Unskilled workers don't have a path to permanent residency

[Heracles 417]

Up until the recent Recession, Ireland was also looking for foreign workers. It is a common issue among most nations. Go to Abu Dabai and you'll find a large number of Filipinos working there.

Ireland = 6 million population. How about looking at their immigration quota now during the recession?

You clearly advocate anyone and everyone enter.Regardless of the number, the state of the economy, its impact on wages or its impact on the quality of life for Americans.

The two arguments you guys have for this is country of immigrants and they pay taxes too. Also quick to state that anyone for responsible immigration to a country of 310 million, is a bigot, racist etc. Without a doubt, these labels are coming in the next few posts.

Edited June 3, 2010 by Booyah!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Right, 'cause these 'unskilled workers' working as dish-washers and lawn-mowers will contributing a buttload in taxes.

In terms of tax revenue, there is no difference between a minimum wage earner who is a USC and a foreign worker. Statistically speaking, however, foreign workers tend to be much more reliable and harder workers. As someone mentioned earlier, they have nothing else to prop them up but their hard work and determination, while many USC living on low wages have a myriad of government welfare programs that are good intentioned, but also can keep them in perpetual poverty.

[sachinky 465]

Because they become taxpayers.

So you are basically advocating handing out visas to every Tom, ####### and Harry unskilled laborer who wants to 'better his life' and is willing to mop floors just to be 'the Land of the Brave and Free' so that the tax base keeps on increasing?

Edited June 3, 2010 by sachinky

[Heracles 417]

In terms of tax revenue, there is no difference between a minimum wage earner who is a USC and a foreign worker. Statistically speaking, however, foreign workers tend to be much more reliable and harder workers. As someone mentioned earlier, they have nothing else to prop them up but their hard work and determination, while many USC living on low wages have a myriad of government welfare programs that are good intentioned, but also can keep them in perpetual poverty.

There is a difference actually. It's called supply and demand. It's also why various blue-collar workers, as posted earlier by me, now earn $2k a week in AUS. A wage that most in Silicon-valley no longer earn. Your logic is evidently that if we flood the IT market, this will be good because they pay taxes. Come to think of it, the last person I will take advice on tax or running a state is a Californian.

Because of the constant supply of cheap workers, such wages will never increase in America; therefore taxes collected will remain low and not offset the demographics huge use of government services. Those Americans who are consequently sidetracked for jobs in their own country, will have to remain on welfare and this ultimately ends up costing taxpayers even more money.

Once again you seem to ignore [not sure why] the immigration policies and population of countries that have a much lower unemployment rate, a much higher minimum wage and a lot less poverty.

Edited June 3, 2010 by Booyah!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

So you are basically advocating handing out visas to every Tom, ####### and Harry unskilled laborer who wants to 'better his life' and is willing to mop floors just to be 'the Land of the Brave and Free' so that the tax base keeps on increasing?

I know that wasn't directed at me, but I've said several times here that it would have to be NEED BASED, which is how our guest worker visas currently work. The difference being that guest worker visas are limited right now to seasonal migrant workers and I'm advocating we expand it to service sector jobs where employers can demonstrate a need.

[mawilson 2,133]

The truth is, if we were to KILL OFF every illegal immigrant tomorrow, we wouldn't have enough citizens/legal residents to fill all the positions those millions of illegals currently hold.

Sure we would - there are 15 million unemployed Americans at the moment.

[GabiandVi 34]

I'm not against a visa for unskilled workers but currently, there is no need for unskilled laborers, which is largely due to the fact that illegal aliens are working those positions.

Again, "hard-working" or "deserving" aren't really qualifications for visas. Sure, there are a lot of hardworking, dedicated people who'd love the chance to come to the U.S. and would probably be much better at a job than some lazy American bum but that doesn't mean that she/he should be entitled to a visa. That's just the way it is. Immigration isn't based on who is more deserving and who isn't.

Then we completely agree. I never equated "hard-working" or "deserving" with qualifications for a visa. I have said in every post on this thread that we currently don't have a need for unskilled laborers because we have a whole mess of unskilled illegal laborers. I've also stated that visas for unskilled laborers would have to be tied to a need based on unemployment numbers, etc.

I agree that immigration has to be based on what is best for America and Americans, not on what is good for the potential immigrant, though I would feel a lot more comfortable living among and employing some of those "hard working," "deserving" third-world wannabee immigrants than a lot of Americans, but that is not a topic for immigration.

[Heracles 417]

Sure we would - there are 15 million unemployed Americans at the moment.

Now factor in the number that are no-longer counted [long-term unemployed off benefits] or the underemployed. I'd say at least 55 million.

Edited June 3, 2010 by Booyah!

[Peikko 1,575]

Now factor in the number that are no-longer counted [long-term unemployed off benefits] or the underemployed. I'd say at least 55 million.

What's the point of adding in the bolded? If they are already doing work that they are overqualified for, they are hardly in the market for another unskilled post.

[GabiandVi 34]

Sure we would - there are 15 million unemployed Americans at the moment.

There are statistics showing higher numbers of illegal immigrants than unemployed Americans, but the point is moot. The point is that if we did have a need for unskilled laborers, which is a possibility I hope we all look forward to some day, we should offer visas to fill those positions.

Now . I know someone who works with jobs corps around here. This person has told me they have given up training high school kids to fill the 10s of thousands of open positions they are working to fill with qualified workers because they see no hope in getting them qualified. They've set their sights on the junior high students.

[Laveau 67]

Well he is right on the money, who wants their country to end up a China or India? Certainly no other first world country, hence their small population. Once the US reaches that point, it's too late to reverse course - damage done. AUS has had a massive immigration increase and that is causing a range of problems. As a result, they are even discussing and studying the impact of the country potentially reaching 36 million by 2025 and want to slow down immigration. That is how you keep a first world lifestyle. They don't run or rely solely on slogans or cliches like country of immigrants.

It's still quite difficult for unskilled people to enter most other first world countries as well. I will agree that using the points system, many allow people with various skills to enter, which makes it easier. Whereas, over here, you have to have a degree and a job lined up period.

It's not about being anti-immigrant but about using some common sense. Less than 100 years ago, the US had under 100 million people. Now it has 310 million and is projected to reach 500 million. What do people think this will do to the quality of life for most Americans? Now, what does pretty-much every third world country have in common? Hint: involves people and is the opposite to the first world.

[sachinky 465]

To clarify, I'm not against a visa for unskilled workers if such a need arose which there currently isn't -- I still don't support a path to permanent residency or citizenship for them. I can understand, "come pick lettuce in the summer and go back home" but "come pick lettuce and become a USC in 5 years" is just crazy-talk.

[Heracles 417]

What's the point of adding in the bolded? If they are already doing work that they are overqualified for, they are hardly in the market for another unskilled post.

Underemployed is a college student working at Burger King or someone only working 20 hours instead of fulltime. Therefore, while these people are employed, they are not earning to their full potential.

Just in case you have not heard, an economy is tied together - joined at the hip. You cannot have a huge underclass or millions unemployed in one sector and believe, it will not impact you. However, this mindset is nothing new from you. After all, you clearly support an unlimited number of eastern Europeans entering the UK and refuse to accept their negative impact on wages for Brits.

Edited June 3, 2010 by Booyah!

[GabiandVi 34]

As to first part of your question, since, I'm the alien beneficiary, I'll answer this. None. Not once. My family and friends are not desperate to get to the U.S. They are quite happy with their lives in India. Sure, they'd love to come visit me and my husband and that's fine since both my parents hold 10 year tourist visas.

I don't see anything wrong with the options. You can come to the U.S. as a visitor (considering you meet the requirements), as a student to study, as a special skilled worker, on a worker exchange program. There are dependent visas. There's visas for large multinational corporations. Religious visas. Entertainment/Athletic visas. You can be petitioned by an immediate relative. You can win the diversity lottery. There's a whole list of visa categories ranging from A-Z. I don't understand why you seem to think that the U.S. should offer even more visa categories to basically those who 'just want to come here because they want to better their life.'

Again, just to reiterate, though I think we've established we are basically on the same side of this argument. I DO NOT want to offer visas to people who just want to come here to better their lives.

I want there to be opportunities for a whole host of people who do not fit those other visa categories, but who would be willing to take distasteful jobs if we needed them to.

If we don't need them, I don't care how deserving or how badly they want to come, there would be no job for them and no one to sponsor them so it would be irresponsible to offer them a visa.

But if we needed them because we had a worker shortage, which I hope we will have again some day, it would be irresponsible to not offer the visas. That would be a large factor in illegal immigration, which I see as a rather large problem in the US.

[Heracles 417]

To clarify, I'm not against a visa for unskilled workers if such a need arose which there currently isn't -- I still don't support a path to permanent residency or citizenship for them. I can understand, "come pick lettuce in the summer and go back home" but "come pick lettuce and become a USC in 5 years" is just crazy-talk.

Excluding family immigration, immigration should be on a per-need basis. At 10% unemployment, there is little justification for any workers, let alone unskilled. Those with niche specialties, like a PhD, being the exception of course but not any others. Once the economy improves, the Visas can open up again.