When I lived there, I was amused how the Danish government was forced to provide free education and a $1,000 a month stipend to foreign EU university students, and then did such a bad job integrating them they all went home.
The name of the program for free university and stipend?
It's not a program, it's that under EU law citizens and EU nationals cannot be treated differently. In Denmark university is free, and everyone is entitled to a stipend while studying called SU (can't remember what it stands for).
kind of amusing to say that, given the reason this is occurring is because the US is an incredibly popular country for immigrants to flock to improve their QOL and give their kids the best opportunities even though they know they're entering on non-immigrant visas. Yeah USCIS is infamously glacial and the visa situation these people are in is extremely frustrating, yet they persevere to live in the US.
That's the crux though, no? The US could be a legitimately incredible place, and there are glimpses of that all the time. The fact that her parents were able to immigrate and raise their child there is a great success story. I won't hesitate to say they contributed to the US's economy and tax system as much as any native born citizen. But then the US turns around and does this to the children of immigrants who would continue to contribute meaningfully?
It's insanely wasteful, destructive, short-sighted and, most of all, cruel.
If I had to describe the US in one sentence, that would be it. If I had to present an example of how paradoxically destructive the system is in the US, I'd pick her story, because it's oddly reflective of probably most stories I hear out of the US. Great deeds marred by evil, intentional or not.
The US has by far the most foreign born residents of any country, and is always in the top 2 or 3 countries accepting immigrants every year! So, if you're going to measure the cruelness of a country by the immigrants they take in, the US would fair well on that scale.
I mean basically everyone I know is either a first, second, or third gen immigrant.
Tell that to the 19 year old girl who might get deported and who'll lose the only life she knows. I'm sure it'll comfort her to know how good other immigrants have had it. Cruelty can't be measured the way you're trying to.
I feel like this idea of no need for responsibility is a massive trend in the US here and imo it needs to stop. You are completely blaming the us here when in fact the responsibility of this is on the parents. If the law had changed then while the child was growing up, sure say this is cruelty on the part of the US but in this case if you are going to say its cruelty then that cruelty falls on their parents who knowingly put them in this position.
If I tell you not to go to the top of mount Everest as you will die and no one will come save you, then you choose to go to the top of Everest and freeze is who is at fault? The Nepal government or you? Imo that is 100% your fault.
I'm just not going to reply to the heartless comments from (clearly) Americans. I don't have an infinite amount of time nor the responsibility to teach any of you compassion or economic common sense.
It's a tragic story, but it is simply not the story of the US. There are lots of people looking out for Dreamers, too, I'd be surprised if she wasn't able to stay when it's all said and done.
I moved from the US to a northern European country. Taxes are high, but not as high as taxes + health insurance premiums + copay was in the US.
And I can tell you this: If I were to have children, they are going to have plenty more opportunity here than they would if I still lived in the US. Even if they are poor, they are likely to have food, housing, and medical care.
If you lack things like food, housing, and medical care, moving to the US might seem like a viable option, though.
I want to make one thing clear: the US is paradise for immigrants.
You would not believe the pure economic calculations and soullessness that my northern European country visits upon refugees and migrants.
The State is an all powerful and all encompassing entity that crushes anyone in its path.
US is way more welcoming to family based immigration. US is not welcoming to employment based immigration, and specifically is easier for lower skilled ones than higher skilled ones. To top it off, it prefers countries from smaller countries.
All combined USA isn't as welcoming for higher skilled individuals from India and China vs other developed countries.
Per country limits appear to be designed to stop 'invasion' by migration. If 200 million Indians or Chinese arrived in the US tomorrow it would radically change the culture of the US. India or China may remain largely unchanged, even by such a large outflow of people.
This fear isn't entirely misplaced, IMO, considering the US history with the natives who lived here thousands of years before European migrants arrived.
It's not so easy when people actually want to move to your country. I'm not from the US so I have no particular interest in defending it, but if Scandinavian countries were even a fraction as attractive to immigrants as the US, I'm sure their immigration systems would be a shitshow as well.
As someone living in a southern European welfare state, I'll just say that I'm jealous of the US immigration policies. The free-for-all policy that we have here depresses wages, raises crime rates, and dilutes our culture.
