Why shouldn’t US immigration law be good for the US?

Are you looking to migrate to US by consulting an immigration law firm in London? If yes, it is very necessary for you to understand all the aspects of US immigration law that is bound to change at various intervals. Last year, bureaucrats send a reform bill to Trump for approval. Though it won’t be applicable anytime soon, it is meant to put a lot of effect on the immigration process.

There are two simple principles behind the bill. We’re going to admit people on the basis that they’ll make Americans better off. And amnesty is off the table.

The bill would bring down the number of family-preference immigrants, individuals who come here because they have an instant relative in the country. Right now two-thirds of our green cards each year go to family members. They’re a source of chain migration, people admitted because they have a relative here, and who once here bring their relatives in.

Under the RAISE Act, the number of family-preference immigrants would drop from 600,000 a year to less than 90,000. Along the way, the bill would eliminate the idiotic lottery system, which at present admits 50,000 people a year who hold a lucky ticket.

The case for family-reunification preferences is far weaker today than in the past. In the 19th century, the immigrants who arrived at Ellis Island didn’t expect they’d be seeing their relatives in the old country again. It was the long goodbye. But today it’s different. Compared to 1965, plane tickets and calling cards are cheap, and Skype is free.

It’s often considered that our existing immigration policies impoverish America, but when economists run the numbers it’s not clear that on net they’re costly. The most respected immigration scholar, George Borjas, concludes that one really can’t say. That’s not the end of it, however.

Even if immigration on net is an economic zero, it still creates winners and losers within the United States and amounts to a wealth transfer from poor to rich Americans. Borjas reports that increasing the immigrant flow by 10 percent depressed the earnings of native-born Americans by 4 percent between 1960 and 2010. And it is quite sure only an experienced immigration law firm in London would be able to guide you throughout this.

These costs are most largely dealt by African Americans, the most fragile group of citizens, whose unemployment rate is nearly double that of whites, and a 10 percent increase in immigration was associated with a 5.9 percent reduction in the black-employment rate.

In addition, a comparison between current immigrants and native-born Americans misses the opportunity costs of doing better still with higher-quality immigrants. Why not the best?

This is the reason why the RAISE Act proposes to copy the Canadian points system, which is generally considered the model for immigration reform. Under this system, immigrants can log on to a Web site and see if their work, education and language skills qualify them for admission to Canada.