<p>I think the wealthy people from countries like UK, at least one wealthy guy I know doesn’t want to live in US. But lots of wealthy people from China are in my neighborhood. I guess the polluted air doesn’t help.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>This is largely true. We don’t have the number of unskilled jobs like we did many decades ago. We don’t need more people who will just be tax-receivers. </p>
<p>Really, zoosermom? Because I feel like you are treating me like a 6-year-old. As a history major, and with two masters degrees in relevant fields, I’ve studied and thought plenty about the changes in the world and education in the last few centuries. If you have so much knowledge, then be more specific instead of obfuscating your comments.</p>
<p>Yes, migration from Mexico IS down. The increase is from other countries, specially El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Honduras.</p>
<p>Here is the actual data on apprehensions from DHS: <a href=“http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/ois_enforcement_ar_2013.pdf”>http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/ois_enforcement_ar_2013.pdf</a></p>
<p>Obfuscating, fireandrain? I didn’t initially believe that you were actually asking what changed in terms of education in the last 160 years because it was a ridiculous question. If you have studied this topic, then you will certainly understand how difficult it is in 2014 to get a job that will support a family if you can’t read the language of the nation in which you reside. You surely also understand that in a global, fast-moving, modern economy, there are few manufacturing jobs or other jobs that don’t require literacy and technological proficiency. I’m sure you will also understand that if basic literacy does not occur, then technological literacy and skills attainment is not possible, either. But to spell it out for you, in one’s own language as a child, it is much easier to become literate, numerate and technologically proficient than it is as an adult in a different language, and the people who don’t achieve those goals will never be self-supporting in the new country. Additionally, and I don’t expect you to know this already, but teaching the concepts of literacy to older children and adults is a staggeringly-difficult task and often success does not occur. when the children of those parents are educated, their level of attainment is much less than what is achieved by parents with literate parents, so the problem is also intergenerational.</p>
<p>I don’t care if you are rich or poor, if you are illegally here, you are illegal.</p>
<p>I’ve mentioned that I have two grandparents who were illegal. Yes, I am appreciative that they weren’t deported.</p>
<p>This is so similar to speed limits. If they enforced speed limits, lots of people would be fined and perhaps people would not speed. But other people think speed limits are bullcrap, that they are unfair and put too many requirements on people, that they should be able to decide themselves.</p>
<p>It is onerous for some people, especially poor people, to come to the US legally. And poor people coming here are at a significant disadvantage in their home countries, and yes the US makes it too easy (often non-profits are getting government help to help illegal immigrants, sigh) for them to stay here illegally.</p>
<p>The real problem is not the people, it is the regulations and enforcing the regulations. I don’t hire illegals, I have friends who do. I know a handful of illegal immigrants, I know many many legal immigrants. </p>
<p>Look - the VA has put people on waiting lists and lied about it, and people died waiting for care. Our government has more than their share of druggies and criminals. Politicians are too hung up about “the mid-terms” to actually get anything done. Boehner couldn’t agree with Obama on where to have lunch.</p>
<p>I don’t know how things can change, but they need to. This kid’s story is not part of the problem, it is part of the solution. If private corporations, with HUGE endowments, feel that kids who are in the US illegally should get financial support, and consider admission regardless of immigration status, maybe that will pave the way to an amnesty and ways to prevent future illegal immigrants.</p>
<p>Whether or not everyone likes it. Many people don’t like Roe v. Wade, and the Citizens United decision. But things will not change without the politicians becoming competent and able.</p>
<p>Great post, rhandco! </p>
<p>
Amnesty will increase illegal immigration. Always has and always will.</p>
<p>I don’t blame politicians, and think that is the easy way out. I think our politicians on both sides are quite competent. The problem is that there is not an easy solution to the problem and not everyone agrees what the best solution is. </p>
<p><a href=“Failed Amnesty Legislation of 1986 Haunts the Current Immigration Bills in Congress - The New York Times”>Failed Amnesty Legislation of 1986 Haunts the Current Immigration Bills in Congress - The New York Times;
<p>The 1986 amnesty required 4 years of residency. I would think requiring 10 years of residency would be fair.</p>
<p><a href=“https://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/illegal-immigration/seven-amnesties-passed-congress.html”>https://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/illegal-immigration/seven-amnesties-passed-congress.html</a></p>
<p><a href=“https://www.numbersusa.com/content/files/pdf/1986%20irca%20chart.pdf”>https://www.numbersusa.com/content/files/pdf/1986%20irca%20chart.pdf</a></p>
<p>Read up on it. Make your own decision about whether amnesties work or not. And how they are supposed to work.</p>
<p>Or just insist that illegal is illegal and the people who leave for economic and safety reasons but aren’t eligible for refugee status have tough luck. </p>
<p>But this lady can get refugee status based on lies:
<a href=“No Longer the Perfect Victim? Nafissatou Diallo Defends Herself | TIME.com”>http://healthland.time.com/2011/07/26/no-longer-the-perfect-victim-nafissatou-diallo-defends-herself/</a></p>
<p>We can’t pick and choose who is “good enough” or “targeted enough” to be a refugee when the major criteria is which country you are from - as long as you don’t share a border with the US.</p>
<p>The requirements for amnesty in the bill that passed in the Senate last year that the House hasn’t put up for a vote is 16 years. </p>
<p>And the laws regarding refugees and asylum seekers are different. The rules over who can received refugee status are based on the 1951 UN Refugee Convention (International Law) which the United States signed in the 1960s and then in 1980 included in national Law in the Refugee Act: </p>
<p>"a refugee is someone who “owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality, and is unable to, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country.” </p>
<p>Not giving asylum to someone with a well founded fear of prosecution would then break both American and International law. And the criteria falls on an immigration judge to decide whether the fear is well founded.</p>
<p>For immigrants who are not escaping prosecution for those reasons, there is no relevant international law. And the US law that defines immigration policy (for people not applying for refugee status) is the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act -with some subsequent amendments- not the 1980 Refugee Act.</p>
<p>In other words, refugees and immigrants, legally, are not the same.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A few hundred a year, excluding China, is low to me.</p>
<p>Actually I suspect more “wealthy” (calling even $1m or so wealthy) Americans leave the country to live, than wealthy foreigners come to the US to live. Mostly for retirement though. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t exclude China, now it’s several thousand. Have fewer restrictions and speed the process up, now it’s thousands more. Make it much harder to immigrate otherwise, now it’s tens of thousands more. </p>
<p>Probably not many with under 4M networth are doing EB-5. Sure, having someone with a 1M networth come to the country is better than having an uneducated farm worker with $2000 to their name come to the country, but the focus should be on those with 8 and 9 figure USD networths, not 7. </p>
<p>
Why should it be easy to immigrate to the US? It’s not the 19th century. We don’t have a shortage of unskilled labor.</p>
<p>
We don’t make public policy regarding illegal immigration to cater to the 0.01% academic elite. </p>
<p>Haha GMT…Remember we don’t LIKE the 0.01%. They are the cause of all of our social ills. They must be taxed! </p>
I have talked to the kid that was admitted. Trust me when I tell you he had the stats to be accepted. They did not ‘lower the SAT/GPA standard.’