Does that mean that they will continue to do so going forward?... I say no. For a couple hundred years, we had a desperate need for unskilled labor, first to conquer the West, then eventually to fill the seemingly never ending demand for factory work. America was the land of opportunity, where unskilled people could work hard and carve out a piece of the American dream. This never ending stream of unskilled workers was without question a VITAL aspect to Americas prosperity. We like to romanticize that we did this to be a beacon of opportunity for the world, but in reality we did this because it was in our country's best economic interest. We live in a different day and age now. We have massive problems with our current unskilled labor workforce, because manufacturing no longer exists here, and despite what some people claim, that isn't going to change to any great degree. We have switched to a technology economy, and that is our path to prosperity going forward. A technology economy requires education, and unskilled workers are far more likely to be a drain on our resources than they are to propel our economy forward. In other words, open immigration policies will only serve to drag our economy down. We would be best served by being highly selective as to whom is allowed to emigrate here, and education needs to be the foremost requirement. We no longer live in the 1950s where we were the only manufacturing game in town, and the rest of the world had to purchase our products at whatever price we set. We now legitimately need to compete with the world, so it is more important than ever that we do what is necessary in order to maximize our competitiveness, or we will continue to see our standard of living decrease relative to the rest of the world. Our first responsibility is to OUR citizens, not the hopes and dreams of uneducated masses coming from other countries. What is best for OUR citizens is that we set policies so that our economy and citizens can thrive, NOT some outdated romanticized notion that we are the beacon of opportunity for the world. There are a lot of other country's, like Australia, that very carefully regulate who can and cannot come there, and never has it crossed my mind that they are xenophobic animals. They are sovereign country's and they have every right to make decisions that are in their best interest, as does the United States. Which also leads to the notion of immigration from Middle Eastern country's that currently are exporting Radical Islamists. We have seen what is happening in France with the expansion of Muslim ghettos and uncontrollable terrorist attacks. Why exactly do we not want to avoid that ? Halting immigration from that part of the world during this particular time of global turmoil, seems to me like a no brainer. My belief is not based in hatred for the innocents that otherwise could immigrate here, but rather a hatred for the lunatics that would inevitably be a part of that immigration.
Before 1965 most of our immigrants came from Europe. Since 1965 most of them have come from the 3rd world. It's not hard to understand why we are in the situation we are in. Just look at Mexico.
i think the japanese are the best example we can offer up for this. The main contention is that people of the current third world never had a shot due to the disadvantages you mentioned. Prior to the 1900's the Japanese were never a regional power. They had an attempt to invade korea which failed and most of the time they spent killing each other. They were really never even able to reach south east asia. They had a shogun or an emperor to rule them at all times with really very little limit to their power aside from the other nobles or military commanders. Their peasants were even disarmed due to the sword laws enacted by the toyotomi. They had very little resources as can be seen by their drive to conquer just to get some basic neccessities for their war machine. So they started off historically just like any other third world country. They were forced to open with the unequal treaties and essentially they were about to be divided up by various foreign companies. Did they revolt right away? Complain about how unfair life is? No. They took every damn thing they could learn from their "conquerors" and by the start of the 19th century beat Russia in a war. A war noone thought they could win. If Japan can do these starting off from much the same position as other third world countries why can they not do it? Or why did they not do it before?
Don't know, tsuke. Japan industrialized early. I'm sure that plays a part. Their culture appears to be submissive to authority. They were a proud empirical society. It's a lot more complex than Japanese history. Such a story means nothing to a Haitian.
are you saying that when japan was opened up by the unequal treaties they were industrialized? They were still mostly using swords with a few guns! THey had some domestic musket manufacturing but everything they had still dated back to the 1500s!!!! Now did they industrialize AFTER the white man took over and forced them into the unequal treaties? Yes. They took every damn thing they could learn from him before throwing them out. The significance to Haiti? Japan could have easily ended up another third world country if they reacted differently. The fact that these countries are third world now is partly because of their reaction and preparation in times when they were conquered/occupied.
Are you saying they aren't? lack or resources, seriously? if resources mattered that much we would see congo the richest country in the world, and japan the poorest. Resources are only useful if you know what to do with them. No, their problem isn't a lack of resources. Their problem is their people, and their culture.
How condescending of you to assume immigrants are 'unskilled labor'. 40% of Fortune 500 corporations were founded by immigrants or their children. Source Today some of America's premier corporations have foreign born CEOs, some of whom such as Muhtar Kent (Coke CEO), Mohamed El-Erian (PIMCO) and Indra Nooyi (Pepsi CEO) would have been banned under Trump's immigration proposals.
The point of the OP is not to quantify what % of past immigrants were unskilled, but rather to make the argument that future immigration needs to be selective, which would include requiring an education that would take someone out of the category of "unskilled labor", and while I didn't say it, should also include the ability to speak English so that person has an ability to thrive in this country. With that being the case, the assumption that you are implying that I made, does not exist.
Lack of what resources? Seems to me we get most of our resources from the "third world." And why is it the West developed non-tyrannical government and the rest of the world did not? And how did the West become literate and the rest of the world did not? What is the "root cause" of the rise of the West?
ILLEGAL immigrants sneaking across the border, not paying taxes, using all the free services paid for by tax payers and waving Mexican flags......DID NOT MAKE THIS COUNTRY GREAT ..ever..
Right. Immigration should be for the benefit of the host country, not the immigrants. So that should be the skills and people we need.
