digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.

Did You Know? 50 Million American Citizens Do Not Qualify for Green Cards

navtejkohli.com — The process of obtaining a Green Card is very complicated. So complicated, in fact, that almost 17% of the United States ’ population would either not qualify to be permanent residents of their own country, or would find significant road-blocks on their way to residency.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • janemcopland, on 10/10/2007, -9/+47I understand why the US have a lot of their rules, but I'd never stopped to consider how many of their own citizens would be hypothetically excluded by them. When I got married to an American, a lot of my friends were like, "oh, so you are a citizen now, right?"

    Not even close, people. Not even close.
    • insomniac8400, on 10/10/2007, -40/+1*****, marrying a citizen makes you one.
    • djphatjive, on 10/10/2007, -4/+11Still need to get papers after you marry. There is a waiting period because of these people thinking they can just go marry and be a citizen.
      • janemcopland, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Ah, you think I don't know that? And the waiting period is not because "these people" think they can get married and become a citizen. There's a waiting period while the government process the thousands of I-485, I-765, I-130 and I-131 applications that they receive. Daily. Don't make comments when you have no idea how the process works.
    • JC4P, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5so you are a citizen now, right?
    • 6ixStringJack, on 10/10/2007, -20/+2Don't worry. When all of your kids grow up to be ***** raised by a school system that doesn't teach its kids anything, none of your kids will know how you got that citizenship either. Hey... don't blame me. You actually hopped a fence to come over here and put your kids in our schools.
    • 6ixStringJack, on 10/10/2007, -13/+4Oh... and if you're wondering where most stupid Americans got that idea from, janemcopland, watch "Green Card" with Andie MacDowell and Jerared-french-guy-with-a-huge-nose-my-father-the-hero.

      The problem is that most Americans learn ***** they "think" they know because they saw it from Hollywood. That ain't never going to change. I wonder if your kids will be able to pass that test when they turn 18. I highly doubt it. Taking your daughters to see Bratz this weekend?
      • happytron, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Buried for gratuitous use of bad grammar.
      • JimmyTheClam, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Did you learn grammar and English from Hollywood too, 6ixStringJack?
    • 6ixStringJack, on 10/10/2007, -9/+3Digg down people. I know the truth hurts.
    • felman87, on 10/10/2007, -0/+17Though I am an immigrant, I've only spent the first 2 years of my life outside the states. All the education I received came from the US public schools. I've taken the immigration test and passed with 100%. Now, granted, I'm not ***** retarded and actually cared about education and stayed away from ***** like eating paste and paintchips.

      The biggest problem with stupidety in america is that people just don't give a ***** about the truth. Digg is a fine example of that. how many times have we read something, took it as gospel and it was proven false a week later? It happens almost every week.
      • sakuraz, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I guess the difference is, we'll know it's fake, even if it takes time.

        In that sense, Digg is way more superior than TV.
      • tdogg241, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I'm digging your post for the simple irony of misspelling stupidity.
    • abdrahman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Are there ANY countries that give you citizenship automatically for marrying an citizen of said country? In most that I have read the rules for, you are lucky if they allow you to APPLY for permanent residency, much less citizenship
      • tokyoturnip, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Digg up. This is true for Japan. Married to a Japanese in Japan? So what? Get in line with the rest of the barbarians to get a visa. Have a child from that Japanese spose? So what? Get in line, your kid is a citizen and you still need to apply for a visa.
      • cbuddha42, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Double post. Digg Down.
      • cbuddha42, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1*****, I tried to digg both of these up, but they are showing as burried instead. Wish there was a way to fix that.
    • mahdaeng, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It's none of their business anyway.
  • elizabethmuelle, on 10/10/2007, -28/+10Why is this news? 100 Million probably dont qualify for welfare either? If u dont NEED it of course u wont QUALIFY for it.
    • janemcopland, on 10/10/2007, -6/+16Qualifying for immigration and qualifying for welfare are very different. Apples and oranges.

