Views On Future Immigration in USA

GOD_BLESS_YOU

Registered Users (C)
10/25/2004: Pessimistic View on Future of Immigration in U.S.: A "Quote"

This website has never posted an opinion which was expressed by people in another websites. However, the Reporter has decided to break the tradition to quote an opinion, not because this Reporter agrees to the conclusion of the writer but because of the description of the events that are and will be unfolding in this country with respect to the immigration. The view is "well put" and deserves this website visitor's valuable time and "quoted" as follows:
Quote: "My suggestions to aspiring immigrants:
a. no president will be kind enough to let you be in American with ease.
b. Pro-immigration is most unpopular public policy and that's why Bush played the trick: he gave a speech about kind of pro-immigration policy at off season without any policy proposal in the Congress. He did it to fool Mexican President Fox as if he has plan to do something for immigrants. But at election time, he hardly made any statement about it.
c. Kerry has talked nothing about it either except in one question answer session.
d. Kerry sounds a bit more pro immigrants than Bush but don't be fooled. Even the most compassionate sounding and broad-minded Clinton brought the harshest immigration policy in 1996 although Republicans were the champions of this policy in particular.
e. Aspiring immigrants are not voters and those who are voters do not like to hear about pro-immigration statements. So, it is understandable. Most of the naturalized ones are the most anti-immigrants.
f. Economists know that the future of this country holds on immigrants a lot. But politics is different thing. Canadians exploited the Chinese but did not let them earn legalization at earlier time. When the country faced serious population shortage and skilled worker shortage because of low fertility and huge immigration to the US of its White population, it now accepts all skilled workers of India and China in particular.
g. America for some reason has not faced it so and majority of America will not entertain immigrants until China dominates the world economy and America fails in its competition with the European Union, China and India mainly because of its rising obesity and aging and problems like social security, health care and high wage.
h. So, for coming 20 to 30 years, US immigration policy will be no better than today's. It may go worse.
i. I know America has hard days ahead because of :
. Moslem fanatics of the world
. obesity which cause too much allocation of resource to health care and loss of productivity
. severe inequality in income distribution which will cause more street crimes, unsafe neighborhood, possible political unrest if the rise in inequality persists and if the poorer find it harder and harder to live.
. huge failure to bring the Black and Hispanic population to the mainstream of educational, economic and political system
. too much technological dependence (e.g. internet which is prone to attack from anywhere of the world)
. identity theft
. loss of privacy
. too much crackdown on people’s rights in the name of terrorism control
j. So, I think it's better for today's generation of aspiring immigrants not to be desperate to settle for the longer term in this country. When you retire, who will care you? The system is made so difficult to survive: rising health care costs, loss of social security and medicare, higher cost of living, almost no public support, rising identity theft, skyrocketing tuition fee of your children to pay the royals of the college system will make life difficult in America too.
k. Aspiring immigrants, I know your home country is no better. But one thing is better there and that is you will not face the uncertainty of visa status. Also you will not be too worried about greencard. You will not need to wait for many years for Greencard. Nobody will intermediate you of deportation. You will not need to worry too much about being caught by the INS officer or police. Your quality of life may be higher because of this in real terms if not in monetary terms.
So, let us make plan to leave this country in a reasonable period of time. If we plan well to live a simple and humble life, life may not be too hard at our motherlands too!! Let us not blame American people either. American people are the hardest hit by the ongoing trends of this country. Their anti-immigrant sentiment is the reflection of their fear of future hardships." Unquote

source:www.immigration-law.com
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Interesting Analysis

