Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Patents Government Politics

The Impact of Immigrant Innovators 471

Posted by Zonk from the we-don't-have-a-monopoly-on-good-ideas dept.
Ramakrishnan writes "The Wall Street Journal is carrying a report on immigrant innovators and entrepreneurs. According to the piece, nearly a quarter of all California startups which went into business between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant as a founding member. These businesses, together, employ almost half a million workers and generated about $50 billion in sales in the year 2005. The study seems quite topical, given recent discussions in the U.S. capital. From the article: 'Supporters of an immigration bill are likely to use the study to argue the importance of foreign-born workers to the U.S. economy. An immigration bill passed by the last Congress and heavily lobbied by business groups would have greatly increased the number of green cards available to skilled workers. Business has long argued that the U.S. schools aren't turning out enough scientists, mathematicians and engineers, and that the economy will lose its competitive edge without more skilled foreign workers.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Impact of Immigrant Innovators More

The Impact of Immigrant Innovators

Comments Filter:

  • rings a bell (Score:5, Insightful)

    by macadamia_harold ( 947445 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @01:52PM (#17489694) Homepage
    The Wall Street Journal is carrying a report on immigrant innovators and entrepreneurs.

    You mean like Albert Einstein?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:rings a bell (Score:5, Funny)

      by Hogwash McFly ( 678207 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @02:32PM (#17490180)
      You're thinking of Pavlov.
    • No, ring a bell like Alexander Graham Bell [wikipedia.org] kind of bell.

  • This will not end well. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Spazntwich ( 208070 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @01:54PM (#17489712)
    I'm tired of people not addressing the distinction between skilled workers trying to immigrate and improve their lives while also boosting our economy, and the people who hop the fence illegally just to take advantage of health care they won't have to pay for and a lack of responsibility for income taxes.

    Immigration is great. It strengthens America as a whole. Illegal immigration sucks money from the economy and stresses our entire infrastructure. I would say these statistics have near nothing to do with recent discussions in congress, but then again, what do I know? I'm a bear! I suck the heads off fish!

    • Re:This will not end well. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jadavis ( 473492 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @02:07PM (#17489880)
      and the people who hop the fence illegally just to take advantage of health care

      That's not even the real issue. I don't have any problem with the Mexican immigrants, but I do have a problem with our policy. We have laws, and we should enforce them.

      (1) We should have some kind of limit on immigration. It might be a very high limit, but there should be a limit because otherwise there would be a billion more people here overnight, and no economy can adapt that many people so quickly.
      (2) We should have a way to filter out criminals reliably.
      (3) We should NOT play favorites with Mexico. Those immigrants should get in line and go through the security checks, criminal background checks, and any other filters we have, just like the other immigrants.

      A fence and people to watch it solves all of these problems. A good fence. It won't solve the problem 100%, but it will solve it about 99%. Murder is not 100% solved either, but we still enforce when we can.

      I won't even consider an Amnesty policy of any kind until the number of illegal Mexican immigrants is cut by a factor of 100. Otherwise they will say "this is the last time we need to do Amnesty, we promise" and then never come through with the enforcement.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gravesb ( 967413 )
        This is a common problem, and not just with immigrants. Look at all the laws we have that should cover issues if they were properly enforced. They aren't, but the problem still exists, so the legislature passes new laws, with make the statutes longer (try reading them sometime), and make is less likely that any individual statute will be enforced. I would love to see government at all levels prune back the laws, and enforce the important ones. A good place to start? Taxes. Imagine a consumption tax.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by jadavis ( 473492 )
          Taxes. Imagine a consumption tax. It doesn't matter how much you make, but how much you spend. That would encourage saving money, the lack of loopholes would make wealthy people pay a fair amount of taxes, and lower taxes on essential goods would limit the tax liability of the poor.

