I agree with everything you've said. I strongly favor more legal immigration; notionally, I'm pretty well aligned with Matt Yglesias's idea of "One Billion Americans" within maybe two generations, maybe less.
For me, that certainly means a lot of skilled immigration, but it can also include non-skilled immigration, as long as we guarantee…
I agree with everything you've said. I strongly favor more legal immigration; notionally, I'm pretty well aligned with Matt Yglesias's idea of "One Billion Americans" within maybe two generations, maybe less.
For me, that certainly means a lot of skilled immigration, but it can also include non-skilled immigration, as long as we guarantee that it won't be at starvation wages. Americans should not be permitted to import an underpaid underclass just to have artificially low prices at the supermarket, or to support farmers whose crops don't make economic (or environmental) sense. If there are crops that cannot be raised economically in the US while paying a living wage, that for me is an indication that we should be importing them from places where they CAN be raised economically, not importing people to exploit in the US.
We should be rigorous and consistent in fulfilling our asylum obligations under international law and the treaties we have signed to shelter those who have a "well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion" by state action or with state connivance. No one from places like Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, or Myanmar should ever be deported against their will to those places, unless they come to the US under false pretenses. On the other hand, victims of natural disasters and citizens of failed states should not be considered for asylum, although Congress should always be free to grant them Temporary Protected Status, if it judges that to be warranted. Merely economic migrants who enter the country illegally under color of asylum are trying to game the system and should be ejected summarily.
I'm an immigrant myself -- an American immigrant in Brazil. Brazil is one of several countries -- I would also include Canada and Australia -- from which the United States could learn a lot to come up with a fair, welcoming system that has broad political support. Of course, the US is the world's #1 migrant target, and not every policy is scalable, but many are. It doesn't all have to be invented all over again: it's ok to copy and adapt.
I agree with everything you've said. I strongly favor more legal immigration; notionally, I'm pretty well aligned with Matt Yglesias's idea of "One Billion Americans" within maybe two generations, maybe less.
For me, that certainly means a lot of skilled immigration, but it can also include non-skilled immigration, as long as we guarantee that it won't be at starvation wages. Americans should not be permitted to import an underpaid underclass just to have artificially low prices at the supermarket, or to support farmers whose crops don't make economic (or environmental) sense. If there are crops that cannot be raised economically in the US while paying a living wage, that for me is an indication that we should be importing them from places where they CAN be raised economically, not importing people to exploit in the US.
We should be rigorous and consistent in fulfilling our asylum obligations under international law and the treaties we have signed to shelter those who have a "well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion" by state action or with state connivance. No one from places like Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, or Myanmar should ever be deported against their will to those places, unless they come to the US under false pretenses. On the other hand, victims of natural disasters and citizens of failed states should not be considered for asylum, although Congress should always be free to grant them Temporary Protected Status, if it judges that to be warranted. Merely economic migrants who enter the country illegally under color of asylum are trying to game the system and should be ejected summarily.
I'm an immigrant myself -- an American immigrant in Brazil. Brazil is one of several countries -- I would also include Canada and Australia -- from which the United States could learn a lot to come up with a fair, welcoming system that has broad political support. Of course, the US is the world's #1 migrant target, and not every policy is scalable, but many are. It doesn't all have to be invented all over again: it's ok to copy and adapt.
Completely agree, Al. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Be well :-).