As interesting as the analysis is , I am not sure what this analysis is based on other than personal opinion. Aspiring immigrants fall into two categories, legal and illegal. This site mostly serves legal immigrants and so I am going to eliminate the fear and intimidation due to deportation. I do agree with the fact that America will never have an open immigration like the Canadians simply because they dont have to. As Greenspan stated and suggested , USA will depend upon skilled young immigrants to support an aging American population. There are efforts currently underway to speed up backlogs in Immigration processing and labor certification. This is not a grand scam, but an honest attempt to stream-line the immigration processing for the deserving. There are always currency fears and economic downturn, but American economy is booming and is one of the strongest in the world, and will continue to be one. The reasons are an aging American population will leave behind a huge asset in wealth inspite of skyrocketing health care cost. Lets face it, no dying elderly will sell everything they own to post-pone their end by a few months. On the contrary they would like to leae something behind for their children. America being an open market will find ways to compensate for high tuition and other expenses. An offshoring culture may lead into getting an Offshored education. Americans are buing prescription drugs from Canada, they may choose to get their education from Australia or India. They are retiring in Mexico and Beleize, they may retire as far as India in a Yoga retreat.
What is certain to happen is that we will live in a world of interdependency and co-operation (concept from Bill Clintion) where borders will make no sense and people will have multiple citizenships. I am Indian, Canadian PR and an aspiring US resident and I love all the three countries (Ofcourse Canada is my favourite).
Currently US is the best place to live due to my age and the opportunity I have here. While I am here let me try and get a GreenCard. I am sure a lot of people in my demography will share my opinion and optimism. To me leaving the USA is not a sensible personal decision. But if I have to, life would not be so bad in Canada, India, Ireland or Australia.

Good Bless America and Canada and the whole world.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
metaman,

Let me ask you one question. When did you come to US and when did you apply for your LC? You might still be in the so called honeymoon phase when everything in US looks rosy. Once you get in to the mature phase and have to move from post to post with your family your view of the US and the entire world might change.

I am not suggesting that it is not good to have a positive attitiude. For that matter I do not fully agree with GOD_BLESS_YOU aslo. Beacuse his views are entirely negative.

If you look at the ground realities life is geting tougher day by day in the US while opportunites and quality of life is imprving in developing countries like India & China. So the old paradigm of US being the dreamland is changing.

Good Luck.

metaman said:
As interesting as the analysis is , I am not sure what this analysis is based on other than personal opinion. Aspiring immigrants fall into two categories, legal and illegal. This site mostly serves legal immigrants and so I am going to eliminate the fear and intimidation due to deportation. I do agree with the fact that America will never have an open immigration like the Canadians simply because they dont have to. As Greenspan stated and suggested , USA will depend upon skilled young immigrants to support an aging American population. There are efforts currently underway to speed up backlogs in Immigration processing and labor certification. This is not a grand scam, but an honest attempt to stream-line the immigration processing for the deserving. There are always currency fears and economic downturn, but American economy is booming and is one of the strongest in the world, and will continue to be one. The reasons are an aging American population will leave behind a huge asset in wealth inspite of skyrocketing health care cost. Lets face it, no dying elderly will sell everything they own to post-pone their end by a few months. On the contrary they would like to leae something behind for their children. America being an open market will find ways to compensate for high tuition and other expenses. An offshoring culture may lead into getting an Offshored education. Americans are buing prescription drugs from Canada, they may choose to get their education from Australia or India. They are retiring in Mexico and Beleize, they may retire as far as India in a Yoga retreat.
What is certain to happen is that we will live in a world of interdependency and co-operation (concept from Bill Clintion) where borders will make no sense and people will have multiple citizenships. I am Indian, Canadian PR and an aspiring US resident and I love all the three countries (Ofcourse Canada is my favourite).
Currently US is the best place to live due to my age and the opportunity I have here. While I am here let me try and get a GreenCard. I am sure a lot of people in my demography will share my opinion and optimism. To me leaving the USA is not a sensible personal decision. But if I have to, life would not be so bad in Canada, India, Ireland or Australia.

Good Bless America and Canada and the whole world.
 
I came to US in 1998 on F1 and got my H1 in 2000, Got labor certified in 2001 and applie dfor 140. Laid off in Sep 2001 and found another job. Applied for labor in Non RIR in Aug 2004. (Currently processing April 2001). Why am I still here ? I make great money, I save a lot and vacation in the Carribean. Why are you here and not in India or China? THe point is to 3 million people waiting for labor USA is a great place. If they dont agree, WIPRO, INFOSYS and TCS are hiring. And please when any one of you returns to India , please withdraw your labor application. It helps others.
I used to be stressed and worried about immigration. This year I gor a Canadian PR. But the job offers I get from Canada are not comparable good to what I have. But soon, I will move to Canada and work there to repay the Canadians who graciously shared their country with me. I dont want to give you the impression that I hate India. I love India, the traditions and some aspects of it and I love USA and Canada. If I lived in China I think I will be facinated by that country. (Funny some head hunter from monster.com wanted to see if I will work for IBM in Shangai).