      I think the point is twofold: there are a lot of Americans living in sub-standard conditions, and there is significant unfairness in the immigration system when you disallow gays from bringing their partners in. Other than that, the statistic alone is just interesting. 50 million people is more than the entire population of many countries.
    • pikpikcarrotmon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4This article bugs me because it's misleading in a way. I mean, C average students at Stanford couldn't get accepted to Stanford, yet they're at Stanford. Likewise, the immigration laws are there for many reasons, one of which being that the government doesn't want the unemployment and poverty rates to skyrocket as millions of poor immigrants flood into the country.
  • ilkeryoldas, on 10/10/2007, -25/+18YEAH! Bush being one of them
    • Dreww40, on 10/10/2007, -3/+11wow... must you take every single article and somehow find a way to say bush sucks. its getting really old. save those comments for articles about bush
    • pikpikcarrotmon, on 10/10/2007, -6/+3Yeah, because Bush is gay, lives in poverty, is dependent on alcohol, has a drug problem, has HIV, has gonorrhea, is a sex offender, and has other unacceptable illnesses. The definition of someone who couldn't be given a green card, right?
      • Dumbledorito, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2He was dependant on alcohol and had a drug problem at one time (and hopefully, he's over them, but...).
  • blacklist, on 10/10/2007, -24/+14I don't think any American citizen qualifies for a Green Card....thought that was for non citizens.
    • janemcopland, on 10/10/2007, -10/+14Hear that "whooosh" noise? It's the sound of the point flying right over your head.
    • felman87, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0swing and a miss.
  • Nighttime, on 10/10/2007, -5/+58I thought this was interesting, and very relevant:
    As of 2006, the United States accepts more legal immigrants as permanent residents than the rest of the world combined.[2]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States
    • NgrHader, on 10/10/2007, -4/+8Is that something that is 'wrong' I came to this country to live a better life why can't they?
      • abdrahman, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9No, it is a kind way of saying,"STFU about the US being 'dicks' about immigration". People complain about the US-Mexico immigration situation, claiming we aren't allowing enough people in; however, they fail to recognize that we get millions of applications each year from countries other than Mexico.
    • felman87, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5legal immigrants tend to be either smart or married to an American. America needs all the smart people she can find.
      • tokyoturnip, on 10/10/2007, -5/+1Although an American myself. I am glad you wrote "OR", because if they decided to marry an American they could not have been that smart.
  • Nighttime, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7From the same article:
    Bureau figures show the U.S. population grew by 2.8 million between July 1, 2004, and July 1, 2005. Hispanics accounted for 1.3 million of that increase. If current birth rate and immigration rates were to remain unchanged for another 60 to 70 years, US population would double to some 600 millions. The Census Bureau's estimates actually go as high as predicting that there will be one billion Americans in 2100.[4]

    One billion Americans by 2100?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States
    • navtejkohli, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6The point of the original post isn't to say that the US should accept more immigrants, if that's what your two comments are implying. I wrote the post to highlight a) the sad state that many Americans live in, and b) the fact that 20 million gay people would have a tough time acquiring a Green Card since marriage is the easiest way to gain residency. which is descriminatory. All other methods are tough, to say the least.
      • Nighttime, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2I agree that gays should be allowed to bring partners/spouses to the US. If the article is correct, and we allow more than all the other countries combined, I don't see how the other methods can be too tough. Personally the thought of the US with a population of 600 million to 1 billion people is very depressing.
        • navtejkohli, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1I seriously doubt that that will happen. Numbers can be made to say a lot of things that will never happen... my graph isn't meant to predict or dictate, just to show something that, by my best estimates and research, appears to be happening right now.
          • Nighttime, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5The population of the US has tripled in the last 100 years. Why would you doubt that it could double in the next 100?
          • navtejkohli, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13Because then people would actually have to start living in Wyoming :)
        • mahdaeng, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"I agree that gays should be allowed to bring partners/spouses to the US"

          Sure, but they'll have to stand in line like everyone else.
    • Xunnamius, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1And then by 2500: America should catch up with China. Now can you say..... Owned?
    • felman87, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0just thought it should be said that population increases are never constant. How can you predict how many people will have sex? plus add in contraceptives and abortion and you're in estimation hell.
  • Andronicus1717, on 10/10/2007, -19/+29Inaccurate, being gay does not exclude you from being able to get a green card. It is a fallacy is that you must marry a citizen to get permanent residence. Being gay does not preclude you from marrying a citizen of the opposite sex to get into this country. That just dropped his total down to 30 million.