          I'd like to subscribe to your literature, please ;)

          Just a quick addition, a consumption tax shouldn't be a sales tax. It should be, just like you said, a tax on how much you spend in a year. That way you can make it progressive i
          • Just a quick addition, a consumption tax shouldn't be a sales tax. It should be, just like you said, a tax on how much you spend in a year. That way you can make it progressive if you want, where people sum up the amount they spend in a year and pay taxes on that. This avoids loopholes where rich people by 1 million of something that's not taxed because some lobbyist wanted it not taxed. The only way to avoid taxes is to reduce the total stuff you buy over the year (and if it's low enough, probably not taxe
      • We should have some kind of limit on immigration. It might be a very high limit, but there should be a limit because otherwise there would be a billion more people here overnight, and no economy can adapt that many people so quickly.

        Really? Why not? All people in this country are producers and consumers. This is the basis of civilization. If a billion people came overnight, there would be a billion new jobs because there would be a billion people needing to do things. Of course I'm exagerating here --

        • If you have smart, ambitious people living in shit on one side of that fence, and people living in prosperity on the other side of that fence, and you don't provide a reasonable way for those smart, ambitious people to cross over legally... well... what do you think is going to happen? What would you do in such a situation. You would find a way.

          I would set up armed guards on our side and publicize the fact. The reason Mexico is such a shitstain is that it's easier for the poor to jump the border than it

          • I would set up armed guards on our side and publicize the fact

            And there lies the fallacy that causes so many of our problems.

            Can you tell me how successful the entirity of the US armed forces has been in Iraq at stopping frustrated, motivated people? Here's a hint: the answer rhymes with "not very". Repeat after me: you cannot force people to do things they think are worse than death.

            You are right that Mexico needs to clean house. But like I said, what would you do? You really think you and your family,

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by jadavis ( 473492 )
          This is the basis of civilization. If a billion people came overnight, there would be a billion new jobs because there would be a billion people needing to do things.

          You're right as long as there is enough time to fit in. I am not willing to try a giant people-moving experiment larger than the one we already have with Mexico. Let's start with some reasonable limits, check the people that enter, and see how that goes.

          If nothing else we couldn't have any social services, because that kind of influx doesn't al
      • We should have some kind of limit on immigration. It might be a very high limit, but there should be a limit because otherwise there would be a billion more people here overnight, and no economy can adapt that many people so quickly.
        Haha. You seem to be under the assumption that the world envies your country. Maybe the less developed parts...

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by jadavis ( 473492 )
          Haha. You seem to be under the assumption that the world envies your country. Maybe the less developed parts...

          I don't care whether they envy it or not. I just know they would come here, because if you're a farmer in China it's in your best interest to do so if possible.

    • Re:This will not end well. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by David Greene ( 463 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @02:19PM (#17489994)

      You are completely off-base.

      Do you even know any immigrants who fill unskilled labor jobs? I do -- plenty of them. They are hardworking people. They pay taxes (yes, even the undocumented ones). Many of them lack higher-level education but some are doctors, nurses, etc. who cannot legally practice in our country due to draconian immigration policies.

      These immigrants are quite literally saving our cities. South Minneapolis (my home) was a wasteland of crack houses and brothels in the 80's and early 90's. Latino and Somali immigrants moved in and completely transformed the place. It is now quite safe to walk around the main thoroughfares at night. I still wouldn't go into some parts of the city after dark but those places are becoming fewer and fewer.

      These immigrants are certainly not criminals. The worst you can charge them with is a civil offense (though some bastards in Congress want to change that). They are not sucking money from the economy, they are creating wealth. And since when is a persons' economic benefit to you the primary definition of whether they are human beings?

      Our immigration policies are out of whack, built by bigtos for a time long past. They do not serve the current needs of our country. If we allowed many more immigrants into this country (particularly from Central and South America) we would not see the undercutting of wages we are seeing now. Middle class workers are not losing jobs to immigrants. They are losing jobs to criminal employers that are taking advantage of our unjust immigration system. If all of the undocumented immigrants in this country were given legal immigration status those wages would rise.

      The solution isn't to keep people out. It's to welcome them in with open arms.

      Here's the low-down. You have to decide whether you will support the inherent dignity of human beings or not. If someone wants to emmigrate to build a better life from his or her family, it is our responsibility to provide the opportunity. We have great wealth and power. Therefore, we have a greater responsibility than others. This is not a "controversial" issue, it is quite simple. It's a question of right and wrong. It's a question of whether or not we are our brothers' keepers. Are we a selfish, arrogant and unjust people or not?

