[joefranklinsr]

If this was true, then US being the biggest immigrant-friendly country in the world, would do so in a heartbeat. But neither the government nor corporations are advocating this. America currently has the biggest economy in the world, an average of $58,000 income, a low 3.9% unemployment rate while enjoying GDP growth rate of close to 5% in Q2, as well as close to 220,000 new jobs every month, and growth in wage increases. In some areas (like silicon valley), employees are offered 200k-300k salaries. It got to here by having a strong republic/democracy and rules and laws, support technologies in public and private sectors, limit immigration to skill-based, and recently choosing to lower corporate tax rate and reduce corporation regulations.

[themagician]

A lot of how we “got to here” has to do with being all the was left after WWII. Trying to pretend like all the things you advocate for are the reasons for prosperity is silly. Your statement is basically, “things are good now and they are good because <insert political platform>”

There are other periods of time that have been as good or better with a different political platform. In the 1950s (when America was “great”) the top tax rate was 90%.

Federal politics and the economy are linked, but not 1:1 and the net impact of changes to federal law often isn’t felt for years or decades (if at all).

[joefranklinsr]

Sure, and we could have blown the lead in the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, the 00s, the 10s, etc. But we didn't. We valued entrepreneurship, hard work, and being the best.

50s was an anomaly with a 36% growth rate, like you said, because we were all that were left. The economy currently is very stable, diversified, and fast growing still for its size, some 70 years later.

[18pfsmt]

Where on the US Bureau of Economic Analysis' site do you find 5% GDP growth?

https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease...

I keep seeing these overly optimistic GDP growth numbers, but I can't find them.

[joefranklinsr]

4.8% https://www.fxstreet.com/news/atlanta-fed-q2-gdp-estimate-ri...

4% https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/15/goldman-sachs-model-now-poin...

[themagician]

My point is that most of where we are today can be attributed to the post war advantage and not any specific policy decision. We are increasingly losing ground to China in terms of output and GDP growth and losing out massively to Europe in terms of quality of life.

[temp-dude-87844]

Increased immigration of low-class workers is politically unpopular in the heartland. In fact, even importing certain skilled workers is unpopular among the rank-and-file, as casual criticism of H1-Bs shows.

Instead, since the 1970s, US thought leaders and business leaders of both parties long pursued similar trade policies that embraced deregulation and open markets, which allowed similar gains to be realized by US businesses operating in a globalized world (e.g. outsourcing, offshoring, integrated supply chains).

SV companies pay generously because dozens of companies flush with cash are all competing for the same pool of veterans of other companies. Any company that has less profit per employee (most small businesses) can scarcely afford to pay a premium for rank-and-file employees with domain experience; nor is there enough effortless mobility in specialty skilled manufacturing roles to make such escalating wages necessary.

[gloriousduke]

How does the rosiness of this assessment jive with the UN’s report that 40 million Americans live in poverty? Perhaps they are an ancillary component of such a Republic?

[joefranklinsr]

if we look at this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_percentag...

it would appear US is in similar leagues with Canada, Norway, Sweden, New Zealand, etc, of having close to 0-1% in poverty. Check out the other countries in Asia or Africa if you really think America has it bad.

[setr]

Theres only ~300 million people in the us, so the gp's source is claiming something like 10% poverty

Something's clearly misaligned with the definition of poverty between your sources; you're differing by an order of magnitude

[schoen]

That's a huge difference. I assume different sources did use quite different measures:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty#Measuring_poverty

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_threshold

[ThomPete]

Is that relative or absolute poverty you are talking about?

[Latteland]

The higher growth in q2 is temporary, because we juiced our economy with the tax cut for rich people and tax change to allow companies to bring money from overseas and pay it out to shareholders. In the 5-10 year period, we'll have significantly increased our national debt for this temporary cut.

[qaq]

"immigrant-friendly" thats very far from being accurate.

edit: strong lang.

[joefranklinsr]

Well, I guess it depends on each person's experience. but according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_d..., US has the most immigrants at 46 million, next closest is Germany at 12 million and Russia at 11 million.