    Drugs and alcohol? If you were stranded on a desert island and had neither of those you could still survive. The total of people who would die from withdraw of either is substantially lower that those numbers so there goes another 15 million.

    Total B.S.
    • janemcopland, on 10/10/2007, -5/+16If you're gay and you marry a person of the opposite sex to get into the country, that is marriage fraud and contrary to popular belief, the US Citizenship and Immigration Service is very good at detecting it.
      • Rodman930, on 10/10/2007, -7/+5So that excludes everyone who is not currently engaged to the person they love.
        The story is total B.S.
      • mitrovarr, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1If you marry anyone just to get into the country, it's still marriage fraud and they'll still toss you out if they detect it. It might be harder to detect with heterosexuals, but it still could bite you in the ass if you divorce them soon enough, or immigration finds out that you are both living in totally different areas of the country and conducting outside relationships.

        Of course, you could always fake it to your spouse, but good luck getting away with it indefinitely - and the situation you are leaving had better be dire, because you're probably going to be miserable for a very long time.

        It's just ridiculous that this article says that homosexuals are excluded because they cannot marry their way in. Marrying your way into the country is not an option for people legitimately trying to enter the country, only an option for entering the country for people legitimately considering marrying Americans. It might as well complain that disabled people can't jump the border or illiterate people can't forge their paperwork.

        Of course, it sucks that homosexuals can't get married and bring in their partners, but not because homosexuals can't try to marriage-fraud their way into the country. It is because it could be a real problem for legitimate couples.
      • tomgibbons, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Correct, being gay wouldn't exclude you, but then the article didn't necessarily suggest that it would. From the description at the top of this page: "or would find significant road-blocks on their way to residency". A homosexual would find significant roadblocks, but not necessarily be excluded.
    • happytron, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Agreed, by the same reasoning they should have thrown in the 50M or so Americans that are too unattractive to be marriageable.
    • cbuddha42, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Agreed. Throwing in all the gay people was just a numbers booster. Even if you reckon that gay people can't apply for a green card on the basis of their marriage, they may still do so on other grounds. In effect it only removes the freeloader "someone in america wants you to live with them" method of entry, not the "america wants you because you can contribute" method.
  • lukas88, on 10/10/2007, -13/+13Count me as another person who buried it as inaccurate on account of the gay category. It has nothing to do with "qualifying."
    • navtejkohli, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5It does if you want to immigrate based upon marriage, and these are the criteria for marriage-based applications. Try sponsoring your gay partner for residency in the States. You'll be denied.
      • abdrahman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2maybe because gays cannot legally marry in the US?
        • cfulp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Vermont.
        • Acolyte357, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2not federally recognized, and you would be filing federal papers
  • Shredgnar, on 10/10/2007, -7/+0"I even made up a song to remember where i put it: Green card in my right shoe, something something right shoe."
  • MasterThief117, on 10/10/2007, -8/+15"a gay U.S. Citizen cannot act as the sponsor of his or her foreign partner."
    That's gay.
    • sonaboy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2That's also inaccurate. One of our art directors at work sponsored his partner he met in Venezuela, and the person has been here for 5 years now. The person has no special priveleges or conditions to be here.
      buried as inaccurate for this reason alone.
    • musashihazmat84, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0They cannot sponsor as a fiance or a spouse.
  • janemcopland, on 10/10/2007, -11/+6Legalize gay marriage and this number drops by almost half.
  • redlantern64, on 10/10/2007, -25/+40Did you know that 50 million American citizens are actually CITIZENS, and thus don't need to qualify for a green card?
    • janemcopland, on 10/10/2007, -10/+22Did you know that it's a hypothetical example of what would happen if said Americans were not Americans and were attempting to gain residency in the country? Retard.
    • WoollyMittens, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Captain Obvious, is that you?
    • ktonini, on 10/10/2007, -9/+4Did you know that it's a valid argument pointing out the stupidity of the article? *****.
  • bharbhar, on 10/10/2007, -19/+5are u serious? why would citizens need a greencard? they are already citizens.
    • janemcopland, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Ah, it's hypothetical. Look that up if you don't know what it means.
      • inspecality, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3what is that like your 15th comment on this story? god damn
  • Ramenhood, on 10/10/2007, -7/+6Doesn't seem that hard to be an American citizen. Don't do drugs or have promiscuos sex. HEY I MADE IT LOL.
    • musashihazmat84, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Being a slut doesn't disqualify you from becoming a citizen, lol
  • whoaohh, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3It's interesting to put this next to the 43 million without health care figure. It's unfortunate the gay marriage law's in place and it should be abolished, however it still exists. If you can't even qualify for a green card, why should the rest of us pay for your health care?
  • ntotten, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3I don’t think this article is accurate. The medical examination doesn't appear to say that if you have any of those diseases you cannot enter. For example, "HIV Infected: Post-test counseling is not required, but the applicant should be encouraged to seek appropriate post-test counseling.". So unless you have other sources I missed I think this is just based largely on assumption.
    • jkays, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2The Immigration & Nationality Act in Section 212(a)(1)(A)(i)- makes applicants for a visa or for admission to the United States inadmissible, if they have “a communicable disease of public health significance.”
  • mal1964, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3"significant road-blocks on their way to residency"
    We don't need to take the test.

