# What is the case against "chain immigration"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 23, 2018, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303 "2018-01-23T16:21:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![BeenJammin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beenjammin/32/448_2.png) [@BeenJammin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeenJammin)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/41 "2018-01-25T15:26:47Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > There is a definite irony with this, considering our current PotUS has imported 2 out of 3 wives from other countries. But it’s OK when HE sponsors someone… **ILLEGAL** immigration, especially when officially endorsed by things like DACA, is a slap in the face to people like Trump’s wives, and millions of other \*\*LEGALLY \*\*sponsored immigrants. They undergo alot of red tape and administrative BS over a long period of time in order the **EARN** the right to be U.S. citizens. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > This does not leave a lot for asylum seekers and lottery or merit based immigration. As is intended. So what is every other SOB and in some cases their entire family to do, when earning what they want does not seem to them to be a viable option? Why sneak in illegally, of course! Maybe we get away with it, maybe we don’t. Lotsa rollin’ the dice going on. But then again, a good gambler knows the odds. What do you think the odds in the illegal immigration game should be? ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/42 "2018-01-25T15:56:48Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If I relocate to Sweden I have no expectation that I can bring my Mom, my mother-in-law, and my wife’s siblings with me and get them free Swedish health care. And that my mom and mother-in-law can then bring in THEIR siblings. Given that Swedish law does, in fact, allow that, the above merely indicates that you’re completely unfamiliar with Swedish immigration policies and laws. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/43 "2018-01-25T16:01:19Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I disagree with chain migration, and I’ll tell you why: > > Immigration policies should be in a nation’s interest. It is in our interest to bring in skilled workers. That’s the immigration strategy of most countries, and it should be ours. Now of course those skilled workers should be able to bring their spouse and kids. Where it gets less in the national interest is when you start throwing in their adult children, their parents, and their siblings. The reason it’s called chain migration is that this then leads to THOSE people bringing in their parents and siblings and adult children, so that even if we had a policy that admitted mainly skilled workers, you’ve got a chain that brings in dozens of unskilled, uneducated workers in for every one skilled worker. > > One way to fix this problem is to actually enforce the requirement that immigrants cannot be admitted if they are likely to become a burden on society. Like many things coded into immigration law, this is rarely enforced and is up to the discretion of the authorities. One good way to reform immigration law would be to do this: > > 1. Only someone over a certain income level can bring in family members > 2. They are responsible for the support of the family members they bring in > 3. Only spouses and dependents are eligible. I think you missed that in another thread I pointed that that is the case now. \*\*And they do the same support and income checks for spouses too. \*\* As it usually happens, the right wing media “forgets” to tell such things to their viewers or readers. > [@adaher](#): > > Now while the term “chain migration” is a pejorative, Democrats framing of this policy as “family reunification” is also inaccurate. If one person immigrates to the US, you know the best way to unite him with his family? for him to return home. Personal experience tells me that that usually means that the authoritarian regimes, dictatorships or gangs that are looking for those “enemies” returning home actually put not only themselves in danger, but the whole family. It may unite them alright, in their graves. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/44 "2018-01-25T16:05:11Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > That last point is a false dilemma as the policy was more humane in the past by allowing more asylum seekers in until El Trompo decided that it was inconvenient. No, there is a hard cap in the law at 675K greencards a year. Asylum seekers and lottery get whats left over after the families and employers get their share. This is often not very much. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/45 "2018-01-25T16:12:21Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > Given that Swedish law does, in fact, allow that, the above merely indicates that you’re completely unfamiliar with Swedish immigration policies and laws. The odds of me being allowed to immigrate to Sweden in the first place are close to nil, so it’s irrelevant. Sweden sticks to skilled workers and refugees, and of course the free movement of citizens of EU countries, which isn’t strictly “immigration” in any real sense, since obviously with free movement you can bring whoever you want as long as they are EU citizens. > **[10 things you should REALLY know before moving to Sweden](https://helenejones.wordpress.com/2015/07/27/10-things-you-should-really-know-before-moving-to-sweden/)** > > (If you’re thinking of moving, read this post too: Should you  move to Sweden?) “Moving to Sweden” seems to have become the UK’s equivalent of “moving to Canada”… I would actually need a job offer, which is not going to happen with my relatively mediocre skills, or enough money to support myself. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/46 "2018-01-25T16:16:43Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Personal experience tells me that that usually means that the authoritarian regimes, dictatorships or gangs that are looking for those “enemies” returning home actually put not only themselves in danger, but the whole family. > > It may unite them alright, in their graves. That’s what the asylum process is for. For purely economic migration, which is the vast majority of immigration to the US, the best way to achieve family unification is actually to just return home. I have no objection to every single Cuban moving to the US. I’ll take the Venezuelans at this point too. But Mexico is a functioning democracy. El Salvador and Nicaragua are functioning democracies. They may have serious problems, but no one from those countries is a refugee unless they’ve been specifically threatened and the government cannot protect them or they can’t relocate in-country. