Opinions/Questions on LEGAL Immigrants?

Question

I'd like genuine, well thought-out opinions about LEGAL immigrants.

If you could cite sources to back up your opinions, that's a gold star! *^^*

None of this "Go back to where you came from" c**p. - if you believe immigrants have a negative effect on the US economy.. please state why you think so.

1. Should there be a set of requirements imposed on immigrants before they are allowed into the US such as English language proficiency, a certain level of education, or even specific skill levels?

2. Should there be some form of national identification program for everyone entering the US?

3. Do immigrants pose a serious threat to the US economy?

4. Are current immigration policies biased in any way against minorities?

5. Would establishing Temporary Work Visas or national ID cards help in keeping track of immigrants? Why or why not?

I'm as ignorant about politics as you can get, and I just wanted to get an idea as to what you guys think. =]

Answer 1

1.  No and yes.   I think that they should work towards English proficiency in the years before they are granted actual citizenship, but I certainly don't think they need to acquire that skill before they enter the country.  I think that a certain level of education or skill levels are warranted.  I think this should be flexible.  When we need unskilled labor, we should allow unskilled immigrants into the country.  If we need engineers, we should let engineers into the country.  

It's only wise to match our needs with the needs of the immigrants.  That makes for happy people all the way around.  The immigrants can get jobs and employers can get valued employees.

2.  Yes and for citizens.

3.  Unfettered immigration certainly does.  A wise and healthy immigration program with set quotas and checks and balances doesn't have to.

4.  No.  Current immigration policies are weighted towards minorities.  In fact, the entire green card lottery is closed to all but minority groups.  Our current immigration policy (an unwise one, I might add) is weighted towards relatives of immigrants.  As a result, the vast majority of legal immigrants (not just illegal immigrants) are minorities...particularly hispanics.

5.  We already have temporary work visas.  They are the E1, E2, E3, H1B, H1B1, H1B2, H1B3, H1C, H2A, H2B, H3, L1A, L1B, O1, O2,

P1, P2, P3, Q1, R-1, R-2 (all these are for periods over 1 year and under 10 years)  There are additional visas for workers that must be renewed every year. http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/m...  A national id program may or may not work -- depending on whether it is or is not enforced.  Currently, we have MANY good laws.  They just aren't being enforced.

Answer 2

1. There are already such requirements, at least in part. While there is no requirement for green card holders to know English, most do, in fact, have to know English if they hope to get a job in America. Temporary work visas are given to people whose value has been recognized by a US employer who decided to sponsor them for a work visa. Employer sponsorship is the only way you can get a temporary work visa, there are limited numbers of such visas for each year, and those visas are usually given out to people with higher academic achievements, and/or skills, and/or experience -- and again since America speaks English, those job seekers would have to know English although that is not required under immigration law.

There is, however, an English language requirement that applies to the majority of applicants for US citizenship; if you wish to become a US citizen, you need to pass an English language test, as well as a US civics test.

2. I think that would be a good idea in theory; in practice, however, I think it would be too costly compared to its effectiveness. The current system is that foreigners need a passport and, in a lot of cases, a visa to enter the US. Their visa determines what they can or cannot do within the US and how long they may stay. The trouble is that once they are out of the airport, they can do anything, because there is no way to keep track of what they do or where they go. There is no simple, effective way of controlling that unless you have one government agent following every move of every person that comes into the US. Or you implant them with a chip or something. Not cost-effective, like I said.

3. I'm of the opinion that no, legal immigrants are no threat to the US economy. In fact I think they help a lot with keeping the US economy thriving. Look at it this way: temporary work visas (H-1B) are allocated by quota each year and can only be obtained after an employer has sponsored an immigrant. In order to sponsor anybody, an employer has to show that the position the immigrant is getting could not be filled by an existing member of the US workforce; therefore that company had to seek outside of US borders. What that means is that the position may not have been filled at all without the possibility of filling it with an immigrant, or it may have been filled by somebody who, granted, is a US citizen, but may have been far less competent than the foreigner that is being sponsored.

While giving the job to a less competent US citizen may seem like the "charitable" thing to do with regards to "keeping it in the family", most companies will laugh at such a philosophy and give preference to a more qualified foreigner.

Here's an article on the subject: http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/...

While it's worded aggressively like the rest of that web site (which is awesome, by the way), I think it sums it up nicely.

4. As far as legal immigration is concerned, there isn't really a "bias" so much as there are "red flags" especially when it comes to family-based immigration. People seeking to immigrate to the US from former "Iron Curtain" countries, or China, South East Asia, Africa, Central/South America, the Philippines, or the Middle East, are subject to more scrutiny for various reasons. All of the above except Middle Eastern immigrants are considered higher risk for immigration fraud (e.g. marrying a US citizen with intent to divorce them and move on with their lives as soon as they have their paperwork in order), while Middle Eastern immigrants are considered potential security risks. So that is the kind of bias we are looking at.

5. I think that question is pretty much the same as your #2 above so you can refer to my answer to that above. There are already temporary work visas (they are called H-1B as I mentioned earlier). They are limited to 3 years, extensible to 6, after which the immigrant must return to their country. H-1B visa holders can be granted a green card if sponsored by their employer, which effectively waives the 3 to 6-year duration of the visa.

