Hacker News Reader

Comment by 0xcafecafe | Hacker News Reader

Why though? If Google is hiring an engineer, it doesn't make a distinction and does so purely on skill. Why should it matter if said engineer is from Argentina (arbitrary example) instead of India?

The US issues roughly 1 million green cards each year. 86% of those go to family based immigration. The rest 14% are for employment based immigration. Even in there the dependents (spouse + kids) are counted against that quota. So net effect is close to 5% employment based immigration if we count only primary applicants. What purpose is discrimination by country of birth serving here?

View on HN

Benefit is greater diversity. Rather than have majority of immigrants from hugely populated countries like China or India, immigrants are more evenly distributed from all around the world. The system obviously has big downsides to individuals from India/China. If it can be proved to US citizens that it’s in their interests to get rid of the cap, I think it will be gone.

What makes arbitrary geographic borders markers of diversity ?

The language, religious practices, food, festivals and traditions change every 100 miles in India. It is an old civilization with as much or more diversity than all of Europe.

Small countries like Belgium, Netherlands and Austria can balkanize and claim diversity over minor differences. Yet, Indians are clumped together under 1 umbrella ? How does that make sense ?

What makes skin color marker of diversity ? This is world we live in.

India can have diversity claims if they let individual states in India their passports, languages, flags and so on. It's on them to show diversity before expecting others to appreciate it.

It gets even more ridiculous if we try to use 'physical' differences. It then becomes about genes.

Guess what ? Everyone who lives out of Africa has a common-ish ancestors as far as 80k years ago. So, Africans are significantly more diverse than the rest of the world combined.

Diversity can be preserved for 86% of the green card quota. Why does need to be there for the other 14%?

Already this is forcing companies to make investments in offshore centers as it is difficult to hire here. There is enough proof this is bad for Americans but the current political climate makes any change impossible.

Doesn't the country cap also apply for family sponsored greencards?

Indians and Chinese make 40% of the global population, but only 1% of US population.

So, clearly the diversity of US isn't representative of the global population.

> Benefit is greater diversity.

There are other "diversity" visas. One is a literal diversity lottery and a family permanent resident visa. Does it not make more sense to look at qualifications for employment petitions.

You get enough diversity from the 85% of people who come in through family based immigration. So, the majority of immigrants are not coming from countries like China or India irrespective of whether this discrimination persists or not.

The purpose is twofold: diversity of origins and the fact that there are 1.3Bi Indians for 300Mi Americans

Diveristy actually means not getting everybody from the same place, being that inside or outside the US

We are talking about 14% of the total annual green card quota, 140,000/1,000,000.Everybody is not coming from same place and it will be a pure FCFS system if these archaic quotas are gone.

>> Now i wouldn't want anyone to be discriminated but still it makes sense to limit green card based on nationality

> Why though? If Google is hiring an engineer, it doesn't make a distinction and does so purely on skill. Why should it matter if said engineer is from Argentina (arbitrary example) instead of India?

Because the priorities of the system don't have to be the same as Google's. Specifically, the US decided it prefers to get immigrants from everywhere rather than letting a couple big countries flood the queue.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com