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

US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

pluralistic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 159 posts

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#101

Post by Steltek »

roenxi wrote: post #51
Apreche wrote: post #27

My family came to the US via Ellis Island. Compared to what people have to do today, their legal path to US citizenship was relatively easy. I see no reason that becoming a citizen today should be any more difficult today than it was in the early 20th century. Open a 21st century equivalent of Ellis Island, and let people become citizens.

The growth of a welfare system seems like the major change. How does that plan interact with the welfare system? If someone is impoverished in Asia can they get a plane ticket to the US and expect to eventually be entitled to a state-sponsored minimum standard of living? Maybe healthcare if the left's plans for that get through eventually?

There were only two requirements at Ellis Island:

1. You were free of contagious medical diseases

2. You were not in danger of "becoming a public charge" (welfare)

That plan is perfectly compatible with your concerns.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#102

Post by Apreche »

roenxi wrote: post #51
Apreche wrote: post #27

My family came to the US via Ellis Island. Compared to what people have to do today, their legal path to US citizenship was relatively easy. I see no reason that becoming a citizen today should be any more difficult today than it was in the early 20th century. Open a 21st century equivalent of Ellis Island, and let people become citizens.

The growth of a welfare system seems like the major change. How does that plan interact with the welfare system? If someone is impoverished in Asia can they get a plane ticket to the US and expect to eventually be entitled to a state-sponsored minimum standard of living? Maybe healthcare if the left's plans for that get through eventually?

These new immigrants will work and pay taxes.

And of course, taxing the rich can cover a LOT of people.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#103

Post by graemep »

m_a_g wrote: post #35
graemep wrote: post #24

He is a US citizen? Three nationalities? His reasons for leaving the UK make interesting reading in current circumstances: > The USA is putting curbs on surveillance, expanding its national healthcare, and there are mass parental boycotts of standardised testing in its public schools. The UK just elected a Tory majority government that's going to continue to slash and burn the welfare state, attack schools, health, l…

At first, I couldn’t believe it, but Cory Doctorow did write that terrible blog post. (Un)Surprisingly, everything turned out quite differently than expected. London outshines LA in many ways, except for the weather.

Yes, very unlike him to write something that bad.

I would guess he might have misunderstanding the politics - you can get an exaggerated sense of how much difference a Conservative rather than Labour government makes from the media. Maybe also taking a short term view - the prime minister changed the following year, and Labour won last year's election.

The odd thing is that he became a British citizen when the UK had a Conservative government and lived in London for another five years before deciding to move.

I even agree with some of his criticisms of London and how it has developed, but a lot of his reasoning just does not make sense to me

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#104

Post by rayiner »

Apreche wrote: post #102
roenxi wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The growth of a welfare system seems like the major change. How does that plan interact with the welfare system? If someone is impoverished in Asia can they get a plane ticket to the US and expect to eventually be entitled to a state-sponsored minimum standard of living? Maybe healthcare if the left's plans for that get through eventually?

These new immigrants will work and pay taxes. And of course, taxing the rich can cover a LOT of people.

No, your assumption is false. Even if all those paper valuations, etc., were real money you could use to pay for school lunches today, a 100% tax on the total wealth of U.S. billionaires wouldn’t even fund the federal and state governments for a year.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#105

Post by eudamoniac »

jgwil2 wrote: post #99
eudamoniac wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it is culture. The desire for an ethnostate is a proxy desire for a monoculture, somewhat easier to implement because it's easier to see someone is white than to see their behavior patterns. There are also studies that show most people have subconscious tension among other races even from the same culture, though. But the outright desire for an ethnostate or a monoculture are both politically untenable in the Wes…

> Never mind that every country we idolize, e.g. Japan, Scandinavia, are essentially [ethnostates]. In Sweden 25% of the population has foreign background, in Norway 19%, in Denmark 14%. Hardly "ethnostates" at all.

