Immigrants founded America as a nation. Many people fled various challenges in Europe in the 17th century to go find better opportunities in the new world. The waves of immigrants continued to pour into America either fleeing from persecution, or seeking better opportunities for education and work. This is still going on. Bush, McLarty and Alden (2009) justify this phenomenon when they say, Allowing people to come to this country to visit, study, or work is one of the surest means to build friendships with future generations of foreign leaders and to show Americas best face to the world (p. ix).
In modern times, immigrants from Asia and South America form the bulk of arrivals to the seaports and airports of America. There are two classes of immigrants, legal and illegal. Mexico remains one of the most significant sources of immigrants. Over time, a Latino voting bloc has emerged, and it is growing more and more influential in Americas political landscape. The bloc comprises first generation immigrants who have settled in America and descendants of older generation migrants. This explains the importance President Obama has attached to the issue of immigration. Their role as a swing vote is important in the outcome of elections in some states in America.
Immigration is a hot topic among politicians and within the public. With the current high rate of unemployment in America, voters easily associate immigrants to fewer job opportunities. This is not unique to America. The global economic meltdown contributed to the escalation of immigration into a sore issue in the national platforms of many countries. It was a subject of hot debate in Britain during the recent elections.
France and Germany, among other European nations, have not quite put a leash on the matter either. It continues to define policy the world over as countries grapple with tough choices regarding immigration laws and dealing with illegal immigrants. There is consensus among republicans and democrats that immigration laws require fixing, although there is much variance in the details. The state of Arizona passed tough immigration laws, which some parties consider draconian.
A report in the New York Times published a week before the mid-term elections portrayed the president as a pro-immigration champion, whose efforts the republicans are sabotaging. It also brings out a sense of desperation on his part to get the Hispanics out to vote on the crucial day. In addition, the report portrays republicans as opposed to comprehensive immigration reforms, and as unwilling to discuss immigration issues with the democrats. They would rather see stricter border controls and stiffer laws such as those enacted in Arizona.
This report has a distinct bias since it presents the presidents viewpoint. It includes several direct quotes from the presidents radio interview, which serve to advance his view. It presents the republicans response to debating immigration reforms as rigid, and portrays them as uncooperative. Despite this bias, the report provides a fair view of the Democratic Party and the presidents view of the republicans on the issue of immigration. It presents the democrats feeling. The reporter does not end up sensationalizing the emotive issue. He is sufficiently objective to report the presidents interview without passing off personal convictions on the issue.
The report influences public perception over immigration in three ways. First, the public can feel that there is a lack of political consensus over the issue, mainly caused by the uncooperative republicans. The republicans have their stand on the matter and are not willing to talk to the democrats about any of their proposals. Secondly, the public can see Obama as very inclined towards a comprehensive solution to the problem, with a human face to it, as opposed to the republicans who have very drastic proposals bent on stricter control and draconian legislation.
The third way public perception is affected is that they can feel the need for the Hispanic vote in the effort towards reform. Its absence may see the republicans getting control of Congress, which may end up further jeopardizing the chance for a comprehensive solution to the immigration issue. The report has the potential to encourage prejudice against republicans. According to the report, they do not seem at all interested in dialogue in the issue. The democrats seem to be doing all the reaching out. It however portrays the need for immigration reform as one that will bring more inclusion for immigrants in America. Since the president is seeking the Hispanic vote, it portrays them as an important minority in the American society who can influence the composition of Congress.
Hispanic immigration already affects the American economy and labor profoundly. Most immigrants are low skill labors who seek low wage jobs. Due to their status in the American society, they are unable to negotiate for better pay. This is worse when they are illegal. In describing their experience, Bush et at (2009) note that, they face a dangerous gauntlet of immigrant smugglers, stepped up border enforcement, and the threat of criminal prosecution for the reward of what is often an insecure job that lacks basic workplace protections (pp. 5-6).
The segment of the labor market affected depends on the class of immigrants. Borjas (2007) states, Low-skill immigrants will typically harm low skill natives, while skilled migrants will harm skilled natives (p. 5). They are a source of competition to the natives. On the other side, since they demand lower wages, small enterprises willing to risk labor laws have lower production costs. This makes them more competitive in the global environment, which adds to the economic growth of America.
The effect of the political impasse in immigration reform on the US economy and on labor is difficult to describe. It has effects on investment decision making since whatever position the country takes, there is a corresponding effect on the availability of labor, which is a critical factor of production. Bush et al (2009) point out that, More than half the recent growth in the U.S. labor force has come from immigration, and nearly all the future growth will come either from immigrants or from current workers delaying retirement (p.13).
The key effects of the media report on employees will be the stressing of differences between democrats and republicans. It also touches on the work status of immigrant workers and their relatives, who may feel threatened by change in the immigration laws. It is important to promote cross party understanding and get the employees to focus more on the objectives of the organization as opposed to party differences.
