Legalize illegal immigration, YES or NO

Joined
5/2/06
Messages
12,166
Points
273
What are your thoughts on this? Should the US government allow millions of illegal immigrants to become legal residents, then citizens to get them out of the shadow? Will this encourage more illegal immigrants to come here in hope of future amnesty?

I know all of us here are law bidding citizens and many have waited years to do it the right way (F1-H1B-GC-USC). With all the politically motivated rules such as the TARP limit, it's getting harder for talented people like the people graduated from MFE programs to get a job after doing everything by the book. Is it fair?

Immigration Rally Draws Thousands - NYTimes.com
Senators try to exclude illegal immigrants from 2010 Census - USATODAY.com

Share your thoughts.
 
The only easy answer to this is some change is better than status quo. On one side, legalizing them will probably cost less time, effort and money than deporting them ( time and again ). Plus, they will then be tax payers instead of social drains.

On the other side, what is the message sent to those who follow the legal route. My wife and her family spent almost 15 years dealing with immigration trying to do it the right way.
 
Two Sides of the Issue

I think, there are two sides of the barrier, so to speak. One side: people who do not have GCs yet and/or have the process pending (that even may not conclude positively and fast enough); and those who already on the other side (have GCs). [Also there is a category of people who do not understand the problem in the first place (among them are those who were born in the US or came very early in their lives, no matter if they say they do).] In general, those two sides will have opposite opinions, at least that's what I think, I might be wrong.

On one hand, when I think how much money, effort and time it took me to get my GC, I feel that it's somewhat unfair that some people will get documents in a quite fast, relatively cheap and straightforward way. On the other hand, I think it's time to do "something" in regards to illegal immigration problem. Obviously it's not an easy one to solve. I think there is not enough done to prevent it in the first place, or at least reduce it. It's very complicated issue...
 
I don't think there is a clear solution to this problem. The last time US tried to solve this, Regan signed 1986 Amnesty and it made it worse.
If this legislation is to pass (wind of change), I'd like to see drastic improvement to the queue of people who are doing it the right way. The current visa wait for siblings of American citizens are 12 years. Looks like they will have to wait longer than illegal immigrants to get a GC.
 
I think government needs to come up with a way to give away GC to legal immigrants who went to schools here in the US, paid out of State tuitions and have full time jobs in Engineering/Sciences and are paying taxes and with no hope of getting a GC.

Currently it cost over 20k for a large Corporation/Bank to do GC for an H1B and nobody wants to do it. I have been in the US for almost a decade F1-H1 and H1 is now running out with no hopes of getting a GC even if i want to pay for it. I think it will also help the housing crisis as lot of them have to leave the country in ten days if they loose their jobs so some are reluctant to even purchase a house.

Goverment can adopt the point system to legalise people just the way they have it in other first world countries like Canada/Australia/UK.

Illegal immigrants need to be shipped back if they have criminal records, the rest who worked jobs that American would not normally do for a decade should be legalized. Reward them with something as they never made the money in their lives, atleast their kids can enjoy the AMERICAN DREAM
 
I thought it's 6 years. At least if you are category 1.
Siblings are FB4 with a visa wait of over 10 years currently.
Visa Bulletin November 2009
If you are unlucky enough to hail from the Philippines, it's a 22 years wait.
I think government needs to come up with a way to give away GC to legal immigrants who went to schools here in the US, paid out of State tuitions and have full time jobs in Engineering/Sciences and are paying taxes and with no hope of getting a GC.
Laws are influenced by powerful special interest groups. The agricultural, restaurant, apparel, meat packing, etc industries all benefit from cheap labor.
Imagine the influx of talent if the US institutes a scoring system like the UK/Canada. That may not go well with groups acting on the name of "protecting American jobs".
 
Originally Posted by Andy
Laws are influenced by powerful special interest groups. The agricultural, restaurant, apparel, meat packing, etc industries all benefit from cheap labor.
Imagine the influx of talent if the US institutes a scoring system like the UK/Canada. That may not go well with groups acting on the name of "protecting American jobs".



Very well agree ! I see no special interest in giving away GC to legal immigrants. Some of the republicans might accuse Obama administration of legalizing terrorists. I think when or if they pass an immigration reform for illegal immigrants, i might have to hop in the bandwagon with the fellow "Amigos".

