New at Reason

April 26, 2007

Shikha Dalmia surveys the bold, daring proposals that would make illegal immigrants stand in line.

Comments

|4.26.07 @ 12:18PM|#

One issue I have (as a legal immigrant) with anything resembling amnesty is that is takes TOO FUCKING LONG to process paperwork as is. In my case (EB2 NIW - "sub-Einstein" visa) it took almost 3 years from I-140 to green card. In my friend's case... she filed 2 years ago (marriage-based), and still no end in sight. If amnesty is going to swamp the system and fuck up my citizenship application (which takes 3 years or so to process), I'd say - screw illegals. They knew what they were doing and what consequences are.

...that is not to say that I will not support a sensible policy - criminal background restrictions only, or something close to that.

Guy Montag|4.26.07 @ 12:41PM|#

How about they stand in line for jobs to build the souther border wall?

Jorgen Harris|4.26.07 @ 12:52PM|#

I really don't understand why our restrictive system for skilled immigrants doesn't get more press. We benefit tremendously by getting brilliant people from all over the world, and people aren't always going to be willing to go through the painful and humiliating process we have in place now.

|4.26.07 @ 1:01PM|#

Guy Montag | April 26, 2007, 12:41pm | #

How about they stand in line for jobs to build the souther border wall?

Yea, since 'mer'cans are unwilling to do hard labor...right?

|4.26.07 @ 1:05PM|#

I really don't understand why our restrictive system for skilled immigrants doesn't get more press. We benefit tremendously by getting brilliant people from all over the world, and people aren't always going to be willing to go through the painful and humiliating process we have in place now.

But all those smart foriegners are stealing jobs away from dumb Americans! We were born in a wealthy country, and a good paying job with little effort is our birthright! How dare those funny speaking, different looking people expect jobs in our country just because they are hardworking and talented!

|4.26.07 @ 2:16PM|#

But all those smart foriegners are stealing jobs away from dumb Americans!

Actually, they aren't. In the I/T industry we employ a significant number of H-2B's simply because we can't get Americans with the necessary skills. It's not a matter of underpricing the American workers - sufficient American workers with the required skill sets aren't available at any price. If we could find 'em, we'd hire 'em. If we didn't have access to H-2B's those jobs would simply go unfilled. And we still don't have enough workers to fill the available positions.

|4.26.07 @ 2:21PM|#

For two decades, immigration bashers have stymied any attempt to regularize the status of illegal aliens in this country by employing one, single trope against them: they are queue-jumpers who illegally crossed the border ahead of those patiently waiting their turn.

Wow, three falsehoods in the opening sentance!
1 - "immigration bashers" are not the same as "illegal immigration bashers"
2 - "immigration bashers" don't employ a single "trope"; there are many arguments against illegal immigration
3 - I know using "trope" is a nifty fad now, but it's still not the correct word.

But the trope is a fallacy based on a complete misstatement of U.S. immigration policy. There is no such line - a legal pathway to citizenship for unskilled workers.

Also false.
http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?ID=208
"In terms of the annual inflow of legal immigrants, about one in seven are Mexican. This share is substantially larger than the legal flow from any other country."

Should I bother reading the rest of the article? I think not.

Guy Montag|4.26.07 @ 2:31PM|#

Yea, since 'mer'cans are unwilling to do hard labor...right?

What are you talking about?

|4.26.07 @ 2:36PM|#

In terms of the annual inflow of legal immigrants, about one in seven are Mexican. This share is substantially larger than the legal flow from any other country.

That number is pretty much entirely under family unification quotas, not under work quotas, so the point is not particularly relevant to the issue of legal unskilled workers per se.

Besides which, one-seventh of a too-small number is still a too-small number. If legal immigration of unskilled workers is so prevalent, why are there illegal unskilled workers?

|4.26.07 @ 3:02PM|#

They're takin' r jerbs!

|4.26.07 @ 3:09PM|#

In case I look like I am arguing solely for unskilled immigration...

Limiting skilled worker migration is one of the most damaging things you can do to the US and to the world.

Restricting the access of US jobs to the skilled people of the world is a consistent drag on where the US economy should be. Restricting skilled people from the rest of the world from working in the US, learning how to operate in a high productivity environment, and then taking that knowledge back to their home countries to improve their productivity and wealth, is a consistent drag on where the world economy should be.

These observations hold for the unskilled as well, but not with the high productivity multipliers of the skilled.

|4.26.07 @ 3:37PM|#

the title is "why should day labors have to touch back?"

the answer is; to appease the foaming at the mouth protectionists enough so we can get a sane immigration policy.

Federal Dog|4.26.07 @ 4:55PM|#

"to appease the foaming at the mouth protectionists"


You see a lot of those, do you?

|4.26.07 @ 5:26PM|#

You see a lot of those, do you?

The foaming at the mouth protectionists are more noticeable than the banal variety.

nebby|4.26.07 @ 7:06PM|#

Yeah we should have open immigration like... like...

