[tapiwa]

Can someone please remind me again why USians should have a god given right to jobs in the US? Or put another way ... should an accident of birth(place) be the most import decider on whether someone should get a job or not?

I realise that this is probably going to get stupidly downvoted, but I am a die hard libertarian.

Why is it, in 2016, still OK to pick on the foreigners? Replace the word "foreigner" with Black/Woman/Jew/Gay/White/Whatever, and it would be totally unacceptable.

Way I see things, in a hundred years or so, picking on foreigners will be seen in the same light as picking on some minority group today.

I just worry that I won't get to live to see that day.

[diogenescynic]

>pick on the foreigners?

You're being ridiculous. It's not picking on them at all. They are trying to protect US citizens from losing their jobs (or getting wages cut) due to a sudden availability of cheap labor. A government is rightfully concerned with making sure its own citizens are gainfully employed. Citizens vote, foreigners don't. Every person within those borders who does not have a job puts a drain on the rest of the country. Someone without a job outside of those borders does not. So bringing someone across those borders while an unemployed person is within them is a net economic negative. Look at the biggest H-1B recipients: http://www.myvisajobs.com/Reports/2015-H1B-Visa-Sponsor.aspx It's all low quality outsourcing shops like Infosys and Cognizant.

>why USians should have a god given right to jobs in the US?

These laws/protections are intended to prevent a race to the bottom. If the public subsidizes the operation of a company through security, education, and infrastructure, the community that makes that investment is entitled to ensure that the fruits of that investment go to other members of the community.

[tapiwa]

>>They are trying to protect US citizens from losing their jobs (or getting wages cut) due to a sudden availability of cheap labor.

Mmmm. I hear you. Sort of. Your argument though, is not very different from the "women are taking jobs that rightfully belong to men" spiel that was all the rage after WWII.

I suspect that my argument is fundamentally based on wishful thinking. That said, you can't have your cake and eat it. The 'race to the bottom' you alude to is already happening with offshoring though.

But my central argument remains ... foreigners (based on borders determined by middle aged white men a couple of centuries ago), remain the last 'minority' group that you can still discriminate against, vocally, in polite society.

[diogenescynic]

>discriminate against

The fact that you think it's discrimination shows you completely misunderstand the issue and are coming at it from an emotionally biased perspective. You aren't entitled to anything. The government is rightfully concerned with protecting its own citizens and making sure they are gainfully employed. Citizens vote, foreigners don't. Every person within those borders who does not have a job puts a drain on the rest of the country. Someone without a job outside of those borders does not.

Also, the last I checked Americans aren't allowed to work nearly as freely in most of the countries where we accept immigrants from. We are already an exceptionally generous country and our visa program is already abused and rife with fraud. To expect even more from the US is just hypocritical and self-entitled thinking.

[A_COMPUTER]

Why do you discriminate against other kids by only feeding your kids

[Can_Not]

That's like saying "Why is OK to not let random homeless people in your house to live and raid your fridge?"

If you have the capacity to house them, feed them, train them, then that's great. Do that. But me? I need my children to be able to sleep at night. I need to feed my children. I need my children not raped. I need my children to have room and freedom to study. Will I be looked down upon as a lesser person for this through tumblr-tinted glasses in 50 years? I doubt it.

Why do I think my children have a god(s) given right to my house? I don't. Instead, I am merely thankful.

I have a much better idea. Instead of bringing the homeless world into my house, let's make a better world for the homeless?

[falsestprophet]

"Should an accident of birth(place) be the most import decider?"

There is a school of though that it shouldn't. Many countries confer citizenship jus sanguinis (by descent). Is that system easier for you to understand?

Citizenship conferred jus soli (by place of birth) arose at a time when people were less mobile and less likely to acquire citizenship by "accident of birthplace" and when there were few practical benefits to citizenship in any case. It seems entirely outdated.

Modern nations belong to their citizens who are free to vote for representatives that write laws to benefit citizens and their children.

I doubt you'll have any luck convincing the people of the United States to give away their kingdom or taking it by force.