Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10969
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 22 Jan 2018, 2:49 pm

Fate
I'd be willing to negotiate #4, but chain migration has to be on the table. It's fine when it's immediate family, but not beyond that. Also, there is no reason not to make sure everyone in DACA, etc., is a wonderful human being. After all, the whole idea is to let illegals jump to the front of the line, so we should be sure they're really as pure as the driven snow.


I think you have an unrealistic view of the ease with which immigrants enjoy "Chain migration".
As of May 2016, for most countries, unmarried children of U.S. citizens must wait more than five years and siblings of U.S. citizens must wait more than 10 years. People from countries with high levels of immigration to the United States—Mexico, China, India, and the Philippines—generally have longer waiting times. For example, married children of U.S. citizens from Mexico must wait more than 20 years for a visa to become available, and Filipino siblings of U.S. citizens currently wait about 25 years.

If the term that was originally given to the program, "family reunification", were used instead of "chain migration" ... it might change attitudes towards the program more.
But yes, like most things the American political system gets its hands on, immigration system with its country quotas is unnecessarily complex.
I agree that anyone who is illegal(undocumented) l but wants to "get legal" should have to register and apply, providing a history of employment education etc. Employers should be encouraged to be sponsors on those applications. I would envision hundreds of tribunals constructed to hear applications and approve or deny quickly. And the guidance for the tribunals should be a simple point system that provides points for 1) length of stay 2) age at entry 3) employment status 4) education level 5) employer sponsorship 6) criminal history and more?
Make sense?
I also think that employers who are found on the registry but aren't sponsoring the applicant should be called as witnesses. And if they are found to be a comany that has exploited illegals knowingly over the years, charged.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21061
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 22 Jan 2018, 3:41 pm

rickyp wrote:I think you have an unrealistic view of the ease with which immigrants enjoy "Chain migration".

Nonsense. All of your examples are of adults.

If a citizen's adult children have to wait, that's fine.

We could certainly look at streamlining some of the processes.

Build the wall!
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10969
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 23 Jan 2018, 7:15 am

Fate
Nonsense. All of your examples are of adults


You are uninformed.

A lawful permanent resident (a foreign-born individual with a green card) may petition to bring their child to the United States, depending on the child's age and marital status. Under U.S. immigration law, a "child" is a son or daughter under the age of 21 who is unmarried. This also includes the children of your child. Permanent residents also may petition on behalf of unmarried sons and daughters who are over the age of 21 (as well as their children)
.

http://immigration.findlaw.com/visas/br ... dents.html

Under 21 could mean 6. Or 14...
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21061
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 23 Jan 2018, 9:01 am

rickyp wrote:Fate
Nonsense. All of your examples are of adults


You are uninformed.

A lawful permanent resident (a foreign-born individual with a green card) may petition to bring their child to the United States, depending on the child's age and marital status. Under U.S. immigration law, a "child" is a son or daughter under the age of 21 who is unmarried. This also includes the children of your child. Permanent residents also may petition on behalf of unmarried sons and daughters who are over the age of 21 (as well as their children)
.

http://immigration.findlaw.com/visas/br ... dents.html

Under 21 could mean 6. Or 14...


Nope, you're a tool. Here's what YOU said:

As of May 2016, for most countries, unmarried children of U.S. citizens must wait more than five years and siblings of U.S. citizens must wait more than 10 years. People from countries with high levels of immigration to the United States—Mexico, China, India, and the Philippines—generally have longer waiting times. For example, married children of U.S. citizens from Mexico must wait more than 20 years for a visa to become available, and Filipino siblings of U.S. citizens currently wait about 25 years.


So, try to construct a situation wherein these descriptions actually apply to a child. What citizen of the US would have "unmarried children" under 18 who are not with them?

Go ahead.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10969
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 23 Jan 2018, 4:23 pm

Fate
What citizen of the US would have "unmarried children" under 18 who are not with them?