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/47 "2018-01-25T16:21:59Z")
> [@BeenJammin](#): > > **ILLEGAL** immigration, especially when officially endorsed by things like DACA, is a slap in the face to people like Trump’s wives, and millions of other \*\*LEGALLY \*\*sponsored immigrants. They undergo alot of red tape and administrative BS over a long period of time in order the **EARN** the right to be U.S. citizens. :dubious: > **[Trump's wife worked illegally during her first weeks in the US, documents show](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trumps-wife-worked-illegally-during-her-first-weeks-in-the-us-documents-show)** > > Melania Trump was paid for 10 modeling jobs in the United States worth $20,056 that occurred in the seven weeks before she had legal permission to work in the country, according to detailed accounting ledgers, contracts and related documents from 20... > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON – Melania Trump was paid for 10 modeling jobs in the United States worth $20,056 that occurred in the seven weeks before she had legal permission to work in the country, according to detailed accounting ledgers, contracts and related documents from 20 years ago provided to The Associated Press. > > The details of Mrs. Trump’s early paid modeling work in the U.S. emerged in the final days of a bitter presidential campaign in which her husband, Donald Trump, has taken a hard line on immigration laws and those who violate them. Trump has proposed broader use of the government’s E-verify system allowing employers to check whether job applicants are authorized to work. He has noted that federal law prohibits illegally paying immigrants. > > Mrs. Trump, who received a green card in March 2001 and became a U.S. citizen in 2006, has always maintained that she arrived in the country legally and never violated the terms of her immigration status. During the presidential campaign, she has cited her story to defend her husband’s hard line on immigration. > > The wife of the GOP presidential nominee, who sometimes worked as a model under just her first name, has said through an attorney that she first came to the U.S. from Slovenia on Aug. 27, 1996, on a B1/B2 visitor visa and then obtained an H-1B work visa on Oct. 18, 1996. > > The documents obtained by the AP show she was paid for 10 modeling assignments between Sept. 10 and Oct. 15, during a time when her visa allowed her generally to be in the U.S. and look for work but not perform paid work in the country. The documents examined by the AP indicate that the modeling assignments would have been outside the bounds of her visa. > [@BeenJammin](#): > > As is intended. So what is every other SOB and in some cases their entire family to do, when earning what they want does not seem to them to be a viable option? > > Why sneak in illegally, of course! Maybe we get away with it, maybe we don’t. Lotsa rollin’ the dice going on. But then again, a good gambler knows the odds. > > What do you think the odds in the illegal immigration game should be? As pointed before, I do think it is insulting to call it a game when lives are on the line. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/48 "2018-01-25T16:28:26Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That’s what the asylum process is for. For purely economic migration, which is the vast majority of immigration to the US, the best way to achieve family unification is actually to just return home. Sorry, that is what Reagan and henchmen tried to call the Salvadorians then and there is a lot of that with the Trump adminstration now. You need to face that a lot of what many right wing sources are telling you is grossly incomplete; they are here not just for economical reasons. > [@adaher](#): > > I have no objection to every single Cuban moving to the US. I’ll take the Venezuelans at this point too. But Mexico is a functioning democracy. And that is the line made by ignoring what gang violence (brought to by the war on drugs too, that Sessions and henchmen want to make worse) should make exceptions that are inhumanely ignored. > **[When Deportation Is a Death Sentence](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/01/15/when-deportation-is-a-death-sentence)** > > Hundreds of thousands of immigrants in the U.S. may face violence and murder in their home countries. What happens when they are forced to return? > [@adaher](#): > > El Salvador and Nicaragua are functioning democracies. They may have serious problems, but no one from those countries is a refugee unless they’ve been specifically threatened and the government cannot protect them or they can’t relocate in-country. By personal experience now, I can tell you that that (that they cannot protect them or they can’t relocate in-country.) is more often the case. There is also the very likely effect that when a lot of people is forcibly moved back to “their” countries or forced to move in large numbers to the cities that unrest follows. Making more likely that more refugees will have to be taken in the future. Nice job braking it, hero Trump! ---
**Author:** ![BeenJammin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beenjammin/32/448_2.png) [@BeenJammin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BeenJammin)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/49 "2018-01-25T16:29:44Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > :As pointed before, I do think it is insulting to call it a game when lives are on the line. And don’t forget the part about it’s only a fair game when played by the rules. Life “is” a game. Perfunctory illusions otherwise are categorically dismissed. Clearly there are winners and losers. Some believe there are just too many insulted losers/cheaters in the immigration portion of the game. If any lives were put on the immigration game line, it was by the one(s) who decided to try and beat the system (cheaters.) ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/50 "2018-01-25T16:30:15Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > I think you missed that in another thread I pointed that that is the case now. \*\*And they do the same support and income checks for spouses too. \*\* > > As it usually happens, the right wing media “forgets” to tell such things to their viewers or readers. This is true and yet once they are here, they do not have an actual obligation to support their relative after they become eligible for social benefits. The percentage of immigrant elderly that are in social welfare when they become eligible is pretty staggering. OTOH, I personally had 2 grandparents on Medicaid and welfare as soon as they were eligible and I remind my Republican sister of that every time she thinks that poor people cost her too much in taxes. Those two chain migration grandparents had grandchildren that became 3 doctors, 2 lawyers, 2 engineers and 4 small business owners. Most of them don’t bitch about paying taxes except for my sister. IOW, I don’t think you ought to create an immigration policy that focuses solely on the direct contributions those immigrants make to the GDP. Even among Hispanics (the bogeyman of modern immigration discussions), we see significant increase in education, income and wealth among later generation Hispanics. But the ones that just came over are dirt poor huddled masses yearning to breath free types. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/51 "2018-01-25T16:32:56Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Sorry, that is what Reagan and henchmen tried to call the Salvadorians then. You need to face that a lot of what many sources are telling you are here for just economical reasons are not exclusively here for that reason. That’s a good point, but less applicable today than during the Reagan years. Almost all Latin American countries are functioning democracies today. Back then, only about half were, and even then they were very unstable and much poorer than today. Today, most Latin American countries are middle income. Many people might prefer to move to a richer country, but it is not a humanitarian imperative anymore to allow it. > [@](#): > > And that is the line made by ignoring what gang violence (brought to by the war on drugs too, that Sessions and henchmen want to make worse) should make exceptions that are inhumanely ignored. > > [When Deportation Is a Death Sentence | The New Yorker](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/01/15/when-deportation-is-a-death-sentence) > > By personal experience now, I can tell you that that (that they cannot protect them or they can’t relocate in-country.) is more often the case. If an asylum seeker can make a credible claim, then that’s fine. And that makes it all the more important to keep illegal immigrants out. What good is moving to the US if the people wanting to kill them can easily get in or communicate with gang members who will just take you out in the US? Which does happen. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/52 "2018-01-25T16:33:55Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That’s what the asylum process is for. For purely economic migration, which is the vast majority of immigration to the US, the best way to achieve family unification is actually to just return home. You do realize that 40% of Fortune 500 companies have been founded by immigrants or their children? > **[Almost half of Fortune 500 companies were founded by American immigrants or...](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/almost-half-of-fortune-500-companies-were-founded-by-american-immigrants-or-their-children/)** > > Economists disagree about a lot of things, but two areas—the importance of entrepreneurship to economic growth and job creation, and the outsized role that immigrants play in founding American companies—have reached broad consensus. And yet,... The US is only the economic power we are today due to immigration, what possible benefit do we have outside of Nativism to follow a policy as you suggest. What advantage does the US gain by not attempting to attract the best and the brightest to settle here? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/53 "2018-01-25T16:35:54Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > :dubious: > > [Trump's wife worked illegally during her first weeks in the US, documents show | Fox News](http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/05/trumps-wife-worked-illegally-during-her-first-weeks-in-us-documents-show.html) > > As pointed before, I do think it is insulting to call it a game when lives are on the line. To be fair, on location shoots, do not usually require a lot of documentation. Why do we have a preference for unskilled Mexican immigrants over unskilled Indian and Chinese immigrants? Is it just because they can get here easier? It seems to me at least the Indian immigrants will speak English (or at least understand it) and the Chinese immigrants have a better track record for catching up income and education-wise within a generation or two. Why shouldn’t we replace illegal immigration with lottery? Why shouldn’t we replace some of the family reunion stuff with lottery. These are policy areas on which reasonable people can disagree. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/54 "2018-01-25T16:37:00Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That’s a good point, but less applicable today than during the Reagan years. “less” is even debatable, and Trump and henchmen know it. > [@adaher](#): > > If an asylum seeker can make a credible claim, then that’s fine. And that makes it all the more important to keep illegal immigrants out. What good is moving to the US if the people wanting to kill them can easily get in or communicate with gang members who will just take you out in the US? Which does happen. Much, much less likely than being forced to become a sitting duck in the old country. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/55 "2018-01-25T16:39:04Z")
> [@rat\_avatar](#): > > You do realize that 40% of Fortune 500 companies have been founded by immigrants or their children? > > [Almost half of Fortune 500 companies were founded by American immigrants or their children | Brookings](https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2017/12/04/almost-half-of-fortune-500-companies-were-founded-by-american-immigrants-or-their-children/) > > The US is only the economic power we are today due to immigration, what possible benefit do we have outside of Nativism to follow a policy as you suggest. > > What advantage does the US gain by not attempting to attract the best and the brightest to settle here? That’s exactly what we want. The best and brightest. Not millions of low wage laborers. Sure, many of those low wage laborers will go on to have kids who accomplish great things. You know who has kids who accomplish great things more? Skilled workers. I agree that those who want low levels of immigration are wrong. But I think that 600K or so per year is a fine number. The bulk of those should be people with skills. