1], but they've written a lot more.

You don't have to agree with them, but I'm just saying that they actually have done a fair bit of work in this field and they have given some amount of justification to why they hold these views.

[1] https://www.cato.org/testimony/unlocking-americas-potential-...

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#12

Post by Jtsummers »

Matheus28 wrote: post #7
xiphias2 wrote: post #3

[flagged]

Illegal immigrants can’t vote. Permanent residents can’t vote either. You can only vote once you acquire citizenship (which means doing the whole immigration process, then waiting several more years to be able to apply for citizenship).

And waiting 1-3 years to actually get citizenship once you've applied. It was ~18 months for my wife. It also took nearly a year to get a visa for her to move here.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#13

Post by tombert »

crimsoneer wrote: post #2

It's interesting how Cato, that would once have been considered relatively fringe, is ending up opposing some of the more nationalist instincts of the administration.

I think Cato has always held that we should loosen our restrictions on the border, so if an administration goes against that stance then they're going to oppose parts of that administration.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#14

Post by renewiltord »

The US can use a lot more legal immigration. There's nothing wrong with a skill-based immigration program that doesn't necessarily only select for Nobel prize winners. With another hundred million people, and improved land use, we're talking perhaps another 100 years of Pax Americana. I think American should do this for her own sake and for the sake of humanity.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#15

Post by dkjaudyeqooe »

pton_xd wrote: post #4

Conclusion: "The administration should loosen all the restrictions that it has imposed above and beyond what Congress has required, and Congress should overhaul the system to open legal immigration for any person willing to work to contribute to the success of the United States." In other words, we should "promptly admit a majority of the 158 million who told Gallup that they would want to come," according to the 201…

All immigration is GDP additive and increases the market for goods and tax income for governments. It offsets low birth rates. If there is a labor shortage it will reduce inflation.

Of course there many considerations but generally it's a good thing.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#16

Post by tomrod »

blindriver wrote: post #6

Just because someone wants to immigrate to the US doesn't mean they should be allowed. This is the underlying truth that is indisputable. This article says that it grants 1 million green cards per year to legal immigrants, which is extremely generous. To say it's "nearly impossible" is absurd. I myself, my wife, and 80% of my friends are all legal immigrants to the US.

> Just because someone wants to immigrate to the US doesn't mean they should be allowed.

I'll bite.

Why not?

We let capital typically move freely. Why shouldn't people be as free to move as money?

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#17

Post by brailsafe »

pton_xd wrote: post #4

Conclusion: "The administration should loosen all the restrictions that it has imposed above and beyond what Congress has required, and Congress should overhaul the system to open legal immigration for any person willing to work to contribute to the success of the United States." In other words, we should "promptly admit a majority of the 158 million who told Gallup that they would want to come," according to the 201…

> In other words, we should "promptly admit a majority of the 158 million who told Gallup that they would want to come," according to the 2018 survey.

Seems like an alarmist and selective pull.

There's a difference between having a more broadly viable path for legal immigration and instantly admitting anyone who filled out a survey. The context was just making a comparison to frame a previously established inaccurate comparison with other countries, by hypothetically inviting everyone.

> If all 32 million immigrants who attempted the U.S. process in 2018 were added to the U.S. population, it would only bring the immigrant share of the U.S. population to 22 percent—in line with Canada (21 percent). The only way to rival countries like New Zealand (28 percent), Switzerland (29 percent), and Australia (30 percent) would be to promptly admit a majority of the 158 million who told Gallup that they would want to come. On a more reasonable time horizon for natural inflows that accounted for the population growth of U.S.-born Americans, that scale would also be insufficient.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#18

Post by jalapenos »

This historical pattern is quite usual though right? Like Singapore did a similar thing. At the outset, before the country is rich, there's not the same incentives to immigrate as later. Price of admission rising as demand increases isn't that surprising.

But again like another commenter mentioned, these arguments never care to address why the people already there would, as a whole, benefit from others coming.

Sure, the state benefits from increase tax receipts, and the corporations benefit from increased labor supply. But all the people as a whole get is increased competition for everything.

So I assume these Cato people are in a class that stands to benefit, and couldn't care less about other classes.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#19

Post by fatbird »

How many immigrants are allowed in is orthogonal to whether the process is efficient and direct. The process is insanely complicated and takes years and no small amount of luck, or dodging arbitrary discretionary decisions by mid-level bureaucrats. Reforming the process entails nothing about whether that means more or fewer legal immigrants are allowed in, and removes a huge incentive to bypass the process.

In a previous job I helped H-1B cardholders get green cards. I kept getting applicants approaching me saying that they could get one easier with $5,000 in Chicago than waiting all this out. It was hard to argue against that.

Re: Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible: US Legal Immigration Rules Explained

#20

Post by tombert »

Matheus28 wrote: post #7
xiphias2 wrote: post #3

[flagged]

Illegal immigrants can’t vote. Permanent residents can’t vote either. You can only vote once you acquire citizenship (which means doing the whole immigration process, then waiting several more years to be able to apply for citizenship).

Yeah, and it's much harder to get the permanent resident and citizenship status than everyone seems to think it is.

My wife was brought here when she was eight years old, and was able to apply for a quasi-legal status when Obama enacted DACA. When we got married, we were frustrated to find out that we couldn't actually apply for her green card because she was still considered "illegal".

Eventually we got an attorney and she was able to find a waiver for us to apply for a green card, but that took three years of waiting. She finally is qualified to apply for citizenship now, and she has, but we're waiting (probably another five to six months) for an update on that.

When we got married, everyone acted like I was some sort of idiot because "obviously" you get a green card automatically if you marry a citizen. Apparently people are getting their understanding of immigration law from sitcoms.

Post reply on HN