    • navtejkohli, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2The point is not whether you need to take it or not. The point is what would happen IF you did.
      • mal1964, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1"The point is what would happen IF you did"
        I would study and try my best to pass.
  • mitrovarr, on 10/10/2007, -4/+9Why is this surprising? There are tons of worthy people all over the world, and lots of people that aren't exactly a net positive to the country within its borders, but that doesn't mean we should just throw open the gates. Our population would balloon uncontrollably, probably not stopping until it was over a billion. The country would be just one giant slum.
    • navtejkohli, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4The author never advocates "throwing open the doors." He doesn't appear to advocate any action whatsoever; he just states the numbers.
      • mitrovarr, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Well, what's the point then? Every country has a lot of people inside it whom it would never have voluntarily allowed in, had they not been born there. It basically goes without saying.
      • FastZ, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Um, if I'm not mistaken, you ARE the author. Stop talking about yourself in the third-person. Unless of course you stole that ***** and put it on your site.
    • chrisut, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Well its one way to get the housing market moving again
  • EPhibian, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6I don't think it is due to not being able to pass, more the burocracy behind obtaining one. My greencard was delayed two years by the FBI because one of my forms said I was born in the Netherlands, while the other said I was born in Holland. It really feels like a crap shoot, but in the end, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about, you will get your greencard.

    As an aside, I don't remember being tested for mental illness during the slew of medical exams. Then again, I can act pretty normal when the situation calls for it, haha.
    • kuzotz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Holland is the Netherlands.... Not surprised seeing that its the FBI. They're dip ***** that get paid less than city police.
  • daeggman, on 10/10/2007, -4/+13This is totally lame. Aside from the fact that actual citizens don't even NEED green cards (I *know* it's a hypothetical situation, but it's a STUPID hypothetical situation), those numbers are just misleading. It's just like that old riddle - if everyone sleeps 8 hours a day, spends 8 hours a day away from work, has 2 weeks vacation, has weekends off, has major holidays off, etc., then each person only works one day a year - that doesn't take into account that many of the categories overlap.