My point is nobody is in USA doing USA a service. THey are here for their own good. If it is not good, they will leave. Good luck to all of you.
God bless Canada.
 
Just a thinking

Hello Metaman,

I agree with your interdependency vision. I am a citizen of a South American country, a permanent resident of Canada and US greencard applicant as well. I think the world is moving torward cultural exchanges. Incredible how many Canadians and Americans recently have asked me how to immigrate and get IT jobs in Brazil... I am here and they want to go there. Isn't that interesting ?

I just hope that the awful terrorism just doesn't blow away this beautiful idea of country interdependency. It is something that it should not be overlooked. I hope the US administration will have the wisdom to watch and take proper actions. Paying attention to that Mexican-US border is very important to avoid 'illegal immigrants' that can walk by so easily and eventually decide to bring a "baggage" able to do real damage to the US... nobody seems to be acting on that you know.

Just a thinking:if Canada is your favorite country, I am wondering why you are not there then ? :-) My favorite country is the US, because this is the place where I got all opportunities and life style I was looking for. This is just a personal choice, and I do respect yours, obviously. Just a friendly comment.

The US economy took a hit after the IT bubble burst. We lost our lobbying power right there. Bill Gates, John Chambers and many other powerful US employers were the ones that really propelled and influenced the immigration laws. They no longer have motives to do that now. Now I will wait a little longer and see if these backlogs will really be fixed. The government shouldn't retort the greencard applicants like that way.

If that backlog doesn't get fixed next year, I may decide not to submit my family to this long awaiting greencard process anymore. I think others will eventually do the same, and the US will start losing talent to other countries then. Too bad.

I will make sure to keep writing to the US congress about it. I'd encourage you do the same. Write to the US congress and tell them that we are honest, hard working professionals that can bring values to this country. An effective, fast and fair immigration process would be a win-win situation to the US and greencard applicants alike. Please remember that the government has suggested backlog reduction goals since 1999. I will not hold my breath until I actually see it, therefore I will keep reminding the congress.

We'll see what happens.

Regards,

Marlon
 
Times may change soon regarding immigration, it may be forced to change. This article is two yrs old but is very interesting the points raised.

PAGE 1.

Judy Reed is a buyer in a buyer's market, and frankly, that has its advantages. The vice president for human resources at Stratus Technologies, a Maynard, Mass., maker of high-reliability servers, Reed never lacks for attention at parties and dinners in this employment-starved economy. When she does post a job, she gets four times the volume of responses she got three years ago, and some job seekers even follow up with Christmas cards. If she wanted to, she could fill every opening at a salary 15 percent below the going rate -- as, in fact, many of her competitors do.

But that's one advantage Reed won't take. She recently hired an engineer with more than 10 years' experience for nearly six figures -- the same wage she paid at the height of the bubble. Reed isn't just being kind. She asserts that any other course of action is asking for trouble down the road. "The buyer's market we're in now is temporary," she warns. "Maybe it'll last another year or two." And then? "Companies that haven't taken care to build worker loyalty," she says, "will find themselves in the same predicament as in 1999 and 2000."


At this particular moment in economic history, that is quite a statement. Two million workers have been downsized or displaced since the recession of 2001. At 6.2 percent, the national unemployment rate is the highest it's been in nine years, and the number of new jobless claims has sat above 400,000 for 20 weeks. To base hiring policy today on the prospect of a return to the tight labor market of 1999 seems not just counterintuitive -- it defies the evidence of one's own eyes.
 
