Legalize illegal immigration, YES or NO

[Joy Pathak]

As a canadian, even though I fall under NAFTA agreements and have to go get myself a TN Visa, I am apposed to this.

Maybe give Canadians a green card if we get a masters? lol JK!

I don't think it is fair to Americans to give international students a green card just after getting a Masters. A green card after PhD is understandable.

 

[bigbadwolf]

A letter in the NYT:

To the Editor:

I am a scientist made unemployed by legal immigration, so I oppose Thomas L. Friedman’s support of opening the doors further. There are too many scientists with Ph.D.’s in many fields in the United States. Without stricter immigration policies, the oversupply of Ph.D.’s just gets worse and worse, with the result that in some fields immigrants are being given a large fraction of the jobs. These are science jobs that Americans want, are applying for and are being turned away from.

It is harmful to trumpet the rest of the world’s students who are being given our jobs as “America’s Real Dream Team.” Let’s make sure American scientists can stay a part of the American Dream Team!

Stuart Taylor
Los Angeles, March 21, 2010

 

[martizzle]

I don't think it is fair to Americans to give international students a green card just after getting a Masters. A green card after PhD is understandable.

I disagree. Although there will be a lot more international students receiving green cards if the MS degree is used - as opposed to the PhD; - those who receive it will be able to work in a variety of fields and positions in both academia and industry. If the PhD standard is used, the international students who do receive it will be too 'smart' to be employed in various entry-level and non-academic positions. Teaching jobs amongst others will become scarce - fewer Americans will be able to compete with their international counterparts (who for the most part, are more competitive).

I have a BS from the states and I'm an international student. Last year, I lost four jobs because I was international: the first, because my EAD card came in late; the second, third and fourth because I was not 'eligible to work in the US without restrictions.' I personally do not think it is fair to international students, to use the PhD standard. Keep in mind the funding issues this will create - most international students are more competitive than their american counterparts; if we use the phd standard; the international students (who want green cards & apply to phd programs) will be more likely to get into the phd programs -> making the american kid lose his graduate education/take a loan out for it.
This is a tough one...phd/ms...people will not be happy either way.

 

[Joy Pathak]

Well what I was trying to say was more on the terms of "longer" degrees. A PhD is a 4-5 year degree, similar to an undergraduate degree. I think maybe if a student gets a Bachelors and MS then he/she can get a green card of if a student gets a PhD. The best would be the status quo of getting companies to sponsor you. If you're international but you are good and valuable asset for the company to have then be it...sponsor for an H1-B, otherwise no. Well...to some extent atleast. Right now it is just really hard for international students. But in other professions many international students are getting jobs.

What I say doesn't matter one bit though. The regulators will make the decision and this is all just noise.

I am a Canadian student who will be moving to US so therefore technically international also. But obviously my work permit related restrictions are different. I don't want to get too deep into an immigration related debate as this is very sensitive area.

I personally just feel bad because lots of Americans have good degrees and are pretty smart but are loosing jobs to international students. It is their country and I think they should get first preference. Just something I feel. There are many people that I know who graduated few years ago in the Michigan area and are unemployed because young international students from India and China came in and were employed and sort of did the job of two people kind of thing causing the cuts of others.

But that's all I have to say as whatever I say or you say here means absolutely nothing. These are purely our opinions....and that's all. I don't mind a good debate but this is a bit over-sensitive area and I am in a weird spot to argue because I am an Indian citizen who came to Canada and then became a naturalized citizen and now have dual citizenship.

 

[atreides]

You do have some valid points, and yes this is a very very sensitive issue. At least from my experience people leave their countries and come to the US to study because of the chance for a better life. The governments in their home countries are "extremely corrupt" and most of the institutions are in a failed state.

That said, these folks expect to be able to at least work here in the US after spending thousands of dollars in tuition monies.

I remember career fair days back in undergrad, where companies would tell you that they can't even look at your resume because you're an International student, which is in itself very demoralizing. Okay, I'll spare you all the details.

 

[alain]

these folks expect to be able to at least work here in the US after spending thousands of dollars in tuition monies.

That's the wrong expectation. You are paying for an education, NOT for an education AND a job.

 

[bigbadwolf]

That's the wrong expectation. You are paying for an education, NOT for an education AND a job.

Nevertheless, these are the expectations many international students come with -- including MFE students. The international students don't disguise their ambitions in this regard. This is part of the reason European universities are not so popular: it's much more difficult to get work permission in Europe.

From capital's point of view (and hence Thomas Friedman's point of view) this expectation is ideal: there's a larger body of candidates to choose from (in none of which capital has made any kind of investment), and it tends to keep salaries stagnant (if not drifting downwards) as there's a reserve army of (skilled) labor which is willing to work for less and which can be drawn upon if employees become too uppity. In those places where employees might band together to show a collective face to capital (i.e., some kind of white-collar union), the international component of the workforce makes it more difficult to organise as the visas of foreigners often depend on the whim of the employer, they don't know their way around (in terms of rights), and they're grateful for any kind of employment under any kind of conditions.

