We already do that, partly because various industrial lobbies demand it. But allowing skilled foreigners to work and study in the country is useful in its own right for promoting international connection and expertise. So with respect to high-value work and investment, you have to weigh both positives and negatives. The Left position is usually to maximize all positives and actively mitigate negatives: comity with the poorer countries, not isolationism.
However, I was responding to
I might agree in theory, but what was it they say about blue sky thinking? The meaning of my quip was exceedingly simple, that the problem of authorization is one that can always be solved instantly through bureaucratic fiat. And the problem of authorization is one whose existence makes Americans worse people, incites tyrannous governance, and subjects millions to incalculable cruelty and duress. It began a century ago as an avowedly racist policy and it has never stopped being a racialized implement. The immigration and customs bureaucracy is designed to be almost impossible to overcome except by wealth or special dispensation. Today, burgeoning millions have excellent cases for seeking asylum, and almost none will be granted it. That's my bottom line. These are inescapable truths that have to be apprehended in any policy proposal. That's all I meant.
To synthesize a response to both your perspectives, I advocate reviving the old ideal of pan-Americanism. Start (t)here.
Bookmarks