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

I spent the last 15 years trying to become an American and failed

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 615 posts

Re: I spent the last 15 years trying to become an American and failed

#51

Post by JoshTriplett »

surge wrote: post #42
murbard2 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that logic , you cannot have a welfare state without mandatory sterilization of the poor. Most will recoil in horror at this, and yet, the harm done by closed border is far greater (people are literally dying while eating dirt because they were born in the wrong country). But that's beside the point since I was specifically addressing highly skilled immigration.

It's a major problem for Scandinavian countries right now, if you read the local news, its a big problem that many immigrants have a higher and satisfactory conditions of living on welfare compared to where they were from. They have little incentive to work when they are provided what they consider a high standard of living with no effort. It's caused quite a bit of backlash and "racism" in their otherwise progressiv…

If a welfare system only works because people are culturally indoctrinated/shamed away from using it, then it's broken by design. Sure, it would be nice to have a culture in which people are disinclined to be supported by charity unless they absolutely need it (though that kind of shaming can also push people to avoid it even when they do need it). But at the same time, if that cultural disinclination is the only control on the welfare system, it's broken. The goal of any welfare system should be to prevent people from suffering or dying because something went horribly wrong; it's an insurance mechanism. Nobody should die just because they fell on a string of bad luck or circumstances; on the other hand, why should welfare support someone with piles of opportunities available but no inclination to pursue them?

Re: I spent the last 15 years trying to become an American and failed

#52

Post by nicolas_t »

I work for customers in the US as a software consultant (paid at New York rates) but because of the hassle and difficulties to get a visa there, I do not live there. This means that I get money from the US but I do not reinject it in the economy, I also do not pay taxes in the US. I'm a net loss for this country all because of the visa policies.

Re: I spent the last 15 years trying to become an American and failed

#53

Post by scott_s »

eloisant wrote: post #50
KingMob wrote: post #46

Without discussing the larger issue of immigration, might I suggest that the right outcome was reached in this particular case? Job opportunities in the legal profession have decreased drastically in the last decade, and for all his rhetoric of "America wanting the best and brightest", it may have been hard to justify letting him stay when there is a glut of lawyers. This probably factored into the decision of his bo…

I'd say sponsoring for a green card is usually not a good move for an employer, as the employee will have more freedom to change jobs once he gets the green card. Also it's a very long and costly process. They'd have to really want to keep the employee, and to have exhausted all other visa options.

I know that some employers treat green card sponsorship similar to a bonus: if you leave before z years after getting the green card, you owe them $x0,000.

Re: I spent the last 15 years trying to become an American and failed

#54

Post by fred2133 »

markbnj wrote: post #40

It seems to me that labor is at a significant disadvantage when capital can move from country to country and is welcomed with open arms wherever it goes, but workers are locked into whatever situation they were born into.

Free movement of goods, labour and capital. Miss out one and you don't have a free market, you're just being scammed.

Re: I spent the last 15 years trying to become an American and failed

#55

Post by JoshTriplett »

kazinator wrote: post #24
murbard2 wrote: post #12

I personally consider that opening borders is a moral imperative, but I understand why it is controversial. I understand that the arguments against "letting everyone in" have some merit, though I ultimately disagree with them. What is a real head scratcher to me is the US policy on highly-skilled immigrants. There are certainly some political constituencies in favor of those, but I can't think of anyone against, at l…

Opening borders works for multicultural countries built on immigration. For countries that are based on a unique language, ethnicity and culture, it is damaging.

> For countries that are based on a unique language, ethnicity and culture, it is damaging.

Let's take those one at a time.

Language: Sure, granted, there's a tendency to gravitate towards more common languages. Arguably that's a net benefit for people who would otherwise have grown up only speaking a less common language; learning a more common language grants access to a much larger set of speakers, information, and opportunities. That said, language doesn't tend to be lost, just not kept as an exclusive cultural barrier. Witness the massive efforts to internationalize information, to improve accessibility. And it's still common in many countries to look down upon anyone not speaking the native language, if that can be considered a feature.

