44 Comments

But surely after a couple of years at an American college, most of them would become communists.

(Ho Ho!)

Expand full comment

Since Trump’s days as a candidate running to win the nomination for the Republican Party, Trump has said that the US needs greater legal immigration. Libertarians living in echo chambers have discerned that all moving about of people is ‘legal’.

Trump has advocated for a more robust approach to immigration to allow for many more people to enter into the process of immigrating.

There is a difference between being unchecked entrance into the US and then a process to weed out with background checks.

Again, in 2016, Trump talked about increasing legal immigration because ‘a growing economy will need more people’.

Expand full comment

Exactly, this is just one of many times that Trump talks about increasing legal immigration and the second time he proposes that every graduate in America stay working in America.

Trump seems to think it as a way to steal talent from Europe, India and China. Not because Trump believes in the net benefits of immigration, but because he sees it as a zero-sum game; e.g. if we don't have the best AI engineers, then China does.

Expand full comment

Uummmm….. he didn’t advocate for only highly skilled workers, albeit that it is where he sought the greatest increase for the reasons you stated.

He did advocate for increased legal immigration of low skilled workers, as well. He said that for our economy to grow significantly as he expected it to, that we needed a large increase of immigration.

Expand full comment

Smh…… comment is a low IQ rant filled with misnomers and ad hominem for the purposes of fulfilling your wish to be hateful.

Go read a book, meditate, find peace in your soul, and drink a tea with chamomile.

Your comment is for pew sitters filled with rage as tv tells you to be upset and angry. Turn off the tv and think for yourself.

Expand full comment

He has a lot of fans who are low-IQ, low-info voters, many of whom just hate foreigners and people who can't pass a paper-bag test. But it wouldn't matter, since they have no-one else to go to who matters and most don't read snd won't notice anyway.

He also has a lot of high-IQ, high-info racist voters who are either deluded into thinking he's some sort of messiah, or accelerationists whose only priority is to move the Overton Window, and they'd be far more hurt. But they're far smaller and less powerful than the nonracist high-IQ, high-info voters, so no one cares what they think.

Expand full comment

Trump was President for 4 years. If he is so much for legal immigration, in what way has he used his executive power to make it easier for people to immigrate legally?

Expand full comment

Congress sets the law. Is there existing law which the executive branch could have used to move legal immigration quotas higher?

As was the bargaining for dreamers. Trump couldn’t act on it alone. He was dealing with Majority leaders for legalizing ‘dreamers ‘ in exchange for greater security funding. Congress has to appropriate funds.

Expand full comment

As an obvious example, the US immigration authorities has for years interpreted the law (which is at best vague on this subject, and likely against congressional intent) as including the families of green card recipients against the green card quota. This - once again - is something on which the law can be interpreted othyerwise, and it's highly likely that Congress has intended the families of GC recipients to not be so included. Simply directing the relevant agencies to adopt the interpretation that Green Card recipients' families not be included in the quota would have freed up over 200,000 green cards per year. I observe that this has not happened.

Any US bureaucracy has dozens, hundreds of avenues in which there is leeway in the interpretation of the law, which is exactly what allows the Executive to act. Yet the Executive has not acted.

Expand full comment

Good example!

Why not do as other admins have done and just interpret it to fit suit his own want?

Not acting on such an ability to interpret a vague legislation to one’s own will could be done, as we have seen with the Biden admin.

Going forward, such reinterpretations won’t be allowed with Chevron being overturned.

I am saying that trump has throughout his run for president and as president stated the need for greatly increased legal

Immigration with a preference for skilled labor. He did include the low skill (agricultural) but prioritized skilled.

Expand full comment

Trump had no problems directing the executive to interpret the laws in as necessary for his agenda when it suited him. To a great degree this is part of the power of the President. (The abolition of Chevron deference doesn't abolish this entirely.) Obviously Trump didn't have any problem doing this to direct NDAA funding to be used to build Ze Wall, or to ban bump stocks. Weird, this.

