6 ms·

I'm an American who's lived in Europe for the past 20ish years. Comparatively, the US is extremely good at 'integrating' immigrants for whatever reason they co

by furyg3 23d ago

I'm an American who's lived in Europe for the past 20ish years. Comparatively, the US is extremely good at 'integrating' immigrants for whatever reason they come (asylum, work, family reunification, etc). There are a lot of factors, but I'd say the biggest one is that the "American" identity is one of immigration and is generally more flexible than say, the Dutch or Norwegian identity. I'd also say the general lack of a safety net compared to more socialist countries mean you pretty much have to hit the ground running and work, which usually means learning English quickly and all of the social components that come with work. The idea that there is an urgent need to protect the US from a significant number of people abusing the system who come via legal immigration (as is the case in this context) is, to me, pretty laughable. I would assume that any abuse in the system or strategic priority shifts (which I may or may not agree with) could easily be picked up through a more normal policy/procedure/training structure within the state department. There doesn't appear to be a specific, recent event where a significant number of people were discovered to have gotten through some state department filter or loophole that needs to be IMMEDIATELY closed in the context of some large risk to the US.

motbus3 23d ago
I am not aware. What loophole do you mean? And what risk do you mean? I am not being pedantic. I think I lack lots of context here.
- furyg3 10d ago
  Late reply. I don't see any loopholes. There are immigration policies that guide state department employees through a process of deciding who gets a visa. Let's say, theoretically, that a particular visa was meant for one scenario... let's say allowing athletes to live and train in the US with no additional checks or limits based on country of origin. And then let's say that all the sudden this summer we saw the number of people receiving that visa go from 10k / year to 100k in a month. That would be a scenario where you could say holy cow we need to put a pause on the visa application process because when we created this visa program or wrote the screening criteria we did not envision this at all. In this scenario you could, of course, just put a pause on this particular type of visa while you revisit the intent and criteria. I was saying that I don't see any evidence for that at all. So any desire by the administration to change what kind of visas are given out, or what the criteria or thresholds should be for those visas, should be adjusted in the normal way of working and not via some huge pause on all visas.
account42 23d ago
> I'd also say the general lack of a safety net compared to more socialist countries mean you pretty much have to hit the ground running and work, which usually means learning English quickly and all of the social components that come with work. Even before that, the US only attracts people who are at least willing to work.
- motbus3 22d ago
  I think there are different kind of safety nets. When economy is good in the US, credit is easy, interests are low and if you have a problem you can pay in the long run. I think depending where in Europe is the same but you still have some other things that you pay as taxes. On some other countries you pay for everything and sometimes you have it sometimes not. It makes me feel that the levels of accessibility to the thing are about the same but they way the uncertainties of life can hit you are different. There are the negative effects as well. There is all the incentives in the US for health to cost more or for people to do deals with pharmaceuticals or similar businesses. In other countries a more general public policy is required to make things standardized. About people only willing to work. I am 100% sure there people who are not willing to, but in the UK and France and Italy, the illegal immigrants cannot work, literally. They are not allowed. So what can they do? Most of them needs to use fake accounts to get a gig job which certainly is more exploratory than a anything. I was told that Brazil has a policy to integrate immigrants more similar to what Spain is doing now. The idea is that as soon as you get the safety of not being kicked out, which seems to be quite fast, you need to start working. Brazil does not have as many public funds available other countries in Europe, but to be honest, some of them have all the incentives for locals to not work as well. Not saying it is right or wrong. In the UK if you go to a uni and start earning after a certain threshold, you need to start paying back what you spend, but now as the economy is bad it is likely to not have a related job that allows you to pay it back and live a normal life, so you might be better living on benefits because the other option is much worse. I think it is time for UK to reshape how to pay these bills and the thresholds so people can start working.(And maybe not offering support for random stuff too)
bibimsz 22d ago
[flagged]

by furyg3 23d ago

motbus3 23d ago

I am not aware. What loophole do you mean? And what risk do you mean? I am not being pedantic. I think I lack lots of context here.

furyg3 10d ago
Late reply. I don't see any loopholes. There are immigration policies that guide state department employees through a process of deciding who gets a visa. Let's say, theoretically, that a particular visa was meant for one scenario... let's say allowing athletes to live and train in the US with no additional checks or limits based on country of origin. And then let's say that all the sudden this summer we saw the number of people receiving that visa go from 10k / year to 100k in a month. That would be a scenario where you could say holy cow we need to put a pause on the visa application process because when we created this visa program or wrote the screening criteria we did not envision this at all. In this scenario you could, of course, just put a pause on this particular type of visa while you revisit the intent and criteria. I was saying that I don't see any evidence for that at all. So any desire by the administration to change what kind of visas are given out, or what the criteria or thresholds should be for those visas, should be adjusted in the normal way of working and not via some huge pause on all visas.

account42 23d ago

> I'd also say the general lack of a safety net compared to more socialist countries mean you pretty much have to hit the ground running and work, which usually means learning English quickly and all of the social components that come with work. Even before that, the US only attracts people who are at least willing to work.

motbus3 22d ago
I think there are different kind of safety nets. When economy is good in the US, credit is easy, interests are low and if you have a problem you can pay in the long run. I think depending where in Europe is the same but you still have some other things that you pay as taxes. On some other countries you pay for everything and sometimes you have it sometimes not. It makes me feel that the levels of accessibility to the thing are about the same but they way the uncertainties of life can hit you are different. There are the negative effects as well. There is all the incentives in the US for health to cost more or for people to do deals with pharmaceuticals or similar businesses. In other countries a more general public policy is required to make things standardized. About people only willing to work. I am 100% sure there people who are not willing to, but in the UK and France and Italy, the illegal immigrants cannot work, literally. They are not allowed. So what can they do? Most of them needs to use fake accounts to get a gig job which certainly is more exploratory than a anything. I was told that Brazil has a policy to integrate immigrants more similar to what Spain is doing now. The idea is that as soon as you get the safety of not being kicked out, which seems to be quite fast, you need to start working. Brazil does not have as many public funds available other countries in Europe, but to be honest, some of them have all the incentives for locals to not work as well. Not saying it is right or wrong. In the UK if you go to a uni and start earning after a certain threshold, you need to start paying back what you spend, but now as the economy is bad it is likely to not have a related job that allows you to pay it back and live a normal life, so you might be better living on benefits because the other option is much worse. I think it is time for UK to reshape how to pay these bills and the thresholds so people can start working.(And maybe not offering support for random stuff too)

bibimsz 22d ago

[flagged]