Depending on severity of the divide, it may be beneficial to organize special facilitated sessions where all employees can meet and air their political differences and find a middle ground. Secondly, as a manager affected by this issue there is need to reassure all immigrant workers and ensure that their status is legally acceptable, by providing all assistance needed to renew work permits. A manager will promote inclusion by emphasizing the fact that America is, a country shaped by generation of immigrants and their descendants (Bush et al, 2009, p. 3). This will promote better accommodation of the immigrant workers by natives.
Reference list
Borjas, G. J. (2007). Mexican immigration to the United States. A National Bureau of Economic Research Conference Report. London: University of Chicago Press.
Bush, J., McLarty, F. T., & Alden, E. H. (2009). U. S. immigration policy. New York: Council on Foreign Relations.
Different individuals living in the United States of America define their identity disparately. The ever-increasing ethnic diversity in the country is compounding the problem of defining identity (Hughey 111). The ambiguity of defining identity revolves around the immigrant issue, which appears to be dividing public opinion on being American. The pertinent question in this case is the extent to which immigrants feel American. The first, second, and even third-generation immigrants hold on to some cultural practices, which are connected to their native countries. Therefore, when defining identity, they are torn between being American and natives of their countries of origin. For instance, an Indian born in the United States might not know whether to define his/her identity as Indian-American or American-Indian. This paper explores why it is hard to define identity based on what it means to be American.
The ambiguous identity
According to Schildkraut, A complex and contradictory set of norms exist, and it is difficult to reduce them into a single measure of Americanism (598). Conventionally, identity is formed from shared values and norms, which underscore cohesiveness in a given society. However, when these norms and values are diverse, the cohesiveness disintegrates, and thus every person develops his or her own identity. Therefore, it becomes hard to come up with one definition for identity. The American society is divided along racial, ethnicity, religious, and ideological lines. Therefore, people from a certain ethnicity, like the Latinos, will have a different definition of identity from that of Native Americans (Huntington 84).
Similarly, the affluent will have different a definition of identity from that of the poor. The rich might define their identity based on their material wealth, which paints the United States as a land full of opportunities. On the contrary, the poor and the homeless in the United States may form identities based on their experiences and struggles, and thus opportunities in the country might be defined as elusive. Therefore, the definition of being American between these two groups will be different, hence the differing identities, due to the lenses used to view the prevalent circumstances.
Similarly, when immigrants to the United States define identity based on what it means to be American, they have differing opinions depending on their experiences and places of origin. Therefore, identity based on what it means to be American is subject to nativity, ethnicity, locality, and ideology. For instance, in Jahromis article, Shila posits, I think Im American-Indian, but not Indian-American. I think Im more American than Indian, but I still think that I retain parts of my culture (Jahromi 82). The definition given here underscores the earlier claim that identity can be tied to ethnicity. To Shila, she cannot define her identity without mentioning India, even though she was born and brought up in the United States. On the other hand, Beth defines identity based on ideology. She posits, [People] are considered equal, but they arent really&money determines more than you technically being an equal person&So equality is a great concept, but I dont think it ever actually plays out the way its supposed to (Jahromi 85).
Her definition of identity is based on ideologies concerning equality, capitalism, and opportunities amongst others factors. Finally, Nina defines identity based on location. She notes, I was born in Guatemala, which Im very proud of. I have been raised in South River all my life. Im probably more connected to South River because Ive been raised here and Ive only visited Guatemala a couple of times (Jahromi 86). Therefore, to Nina, her identity revolves around her location. She does not identify with Guatemala because she does not live there. On the other side, she identifies with South River because it is her locality.
Therefore, defining identity hinges on different factors. In addition, the meaning of being American is diverse based on several elements. Currently, Americans do not share the same values and norms, which form a culture. Therefore, the American culture is divided (Gitlin 86), and thus it becomes hard to define identity. Jahromi concludes, There is certainly not one way to be an American (90). Similarly, there cannot be one way of defining identity. Abdelal et al. argue, One key aspect of identity content is the set of constitutive norms that provide formal and informal rules that define group membership (698). However, the constitutive norms are lacking in the American context, which underlines the difficulty in defining identity.
Conclusion
The definition of identity based on what it means to be American is arbitrary. As noted in this paper, the constituents of being American are diverse and they are subject to different aspects like race, ethnicity, ideology, locality, and religion. Therefore, without a common definition of what it means to be American, it becomes difficulty to define identity based on the same premise. Jahromis article supports this argument as the three interviewees define their identity based on different parameters. The lack of cohesiveness, common values, and norms in the American society disintegrates the fabric that can be used to define identity based on being American.
Works Cited
Abdelal, Rawi, Yoshiko Herrera, Alastair Johnston, and Rose McDermott. Identity as a Variable. Perspectives on Politics 4.4 (2006): 695-711. Print.
Gitlin, Todd. The Twilight of Common Dreams: Why America Is Wracked by Culture Wars, New York: Macmillan, 1996. Print.
Hughey, Matthew. White Bound: Nationalists, Antiracists, and the Shared Meanings of Race, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2012. Print.
Huntington, Samuel. Who are We?: The Challenges to Americas National Identity, New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004. Print.
Jahromi, Parissa. American Identity in the USA: Youth Perspectives. Apllied Development Science 15.2 (2011): 79-93. Print.