Expand full comment

I repeat…. Donald Trump has advocated for increasing legal immigration and speeding up the process for entry since 2016. He has said, on many occasions that the US needs increased immigration. But, that it should be done via processing, background checks, etc.

Expand full comment

I'm doing a master's degree in Germany because tuition is 300 euros a semester.

If doing it in America, guaranteed me a green card, I'd drop out, and gladly pay $50,000 USD to do my master's in America.

Expand full comment

A similar policy has inspired immigration backlash in Canada. I think fixing the housing situation and getting more housing built is necessary to do alongside it.

Expand full comment

Yes, the housing is really the problem; I've seen very little hostility to immigration per se in Canada, but strains on housing and, to a lesser extent, public services are the key issues.

Expand full comment

Trump said about the same thing in 2015.

Expand full comment

Basically Canada did that since approximately 2000 (not quite, but STEM students get preferential treatment). My daughter was given a social insurance card upon arrival, two year citizenship path if employed in Canada upon graduation, and immigrant status for my wife and I if we applied. It was very different to how foreign students were treated thirty years prior when I went to university there.

Now the government blames the housing shortage on immigrants.

Expand full comment

Had came here to make the same points. Sad that the Canadian government didn’t factor in the infrastructure it needed to build to adjust for the population growth.

Expand full comment

More than not factoring in infrastructure, they actually made it harder to develop the infrastructure than it was before. They signed on to the climate hysteria instead of being rational about resource allocation, and this is what caused the housing shortage and extreme price hikes.

Expand full comment
deletedJun 28
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

Immigrants didn't cause Canada to stop building houses. That was the watetmelon environmentalists, who are a plague upon the Free World.

Expand full comment

What about the NIMBYs?

Expand full comment

As per other commenters, this is essentially what happens in the UK for the last few years already and is part of why the Conservatives are about to get exterminated.

So even if it were all true, expect it to only last until the next election, the backlash would be monumental. (Not that I expect politicians to deliver on their promises or to resist deeply entrenched interests).

Expand full comment

Well, Trump won't care about the next election, unless he manages to abolish term limits.

Expand full comment

Aren’t American universities already suffering enough from everybody trying to repurpose them for completely off-mission goals? I’d like to expand legal immigration! But turning universities into the gatekeepers sounds like it could have terrible side effects.

Expand full comment

Small loss, really.

Expand full comment

This is just one of many times that Trump talks about increasing legal immigration and the second time he proposes that every graduate in America stay working in America.

Trump seems to think it as a way to steal talent from Europe, India and China. Not because Trump believes in the net benefits of immigration, but because he sees it as a zero-sum game; e.g. if we don't have the best AI engineers, then China does.

Expand full comment

"If I believed Trump was in earnest, I’d even consider voting for him."

And for every new vote gained by such a harebrained scheme, ten current ones would be lost. Open borders is for losers.

Expand full comment

Trump is an inveterate liar who will say anything to anyone and forget it the day after to the extent it suits his purposes.

Expand full comment

Trump: the pro-immigration President!

Expand full comment

None of this makes sense to me. If people at the border had any significant money to their name, wouldn't they at least come in as tourists and never leave instead of crawling under barbed wire?

Expand full comment

For this scheme they don't need their own money: financial institutions will loan it to them.

Btw, for people from certain countries tourist visas are hard to get, even with money to your name.

I'm German and I had less money to my name when I first visited the US in 2009, than it costs people from many third world countries to pay a trafficker to get them into the US.

The difference is in the passport, not just the money. Alas.

Expand full comment

I'd be cool with something like getting a 1200 on the SAT + Graduating from a US University. Would not be open borders, but would let a lot of people with relatively high human capital in.

Expand full comment

We desperately need tradespeople, too

Expand full comment

And no connection to our culture.

Expand full comment

This is actually kind of how the Australian economy works.

Expand full comment

Trump was President for 4 years. If he is so much for legal immigration, in what way has he used his executive power to make it easier for people to immigrate legally?

Expand full comment