Choosing the Best Immigrants, Not the Handiest

The United States must deal with one of the most important questions facing nations. That question involves adding immigrants to our population. As in making any important decision, we should consider the need for new immigrants, the type of immigrant that would offer the most to the country and the economy, the number of immigrants needed, and the timing of their acquisition. The immigrant selection process should overshadow party politics, and mere proximity of a large pool of potential immigrants.

ImmigrationThe process should be a deliberate and well informed undertaking about potential immigrants. Present location of potential new members of our society should not play an important role in the selection process because the pool of potential immigrants that would add the most to our society and economy may not be the closest. Close proximity of potential new residents does not necessarily imply that such people would make the greatest contribution to the host country. Certainly, the fact that a candidate already resides illegally in the host country would argue against the selection of such a person than a reason to grant resident status and potential citizenship. Past wrong doing does not speak well of potential immigrants.

The present process focuses on granting amnesty to a group of ten to twenty million foreigners who showed contempt for our laws in coming here. In fact, such disregard for legal entry requirements would seem to permanently disqualify such an individual from participation in the immigration process. After all, the failure to enforce law uniformly and impartially eventually encourages other people to break laws and demand forgiveness. Maintaining order within a country requires making the laws clear and understandable, and enforcing them impartially and click here for info http://immica.org/tin-tuc/tin-tuc-di-tru-my/lam-sao-de-dinh-cu-o-my-nhanh-chong-va-toan.html.

Admission of an immigrant requires the host country to assume an indeterminate degree of risk. For example, an immigrant could prove unable to earn a sufficient amount of money to support him or herself, which places a burden on taxpayers to subsidize the income of the immigrant, placing an unnecessary obligation on present taxpayers. Also, a person covered by grants of mass amnesty may suffer from poor health or the effects of old age, which again places a burden on taxpayers. For these reasons and others, it behooves the host country adopt standards of skills, health, age, language skills and education or training it requires of immigrants, rather than taking on potentially expensive responsibility for immigrants lacking the ability to support themselves.