    On that oh-so-official-looking chart they made, how many gay people are also alcoholics? How many living in poverty also have a drug problem? How many gay people live in poverty and have drug and alcohol addictions? A little thing called a Venn diagram would be much more believable in this kind of "study." The article mentions the overlap factor, but it doesn't affect the numbers. Buried as lame.
    • navtejkohli, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3I ACCOUNTED FOR OVERLAP! How many times do I have to ask you people to actually read the text before you make stupid comments? I excluded millions of people who make between 100 and 125 percent of the poverty line, as well as all those who exhibit disabilities that are unaccounted for by statistics but will still limit people's ability to qualify.
      • daeggman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4If you had read my comment, you would see that I acknowledged that you SAID you accounted for overlap, but your "official" numbers don't state that - and a black bar with a question mark doesn't count.
      • alliekins619, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4You do realize the "accounting for overlap" doesn't mean excluding some data that actually has nothing to do with the overlap, right? If somebody's a gay alcoholic with AIDS, they're counted three times. You may have excluded people between 100%-125% of the poverty line, but the point is, the gay alcoholic with AIDS still got counted thrice, despite the fact that the almost-poor didn't get counted at all. For the record, yes, I did read the article. And I also took statistics, something you seem to have missed out on. I'm not even going to get into the fact that being gay only blocks the marriage route to residency, it doesn't completely render you un-green-card-able as your chart implies. All I can say is, man, you gotta read some books or something.
      • FastZ, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1In other words, nav, you suck.
  • biggslikk317, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9This is nonsense. The categories are not independent of each other, therefore you cannot simply add them. Anyone who has taken the most elementary statistics class can tell you that. I'm certain there is at least 1 gay, drunk, poor, drug-abusing sex-offender who has HIV and Gonorrhea. He may be one person, but according to the chart he is seven people.
    • navtejkohli, on 10/10/2007, -5/+2I counted for overlap by include the last bar, the "unknown limitations" bar, as well as excluding people who make between 100 and 125 percent of that which indicates poverty. That includes millions of people. READ THE ARTICLE BEFORE YOU MAKE STUPID COMMENTS.
      • abdrahman, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3learn ***** statistics before you post stupid "facts".
  • warlax27, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Did You Know I DON'T CARE?
  • Matster, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Am i the only one who thinks this is a good thing. I don't mind immigration, but this is helping our nation by letting more people in to help our nation in a good way as oppose to letting any felon or diseased person in.
    • WoollyMittens, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3The problem is that The US system doesn't care if you are highly educated, since the H1B's were cut off. You're not getting in unless you bring 300.000. Even marrying a US citizen required an affidavit of support and that's only good for a temporary visa.
  • Noctem, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Wow, talk about an exercise in futility.
  • 6ixStringJack, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0Don't worry. When all of your kids grow up to be ***** raised by a school system that doesn't teach its kids anything, none of your kids will know how you got that greencard either.

    Hey... don't blame me. You actually hopped a fence to come over here and put your kids in our schools.
    • navtejkohli, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I did?
      • 6ixStringJack, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0If you didn't hop a fence or float over here on a rice patty or fly over here on a magic carpet, then no.... I wasn't talking to you.
    • MentalV, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Of course you did, that is why there are only Mexican immigrants here... every immigrant jumps the fence and has kids to put into the schools, even the gay ones that can't get married and don't have kids... don't you know? even Chinese people do it, they go to Mexico and then jump the fence in order to get to the US... that is why every immigrant is believed to be a Mexican, first, even if they come from another country.... every. single. one.

      It just makes it easier for "the quiet racists" to see an immigrant, seeing them all as Mexicans makes it easier for them... after all, our glorious school system here teaches so little about the external world... people like 6ixStringJack couldn't tell where the immigrant is from anyway even if he had finished high school... and yes, I am a natural citizen...
      • FastZ, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I think what the problem with that is, is that it's the Mexicans who give us the most problems out of all the races that immigrate to the U.S.
  • anuttam, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0Here's one rule that excludes all immigrants from getting citizenship that he forgot:

    They aren't born in the USA.

    or their parents aren't US citizens.
    • janemcopland, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Do you have any idea how many US Citizens were naturalized to be such, i.e. they were born elsewhere?
  • adam84a, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Well, we could just deport the 600,000 sex offenders. But what country would want to be the dumping grounds for other nations? Oh wait, that's right no country would probably want that, hence why there are restrictions in place to prevent America from having to deal with the rest of the worlds problems.

