Steve_

That's from 2002, tax rates in California have gone up significantly since then. They did put up sales taxes in Arizona as well but I think it has expired now (or is about to).

Steve_

Scottsdale has the highest average age per capita of any US city.

Steve_

Are you joking? The US is a case study in badly written laws.

When huge numbers of people don't follow the law, that's usually an indication there's something wrong with the law. Laws are a reflection of society, not the other way around, you cannot compel a society to follow a law they don't agree with.

Steve_

I think the idea of the W category is actually to temporarily regularize the status of people who are in the US illegally while they apply for LPR status, which is why I am a bit puzzled about the idea of putting a quota on it. Because there are already guest worker programmes, i.e. H-2A and H-2B and logically it would make more sense to open up H-2B than to create an entirely new category.

But then logic is in short supply in Congress.

Steve_

You only have to look at Japan to see where really tight immigration laws lead, the population there is declining rapidly, their economy has been stagnant for many years now.

Or look at Canada, which allows more employment-based people in every year than the US does and is currently in better shape economically than the US.

But I do agree that having people in a guest status indefinitely is the wrong thing to do, there has to be some sort of eventual path to being able to stay permanently.

I don't think illegal aliens should be awarded with citizenship either, that sends out totally the wrong message.

I think what will happen once the House of Representatives gets their hands on it will be that there is some sort of conditional permanent residency and the condition will be you cannot apply for citizenship, unless you get a waiver and somehow qualify (e.g. marriage to a US citizen) through the legal immigration system - then you can get the condition removed.

That is more equitable and is the likely compromise, imo.

This assumes they pass anything meaningful.

scrubbedexpat099

Why not UK as an example of the benefits of mass immigration?

Your points coincide with the Gun debate, except many many more people do not agree with the intent of a minority to introduce legislation.

Unlikely the Dems will back down on a pathway to Citizenship, they see it to be to their electoral advantage.

The numbers I mentioned were new guest workers, not those here already.

Uncle_Bob

According the 2010 census the population was spread out with 17.7% under the age of 18, 5.0% from 20 to 24, 32.6% from 25 to 49, 22.8% from 50 to 64, and 19.9% who were 65 years of age or older.

LinkTen

It seems the new 'Gang of 8' immigration bill will be announced on Tuesday. Rumours have it that the pathway to citizenship for 'undocumented' immigrants isn't as easy as some were hoping. Apparently it might be quicker, easier and cheaper to go home and apply like everyone else.

scrubbedexpat099

Errr

No

sir_eccles

I doubt any politicians would dare vote for it any other way.

Steve_

The UK is in better shape than Japan, and it has a lower foreign-born population than either Canada or Australia - both of which are in better shape economically than the UK at present. So your point is...

Steve_

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2...-revealed?lite

So essentially some form of conditional permanent resident status, which is what I suspected.

So basically, after ten years they can apply to use the legal immigration system, because the "merit" thing is new and anyone can use it. Because they've been in the US for at least 10 years they will probably have enough points to qualify under it. But given the quota they're talking about for it, they'll be waiting a long time for their green card...

Nothing new.

Hard to have a metric for activity that is by definition illegal.

Waste of money, imo, although not much money really.

Sounds silly.

Even more silly. They can't even apply for ten years and even then they would have to wait years longer.

Don't quite get this one, why not just open up H-2B?

Mmm, that one is sensible but what about all the people currently waiting for a visa number in fourth preference? And until I read the bill what EB categories... everything except EB-3 unskilled?

Sounds good until you realize Canada lets in about 150,000 people under their points system and we have a ninth of the population - so in short order this will have long tailbacks.

Biometric social security cards?

Not that important if they remove the quota on EB-3 skilled worker and have a new "merit-based" system. Why not just come in as an LPR?

scrubbedexpat099

I did not have a point, just wondered why the UK seems to get left off when lauding the benefits..

I would disagree with the Japan comparison, but that is another topic.

Steve_

Text of bill: http://www.schumer.senate.gov/forms/immigration.pdf

Steve_

Well that was a fun read. Lot of stuff in there.

Some of the highlights:

There will be a higher quota for H-1B but it will be harder to get, tougher labour certification and dependent employers will have to pay huge amounts for an I-129 application - that bit applies to L as well. Good news is that spouses on H-4 will be able to work if the country they're from reciprocates (assuming the principal holds H-1B or H-1C). There are a wide variety of restrictions on L and H-1B basically to stop people misusing them;

All employers within 4 years of enactment will have to sign up for E-verify;

Illegal entry will be made a criminal offence (many entries are currently a civil offence and they just ship you home);

New non-immigrant categories - W is for unskilled or semi-skilled workers coming to fill an identified labour shortage in a certain area in the US (people with degrees are specifically excluded and so are IT workers), this bit is probably the most controversial, appears to be quite sloppily written, allows dependent minor children for example to work;

X is a new "investment" category that seems a lot like E-2 but you can go to AOS more easily;

Y is a new "retiree" category, you have to have $500,000 invested in US real estate and it has to be renewed every 3 years and you've got to be 55 or older;

All H-1B holders from FTA countries will be redesignated as E-3 (i.e. Singapore, Chile, etc.)

Quota for H-1C is reduced to 300 (really, why bother with it still);

Various methods of regularizing the status of people in the country illegally, e.g. a "blue card" for agricultural workers (H-2A appears to be binned and replaced with a quota for blue cards), a conditional permanent resident status for people illegally in the US prior to 2012 provided they pay back taxes and a fine;

One bit that caught me is that people in the US for at least ten years in a work authorized non-immigrant status will be allowed to apply for AOS - so if you've been on H-2A, E-1/2, TN-1, etc. for ages you can finally get LPR status.

On immigrant visas there are a lot of changes as well:

Third and fourth preference are scrapped but if you fit in those categories you get points towards the new "merit" based immigrant visa. People currently waiting will all be processed by 2021;

Spouses and minor children of LPRs will now be eligible for visas immediately the same as for US citizens - currently outstanding petitions will be automatically converted;

Merit-based visas using a points system, the points you get are in the bill but the points you need will be based on demand for the visas. Which means to begin with given the rather low quota you will need a ton of points to qualify. There are separate methods for skilled and less skilled workers, this part of the bill is quite badly written, I suspect it will be changed somewhat;

Tons of stuff to do with enforcement, border agents, asylum seekers, etc. but I suspect on this forum you're more interested in the foregoing.

I think the odds of it passing as written are pretty low, some overlapping provisions for example (e.g. blue card and W visa) and the merit-based visa needs to be more clearly defined.