Schildkraut, Deborah. Defining American Identity in the Twenty-First Century: How Much There is There? The Journal of Politics 69.3 (2007): 597-615. Print.
America is largely a land inhabited by immigrant. Prior to the world wars, it is estimated that millions of people left their homelands in Europe, Asia and Africa to find a place in the new land which was America. According to Bodnar, most of the people immigrating to America did so in an attempt to flee disorder and poverty in their homelands (xvi). On reaching the new land however, most of them weakened from the inhospitable cities and climate in America in addition to the back-breaking labor most of them had to undertake in order to survive.
The life
According to Bodnar, life for immigrants was always full of challenges, Their fate was one of a life in insulated ethnic ghettos, continual struggle, and an eventual but precarious attachment to the new economy (xvi). Not all immigrants however found it extremely hard to adapt. Some successfully used their long-established traditions to organize new lives thus easily transitioning from the lives they had been used to in their homelands, to the new economic, social and political realities of the new land.
It is however notable that the immigrants experience was not similar to all. This was especially so because different immigrants had different ideologies and cultures. When the different people from different cultures met, it was a recipe for speculation and mistrust amongst each other especially when the different parties did not share a language (Daniels 309).
As Portes and Rumbaut notes, immigrants lacked sufficient knowledge of the English language, and this meant that they failed to fully understand what was happening around them and also could not explain themselves effectively (119). More to this, immigrant parents who did not want their children to learn the new language (English) often picketed schools that insisted on using English as the sole mode of communication. This meant that English acquisition among the younger generation at the time was also delayed.
The lack of a voice in the first generation of immigrants meant that there was an enforced positivity which entrenched the native fears in some communities. In return, lucrative demagoguery and active hostility flourished in some of the communities. Since the fears in most of the immigrant communities were just illusionary, they had no political consequence thus meaning that they were never successful even where the communities had specific goals.
Notably, groups of immigrants sharing the same culture and norms underwent the process of reactive formation , which according to Portes and Rumbaut, gave birth to some for of ethnic resilience (120). Notably, this was not a deliberate effort by the immigrants to carry on with the culture they had been used to in their homelands; rather, it was a reaction to the discrimination, views and the situations they faced on arrival to America. Accordingly, most social solidarity in the immigrant groups was not defined by social class but by the place of origin.
Motives of the Immigrant
In order to understand the motives of the immigrants, it is important to highlight why they left their original countries in the first place. With the exception of slaves who were involuntary immigrants, Portes and Rumbaut identify four reasons why immigration occurred as it did. According to the two authors, the lack of peace in some countries made people flee to countries perceived as more peaceful; hostile stets where dictatorships and other forms of undemocratic rule which oppressed the population also made people migrate to other countries; indifferent countries that cared less if part of the population moved to other countries or not also saw a high number of the population therein leave; and finally, countries that encouraged their populations to move abroad in order to serve the interests of their countries from the new outposts (Daniels 289-302).
With America being a reflection of good governance, capitalism, peace and abundant opportunities to the rest of the world, it is apparent why most immigrants choose to immigrate to the country. Besides this, America was a country whose economy relied more on knowledge and skills from the immigrant population, it had its doors open to the immigrants. This begs the question- were the motives of the immigrants fulfilled? Well, this essay holds the opinion that some were while others were not.
Portes and Rumbaut observe that the flow of immigrants into America mainly comprised humble people who served the country well by fulfilling it labor needs (121). However, most immigrants were uniformly in a disadvantageous position mainly because they lacked the education and skills necessary to get good jobs and hence lead better lives. In addition, while the US governing administration allowed them easy access into the country, it did not take any responsibility for their welfare. This meant that employers were at will to employ them for whatever wages they deemed fit. Worse for the immigrants was the perception that some of the earlier immigrants who had already settled and established businesses in America had of them. They were accused of docility, organizational incapacity and inertia in addition to being labeled uncivilized, desperate and poor (Portes & Rumbaut 122).
The situation was worsened by the massive problems that occurred by the huge influx of people into the country. At the height of the immigration for example, New York suffered a cholera outbreak. Emerging slums made the situation no better and stereotypes emerged that pitted the wealthy Americans against the middle-class immigrants. Xenophobic tendencies targeting the immigrant communities were common. This kind of denunciation of the immigrants meant that most if them experienced the harshest side of American capitalism.
This led to political socialization among the immigrant communities. Notably however, those who participated in the socialization organizations were mainly peasants. The literate skilled minority did not participate in party politics. As noted above, there were a category of immigrants who sought to make the most money while working in America, with the view of investing in their home countries. As Portes and Rumbaut observe, some of such immigrants realized their intentions albeit more slowly than they had initially anticipated, but others did not or changed their minds about going back to their countries (125).
