Immigration in the west isn't oriented in benefiting the welcoming nation,but the migrants themselves.Until intentions change we won't see meaningful results
I think the immigration policy on the top should be oriented explicitly around a brain-gain goal. 1,000 immigrants from each country, is pretty stupid considering the top 1,000 immigrants from Eritrea are probably all below the top 100,000 or even million from populous and educationally developed countries like India or China.
For those immigrants that are productive, give them a fast-track to citizenship. That way their GDP is forever taxable by Uncle Sam even if they eventually return home.
It’s currently a huge waste that we have international students attending top US universities (in the hard sciences) that don’t have a clear path to permanent residency. These aren’t degree mills like is going on in Canada, but legitimate highly productive people who are interested in living in the US.
You can add other countries to the permanent residency list, including Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, Serbia, Singapore etc. These aren’t in NATO but are developed and have small populations. Probably not many would come so it wouldn’t upset the apple cart. Also perhaps Japan and SK? I feel like restricting India and China to 1,000 non-bid visas per year is too few, relative to the vast talent in those countries.
I am skeptical of Serbia as it seems to function as a proxy of Russia, but that may change.
Ireland and Austria should honestly be pressured to join NATO, since they de facto benefit from NATO protection, but don't contribute. It's slightly parasitic.
From my article: "There would be one major exception to this quota for countries which participate in mutual defense treaties with America." America has mutual defense treaties with both Japan and SK.
I think 1,000 per year would be a good starting point given that our border isn't sealed and birthright citizenship still exists, so there is still "birth tourism." If we could secure the border and remove birthright citizenship, I would consider expanding this number, but currently there is too much cheating.
Immigration in the west isn't oriented in benefiting the welcoming nation,but the migrants themselves.Until intentions change we won't see meaningful results
I think the immigration policy on the top should be oriented explicitly around a brain-gain goal. 1,000 immigrants from each country, is pretty stupid considering the top 1,000 immigrants from Eritrea are probably all below the top 100,000 or even million from populous and educationally developed countries like India or China.
For those immigrants that are productive, give them a fast-track to citizenship. That way their GDP is forever taxable by Uncle Sam even if they eventually return home.
It’s currently a huge waste that we have international students attending top US universities (in the hard sciences) that don’t have a clear path to permanent residency. These aren’t degree mills like is going on in Canada, but legitimate highly productive people who are interested in living in the US.
My article on elite immigration explains why brain-gain goals have scaling costs.
You can add other countries to the permanent residency list, including Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, Serbia, Singapore etc. These aren’t in NATO but are developed and have small populations. Probably not many would come so it wouldn’t upset the apple cart. Also perhaps Japan and SK? I feel like restricting India and China to 1,000 non-bid visas per year is too few, relative to the vast talent in those countries.
But interesting article; quite refreshing!
@Bobsyouruncle:
I am skeptical of Serbia as it seems to function as a proxy of Russia, but that may change.
Ireland and Austria should honestly be pressured to join NATO, since they de facto benefit from NATO protection, but don't contribute. It's slightly parasitic.
From my article: "There would be one major exception to this quota for countries which participate in mutual defense treaties with America." America has mutual defense treaties with both Japan and SK.
I think 1,000 per year would be a good starting point given that our border isn't sealed and birthright citizenship still exists, so there is still "birth tourism." If we could secure the border and remove birthright citizenship, I would consider expanding this number, but currently there is too much cheating.