(Page 2 of 5)

But Reed isn't alone. Executives at Cigna (CI), Intel (INTC), SAS, Sprint (PCS), Whirlpool (WHR), WPP (WPPGY), and Adecco (the world's largest placement firm) have told Business 2.0 that they, too, worry that the supply of labor is about to fall seriously short of demand. Former treasury secretary and current Harvard University president Larry Summers regards a skilled labor shortage as all but inevitable. Economists like former Deputy Secretary of Labor Edward Montgomery and Sigurd Nilsen, the director of education, workforce, and income security in the General Accounting Office, have issued warnings to the same effect. And in April the country's largest and most influential industrial trade group, the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), added its voice to the chorus. The association released a white paper based on research by labor economist Anthony Carnevale, former chairman of President Clinton's National Commission for Employment Policy, that forecast a "skilled worker gap" that will start to appear the year after next and grow to 5.3 million workers by 2010 and 14 million 10 years later. (Including unskilled workers, the gaps will be 7 million in 2010 and 21 million in 2020.) "By comparison, what employers experienced in 1999 and 2000 was a minor irritation," Carnevale says. "The shortage won't just be about having to cut an extra shift. It will be about not being able to fill the first and second shift too." This will occur, he adds, without any heroic growth rates or bubblelike economic anomalies; all it will take is a return to the economy's long-term growth rate of 3 to 3.5 percent a year.

The cause of the labor squeeze is as simple as it is inexorable: During this decade and the next, the baby boom generation will retire. The largest generation in American history now constitutes about 60 percent of what both employers and economists call the prime-age workforce -- that is, workers between the ages of 25 and 54. The cohorts that follow are just too small to take the boomers' place. The shortage will be most acute among two key groups: managers, who tend to be older and closer to retirement, and skilled workers in high-demand, high-tech jobs.


To see the demographic time bomb in microcosm, just count the gray heads around your own office. At Sprint, for example, half of the 6,000 field and network technicians are over 50. At Cigna Systems, about a quarter of the 3,400 IT workers will pass 55 this decade. And at Cary, N.C., software maker SAS, more than a quarter of the staff will be eligible to retire by this decade's end. The company's VP for human resources, Jeff Chambers, says this group is filled with veteran designers and engineers, many of them architects of the company's most successful products. "It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what's going on," he says. "Existing staff are going to start getting out soon, and the feeder pool just isn't coming up. If you're responsible for the workforce, you'd better ask yourself what you are going to do."

What employers will have to do, of course, is not difficult to predict: bid up wages, raid competitors for employees, seduce older workers to stay on the job, outsource whatever work they can, and lobby the government to jack up the quota for skilled immigrants. What they will not be able to do -- at least not for much longer -- is ignore the problem. "People think we're going to have plentiful workers forever, but that's not so," explains David Ellwood, a Harvard University professor who recently led an Aspen Institute study of the problem. "If you want to hire somebody who has traditionally been the bread and butter of the labor force, you're soon going to have to hire them away from somebody else."


As the boomers retire, the workforce will stop growing ...
The U.S. has always been able to count on an expanding labor force. But as the boomers are replaced by a smaller generation, the number of workers between the prime working ages of 25 and 54 will stagnate.
Prime-age workers (ages 25-54), in millions

and the average worker's education will flatline ...
During the past 20 years, the share of the workforce that had attended college grew from just over 40 percent to almost 60 percent. That figure will barely budge during the next two decades.
Prime-age workers (ages 25-54) with more than a high school degree

causing a serious shortage in skilled workers.
The static educational level of the workforce, coupled with the retirement of the baby boomers, means that there won't be enough skilled workers to meet continuously rising demand over the next 20 years.
Numbers of jobs and workers, in millions
(adjusted for multiple job-holding)

Sources: David Ellwood/Aspen Institute's Domestic Strategy Group; Anthony P. Carnevale and Donna M. Desrochers, Educational Testing Service
 
No sentient adult could have made it through the past decade without developing a healthy distrust of forecasts like these. But the case for the worker gap differs from the usual economic entrail reading in one crucial regard: It's based on demographics, a far more certain discipline. When Carnevale's model, for instance, shows that within seven years 30 million people now in the workforce will be older than 55, that's not a guess. It is virtually a certainty. "Any kind of demographic projection with respect to people who have already been born is notoriously accurate," agrees former Treasury Secretary Summers.

