Oh fuck off, the way the US government is currently treating asylum seekers and immigrants is horrifying. Only within the bubble of American politics could someone brush complaining about it off like that.
One of these means is lengthening the asylum-seeking process and requirements. Another is reducing the allowed number of successful asylum seekers through informal quotas.
The current administration has done both. They are intentionally gumming up the asylum system in order to make good on their campaign promises.
"It's the fault of invalid economic migrants" is a talking point.
HN loves to rail against the corrupt H1-B system, but apparently actually getting asylum seekers is amoral.
What would be more honest is to say “I don’t like cheap tech labor, so therefore clamping down on H1-Bs is good.” And “I don’t like the Trump administration and I want an open immigration system, so what Trump is doing to asylum seekers is bad.”
It’s all politics.
Also, claiming asylum because of local criminal elements (non-state actors) is an automatic no-go for an asylum claim.
(Note, Obama's DOJ fucked this one up by letting an immigration judge (unlawfully) grant an asylum claim because of local non-state criminal threats.) Hence, the flood gates opened and people began sending women and children first, rather than adults to sneak in and find work.
It is lengthening the process no matter how I or anyone "sees" it. It's comparative, I didn't give a value judgement.
It is all politics. Part of the current administration's campaign promises was to let in less immigrants. They now take political moves to do so, including lengthening the asylum process.
There are other reasons besides not liking cheap tech labor to not like H1-B visas. Because they are tied to employers, workers that hold them are easier to abuse, as they have few other options. Other people don't like that it is based on a lottery system, and so companies that request the most H1B visas will get the most H1B visas.
It is not dissonant to believe that H1B should be reduced or removed in its entirety but other visas and legal immigration avenues should be also be opened up.
Edit: arguing about the legality of the asylum seekers is also missing the point.
People who cross national borders, without documentation, and not at designated points of entry, are NOT "immigrants". They are illegal aliens. People need to stop conflating the two.
[1]https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48548031
[2]https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/as-trump-t...
It's easy to pretend you're fellow Americans are monsters, but they're not.
No, they are people fleeing violence in Central America through Mexico, in large part.
That violence, incidentally, is in substantial part resulting from the US training nonviolent drug war criminals into extremely violent criminals in its original and then deporting then to Central America what they have no substantial roots.
If you are passing through one country because you desire to get to a specific destination, you are basically asylum shopping.
Even nativist politicians making incorrect claims about the law here tend to claim it requires efforts to seek asylum in the first safe country, which even if true would, in fact, fully take into account the problem of an intervening country that shared the same problem being fled from in the country of nationality or habitual residence. See, e.g., referring to this claim:
https://fullfact.org/immigration/refugees-first-safe-country...
> These aren't people fleeing genocide.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/traveladvisories/...
You as an American should not go there, but them fleeing here is problematic?
https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/asylum-or-refugee-st...