    It's kind of like this, if you have a bad rash, you will try to do what you need to do to take care of it, but you don't want strangers rubbing their rash on you. I swear that made sense a second ago . . .

    But with that said I have several friends that are from Africa that have married American spouses but still have a very hard time becoming citizens. Of course I've never heard any of them complain about it, they think it's worth it to become a citizen of America.
  • giraldus, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8The article is indeed inaccurate; I came in with a visible physical disability and was not turned away; I was indeed worried a bit when I saw the medical stuff during the application process, but it turned out not to be an issue, the physician wrote it down, they got a chest X-ray, tested for TB, got me shots for a whole cocktail of vaccinations, and I was good to go. Another thing that had me worried but turned out to be a non issue too was the TB test: coming from a country with mandatory TB vaccinations there is a chance of showing up positive during the test. Guess what, they know about it too.
  • beetleb, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3This article is incredibly full of holes.

    Yes, one can get a green card if they have exceptional ability. But that and marriage are not the only way. I've known many foreigners who came here to study, got engineering or science degrees (even just an undergrad degree). Most can find a job in the US, and almost all of them ultimately get a green card based on their abilities. Hardly "exceptional". And this really isn't limited to tech degrees. Pretty much works for any field as long as the person can remain employed.

    And the article is dead wrong about student visas. If a student visa expires, he does NOT have to leave the country. As long as his I-20 is not expired (a document given to him by the university he's studying in), and he remains a full time student, he's at liberty to stay in the US for as long as he wants. The only catch is if he goes home for vacation after his visa expires, he can't return unless he gets a new visa. But as long as he's in the country, his stay in the US is independent of a student visa.

    There are real delays in getting a green card these days - especially due to FBI background checks which (they claim) are really backlogged. I know people who are stuck in this background check for years now. And it's the same problem once they have a green card and are trying to get citizenship - stuck at the background check.

    Yes, there are problems in obtaining green cards. I wish the author of the article knew something about them.
    • jkays, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Well if you are talking about self sponsorship, exceptional ability is the only way besides marriage. Those pursuing the degree/employment track have experienced in some cases waits of up to 12 yrs. Incase you missed it, the system is plagued with serious problems: http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/jul2007/db20070716_514499.htm
      On the I-20, it has a limit, you can't stay in school indefinitely. The law states that the student must take no less than 12 hrs a semester. At that rate unless one flunks their classes consistently (in which case the university is likely to recommend an academic suspension and one would have to leave) and has no desire to complete their education they are duty bound to leave the country 60 days after graduation or in the alternate obtain permission for a 1 year practical experience after which they must leave unless they transition to another visa status.
      It seems however that the hypocrisy of the article is being lost and misintepreted.
      • beetleb, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0"Well if you are talking about self sponsorship, exceptional ability is the only way besides marriage."

        Nope. Not talking about self sponsorship. Waiting 12 years is a rare exception. The average time used to be a bit under 6 years. After the aggressive FBI background checks kicked in, an extra 2 years is added on average.

        I've known lots (i.e. in the hundreds) who got and are getting their green card using the employment route. As long as they can keep their job during those years, pretty much everyone gets their green card. The number of people I know who got it using this route is about the same as those who married, and much greater than those who self sponsored or had exceptional ability.

        "On the I-20, it has a limit, you can't stay in school indefinitely."

        As long as the student has been studying full time, and isn't routinely failing, the university will extend the I-20, and keep doing it. This may vary from university to university, but the extension is quite routine.

