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

91–100 of 159 posts

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#91

Post by eudamoniac »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #86
rayiner wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cultural differences between companies in a country are superficial compared to the cultural differences between countries. We have strong evidence that deeper cultural, everything from attitudes towards saving, government, and social trust, persists for generations after immigration: https://www.nas.org/academic-questions/36/2/rethinking-immig... (“The authors found that forty-six percent of home-country attitud…

> You can see this just by going around the country. Scandinavia has much higher social trust than Italy. The upper midwest, where Scandinavian immigration dominated, has higher social trust than NJ/NY, which saw mass immigration from southern Italy. OK, that's interesting, I'll have to look into that book. However, what's going on in this chart? https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-trsic/tru... I can s…

Not OP, but UK has experienced massive amounts of foreign culture immigration recently that Ireland has not.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#92

Post by eudamoniac »

nisegami wrote: post #20
kreetx wrote: post #5

Summary: legal immigration is very difficult to impossible. The solution, IMO, isn't "just enter illegally". When you're not a citizen then, quite frankly, the fact that you want to immigrate doesn't matter. It's the country that says whether you should get in or not.

The Europeans didn't refrain from creating colonies in the Americas after learning it was already inhabited.

How did that work out for the previous inhabitants?

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#93

Post by surgical_fire »

rayiner wrote: post #85
surgical_fire wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many fear that refugees are a drain on their welfare state At least the excerpt of the article you linked say that people fear that, but does not provide any numbers to say that this fear makes sense or not.

The article has a chart based on data collected in Denmark: https://share.google/ilc3koVJx2YOokuXa

So, based on this chart, only migrants from "MENAPT" countries are a net negative in terms of contributions irrespective of age?

It's difficult to evaluate on others.

For example "other non-western immigrants" are net positive during their work years, but net negative in their ols age. But people typically don't become migrants in their 70s, they become migrants mostly during work years.

This chart is bad for multiple reasons. It does not separate migrants by type of visa - are they on some sort of critical skills visa? Are they undocumented? It doesn't say.

It also does not indicate the proportions. If 99% of migrants are on their working years and only 1% of migrants in their old age, then in general it is a net positive even if some are a strain on welfare.

Any evaluation on migrants that don't account for the type of migration going on is very flawed. Are we talking about refugees? engineers? medical doctors? nurses? academic researchers? low-skilled undocumented migrants?

All of those will be dramatically different in terms of how they integrate into society, how they contribute to the welfare state, how mucch they pay in the taxes, etc.

Painting it with broad strokes sound to me way too much like fear mongering.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#94

Post by logicchains »

anovikov wrote: post #89
logicchains wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're rich America is one of the safest places in the world: you can access the best hospitals in the world and well-armed private security. Citizenship means you can't suddenly be kicked out for expressing your political views.

But there's absurd amount of crime... Best hospitals, true, but Israel has same or better ones and they are much cheaper too. Which again isn't a valid reason to live there let alone not to get citizenship. For any kind of acute/emergency care, you don't need "best" hospitals, just good ones are fine. For more complex conditions, you can always travel for treatment/live temporarily.

Israel's at very real risk of being hit by a neighbouring country's rocket, which is extremely unlikely to happen to the US. And the crime in the US isn't in the places where very rich people live.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#95

Post by surgical_fire »

eudamoniac wrote: post #91
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can see this just by going around the country. Scandinavia has much higher social trust than Italy. The upper midwest, where Scandinavian immigration dominated, has higher social trust than NJ/NY, which saw mass immigration from southern Italy. OK, that's interesting, I'll have to look into that book. However, what's going on in this chart? https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-trsic/tru... I can s…

Not OP, but UK has experienced massive amounts of foreign culture immigration recently that Ireland has not.

https://www.gov.ie/en/department-of-the-taoiseach/collection...

According to official stats, 16% of Irish residents are citizens of other countries. Keep in mind that this number will exclude foreign nationals that got Irish citizenship through naturalization (and therefore became Irish citizens).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign-born_population_of_the...