The impact of foreigners on, for example, American computer programmers has already been documented and I think this may have been mentioned on this forum a couple of years back.

 

[alain]

Nevertheless, these are the expectations many international students come with -- including MFE students. The international students don't disguise their ambitions in this regard.

I'm sure that's probably true but it's very wrong to come under that assumption and to complain about it after the fact.

 

[atreides]

That's the wrong expectation. You are paying for an education, NOT for an education AND a job.

Case in point Sweden. Tuition in Sweden is free as in free beer, free software, etc for everybody including international students. The swedish tax payers subsidize the education.

The swedish higher education system is probably comparable to the American/ Canadian systems in terms of quality. With the introduction of tuition fees in Fall 2011, they expect to loose about 60 - 70% of their 36,000 international student population.

In the US, there are close to 600,000 international students, and I would guess a majority of these folks are paying their way through.

 

[alain]

The swedish tax payers subsidize the education.

I don't think this will ever fly in US.

 

[atreides]

I don't think this will ever fly in US.

Exactly, so if folks make an investment to get an education in the US, there is nothing completely out of the ordinary if they expect a return on that investment.

 

[Stefan Zota]

There won't be an agreement on this topic. However I think the driver should be the real economy. More specifically, authorities need to set in stone a clear structured process of immigration for "skilled labor". Current process has become excessively bureaucratic.

It should involve support from an employer and a clear schedule. A degree does not guarantee anything and it shouldn't in the future either.

On the other hand, I find it interesting that some people still claim that skilled immigrants are taking jobs from Americans. As an immigrant you have a few added hurdles that an American doesn't have. It starts with caps by the employer and it ends with language barrier. An employer (especially bank sector) will always prefer to hire an American than an "outsider" most things being equal.

 

[bigbadwolf]

On the other hand, I find it interesting that some people still claim that skilled immigrants are taking jobs from Americans. As an immigrant you have a few added hurdles that an American doesn't have. It starts with caps by the employer and it ends with language barrier. An employer (especially bank sector) will always prefer to hire an American than an "outsider" most things being equal.

Ceteris Paribus (i.e., other things equal) employers would prefer an American. But if, say, an American programmer costs $80,000 and an Indian programmer, say, $45,000, then that affects the calculation. Furthermore, if you have enough, say, Indian programmers then the American programmer will have to reduce his expectations to, say, $60,000. This is exactly the kind of "flexible workforce" capital wants; it's the reason why Bill Gates and Michael Dell scurry to DC to testify before senate committees on why H1B quotas should be kept high.

The proponents of unlimited influx like to portray it as a process where everyone wins. Or in the case of Thomas Friedman, where American labor will have to become more "competitive" and "flexible" to compete in a "global marketplace," which is portrayed as something inevitable. But it appears not everyone wins. Foreign workers win something (otherwise they wouldn't bother); capital wins; but it looks like local labor loses.

---------- Post added at 12:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:17 PM ----------

I don't think this will ever fly in US.

But remember that 40 or 50 years ago, the NYC colleges were free, as was the University of California.

 

[sak]

I don't think this will ever fly in US.

If Obama remain at helm, this will happen too. Leave it to him and he will make the entire world socialist world where the hardworking pay for lazy.

---------- Post added at 01:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:44 PM ----------

Well what I was trying to say was more on the terms of "longer" degrees. A PhD is a 4-5 year degree, similar to an undergraduate degree. I think maybe if a student gets a Bachelors and MS then he/she can get a green card of if a student gets a PhD. The best would be the status quo of getting companies to sponsor you. If you're international but you are good and valuable asset for the company to have then be it...sponsor for an H1-B, otherwise no. Well...to some extent atleast. Right now it is just really hard for international students. But in other professions many international students are getting jobs.

What I say doesn't matter one bit though. The regulators will make the decision and this is all just noise.

I am a Canadian student who will be moving to US so therefore technically international also. But obviously my work permit related restrictions are different. I don't want to get too deep into an immigration related debate as this is very sensitive area.

I personally just feel bad because lots of Americans have good degrees and are pretty smart but are loosing jobs to international students. It is their country and I think they should get first preference. Just something I feel. There are many people that I know who graduated few years ago in the Michigan area and are unemployed because young international students from India and China came in and were employed and sort of did the job of two people kind of thing causing the cuts of others.

But that's all I have to say as whatever I say or you say here means absolutely nothing. These are purely our opinions....and that's all. I don't mind a good debate but this is a bit over-sensitive area and I am in a weird spot to argue because I am an Indian citizen who came to Canada and then became a naturalized citizen and now have dual citizenship.