        "and has no desire to complete their education they are duty bound to leave the country 60 days after graduation or in the alternate obtain permission for a 1 year practical experience after which they must leave unless they transition to another visa status."

        Yes, the 60 day thing is there. But the latter part has changed. Now students cannot apply for Optional Practical Training unless they complete their degree.

        "It seems however that the hypocrisy of the article is being lost and misintepreted."

        Yes, the article was not about this. But with two grave mistakes, I'm not likely going to believe him on anything else he wrote.
    • Learn2Think, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1@beetleb, you made a mistake

      >If a student visa expires, he does NOT have to leave the country. As long as his I-20 is not expired (a document given to him by the university he's studying

      Totally wrong. I-20 is a form that you use to apply for visa at US consulate. Your length of stay in the country is controlled bythe I-94 that you get at the airport
      • beetleb, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Nope - not mistaken. The I-94 on merely states: Duration of Study (or as they write it, D/S). The I-20 dictates how long the duration of study is.

        As long as the student remains full time, and the university thinks he's not failing, he can stay on. When the I-20 is close to expiring, universities almost always extends it. Now if someone is taking 8 years to do an undergrad degree, the university will likely not renew. But grad degrees are notorious for taking long: 7 years is not at all rare.

        Anyway, my point is that the expiration of a student visa has no bearing on whether the student can stay or not.

  • WoollyMittens, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Given the state of the economy, it surprises me that not more American emigrate. At least the Netherlands, where I live, is suffering a brain-drain. With the educated population desperate to live somewhere where working hard is rewared better than suffering the bill for the professionaly job-less.
    • mitrovarr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Well, in the US working hard only rewards you with having to support the fantastically wealthy and the white-collar criminals, so it's not really any better, and you don't get any vacations. I'm surprised more people here don't move as well.
  • 6ixStringJack, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5Just a bunch of haters. We got a better life and you want it. Quit whining *****. You think my life is easy. Walk a mile in the average American's shoes. We all don't live life like Paris Hilton. Cry me a ***** river.
  • JJsays, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Ummm, they were Born here and it's a free mans choice not to know *****
  • billobob, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Am I the only one who thinks keeping alcoholics and drug addicts and sex offenders and people with STDs from immigrating isn't really a bad thing, or does that not flow with the knee-jerk reaction space cadets who post a lot of the political articles on here?
  • obxjdt, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Try moving to Mexico.....Their a lot tougher than we are.
    • FastZ, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Who the ***** would want to immigrate to Mexico?
  • sirpsychosexy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3lol, sry mxcns.
  • sexylee, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0With the way our country is operating right now, I'm not surprised.
  • mhearne, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3The Vandals, the Goths and the rest of them didn't invade Rome to destroy it; they all wanted a piece of the cushy lifestyle they assumed the Romans had. Old Rome ceased to exist because of it, around 400 AD, because they couldn't support the influx. There can be no more discussion when a country is dead.

    In my opinion, the article is pro-immigration, and the author is attempting to make an ugly point. Apparently, we have had our "turn", and now it's time to move over for the new guys.

    The fact that our own government is siding with them should alarm everyone. We'd better bring the troops home and put them on the borders and the shores where they belong.
  • TheKrillr, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Good. This is the way it should be. We should be tougher on people coming into the U.S. than those already having citizenship. Why? So we don't have more losers coming in and sucking up our resources than we already have ourselves.

