Dubai Debt Issues Push Stocks Down
GMA: Adam Lambert, No; Chris Brown, Yes
Family Gets Early Christmas Gift From Ellen DeGeneres
Mayor: Sex Trafficking Victims, Please Speak Up
Street Artist Proposes on Subway Signage
The new legislation reform bill that no one is very happy with has raised many questions about its effect on the city. Mayor Bloomberg said that the bill is a good first step, but called the provision where immigrants would go back to their native country "a joke," saying, "Nobody’s going to go home for a year and come back. Nobody could ever enforce that. Nobody in their right mind would ever try to do it." Today, the NY Times has an article on how immigration has shaped the city.
The proposed bill would stop the practice of family members sponsoring relatives to come to the U.S. and would essentially filter immigrants with a scoring system - higher levels of English fluency and education would give people more points than family ties. The article, though, speaks to immigrants who entered the U.S. with family sponsorship and now thrive. Two were business owners on the Lower East Side: Jamal Hussain, owner of a deli on Delancey Street, has "opened his deli with loans from relatives four years ago" and has since "repaid the loans, married, had a baby, and bought a house in the Bronx." Steven Lai, whose mother sponsored him, came arrived in New York at 23, learned English at night school, and opened up a locksmith business on Grand Street 18 years ago. As the Times' Nina Berstein writes, "Under the proposed point system, Mr. Lai would have been locked out."
And some people who study immigration agree:
“The way that New York has come back is one of the great American success stories of the last 40 years, and immigrants are absolutely central to it,” Professor [Gary] Gerstle [historian of immigration who teaches at Vanderbilt] said. “Mom and pop stores in New York have been a very dynamic force in the making of American society, and I would not want to see that possibility foreclosed.”There are some questions about whether the point system who also give an edge to certain ethnic groups that are more educated and well-to-do. But a Yale professor, Peter Schuck, who supports the point system, said,"The country can’t simply throw up its hands and say, ‘We’ve done it this way for the past few generations, so we just should go on doing it.'"“If it was just geared to skilled labor, New York would be in trouble,” said David Reimers, an emeritus immigration historian at N.Y.U. “Like all big cities, it depends on unskilled labor.” If family members are left out, he added, “they’re going to come in by hook or crook.”
Interestingly, there's another Times related about immigration, but about an immigration scam. Ralph Cucciniello was arrested after telling hundreds of Irish immigrants that he could file paperwork to make them legal citizens. Cucciniello said he worked for the Yale Immigration Law Clinic and ask for $5,000 checks; then it turned out there was no Yale Immigration Law Clinic and somehow Cucciniello managed to use his position as an occasional volunteer and assistant to secure a Yale email address and meeting space at the Yale Law School Library. He was charged in NYC, because many of the victims live here.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Downplaying family connections seems like a great way to favor rootless immigrants, with little incentive to establish long-term roots in the U.S. This whole thing has disastrous unintended consequences written all over it. And isn't a favoritism towards speaking English a fairly de facto bias against non-white, non-European immigrants, who might not know English before they've had the opportunity to adopt it?
The new bill (which is a joke in MANY respects) allows spouses and minor children, so this whole "We'll never have Mom-n-Pop shops again" is false.
What the bill ends is the practice of chain migration, where an immigrant is able to bring in their grown siblings, who bring in their spouses, who bring in their parents, who bring in their children, who bring in their spouses, who bring in their parents, who bring in their children, who bring in their spouses, who bring in...
God, the Times is desperate to support ILLEGAL immigration. They keep using this tactic - find one wonderful person who would be hurt by some event, and then write a whole page about them, and aren't we wicked people to deny anything to this wonderful person.
The problem is not with the immigration, but with *illegal immigration*.
As for DaveH's "favoritism towards speaking English a fairly de facto bias against non-white, non-European immigrants, who might not know English", here we go. The race card again. I didn't realize English was the official language of everyone who's white. If anything, this amnesty is a de facto bias against the white, european immigrants who can't simply run over the border.
