As per a leading immigration observer and critic of the current US immigration policy of the incumbent Donald Trump-led Government, shared goals are at the core of every well-intentioned deal. He adds that the American Congress and Trump are energetically negotiating a deal on the "Dreamers" and the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, called DACA, allegedly, to prevent the administration from closing on January 19. A bigger immigration package will arrive subsequently.
Allegedly, economic progress and development can, and ought to, be a key shared goal of the immigration reorganization. As luck would have it, a net positive for the national GDP--which is a requirement for the US Republican backing--can be obtained via the right boosts in the levels of immigration, which are required for Democrat backing. A well planned, economically driven strategy to augmented movement is a deal that Trump and Congress members will do well to fructify this year.
The observer further adds that that inactive manpower growth is, and will continue to be, a big drain on the national economy. The populace of the native-born 18-to-64-year-old employees in the US will swell by only 0.1% every year on average over the coming 10 years even as this flat line of human wealth denotes fewer yields and insistently inferior economic development and expansion. Even as the economic need to add manpower to the American population is indisputable, the two possible sources of manpower do allegedly carry different expenses & considerations.
Raising & imparting education to kids is costly. As per a concerned organization, the American families dole-out an average of close-to 260,000 US Dollars on raising a kid to the age of 17. And increase to that the public price of imparting education to a kid through the age 17, which the concerned organization prices at more than 11,000 Dollars, per pupil, every year. It allegedly denotes the joint public and private expenses to raise the average native-born kid through age 17 hits just more than 400,000 Dollar mark. Conversely, an educated, working-age outsider does not result in any such cost for the nation.
Buttressing his argument further the observers reportedly adds that the new study by a well-known body shows that adding just 100,000 working-age immigrants every year proffers a potion of precious human wealth that would cost a staggering 47 billion Dollars to obtain, via education & child rearing expenses on the native-born manpower.
Together with ready-to-work immigrants--who move to the nation with a Bachelor's Degree in pocket--the overseas-born labor force offer a value of human wealth to the American economy worth 314 billion Dollars every year, equal to 1.9% of the GDP.
The observer continues that the though the present law does inspire some overseas movement, on the basis of skills and employment, the considerations of these schemes are both archaic and inadequate to cater to the manpower requirements.
For instance, the H-1B admissions are controlled by the software developers, computer programmers, and others in computer-related professions—the domains where those in the know do not expect labor scarcities, thanks to the limited giving up of work, and large figures of new candidates in those jobs.
In the meantime, the present law makes it tough for the overseas-born nurses & home health assistants—the need of which is acute in the country--to move to the US.
Taking a Leaf out Of Canada’s Books in National Interests
The observer continues that Washington DC & Congress might look to US’ neighbors in Canada for the right concepts about developing the American manpower, via shrewd immigration swells. In the Maple Leaf Country, the native-born labor force is decreasing in volume.
Ottawa plans to admit nearly 1 million immigrants in just the coming three years--close-to 3% of their entire populace-- roughly 60% of whom will move, via the different employment-based platforms. Contrast it to just 14% of immigrants presently moving into the US via the different employment-based schemes.
Ottawa also features geography into their immigration strategy. Well aware of the fact that the different provinces have different labor shortage risks the lawmakers in Canada have permitted the individual provinces to choose immigration requirements to meet their particular requirements. The US states must enjoy similar flexibility.
Factoring in geography may also address the fears related to the potential for the downward pressure on salaries for the local manpower. In case employees move into the states, where their need is felt the most, the probability of negative effect on the local labor force gets cut down. When administered tactically, immigration generates extra consumer demand even as it is positive news for all the employees.
Considerably boosting the level of the employment-based visa limits, and permitting every US state to draft its intake, on the basis of their workforce needs, would enable the national economy of the US to powerfully capture the employment-ready, educated labor force it requires for more healthy economic progress and expansion.
Restructuring the country’s immigration system--via drawing educated, working-age individuals who will be pivotal for the American economy--is also one policy deal on which the Administration & Congress would do well to have concurrent views.
The same will boost economic development and expansion, via boosting both the quality and quantity of obtainable manpower, without cutting down the good breaks for the local-born employees, and this will be ‘an artful deal, based on shared goals’, the observer reportedly concludes.