Religious obstacles were also part of the struggle that immigrants had to undergo in their new found land. Bodnar observes that while immigrants hurdled together in religious groups every so often especially when the realities of the capitalist America was too harsh for them, they found much comfort in such groups especially in a society which favored being secular (144). Holding on to religion was especially comforting to people who feared the thought of dying in a foreign land but knew that going back home would be worse of than dying in America. However, religious groupings suffered outside influence in America often causing members to protest. This affected even the religious leaders who felt threatened in the Industrial America by others who also competed for the immigrants mind and soul (Bodnar 159).
Conflict among the immigrant communities was attributed to different cause. Smith (cited by Bodnar 247) for example says the conflict was caused by voluntarism in different groups, while Portes & Rumbaut (302) cite different faiths as a main cause of violent conflicts among the migrant communities.
The effect of the war and depression on immigration
Human beings by their very nature like keeping off troubled areas. This explains why America always had low immigration rates whenever there was war. When the First World War broke for example, the US Immigration Support notes that the immigrants to the United States declined significantly. This was especially the case on immigrants from Europe (1). Soon after the war was over however, the immigration from Europe to America resumed in high number causing the US congress to introduce the National Origins Quota Act that specified that only 3 percent an ethnic makeup that already lived in the US could be allowed into the country.
But perhaps the biggest decline in immigration was witnessed during the Great Depression. According to the Immigration Support, the US registered zero population growth from immigration during the depression. While the wars had immigrants away from the US due to the physical dangers and insecurities of warfare, Immigration Support notes that no immigrant wanted to travel to a country where the harsh economic realities were apparent (1). Besides, it was still unclear how much longer the US economy would take to rebound. Having been dubbed a country of opportunities, most immigrants went to the US with the hope of having a better life. When this illusion was shattered by the Great Depression, then the need to travel to the new land was no longer there (Daniels 287-302).
The World War II soon followed and while people had started migrating to the US after the economic depression was over, the war halted the immigration once again. According to the Immigration Support, the low immigration statistics lasted 20 years from the end of the Second World War in 1945 (1).
Identity
According to Daniels, while it would have been easy to loose their cultural identity in the melting pot that was the American society, most immigrants held onto the small communities that gave them identity. The black slaves for example found unity in communities especially those formed around religion (302). Jones observes that the American government knew that the only way to establish a national identity was through concentration and isolation (42). Assimilating the minority communities in dominant communities also succeeded in establishing a sense of national identity much faster. The cutting of ties between the immigrants and their home countries further served to erase any trace of cultural identities that the communities tried to preserve.
Conclusion
The diverse American culture as we know it today can be traced to the different immigrants who came to the country in different phases. By living together, ethnicity or any unique cultural trait did not live beyond the second or third immigrant generation. Traces of the culture which were shared from one generation too another may have been fused with other cultures to form the unique American culture, which is in itself hard to define.
Works cited
Bodnar, John. The Transplanted: a History of Immigrants in Urban America. Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1987. Print.
Daniels, Roger. Coming to America: A history of Immigration and Ethnicity in American Life. New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1990. Print.
Jones, Malwyn Jones. American Immigration: The Chicago history of American Civilization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. Print.
Portes, Alejandro & Rumbaut, Ruben. Immigrant America: a portrait. California: University of California Press, 1996. Print.
US Immigration Support. Immigration to the United States. 2010. Web.
COVID-19 pandemic has affected the United States severely, as our country suffered the most in terms of absolute numbers. Despite the hard work of our brave medical personnel, the USA reported almost 34 million cases by May 21st, which resulted in more than 600 000 reported deaths (Worldometer, 2021). On March 20th, 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 2020a) of the US Department of Health and Human Services issued a special order to curb the spread of COVID-19. Relying on a disease suspension provision from the 1944 Public Health Service Act (Guttentag, 2020), the order applied to several groups of persons traveling from Canada and Mexico. The 20th March order targeted all aliens from Canada and Mexico who travel without proper documents or try to enter the United States unlawfully. Therefore, it can be seen not only as a public health measure but as an immigration control instrument as well.
March 20th Order Main Provisions
The March 20th order recognized a rapid global spread of COVID-19 and offered a solution, which was supposed to protect the USA from disease outbreaks. The order stressed that COVID-19 easily spreads and sustains itself within communities (CDC, 2020a). Since the aliens from Canada and Mexico arrive in groups through the land Ports of Entry (POE) and Border Patrol stations, they spend a significant time in congregate settings. Such groups provide a perfect environment for COVID-19 spread and its subsequent introduction into the US territory. Therefore, the order immediately ceased the introduction of all covered aliens for 30 days, with a possibility of extension (CDC, 2020a). The covered aliens already present in POEs and Border Patrol stations were subjected to fast repatriation. However, the time and statistics have shown that the 20th March order was not sufficient to prevent the extreme COVID-19 situation in the US.
March 20th Order and Human Rights Controversy
Soon after its implementation, the 20th March order became a subject of sharp criticism from the legal and human rights protection points of view. First of all, the fast implementation of the order put it in conflict with various provisions and conventions to which the USA adheres. For instance, the repatriation and suspensions of all covered aliens contradicted the 1980 Refugee Act and the Convention Against Torture (Guttentag, 2020). Moreover, the order failed to address the issue of asylum seekers, thus indiscriminately returning them to potentially dangerous conditions without proper attending to their cases (HRW, 2020). Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Mark Morgan claimed that this is not about immigration, and public health was a priority (Montoya-Galvez, 2020). The original motives behind the March 20th order will probably stay hidden, but it caused legal and ethical controversies.
