# Trump backs plan that would curb legal immigration **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 2, 2017, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651 "2017-08-02T20:58:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/61 "2017-08-03T16:41:14Z")
> [@puddleglum](#): > > If enacted this reform would increase GDP. Educated people are more productive than uneducated people so this would increase GDP. Educated people are also less likely to use government assistance so that would increase GDP. Educated people are also less likely to commit crime than uneducated people so that would increase GDP. They are proposing to cut immigration in half. They’d need to offset with a 2x productivity increase in the new immigrant population. Good luck with that. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/62 "2017-08-03T16:46:49Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Free school lunches don’t have anything to do with whether immigrants are a burden on the welfare system (rather, all it says is something about where they live – poorer neighborhoods). SNAPP and cash welfare might, but those statistics show that immigrants are no more of a burden than non-immigrants. Why is no more a burden than non-immigrants the standard? Why shouldn’t we shoot to allow only those that can support themselves to immigrate? > [@](#): > > In 2014, 64 percent of immigrants admitted with legal residency were immediate relatives of American citizens or sponsored by family members. Just 15 percent entered through employment-based preferences, according to the Migration Policy Institute, an independent research organization. But that does not mean that those who came in on family ties were necessarily low skilled or uneducated. > > The legislation would award points based on education, ability to speak English, high-paying job offers, age, record of achievement and entrepreneurial initiative. But while it would still allow spouses and minor children of Americans and legal residents to come in, it would eliminate preferences for other relatives, like siblings and adult children. > **[Trump Supports Plan to Cut Legal Immigration by Half (Published 2017)](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/us/politics/trump-immigration.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news)** > > Legislation would favor immigrants based on skills and education, while curtailing those brought into the country through family ties. I don’t see anything wrong with this. I’d prefer to see slots given to those likely to be successful here over those who happen to be related to people likely to be successful. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/63 "2017-08-03T16:46:49Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I think if they had used an argument with numbers that actually supported their argument (I’m not sure about the accuracy of the study you cite, but at least those numbers would actually be relevant to their argument) then it would have been much stronger. Although the fact that this study doesn’t differentiate between legal and illegal immigrants weakens it when relating to the proposal about limiting legal immigration. > > But why do you think the school lunch numbers are relevant at all? The only thing they tell us is that immigrant children tend to go to poorer public schools. Why would that be relevant to relative burdens? I don’t think the school lunch numbers are particularly relevant, but it is a form of public assistance (apparently one that we means-test at the school district level instead of the individual household level - learned that today), and I wouldn’t call it “total bullshit” for someone to include it in a discussion about welfare. It’s a form of welfare. I would understand your complaint more if free school lunches was some sort of an outlier that significantly distorted the numbers being cited, but that doesn’t appear to be the case either (51% \> 30% vs 46% \> 28%). Given that excluding school lunches doesn’t appear to make ‘significant’ differences to the underlying claim, I hardly think it’s unfair or a “lie” or “total bullshit” for the White House to cite the ‘top line’ numbers from the study (51% \> 30%). I’m not sure about the accuracy of the study _the White House_ cited either, except that at a quick glance it appears to be at least plausible, and based on a reasonable data set. Your point about legal vs illegal immigrants is one worth noting, and if you’ve got some information that the welfare use is significantly different among those two subsets, I’d love to hear it, and think it would be valuable context to wrap around my understanding about immigrants and welfare. Given all of this, do you still think your opening post (quoted below for reference) - and particularly the “total bullshit” line - is fair / accurate / having an adult conversation? From where I sit, this is one time that Trump’s claim seems to be on at least pretty-decent ground, and your (and several other Dopers’) reflexive disbelief in anything and everything Trump says did not serve you well. Your thoughts? > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > The “welfare benefits” to “50%” statement by the White House is [total bullshit](http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/ap-fact-check-shaky-assumptions-trump-immigration-pitch-48998999) – they’re counting free lunches to poor schools as “welfare benefits”. In terms of cash welfare, there’s no difference between immigrant and non-immigrant families, and even for food stamps, there’s virtually no difference. The free lunches in poor schools just tells us that immigrants tend to live in poorer neighborhoods, which is no suprirse whatsoever. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/64 "2017-08-03T16:50:38Z")
It seems to me that there are many cities, like Detroit, with declining populations. Meanwhile, there are thousands of refugees from places like Syria who are desperate to improve their situation. I think these refugees should be permitted to settle (in large numbers), if they move to these underpopulated cities. It would go a long way to revitalizing decaying parts of the country. At the beginning they will require some assistance, but I think they will be a net positive ultimately. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/65 "2017-08-03T16:50:48Z")
