I am a liberal ( I shift allegiances depending on economic factors), a bleeding heart liberal, but I often lean conservative on many fiscal issues. One being immigration. I realize the unemployment rates are 6% deep, and I hate to see our neighbors sit in poverty. I acknowledge that open door policies, in our current economic situation, are not entirely wise. That said, I do think they are needed in some form. I am both against the conservative 0% immigration rates, and the liberal "brace for impact" methods. We have to understand that tact and decisive immigration policies can attract just the right people, which is not currently being utilized under our 0% immigration rates. I am not one for free soil, but I have been a fan of the new unlimited visa movements. Americans have been restricting work visas to 180 days for most people, and in rare cases 360 days. This is not currently working. We are training and profiting from educated workers who leave our country after 6 months. The solution is simple. Work visas need to unlimited as far as expiration goes. Corporations need to be a part of this process, and the government needs to implement specific policies to ensure these people stay for the long term. This includes their families as well. A problem that has often resulted in the leaving of professionals to their host countries. There is no doubt in my mind that this would lead to economic prosperity.
I don't think you are characterizing Conservative immigration policy by saying it's about "0% immigration rates." Except for amnesty, the right and left are not really that far apart. If it weren't for the amnesty issue, we could have already had an immigration bill. The problem is, for the left, every other aspect for immigration is in service of amnesty, so they will not support any incremental improvements. Steve Jobs's Advice for Obama According to Mr. Isaacson, Jobs "stressed the need for more trained engineers and suggested that any foreign students who earned an engineering degree in the U.S. should be given a visa to stay in the country." The president reportedly replied that this would have to await broader immigration reform, which he said he was unable to accomplish. Conservatives could support immigration reform that had expanded work visas for skilled workers (those that there are genuine shortages of) and a certain amount of low skilled work visas for some fields that are heavily dependent on foreign workers, like agriculture. But they are not interested in replacing every low skilled job with foreigners, which is the liberal goal. I want to squeeze the the low skilled labor market so that wages start rising again for the working class.
I feel the same way. Immigration has become a GOP and Democrat talking point. Which both sides are guilty of. Shows how screwed up our system is, that we can't pass things both sides want, because they work well in elections. Abortions another one. S 711 is as moderate as can be.
Well, in Italy we prefer to give citizenship instead of unlimited visas [at the end it would be almost the same thing]. But it take a lot of time to get the Italian citizenship. Regarding Visas, here they are connected to the endurance of the job contract that the migrant has signed [to obtain a visa to work in Italy you have to demonstrate to have a legal job!]. So it can happen that the same foreign worker has to obtain may temporary visas before of being allowed to ask the citizenship.
I guess I take an extremely humanistic approach to this topic and find myself at landing at a very radical opinion. If I were a person who lost some cosmic dice roll and were born in an impoverished nation and all I had to do to greatly increase my families well being was cross an imaginary line and work, then there's is no chance I wouldn't do that. So if I'm an empathetic person, which I try to be, then I find limiting law abiding ability to cross our border inhumane. So I agree 100% with unlimited work visas. If a business has labor demands that are unmet by our own population then there's no justifiable reason to bar persons from elsewhere from filling those slots.
Immigration has never really been that disagreed on. In America, its simply a talking point for elections. Just let people in for legitimate jobs, and they can pursue citizenship while they're here working. I still don't get how prolonged the immigration debate was here, and why it even needed to be that way.
It's clear the argument has got a political weight. In Italy it has got too some importance, but limited to some sectors of the electorate, so that at general level there are not remarkable political confrontation about the matter.
It's not just a talking point, it's a real dividing issue. On one side, pro-amnesty that rejects the concept that the national government should have a say on who is inside it's borders. The logical conclusion is open borders and is already a de facto open borders policy. The other side, opposes amnesty, and thinks that the national government does have say on who can be inside it's borders and doesn't think that non Americans have a particular claim on American residence and legal status. Those are significant policy divisions, not mere talking points. That's why there is a stand off on this issue.
The amnesty argument is a sham to pro long progress until the 2016 debate. I would be extremely shocked if people believed any thing less than pro amnesty. There is absolutely no good that comes out of the contrary. On one hand, we can gain the respect of the citizens, boost our image, and not toy with the economy by taking people out of the work force. On the anti amnesty side, we spend millions of dollars continuing to deport people, who easily evade us, we lose respect among 10% of Hispanic population (If you really want to seal the latino vote), and we toy with the economy tremendously. There is not one good reason for not granting forgiveness and moving forward. The GOP will argue that "It encourages people to break the law". This is ridiculous. How many times have we granted amnesty in the past? About 4-5 times. People aren't going to start stealing, because they are under the guise they'll be granted amnesty. When has one amnesty policy in America failed? The Latino community is here to stay, so lets hunker down and deal with the problems we already have in our nation.
Well, I think you've proven my point if you can't even imagine the other side has a point of view. So yes, you are definitely a liberal since you cannot accept the legitimacy of an opposing argument.
