Derbyshire On Immigration Debate: "A Sensible Immigration Policy Would Favor High-Human-Capital Populations As Being More Likely To Enrich The USA."
Print Friendly and PDF

John Derbyshire reports on the Intelligence Squared immigration debate that happened in New York recently

"The audience's temper made itself known right away as the moderator was introducing Kris[Kobach]. When he mentioned SB 1070, several people hissed. That's New York for you: Liberalism Central. Kris took it in good humor; he's fielded much worse.

Once underway, the debate worked over some well-trodden ground. None of us who are engaged with the issue heard anything new. Studies were quoted, numbers tossed back and forth: 25 percent of patent applications come from foreign-born persons (Jacoby); immigrant welfare usage is $140 billion net of taxes paid (Kobach).

If you know the territory it's easy to spot the fudges and evasions employed by the immigration enthusiasts. Take that "25 percent," for example. Duke University counted up the patent applications filed by immigrant non-citizens in the years 1998-2006, breaking them out by the applicant's country of citizenship. The top twenty contributing countries were, in order: China (including Taiwan), India, Canada, UK, Germany, France, Russia, Korea, Japan, Australia, Italy, Israel, Netherlands, Switzerland, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Ireland, Greece, and Iran. Not much of an argument there for mass immigration from Mexico and Central America, which is the mass immigration we've actually been getting."[Debating Immigration,]

The pull quote that accompanies these paragraphs is ”A sensible immigration policy would favor high-human-capital populations as being more likely to enrich the USA.” This one of those things you aren't allowed to say. In fact, it's the political impossibility of any such program that has led us to suggest a moratorium instead.

Print Friendly and PDF