[godwinson__4-8]

Have you ever lived overseas? Honestly you sound delusional. Do you think the USA makes it easy to become a citizen? Short of that, there is a wide spectrum on how countries treats immigrants. This is the most important factor for people actually living in a place. Acting like the bar for living somewhere is citizenship is nuts.

> Are you seriously suggesting that people can literally just not engage at all with the society they live in?

This pretty much confirms you have never lived overseas lol. Anyone who has will have met many people that achieve this. Like living anywhere immersing yourself in your surroundings (w/e that means to you) takes extra effort. Most people go overseas to work. It's not playtime. With that comes a built in community.

> None of which is related to immigration

How is getting money and support to live in a place not related to immigration?

Why are you so reactive about something you clearly know nothing about? Because China bad?

[Levitz]

I have lived abroad, yes. Does the USA make it easy to become a citizen? If the comparison is China, yes, a thousand times yes. Does language and society matter a truckload? Absolutely.

>Short of that, there is a wide spectrum on how countries treats immigrants. This is the most important factor for people actually living in a place.

Yes. Does China treat immigrants better than the US? As I explained, no. There is no contest. The comparison borders on the absurd. The US is a remarkably flawed country in many aspects, but the vast majority of the stigma around its immigration comes from the fact that it's a matter that the US takes very, very seriously. The bar for living somewhere is not necessarily citizenship but it absolutely is a factor if someone is seriously planning to immigrate somewhere.

For an incredibly evident and very current example, the 14th amendment was very recently reaffirmed, with a whole lot of people being horrified it was even thrown into question at all.

>How is getting money and support to live in a place not related to immigration?

Because any quantity of money beyond a livable wage has barely any relation to integrating people into a culture. A model of immigration based on money is not immigration at all, that's just hiring foreign workers.

[fakedang]

> Does China treat immigrants better than the US?

Yes, if they're well educated enough. Which is the kind of immigration the article deals with in the first place. China doesn't want "doctors and engineers" from Africa and the Middle East. It wants engineering and scientific talent, and it brutally competes with the rest of the world with some of the highest pay packages. Pay for these folks is often higher than for even the best Chinese talent.

Compare that to the current US. ICE roaming the streets that my PhD and HSW MBA holding friends have to carry their passports even when going grocery shopping or out on dates. An administration that is hellbent on kicking them out and cutting their grant funding. One side of the house hellbent on discussing immigration and silly debates on Shariah law when it barely affects the country anyhow, while branding all foreign immigration as evil. You must be delusional if you think otherwise.

> . A model of immigration based on money is not immigration at all, that's just hiring foreign workers

That is precisely China's model. China wants technical mercenaries, not people who want to build roots. Work hard for a decade or two, then enjoy your newfound earnings.

[godwinson__4-8]

You clearly have a certain cultural fixation with immigration that frankly is pretty narrow and seems of a particular American variety.

How is the condition of foreign workers not a question of immigration? What distinction are you making? Is your logic the United States treats immigrants well because any foreign national treated under a subpar regime you get to reclassify as a "foreign worker"?

You know not all "foreign workers" are treated the same right? This applies to almost all countries. Plenty of people are happy to go to a place and work. Not everyone who goes to a place wants to or plans to become part of that culture. Or would expect to fully integrate. It is a balance. The reaffirmation of the 14th amendment is not exactly impressive. Quite a low bar you've reached for there.

Where did you live overseas? For how long? Did you consider it "immigration"? What were the terms of your status re work? Did you become a citizen?

I just don't really buy it. For someone who lived overseas the narrowness of your perspective is rather alarming.

[BeetleB]

Not the person you're responding to, but I've spent almost 2 decades outside the US.

Sorry, his perspective matches my experience much more than yours.

[godwinson__4-8]

Why would you apologize for that? Name one claim I've made that is impeached by your "experience"?

Doubtless many others have shared your experiences. Good for you. It's not really the point. My questions as to the OP I was responding to of a personal nature were quite obviously rhetorical. The point was to perhaps suggest some introspection. Not everyone's experiences are the same.

The more substantive questions have still not been answered. Oh well, I'm not owed anything.

But the fact you doubled down with a "me too" shows you also missed the point. I can supply you with people who have the opposite experience. Will you suddenly have a different view?

