The term "Merit" and Immgration

[icenine]

Merit based immigration is a slogan rather than a policy.

From the beginning of our nation nearly all immigration has been family-based in nature, so when Trump wants to get rid of so called chain immigration what he really means is that he wants to reduce immigration period. From what I remember from American history there has never been a time when just single people were allowed to immigrate. Many single people did immigrate however and bring family member over later on. This is how America was built.

Plus if you eliminated the ability for immigrants to sponsor relatives you would reduce the number of skilled immigrants in general since most people who are able to come to the US in the first place are at the top of their home nation's socio-economic ladder already. They might not be all engineers and doctors when they come to the US but they do end up being assets to the nation in other ways.

Yeah there is a lot of talk about Canada's "merit" based system but don't get fooled by the term merit. Both the United States and Canada are nations that have a long history of welcoming immigrants. Plus in Canada 28 percent of all immigration is still so called "chain migration." In Australia chain migration is 30%.

Don't let a moron use semantics fool you. Well I guess in many cases that is too late.

[Dondilion]

Trump is trying to limit the burgeoning brown population to the point where it does not challenge effectively the political dominance of white people.

He and the Republican right wing base are in a losing situation.

1) It is impossible to seal the southern border.

2) Many areas now occupied by brown people have reached a critical mass where they can comfortably absorb illegals. These illegals are creating citizens.

3) White people - with a few exceptions - have become self absorbed. They seem to invest in denying the presence/creation of children.

4)I believe any merit system installed would favor Asians...largely brown.

5) Many of Trump's tweets, sayings indicate his opposition to brown people and this will drive more browns to the Democrats. Long term it does not look good for white Republicans.

[donquixote99]

Some people think it a matter of grave concern that brown illegals are creating citizens, while white people are self-absorbed.

There is a name for this sort of feeling.

Is there really some reason I should be concerned about the average hue of Americans, or the relative proportion of various color groups? Other than an instinct I do not find controlling?

[Rajoo]

"Birds of a feather flock together" might apply.

[donquixote99]

Yes, they often do.

But is it important that one's 'flock' be of maximum size and power?

[Rajoo]

It is if one wants to hold on the power. "They are different" or "not one of us" will apply since color is a primary distinguishing factor.

[donquixote99]

Funny use of the word 'one' in the context of huge populations groups. But I guess that's how racial identity works--that huge group is 'you,' in some emotional/psychological way.

Your view is, then, is that people are racist, and that's that?

[Rajoo]

Is racism and racial preference the same?
Is preference and prejudice one and the same?

[nailer]

I think culturalism is often mislabeled as racism, and those who mislabel it so often possess racial prejudices.

[donquixote99]

Is racism and racial preference the same?
Is preference and prejudice one and the same?

Different points on a scale, that's all.

[donquixote99]

I think culturalism is often mislabeled as racism, and those who mislabel it so often possess racial prejudices.

I think you transparently want 'them' called a bad name, not you.

There's not a dimes worth of difference between cultural chauvinism and racism. By 'chauvinism' I mean a bit higher up the scale than the mildest points suggested by the nice soft word 'preference.'

[whell]

Merit based immigration is a slogan rather than a policy.

From the beginning of our nation nearly all immigration has been family-based in nature, so when Trump wants to get rid of so called chain immigration what he really means is that he wants to reduce immigration period. From what I remember from American history there has never been a time when just single people were allowed to immigrate. Many single people did immigrate however and bring family member over later on. This is how America was built.

Plus if you eliminated the ability for immigrants to sponsor relatives you would reduce the number of skilled immigrants in general since most people who are able to come to the US in the first place are at the top of their home nation's socio-economic ladder already. They might not be all engineers and doctors when they come to the US but they do end up being assets to the nation in other ways.

Yeah there is a lot of talk about Canada's "merit" based system but don't get fooled by the term merit. Both the United States and Canada are nations that have a long history of welcoming immigrants. Plus in Canada 28 percent of all immigration is still so called "chain migration." In Australia chain migration is 30%.

Don't let a moron use semantics fool you. Well I guess in many cases that is too late.

Countries adopt immigration systems NOT for the benefit of immigrants, but for the benefit of the country setting up the immigration system. Its not relevant to suggest that other countries have "chain migration" (a term that Dick Durbin thinks is racist, by the way, so be careful :rolleyes:), therefore the US should do it too. The right way to ask the question is: to what benefit is it to CA or Aus to continue chain migration?

In other words, its not about semantics or spin. Its about orderly managing immigration in a way that allows immigrants to be successful and productive members of society without negatively impacting the economy or culture of the receiving country.

And yes, there is a unique American culture that needs to be preserved. (I know some folks here HATE that idea, but there it is.)

[finnbow]

In other words, its not about semantics or spin. Its about orderly managing immigration in a way that allows immigrants to be successful and productive members of society without negatively impacting the economy or culture of the receiving country.

And you're depending on Trump delivering an orderly anything?:rolleyes:

[whell]

And you're depending on Trump delivering an orderly anything?:rolleyes:

You just can't help yourself, can you?

This is a matter for the legislature, not the executive branch to address anyway.

[Chicks]

You just can't help yourself, can you?

This is a matter for the legislature, not the executive branch to address anyway.

Huh. So all those XO’s Donny’s been signing on immigration (that the courts have been calling unlawful) came from the legislature? Golllllllly. Had me fooled.

[nailer]

I think you transparently want 'them' called a bad name, not you.

There's not a dimes worth of difference between cultural chauvinism and racism. By 'chauvinism' I mean a bit higher up the scale than the mildest points suggested by the nice soft word 'preference.'

You perceive the world as us and them, not I.

[finnbow]

You just can't help yourself, can you?

This is a matter for the legislature, not the executive branch to address anyway.

Your Dear Leader has shown his ability to undermine anything, particularly if has anything to do with immigration. Just ask Graham and McConnell.

[icenine]

In all reality Nigerians would beat Norwegians if they were subjected to some kind of "merit" test for immigration.

What Trump really wants is stop brown and black human beings from coming to America.

I mean isn't he the one ending DACA? I don't think he needs Congress to extend Obama's order.

[donquixote99]

You perceive the world as us and them, not I.

Open and candid as ever, Nailer.

[whell]

Your Dear Leader has shown his ability to undermine anything, particularly if has anything to do with immigration. Just ask Graham and McConnell.

What Graham and Durbin produced was crap. It met with the fate that was appropriate for it. Regardless, it wasn't likely to even make it through Congress.

[whell]

Huh. So all those XO’s Donny’s been signing on immigration (that the courts have been calling unlawful) came from the legislature? Golllllllly. Had me fooled.

Gotta hand it to the Dems. They did a nice job court-shopping the lawsuits against those EO's.

[finnbow]

Gotta hand it to the Dems. They did a nice job court-shopping the lawsuits against those EO's.

I guess they got the idea from Republicans who did exactly the same thing against Obama by filing all of their lawsuits in Texas.:rolleyes: Greg Abbott alone filed 44 lawsuits against Obama in Texas and Scott Pruitt filed 14 in Oklahoma.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/abbotts-strategy-in-texas-44-lawsuits-one-opponent-obama-administration-1466778976

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-epa-pick-scott-pruitt-2017-1