Isn't that the type of legal immigration the federal government should want to encourage? Spouses, siblings, family who want to make new lives in the U.S.? Instead it sounds like the bill wants to favor itinerant residents who have no incentive to establish long-term stakes in America.
Regardless, I'm hopeful that Ralph Cucciniello will be persecuted to the full extent of the law for cheating Irish immigrants out of thousands of dollars with his scam. Whoops! Did I say persecuted instead of prosecuted? Eh.
DaveH, what part of "illegal" do you not understand? They broke the law. Giving them amnesty is not only an encouragement for others to break the law, but is also a slap in the face of immigrants who came here the legal way.
How are your kids? Peachy?
I have no position on this bill, other than questioning the wisdom of its perhaps unintended consequences of favoring itinerant immigrants over people who want to bring their families and become permanent Americans.
Legal immigrants are perfectly fine.
As for illegal immigrants, there are laws on the books to deal with them and they should be enforced to the fullest extent. Simple, no need for more useless laws and perhaps then we can get back to getting out of the bloody war of choice in Iraq.
Who are these "itinerant immigrants" you speak of? I question the wisdom of favoring low skill immigrants (and their families to boot) over those with high skills. But that aside, the bottom line here is that breaking of the law should not be encouraged.
As Stan states, why is the expectation of an immigrant to speak English a racist issue? This country has bended over backwards to accept people from all over the world, much more so than any other country. Why do people come to the U.S. claiming how much better their lives are here and then stubbornly refuse to assimilate into our society? I've been at too many stores where it seemed there were no English speaking people in customer-service positions which is frustrating as hell. Does that make me a racist?
Good luck going to many other countries where English is not the national language and getting as many opportunities that are available here.
Immigrants are a valuable part of our country and history but let's all please stop with this bullshit "racist" rhetoric.
Simple, no need for more useless laws and perhaps then we can get back to getting out of the bloody war of choice in Iraq.
Leave it to Toby to initiate thread drift to Iraq. I know it's something you like to talk about but there was no post on Gothamist about Iraq today. Maybe you should go hang out on Daily Kos.
Literacy laws for voting definitely weren't racist. Laws on English-speaking fluency do have disproportionate impacts on different groups.
Open borders are not a reasonable option. Closed borders are a completely impractical reaction. Denying obvious factors in the immigration debate, including race-based favoritism and the consequences of certain policies is to ignore history's lessons and the possibility of pragmatic debate.
DaveH,
"English-speaking fluency do have disproportionate impacts on different groups"
Right. You have 2 groups, basically. One that has profeciency in English and the other that doesn't.
"including race-based favoritism"
You are the only one who keeps bringing up race. We want english speaking, educated folk to come here. Legally. Regardless of color.
Immigrants from countries like Jamaica, India, South Africa and Nigeria are usually at least somewhat familiar with English. But keep on waving that race card in the air, Dave.
Why does America "allow" poor uneducated immigrants to come in no questions asked and give educated immigranst a hard time? Hmmm. Coud it be that America wants to keep the working man down? It's been that way forever. Immigrants helped to break unions. They help keep the cost of living artificially low in America. They benefit both the republicans and the democrats. I'd like to see immigration inspectors actually show up at a business in NYC and ask for people's papers. This will never happen. America is all about making laws but not about enforcing them. It's a joke this new legislation, like any illegal immigrant is actually going to return to theiur home country. Give me a break!
"I'd like to see immigration inspectors actually show up at a business in NYC"
...or at at the multi million dollar homes of the hollywood liberals. Check their maids' and nannies' papers.
Why does America "allow" poor uneducated immigrants to come in no questions asked and give educated immigranst a hard time? Hmmm. Coud it be that America wants to keep the working man down? It's been that way forever. Immigrants helped to break unions. They help keep the cost of living artificially low in America. They benefit both the republicans and the democrats. I'd like to see immigration inspectors actually show up at a business in NYC and ask for people's papers. This will never happen. America is all about making laws but not about enforcing them. It's a joke this new legislation, like any illegal immigrant is actually going to return to theiur home country. Give me a break!