You think this is a made up situation? Why? What informs you that its made up?
You want Examples?
Phillipino women who come to work as nannies, and are eventually sponsored for their green card by the families they care for... There are thousands of them.
Mexican farm laborers who are sponsored for permanent residence after may years working for the same farms...
Most migrant workers have spent years in the US sending money back to their families. If they are lucky enough to achieve permanent status while in the US, they immediately want to reunite their family.
Then there are gifted students coming for their post secondary education including masters and doctorates.. and who, upon graduation, are offered jobs by tech firms, research laboratories etc. Often they have left young families behind for the years they are studying.

Its why the program is called "family reunification". Its was created because there was a huge need, and there was compassion towards those who had sacrificed to improve their families lot.
Family, being so highly valued by so many Americans.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21061
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 23 Jan 2018, 4:30 pm

rickyp wrote:Fate
What citizen of the US would have "unmarried children" under 18 who are not with them?

You think this is a made up situation? Why? What informs you that its made up?
You want Examples?
Phillipino women who come to work as nannies, and are eventually sponsored for their green card by the families they care for... There are thousands of them.
Mexican farm laborers who are sponsored for permanent residence after may years working for the same farms...
Most migrant workers have spent years in the US sending money back to their families. If they are lucky enough to achieve permanent status while in the US, they immediately want to reunite their family.
Then there are gifted students coming for their post secondary education including masters and doctorates.. and who, upon graduation, are offered jobs by tech firms, research laboratories etc. Often they have left young families behind for the years they are studying.

Its why the program is called "family reunification". Its was created because there was a huge need, and there was compassion towards those who had sacrificed to improve their families lot.
Family, being so highly valued by so many Americans.


And, if you can show that minor children in these situations are kept out of the country, that's a policy issue.

In the meantime, give me everything else I want and we'll deal with the 12 kids stranded in a foreign country, separated from their parents.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10969
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 24 Jan 2018, 9:11 am

fate
In the meantime, give me everything else I want and we'll deal with the 12 kids stranded in a foreign country, separated from their parents

Sure...those are the numbers...

Another useful indicator to understand the waiting times is the number of people whose documents are on hold because there are no immigrant visas available for a given family/employment preference or a given country of origin. According to data on the petitions submitted to the State Department, there were about 4.4 million applicants (including spouses and minor children) who were on the waiting list as of November 1, 2016. The overwhelming majority were family-sponsored applicants (4.3 million, which includes the principal applicant and their immediate family members). About 107,000 were employment-sponsored applicants and their families.

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article ... s#Children
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21061
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 24 Jan 2018, 10:56 am

rickyp wrote:fate
In the meantime, give me everything else I want and we'll deal with the 12 kids stranded in a foreign country, separated from their parents

Sure...those are the numbers...

Another useful indicator to understand the waiting times is the number of people whose documents are on hold because there are no immigrant visas available for a given family/employment preference or a given country of origin. According to data on the petitions submitted to the State Department, there were about 4.4 million applicants (including spouses and minor children) who were on the waiting list as of November 1, 2016. The overwhelming majority were family-sponsored applicants (4.3 million, which includes the principal applicant and their immediate family members). About 107,000 were employment-sponsored applicants and their families.

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/article ... s#Children


Huge numbers, apart from *specific* information, are worthless.

Again, give me everything else, and we'll talk.

However, "chain migration" is far from limited to minor children of adult citizens. Do we need more truck drivers, like this guy? He won a "diversity visa."

Is there a need for more unskilled, random labor? At what risk?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15952
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 25 Jan 2018, 9:14 am

Certainly I have seen it where one adult comes over to work, leaving spouse and kids behind until they establish themselves. Was very common for Caribbean immigrants to the UK in the 50s and 60s. Later, the wife and kids would come over.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10969
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 25 Jan 2018, 12:13 pm

Fate
Huge numbers, apart from *specific* information, are worthless


Fate
In the meantime, give me everything else I want and we'll deal with the 12 kids stranded in a foreign country, separated from their parents.


