|
|
|
|
|
|
by listenallyall
688 days ago
|
|
|
I'm not here arguing for or against any proposal, or claiming any moral approval or disapproval. I'm just stating that they would face serious resistance and therefore would be extremely difficult to pass, directly contradicting the OP's implication that they are simple and easy. 1. and 2. are anti-business. Just like raising the minimum wage, passing anti-business legislation is very, very difficult. 3. well, if there aren't any negatives, why is there currently a limit on the number of visas? |
|
|
Sure, I'll agree to that.
>3. well, if there aren't any negatives, why is there currently a limit on the number of visas?
That's a good question, and I have no idea what the answer is. If anti-business legislation (like #1 and #2 here) is so hard to pass, then it seemingly shouldn't be that hard to pass pro-business legislation. Increasing the number of visas (or eliminating the limit) should, logically, be a pro-business position (lots more workers), while also being of interest to the left-leaning people who generally claim to be pro-immigration. So WTF is the problem? I don't know. The only people who should be opposed to such a move are 1) the outright anti-any-kind-of-immigration racists on the right (who aren't even a sizeable number, a large portion (most?) of the anti-immigration people are usually against illegal and/or low-skilled immigration), and 2) any firms that are profiting off the shortage of visas.
>directly contradicting the OP's implication that they are simple and easy.
I don't think the OP was under any illusion that passing such legislation would be simple and easy, due to the hyper-partisan nature of the current government. If the government weren't this way, passing reforms would be easy.