Okay, but those are very recent developments to which the historical sentiment hasn't fully caught up. To the extent it has, it's via negative memetic sentiments, e.g. "Stockholm is now the rape capital of the world!" Sweden, at least, also, doesn't capture racial demographics, so we don't know the makeup of the foreign born population. Walking around Helsinki, you don't need statistics to notice the homogeny.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#106

Post by eudamoniac »

LexiMax wrote: post #100
eudamoniac wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it is culture. The desire for an ethnostate is a proxy desire for a monoculture, somewhat easier to implement because it's easier to see someone is white than to see their behavior patterns. There are also studies that show most people have subconscious tension among other races even from the same culture, though. But the outright desire for an ethnostate or a monoculture are both politically untenable in the Wes…

> Countries have the right to cultivate this feeling among their citizens. I disagree, because what seems to always be the logical next step is "My monoculture is superior, and deserves dominion above your monoculture, which deserves eradication. And oh by the way, if you don't like our monoculture and try to escape it, we'll invade that place too." That's kind of what the "mono" in monoculture implies. Multicultural…

I don't see it that way. From my perspective, America would be more stable socially if it balkanized. There is a lot of tension borne of cultural heterogeneity. Coasts vs South, most of Texas vs Houston, etc. Nothing about it is positive, except maybe economically.

I guess this might lead to wars via a more cohesive national identity, like how diversity in the workplace reduces unionization efforts, but I largely doubt it would turn out so poorly.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#107

Post by _DeadFred_ »

fhkatari wrote: post #30

I want to share a couple of stories of immigration. 1. Personal. In the aftermath of 9/11, a simple switch from F1 Student Visa to H1 work visa became a perfect Kafkaesque nightmare. The consulate denied the visa without giving a reason. After two months of non-response, my company reached out to the congressman's office. Apparently, the consulate wanted a copy of my transcript and they reached out to my university,…

Imagine launching $75 billion dollar war on drugs where you didn't arrest drug dealers, only users. Yet the party of law and order and their supporters somehow aren't demanding these large scale abusers of employment law, and encouragers of illegal immigration be included in enforcement action. Really makes it look about racism more than smart/intentional/traditional law enforcement.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#108

Post by _DeadFred_ »

bubblethink wrote: post #56
roenxi wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The growth of a welfare system seems like the major change. How does that plan interact with the welfare system? If someone is impoverished in Asia can they get a plane ticket to the US and expect to eventually be entitled to a state-sponsored minimum standard of living? Maybe healthcare if the left's plans for that get through eventually?

I've heard this argument going back to Milton Friedman, but the immigration discourse these days is quite detached from any economic concerns. Forget impoverished people; there is rabid opposition to pretty much all immigration including, for example, investor or employment categories. It's a lot more tribal than rational.

Man I'm ashamed that I wanted to see H1B reformed and was a part of this crowd.

I want more immigration I just don't want companies able to abuse people/people be treated any different/having less rights/power than anyone else in American. I think I'm just going to be full 'open borders' now because otherwise it always ends up with trash manipulating things in racist/corporate power way.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#109

Post by csa »

astura wrote: post #61
bubblethink wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author is mostly correct. A lot of discourse in America revolves around, "Why don't they get come in legally?"

>A lot of discourse in America revolves around, "Why don't get come in legally?" Do you honestly believe that people who say "Why don't [they] come in legally?" are complaining about a lack of administrative process? Do you really, honestly believe that? Because if you do I have a bridge in Brooklyn I can give you a great deal on. "Why don't [they] come in legally?" is just conservative doublespeak for for "they don'…

> Why don't [they] come in legally?" is just conservative doublespeak for for "they don't belong here." It's begging the question and everyone knows that, even the person saying it.

While this question is definitely used in the way you, I’ve heard it come from the mouths of more legal immigrants than I can count.

It’s not just conservatives who are saying this.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#110

Post by secretballot »

astura wrote: post #61
bubblethink wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author is mostly correct. A lot of discourse in America revolves around, "Why don't they get come in legally?"

>A lot of discourse in America revolves around, "Why don't get come in legally?" Do you honestly believe that people who say "Why don't [they] come in legally?" are complaining about a lack of administrative process? Do you really, honestly believe that? Because if you do I have a bridge in Brooklyn I can give you a great deal on. "Why don't [they] come in legally?" is just conservative doublespeak for for "they don'…

I can 100% guarantee you that most Americans have no clue whatsoever how hard it is to "come in legally".

People from cosmopolitan well-educated world traveler tech-connected circles are common on HN, but are extreme outliers. I would agree that the overwhelming majority of those sorts are aware of it. The general public? No.

It's true that many don't want anyone (or certain anyones) to come in at all and are saying those kinds of things as a deflection or smokescreen, but plenty of others saying "they should just come in legally" don't realize what a feat they're demanding. They don't know what any immigration process anywhere looks like, in the US or elsewhere. They don't know what ours has been like in the past, either, at all (in fact I bet many think it's been trending less strict and difficult over time, which, LOL). But they're still comfortable suggesting people should simply find a legal route to come in (while, again, having no idea what that actually means).

Post reply on HN