Shit, like no country worth living in?

I have two advanced degrees and there is no way I could qualify to immigrate to any EU country. Why are we supposed to absorb unlimited numbers of the poor of the world again?

|4.26.07 @ 7:46PM|#

Why are we supposed to absorb unlimited numbers of the poor of the world again?

The numbers are not unlimited. They are very much limited by the availability of opportunities in the US.

Federal Dog|4.26.07 @ 8:02PM|#

"They are very much limited by the availability of opportunities in the US."


I thought all those "foaming at the mouth protectionists" were the problem.

|4.26.07 @ 10:03PM|#

MikeP

The numbers are not unlimited. They are very much limited by the availability of opportunities in the US.

You were kidding when you said that, right? I mean it was just a joke?

|4.26.07 @ 10:05PM|#

This is a great article for the choir. If preaching to the choir is what you like doing.

The so-called problem of illegal immigration is purely the creation of America's restrictive immigration laws.

Duh. Is this supposed to be some kind of grand insight, that we've all been lacking?


And before they approach the issue again, they need to first recapture the high-ground by exposing the myth of the queue - and forthrightly embracing amnesty.

Before anyone does anything, they better see it my way first. And that's the name of that tune.

This article is utterly unpersuasive.

|4.26.07 @ 10:14PM|#

I really don't understand why our restrictive system for skilled immigrants doesn't get more press.

Who knows why it doesn't get more press. But this "system" is more screwed up than just the cap on H1-B's.

We let foreign students into the US as grad students to study science and engineering. They get research and teaching assistanceships (in engineering, that's basically the only way you can get through grad school). They do NOT have to pay the taxes that the rest of us US citizens have to pay, while in grad school.

Note that research and teaching assistanceships are paid for by the US taxpayer, et al. So this is basically a form of US sponsored international welfare when you get down to it.

Then these students get out and we give them a hard time about staying here.....after we've paid for their educations.

I know that in fact, most of them who are good and who actually want to stay here, manage to find ways to do it. But if we're going to pay for their educations then we really ought to make it easy for them to stay here.

Somebody had a great big screw loose when they dreamed up this "system".

But in fact the problem is, that one person did not dream up the system alone. A bunch of disconnected beauracrats pieced it together over many years.


We could easily set up a "system" here that allowed us to brain drain the world. But first we'd need to get our own brains working.

|4.26.07 @ 10:35PM|#

Of course, we won't get far into this discussion before encountering the myth of "the shortage of technical talent in the US".

There are a select few areas, like IT support, where we don't have enough people. Particularly in places where the cost of living is bat-shit insane (think places like Long Island and southern California).

But by and large, in the field of science and technology, there is no real "shortage" of labor. If anything there's an over-supply.

There are shortages in flavor of the week specialities, for example Chem E's go through bust-boom cycles. But as a rule, while tech people do get jobs, most of the ones I know have not found job offers to be a dime a dozen. And the more advanced your degree, the more that's the case.


Foreigners make up a huge fraction of our engineering grad schools, that's true. But it's not because Americans are unwilling to work. It's because "engineers are some of the lowest paid smart people around", as it's been said.

If you're smart enough to get an engineering degree, you're probably smart enough to be a doctor or a lawyer -- and they get paid way better.

Meanwhile, American industries and manufacturing have been moving overseas for decades, with lots more of that happening in very recent history.


So do we need more immigrants in the tech community? I don't know, but if we're going to pay for their education we ought to get to use the resulting talent.


Whole point of this is: understanding what's really going on "out there" is one helluva lot harder to do, than the canned diatribes in this article would imply. And that's true whether you're talking skilled or unskilled labor.

|4.27.07 @ 1:34AM|#

You were kidding when you said that, right? I mean it was just a joke?

No, it was not a joke.

People use words like "unlimited" or "hundreds of millions" or "the entire population of Mexico" flippantly and think it's an argument. It isn't.

With open borders, people will come to the US only if the opportunities in the US are superior to the opportunities in their home country or elsewhere. The first few million may find better opportunities, but they will quickly soak up those that are available. The next few million will find fewer opportunities with lower marginal improvement on what they could have in their home countries. At some point it is not worth it for the next persons to migrate to the US: They are less suited to it than those who came before, and there is less opportunity available than that found by those who came before.

Note, too, that with open borders a significant number of "immigrants" will come and go -- either seasonally or after a few years work -- improving even further the matching of migrants to opportunities.

|4.27.07 @ 1:36AM|#

I thought all those "foaming at the mouth protectionists" were the problem.

Yes, they are. They prevent immigrants from taking opportunities available in the US.

|4.27.07 @ 2:41AM|#

@nebby

Yeah we should have open immigration like... like...

Shit, like no country worth living in?