Most recent numbers from the UK list 16% of the population being "foreign-born". While this number may be similar to Ireland, it still counts someone as foreign born even if they became UK citizens by naturalization.

Also, consider that one of the most prominent migration sources for the UK is of Irish nationals (that can live and work in the UK even after brexit). Irish culture is not too dissimilar to UK culture (especially considering that Northern Ireland is currently part of the UK).

If anything, Ireland experienced more foreign culture immigration than the UK, not less.

Your point is invalid.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#96

Post by mothballed »

surgical_fire wrote: post #95
eudamoniac wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not OP, but UK has experienced massive amounts of foreign culture immigration recently that Ireland has not.

https://www.gov.ie/en/department-of-the-taoiseach/collection... According to official stats, 16% of Irish residents are citizens of other countries. Keep in mind that this number will exclude foreign nationals that got Irish citizenship through naturalization (and therefore became Irish citizens). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign-born_population_of_the... Most recent numbers from the UK list 16% of the populatio…

Do they count North Ireland as 'foreign born' even though they are notionally Irish and born in Ireland (but not RoI)? Those have got to be one of the major 'immigrants' to RoI.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#97

Post by kreetx »

Ar-Curunir wrote: post #80
kreetx wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The entire post reads like a justification to illegal immigration, no?

No, it reads like an explanation of the pain-in-the-ass called immigrating to the US.

In context of current events it really doesn't.

Also, perhaps the pain is deliberate as to limit the inflow?

Again, vote into office people who do it the way you want and don't try to rip law apart when you're the minority.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#98

Post by surgical_fire »

mothballed wrote: post #96
surgical_fire wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.gov.ie/en/department-of-the-taoiseach/collection... According to official stats, 16% of Irish residents are citizens of other countries. Keep in mind that this number will exclude foreign nationals that got Irish citizenship through naturalization (and therefore became Irish citizens). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign-born_population_of_the... Most recent numbers from the UK list 16% of the populatio…

Do they count North Ireland as 'foreign born' even though they are notionally Irish and born in Ireland (but not RoI)? Those have got to be one of the major 'immigrants' to RoI.

Irish numbers are not based on being "foreign born". It is only based on citizenship status.

As far as I know, those born in Northern Ireland have automatic right to Irish citizenship for being born in the island of Ireland.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving-country/irish-c...

> The Good Friday Agreement, which was signed between the Irish and British governments in 1998, confirmed that people born in Northern Ireland could choose to be either British or Irish citizens.

> Since 1 January 2005, if you are born in Northern Ireland, you can claim Irish citizenship if your parent (or parents) are either British or Irish citizens, or one of them has lived on the island of Ireland for at least 3 out of the 4 years immediately before your birth.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#99

Post by jgwil2 »

eudamoniac wrote: post #90
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With recent legislation here in Australia Are you of Aboriginal extraction? Otherwise, I'm not sure an ethnic homeland for you would be Australia, right? This stuff is so weird, as basically all humans migrated to wherever they are now. Like, I'm pretty sure that I have Celtic, Norman, Viking and other ancestors, despite my official ancestry being Irish (and all of my last 3-4 generations being born in Ireland). Is…

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.

Re: US Immigration on the Easiest Setting

#100

Post by LexiMax »

eudamoniac wrote: post #90
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With recent legislation here in Australia Are you of Aboriginal extraction? Otherwise, I'm not sure an ethnic homeland for you would be Australia, right? This stuff is so weird, as basically all humans migrated to wherever they are now. Like, I'm pretty sure that I have Celtic, Norman, Viking and other ancestors, despite my official ancestry being Irish (and all of my last 3-4 generations being born in Ireland). Is…

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. Multiculturalism isn't an asset because it's the most stable form of soceity, rather it's best we've figured out when the alternative is bloodshed between warring tribes.

Post reply on HN