What the projections reveal is a passing of the workplace torch unlike any other in U.S. history. Up to this point, each generation to enter the workforce has been larger and better-educated than its predecessor. This time, however, neither will be true. The number of workers in the prime-age category -- the years when skilled, educated workers are at their peak productivity -- will hardly budge during the next two decades, even assuming that there will be about 1 million legal and illegal immigrants a year. At the same time, the percentage of the prime-age labor force that has been to college will flatline at about 60 percent. In fact, enrollments in the crucial fields of engineering and computer science have actually been declining.


Where the Jobs Are Going
Americans will find the hottest job growth this decade in Southern and Western metro areas fed by expanding service industries and by a resurgence in the tech and defense sectors.
Metro area Job growth,
2003-2013


Las Vegas 47.7%
Orlando 31.9%
West Palm Beach, FL 28.7%
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 25.7%
Riverside, CA 25.6%
Phoenix 25.3%
Jacksonville, FL 24.8%
Tampa, FL 24.4%
Raleigh-Durham, NC 24.0%
Sacramento, CA 23.7%
Austin 22.9%
Charlotte, NC 20.4%
Atlanta 19.8%
San Diego 19.2%
Washington 18.5%
Dallas 17.4%
Oakland, CA 17.3%
Miami 16.5%
Denver 16.5%
Orange County, CA 16.4%

Sources: Global Insight; Bureau of Labor Statistics
The result is an unprecedented mismatch between the workforce and the demands of a growing high-tech economy. Projections by the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics indicate that the seven fastest-growing occupations this decade will all be in technology. Demand for applications software engineers and tech support specialists, for example, will double by 2010, according to the BLS. (See "The 10 Fastest-Growing Occupations.") Even the seventh-ranked category, database administrators, is projected to grow by a stunning 66 percent. These high-demand tech fields will be the first to feel the labor crunch. By 2005, Carnevale says, "we'll start to see spot shortages all over the place." In some fields, he predicts, employers will be reduced to filling desperate job shortages with unqualified workers. By the following decade, when the bulk of the baby boomers bid their cubicles goodbye, a broad swath of corporate America will be scraping the bottom of the barrel for white-collar workers.


Every economic forecast has its critics, of course -- particularly one so at odds with the prevailing mood about employment. The projections assume, for instance, that the baby boomers will leave the workforce at roughly the same age as their predecessors, but how do we know that they won't delay retirement to make up for recent stock market losses and depressed 401(k)s? The answer is that the trend toward early retirement is a deeply entrenched pattern established during the past four decades, and neither bull nor bear markets have made a dent in it. Even the Social Security Administration, which would love nothing more than to make the case that the retirement age will soon rise dramatically -- the better to prove its own solvency -- has been unable to find any data to support that view.


Another loud objection is that the model expects far too much growth in the battered tech sector. John Sargent, a senior policy analyst in the Commerce Department's Office of Technology Policy, says he hears that all the time. "A lot of people say, 'Are you freaking crazy? Haven't you seen what's happened in the last year and a half?'" But Sargent, an authority on economic measurement, defends the BLS numbers, calling them the "closest you get to absolute objectivity." To assume that the sector's current weakness is permanent makes no more sense than believing in 1999 that the gravy train would never end. Several studies show that where the bureau has erred, it has traditionally underestimated demand for tech.
 
The tech sector usually leads the economy during periods of employment growth, and it's not clear what force would prevent it from doing so during the next bounce. Some skeptics argue that the culprit might be technological progress itself. They point out that a considerable amount of brainpower at software companies is now aimed at automating business data centers and, in effect, putting hordes of gainfully employed IT workers out on the street. IBM (IBM) calls the effort "on-demand" or "utility" computing. Oracle (ORCL), typically, calls it nothing but boasts that it has developed software that could soon make database administrators as obsolete as typesetters.

