
Trump Pushes Bill to Cut Number of Green Cards Issued by Half - SirLJ
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-pushes-senate-bill-to-curb-legal-immigration-1501694221?utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=54924931&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8Z4MXe7cQlqVGEKEiSka62B_e8b7DYD4CufaMTOxcjZVTDMN5egAMxszvMnA4QctubMjab8UOl7cf_6S6I-EXC7QLJ8Q&_hsmi=54924931
======
nyxtom
Cutting the issued cards in half seems a bit of the wrong focus point in this
bill and creates a lot of controversy/doesn't really get the intended effect
(i.e. merit based policy); so I would can that and the "English" requirement.

Don't a lot of other countries implement a merit-based immigration policy? I
say that but also knowing that a lot of other countries also prioritize
refugees (Canada) in addition to merit-based immigration. The system I would
prefer would be : prioritize refugees, merit-based skills & financial
stability for employment and allow spouses and children to come along
(preferably allowing spouse to live and work as well). Some countries, like
Switzerland, prioritize EU citizens first for employment for instance before
considering employment for immigrants from non-EU states. France, another one,
is pushing forward with a tech visa program that is a bit enticing since your
spouse can also live and work in the country. Overall, this proposal seems to
fall closer in line with how other countries are doing things (not exactly the
same) but somewhat closer.

I would be curious to know the numbers in terms of population growth
percentages to what other countries capped immigration numbers are; also
taking into account people migrating out of the country or in the case of the
EU, to and from a given country that works with the EU (i.e. Switzerland).

------
hackerboos
Sad to see the DV lottery is being canned. I've been applying for the last few
years.

~~~
khuey
This proposal is unlikely to go anywhere.

------
ep103
So I was confused by this article, and did a little bit of research.
Specifically, I was confused how cutting 50k applications could cut our
immigration rate in half. We're a country with a population of 330 million
people, 50k shouldn't cause a dent.

It turns out, that the legal immigration rate into the US hovers around 1-2
million people a year.

The Illegal immigration rate hovers around 10 million people a year.

Over the course of the 1990s, ~10 million people immigrated legally, and 100
million illegally.

So my immediate reaction is that this bill is Trump half-assing again. Dealing
with illegal immigration is a difficult issue. But dealing with legal
immigration, is far, far easier. After all, these are the law abiding people.
So to me, this looks like, just like the Muslim ban, Trump going after
something that looks like easy points to put on the board, regardless of
policy.

Illegal immigration is much harder to deal with. There are so many people here
already, that you're stuck with either the status quo, deportation, or mass
amnesty, none of which are great options. On top of that, the Democratic party
likes to turn a blind eye to the issue, as the demographic trends this enables
works in their favor long term. Similarly, there is strong economic lobbying
pressure, usually to the Republican party, by businesses not to crack down on
illegal immigration, by businesses who exploit these people as workers without
any rights or protection. Historically, while Republican presidencies have
been willing to deport people found with illegal immigration status, they
genuinely undermine or completely stop enforcement against businesses that
hire illegal immigrants, which in turn results in higher illegal immigration
during Republican presidencies. Credit due where credit is due, I've seen a
few articles mention that that isn't the case for Trump's administration, but
I haven't found anything conclusive yet.

So, I welcome with someone with more knowledge than a few google searches, but
this seems like a bullshit bill that hurts good people, to give Trump an "easy
win".

~~~
shalmanese
I think you've read your numbers wrong. There's a total of 10 million illegal
immigrants in the US. Inflow is about 200K.

------
Retric
'While still targeting the middle class for downward wage pressure.' I am not
saying it's a bad thing, just coverage on this issue seems odd.

------
jeremynixon
Pass the paywall: [https://t.co/evMDPWlEHx](https://t.co/evMDPWlEHx)

~~~
sunwooz
How does this work?

~~~
hackerboos
HTTP referrer header is set to allow those incoming from social media to get X
articles free a month.

------
cmahler7
I don't see how anyone can be against this. Should we really take an unskilled
immigrant who can't speak english over an AI researcher? This is a similar
merit system as used by Canada and Australia.

Reminder that people who couldn't work or speak english were sent back at
Ellis Island. People who came here knew they were going to have to work and
wouldn't be getting handouts. The idea that we just took in whoever wanted to
come here is revisionary history used to push agendas.

~~~
dang
It looks like you've been using HN primarily for political and ideological
arguments. That's not a legit use of the site, so we ban accounts that do it,
so would you please stop?

HN is intended for gratifying intellectual curiosity, and the two things are
pretty much incompatible, because political and ideological flamewar burns up
everything else.

~~~
cmahler7
I've given obviously contrarian opinions on subjects posted to HN, but none of
it was off-topic to the posted subject. If you don't want these topics being
discussed just delete the thread, what's the point if contrarian opinion is
going to be banned?

[http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html)

------
ulfw
This won't have much impact as I doubt there'll be that many Green Card
applicants while he is in charge.

~~~
crusso
If we could just get away from the notion that the President (and the rest of
the Federal government for that matter) is "in charge" of anything beyond the
explicitly enumerated powers in the Constitution - these political changeovers
wouldn't feel so important to most members of the civil society.

~~~
cmahler7
The funny thing is the far left will switch between comparing Trump to Hitler
then the next day make fun of him for not getting legislation passed. Is he an
authoritarian dictator or a weak leader who can't get things done?

~~~
asveikau
I will risk some downvotes to point this out...

You must be confused. There is no left in this country. The Dems are a center
right party shifting rightward over the last few decades in line with the
general rightward shift in most national officeholders.

For all this deriding of "the left" I hear from my righty friends I cannot
name very many authentically leftist officeholders or party leadership.
Instead, that party just offers what used to be considered Republican plans
(like Gingrich or Romney's views on health care, or the Reagan/Bush tax
policy)

~~~
dragonwriter
> The Dems are a center right party shifting rightward over the last few
> decades in line with the general rightward shift in most national
> officeholders.

That's not entirely true; the Democratic rightward shift pretty much stopped
around 2008, plus or minus a little bit. It's dominated by a center-right
faction, but it has a substantial (and resurgent over the past ~decade, after
having been in retreat since the late 1980s) faction that is somewhere between
center-left and left (but not hard left.)

~~~
asveikau
I think worldwide the rightward shift really accelerated in the timeframe
you're talking about and the years that followed, when seemingly every elected
person of seemingly all persuasions started to love austerity.

And in the US, the Obama years were tempered from day 1 by the crowd that
wanted to moderate a perceived left counter-push which never materialized in
legislation. Witness Obamacare is not and never was seriously proposed to be
single payer, it has always been a 1990s GOP alternative to single payer.