March 20th Order: Implications and Amendments
As stated before, the March 20th order directly targeted asylum seekers, including children. By May 7th, 2020, the officials repatriated about 20 000 unauthorized migrants (Montoya-Galvez, 2020). According to Human Rights Watch comment, US Customs and Border Protection expelled hundreds of unaccompanied children, thus putting their lives in danger (HRW, 2020). Whether intentional or simply a side effect of a poorly thought and implemented ad hoc public health measure, this situation cannot be considered normal.
To the CDCs credit, they amended the March 20th order to adjust it to the human rights agenda and finally replaced it. The version of October 13th, 2020, does not apply to aliens without a negative COVID-19 test (CDC, 2020b). In addition, the current order does not cover people who can be excepted from repatriation based on humanitarian interests (CDC, 2020b). Overall, the CDC order ceased to be as harsh to migrants as it used to be right after implementation. However, the current COVID-19 statistics show that the control measures over Canadian and Mexican borders were ineffective against the pandemic. The Trump administration was caught by surprise and could not develop sufficient means of public health protection in time. The CDC order was one of those haphazard solutions, which did not work.
Centers for Disease Control. Order suspending the right to introduce certain persons from countries where a quarantinable communicable disease exists (2020b). Web.
To begin with, it is necessary to mention, that Following innovative federal immigration policy and procedures implemented in the 1960s and particularly after incidents of political turbulence in the early 1990s there has been a quick augment of settlers from Asian states such as India, China, and Hong Kong. Though this phenomenon has outlined in positive financial growth in Canada there are lots of fundamental complexities that immigrants usually have to challenge when immigrating to Canada comprising the underdevelopment of community services, difficulties in policing and surrounding security, and modifications in employment practices and estate allocation. Immigrants from all over the world can assist Canadian proliferation in lots of ways. Given that recently arrived immigrants are able to offer essential sustain expressively and culturally, it is probable to make a welcoming and friendly environment for everybody. (Buenker, 2002)
The fact is that not all inhabitants supported multiculturalism. For instance, in English-speaking Canada, some were anxious that multiculturalism would separate Canadians rather than join them. Others were afraid that multiculturalism would corrode the rich British inheritance of English-speaking Canada. Lots of Quebec inhabitants complained that multiculturalism was emphasized to destabilize Quebec nationalism. Ottawa, they claimed, would apply multiculturalism to frustrate Quebecs ambitions by connecting it with other national groups in Canada.
But lots, particularly in metropolitan English-speaking Canada, maintained the regulation. They regarded it as an opportune acknowledgment of pluralism that was a detail of Canadian life. When the strategy was proclaimed in 1971, the Canadian ethnic assortment was still greatly governed by those of European inheritance and was created to distinguish their donation to Canada. Nevertheless, as migration to Canada from the developing world amplified, the multiculturalism procedure had to contract with the troubles and anxieties of noticeable minorities. These innovative and increasing societies were less anxious on the matters of recognition of their inheritance in Canada. They followed the multiculturalism approach, not to sustain ethnic improvement but rather for assistance in the exclusion of racial intolerance and segregation. They wished to guarantee equivalent employment conditions to jobs, accommodation, and education. (Richmond, 1999)
The government adequately reacted. In 1981, officials who were engaged in the solving process related to federal multiculturalism stated a unit dedicated to race contacts in Canada. This was later increased to make race contacts a principal center of the multicultural approach. Most regions and lots of bigger administrative units have followed suit within their spheres of authority, principally education, policing, community services, and human rights protection. In Quebec, which still had troubles with the notion of multiculturalism, the regional government has enhanced its own approaches in rejoinder to the new cultural and racial actuality. These approaches are equal in lots of ways to those of the other regions and the national government. Nowadays, most central multicultural approaches concentrate on organizational modifications, inter-race contacts, and citizen incorporation and partaking. The central multiculturalism approach is valued for Canadians at about one dollar per year.
Underdevelopment of public services
The huge pressure was put on governments to stabilize the improvements of new migrants and compromising for their troubles is massive. Persons who are recently arrived challenge the troubles comprising anxieties for their childrens education or growing up, medical care, and a language barrier that is challenged with both the local Canadians and other cultural groups.
The longest-position test of Canadas capability to stabilize harmony and assortment is the trouble of linguistic duality. Canada is a legitimately bilingual country. And bilingualism is at the very essence of the general policy relating to diversity. It has been classified as the feature of the Canadian community from the very start of our legitimate expansion.