Not likely. Even if such breakthroughs ever made the leap from PowerPoint presentation to reality -- and they haven't yet -- they probably wouldn't shrink demand for tech overall. That's not how progress works. Whenever new technology eliminates less sophisticated jobs, it tends to create higher-level positions elsewhere. Cathleen Barton, U.S. education manager at Intel, points out that in 21 years of steady improvements in equipment and processes, Intel's workforce has only grown. "There's always the argument that the more technology you put in, the fewer and less-skilled workers you will need," she says. "But that's just not the case." In 1982, for example, Intel had about 20,000 U.S. employees, and an entry-level plant operator needed only a high-school education. That worker's skills would be obsolete today, it's true. But in its current 49,000-person U.S. workforce, Intel employs far more plant technicians than it did two decades ago. The difference is that entry-level applicants now need at least a two-year degree in applied science to handle the job.


If smarter software and increased automation won't derail a coming surge in demand for skilled American workers, how about competition from cheaper workers abroad? The double-digit growth in outsourcing of service jobs to low-wage countries, particularly India, has spawned more than its share of hand-wringing in the press and protectionist brimstone in state legislatures. Much of the worry seems to have crystallized around an estimate by technology research and consulting firm Forrester Research (FORR) that India and other nations will import some 3.3 million U.S. service jobs during the next 15 years.


The 10 Fastest-Growing Occupations
Over the course of this decade, the biggest increase in employee demand will occur in the technology and medical fields. Here's the forecast for the top 10 job categories through 2010.

For the most part, economists say, this is mere hysteria. India, China, the Philippines, and other newly industrialized countries simply haven't enough capacity to prevent the U.S. labor squeeze, especially in IT. India's IT industry, after all, produces about $14 billion a year, a gnat on the hide of the U.S. sector's $813 billion. Likewise, the subcontinent's 150,000 tech workers represent less than 2 percent of America's domestic IT labor force, barely enough to make a ripple in the looming job shortage.


And what of the 3.3 million jobs that Forrester predicts will move offshore by the end of the next decade? Most experts in the field put little faith in that number; they say there's not yet enough data to make any credible projection. (Some, in fact, dismiss Forrester's study as little more than a marketing brochure for Forrester's own offshore outsourcing consultancy.) Martin Kenney, a professor at the University of California at Davis who has just released a study on outsourcing in India, guesses that the true figure will be only half that many and that most of those will fall into lower-skilled categories like call centers. But even if Forrester's prediction came true -- and even if each of the 3.3 million exported jobs would otherwise have been filled by a U.S. manager or skilled worker -- that still represents only a fraction of the shortage that Carnevale and other economists foresee. In other words, the long-term tragedy of offshoring isn't that it's snatching away skilled American jobs. It's that it can't possibly snatch enough of them.
 
Elementary economics teaches that there can never be more jobs than jobholders. A gap of 5.3 million workers in 2010 doesn't mean that there will be millions of empty cubicles waiting for workers who will never show up. Instead the labor market will "clear." Wages in the hottest professions will rise high enough to induce workers to change careers, emigrate to Silicon Valley, or retrain themselves in the desired skills (remember "Internet or Bust"?). Companies will coddle workers to build loyalty (remember free massages?), lure skilled retirees back from the golf course, or redeploy other workers. Eventually the demand will be met.

For more information on the impending labor shortage check out these links:
A new study predicts a shortage of millions of workers starting in 2005. See page 48.

One of the first employers to feel the pinch of the skilled-labor shortage will be the federal government. See page 12.

The Department of Defense is struggling to cope with its own retirement time bomb.

The largest industrial trade association in the United States, whose companies employ about a seventh of the nation's workforce, sounds the alarm over a "worker gap."

A Harvard economist and the Aspen Institute show how the stagnating supply of skilled workers threatens U.S. economic growth.
Anticipating the shortage, some companies have already put the process in motion. For example, Gail Doughtie, a vice president at Cigna Systems, has begun preparing for a shortage of database administrators by training other Cigna IT workers for the job; on big projects she looks for chances to pair veteran database administrators with junior IT workers in their 20s and 30s.