    And yes, those losers were born here they get to stay here. Sadly.
  • empirefalling, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3250 million Americans do not wish to live in America under the current totalitarian regime. Who would?
    • origclubsoda, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7You have no idea what totalitarianism is. At least go travel outside the US before you make retarded statements like this.
  • Pyroteknik, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5There are enough deadbeats in this country already without letting more in. I see no reason to let the diseased in when we can't take care of our own diseased. I see no reason to let the impoverished in when we can't take care of our own.
    • anonym41414, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I guess it's time to change the sign on that big green broad in the harbor.
  • jkays, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/05/02/usdom13290.htm Notably, the report details how current U.S. exclusionary policies are rooted in a long history of anti-immigrant sentiment, in which fears of sexuality have played a steady part. From the McCarthy era until 1990, U.S. law barred foreign-born lesbians and gays from entering the country. The United States is also one of the few industrialized countries that imposes a blanket ban on entry by HIV-positive individuals, a bar that reinforces irrational fears and stigma but does nothing to protect public health. The 2000 U.S. Census estimated that in the United States there were almost 40,000 lesbian and gay couples in which one partner is a U.S. citizen (or permanent resident), and the other a foreign national. This figure does not include the many thousands of binational couples who have to hide the fact they are partners, are forced to live apart, or who have been forced to leave the United States. http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/refugee/faq/faq_aliens.htm#_Toc98743955 What are the communicable diseases of public health significance that would cause an applicant to fail a medical examination or be inadmissible? Communicable diseases of public health significance include-- Tuberculosis Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Infection Syphilis Chancroid Gonorrhea Granuloma Inguinale Lymphogranuloma Venereum Hansen's Disease (Leprosy)
  • origclubsoda, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1Did you know you are retarded. Citizens dont need green cards. ... Now how about those millions of "citizen" babies to illegal immigrants. Lets see them pass your test. You have the logic skills of a toad.
    • janemcopland, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1This is about what would happen IF THEY DID need Green Cards, you idiot.
  • psyops2000, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Damn, from the looks of the graph, it would really suck if your a gay alcoholic who lives in poverty with a drug problem while being pestered by a cornucopia of STDs and other diseases. :o
  • slamiam, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2100% of US Citizens don't need a green card.
    • janemcopland, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1This is about what would happen IF THEY DID, retard.
  • voodooKobra, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1That's because there are 50 million stupid people in the US. I say we kill them all for the sake of cleansing the gene pool!
  • ycomp, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard... it is apples and oranges. Why would a US citizen need a green card? There are many undesirables who are citizens of a country already, the point is not to let any more in :D

    that's a joke, but the point is still true... of course you want immigration controls to be strict (where it makes sense). People who are already citizens don't always have the same things you are looking for in a desirable immigrations (e.g. skills)
  • yndy, on 10/10/2007, -3/+6Dugg down because article is inaccurate, unscientific and sensationalistic...
    Even if it were true, who cares? I could use similar statements to show that most Brits couldn't immigrate to the UK - but that's not the point.
    • pauldy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1With the witter claiming a full 20million people being ineligible because they are gay you know the story is worthless fud praying on peoples ignorance of the immigration system in general. The whole point of the system is to bring in people who benefit society in general without being a burden on it. I think it should be more strict it would be nice if 50% of America couldn't make citizenship. Then at least we could have some confidence that people immigrating to America are really helping to make this country better.
  • tmk40, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This article is idiotic. Almost all of the foreign consultants I worked with in my company got their green cards because they had good jobs. Why should America give green cards to low skill persons who will suck off the nanny state tit for the rest of their lives? And if you are a gay foreigner, I guess you will have to find another way to get your card in America. This stupid ass article is just trying to get people to feel sorry for gays, when the fact is that there is no discrimination against them marrying someone of the opposite sex. I guess some people think that taking care of millions of dead beat Americans is not enough...that we should be subsidizing the entire planet for the rest of their lives.
  • CluelessTroll, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2"Did You Know? 50 Million American Citizens Do Not Qualify for Green Cards"

    Well it's a good thing they were born and raised, an American...don'tcha think?
    I should feel empathetic to the border jumpers, why? Oh, because they'll work our ***** jobs, in turn contributing to the minimum wage consistently stagnating below the cost of what one would consider to be a "living wage?"
  • ffleming, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I'm not a huge fan of our current immigration laws, but you'll be hard-pressed to find a nation that lets in people with low earning potential, little to no education, serious medical ailments, etc. Just look at the immigration requirements for the UK, Canada, and Australia. Immigrating to a first-world Western nation is not easy. The US isn't special in this at all.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.