Didn't take Bannon long: GOP Senators seek to cut LEGAL immigration

They better do this before the border states flip...a flip that could happen even before the next census redistricting in response to trump.

This is a last gasp of sorts. One that'll lead to an increasingly authoritarian bipolar state or a hiccup back to the normal started with Bush Sr.

 

Is even a conversation about the levels of immigration not allowed by the left?

Immigration is a government controlled (when they can be bothered) policy and how it is controlled is allowed to be debated.

 

We all know this intended to reduce the Asian and Latino legal immigrants into this country. They took away all our labor jobs and now they are taking away all our engineering and IT jobs too!

 

I don't see any problem with adjusting the legal migration number. I don't have an interest to see it reduced, but it's appropriate to think about immigration levels from time to time. It does, however, play right into the narrative that Trump and some Republicans are xenophobes (let's say I was not surprised to see Cotton's name). An immediate-family rule seems reasonable, except I don't think I like the exclusion of parents.

 

I don't have a problem with reducing immigration, i.e., cutting it in half, as long as there's a means to increase it. It does pander to the xenophobes but there is not a set number of immgrants we allow.

 

What do you mean we all know that? You mean when someone says they want to reduce legal immigration you looked at who accounts for most legal immigration and that is who we want reduced? Indians get over 70% of the H-1B visas, of course if you reduce immigration you will reduce them.

Legal immigration is a debate if current law is still in the best interest of Americans. And it is totally valid. The left, as displayed perfectly by you, is terrified of debate and uses racism accusation as a way to avoid it.

 

If we have a limit already in place, then what that limit should be is open to debate. Cutting by half seems like an overly severe measure, though.

 

The only reason we dont have negative population growth is immigrants. This is stupidity. If you want to recreate Europe's demographic problems, then fine do something stupid like this. Have fun in 30 years when you have a growing share of the elderly with fewer workers. You think Medicare and Social Security (and really any safety net) have trouble now with the baby boomers, wait till that future happens.

This is just stupidity in order to pander to some misplaced anger. And as a child of an immigrant, I take this rather personally especially when my family didn't have a particularly easy time coming here in the first place.

Remember when Republicans wanted to increase the immigration quotas (like oh I dont know two years ago)? Now that Trump created some new target for the masses to rage on, we'll get more stupid public policy like this.

Immigrants are critical to keeping this country afloat and making the math work. Japan's a real life example of the consequences of immigration restrictions. They're literally out of workers and pouring more and more into retirement programs because their population is aging too quickly. Countries don't work very well when that happens.

Also now that Devos is going to slowly weaken our education system, you should really consider accepting more educated immigrants to keep the economy going.

The nativism is truly disgusting. Nothing makes you feel less American than some fools in Congress suggesting that your parents aren't welcome and that they're somehow taking something from this country (rather than contributing to it).

 

The Left probably feels this issue was settled and were more preoccupied with the ongoing 20 year illegal immigration "debate". I guess that's a delusion of the left to think an issue as old as the nation's inception would be settled over time.

I support immigration reform because my parents were immigrants. People in my exact circumstances could feel differently, but I don't think adding 1 million able bodied or monied immigrants for citizenship will dilute the 350 million or so Americans already there...provided we continue to learn to share and live together.

 

Do we really have too few people in the country to where it's a problem if they scale back the number of additional people in the country? I mean, I don't care one way or the other, but I've never thought that there were too few people in the US.

 

You mean the last 20 years with no action on illegal immigration? Both political parties serving their own interests by doing nothing on that issue is one of the reasons we have Trump.

I don't think H-1B visas were around as long as you claim, therefore policies get updated. Sort of the point of having an active government. The delusion of the left is that you can avoid debate forever. The delusion of both sides is you can do nothing and avoid consequences forever.

 

Populations have to grow for economies to sustain themselves. If you don't have growth then you're stuck with ever growing liabilities for senior citizens without workers to pay for those liabilites. Plus how can companies expect to grow if populations don't grow? You end up with situations where companies can't staff appropriately over time which then incentivizes companies to go abroad for talent. I could've sworn Trump's whole schtick is to prevent that sort of thing.

Part of economic growth involves maintaining a certain level of human capital, especially in an age where most states aren't adequately investing in their education systems. You can actually see this phenomenon at the state level. Where I live, we have a fantastic economy with arguably the most highly educated workforce in the US (Minnesota) but we have very little population growth. Businesses here have been complaining for years that the high level of economic growth here can't be sustained without proper population growth because over time the workforce ages out and there just aren't enough people to replace them. Minnesota is a pretty high tax state that has managed to retain all of these fortune 500 companies because our workforce is near the top of the US as far as education. But if there's no population growth then even that won't save you. Consequently a state like Texas which has tons of immigration (from other states and other countries) is in a much better position for long term growth but Texas has limits because of its lousy education system. Ironically Texas is over-reliant on immigrants from other states and countries as a result so Texas gets hit harder by immigration restrictions than other states.

 

At a certain point though that becomes unsustainable, you can't just constantly keep growing your population because at a certain point you run out of resources....especially when the bulk of that population sticks to only a dozen or so places in the country. Again, there's really not a shortage of people in the country as is. Perhaps there's a shortage in places that no one wants to live, but just adding more people to the country as a whole isn't going to change that.

 

This is to keep America white as long as possible. Trying to delay the inevitable where the majority is less than 50%.

 

It's odd but "white nationalists" feel the nation belongs to them, first and foremost

 

That's a separate question about resources. But economies don't work without population growth, period. You will the problems of Western Europe (and Japan in a more extreme case) if you keep immigrants out. If Republicans want to sustain the level of GDP that we have today, then we need growth. GDP growth correlates quite well with population growth. There is always a need for human capital in any economy regardless of automation and new technology. Plus you'll drown in pension and safety net liabilities if you don't grow.

The resource question is fair but the US is no where near hitting its resource capacity. And frankly we're incredibly inefficient with the resources that we do have.

 

And more racism accusations to avoid debate on what is good policy. Oh look you were quoted by someone who accused people of being white nationalists (definitely not an echo chamber)