For her part, Judy Reed has refused to cut not only starting salaries but also budgets for athletic teams, picnics, and parties. "If your social life is at work, then it's harder to leave that work behind," she reasons. The company also offers over 70 courses a year in technology, management training, and skills like negotiating and writing. "Loyal workers refer other loyal workers," she says.


SAS, meanwhile, has used the current downturn to staff up, hiring more than 800 new employees. "We've been using this downturn to buy loyalty with these people, in the hope that we can ride them through the decade," Chambers says. "If you lost your job at Dotcom Inc. but got hired at SAS and prospered, you're probably not going to move when a competitor comes calling."


Like Reed, Chambers predicts that tech companies will try to offset the shortage of IT help by enticing boomers to work far beyond the standard retirement age. He's been urging senior SAS management to adopt programs to keep the more than 1,000 managers nearing retirement age from leaving. Among his suggestions is one that's almost certain to become more widespread this decade: flexible hours. "I know I'm not going to want to work every single day when I'm 55," Chambers says, "but I'll still probably want to work. We'll say, 'We'll pay you for an average of 100 hours a month, but if you want to take off June to spend time with your new grandchild, that's OK.'"


As the labor shortage grows more acute during the next decade, the returns on such tactics are likely to diminish. At the margin, there may simply be no cost-effective way to coax one more warhorse out of retirement or equip one more high school dropout for the rigors of a high-tech economy. In that case, the labor market will still clear -- but it will do so not by increasing supply, but by lowering demand. Projects will be abandoned, growth opportunities will lie fallow, and economic output will settle at a new, slower rate of growth.


Between now and then, though, there promises to be one ferociously tight labor market. Hard as it may be to picture in the midst of today's employment gloom, the coming squeeze could be as big a bonanza for skilled workers as 1999 was -- and as big a headache for employers. The only difference is, you can see this one coming. Whether you prepare for it or let it catch you by surprise is up to you.
 
APD said:
metaman,

Let me ask you one question. When did you come to US and when did you apply for your LC? You might still be in the so called honeymoon phase when everything in US looks rosy. Once you get in to the mature phase and have to move from post to post with your family your view of the US and the entire world might change.

I am not suggesting that it is not good to have a positive attitiude. For that matter I do not fully agree with GOD_BLESS_YOU aslo. Beacuse his views are entirely negative.If you look at the ground realities life is geting tougher day by day in the US while opportunites and quality of life is imprving in developing countries like India & China. So the old paradigm of US being the dreamland is changing.

Good Luck.

PLEASE NOTE THAT THOSE ARE NOT MY VIEWS ..
I AM A POSITIVE THINKER.. and OPTIMISTIC ALWAYS

I mentioned the source http://www.immigration-law.com
 
Last edited by a moderator:
metaman said:
I came to US in 1998 on F1 and got my H1 in 2000, Got labor certified in 2001 and applie dfor 140. Laid off in Sep 2001 and found another job. Applied for labor in Non RIR in Aug 2004. (Currently processing April 2001). Why am I still here ? I make great money, I save a lot and vacation in the Carribean. Why are you here and not in India or China? THe point is to 3 million people waiting for labor USA is a great place. If they dont agree, WIPRO, INFOSYS and TCS are hiring. And please when any one of you returns to India , please withdraw your labor application. It helps others.
I used to be stressed and worried about immigration. This year I gor a Canadian PR. But the job offers I get from Canada are not comparable good to what I have. But soon, I will move to Canada and work there to repay the Canadians who graciously shared their country with me. I dont want to give you the impression that I hate India. I love India, the traditions and some aspects of it and I love USA and Canada. If I lived in China I think I will be facinated by that country. (Funny some head hunter from monster.com wanted to see if I will work for IBM in Shangai).

My point is nobody is in USA doing USA a service. THey are here for their own good. If it is not good, they will leave. Good luck to all of you.
God bless Canada.
Your analysis is very realistic. Since you worked in different countries you know the realities on the ground.
 