Yes, you always back up your claims with very specific numbers..

Fate
However, "chain migration" is far from limited to minor children of adult citizens. Do we need more truck drivers, like this guy? He won a "diversity visa.

You are arguing the specifics of "chain migration" (family reunification) by bringing up the case of someone who got in under the "diversity lottery".
Please find a government web site that alludes to the acceptance of more than this..
A lawful permanent resident (a foreign-born individual with a green card) may petition to bring their child to the United States, depending on the child's age and marital status. Under U.S. immigration law, a "child" is a son or daughter under the age of 21 who is unmarried. This also includes the children of your child. Permanent residents also may petition on behalf of unmarried sons and daughters who are over the age of 21 (as well as their children)
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21061
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 25 Jan 2018, 12:39 pm

Here, have some chain migration.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12 ... s-say.html

Sorry, but if your country is so bad that you have to come to the US, but leave your children behind?

Not in my lifetime.

But, I am not after "immediate family" anyway. Let the minor children come.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15952
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 26 Jan 2018, 5:29 am

Doctor Fate wrote:

Sorry, but if your country is so bad that you have to come to the US, but leave your children behind?
As I said, it is quite common. And the world is not binary like that - the US is better than most countries, but that doesn't mean those countries are complete disasters. People come over for various reasons - often to work. And it is easier often for immigrants to come over first as a working age adult to find work and establish themselves, but needing flexibility, while the rest of the family waits, gets remittances, and follows later.

But, I am not after "immediate family" anyway. Let the minor children come.
and spouses? What is wrong with children up to 21?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21061
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 26 Jan 2018, 8:45 am

danivon wrote:
Doctor Fate wrote:

Sorry, but if your country is so bad that you have to come to the US, but leave your children behind?
As I said, it is quite common. And the world is not binary like that - the US is better than most countries, but that doesn't mean those countries are complete disasters. People come over for various reasons - often to work. And it is easier often for immigrants to come over first as a working age adult to find work and establish themselves, but needing flexibility, while the rest of the family waits, gets remittances, and follows later.

But, I am not after "immediate family" anyway. Let the minor children come.
and spouses? What is wrong with children up to 21?


It's open to negotiation.

What I find very questionable is the idea that mothers and fathers leave their children in places where they are endangered or impoverished, while they steal into the land of milk and honey. I wouldn't do it and I doubt many would.

I don't believe the United States is beholden to those who break the law to enter our country. Is Mexico? How do they treat illegal aliens to their country?

Answer: far worse than we do. Here, we shut down the government for them.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 10969
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 26 Jan 2018, 11:41 am

Fate
Huge numbers, apart from *specific* information, are worthless.


So you now offer a Fox news piece and it says this...

He “was admitted to the United States after presenting a passport displaying an F43 family immigrant visa in 2011,” Houlton said of Ullah, who “is a Lawful Permanent Resident … who benefited from extended family chain migration.”
Ullah was one of 141,501 immigrants who have entered the U.S. from Bangladesh through chain migration since 2005, according to the White House


What these numbers say is that 141,500 immigrants from Bangladesh seem to have been successfully integrated since 2005 and one man, apparently became corrupted or disillusioned after 6 long years and attempted one of the most incompetent acts of terror ever..
So its your contention that in order to avoid the possibility of another in the next 141,000 becoming a terrorist the whole program needs to end?
Or what is it that you think this proves?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21061
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 26 Jan 2018, 12:38 pm

rickyp wrote:What these numbers say is that 141,500 immigrants from Bangladesh seem to have been successfully integrated since 2005 and one man, apparently became corrupted or disillusioned after 6 long years and attempted one of the most incompetent acts of terror ever..
So its your contention that in order to avoid the possibility of another in the next 141,000 becoming a terrorist the whole program needs to end?
Or what is it that you think this proves?


Uh, no.

The question is whether we need "chain migration" wherein one person is able to drag every single limb of their family, distant or not, into the US. If you want to let everyone on the planet into Canada, feel free.