Open immigration isn't the issue under discussion. Availability of work visas to foreign workers is. Two different issues. I don't favor open immigration either. I do favor making it easy to import necessary workers. Immigration policy should be driven by the interests of the United States, not the interests of aspiring immigrants.

@Genghis Kahn

There are a select few areas, like IT support, where we don't have enough people. Particularly in places where the cost of living is bat-shit insane (think places like Long Island and southern California).

But by and large, in the field of science and technology, there is no real "shortage" of labor. If anything there's an over-supply.

Yes, we have a quantity of workers in science and tech (also in I/T), what's at issue is the quality. Sure, I know plenty of people in the I/T field that are unemployed, the problem is the skills they have are either a.) not matched to the market demand, or b.) insufficiently advanced to competently fill needed positions.

@MikeP

With open borders, people will come to the US only if the opportunities in the US are superior to the opportunities in their home country or elsewhere. The first few million may find better opportunities, but they will quickly soak up those that are available. The next few million will find fewer opportunities with lower marginal improvement on what they could have in their home countries. At some point it is not worth it for the next persons to migrate to the US: They are less suited to it than those who came before, and there is less opportunity available than that found by those who came before.

That's a bit like arguing that if a farmer is having a problem with crows raiding his cornfield, the appropriate solution is simply to allow the crows to eat all the corn, and when all the corn is gone the crows will go away.

Yes, if your only objective is to be rid of the crows, it'll certainly work, but....

|4.27.07 @ 2:53AM|#

P.M.,

Immigration policy should be driven by the interests of the United States, not the interests of aspiring immigrants.

At last, someone who isn't afraid to put it just that way. Progress in America!

Yes, we have a quantity of workers in science and tech (also in I/T), what's at issue is the quality.

Okay. But I still contend that outside a few select disciplines, the quality of availalbe workers isn't lacking either.

I've spent lots of time working with immigrant engineers and scientists. Take the Chinese and Indians, since there are so many of them. They're really, really good at math.

But their typical skill set is like the Chinese guy I knew who failed his PhD qualifying exam in mechanical design, because he didn't know what a fly wheel was.

|4.27.07 @ 6:57AM|#

That's a bit like arguing that if a farmer is having a problem with crows raiding his cornfield, the appropriate solution is simply to allow the crows to eat all the corn, and when all the corn is gone the crows will go away.

Well, kind of... if the farmer asked the crows to come eat his corn, got to choose which crows would eat how much corn, and then as the crows ate the corn, they produced goods and services of greater value to the farmer than the corn they ate.

The problem is not crows eating one farmer's corn. The problem is other farmers' restricting the one farmer from doing what he wants to do with his own corn.

Federal Dog|4.27.07 @ 7:54AM|#

"Yes, they are. They prevent immigrants from taking opportunities available in the US."


You are best advised not to engage in ridiculous hyperbole. Exactly how many people have you seen "foaming at the mouth?," and why do you think that you cannot state a political position without wildly exaggerated personal invective? If your political position is so indefensible that you cannot state it without over-the-top personal attacks, you need to rethink that position.

|4.27.07 @ 9:43AM|#

"They do NOT have to pay the taxes that the rest of us US citizens have to pay, while in grad school"

Lie. Would you like to see my tax forms back from the 90ties?

|4.27.07 @ 9:58AM|#

And believe me, Kahn, if I (now being a college professor) were able to find an American student who:

1. Is hard working
2. Has something not unlike a brain
3. Could do basic math (y'know, the kind of student I don't have to explain to what dN/dt stands for)
and, 4. Could communicate his point worth shit,

I would have taken him any time: I have a hard time comprehending Asian accents. No such animal.

nebby: I have two advanced degrees and there is no way I could qualify to immigrate to any EU country.

Could it be because you're simply not good enough? I am no Einstein, but I knew I would have had much easier task immigrating to Germany or Great Britain. (I chose U.S. for philosophical reasons, in case anyone wonders)

|4.27.07 @ 10:58AM|#

Exactly how many people have you seen "foaming at the mouth?," and why do you think that you cannot state a political position without wildly exaggerated personal invective?

You may be right: The Dobbses, O'Reillys, and Tancredos of the country may not be as big a component of the problem as is the greater population of people who quietly believe that where you happen to have been born should have a legally important impact on where you can work.

|4.27.07 @ 4:14PM|#

Lie. Would you like to see my tax forms back from the 90ties?

Definitely not lie. My room mates were Chinese and Indian. We were all on the same $/month assistanceships. They got over $300/month more take home than I did.

if I (now being a college professor) were able to find an American student who:

1. Is hard working
2. Has something not unlike a brain
3. Could do basic math (y'know, the kind of student I don't have to explain to what dN/dt stands for)
and, 4. Could communicate his point worth shit,

I would have taken him any time:

These nebulous American grad students do exist. I was one of them once, my dissertation was 85% math.

I don't know where you teach, but most Americans I know who did go on to grad school, went to top 10 universities. The percentage of American grad students was much higher at Georgia Tech.