      • Re:This will not end well. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Overly Critical Guy ( 663429 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @03:11PM (#17490582)
        Oh, here we go. You're one of these no-borders folks who thinks screening people who come into the country is somehow degrading to human beings.

        Do you even know any immigrants who fill unskilled labor jobs? I do -- plenty of them.

        I have two questions, then.

        1.) Why didn't they immigrate legally like millions of others have?
        2.) Why do they get to take jobs that would otherwise be high-paying jobs for legal residents? Do they realize if they were legal, they would get higher wages?

        If someone wants to emmigrate to build a better life from his or her family, it is our responsibility to provide the opportunity.

        And what about their responsibility to follow our laws?

        With a completely open border, anybody could come in unchecked. Fugitives, Al Queda, drug dealers, and others would have a field day. It is not our responsibility to house the entire world; our responsibility is to provide an opportunity for our legal residents.

        • Re:This will not end well. (Score:5, Informative)

          by David Greene ( 463 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @03:36PM (#17490848)
          1.) Why didn't they immigrate legally like millions of others have?

          According to some reports, there are a couple tens of millions of undocumented workers in this country. Given the maximum number of visas allocated in any given year, it would take on average about 4,000 years for someone to legally enter this country from the less-favored areas of the world. I don't know about you, but I would have a hard time waiting that long.

          2.) Why do they get to take jobs that would otherwise be high-paying jobs for legal residents? Do they realize if they were legal, they would get higher wages?

          Of course they do! They aren't stupid, despite the stereotypes. That's why they want a path to citizenship.

          And what about their responsibility to follow our laws?

          This country has a long and proud history of civil disobediance concerning unjust laws. I don't know about you, but I'm doing that right now every time I watch a DVD on my MythTV box. I'd say our new neighbors are learning quite quickly, wouldn't you?

          With a completely open border, anybody could come in unchecked. Fugitives, Al Queda, drug dealers, and others would have a field day.

          Classic fear-mongering argument. Are you really so afraid of other people? How sad.

          It is not our responsibility to house the entire world; our responsibility is to provide an opportunity for our legal residents.

          Our responsibility is to our fellow human beings, regarless of race, creed, country of origin or any of the other silly things we use to divide ourselves against each other

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by bahwi ( 43111 )
      Then charge them income taxes, make it higher than normal to provide for the rest of us. It's not a problem of "Build a better fence!"

      "Illegal immigration sucks money from the economy and stresses our entire infrastructure." only because we don't track it and charge them taxes, because we want to use big words like "Fence" and "Get 'er done!" and "Shoot fence hoppes on sight" to get elected, not solve the problem. It's only a fence, it's only a wall, it won't stop anything. The solution is to find a happy m

    • Re:This will not end well. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by localman ( 111171 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @02:50PM (#17490372) Homepage
      Illegal immigration sucks money from the economy and stresses our entire infrastructure.

      Cool, we agree. So let's do away with illegal immigration. The easiest way to do that, by far, is to provide a straightforward way for any ambitious foreigner to become a legal immigrant. Suddenly they are not forced to dodge our government and make shady deals with shady employers, and they become an asset.

      Cheers.

  • So let me get this straight (Score:4, Insightful)

    by badenglishihave ( 944178 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @01:54PM (#17489718) Homepage
    We (I and other) Americans aren't as skilled or hard working as foreigners, so our solution is to just let more immigrants in? How about stepping up to the plate and showing the rest of the world that we can function on our own with as little help from others as possible! If our best solution is to let someone else do the job right, what does that say about our work ethic and ingenuity as a country?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Sloppy ( 14984 )
      If our best solution is to let someone else do the job right, what does that say about our work ethic and ingenuity as a country?
      It says our work ethic is the most technologically or socially advanced (depending on whether the "someone else" is Bender or Apu).

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Copid ( 137416 )
      Think of it more this way: If we can attract the best and the brightest from foreign countries and add them to the fold of brilliant American entrepeneurs who drive the economy, that's a win. The percentage of Americans who do brilliant work has gone up, and it's good for all of us. These people aren't exactly displacing Americans.

