duns wrote:Yes, we need to streamline the immigration system then there won't be the need for fences along the borders. The people who cross the borders illegally in search of work are not "contemptuous" of the system, as you put it, but frustrated by the restrictions.lkd wrote: Glad you said "immigrants". Turns out, we have a system for that. Also turns out, we have millions of people south of the border that are contemptuous, deliberately or not, of that system. If we need to streamline that system, great. That doesn't justify illegal actions, and I certainly don't support any actions that coddle those that won't work with the system.
They're frustrated by the restrictions, soooo....they choose to break the law.
I'm really failing to follow your logic. Please explain your leaps.
lkd wrote:Your oversimplify the scenario, because the discussion is about immigration, not about what it takes to create a corporation in the US. A company in the UK can't start a new US corporation and then fly half their employees here to live and work without a due process, which requires visas and adherence to numerous immigration and importation laws.duns wrote:I do not know where you got the idea that there are many hurdles for a company to overcome to create a commercial presence in a country. When my UK-based company wanted a commercial presence in the USA, all we had to do was spend about $100 to register a US corporation. That was it. Nothing else. The process to start a US company is exactly the same for foreigners as for US citizens. No extra requirements whatsoever.
Ok, I'm starting to understand your positioning, and I think it's noble, but it almost seems as if you're in denial of the colossal chasm between idealism and reality. I certainly support a free-market system AND a free-trade system (with reasonable exceptions), but we have a system in place that MUST be obeyed before it can be restructured, otherwise the end result is what we have now -- more barriers, more protectionism, and more conflicts. Remember, WE are not inflicting anarchy on their system, it's quite the opposite. Until the laws are obeyed, you can be CERTAIN the laws will get worse (for those south of the border). Frankly, I know a LOT of Mexicans who are quite annoyed that this problem exists, because they work so hard to work within the system, and everybody else undermines their credibility (much like any gun owner gets villified whenever there is a mass shooting).duns wrote:As I showed, there are zero hurdles to a foreign company forming a US-registered corporation. Having done that, they have the choice of recruiting US-born labor or obtaining visas for foreign labor - same is true for a corporation formed by US citizens. So no difference.
Now we are getting to the crux of the matter: there are hurdles to bringing in foreign labor and the hurdles are the same irrespective of whether the company is owned by US citizens or by foreigners. As a capitalist country, one would have thought that the US would allow the markets to determine how many workers are US-born and how many foreign-born. But that is not the case. Instead, many hurdles are placed on employers if they want to recruit foreigners. We see, for example, Congress placing arbitrary caps on the numbers of H1B visas that can be issued to highly skilled workers. Government fees and associated red tape make hiring foreigners more expensive than hiring natives. And foreigners cannot be paid less than natives - visa regulations require prevailing wage rates and benefits to be provided to foreigners. Do you think that employers would go to all that trouble and expense if they could hire Americans to fill the positions? This supports my original point that trade flows freely across the borders but labor does not, and free-market principles should also allow labor to flow freely across the borders.