Huh Im poking around BLS and didn’t realize foreign born have a higher labor force participation rate than native-born. 65% vs 62%. I wonder if age difference factors in. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/66 "2017-08-03T16:52:06Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > Huh Im poking around BLS and didn’t realize foreign born have a higher labor force participation rate than native-born. 65% vs 62%. I wonder if age difference factors in. Given this line from Johnny Ace’s cite from above, I suspect that’s the case: > [@](#): > > The gap derives mainly from the costs for the elderly. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/67 "2017-08-03T16:53:09Z")
> [@Ruken](#): > > Huh Im poking around BLS and didn’t realize foreign born have a higher labor force participation rate than native-born. 65% vs 62%. I wonder if age difference factors in. Definitely. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/68 "2017-08-03T16:53:49Z")
> [@Dewey\_Finn](#): > > It seems to me that there are many cities, like Detroit, with declining populations. Meanwhile, there are thousands of refugees from places like Syria who are desperate to improve their situation. I think these refugees should be permitted to settle (in large numbers), if they move to these underpopulated cities. It would go a long way to revitalizing decaying parts of the country. At the beginning they will require some assistance, but I think they will be a net positive ultimately. In what ways do you think they’d be a “net positive”? If we could conduct an experiment and measure whether they were a “net positive” or a “net negative”, which criteria or metrics would you propose we use? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/69 "2017-08-03T16:56:00Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I don’t think the school lunch numbers are particularly relevant, but it is a form of public assistance (apparently one that we means-test at the school district level instead of the individual household level - learned that today), and I wouldn’t call it “total bullshit” for someone to include it in a discussion about welfare. It’s a form of welfare. > > I would understand your complaint more if free school lunches was some sort of an outlier that significantly distorted the numbers being cited, but that doesn’t appear to be the case either (51% \> 30% vs 46% \> 28%). > > Given that excluding school lunches doesn’t appear to make ‘significant’ differences to the underlying claim, I hardly think it’s unfair or a “lie” or “total bullshit” for the White House to cite the ‘top line’ numbers from the study (51% \> 30%). > > I’m not sure about the accuracy of the study _the White House_ cited either, except that at a quick glance it appears to be at least plausible, and based on a reasonable data set. > > Your point about legal vs illegal immigrants is one worth noting, and if you’ve got some information that the welfare use is significantly different among those two subsets, I’d love to hear it, and think it would be valuable context to wrap around my understanding about immigrants and welfare. > > Given all of this, do you still think your opening post (quoted below for reference) - and particularly the “total bullshit” line - is fair / accurate / having an adult conversation? From where I sit, this is one time that Trump’s claim seems to be on at least pretty-decent ground, and your (and several other Dopers’) reflexive disbelief in anything and everything Trump says did not serve you well. Your thoughts? I’ve seen more studies with opposite results, which I’ll link to when I get a chance – studies that show immigrants (illegal or legal) pay more into the social welfare system then they receive in benefits, and start more businesses, and generally work harder and are more productive than non-immigrants. I’m inherently skeptical of studies from the CIS, which has been extremely shady (and borderline white supremacist) in my understanding. Those numbers appear to directly contradict the other study linked earlier – the one with the same percentage between immigrants/non-immigrants for cash welfare, and very close 27/25 for food benefits. Further, that the actual proposal (as **Richard Parker** noted) prioritizes great English way, way above great education, even when someone has decent English skills. To me, that’s “total bullshit”, especially when the justification is about how much they’ll pay their way and contribute. It’s “total bullshit” to assert that uneducated native English speakers will contribute more to the economy, on average, than highly educated moderate ESL-speakers would. I don’t know if that’s attributable to incompetence or bigotry, but it’s total bullshit either way. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/70 "2017-08-03T17:09:09Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > THe RAISE act really only has one virtue, and it’s a biggie: it’s in line with public opinion. It’s also in line with most nations’ immigration policies, for those who care about that sort of thing. > > It’s not going to pass, because both Democrats and corporate Republicans want more low skill immigrants. Of course they do. They know business needs under the table workers to get stuff done after they have enacted laws which disincentivize legal labor. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/71 "2017-08-03T17:10:22Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Further, that the actual proposal (as **Richard Parker** noted) prioritizes great English way, way above great education, even when someone has decent English skills. No, it doesn’t: > [@](#): > > Education > Points are distributed based on the highest degree a person has achieved. One point is given for an applicant with a US high school diploma or the foreign equivalent. A foreign bachelor’s degree earns five points, while a US bachelor’s degree earns six points. > > A foreign master’s degree in STEM fields earns seven points while a US master’s earns eight points. A foreign professional degree or doctorate earns 10 points and a US equivalent earns 13. > English ability > > Points are also given out for English ability, as determined by standardized English test. > > Anyone with less than a 60th percentile proficiency gets no points. Between 60th and 80th percentile is worth six points, someone in the 80th to 90th percentile range earns 10 points, someone with a 90th percentile proficiency or above earns 11 points, and someone in the 100th percentile range earns 12 points. > **[How to earn ‘points’ under Trump’s immigration plan | CNN Politics](https://www.cnn.com/2017/08/02/politics/cotton-perdue-trump-bill-point-system-merit-based/index.html)** > > Olympic medal? Nobel Prize? Age 25 with a degree? How the points add up under the proposed immigration revamp. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/72 "2017-08-03T17:12:39Z")
