Gothamist: How Immigration Bill's Point System Might Affect NYC

RM

Wed, 30 May 2007 20:52:50 -0500

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...

Stan LS

Wed, 30 May 2007 18:39:26 -0500

Hey, man. In no shape or form am I supporting any amnesty.

liberalism is dead

Wed, 30 May 2007 18:33:32 -0500

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.

greed is good

Wed, 30 May 2007 17:54:09 -0500

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.

glennQNYC

Wed, 30 May 2007 17:51:16 -0500

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.

Legal Immigrant

Wed, 30 May 2007 17:22:16 -0500

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.

Stan LS

Wed, 30 May 2007 17:07:49 -0500

"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.

Reality Czech

Wed, 30 May 2007 17:03:57 -0500

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.

Stan LS

Wed, 30 May 2007 17:03:41 -0500

"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.

rtd

Wed, 30 May 2007 16:58:09 -0500

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.

ToldYe

Wed, 30 May 2007 16:30:21 -0500

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).

Stan LS

Wed, 30 May 2007 16:16:30 -0500

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 ;)

pedro

Wed, 30 May 2007 15:30:31 -0500

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%".

Stan LS

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:58:13 -0500

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?

Reality Czech

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:54:00 -0500

Yeah there too! Anywhere, I'd just like to see the laws actually enforced!

pedro

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:52:15 -0500

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.

Reality Czech

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:52:12 -0500

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!

Stan LS

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:48:12 -0500

"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.

Reality Czech

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:43:49 -0500

Tex

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:42:25 -0500

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.

Stan LS

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:30:03 -0500

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.

DaveH

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:23:03 -0500

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.

focus people

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:10:13 -0500

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.

JP Lynch

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:04:24 -0500

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.

Stan LS

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:02:33 -0500

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.

Toby

Wed, 30 May 2007 14:01:24 -0500

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.

DaveH

Wed, 30 May 2007 13:58:27 -0500

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.

paramus soil

Wed, 30 May 2007 13:58:14 -0500

How are your kids? Peachy?

Stan LS

Wed, 30 May 2007 13:52:18 -0500

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.

DaveH

Wed, 30 May 2007 13:51:19 -0500

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

Wed, 30 May 2007 13:46:48 -0500

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.

Stan LS

Wed, 30 May 2007 13:46:01 -0500

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.

Legal immigrant

Wed, 30 May 2007 13:41:30 -0500

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.

DaveH

Wed, 30 May 2007 13:37:57 -0500

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?