821–830 of 1001 posts
So for those that don't know, it's quite common for a visa renewal to be required to leave the country. Depending on the visa, you might have to do this every year. So just imagine, having a normal job in the US and you're asked to leave to renew your visa and this stuff happens. That's no more appointment, not even a new date and you're now very likely unable to work and possibly can't even enter the country to get…
My company has a H-1B guy that travelled home to India a few months ago and since then can't come back because the next date he can get with the US embassy is next year. Seems he may get stuck even longer... I am to some degree on board with keeping a closer eye on immigration, but the way the current administration does it feels intentionally cruel. The guy at my company has a house, wife, and kids in the US; his vi…
I'm an American that lives abroad. I have first-hand experience how other countries treat 'immigrants'. H1B is a temporary non-immigrant visa. I could never imagine myself buying a home in a country where I don't have permanent access to that real estate. I am not opposed to voting to prevent non-PRs from owning real estate in order to keep housing prices lower for residents and prevent non-immigrants from shooting t…
also h1b is “non immigrant” but it is dual intent. this means it is perfectly legal to seek an immigrant (ie green card) visa. again, you have no idea what youre talking about
They’re doing what they should have been doing all along: enforcing the visa rules. The system is being gamed so they have to crack down. There are around 10-15 million illegal immigrants in the US, not including mass visa fraud. It cannot continue.
"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
I see a lot of comments in this thread in support this stance, as if that is something good for Americans, and say it is not a political statement. One thing that changed my viewpoint was this book. Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism by Anne Case, and Angus Deaton. In it, they make a point that, almost all US economists agree that immigration, both legal and Illegal Immigration, is not the cause for Ameri…
a significant proportion of the HN crowd DGAF because they see themselves as current/future founders whose goal is ultimately to scale/enshittify/retire early, which typically requires the reverse robinhooding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The leaving part is not the issue, as you try to immigrate into a country you're subject to the rules that country sets. You're always free to not immigrate into that country (this is not about asylum). The issue here is that, if you just left the country to do everything the country asked you, you are now in limbo. For how long? No one can tell. Does this mean you lose your job? Maybe. And when you decide it's no lo…
when you treat immigrants like they were not people with lifes, you are just one step away from treating poor people as they were not people and then too treat all common people as they were not people. also it has been quite convenient explanation for adopting systems such as Flock and allowing all kinds of para-police actions which seems very similar to what happened in germany circla 1930-1934
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cruelty is the point.
Look around the thread and notice how little the comments defending these policies have to say about the policies themselves. Instead, what they all have in common is a vague underlying fear of being displaced, or sense that something owed to them is being taken.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it’s a cut and dry constitutional amendment, it doesn’t matter if Thomas thinks the people that were in mind when it was drafted are not the same people it applies to now. if they want to change it, go ahead and get the states to ratify a new amendment. Supreme Court doesn’t get to throw out an amendment because it’s old.
The funny thing is I bet ending birthright citizenship is an amendment that could actually be passed. You don't have to be a virulent racist to think the context has changed when you can get almost anywhere in the world in about 24 hours. (I'm not sure where I stand on it but I can at least see an argument for revisiting the question)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Inhumane maybe, but our government should owe its first allegiance to our citizens wellbeing, not imported workers.
The first responsibility is to protect the rights of all people in the country. Citizenship is not required for protected rights
So now, we're just throwing that all away and becoming a merely average country with an average amount of smart and ambitious people. Throwing away our key advantage for literally no benefit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are talking about change (or extension) of status, not visa. US is unique in that the visa sticker and your right to remain in the country (status) are two different things. The only purpose of the visa sticker is to allow you to travel to a U.S. port of entry, where you apply for admission, and therefore legal status. You can have legal status in the U.S. while the visa sticker has expired, and your status can b…
I thought that was universal. The Visa gets you into the country. Your entry stamp shows how long you can stay. It was an extra white card in USA but I forget what designation the form had. Been a while.