Who doesn't have a PhD in this world? I can count more number of PhDs in a breath than my fingers can keep tab of. PhD was great 20 years ago and we are still carrying the mentality of it's greatness today. Most of the international students that pursue PhD is because they want to save their visa and many times they are working on specialization which has no use what so ever on the planet. So, giving out green card based on PhD would just flood the market with people who are supposedly skilled but cannot do anything useful. They will ultimately become a burden on the society in the same way as the illegal immigrants. The only difference is they would flood opposite segments of the society.

 

[Joy Pathak]

If Obama remain at helm, this will happen too. Leave it to him and he will make the entire world socialist world where the hardworking pay for lazy.

---------- Post added at 01:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:44 PM ----------



Who doesn't have a PhD in this world? I can count more number of PhDs in a breath than my fingers can keep tab of. PhD was great 20 years ago and we are still carrying the mentality of it's greatness today. Most of the international students that pursue PhD is because they want to save their visa and many times they are working on specialization which has no use what so ever on the planet. So, giving out green card based on PhD would just flood the market with people who are supposedly skilled but cannot do anything useful. They will ultimately become a burden on the society in the same way as the illegal immigrants. The only difference is they would flood opposite segments of the society.

Fair argument. Maybe, we should stick to the status quo of companies sponsoring for work visa's where they see fit. Maybe we can increase the quota that is allowed so firms in USA don't start outsourcing their entire research departments to other countries to get more talent.

E.g. Microsoft built an R&D center in Vancouver because of how easy it is for indian/chinese people to get work visa's and so on in Canada.

Also, companies should not be allowed to discriminate on the VISA requirements of students. Everyone should be set equal and the work visa process should be made easier if company finds good talent in an international student. This would keep it fair among international students and domestic students and competition would be purely on skill-sets,etc.

 

[Stefan Zota]

Ceteris Paribus (i.e., other things equal) employers would prefer an American. But if, say, an American programmer costs $80,000 and an Indian programmer, say, $45,000, then that affects the calculation. Furthermore, if you have enough, say, Indian programmers then the American programmer will have to reduce his expectations to, say, $60,000. This is exactly the kind of "flexible workforce" capital wants; it's the reason why Bill Gates and Michael Dell scurry to DC to testify before senate committees on why H1B quotas should be kept high.

The proponents of unlimited influx like to portray it as a process where everyone wins. Or in the case of Thomas Friedman, where American labor will have to become more "competitive" and "flexible" to compete in a "global marketplace," which is portrayed as something inevitable. But it appears not everyone wins. Foreign workers win something (otherwise they wouldn't bother); capital wins; but it looks like local labor loses.

I am not a proponent of unlimited influx. I was saying that a process for skilled immigration is required. Simply granting visas to everyone getting a certain degree will be arbitrary and it won't work.

Overall, at the global economy, I agree with you that it is a balance induced by this "extra skilled" workforce. This keeps a cap on the salary. However your logic with Indian vs American programmer doesn't really apply for all jobs. Big banks have pretty strict levels of pay for junior employees. If that is 80k, then that is all. You cannot say: well I am an immigrant so I will do the job for 40k.
There is not a lot to negotiate. If they want you, they cannot pay half.

 

[atreides]

Now that Arizona has drawn first blood, maybe the house and senate can get their act together and pass comprehensive immigration reform

 

[bigbadwolf]

Now that Arizona has drawn first blood, maybe the house and senate can get their act together and pass comprehensive immigration reform

What Arizona has done is interesting in a broader context. The Federal government has only had responsibility for immigration since the 1890s -- thanks to a Supreme Court ruling. Arizona is reasserting states' rights. In southern Arizona, even before this new law, one had to carry one's permission to be in the US (passport with stamped visa or Green Card) in case one got pulled over and questioned. Arizona, Texas and maybe southern California are the place where illegal migrants cross over and the Federal authorities have little effective control over it. If the Feds can't do their job, why not delegate some of it to the states?

 

[bigbadwolf]

Interesting essay at Pat Buchanan's blog:

http://buchanan.org/blog/the-other-immigration-issue-3987

Massive legal immigration undercuts the wages of American workers and causes unemployment. Of the 1.1 million new green cards we issued last year, 808,478 were to working age immigrants. During this same time period, over five million Americans lost their jobs. With these numbers, there are no jobs Americans won’t do. Harvard economist George Borjas estimates that American citizens’ wages go down 3-4 percent for every 10 percent increase of foreign workers—legal or illegal.

 

[IlyaKEightSix]

That stated, what's the answer? To stop immigration? Screw that! I'm an immigrant, too. I just feel that due to the global economy that immigration run par with employment. If there's high unemployment, we can't let as many people in as when there is low unemployment, otherwise so many more people suffer.