Brought to you by the Mexicans, paid by Americans
Wow another thread you copied off me, but hey it’s okay, it’s your heritage.
First of all these tariffs are stupid. Secondly, we need to be looking into immigration reform.
First of all these tariffs are stupid. Secondly, we need to be looking into immigration reform.
One, of many issues, is the awarding of green cards. The number of green cards that can be awarded is generally limited by law and is split into various categories and preferences. A breakdown can be found at DHS website.
No relation to tariffs.Agreer, but what's the relation to tariffs?
Fyi, take a look at the Lautenberg Amendment. It's a legal asylum sham that puts what's happening on the Southern border to shame. Many of the folks pouring in on the south appear destitute.
With the Lautenberg, you've got folks who are essentially losers and do nothings in their home states who merely claim they are religious and are given a one way pass to this country with government provided assistance to boot. Its a total outrage.
People claim they are persecuted Christians in places like Russia, Ukraine, and Moldova and pour in by the thousands. It's made up. It's a common scheme amongst Iranians as well. Folks who never followed religion suddenly claim to be god fearing Christians. All on our dime.
You don't have to provide a single document of evidence. You literally make a claim of religious faith and you pass go. Can't make this up.
Also by law, no more than 7 percent of green cards can be awarded to citizens of any one country.
One thing that people on both sides of the aisle seem to agree on is that higher-skilled and more-educated immigrants bring greater economic benefits due to entrepreneurship and innovation than lower-skilled or less-educated immigrants bring.That's incorrect. Depends on the category.
Imo, there are plenty of greencards, the question is how to best divide them. I'd start by raising the requirements for diversity visas if not eliminating them entirely.
One thing that people on both sides of the aisle seem to agree on is that higher-skilled and more-educated immigrants bring greater economic benefits due to entrepreneurship and innovation than lower-skilled or less-educated immigrants bring.
One thing that people on both sides of the aisle seem to agree on is that higher-skilled and more-educated immigrants bring greater economic benefits due to entrepreneurship and innovation than lower-skilled or less-educated immigrants bring.
Yes.Maybe, but it sure seems to me that there's a lot of lower paying jobs that need filled as opposed to higher skilled. Have you seen who is working in the fields?
"How can I sell you the blueness of the sky?" -- some Native AmericanThat sound you hear is Arizona going blue. Two Senators from the Democratic Party and EC votes for the Dem nominee for POTUS in 2020.
Yes.
Even if we look at Canada, they have pursued reforms to "focus its immigration system on fueling economic prosperity and to place a high priority on finding people who have the skills and experience to meet Canada's economic needs (2006). And since 2008, Canada has been "tightening its immigration policies and focusing on economic class immigrants and short-term labor needs." According to the Canadian government, they awarded 26 percent of their permanent resident visas on the basis of family connections and 52 percent to immigrants on an economic basis in 2016. So merit-based would not be a new idea.
Title 8, section 1152 United States Code: Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrantsThat's incorrect. Depends on the category.
Imo, there are plenty of greencards, the question is how to best divide them. I'd start by raising the requirements for diversity visas if not eliminating them entirely.
Title 8, section 1152 United States Code: Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants
The total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area in any fiscal year may not exceed 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available in that fiscal year.
The limit of 7 percent per country on green cards is a problem.
The policy ignores both the value of and the justification for individual immigrants coming here exclusively because of their country of origin, and the result is clearly discriminatory.I disagree that its a problem. In fact, I think its a very good thing, specifically in the case of the employment ones. Otherwise, those visas will be dominated by 1-2 countries.
Does not apply to immediate relative categories.
That's incorrect. Depends on the category.
Imo, there are plenty of greencards, the question is how to best divide them. I'd start by raising the requirements for diversity visas if not eliminating them entirely.
The policy ignores both the value of and the justification for individual immigrants coming here exclusively because of their country of origin, and the result is clearly discriminatory.
Another problem is the visa lottery program, which awards 50,000 visas per year.
According to DHS, they are drawn from a "random selection among all entries to individuals who are from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States."
I thought there were annual quotas per country?
Another issue is all the applications for relief that are being filed where they don't really have a legitimate case. It has overloaded the immigration courts.So what?
What happens in the real world is that people from certain places hire other people from the same places. See the dominance of the Indian IT consultancies re: H1Bs.
Or do you think the "experts" being trained by the Americans they are replacing are actually the best in the world?
Yea, i don't care for the current design of diversity program personally. The standards are way too low.
Wrt family categories... i disagree with the 7% cap, however many of the family categories should be eliminated entirely imo.
Another issue is all the applications for relief that are being filed where they don't really have a legitimate case. It has overloaded the immigration courts.
Practically speaking, there is no downside for an alien not filing an application for relief regardless of the lack of facts or support by relevant law. Everyone involved knows that if the alien expresses any sort of harm, the immigration judge has to provide them an application for relief, grant a continuance for them to file the application, and then schedule an individual hearing and prepare a detailed oral of written decision if the application is denied.
Did the GOP have 60 votes in the Senate?The GOP had majorities and did nothing with them. They are entirely unserious about fixing the immigration system, as is Trump.
Given the common practice by the DHS not to appeal discretionary decisions favorable to the alien to the BIA, many immigration judges apparently grant relief from removal to avoid the considerable time required to prepare an oral or written decision.The GOP had majorities and did nothing with them. They are entirely unserious about fixing the immigration system, as is Trump.
Given the common practice by the DHS not to appeal discretionary decisions favorable to the alien to the BIA, many immigration judges apparently grant relief from removal to avoid the considerable time required to prepare an oral or written decision.
In Iqbal v. Ashcroft, SCOTUS established a workable standard for federal judges to adjudicate motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim for relief under Federal Rule 12(b)(6).
It would seem that this standard could be used to help with backlog of the immigration courts.
Probably a question for one of our lawyers
So, what have the tariffs accomplished, except for tanking my Chinese holdings? Fortunately, I did not, or is it could not?, buy Huawei.Wow another thread you copied off me, but hey it’s okay, it’s your heritage.
If a typical state court judge were required to issue the same degree of precision, either orally or in writing, in every case and for any request by the parties, as is currently the practice in immigration courts, their docket would be at a virtual standstill.I don't see any relation between the two?
If a typical state court judge were required to issue the same degree of precision, either orally or in writing, in every case and for any request by the parties, as is currently the practice in immigration courts, their docket would be at a virtual standstill.
I'm guessing the Iqbal standard did not stand.
Interesting look at an old thread. It seems like my prediction of a Democratic win across the board in Arizona was a good one. It's also funny to see a thread with zero participation from McM. He must have been employed back in 2019.Noticing that @sglowrider has been absent around here. He should come back as his contributions were worthy.
The decline of Manchester United proved too muchNoticing that @sglowrider has been absent around here. He should come back as his contributions were worthy.
She’s a good candidate for a person who asks other posters for money and gets pegged. Not for normal people. You’re not normal peopleYeah, I'm optimistic about a Harris administration. She's a good candidate and should be a strong POTUS. Certainly not the chaos from a Trump administration. Or daily embarrassment. BTW, you seem to be fixated on men's testicles. Seems weird, which makes sense with your alignment with Trump/Vance. I have hope for you McC. With a Harris/Walz administration, you should have good opportunities with a continuing strong job market.
We have people from places in Africa and China coming through our Southern Border. How did they get over here? What is the purpose for them being here? I would like to see us charge their country of origin. Those people got here in some way. It smells of collusion.How will your nominee pay for it?
I think he tired of trying to defend the Chinese governmentNoticing that @sglowrider has been absent around here. He should come back as his contributions were worthy.