I'm talking about immigration policy, and in particular maintaining the distinction between high end immigration of skilled workers through programs like 12b-1, which I support and support increasing for reasons of increased economic competitiveness. While I do not support illegal immigration or amnesties for guest workers. I've also stated that I have no problem with using trade strategically for actual grand strategy purposes or to improve human rights, as long as those don't turn into mere excuses to destroy trade. On other threads I've insisted that trade benefits both parties that engage in it economically - which can result in strategic reasons to oppose some trade, as strengthening people better not strengthened - but does not result in any economic argument against trade.
Would you care to tell me which, if any, of those propositions you disagree with?
This goes hand in hand with 'globalization'.
Title the discussion how you will.
You are not just talking about immigration. Its all here for everyone to see.
So be it.
I'm out. Gotta go.
12b is NOT immigration. What 12b is, is cheap hi-tech labor that corporations train here on US soil prior to firing their American workers and moving operations overseas. That's why corporations prefer to hire 12b workers over American workers. You are seeing the largest and fastest transfer of knowledge ever! Ross Perot's "sucking sound" pales to what's really going on... the abortion of America.