[cfadvan]

You can limit immigration fairly. But don't tell me I have a lesser chance of working in USA than a Kenyan and that's not discrimination.

You as one of over a billion people from the same country will understandably have more competition than a Kenyan who is competing with under 50 million countrymen. Overall more Indians have a chance of working in the US than Kenyans, but the pools drawn from are at least an order of magnitude apart.

[rohit2412]

And that's how you are discriminating on the basis of geographical area of birth.

Why isn't the system oblivious to one's country of origin?

[cfadvan]

The idea is to give people from all over the world an equal shot, not to just skew in favor of one or two high population demographics. You can call that discrimination if you like, but in the “discriminating tastes” sense not the KKK sense. The alternative is to discriminate (in the negative sense) against people who don’t come from a population in the billions.

[rohit2412]

You didn't give everyone an equal shot. For some reason, you think a billion Indians deserve the same opportunity as 10,000 Tuvalu residents.

[cfadvan]

I’m Irish and live in Dublin, so there is no “me” in this scenario. I’m just stating how the system works, which as far as I know would easily absorb everyone from Tuvalu, because yes, there aren’t many of them. It’s not Tuvalu’s fault that they can’t exceed the limit on their own, it’s just life.

In addition to the numerical limits placed upon the various immigration preferences, the INA also places a limit on how many immigrants can come to the United States from any one country. Currently, no group of permanent immigrants (family-based and employment-based) from a single country can exceed seven percent of the total amount of people immigrating to the United States in a single fiscal year. This is not a quota to ensure that certain nationalities make up seven percent of immigrants, but rather a limit that is set to prevent any immigrant group from dominating immigration patterns to the United States.

That seems reasonable. You’re not being targeted, Tuvalu isn’t being advantaged, it’s just that there are a lot of Indian people. What’s the alternative? No one gets a chance until every Indian who wants in gets in? Remove all limits? How would that be more fair? You’d just shift one country’s overpopulation to another. If a billion people from various parts of Africa and Asia suddenly were able (and did) immigrate to the US, what would be the result? My guess is economic collapse and social upheaval, followed by people immigrating to the next “best” country with the same results, and so on and so on.

It seems to me you think that the highest population should entitle people to more opportunities. That’s better for the individual, because they get more chances, but it’s at the direct expense of lower populations. That’s not about fairness or being against discrimination, it’s just wanting what you want and fuck anyone else.

[rohit2412]

India is as diverse as Africa and Europe. I find this classification of Indian people as the same as wrong. I demand there be a similar 7% cap for Africa and Europe too.

After all, EU is a combined political and economic entity, makign it a federation, just like India.

[cfadvan]

I demand there be a similar 7% cap for Africa and Europe too.

Africa is a continent, India is a country. The cap isn’t based on diversity, but a country. The reason being the same as several people including myself have stated, namely so that one country doesn’t dominate at the direct expense of all others. Your personal demands based on what you personally want because it would advantage you aren’t how policies anywhere are made.

Given that, and given that your argument is neither consistent nor in good faith, I’m out. It’s clear that you don’t care about diversity or discrimination or anything else, you’re just all about personal advantage. That’s not an argument, it’s a form of bigotry.