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/56 "2018-01-25T16:40:11Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > To be fair, on location shoots, do not usually require a lot of documentation. > > Why do we have a preference for unskilled Mexican immigrants over unskilled Indian and Chinese immigrants? Is it just because they can get here easier? Don’t see that Chinese immigrants or Indian ones are excluded from family unification. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > It seems to me at least the Indian immigrants will speak English (or at least understand it) and the Chinese immigrants have a better track record for catching up income and education-wise within a generation or two. Why shouldn’t we replace illegal immigration with lottery? Why shouldn’t we replace some of the family reunion stuff with lottery. Because, as it was pointed before, nowadays a lot of families do need to move family members from dangerous countries or areas. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > These are policy areas on which reasonable people can disagree. Until Trump is out of office, then yes, we should find reasonable people. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/57 "2018-01-25T16:42:08Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > “less” is even debatable, and Trump and henchmen know it. > Much, much less likely than being forced to become a sitting duck in the old country. True, but there’s no excuse for gang executions within the US. And the immigrant community should be up in arms wanting those not allowed to be here to be deported. And in fairness, many immigrants DO want illegals kicked out. But let’s not play games here, the vast majority of illegals are here for better jobs, and living in dangerous neighborhoods is a price they are willing to pay for that. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/58 "2018-01-25T16:47:18Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Don’t see that Chinese immigrants or Indian ones are excluded from family unification. They are not, but there are lower numbers of them in the US due to geography. Crossing the Rio Grande is a lot easier than crossing the Pacific. If we’re going to let Latin Americans enter and stay even though they came illegally, we really should make an effort to balance that by importing Chinese and Indian poor people. Due to the geographical challenges, the bulk of our Asian immigrants are people who are well off. Same with African immigrants. A nation that truly values diversity should only be admitting 7% Latinos, since that’s the proportion of Latinos to the world population. One third of our immigrants should be from India and China. I bet if we did actually admit 5 Indian and Chinese unskilled laborers for every 1 Latino unskilled laborer, Latinos would become the most hostile demographic to mass immigration in the country overnight. Which I suspect is the real reason Democrats can’t bring themselves to support open borders. Aside from the politics of open borders, having immigration laws but enforcing them lightly is the only policy beneficial to Latinos. Latinos would be harmed by a policy of open borders, because that would put them in competition with Asian and African migrants for jobs. Plus Asians are not reliable Democratic voters and even when they are, they aren’t team players, so Democrats aren’t too interested in bringing millions of them in. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/59 "2018-01-25T16:48:57Z")
> [@BeenJammin](#): > > **ILLEGAL** immigration, especially when officially endorsed by things like DACA, is a slap in the face to people like Trump’s wives, and millions of other \*\*LEGALLY \*\*sponsored immigrants. They undergo alot of red tape and administrative BS over a long period of time in order the **EARN** the right to be U.S. citizens. I’ll remind you that at present chain immigration IS LEGAL. Immigrants brought in by “chain immigration” are JUST AS LEGAL as Trump’s wives. It is in no way an insult to them. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [January 25, 2018, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303/60 "2018-01-25T16:50:35Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That’s exactly what we want. The best and brightest. Not millions of low wage laborers. Sure, many of those low wage laborers will go on to have kids who accomplish great things. You know who has kids who accomplish great things more? Skilled workers. > > I agree that those who want low levels of immigration are wrong. But I think that 600K or so per year is a fine number. The bulk of those should be people with skills. My link has cites that show that immigration doesn’t really effect the wages of native people, and that even immigrants that are leaving challenging circumstances do well for our country. > [@](#): > > U.S. cities and regions that welcomed more immigrants in the past have been linked with higher incomes, less poverty and unemployment, and greater educational attainment today. Immigrants also make outsized contributions to science and technology, whether measured as patent productivity or breakthrough discoveries—in recent years, U.S.-based researchers have been awarded with 65 percent of Nobel Prizes, though more than half of this group was born abroad. Can you justify what seems to be a fairly arbitrary cap in your response? More importantly can you explain how your “go home if family is important” would lead to the results in my link? I know I am just misunderstanding your position, but it seems like it is advocating policies that dehumanize immigrants to the point that they are just chattel labor. Entrepreneur efforts are far more about improving situations for entire families and rarely are about maximizing a pay check, in fact for the hours worked they tend to pay poorly, which is probably why immigrants are more likely to put in those efforts through long term investments of time. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-case-against-chain-immigration/807303.md?page=4)