[eyko]

The USA is the size of a continent, so perhaps a fair(er) comparison would be to add all the immigrants in Europe. That's ignoring the fact that most people don't migrate to the USA because it's immigrant friendly but because of other factors such as proximity, language, and economy, and ease of access. Living in the USA as an undocumented immigrant is not that great. The balance is also tipping at the moment (e.g. more people are leaving the USA than entering the USA, currently).

If you look at the figures for net migration per 1000 inhabitants[1], the USA and Germany are pretty much the same for the period between 2007 and 2012: 15.94 per 1K and 15.54 per 1K respectively. For 2017, the USA sits at 3.9 (Canada 5.70).

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migra...

[qaq]

1) legal? 2) Historical laws vs current laws 3) Adjust for population size Even for say Software Eng. moving to US is a very f@#$up process, but pretty much any other country is trivial often with immediately being permanent resident or some visa that converts to PR in 1-2 years.

[dyarosla]

The link shows percentage numbers as well- relative to total world foreigner population as well as relative to each country’s population.

[qaq]

and point (1) ?

[ThomPete]

Its easier to get into the us than the eu so thats simply wrong. The us have way more ways too.

[verelo]

Have you tried to do either? I’d love to hear what you’re basing this claim on.

[ThomPete]

ive got into the us on an O1 and now have a EB1 green card. i also founded a fairly big agency in Denmark hiring people from around the world so yeah I would say i have experience :)

[qaq]

You've got be kidding the only realistic option for US is H1B majority of EU countries have simple visa's for Software Eng. with no quotas. My former employees from Ukraine are in Germany, Austria, Norway, Ireland, Estonia, Poland, Czech Republic (and outside of EU Australia, Canada) the process was 2-3 month on avg. for EU countries and they become residents pretty quickly with no quotas.

[ThomPete]

theres no quota on an O visa and you have L visas and a bunch of others on top of H1B plus the lottery plus 11 million illegal immigrants living and often working here even paying taxes. I can assure you IAm not kidding and that you should learn a little about just how open the US is compared to the EU.

[troubador55]

>"but pretty much any other country is trivial often with immediately being permanent resident or some visa that converts to PR in 1-2 years."

Not at all. I know a couple that tried to move to Canada after Trump got elected but were shocked to find out they'd have to deposit 250k USD with the Canadian government for 5 years in order to be considered for permanantly residency.

Not only that, the demand for people to move into the US is tremendous so the competition is obviously very steep compared to less desireable places.

[qaq]

If they are from US and for some very strange reason can not get enough points to pass the simplest route is 1 person from the couple goes to college in Canada (even the cheapest one) the second person can get work permit based on being spouse of a student (student can work half time too) With 1 year of work experience and a Canadian degree they will have enough points for PR.

[hueving]

Giving up years of your life for school isn't trivial by any means.

[qaq]

If they get enough points (which is trivial) you get PR even without job offer.

edited: strong lang.

[dang]

Would you please edit the uncivil snips like "BS" and "You've got to be kidding" out of your comments here? We're trying for a bit better than internet median, and taking little shots like that lowers the discussion quality and encourages worse.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[int_19h]

It's pretty accurate if you consider immigration overall, and for one simple reason: US has the most extensive family immigration eligibility, at least among developed countries. In Canada, for example, you can't sponsor your grandparents for permanent residence; but in US, you can. This is also why US is the only developed country dominated by family rather than skilled immigration, by the way.

[qaq]

Sure you can and if grandma is in good health she might survive 10-15 years wait time for this category. "In Canada, for example, you can't sponsor your grandparents" https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/se...

[int_19h]

I stand corrected wrt this particular category and Canada. It's not the case for most other countries, though. And it is still the case that more family members are eligible in US than most other places. That US has a lot more family immigration compared to others is also an objective fact.

[qaq]

In UK you can and also in most(all?) EU countries and without 10-15 years wait time.

[qaq]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_net_migra...

Sort by Net Migration Per 1,000 Inhabitants Australia 45.01 Canada 33.84 US 15.94