      If there's a brilliant software designer from India with a PhD and tremendous skillset who wants to come to the US and start the next hot tech company, we can either let him do

  • Not Surprising (Score:5, Insightful)

    by drooling-dog ( 189103 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @02:01PM (#17489798)
    If you consider that emmigrating from one country to another generally takes a lot of courage and initiative, these statistics are not really surprising. Talented and educated people who are motivated to make that leap are probably going to be motivated to do a lot more once they get here.

  • Immigrants with Ambition (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Cr4wford ( 1030418 ) <(kvcrawford) (at) (gmail.com)> on Saturday January 06, 2007 @02:02PM (#17489818) Homepage
    My girlfriend's mom is from the Phillipines, where the economy is pretty much shit-astic. Her dream, as a young girl in the Phillipines, was to come to America and make enough money to support a family and drive a Mercedes--which she accomplished. This report makes sense to me, because it's natural that a lot of people coming from poorer countries come to America because they're sick of living somewhere poor, and thus have a lot of ambition to make good money. Just my thoughts.

    • Most people lack the initiative to depart from a situation that's familiar, but goes nowhere, to go somewhere that has opportunity and the risk of the unknown. The immigrants that come to America are thus self-selecting for initiative. Since getting here is also challenging, the filter also includes risk-taking, resourcefulness and determination.

      Contrast this with some Americans' idiot nephews who are determined to avoid doing anything useful, or leaving home, ever. Unless you can get them drunk and whe

  • Freedom and Liberty don't stop at the border (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Toby The Economist ( 811138 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @02:03PM (#17489828)
    I believe in freedom and liberty for all men.

    And by all men, I don't just mean the men in this country.

    I don't see how any man can ethically justify excluding others from the land in which they live.

    If a man from India, or Zimbabwae, or Sweden - where-ever - wishes to come here, the only basis upon which we could deny them is self-defence.

    How can we say - all men are born free and equal - and then say "ah, but you lot can't come in".

    • Re:Freedom and Liberty don't stop at the border (Score:5, Interesting)

      by aussersterne ( 212916 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @02:08PM (#17489890) Homepage
      I absolutely agree; I think borders that are used as anything other than an administrative and organizational convenience are immoral. The notion that hard-working immigrants can be kept out "to preserve [my] way of life" is little more than saying "I have more than you by an accident of birth and am willing to use force to ensure that I don't have to share." Why exactly should an accident of birth guarantee someone more wealth than another? Property is an invention of the state and the social contract and historically the social contract has been limited (and thus discriminatory) in scope; "illegal" immigration is just the codification of social inequality by the more powerful group.
      • The notion that hard-working immigrants can be kept out "to preserve [my] way of life" is little more than saying "I have more than you by an accident of birth and am willing to use force to ensure that I don't have to share."
        I hear you, but let me play devil's advocate for a moment; do you feel the same way about your own home? Is it everybody's right to come on in?
      • Why exactly should an accident of birth guarantee someone more wealth than another? - right, why should let's say kids of oh, I don't know, George Clooney be more wealthy than say kids of oh, I don't know, some poor schmack in Uganda? Doesn't that happen by birth right? It's the same freaking thing.

      • The notion that hard-working immigrants can be kept out "to preserve [my] way of life" is little more than saying "I have more than you by an accident of birth and am willing to use force to ensure that I don't have to share."

        No, it's saying, "We built this, go get your own or give us some reason to let you in." We are under no obligation to share with anyone who wants to show up; we own the country, and we allow people to immigrate when it benefits us.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Toby The Economist ( 811138 )
          > No, it's saying, "We built this, go get your own or give us some reason to let you in." We are under no
          > obligation to share with anyone who wants to show up; we own the country, and we allow people to immigrate
          > when it benefits us.

          "We own the country".

          The thing is, you don't own the country. You own your house, that's it. And that's the same for most everyone else - people own their house, if they have a business, they might own their place of work. Some rich people own a lot of houses, farm
    • So you'll not mind if he sleeps in your bed and eats your food. I mean he's just tryin to get on his feet, it'll only be for a few weeks. Promise.

    • Re:Freedom and Liberty don't stop at the border (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Jaguar777 ( 189036 ) * on Saturday January 06, 2007 @04:18PM (#17491172) Journal
      I don't see how any man can ethically justify excluding others from the land in which they live.