My point is nobody is in USA doing USA a service. THey are here for their own good. If it is not good, they will leave. Good luck to all of you.
God bless Canada.[/QUOTE]

MetaMan, just a comment:
The vast majority of people who immigrates to Australia, Canada, Britan, etc are also there for their own good. If it is not good, people will leave. It is not only in the US. I read few weeks ago that in certain regions of Canada officially 40% of newcomers abandon Canada due to lack of opportunities. Educated immigrants are primarily looking for new opportunities. If it is not there, most people will leave. God bless us all.
 
On a side note, bit surprized to find "GOD bless this & God Bless that" in all the messages. Feel really scary when Intellectuals use GOD in discussions.. kinda like Bush Getting Re-elected.
 
marlon2006 said:
Hello Metaman,

I agree with your interdependency vision. I am a citizen of a South American country, a permanent resident of Canada and US greencard applicant as well. I think the world is moving torward cultural exchanges. Incredible how many Canadians and Americans recently have asked me how to immigrate and get IT jobs in Brazil... I am here and they want to go there. Isn't that interesting ?

I just hope that the awful terrorism just doesn't blow away this beautiful idea of country interdependency. It is something that it should not be overlooked. I hope the US administration will have the wisdom to watch and take proper actions. Paying attention to that Mexican-US border is very important to avoid 'illegal immigrants' that can walk by so easily and eventually decide to bring a "baggage" able to do real damage to the US... nobody seems to be acting on that you know.

Just a thinking:if Canada is your favorite country, I am wondering why you are not there then ? :-) My favorite country is the US, because this is the place where I got all opportunities and life style I was looking for. This is just a personal choice, and I do respect yours, obviously. Just a friendly comment.

The US economy took a hit after the IT bubble burst. We lost our lobbying power right there. Bill Gates, John Chambers and many other powerful US employers were the ones that really propelled and influenced the immigration laws. They no longer have motives to do that now. Now I will wait a little longer and see if these backlogs will really be fixed. The government shouldn't retort the greencard applicants like that way.

If that backlog doesn't get fixed next year, I may decide not to submit my family to this long awaiting greencard process anymore. I think others will eventually do the same, and the US will start losing talent to other countries then. Too bad.

I will make sure to keep writing to the US congress about it. I'd encourage you do the same. Write to the US congress and tell them that we are honest, hard working professionals that can bring values to this country. An effective, fast and fair immigration process would be a win-win situation to the US and greencard applicants alike. Please remember that the government has suggested backlog reduction goals since 1999. I will not hold my breath until I actually see it, therefore I will keep reminding the congress.

We'll see what happens.

Regards,

Marlon


I also would like to see "state-less" world forming. Sure, i hate USA sometimes but most of the time i like it. Even though it does not matter to americans whether some third world country citizen likes it or not.

If i dont have opportunity her i would happily go back to india and do my thing. The first message in this thread looks to me like written by some person who was really firstrated with the green card process.

One thing that we should concentrate is forming a political force. We tend to forget the hardship we went through once we become naturalized.
Specillay, south asians should be thinking about forming a political force by joining hands. Then only i think we immigrants can make our voice heard. We have so many cultural/community/language based groups, we sure need them at the same time we need some political force which would influence.
 
gp111 said:
On a side note, bit surprized to find "GOD bless this & God Bless that" in all the messages. Feel really scary when Intellectuals use GOD in discussions.. kinda like Bush Getting Re-elected.

In my view, when the 'God' word is mentioned with sincerity and respectfully, it looks to me more like a sample of one of those good values that some of us can bring to the US. :)
 
God Is Every Where!!

gp111 said:
On a side note, bit surprized to find "GOD bless this & God Bless that" in all the messages. Feel really scary when Intellectuals use GOD in discussions.. kinda like Bush Getting Re-elected.



ANY WAY WHO IS GOD?

GOD IS EVERY WHERE... IN YOU AND ME AND EVEN IN BUSH!!
 
GOD_BLESS_YOU said:
ANY WAY WHO IS GOD?

GOD IS EVERY WHERE... IN YOU AND ME AND EVEN IN BUSH!!
Great, now I have strong case that There is No God ..(if you say he is in BUSH !!)
 
Top