- Joined
- 4/16/08
- Messages
- 394
- Points
- 28
The article is biased, conclusion is wrong in my opinion, however it has some good points. The core of the issue is:
From 2000-2009, we issued over 10 million green cards, the highest decade of American history. Currently, there are 38 million immigrants, 24 million of whom are in the workforce. This does not include temporary workers. DHS did not release the 2009 figures yet, but they issued 912,735 temporary employment authorizations in 2008.
Most of these immigrants are low skilled and from the Third World. Less than 10 percent of new green card holders are from Europe. People of extraordinary ability, investors, and immigrants with advanced degrees made up less than 8 percent of the new immigrants.
Faced with these numbers, how can anyone argue with a straight face that we don’t admit enough immigrants?
If the goal is to select only the best, why were 92% low-skilled people approved for green-card? By penalizing 100%, you are baring the access for the 8%. These guys really made the difference in the past and I cannot see how U.S. can afford to drive them away.
It goes back to my initial argument regarding structure of the immigration process ...