
Microsoft takes a strong stance against reported end to DACA - rahulshiv
https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/31/16236738/microsoft-satya-nadella-daca
======
DaiPlusPlus
As a close friend of one of the 27 Microsoft FTE employees living with DACA
status and knowing their story, it's utterly maddening and counterproductive
that Trump's administration would end DACA for the sake of his base. But then,
he's the president who pardoned Arpaio and banned transgender people from the
services, so it's almost an inevitability he'll get rid of DACA at this point.
Anything to "trigger" those liberals, eh?

It's an established principle that we don't punish children for the mistakes
of their parents - that's essentially the basis for DACA.

The biggest cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face part here is that these 27
employees are easily six-figure earners (I know my friend is...) - that's at
least $25,000/yr in federal tax revenue (multiplied by 27 for $675,000/yr!)
Trump's administration is giving up, sacrificed to the Republican myth of
"come here legally!" when in many cases it's outright impossible (thank you,
H-1B visa caps).

I'm surprised the Reganite part of the GOP isn't advancing a "buy your way
into citizenship" policy: unauthorized immigrants who still made successes of
their lives can make up for their earlier immigration impropriety by paying a
"tax" in exchange for the safety of citizenship[0]. Why would anyone be
opposed to that unless they were racist and/or xenophobic?

[0] I know there exist Green Card-for-investment programs and visas with a
similar basis, but they require at least $500,000 at-hand immediately, which
is inappropriate for someone who is an employee, not an entrepreneur.

~~~
e9
Children should not be punished for crimes of parents but they should also not
benefit from them. As legal immigrant that went through tons of trouble to get
my green card after 8 years I feel insulted when people praise illegal
immigrants. If you want open borders then change the law, until then its
illegal. To me this is similar to parents robbing a bank and giving children
100K and government is saying "oh, don't punish children for parent's crimes
so go ahead and keep those 100K, it's ok". They should be deported and blame
their parents for it, not the government.

~~~
DaiPlusPlus
> I feel insulted when people praise illegal immigrants

Look carefully at what is being "praised". Few are praising their decision to
become illegal immigrants, instead they're praising their children's academic
and developmental accomplishments in the face of adversity (anxiety about
being deported, likely a poor socioeconomic background, et cetera).

I'm a green-card holder myself, and I do not share your anti-illegal-immigrant
stance. I believe in fully open borders and complete freedom of movement of
goods, labor and people: Schengen is testament to this. I got my EB3 green-
card _literally_ because I have a piece of paper (my BSc degree certificate) -
but I know many people who have a greater work-ethic and intelligence than
myself who decided that university wasn't for them, or they were unable to go
to university for other reasons, and that means they're automatically
ineligible for the same privilege I had. While EBx green-cards are largely
meritorious they still exclude many "worthy" people.

I hate the "I worked hard to immigrate" argument because I believe the
opposite is true: provided you meet the preconditions prior to even applying
for the visa you're almost guaranteed a shoe-in: in my case I already had my
degree, all of my immigration paperwork was handled by my employer and
corporate sponsor, all I had to do was accept a job offer, do my job for 3
years, and wait. No adversity or "hard work" here. My contemporaries from
India and China have a minimum 10 year wait for their EBx green-cards, largely
for political reasons - clearly they will have to "work harder" for longer
than me for the same privilege, how is that fair? Other LPR categories require
less hard-work to obtain: marriage and family-based green-cards, or
investment-based (literally: buy a green-card for $500k). I'm curious, what
"hard work" did you perform that permits you to put yourself on a pedestal
above those doing thankless, underpaid, back-breaking agricultural labor?

> To me this is similar to parents robbing a bank and giving children 100K and
> government is saying "oh, don't punish children for parent's crimes so go
> ahead and keep those 100K, it's ok". They should be deported and blame their
> parents for it, not the government.

I'll concede that your analogy is valid - if extreme in its implication. If
you agree that copyright infringement isn't theft, then I don't believe
illegal immigrants are necessarily "stealing" anything from their new country
- they're competing in the open, free market for their labor. There's a whole
other debate to be had about what's involved there that I won't get into.

But in short: there are masses of people, willing to undergo hash conditions,
to work in the USA - it would be a massive economic mistake not to capitalize
on that. It's why Germany was so keen to take in many refugees from the Middle
East: you have workforce-aged people entering the country for free: Germany
didn't have to pay for their education (including elementary/Primary
education) or prior health - allowing them to be employed immediately (subject
to the same labor and wage conditions as indigenous workers) will only boost
the economy - even if they're "unskilled" workers. If they're willing to trek
across Europe, they're willing to go to a trade-school or get certification in
the native language.

I also take exception to your conclusion that deportation should be the only
and immediate consequence of immigrating illegally. It's dogmatic and reeks of
"zero-tolerance" policies this usually thoughtful, reasoned and nuanced
community strongly oppose. Nowhere did I say that illegal immigration should
somehow go "unpunished" \- hence my suggestion for a retroactive taxation-to-
citizenship as one possible solution to the problem. Your proposal is
analogous to advocating that anyone who commits assault should be shot dead by
their victim - while it is a victim's right in Stand-your-ground Law states
when applied broadly it's utterly thoughtless; your school of thought places
arbitrary nationstate borders above our shared humanity.