There is more debate of illegals than legals, seems like they are too many of them so they have snatched the spotlight.

The US still can adopt a point system but does not have to be as lenient as Canada, the Canadian system is too easy with no points given to Canadian education/work experience or years lived in the country. Australian point system factors Australian education/work experience, etc seems like the right way to give away Permanent Residency.

But again there is no real advantage in giving away GC's to legals, one legal resident leaving the country due to visa issues is one white collar job saved.
 
No easy answers. If you don't "regularise" them, they remain a vast shadowy army. If you do, you encourage the practice of more illegal entries. Furthermore, I don't think the country as a whole is better off given the general calibre of illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants weaken the hand of legal American labor by undercutting their wages. Certain business sectors profit from this. I don't think the government has the will to look for real solutions (whatever they might be).
 
Pro immigration? Without a shadow of a doubt yes. After all, I myself am one.

Pro illegal immigration? Heck no.

There's a process. Follow it. It exists for a reason.
 
I don't have a problem with the government bringing the illegals out of the shadows...in fact I think it would be in their best interest to do so...but what would tick me off is if the illegals are given a one way ticket to GC and USC while all those other folks who followed the law to the letter from F1 to H1, and left wallowing in the hope that they might get lucky and win a GC from the DV lottery or some sort of miracle will happen after spending six years on H1.
But again there is no real advantage in giving away GC's to legals, one legal resident leaving the country due to visa issues is one white collar job saved.
Some studies put the percentage of silicon valley companies founded by immigrants at 15% to 25%, so you could also argue that more folks would be unemployed if you chase these immigrants out of the country.
 
Many comments, but two things are certain:
- few people agree with illegal immigration
- GreenCard process is confusing to say the least

I agree with both. The second item can be resolved relatively easy, but there is no "political will".
A ranking system that requires a certain work experience and a Graduate School degree would cover most of specialized workers with F1/H1-B at the moment.
It can include precise details so the people know what to expect.

Now, it is up to the employer and State Department that analyze entire folder of documents for each candidate. These documents were relevant to get the job, then perhaps advance in career. They should not be needed to make a visa decision.
It feels like you are re-taking same exam till passing ...
 
Immigration legal or illegal is a hot potato issue.
There is one recent UN report which talk positively about migration (low skilled or high skilled)
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-10-05-voa18.cfm

My take: Immigration is a huge win in the long term, an almost impossible sell in the short term.

Immigration follows Netwon's first law: there is great inertia for change of any kind. So, immigration is a very tough sell in the short term.

I would argue that immigration restrictions in relative more competetive countires help the source countries(countries that send more net immigrants to one country), their home grown talent (talent grown from their tax payers money), will most likely stay back and give them some returns. With free immigration, they go and serve the relatively richer countries.
For ex: a competent math professor in Vietnam, would prefer to go an teach/serve in the USA. This has two dynamics, the USA is benefitted by the good Vietnamese teacher(the professor grew up in Vietnam, so the Vietnamese taxpayers paid for him), and at the same time deprives Vietnam of a good teacher. Now, if it is tough for him to get jobs in the USA, the professor will teach math in Vietnam. In this process he raises the competetiveness of his fellow (relatively poor) Vietnamese. So in the short term, a slightly less competent teacher in the USA, who would teach instead of the Vietnamese is happy, but in the long term, the students in the USA are benefitted less, and in addition they have to face more competetion from Vietnam.

There will be oppostion to this example: mostly it would be that this is a very specific case, but in general things immigration is bad for the USA. My response to those critics: it is just proof of my hypothesis about immigration issue following : Newton's first law of motion.
 
The fallacy of your argumentation is around who decides competence.
Is it Labor Department? Is it the institution/company where person is employed?

Since there is no absolute ranking overall for workers between companies, I would tend to say that the company is best positioned to decide. Labor department can provide incentives to hire U.S. citizens, however in the end the company decides.
If they need the guy, then he/she must be competent. The company benefits from the employee, higher profit, higher taxes. What is the loss for U.S.?

Perhaps, you consider that an American interviewing for same position evidently weaker (incentives added) than foreigner lost the job? In this case, might as well block immigration completely and wait 50 years to see all science/engineering development moved to other countries (e.g. Vietnam).
 
I think when or if they pass an immigration reform for illegal immigrants, i might have to hop in the bandwagon with the fellow "Amigos".