Ethnicity: What do you have in mind other than language and culture, here? Because I hope you're not suggesting "racial purity" as a property worth preserving.

Finally, culture: Only if that culture is unable to propagate itself on its own merits, or in other words, if that culture has merits worth propagating. Some cultures have incredible history and traditions, and those have typically been preserved and spread further than they ever would have been otherwise. On the other hand, there are cultures built on oppression, indoctrination, suppression of dissent, lack of opportunity, and other undesirable properties; those cultures don't tend to survive exposure to broader information and the outside world (as well as the visibility of those cultures and their traditions to the outside world), which is all the more reason for such exposure. Not all traditions are worth preserving.

Re: I spent the last 15 years trying to become an American and failed

#56

Post by zzalpha »

kazinator wrote: post #24
murbard2 wrote: post #12

I personally consider that opening borders is a moral imperative, but I understand why it is controversial. I understand that the arguments against "letting everyone in" have some merit, though I ultimately disagree with them. What is a real head scratcher to me is the US policy on highly-skilled immigrants. There are certainly some political constituencies in favor of those, but I can't think of anyone against, at l…

Opening borders works for multicultural countries built on immigration. For countries that are based on a unique language, ethnicity and culture, it is damaging.

Damaging in what sense?

Re: I spent the last 15 years trying to become an American and failed

#57

Post by lukeschlather »

ElComradio wrote: post #7
vonklaus wrote: post #4

A friend of mine works in shipping at a reputable and profitable firm. His roommate, a Greek national also engaged with the firm, was "deported". Twice. He wasn't literally thrown out of the country but it amounted to as much, having similar visa issues. His employer, unlike the author, sponsored him. However, two separate lawyers were unable to secure him a place in the country. One made a costly mistake and was fir…

Has it actually been shown that if we were to throw open the borders to STEM employees that it would result in a net economic gain? Because as far as I can tell, movements to get droves of women and immigrants into software is entirely driven by companies' desire for cheaper labor.

We're not really talking about opening the borders to STEM employees. We're talking about keeping highly educated people, educated at US universities, in the country.

There is some exploitation that happens, but by and large people are going to pay market rate +-15%, minus administrative costs. Administrative costs for hiring immigrants are extremely high, so it makes sense that their wages might be a bit less. (The best way to raise their wages is to reduce the administrative costs.)

The system as it is structured right now is basically designed as a foreign aid program. It encourages foreigners to come to the US, get a degree, work for a few years while saving a lot of money, then go home and invest it in building a new business not in this country.

Re: I spent the last 15 years trying to become an American and failed

#58

Post by tormeh »

jmorphy88 wrote: post #5
ryandrake wrote: post #3

US immigration rules would be much saner if people born here had to jump through the same hoops, wait in the same lines, fill out the same forms, and go through the same process for citizenship, as people not born here.

In fact, it's downright oppressive that the government of the United States treats its own citizens differently than citizens of foreign countries.

The government is supposed to represent its citizens, so, uh, no.

Re: I spent the last 15 years trying to become an American and failed

#59

Post by ta92929 »

scott_s wrote: post #21

I agree with the author that the process is absurd, as many of my colleagues have gone through it. But, as far as I understand it, employer sponsorship is not the only path to a green card. One colleague and friend works at a startup, and he is pursuing his green card himself, through an immigration lawyer he hired. It is not cheap - with lawyer fees and all, I believe it's in the $20,000 range - and it requires maki…

That top performer category is hard to get. It's for world class people, like professional athletes, world renown artists, or Nobel Prize winners.

Re: I spent the last 15 years trying to become an American and failed

#60

Post by jacquesm »

nicolas_t wrote: post #52

I work for customers in the US as a software consultant (paid at New York rates) but because of the hassle and difficulties to get a visa there, I do not live there. This means that I get money from the US but I do not reinject it in the economy, I also do not pay taxes in the US. I'm a net loss for this country all because of the visa policies.

But you're a net gain for the country where you do live.
Post reply on HN