231–240 of 701 posts
I assume what they really mean by Immigrants Founded 51% of U.S. Billion-Dollar Startups is that 51% of $1B+ U.S. startups have at least one immigrant founder , right? (as opposed to 51% of unicorn founders are immigrants )
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not true. 70% of Somalians in The Netherlands are still on welfare after 2 years. Most other Africans, most Middle-Eastern types etc all hover between 25 and 50%. In comparison, most Europeans hover around 1-5%. And this is from the CBS (Central Bureau of Statistics), which is a government institution. https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2015/31/zeven-van-de-tien-so... Edit: guys.. just read the link or come with rebutta…
Does that count people legally barred from working (e.g. refugees)?
One of the basic premises of anti-immigrant policies is that you can somehow influence the ratio of "useful" vs "not-useful" immigrants. Apart from the idea of sorting people into useful and useless being inhumane, it also seems to be counterproductive. It looks like every kind of screening of immigrants will deter the more desirable ones, as far as that determination is possible on their arrival at all.
One of the basic premises of anti-immigrant policies is that you can somehow influence the ratio of "useful" vs "not-useful" immigrants. Apart from the idea of sorting people into useful and useless being inhumane, it also seems to be counterproductive. It looks like every kind of screening of immigrants will deter the more desirable ones, as far as that determination is possible on their arrival at all.
Apart from the idea of sorting people into useful and useless being inhumane, it also seems to be counterproductive. Universities do it.
I'd be careful with this information. It did not serve German Jews in the 30's very well to emphasize the fact that they had become important elements of media, finance and science. Instead of showing appreciation, there was a backlash by Germans who felt they were being excluded from these things. It's even easier to see how that same misguided victim sentiment could be applied to immigrants "taking" the opportuniti…
what is to be done though?
the only historically proven thing a person in a potential victim class (such as my own Jewish grandparents) could do in those circumstances is flee for their lives. I hope that things never get to that point in America. We've already a few steps in the wrong direction though.
One of the basic premises of anti-immigrant policies is that you can somehow influence the ratio of "useful" vs "not-useful" immigrants. Apart from the idea of sorting people into useful and useless being inhumane, it also seems to be counterproductive. It looks like every kind of screening of immigrants will deter the more desirable ones, as far as that determination is possible on their arrival at all.
> One of the basic premises of anti-immigrant policies is that you can somehow influence the ratio of "useful" vs "not-useful" immigrants. This is exactly what the study shows is not just possible but easy in screening by nationality. Think about US immigration statistics by country ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_Stat... ): you'll see lots of Central and South American countries. Now take a…
> Immigrants are found to have higher business ownership and formation rates than non-immigrants.
https://www.sba.gov/content/immigrant-entrepreneurs-and-smal...
And let's go ahead and ignore just how unfair Manifest Destiny was to begin with and even more recently Mexican Repatriation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I mean, the problem is that we can't afford to "let them all in", so how do you decide who to let in? An immigration policy that is held be numerous other countries that favors skilled immigrants seems to be reasonable. On the other hand, brain drain. How will those countries continue to get better and enjoy a modern standard of living if all the smart people leave?
> the problem is that we can't afford to "let them all in" Why is that? I'm genuinely curious. Are you making an economic or a cultural argument? On the economic side, there's no evidence that immigration, even mass immigration, has any negative consequences, apart from some more competition at the very low end of salaries, which should obviously be addressed. By and large, immigrants are net contributors to the econ…
I believe that cost per person in developed counties is very high and if the marginal person is not paying a large amount of taxes then they will "cost" the system.
Think things like policing, schooling (for their kids), infrastructure usage, medical costs, administrative costs (documents, id, various "counting"), city services etc. etc.
IMO we should allow immigrants an option to fund these costs to jump the queue (eg, you can get a 4 yr visa for $500k or whatever). Many people feel these kinds of systems "unfair", but I see it as a way that a new person to the country and full invest their future in the good of their new country. Of course all the negative checks should still apply (criminal history for example).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I mean, the problem is that we can't afford to "let them all in", so how do you decide who to let in? An immigration policy that is held be numerous other countries that favors skilled immigrants seems to be reasonable. On the other hand, brain drain. How will those countries continue to get better and enjoy a modern standard of living if all the smart people leave?
> the problem is that we can't afford to "let them all in" Why is that? I'm genuinely curious. Are you making an economic or a cultural argument? On the economic side, there's no evidence that immigration, even mass immigration, has any negative consequences, apart from some more competition at the very low end of salaries, which should obviously be addressed. By and large, immigrants are net contributors to the econ…
Oh just the low end huh? Why all the whining about H1-Bs on this site then?
> which should obviously be addressed
How? Increasing the labor pool is increasing the labor pool. That doesn't lead to higher or even stable wages.
For the eleventy-millionth time: Most of those accused of being "anti-immigrant" aren't against immigrants, but are against illegal immigrants. There must be an orderly process to entry, primarily to prevent criminals & diseases, and also to keep the numbers assimilate-able. The headline alone seems designed to invoke consternation where none existed, or to construe a common position as anti-immigrant which isn't.