So you are assuming that most of the illegal immigrants are from spanish speaking countries, right?

---------- Post added at 12:56 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:52 AM ----------

There's a process. Follow it. It exists for a reason.

This is usually true. However such a process tends to benefit some group of people above others (I'm an example).
 
The agricultural, restaurant, apparel, meat packing, etc industries all benefit from cheap labor.

Not only those, consider also Technology, finance and banking. If I can get somebody with the same skill set as a citizen but with an H1 visa and I can pay him/her less money, why not to do it? I will have the person for around 6 years at my mercy so to speak because I'm the sponsor and if I end that sponsorship what he/she is going to do?

---------- Post added at 01:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:59 AM ----------

I would tend to say that the company is best positioned to decide. Labor department can provide incentives to hire U.S. citizens, however in the end the company decides.

Yes, the company is best positioned to decide what is good for them which mean something like the following:

1) Let me maximize the output/productivity of the person I'm hiring
2) Let me minimize the amount I'm going to pay that person
3) If the person I'm going to hire is going to give me less headaches, that's an added bonus.

Who will fulfill most of those requirements, somebody a Citizen or a Green Card holder or a an immigrant on a work VISA?

It is all about incentive and the companies will try to maximize what's better for them, no necessarily who the most competent is but how I can maximize the output with minimal investment of money and time.

---------- Post added at 01:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:08 AM ----------

Wikipedia says that majority of illegal immigrants are Mexican, followed by other Latin American countries.
Illegal immigration to the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So I can consider myself one of those "Amigos" then.

1) I came from a spanish speaking country
2) I came illegally (running away from communism)
3) I benefited from the Immigration laws in the US that protect people from my country. :)
 
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/19/60minutes/main559476.shtml

Imported from India: CBS article


What is America's most valuable import from India? It may very well be brainpower.

Hundreds of thousands of well-educated Indians have come to the U.S. in recent decades - many to work in the computer and software industries.

The best and brainiest among them seem to share a common credential: They're graduates of the Indian Institute of Technology, better known as IIT.

IIT has seven campuses throughout the country, and as we discovered when we traveled there last year, its students consider themselves the luckiest people in India. Correspondent Lesley Stahl reports on this story which first aired March 2, 2003.
<hr width="50%">
Put Harvard, MIT and Princeton together, and you begin to get an idea of the status of IIT in India.

IIT is dedicated to producing world-class chemical, electrical and computer engineers with a curriculum that may be the most rigorous in the world.

Just outside the campus gates, the slums, congestion and chaos of Bombay are overwhelming.

But inside, it's quiet and uncrowded and, by Indian standards, very well equipped. Getting here is the fervent dream of nearly every student.

With a population of over a billion people in India, competition to get into
the IITs is ferocious. Last year, 178,000 high school seniors took the entrance exam called the JEE. Just over 3,500 were accepted, or less than two percent.

Compare that with Harvard, which accepts about 10 percent of its applicants.

The IITs probably are the hardest school in the world to get into, to the best of my knowledge, says Vinod Khosla, who got into IIT about 30 years ago.

After graduating, Khosla came to the U.S., co-founded Sun Microsystems and became one of Silicon Valley's most important venture capitalists. He's one of thousands of IIT graduates who have made it big in the U.S.

Microsoft, Intel, PCs, Sun Microsystems -- you name it, I can't imagine a major area where Indian IIT engineers haven't played a leading role, says Khosla.

And, of course, the American consumer and the American business in the end is the beneficiary of that.


It isn't just high tech. The head of the giant consulting firm McKinsey & Company is an IIT grad. So is the vice chairman of Citigroup and the former CEO of US Airways. Fortune 500 headhunters are always on the lookout for that IIT degree.

They are favored over almost anybody else. If you're a WASP walking in for a job, you wouldn't have as much pre-assigned credibility as you do if you're an engineer from IIT, says Khosla.

Ninety percent of IIT students are male, and the young men we met in Bombay know they're hot commodities.

Plus, the American companies love the kids from IIT. And the students view it as a ticket to another way of life.

Em Rahm, one of India's leading journalists, says that because the stakes are so high, a kid starts preparing early.

By 10, you know whether you've made it--you're made for it or not, he says.

