Sounds like an argument from the deniers of Shakespeare as being capable of doing the works he did. Skills that are not quite effective in other countries does not forbid the sons or daughters to become successful.
FWIW he was a lawyer, his father in turn was right in telling him that there are too many of them. 
Unfortunately, the current people executing the law are bound to ignore skills that are also beneficial to all.
Bound to be an unfunded mandate for sure, not worthy of serious consideration really. And so it becomes your red herring about Hispanics opposing that in the end, that deserves a response like “and if my grandmother had wheels she would be a bicycle”.
And b) that’s the last thing you’d want to see. Latinos aren’t any more or less accepting of foreigners than whites are. Mass Asian immigration would be met with hostility and resentment by the Latino community as well as the white nativist community.
I am also waiting for any data that shows that Latin and Hispanic immigrants are some how less successful over time. But the quota system is biased against them due to biases that are cultural based.
I should point out that while Mexico is now a top producer of educated engineers, more than Canada, Germany or even Brazil. But that immigration quotas restrict our ability to recruit those valuable assets due to assumptions created through our lack of a temporary worker program while having industries like farming that would simply not exist in the US without “illegal” immigration.
Many of the issues surrounding the USs “illegal” immigration problem stem from biases that ignore the realities of our economy and shift the blame from OURSELVES and place that on the individuals who do come due to the economic model we produced.
Crops rot, and family farms are lost when enforcement ignores the fact that we refuse to admit that we need migrant labor and then we double down by ignoring the highly skilled workers we could encourage to immigrate because they are placed in the same category.
Our own protectionist policies created the market and the problem, and our economy will not function without that unofficial channel for labor and if we cut off our nose to spite our face by ignoring the fact that we created that market we also lose a chance to tap into a valuable source of STEM educated workers.
Your family apparently played a good game and beat the system, as t’were. Way to go!
So how do you feel about a family heritage based on this group of game players?
Oh and BTW, congratulations for their big contribution to the population explosion, as well!
Catholics, no doubt.
So you admit it is driven by bigotry? Shouldn’t we work to raise above those self defeating assumptions rather than use actions of others ignorance to justify our own?
The entire reason immigration restrictions were put into place in the first half of the 1900’s was to stem the tide of Italian, Finnish and Irish immigrants. Looking at the benefits and the full integration of those populations how can we justify continuing policies that were directly created due to what ended up to be invalid concerns about the destruction of the American way of life? It appears that the same exact flawed reasoning is applying to the latest pool of immigrants with no real evidence that the flawed arguments of the mid 1920’s are any more valid today.
The quota system is not biased against them. Latinos make up a small percentage of the world population. They do not have more rights to immigrate here than peoples in the Old World.
If we change to a more skill based system that allows us to recruit skilled immigrants from anywhere we won’t have that problem. As for agriculture, I don’t see European agriculture reliant on illegal labor. Immigrant labor, sure, but immigrant labor paid and recruited according to EU and national regulations.
I think we all agree we need immigration reform. But no one should support a system that is unenforced and where our national interests are irrelevant. I keep on hearing that there are jobs Americans won’t do, yet I’m not so old that I don’t remember Americans working jobs when I was a kid that are unavailable to them now. I remember American cab drivers, and American hotel maids, and American landscapers. It’s true that agriculture work has long been primarily dependent on migrant labor, but urban and suburban low skill work was done by mostly American labor not too long ago, and now is almost all done by foreign labor. Even the factories are now being staffed primarily with immigrant labor. It’s not that Americans don’t want those jobs, it’s that companies don’t want to raise wages.
I suppose I am diverging into broader immigration issues. I was referring to illegal immigration. Why shouldn’t we try harder to stop it so we can create an environment where more legal immigration becomes possible?
20 MILLION people participate in the immigration lottery every year.
So illegal immigrants should be applying for asylum? Or are you saying that Mexico is generally a dangerous country from which people are fleeing?
So you want to wait 3 more years before we get anything done on immigration? 
If you’re arguing for no restrictions I can talk about that. I don’t know that it’s the best policy, but I will say it’s preferable to what we have now. What we have now is a system essentially biased towards Latino immigration, when we should be getting people proportionately from all over the world. At the very least, an open borders policy would get us more diversity and less ethnic concentration in enclaves.
Next you will attribute this to recent Catholic reforms, right? :smack:
Lets put this in context,
Previous to the 1920’s the only restrictions were really targeted at Asian populations, but they also tried to apply the Chinese Exclusion act against Finnish people, claiming that they were not white. The Federal government lost a court case where they tried to deny Citizenship to a group of Finnish people in 1908.
In 1909 Senator Henry Cabot Lodge proposed limitations on immigration by Italian, Finnish and other non-Anglo Saxon Europeans. He had been publicly spreading xenophobic fears of foreign radicals migrating to undermine American values for about 20 years at that time.
They claimed that they were trying to protect the American identity by favoring native-born Americans over Jews, Southern Europeans, and Eastern Europeans and Catholics like the Irish.
Those claims are STILL the core basis of even our modern geographical restrictions.
Can anyone provide cites and/or an argument showing how the American identity was hurt or destroyed by Irish, Italian, Finnish and other “undesirables” or how the modern context is any different outside of the fact that we don’t restrict it to white people now?
This is true for legal immigrants, many of whom came over on H1B Visas or Student Visas.
This is NOT true of illegal immigrants.
Cite,
Because there are a lot of Apple farmers here in Washington state who would be happy to hire native workers that will actually show up for work.
Also note that H1B and Student Visas are not residency paths and actually unrelated to the entire subject of Immigration quotas.
You’re absolutely right here, I’m just not sure how it pertains to the way our immigration system should be structured today, assuming we don’t want to just do open borders, which we don’t.
Seems to me that we have plenty of wealthy nations to look to for guidance, much as liberals urge us to do with health care. Is there something about Canada’s immigration laws that is a problem for you?
We will need a cite for this^^^ before this / / / gets addressed quite thoroughly…
Look at the link in the very first response to this thread, which is from me.
But they DO check an important box in the immigration paperwork.
Don’t be obtuse. We’re talking about today, not 100 years ago.
How is that game playing? How did we beat the system? Its the way the system works.
It was legal for my parents to bring their parents over. They supported them for the 5 years it took for them to qualify for benefits. Then the state carried much of the burden. I suppose we could ban all immigrants from receiving social benefits. If that’s what you want, then you should try to get them to change the law.
Here’s the thing, I can point to millions of families like mine. Maybe not as many doctors, lawyers and engineers but almost all pulling their weight and adding to the prosperity of this country. And as far as I’m concerned his country would be better off if we had a million more families like that.
And no we are not Catholic (bigot much?), Is it really that unusual for there to be a generation of 11 cousins?