How have you spent two decades out of the US and found yourself so self assured? In your two decades did you not come across thousands with different experiences than you? Why would this give you such a high opinion of your own?

[BeetleB]

> Doubtless many others have shared your experiences. Good for you. It's not really the point.

You have made multiple statements questioning his reality:

> I just don't really buy it. For someone who lived overseas the narrowness of your perspective is rather alarming.

> Have you ever lived overseas? Honestly you sound delusional.

> This pretty much confirms you have never lived overseas lol.

I'm pointing out that his reality matches my reality living overseas.

[godwinson__4-8]

Fair enough. To be clear, these were made mostly in jest, in response to similarly assertive language made by the OP, which I guess you identified with. I certainly may be overly optimistic about Americans going overseas and learning some humility. But it's not like this is the first time I've been disappointed in this manner. Oh well.

I'm still curious if the OP acknowledges that some countries may make it easier to be a "foreign worker" vs a "citizen" and whether that has any value. I don't take these debates personally. I think the question of foreign worker vs immigrant could be an interesting one. Have a nice day!

[0xDEAFBEAD]

>The reaffirmation of the 14th amendment is not exactly impressive. Quite a low bar you've reached for there.

Can you name a single country in the EU which offers birthright citizenship? Any country in Asia?

[godwinson__4-8]

Sort of a silly question. Can you name a single country like the US? Have you read your own history?

I said the reaffirmation was not impressive, not the amendment or the nature of said citizenship itself. The fact it had to be reaffirmed is not impressive. The OP I replied to already acknowledged this. Please read more carefully next time. Or if you think the reaffirmation was itself impressive, please just say so.

[0xDEAFBEAD]

>Sort of a silly question. Can you name a single country like the US? Have you read your own history?

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here, exactly. The US is not the only country which offers birthright citizenship. But I don't believe there are any other countries like this in Europe or Asia.

>I said the reaffirmation was not impressive, not the amendment or the nature of said citizenship itself. The fact it had to be reaffirmed is not impressive. The OP I replied to already acknowledged this. Learn to read.

The OP brought up the 14th in the context of the country's stance towards immigrants. From this POV, I don't see why you would give undue weight to the reaffirmation compared with the "the amendment or the nature of said citizenship itself".

You can have the last word in this thread. Your incivility to clarity ratio is way too high for me to wish to continue further with you.

[godwinson__4-8]

It's not about the last word. Just make a decent argument. There's nothing personal here. I actually hope to be corrected. That would be interesting. I don't hold anything against you.

As to your actual question, the reason is because they brought up the reaffirmation. Those were their words. As such, I gave it weight because they did - that was the point I was responding to.

As to the first part of your reply, I think it's very interesting actually. Birthright citizenship may not be exclusive to the United States, but it is relatively uncommon. The unique history of the United States plays a big part in this. This also does not automatically mean that the United States is a better place for immigrants today. One counterpoint is how it makes many of the debates around American immigration have a distinctly racial or cultural nature as nativist elements of the population want to find ways to control who can be born here. Of course it's not like those debates don't also happen elsewhere. No place is perfect.

I'm just pushing back against the self satisfaction of the OP I was replying to. These things are nuanced. I apologize if in my zeal to pushback I made you upset. Have a good day.

[BeetleB]

> Do you think the USA makes it easy to become a citizen?

Just because there are plenty of countries that make it easier to become a citizen doesn't mean there aren't plenty of countries that make it worse.

People going the H-1/O-1 route in a STEM field with an MS degree don't have a hard time becoming a citizen, unless they're Indian (and a little bit if Chinese). Literally everyone I know from my university and work days who went that route got it. A few got audited along the way, which added 1-2 years to the process, but they all still got it.

Now compare that with many friends of mine who left the US for ideological reasons and moved to countries where ... they have no hope for permanent residency, let alone citizenship. I just recently visited one of them - he has been in that country for 18 years, and is about to be kicked out because the economy is poor and they likely won't renew his residency status. For all those years, he never had a path to permanent residency (without paying a huge amount of money).

Another is a faculty member at a good university in the country he's in. He's surrounded by people who've spent their whole careers at that university and are now wondering where they'll move to post-retirement.

Yet another has spent almost two decades in a third country. He likes it, but admits the pressure to never lose a job and always find a stable one so he doesn't get kicked out does get to him sometimes.