> Children are especially malleable to school indoctrination and easily give up their (not yet formed) ethnicity.
You're ignoring the fact that most foreigners from the same country of origin will chose to live with their own communities, creating ethnic ghettos, that the parents don't magically stop teaching their birth language, culture and customs to their kids when they move to a foreign country, that Europe isn't really far from Africa or Middle-East so that families will go back to country the parent's country of origin every summer.
So basically the American model of society in action in Europe.
Sadly I would have to agree about "most" - but not overwhelmingly so, don't forget that "failures" are much more visible than "successes" here !
Still, IMHO ghettos are (mostly) the result of lazy assimilation policies.
It's funny, just today, in between these comments I had a discussion with an Ukrainian mother that was concerned that her kid had too many Russian speakers in her school group, and so that would make it harder for her to learn the local language...
(Considering all these comments I perhaps should have been softer about "giving up [their] ethnicity", I didn't want to mean completely ! Retaining some of the old one is fine, even good, as long as the culture and the values are compatible - it's not like Nations are completely homogeneous anyway, and diversity is strength !)
> Citizenship should be automatic for those that have been around since (public) middle school (give or take).
The examples of educated and well integrated individuals are very sympathetic and most people would agree that US immigration policy is deeply flawed but any path the permanent residency will create powerful incentives. Are you saying any 12yo who comes and lives in the US for six years automatically gets citizenship?
Is that really what we want to incentivize? I'm concerned that trying to "patch" up immigration policy with one-off fixes will just created further problems in the future.
Maybe it would be better to create a true professional immigration process (like Canada?) that would accommodate these individuals and eliminate the mess that's H1B?
> Are you saying any 12yo who comes and lives in the US for six years automatically gets citizenship?
IMO, being able to vote in the country you live and pay taxes in is basically a fundamental human right.
The idea that you should deprive immigrants who are living somewhere permanently of the right of self determination based on some sort of nationalistic idea of how countries should function just seems extremely misguided to me.
If you don't want to let them in that's one thing but once they're living there and paying taxes beyond maybe a few years they're entitled to vote.
> Children are especially malleable to school indoctrination and easily give up their (not yet formed) ethnicity.
I'm not sure why you're saying that like it's a good thing. That sounds horrible.
But I do agree with you. If by "southern Europe", GP meant Italy, I can definitely confirm what you're saying. Like many Romanians, I have family members in Italy and the children either don't speak Romanian at all or speak it quite badly.
It's just what it is, the society that we live in shapes even the adult us - so you better be very careful where you raise your children. (As young adults they will be always able to find themselves and pick a different path, but it's better if they don't start with an handicap in that society.)
And yeah, it can be hard to strike the right balance - do these family members spend some effort to teach Romanian to their kids ?
> easily give up their (not yet formed) ethnicity.
Oh do they? Actually going on the field shows pretty clear signs that those don’t mix, even if the state forbids us from doing stats on how many ethnicities beat up our white kids.
What is your intent, really? What is your intent with our kids?
Scandinavian countries are very nice if you are from there, are Scandinavian looking and have a Scandinavian name. If life gives you only two of the three, it gets a little bit more complicated.
1. Bad weather / harsh climate for a solid 8 months, many places. I've lived in Norway for 80% of my life, and I'm still coping with the harsh winters here.
2. Outside the largest cities, there's not much diversity. And people are notorious for coming off as "cold" here in Scandinavia.
3. Difficult to qualify for immigration. You may need a job visa, higher education, and enough funds / income to live 1-2 years on your own. Depending on what country you want to enter. It can be difficult to come up with $20k-$40k in savings, if you're from a third world country.
60% of their GDP is from exporting petroleum. Their low population and geographically beneficial location for building out hydroelectric power means they can export nearly all their petroleum since they don't need it.
I agree that declaring 'this is fascism' doesn't persuade me to a viewpoint. I work in crisis handling, and it's never been a good idea to compare 'this is worse than that'. You could likely take any country and say 'this is a happy place' and you'd have someone else saying 'this other place is happier'. You can have 50 shades of gray and they're all -> gray. I'd rather not dismiss this claim because we can think of better examples.
I'd be open to hearing in what ways the US demonstrates fascism. Under the old [Presidential] administration I do remember the blind nationalism and racist overtones.