But just standing out in school won't be enough. At about 16, students enroll in a prep class where they're drilled for the IIT entrance exam. There are even pre-dawn tutoring classes before they go to school.

I normally stay up all night and study for my exams, says one student.

After years of preparation, students reach the day they and their families believe will make or break the future finally arrives.

On the day of the exam, my dad, my mom and my younger brother -- they all accompanied me to the center, says one student. I said, 'OK, now you
can leave. I'll come home on my own.' But I was literally amazed when I came back out of the center and see my parents and brother still waiting for me outside the center.

After six hours of testing, theres an excruciating month-long wait for the results.

Results are posted on the Web. And after 10 days, students receive a letter. Top rankers get their photographs in the paper.

But the ranking isn't just an ego trip. The top kids get to choose which campus they want and which major.

It's a big deal in India, it is, says Narayana Murthy, founder of the huge software company Infosys. Hes known as the Bill Gates of India.

It's very easy to lose hope in this country. It's very easy to set your aspirations low in this country. But amidst all this, this competition
among high-quality students, this institution of IIT, sets your aspirations much higher.

Murthys own son, who wanted to do computer science at IIT, couldnt get in. He went to Cornell, instead. Imagine a kid from India using an Ivy League university as a safety school. That's how smart these guys are.

I do know cases where students who couldn't get into computer science at IITs, they have gotten scholarship at MIT, at Princeton, at Caltech, says Murthy.

When I finished IIT Delhi and went to Carnegie Mellon for my
master's, I thought I was cruising all the way through Carnegie Mellon
because it was so easy, relative to the education I had gotten at IIT Delhi, says Khosla.
<hr width="50%">
Students act like entrepreneurs the whole time they're at IIT. They run everything in the dorms, which might be mistaken for cell blocks if not for all the Pentium 4 PCs. They organize the sports themselves. They even hire the chefs and pick the food in the mess halls.

And unlike so many other institutions in India, they all know they're here because they deserve to be here.

There is no corruption. It's a pure meritocracy, says Murthy.

IIT may also be one of the best educational bargains in the world. It costs a family just about $700 a year for room, board and tuition. That's less than 20 percent of the true cost since the Indian government subsidizes all the rest.

While some IIT grads stay and have helped build India's flourishing high-tech sector, almost two-thirds--up to 2,000 people--leave every year, most for the U.S.

Some people would say you're subsidizing factories, which produce
largely for the higher end of the American employment market
, says Rahm.

You don't have to be crudely nationalistic to raise this question. There's a need here. There's a demand here, and these guys are simply not
available.

How many of them ever come back?

Very small percentage, but my view is that we also have to work harder here to make it attractive for them to come back, says Murthy.

And Murthy is doing his part. His software company, Infosys, hires about 150 IIT graduates every year to stay and work in India. He says the brain-drain doesn't worry him.

Some of these people who have reached the higher echelons in the corporate world in the U.S., you know, they have persuaded their corporations to start operations in India, whether it's Texas Instruments, whether it's General Electric, whether it's Citibank, says Murthy.

I have no question that India now is benefiting significantly from the cycling of knowledge, the back and forth, no question about it, says Khosla.

And individual IIT grads are sending lots of money back home, too, but the U.S. still gets the better end of the bargain.

How many jobs have entrepreneurs, Indian entrepreneurs, in Silicon Valley created over the last 15, 20 years? Hundreds of thousands, I would
guess, says Khosla.

For America to be able to pick off this human capital, these well-trained engineers with great minds, it's a great deal.
<!-- sphereit end-->
 
I tell you what. Through the years I have met a lot of graduates from IIT (graduates in the late 80s to graduates in 2000s). Maybe is my perception, but it looks like the quality of the recent graduates is not the same as the quality from the graduates of past years.

BTW, I'm not from India so I don't have any interest whatsoever.
 
I tell you what. Through the years I have met a lot of graduates from IIT (graduates in the late 80s to graduates in 2000s). Maybe is my perception but it looks like the quality of the recent graduates is not the same as the quality from the graduates of past years.

BTW, I'm not from India so I don't any interest whatsoever.


Entirely possible but one reason I can see is that during 80s and 90s, the almost all top achievers in IIT used to come to US. These days due to more opportunities in India, a lot of them stay in India, and a major % of ones that do come here may not be the very best among IITians.
 
Back
Top Bottom