Unskilled workers don't have a path to permanent residency

[GabiandVi 34]

Pretty much actually. How else do you think Canada, Australia and the UK's points system visa works? However and yet ironically, engineers are in short supply here, hence their high salaries following graduation. Basically S&D in action.

You either didn't read the question through, or you are saying that the date that the US finds it does not, at that point, need any engineers, no special skills visa for engineers should ever be granted again, ever in the future, and that particular special skill should be ruled out for any future need.

[justashooter 430]

I voted for Obama and think he's a much better President than Bush was

can you read, boy?

[Heracles 417]

You either didn't read the question through, or you are saying that the date that the US finds it does not, at that point, need any engineers, no special skills visa for engineers should ever be granted again, ever in the future, and that particular special skill should be ruled out for any future need.

Rather, you are the one who is talking about hypothetical times; the what about when when we need unskilled labor. As I have pointed our repetitively, that time is far far away. Thus, no point even even talking about it. In this economy [10% unemployed] and with such a chronic level of poverty, the US does not need unskilled labor for a very long time.

[GabiandVi 34]

Rather, you are the one who is talking about hypothetical times; the what about when when we need unskilled labor. As I have pointed our repetitively, that time is far far away. Thus, no point even even talking about it. In this economy [10% unemployed] and with such a chronic level of poverty, the US does not need unskilled labor for a very long time.

I'm not debating the need. I've stated over and over again we currently have no need. I'm not even saying that we need to create the visa now, 2010. Again, either you are not reading the posts you are responding to, or you are arguing that such a visa should never be granted, regardless of need.

I'm also not debating the US economy with you, nor the outlook for the US economy. My point is very specific. When we have a need for unskilled labor, (which we had not that long ago and did not offer such a visa and a very good argument can be made that this was a large factor in illegal immigration and a system that perpetuates itself and creates more poverty among citizens) we should grant visas for unskilled workers and allow them a road to residency/citizenship.

[Boiler 46,354]

EB-3c: This category is for ‘unskilled workers’ for positions that require less than two years training or experience and with a job offer from a U.S. company

Edited June 5, 2010 by Boiler

[Heracles 417]

I'm not debating the need. I've stated over and over again we currently have no need. I'm not even saying that we need to create the visa now, 2010. Again, either you are not reading the posts you are responding to, or you are arguing that such a visa should never be granted, regardless of need.

I'm also not debating the US economy with you, nor the outlook for the US economy. My point is very specific. When we have a need for unskilled labor, (which we had not that long ago and did not offer such a visa and a very good argument can be made that this was a large factor in illegal immigration and a system that perpetuates itself and creates more poverty among citizens) we should grant visas for unskilled workers and allow them a road to residency/citizenship.

I am arguing that there is no need, however, there will not be any need for at least 10 plus years - possible more. Furthermore, this need is only contingent that illegal aliens be removed and it's no longer an employment option. As such, why would or should the US waste time creating such a visa now? It's like saying I should plan for my kid's college, even though I don't have any children.

I am not debating the US economy either, I am simply stating that those jobs many claim Americans are too good to do, would be filled if supply (labor) was restricted. Why you may ask [or not]? Restricting the supply of labor - which is currently endless in the US - would result in higher wages. After all, employers need people to do the work.

Building on your earlier example, engineers are in short supply; hence their $55k starting salaries straight out of college. Yet if America opened the border and allowed 300,000K graduating from India and China to enter, they wouldn't start on $20K let alone $55k - if they even found a job.

Edited June 5, 2010 by Booyah!

[GabiandVi 34]

I am arguing that there is no need, however, there will not be any need for at least 10 plus years - possible more.

This is a prediction. And it is your prediction. As such, it is not a guarantee. Better to have a visa in place before the need which may not be for another 20 years but might be in many fewer.

Furthermore, this need is only contingent that illegal aliens be removed and it's no longer an employment option. As such, why would or should the US waste time creating such a visa now? It's like saying I should plan for my kid's college, even though I don't have any children.

Completely agree with the first sentence above. As for the last sentence, it wouldn't be a bad idea if you think some day you might. You'll be ready if a child comes along, especially if it happens when you are older and closer to retirement. And if you never have the child, well, you still have the money.

I am not debating the US economy either, I am simply stating that those jobs many claim Americans are too good to do, would be filled if supply (labor) was restricted.

Again, I completely agree. I don't see the two concepts as being exclusive.

Why you may ask [or not]? Restricting the supply of labor - which is currently endless in the US - would result in higher wages. After all, employers need people to do the work. Building on your earlier example, engineers are in short supply; hence their $55k starting salaries straight out of college.

I don't think this response builds on my example at all. I'm not talking about what they are paid or why. I'm talking about the fact that the visa exists when there is a need and when there is not a need. It simply isn't granted when there is no need. If it helps, replace engineer with any other specialized skill.

Edited June 5, 2010 by GabiandVi

[Boiler 46,354]

EB-3c: This category is for ‘unskilled workers’ for positions that require less than two years training or experience and with a job offer from a U.S. company

[Heracles 417]

This is a prediction. And it is your prediction. As such, it is not a guarantee. Better to have a visa in place before the need which may not be for another 20 years but might be in many fewer.

It's quite a logical prediction; after all, I am an analyst. I'd really like to know how you propose the 10% unemployed and the 60 million plus living in poverty will get out of it in less than 10 to 20 years. Consequently, requiring unskilled labor.

I don't think this response builds on my example at all. I'm not talking about what they are paid or why. I'm talking about the fact that the visa exists when there is a need and when there is not a need. It simply isn't granted when there is no need. If it helps, replace engineer with any other specialized skill.

My mistake, I meant using your example not building. What people are paid is extremely important, as it determines quality of life. No one gets out of poverty on a US minimum wage.

Yes, that is how America's immigration system works but not the rest of the world. Many have implemented Australia's points based system, which dynamically changes depending on the need and the state of the economy. Currently there is a shortage of teachers, so they can pretty much walk in. Whereas, as funny as it sounds, there used to be a shortage of hairdressers; so they too got a chance and received extra points when applying. The shortage has since closed and that skill class has been eliminated. They don't just keep visas open for the sake of it.

Edited June 5, 2010 by Booyah!