10/19/2010
10/18/10 — A Minnesota Reader Knows More About Fjords Than We Do
From: Stephen Feldman
Re: Derek Turner’s David Cameron’s Con-Job On Immigration
I have often read reasonable critics of unlimited immigration saying that sovereignty means that a nation may accept some and not all immigrants.
A skills-based immigration policy is already in US and, I assume, British law, but other categories and blatant non-enforcement of any restrictions mean that the bulk of immigrants are unskilled.
Let’s assume there are 50,000 really talented scientists, doctors, engineers and businessmen who want to come to the US in 2011. Fine, with verification of credentials and capital reserves or cash bond, let them in.
Keep the rest out. Extricate the illegals by harsh penalties against not only employers but against the truly awful universities that never met a student whose tuition or mere enrollment didn’t trump patriotism or cultural integrity every time.
Make immigration, if needed in narrow categories, work for the US (or Britain, or the EU). That is how it used to be. We did need manufacturing workers before WWI. We don’t anymore with massive numbers of blue collar citizens out of work or underemployed.
Would China adopt our immigration policies? Of course not. I want a big façade on the Justice Dept or Homeland Security Building that says: WE ARE SELFISH AND WE LIKE IT!
This is a content archive of VDARE.com, which Letitia James forced off of the Internet using lawfare.