> [@treis](#): > > No, it doesn’t: > > [http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/02/politics/cotton-perdue-trump-bill-point-system-merit-based/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/02/politics/cotton-perdue-trump-bill-point-system-merit-based/index.html) This supports my claim. Someone with no education but perfect English would get significantly more “points” than someone with a foreign STEM Master’s degree and 59% proficient English (this uneducated fluent English-speaker would also get 2 more points than a foreign M.D. with 59% English proficiency!). That’s pretty much exactly what I said. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/73 "2017-08-03T17:13:01Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Further, that the actual proposal (as **Richard Parker** noted) prioritizes great English way, way above great education, even when someone has decent English skills. Just to be clear, the max points you get for English Proficieny is 11 points (90th percentile on the test); the max points you get for education is 13 points (STEM PhD from US school). If you think 11 \>\> 13, we will need to revoke your physics degree and kick you out of the country. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/74 "2017-08-03T17:15:07Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This supports my claim. Someone with no education but perfect English would get significantly more “points” than someone with a foreign STEM Master’s degree and 59% proficient English. That’s pretty much exactly what I said. 12 is way way above 7? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/75 "2017-08-03T17:15:57Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Just to be clear, the max points you get for English Proficieny is 11 points (90th percentile on the test); the max points you get for education is 13 points (STEM PhD from US school). > > If you think 11 \>\> 13, we will need to revoke your physics degree and kick you out of the country. 😃 Not for foreign degrees – a foreign Doctor with 59% English gets fewer points than a fluent English-speaker with no degree. That’s nuts, IMO, if the goal is about productivity and potential burdens. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/76 "2017-08-03T17:17:02Z")
> [@treis](#): > > 12 is way way above 7? 12 is significantly higher than 7, in my judgment. Almost double, in fact. I’m not sure if your “way, way” matches my “way, way” – but an in depth discussion of such phrases might be a hijack. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/77 "2017-08-03T17:21:30Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Not for foreign degrees – a foreign Doctor with 59% English gets fewer points than a fluent English-speaker with no degree. That’s nuts, IMO, if the goal is about productivity and potential burdens. It’s better if you go to the link and post the actual categories and points you are talking about. You said “great English” and “great Education”, and you said the former was “way, way above” the latter. It sounds now like you are trying to move the goal posts, so best if you give us the exact coordinates of the goal posts instead of saying “they are over there, somewhere”. Fluent English, no degree = 12 points. (11 points if no HS degree) Foreign Doctor = 10 points. How many points for 59% English? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/78 "2017-08-03T17:25:02Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > It’s better if you go to the link and post the actual categories and points you are talking about. You said “great English” and “great Education”, and you said the former was “way, way above” the latter. It sounds now like you are trying to move the goal posts, so best if you give us the exact coordinates of the goal posts instead of saying “they are over there, somewhere”. Oh come on. Can you look at those points and reasonably characterize it as valuing great education over great English? That’s the goalposts – that this point system very clearly prioritizes English ability over education, for the vast majority of potential immigrants, when IMO that’s totally nuts if the goal is to minimize the potential burden of future immigrants. I deeply and humbly apologize if you found anything I said earlier confusing. I’m far from a perfect human and, as always, I will strive to be a better person and a better poster. Do you have an opinion on this issue, and this point system? I’m interested in that, if you have one. By the way, the max points you can get for English is 12, not 11. But that’s okay – that you got that wrong is no big deal and doesn’t detract from this discussion in any significant way. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/79 "2017-08-03T17:25:50Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > 12 is significantly higher than 7, in my judgment. Almost double, in fact. I’m not sure if your “way, way” matches my “way, way” – but an in depth discussion of such phrases might be a hijack. It’s not a hijack. It’s you making an incorrect statement and then choosing to make a ridiculous argument instead of simply admitting your error. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2017, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651/80 "2017-08-03T17:28:41Z")
> [@treis](#): > > It’s not a hijack. It’s you making an incorrect statement and then choosing to make a ridiculous argument instead of simply admitting your error. Huh? 12 is significantly higher than 7. What’s my error? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-backs-plan-that-would-curb-legal-immigration/792651.md?page=5)