      Nobody is being excluded. They are just being told to get in line.

      You can hold people back from coming in for the same reason you can stop people from getting in a lifeboat. A lifeboat can only handle a certain amount of people before it also sinks, and then everyone is screwed.

      There needs to be a controlled flow of people into the US. If the US declared "All who come will be citizens, and there is no limit." it would collapse. Don't believe me? Look at France. We can argue whether the current flow is enough, or about how to improve the process. Just don't tell me we can't keep that flow orderly to ensure that the US remains a place people want to come to.

      • not true (Score:3, Insightful)

        by argoff ( 142580 ) *
        What you are saying does not match up to practice. Most the immigrants that came to America came in waves, in large waves, and we handled it. After WW2, the tiny area of Hong Kong was literally flooded with poor people, more people, and lots of people - and they not only handled it, they thrived. People are not burdens. Your lifeboat analogy implies that every time one comes in, that it ads more harmful pressure on the system. Well, I'll give that it does to the welfare state, and all the other freebie

  • My brain, it huuurrrtss! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mvdwege ( 243851 ) <mvdwege@mail.com> on Saturday January 06, 2007 @02:25PM (#17490082) Homepage Journal

    I have read TFA, and the linked study.

    Dear God, if this is what passes for research at prestigious places like Berkeley these days, I am not surprised that immigrants outperform U.S.-born citizens

    • Their sample was not random(they called up companies and asked for cooperation).
    • They define 'innovation' by the number of patents filed, and the categories they mention where the most patents are filed in, are precisely those categories where we'd find such innovations as 'one-click-shopping'.

    And that's just two examples. I am at a loss for words to see such stupidity even get past a professor's review.

    Mart

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by baronben ( 322394 )
      In any survey like this, there is a self selection bias. This is accepted and acknowledges by them. In fact, given the large sample size, this becomes increasingly irrelevant. They've included a range of values for the population and an alpha value based on the characteristics of the sample. Every single survey includes this, its at the heart of statistics.

      As for the patents, there are few other ways to determine what an 'innovation' is. Its a fairly vague meaning, something different from what was before i

  • Argh! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by antifoidulus ( 807088 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @02:27PM (#17490110) Homepage Journal
    "capitol" != "capital". Though in this case, both are relevant.

  • Current Immigration Law Sucks (Score:5, Insightful)

    by localman ( 111171 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @02:34PM (#17490192) Homepage
    It's stupider than patents. I have several friends caught up in this crap, and it is bad for everyone. Let me explain how the H1B forces down wages for American workers (who it was supposed to protect): once you get an H1B person over here they are pretty much locked in their job, so the company can massivly underpay them, which makes American born workers even less desirable. If the H1B's had job mobility, they might come in on the cheap (like college kids do anyways), but they'd job-hop and be sucked into American consumerism and they'd demand more and wages would go up for everyone. Well, everyone who can do a decent job.

    And that's just it -- the entire immigration debate (from the high-tech workers to strawberry pickers) is simply an effort to protect our lazy and/or stupid people at the expense of everyone else in the country and the world. Worried about there being too many people who come to take advantage of the system? And what controls are there for keeping US citizens from popping out more babies than they or the government can take care of? None. At least most of the immigrants want to work. The immigration debate is a thinly veiled double standard that has it's roots in racism and fear of legitimate competition.

    Even with the illegal strawberry pickers, the fact that we don't give them legal status forces them to make shady deals with their employers, which in turn allows the employers to pay them less and refuse them benefits they'd have to pay for legal workers. Who suffers? Not just the illegal immigrants -- but also the citizens since they can't reasonably compete with what amounts to slave labor. Every attempt at protecting ourselves backfires.

    And don't just say we need to increase security. That just does not work. We can't get security in Iraq even having the country overrun by military. Force can not stop a people who truly believe their life is only worth living if they violate the laws of that force. And even if it were possible to succeed in that endeavor... what? We get the honor of being like all the lousy countries who have fought to close their borders over the years? Name them for me... not a prestigious list. Rather, we should be finding ways to make the most of the reality that people want to come here, take advantage (in the positive sense of the word) of the people who want to be a part of America. Stop trying to change, outlaw, or discourage them. They are customers of the American lifestyle and economy.