With Confederation in 1867, English and French were agreed certified, legitimate status and an immense diversity of authorities were allocated to the fundamental member regions. Within one province, Quebec, French-speaking Canadians created a huge majority and were capable to apply these authorities to shield and protect their origins. Elsewhere in Canada, the French language steadily came under sprain with a flood of immigrants who were either of English roots or were convinced to speak English. (A Global Perspective, 1994)
It was not until the Official Languages Act of 1969 that a recited attempt was taken to restore the stability and address violations of official language minority rights. This Act necessitates the Government of Canada to provide equal position, rights, and freedoms to both languages in all national establishments and entails federal organizations to serve Canadians in their official language of option. Consequently, with Canadas Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982, Canadian leaders who are participators of the English or French linguistic minority in the region in which they inhabit were guaranteed the legitimate right to have their children taught in that language, where numbers guaranteed.
Away from constitutional and legislative gauges, the Government of Canada also deals with provincial and territorial administrations, society groups, specialized institutions, and volunteer organizations to inspirit the stipulation of overhauls in both bureaucrat words. This maintenance comprises courses to help expand admission to high-quality public schooling in the minority official language and to propose to all Canadian scholars the possibility to learn the second official language in schools. Partially as a consequence of these approaches, a total of five million Canadians are now capable in both French and English. (Annual report, 2004)
Challenges in policing and environment security
Canadian immigration and refugee defense mattes offer continual troubles and produce almost frequent debate for politicians and public volunteers. Strict submission of the legislation and directives infrequently outlines in normal people hiding in cathedrals in order to try to hold back exile. Charitable humanitarian desires, as in the April-June 1999 response of the Kosovo refugees, are counteracted by public aversion at those who arrive unlawfully. Moreover to the human aspects, the former immigration law was tremendously compound, the new law is untested, the pasture is controversial, and the reserves of Citizenship and Immigration Canada were harshly cut back in the mid-1990s.
Community outreach approaches, augmented staffing to the police power of minority communities, augmented training on multiple societies, and population discussion agendas would reduce the quantity of anxiety among the police and members of the community (Mercer, 176). By raising both the existence of the police in high crime regions and the abilities of the police force to solve difficulties with multicultural matters will augment the communities admiration and realization of the police and expectantly reduce the amount of crime entrusted by members of the minority societies.
In recent years, some suspicions have been stated about the size and effectiveness of the openly financial side of the migration official approach. The primary anxieties articulated by observers and the government arise from conflicting standpoints. First, as noted above, the retirement of the baby boom generation starting in this decade has reasoned in fears that the workforce will not be adequately big or trained to facilitate the society to support the national standard of living and maintain the increasing amounts of aging Canadians. Simultaneously, shortages of trained and skilled employees in some spheres have already been classified, and are expected to go on. Immigration is regarded by lots as at least an incomplete solution to these difficulties. (Schissel, 2001)
Another standpoint notes that some financial immigrants have not been as flourishing financially as other Canadian inhabitants recently, and they, would have expected. The selection organization was also condemned on the position that it was not general or translucent, was clear for manipulation, and was too unbendable. As a consequence, for a decade Citizenship and Immigration Canada attempted to invent an assortment structure that would react better to Canadas requirements, enhance the probability of financial immigrants instituting themselves productively, and augment the tempo with which they were able to do so. The improved system explained as a human capital advance, came into action with the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. There is an increasing appreciation, nevertheless, that until matters with the acknowledgment of foreign documentation and training are resolved, and managers become more eager to employ new immigrants, their inhabitant possibility may well be further negotiated.
Lastly, according to the financial challenges of recent migrants, some have requested whether the historical connection Canada has made between financial success and immigration is as sturdy as was beforehand regarded.
Changes in employment pattern and estate distribution
Educated employees are independent immigrants chosen to supply to the financial system by the means of their education, capabilities, and education. To be qualified as an educated worker, the candidate must have worked for a year within the last 10 in one of the particular skill categories or levels as stated in the National Occupational Classification. Fundamentally, this notes they must have worked as an administrator, or held service requiring college, university, or technical education; they should also show evidence of a particular level of funds obtainable to maintain themselves when they arrive in Canada unless they have already sorted hiring.
The new assortment framework awards point for training, language capability, employment skills, age, structured employment, and flexibility. Gone is the prejudiced appraisal of individual correctness, returned by a selection of five intent components (worth from 3 to 5 points), with a maximum of 10 points. Gone also is the subjective levels control aspect, replaced by the capability of the Minister to modify the pass mark as required.
Eradicating the former professions list from the assortment framework means that the amount of job groups is much bigger. Opponents of the new framework are anxious that the severe prerequisites of the different components, united with a passing score of 75, would make it too complex to immigrate to Canada as an expert employee. The fact is that in September 2003 the Minister proclaimed that the pass mark would be decreased from 75 to 67; this change entered into force on 1 December 2003.
One tremendously controversial matter when the directives for the new Act were first made communal was the suggestion that the new assortment conditions pertain to all those in the obtainable inventory at the time the approaches were pre-issued a generous amount. The conclusion on the transitional regulations was somewhat of conciliation, but lots were still critical. Two complaints resulted, and the administration fared badly. In September 2003, the administration made the conclusion to allow all candidates in the account as of 1 January 2002 to be charged under the previous Immigration Act and, if they were not victorious, also under the new Act. The new regulations came into result on 1 December 2003.