And finally, I would add that, contrary to what someone who answered before me suggested, all green cards allow you to work in the US.

Answer 3

excluding the indians, all of us were immigrants at one time or another.

Answer 4

1. Yes, they need to be able to contribute, not drain, from our nation.  If they have specific skills that we are lacking, all the better.  Fresh educational backgrounds and ideas are good for the country.

2. Yes, it would protect them as much as it protects the country and ciizens.

3. No, no threat.  The U.S. grants entrance to a set number each year.  This number is calculated to determine a comfortable growth rate, and to prevent overcrowding.  We let in as many as possible, without it becoming an overwhelming number.  

4. The only bias is that by granting visa types, some people are left out.  If a person from some obscure part of the world does not have someone to sponsor them, they really have a hard time getting here.  The 1986 amnesty gave us a disproportionate number of people from neighboring countries, so people from other areas have a harder time now.

5. I don't agree with temporary work visas, unless it is some specialty or project type situation that we have no workers available to do, and is a one time work situation.  Green cards should serve as a national ID, or requirements to keep passports current would work as well.

Answer 5

1. There already ARE a set of requirements for immigrants. For instance, the diversity lottery requires that you must have at least a high school diploma or its equivalent to even initially enter the country by that route of immigration. Only 55,000 people per year can be selected by diversity lottery. Here is the info on that..

http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pd...

Immigration through employment generally requires a special skill and an employer willing to sponsor you, again, you are not permitted to become a public charge. Here is the info on that, generally, you pretty much have to have a minimum of a bachelors degree or an unusual and needed trade..

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/m...

Immigration through investment requires at least one million dollars to invest and proof that your business will create at least then jobs. You can read about the requirements for that here.

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/m...

Now, you do not have to speak English clearly to get a greencard, HOWEVER, you do have to speak English well enough to pass the naturalization test to become a citizen. No English = no citizenship.

The only form of immigration that does not have education requirements is immigration through an immediate family member. However, a family member with sufficient income has to sponsor that person and guarantee to pay back any fees if the person becomes a 'public charge.'

Even so, to become a full citizen you still have to be able to speak English even if your immigration was based on family relationship.

2. Once again, there already is a national identification program. It's called a passport and you will have to have one with you to cross the border into the US. The citizens of some countries, for instance Canada, do not need visas to come to the United States to visit. However, they do need a passport when they cross the border. The problem is that it is not enforced. Someone will get a visa to cross in and then never leave and not much effort is put into tracking those people down.

3. I do not believe that LEGAL immigrants pose any kind of threat to the US economy. Based on my personal experience in the warehousing and distribution industry, they are willing to do hard work that your average American is no longer willing to do. Where I work, there are set productivity numbers that have to be reached on a daily basis. They aren't that hard to reach, but, you actually have to work while your at work, not browse the internet and crowd around the water cooler. Heck, you don't even get to sit down except for lunch. Most of the locals hired for the job just won't do it. They'd rather make less sitting in an office answering phones in a call center then do real, manual work. We have a pretty low immigrant population in our immediate area, and even so the majority of long term employees where I work are immigrants. That was similar when I worked in construction, the locals weren't willing to sweat and the immigrants didn't think it was a big deal.

4. I don't think that they are that biased against minorities. There a lot more people selected by diversity lottery from Africa than any other region. Canadians aren't even allowed to participate in the diversity lottery. The only thing I've noticed in terms of bias is that couples that would be normal in other countries are perceived as strange in this one. For instance, someone may marry someone from another country. There, it may be perfectly normal to marry someone with a significant age difference, here though, that's unusual and raises suspicion of the marriage being legitimate. Those couples may find themselves treated with obvious suspicion throughout their entire immigration process even if everything else about them seems legitimate. Unfortunately though, because there are unscrupulous people that will marry someone for immigration and even more unscrupulous US citizens that will accept money for marrying someone for the purpose of procuring immigration, you understand why they have to be suspicious of anyone that may not have married for love.

5. Programs like that already exist. They just are not enforced.

Answer 6

Legal Immigrants are welcomed, we have the problem with illegal invaders, they are the ones who drain the economy, bring down the educational system etc... go to numbersusa.com and you will see the statistics on what illegals are costing the American taxpayer!!

Answer 7

1 - Yes, they need to be able to take care of themselves.

2 - Yes, aliens need to be accounted for.

3 - No, all our ancestors were immigrants at one point.

4 - No, they are biased towards them in the name of diversity.

5 - Yes, they used to have to register annually.

Answer 8

LOL hahahaha, check this lame answer out:

"excluding Indians all of us were immigrants.........LOL"

So according to that flawed theory, Indians never immigrated to this continent, they just "showed up" somehow. Freaking lame.

Indians were immigrants too.  And I think this question was referring to modern day immigrants.

Answer 9

They are supposed to be literate and have a job available to them. They are not suppose to take jobs away from us. A laugh, because they do. So yeah they pose a threat. They do pay a lot of money to be able to keep their green card up to date. Green cards can allow them to work or not. Just because they have one don't mean they can work.