    Here's a vague starting point: make the rule that anyone who wasn't a convicted felon in their country could come here for 3 months. If they could find a job and stay off the streets during that time, they (and their dependents) could stay as long as they were working somewhere. After 5 years, they'd be citizens. That would give them the motivation to become a group we can appreciate, perhaps even better than your average natural born American.

    Cheers.

    • Re:Current Immigration Law Sucks (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Fulcrum of Evil ( 560260 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @03:03PM (#17490486)

      and even if it were possible to succeed in that endeavor... what? We get the honor of being like all the lousy countries who have fought to close their borders over the years? Name them for me... not a prestigious list.

      Let's see: the EU, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Singapore, Australia. Quite a rogue's gallery, I agree, but every one of those countries controls who is allowed to immigrate. I wonder if any country currently lets anybody just walk on in.

      • Interesting... I think if I asked most people they'd say that everyone on that list is having a rougher time of it than the US, who was founded on the principle that anyone could come in, and who's rapid growth in the last century was fueled entirely by immigrants, and who wasn't getting so catty about the whole thing until recently, as, coincidentally, we spiral down the tubes ourselves.

        You realize that nearly every single person clamouring for tighter border controls now is the decendant of someone who ca
    • Right. Of course we can't compare US and Brazil.
      But what I can say is that the waves of italian and german immigrants that came at century XIX and after WWI and WWII to Brasil boosted our development a lot. Pick some of the most powerful industrial groups in Brasil, and most likely the founder was one of those immigrants. If you do some selection to weed out the opportunists, immigration can be a very useful input of energy for your economy.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Never underestiminate the power of managers to take advantage of the law. It's like hackers trying to execute arbitrary code through a known exploit in the software. You said, "they can stay in the country as long as they have a job." Manager thinks: "Oh, so I can ask Hamid from Egypt to work 100 hour weeks or I'll fire him, and then he'll get shipped back to Egypt post haste. I can also ask that El Salvadorian chick to suck my cock or else fire her and she'll get shipped home! And no deported foreigne

  • The Hypocricy of Border Control (Score:3)

    by localman ( 111171 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @03:16PM (#17490644) Homepage
    Everyone who wants tighter border controls is the decendant of someone who immigrated to this country before there were border controls. Think about that. If you want those tighter controls, tell me which country you'd have liked your family to have been stuck in, where you'd be living today.

    Fact is, this country is wholly built by immigrants. Get used to it.

    Cheers.

  • Lobbyist Number Games (Score:5, Informative)

    by Tablizer ( 95088 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @03:33PM (#17490824) Journal
    nearly a quarter of all California startups which went into business between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant as a founding member.

    Being that California's population is more than a quarter non-native born, this statistic does not mean much.
         

  • there's a simpler reason why we need immigrants (Score:5, Insightful)

    by artifex2004 ( 766107 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @05:24PM (#17491756) Journal
    The demographics in the US are getting much older. We've seen no net new workers in the 25-64(?) range SINCE 2000.
    That means people are aging out or dying as fast as new ones come in. It's only going to get worse.
    We must have an influx of workers in the future to do things like run our shops, keep services running, etc.
    If we don't, there will be no tax base to pay for medical care for the elderly, etc.
    Never mind that we will have to import doctors and other very educated types, since there will definitely be a shortage of geriatricians, etc.

    Look at France and Germany, they're already having to import workers. Which is why we're seeing more stories about ethnic conflict, racism, and the return of fascism.
    But it has to happen.

  • The key word in "illegal immigrant" is "illegal" (Score:3, Insightful)

    by walterbyrd ( 182728 ) on Saturday January 06, 2007 @08:07PM (#17493136)
    The difference between legal immigration, and illegal immigration is roughly the same as the difference between shopping and shop-lifting.

    Lumping legal immigration with illegal immigration is like lumping shoppers and shop-lifters together and saying we should not prosecute shop-lifters because stores need the business.

Slashdot Top Deals

Successful and fortunate crime is called virtue. - Seneca

Close