While concentration had a tendency to concentrate on the key structures and its impacts whether the structure was too inflexible, what the pass mark should be, and whether persons chose under it for their capabilities were capable to make use of them once in Canada another matter came to social notice. It included unregistered employees, predominantly in the building sphere, and in particular in the Greater Toronto Area. No one, involving the administration, has dependable outlines on the number of persons included. (Daniel, 2005)
In November 2003, the government proclaimed that it was enhancing an approach to provide legal rank to unregistered employees. It would start with the building sphere in Ontario, but might be expanded to other spheres and other regions later. The government emphasized that the approach would not be a reprieve, due to the negative suggestions of that word. It emerges at the time of writing that the agenda may authorize employees to get impermanent resident visas, and then in two years they would be able to demand enduring residence. The average criminal and security ensure would apply.
The policy is not without its demerits. Some stated that the approach profited only a small number of unregistered employees and only those with well-arranged and well-inked labor and union groupings to the atrium for them. Non-grouped employees in service spheres are not impacted.
Conclusion
Lots of factors impacted the opening of the multiculturalism approach. Most of all, it should be regarded as a matter of time. The mid-1960s were scratched by progressively more problematic English-French contacts within Canadian inhabitants. The administration employed a Royal Commission to research and recommend explanations to exceptional troubles. The Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism held trials across Canada. The officials heard about more than just English and French contacts. Ethnic representatives everywhere stated that the old strategy of incorporation was both unfair and a failure. They told the officials that immigrants and their kids had endured the Great Depression alongside other citizens and inhabitants; they had forfeited children to the nationwide war attempt, and they now gathered the merits of Canadas financial revitalization and their own work. (Mercer, 1995)
Immigrants advised that a new replica of citizen contribution in the larger community be taken one that tackled the pluralism of racial collections that were part of Canadian relations. They proposed a plan for a Canadian individuality grounded on the social taking of dissimilarity and support of ethnic pluralism.
References
A Global Perspective A Global Perspective. Ed. Wayne A. Cornelius, Philip L. Martin, and James F. Hollifield. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1994.
Annual report to Parliament on Immigration 2004. Web.
Bernard Schissel; Richard Wanner; James S. Frideres. Social and Economic Context and Attitudes toward Immigrants in Canadian Cities. International Migration Review Vol. 23, No. 2 (Summer, 2001), pp. 289-308.
Berlau, John. Canada Turns into Terrorist Haven; Terrorists Have Been Streaming into Canada Because of Highly Permissive Immigration Policies and Lax Laws That Allow Them to Raise Money for Extremist Organizations. Insight on the News.
Buenker, John D., and Nicholas C. Burckel. Immigration and Ethnicity: A Guide to Information Sources. Detroit: Gale Research Company, 2002.
Daniel, Dominique. The Debate on Family Reunification and Canadas Immigration Act of 1976. American Review of Canadian Studies 35.4 (2005): 683.
Mercer, John. Canadian Cities and Their Immigrants: New Realities. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science Vol. 538, Being and Becoming Canada (Mar., 1995), pp. 169-184.
Richmond, Anthony H. Post-War Immigrants in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto, 1999.
Every day hundreds of immigrants come to the United States for a better life. These include people from Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and El Salvador (Incarcerated Nation Network INC Media, 2020). Each nation brings its own culture, views, and dialects are created. Because of this, people with outdated views of life often humiliate new U.S. citizens. I think the fight for immigrant rights should continue until these inequalities are eradicated.
People immigrate to the United States for a variety of reasons. Many are fleeing a government in which corruption and impunity are deeply entrenched. Others are moving because prolonged droughts have put farmers at risk and demonstrated the governments inability to predict developments. At the same time, mining concessions and other foreign concessions have had a detrimental effect on the environment. Thriving crime is a huge cause, but poverty and insecurity remain the main cause. The American public has been wary of the growing number of immigrants, especially illegal immigrants, for a very long time. The situation has become more acute in the last few years because of global problems like the coronavirus. That is why the immigration debate is now at its peak.
I believe it was colonization that led to the current situation. The entire economic development of the colonies was subordinated to the interests of Spain and Portugal. In the colonies, developing those branches of the economy that might threaten Spains rivalry was discouraged or forbidden. Hence, the population became poor, and no manufactories were built without money. In todays world, multiculturalism is perceived as one of the signs of progressive globalization. Many companies are becoming international, allowing professionals from different parts of the world to cooperate. The international division of labor is the highest stage of development of the social and territorial division between countries, involving a steady concentration of production of certain products in certain countries, especially large ones. That is why people come to those countries in which there are more opportunities for career development.
I believe that illegal migration should stop because the economy of the whole country suffers because of it. Instead, the government could introduce regulations that would imply assistance to migrants who have problems with their documents. This situation has been going on for a very long time because most migrants do not run from a good life, and many have problems with the law or money.
