Before undertaking
the research, I completely backed open immigration policy as the only viable
option to move America. Through my research however, it seems that neither side
can prove efficacy. The pro-immigration side does not seem to take much of the
illegal immigrants in to their economic indicators, whereas the conservative
side almost solely focused on that one aspect. Of course with a topic like
immigration, being polar is almost expected. It is because of this expected
polarity that the need for a compromise is evident.
The sides in favor of immigration are socially liberal and the sides against were economically conservative causing a friction that hurts the American worker as well. Two of the primary sources I used, DAPA/DACA and Texas vs. U.S. is a prime example of how the inability to reach a logical conclusion hurts all parties. Because of the injunction against the deference, 5 million immigrants do not know whether they will be deported or not, and the use of resources in solving these problems has cost the taxpayers, at the state level, about 30 million dollars.
History also teaches us that the only solution in such an emotionally charged debate is compromise. When the Chinese and Irish first started emigrating, massive xenophobia arose from the right-wing party, also mostly from individual states, protesting this new trend. The federal government had the opposite idea through such actions as opening the port of Ellis Island for open immigration. Almost the exact same issue is present today with a different race of people; the same type of evidence is used to back up claims now as they were used to back up the claims in the turn of the 20th century.
From my analysis, maximizing social deference and economic sustainability is the way to ensure the maintenance of America as an ideal and as a reality. By allowing immigration of highly skilled workers, the progression of America is ensured while also increasing real output. Increasing real output increases wages which in turn stimulates the economy by increasing the GDP through individual consumption and investment. This effect can come about through the outward shift of the demand for more laborers caused by technological advancement or increased manufacturing. To do this, immigrants and citizens alike need to do more than sustain production, but increase it. The final solution after not coming to terms with either extreme would be the moderate stance. The moderate stance just comes down to maximizing potential. By adopting stricter, but not impossible, criteria for incoming members and allowing the already residing illegal immigrants to become citizens, we can normalize the influx of illegals and standardize immigration.
The sides in favor of immigration are socially liberal and the sides against were economically conservative causing a friction that hurts the American worker as well. Two of the primary sources I used, DAPA/DACA and Texas vs. U.S. is a prime example of how the inability to reach a logical conclusion hurts all parties. Because of the injunction against the deference, 5 million immigrants do not know whether they will be deported or not, and the use of resources in solving these problems has cost the taxpayers, at the state level, about 30 million dollars.
History also teaches us that the only solution in such an emotionally charged debate is compromise. When the Chinese and Irish first started emigrating, massive xenophobia arose from the right-wing party, also mostly from individual states, protesting this new trend. The federal government had the opposite idea through such actions as opening the port of Ellis Island for open immigration. Almost the exact same issue is present today with a different race of people; the same type of evidence is used to back up claims now as they were used to back up the claims in the turn of the 20th century.
From my analysis, maximizing social deference and economic sustainability is the way to ensure the maintenance of America as an ideal and as a reality. By allowing immigration of highly skilled workers, the progression of America is ensured while also increasing real output. Increasing real output increases wages which in turn stimulates the economy by increasing the GDP through individual consumption and investment. This effect can come about through the outward shift of the demand for more laborers caused by technological advancement or increased manufacturing. To do this, immigrants and citizens alike need to do more than sustain production, but increase it. The final solution after not coming to terms with either extreme would be the moderate stance. The moderate stance just comes down to maximizing potential. By adopting stricter, but not impossible, criteria for incoming members and allowing the already residing illegal immigrants to become citizens, we can normalize the influx of illegals and standardize immigration.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment