America needs more immigrants

[Tintrlvr]

I feel like it'd make sense to open free migration between the USA and the EU, given that there would be likely equal amounts of immigration in each direction in that case.

I think this would be a huge positive, too, but seeing how controversial free migration between the EU and Britain, which are much more similar, has been, this would clearly not be possible in practice, at least right now.

One might consider free migration between the US and Canada as a starting point.

Migration between the US and Canada is already almost free. Canadian citizen can apply to TN visa, and work freely in US. There is no cap for TN and very easy to obtain.

I have no direct experience on this, but Canadian friends speak of a quite difficult process, and all of the Canadian-American couples I know (only three, but still) have said that it's much easier for the American to work in Canada than the reverse.

In any case, "apply for a visa" automatically means we're not talking about free migration.

[Agafin]

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58347

Population. In CBO’s projections, the population increases from 335 million people in 2022 to 369 million people in 2052, expanding by 0.3 percent per year, on average.

This is what I was talking about. Just 10% growth over 30 years is quite low. It's starting to look like America won't reach the 400 million population mark this century (or ever). Not necessarily a bad thing, but an ageing population is.

[Skill and Chance]

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58347

Population. In CBO’s projections, the population increases from 335 million people in 2022 to 369 million people in 2052, expanding by 0.3 percent per year, on average.

This is what I was talking about. Just 10% growth over 30 years is quite low. It's starting to look like America won't reach the 400 million population mark this century (or ever). Not necessarily a bad thing, but an ageing population is.

I would tread carefully here.   We could plausibly have another baby boom generation this century.  The original one wasn't remotely predictable before WWII.  Fertility had already dropped close to modern levels in the 1930's.

[chalmetteowl]

We should have completely open borders to Mexico and many countries in Latin America.

We have too many white people in the United States as it is. We do not need more European whiteys here.

??

i'll support an open Southern border if it's closed to everyone else

i'll support open immigration from other countries if we control the Southern border

but we can't have it both ways. it devalues the process legal immigrants go through if they could just fly down to Mexico and just waltz on in

[_.]

Most intellectual forum thread

[jamestroll]

New proposal:

If you are white and a foreigner you can not emigrate to the United States.

If you of color, yes come on in!

We have enough WHITE people in the United States.

[Kamala's side hoe]

The biggest two that concern me are 1. The importation of H1B visa holders as a replacement for educating native born americans (and the semi racist scorn in response about how Americans are just too dumb or lazy, give me a break) and the racial politics that encourage Asians and Hispanics to be permanently hyphenated americans. I hate the idea that a guy from Korea or China isn’t supposed to become an American, he’s supposed to become an “Asian american” which is a meaningless term only used to divide people into arbitrary racial categories.

Said racial politics reflect how multiracial WEIRD societies (e.g. Canada) work, and are partly rooted in the historic dynamic between ADOS and Caucasian Americans. I wouldn’t expect this to change even after Black America converges with the US as the whole on key socioeconomic indicators.  

Also Forumlurker (being mixed-race) seems to be using an inclusive definition of “Asian American”. Who’s to say he’s more or less Asian American than VP Harris?

Voted Option 3.

I don’t disagree about black Americans (or native Americans). Their historical circumstance does justify some separate identity within the American framework. With immigrants from Asia or Latin America however I don’t understand the impulse to put them into boxes the way historical tragedy has put black Americans in a box. For our country to work we need these new Americans and their descendants to see themselves as being in the same tribe as white and black Americans. Otherwise the “replacement theory” nutjobs are going to start appealing to more and more people.

I see no contradiction between fostering a strong Latino or Asian American identity and members of those groups seeing themselves as part of the same “tribe” as white and black Americans. If anything, I would argue that the racialization of these identities is indicative of integration and assimilation into mainstream American society.

We see this as inter-ethnic Latino or Asian pairings (e.g. Mexican + Puerto Rican or Korean + Vietnamese) are more common among US-born Latinos and Asians than with foreign-borns, as they are less compelled to date and marry within the specific diaspora of their parents and grandparents who all grew up in the old country. Even those of us who date and marry our fellow co-ethnics have mixed race social circles, follow the same sports teams, and generally have the same formative experiences from school and work as everyone else.

This answer probably won’t assuage adherents of the “great replacement” theory, but it’s more intellectually honest than suggesting that we’ll “assimilate into whiteness” or that our group interests are inherently in conflict with those of White America.


I assume everyone’s rationale for voting for Option 5 has something to do with this: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/22411236/immigration-census-population-growth

Voted for Option 3 to be a #moderatehero, but also because most citizens probably aren’t on board with Canada levels of immigration even if it makes the most economic sense.

[Bismarck]

The biggest two that concern me are 1. The importation of H1B visa holders as a replacement for educating native born americans (and the semi racist scorn in response about how Americans are just too dumb or lazy, give me a break) and the racial politics that encourage Asians and Hispanics to be permanently hyphenated americans. I hate the idea that a guy from Korea or China isn’t supposed to become an American, he’s supposed to become an “Asian american” which is a meaningless term only used to divide people into arbitrary racial categories.

Said racial politics reflect how multiracial WEIRD societies (e.g. Canada) work, and are partly rooted in the historic dynamic between ADOS and Caucasian Americans. I wouldn’t expect this to change even after Black America converges with the US as the whole on key socioeconomic indicators.  

Also Forumlurker (being mixed-race) seems to be using an inclusive definition of “Asian American”. Who’s to say he’s more or less Asian American than VP Harris?

Voted Option 3.

I don’t disagree about black Americans (or native Americans). Their historical circumstance does justify some separate identity within the American framework. With immigrants from Asia or Latin America however I don’t understand the impulse to put them into boxes the way historical tragedy has put black Americans in a box. For our country to work we need these new Americans and their descendants to see themselves as being in the same tribe as white and black Americans. Otherwise the “replacement theory” nutjobs are going to start appealing to more and more people.

I see no contradiction between fostering a strong Latino or Asian American identity and members of those groups seeing themselves as part of the same “tribe” as white and black Americans. If anything, I would argue that the racialization of these identities is indicative of integration and assimilation into mainstream American society.

We see this as inter-ethnic Latino or Asian pairings (e.g. Mexican + Puerto Rican or Korean + Vietnamese) are more common among US-born Latinos and Asians than with foreign-borns, as they are less compelled to date and marry within the specific diaspora of their parents and grandparents who all grew up in the old country. Even those of us who date and marry our fellow co-ethnics have mixed race social circles, follow the same sports teams, and generally have the same formative experiences from school and work as everyone else.

This answer probably won’t assuage adherents of the “great replacement” theory, but it’s more intellectually honest than suggesting that we’ll “assimilate into whiteness” or that our group interests are inherently in conflict with those of White America.


I assume everyone’s rationale for voting for Option 5 has something to do with this: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/22411236/immigration-census-population-growth

Voted for Option 3 to be a #moderatehero, but also because most citizens probably aren’t on board with Canada levels of immigration even if it makes the most economic sense.

I just disagree completely. The phrase “assimilate into whiteness” is what scares me. You’re taking mainstream American identity and racializing it. I don’t want hyphenated Americans to become “white” whatever that means. I want these 19th century categories placed on the dustbin of history where they belong. As long as Asians or Hispanics see mainstream American culture as “whiteness” it’s going to be something they don’t see themselves as part of. Meaning any gains they make come at the expense of white people rather than just being more new members of our big American family. isn’t the experience of the Irish and the Italians and the Jews a more appealing model for the new immigrants than the experience of the permanent other that black Americans have suffered through?