New York needs immigrants to clean the offices and deliver dinners to all the important investment bankers, hedge fund managers, and private equity guys. This helps the financiers do their important work because without them surely the world would come crashing to a halt. And without their bloated salaries earned on the backs of everyone else, where would the excess tax dollars sent to Washington come from? And without that imbalance, where would New York liberals get their sense of superiority? Oh right. From their Prius.
Yeah there too! Anywhere, I'd just like to see the laws actually enforced!
pedro,
"and without their bloated salaries"
Hey, if they could get someone to do their job for less, don't you think they would? Or do you think that the hedge funds just *like* to give away money?
Stan LS, what on earth are you talking about? Yeah, hedge fund partners do give away their money - to themselves. Anyone that isn't a partner is merely well off - although still in Al Gore's "wealthiest 1%".
pedro,
So the employees at the hedge funds who are not "partners" get paid minimum wage? I got an idea, why don't you start a hedge fun and see how many people will trust you their money with your expertise ;)
Reality Czech is basically correct - both parties have been allowing illigal immigration to go on because it keeps wage inflation down, particularly in service industries (i.e. those jobs that can't be off-shored).
If you don't like undocumented immigrants, you need to blame the whole global system, not the undocs themselves. Millions of low-end jobs in US that can't be moved offshore, corporations and business not willing to pay good wages, plus millions of people living in countries with no real opportunity for advancement, plus the promise in the US that "if you work hard, you can make it" = One big fat problem. Don't blame immigrants, blame the economic system that brings this situation into being.
"blame the economic system that brings this situation into being."
That's right. Blame mexico for exporting their unemployed here. I like how they try to dictate our immigration policy. Mexico treat their illegals like sh/t, by the way.
The problem is always the US government - a government whose policy has always been one to favor the CEO's and business interests. It's sad, but whenever the US government does or does not do something if you need to find out why just try and connect the $$$'s. You wil eventually find your answer.
"a government whose policy has always been one to favor the CEO's and business interests"
Uhm, yea. Business = jobs. Americans are not swimming to Cuba, cubans are swimming here. Come on, socialism has failed everywhere.
What pissed me off the most about this piece of legislation is that legal immigrants such as myself are being punished by cutting the number of visa available to us, prolonging the process that already takes 5-10 years. Instead of fixing the backlog, they're going to make it worst. The winners? 12 million people that knowingly broke the law. Not to mention millions more that will cross the border knowing that they will get amnesty sooner or later.
Calling illegal immigrants "immigrants," is like calling shoplifters "customers."
When I get an amnesty card for the next law I break, I'll consider amnesty for those who are in this country illegally.
We need more business to develop all the medicine for the sick CEO's kid. karma always comes back in folds.
Notice how many execs in your office has a kid with autism? ever wonder why Dick ebersole's sweet lovely youngest kid died in the plane crash and not the jock son? Karma costs and it was paid back. Poor Teddy.
Count how many execs have more than one kid with autism. it's happening. Sad but true.
One more try Stan: It's ridiculous for the liberals to be touting their concern for the lower class with a minimum wage hike and then sign off on a bill that allows more immigration of unskilled workers. The New York Times proved that the line about immigrants doing jobs "Americans won't do" is a load of crap. Americans will do the jobs if they paid enough to live on. If you subtracted the illegal labor from the pool then it is logical to conclude that low end jobs would pay more, their would be less poverty, and yes, prices would likely be higher. I think it would be interesting to see how many restaurants would have to close if there weren't an unlimited supply of dish washers, busboys, and delivery boys. People might actually have to cook for themselves. Yuppies might not eat out six nights a week. New York City has the worst income gap in the country. All of the Democrats that voted for this bill comepletely sold out their poorest supporters. We expect this from places that want the cheap labor to pack produce and work in meat packing plants. But here.
Hey, man. In no shape or form am I supporting any amnesty.
Well, most Europeans do not speak English very well, or do so at about the same average level of proficiency as Latinos.
The Europeans who do speak good English are mostly British or Irish, and they are hardly coming to America in droves.
In fact the prime beneficiaries of the English requirement are immigrant applicants from India who learn English from kindergarten onwards along with Hindi or some other Indian language.
Indians are hardly white people...