Migration is a difficult process to discuss, as it carries a variety of implications, both negative and positive. When considering the results of the process, both the sender and the receiver country must be discussed, as well as the implications for the migrants themselves. Starting off with the implications the process has on the sender country, migration can be considered a largely beneficial process. The decreased number of workers shrinks the labor pool, improving the income of remaining workers, and reducing unemployment (Asch, 1994). Furthermore, if a person moves to a more developed country, they tend to send money back home, supporting the economy of the sender country with additional funds (Asch, 1994). Peoples living conditions also improve thanks to the received funds. Notably, however, it should be said that immigration can be destabilizing, as the largest part of the migrant population is young, healthy, working adults with families.
Alternatively, the process also has a number of effects on the receiving country. Firstly, the labor force and the number of people contributing to jobs increase, improving access to labor and the price of services for the general population. Secondly, new migrants both earn and spend money, improving the circulation of currency in the economy and revitalizing it with a constant stream of new people. On the negative side, it should be noted that the migrants may be contributing to the problem of employees being underpaid, as employers tend to treat them worse than native workers. The ability to get workers for cheap from the immigrant population drives the jobs away from other populations. Considering the overall implication of migration, it should be also said that the process can facilitate global inequality. Many people escape the unfavorable conditions of their country by moving away, meaning that qualified and strong individuals are not supporting the development of less advanced nations (Crawley, 2018). The trend reinforces the gap between first-world and third-world countries, creating a self-perpetuating cycle.
The issue of the immigration impacts on the U.S. educational system has of late elicited heated debate within the public domain, educational leaders forums, and to a higher extent, congress debates. The contentious issue revolves around the perceived burden that immigrants place on the already overstretched US educational facilities. What is evident from these debates is that majority of people have a biased view that doesnt reflect the reality on the ground as far immigrants and education is concerned.
Main body
According to David Stewart, in his book, Immigrant and Education, The level of immigration is so massive, its choking urban schools, its bad enough when you have desperate kids with U.S backgrounds who require massive resource, income kids with totally different need, and it creates crushing burdens on urban schools while Stewart stand may reflect some truths, the negative impacts can not be attributed to the immigrants, but lack strategy to handle the rising number of immigrants seeking education in U.S. public schools.
Figures from National Centers for Education Statistics (NCES) indicate that the level of immigrants seeking education in the United States is on the rise. Currently, immigrants make 20 percent (1/5) of the total number of students in US schools as opposed the to early 1980s, when only 6 percent of students represented immigrants. While many education leaders acknowledge this fact, they fail to acknowledge the government failed to come up with strategies aimed at expanding education facilities to cater to the growing need for education.
Many argue that expanding education facilities requires state or federal funding, which means more taxation on Americans to educate immigrants. However, the fact that immigrants contribute to the US economy and pay taxes can never be ignored. The notion that immigrants do not pay taxes is misplaced and has no basis. According to figures from National Academy for Science (NAS) and Social Security Administration (SSA), immigrants pay between the US $90 and $140 billion per year in local, state, and federal taxes, with the additional US $20 billion from the so-called illegal immigrants income taxes. As such, the government should at the state or federal level, utilize taxes collected to expand education facilities, employ more teachers and come up with programs that seek to accommodate immigrants and their children to the mainstream education system.
To understand the magnitude of the immigration and school issue, it is important to first understand the perspective that most people in the public domain, political and education circles, have on immigrants. To many people, immigrants are seen as a problem, not as an opportunity. Many believe that immigrants come to the United States to depend on welfare, take away jobs from Americans, send all money to their home countries without paying taxes and drain the economy. A close study on the immigrants patterns will show that all these notions have no element of truths.
Immigrants make up a larger labor force than the U.S population as they come to the US to work, not to depend on welfare. They earn an estimated $240 billion; paying an average of $90 billion in taxes and use a further $5 billion directly to cater for their needs and other household goods. In many parts of the US, immigrants have established thriving businesses that provide jobs to both US citizens and immigrants. It is a well-known fact that in Silicon Valley, California, Indians and Chinese entrepreneurs have established businesses creating over 90,000 jobs. In essence, immigrants do not necessarily take up jobs from Americans, they have the capacity to create jobs opportunities for both Americans and immigrants. It is from this perspective that one understands that immigrants are not a drain to the US economy or a problem, but rather are an opportunity.
To those who are complaining about how immigrants have ruined the U.S. education system, they may need to look at the issue of immigrants from a different perspective. They will need to understand thats it the failure of the government, at State and federal levels, to design and implement strategies aimed at accommodating immigrants in the U.S. education system. There are those who believe that all immigrants come to the U.S. illegally, this group of people will benefit from the knowledge that 75 percent of all immigrants are in the U.S. legally and that they work and pay taxes. They deserve equal education opportunities, like other Americans just as the constitution guarantees.
Conclusion
Immigrants are an opportunity to the United States and it is only through the realization of this fact that the issue of immigrants and education can be solved. Many educational and political leaders tend to mislead the public with biased information on immigrants. Most immigrants are hardworking, pay huge taxes through and as such deserve to be given equal opportunities in all fields. The government should use the taxes to cater to the increasing need for education to alleviate the problem caused by the increase in the number of immigrants seeking education in U.S. public schools.
Reference
Illegal Immigration and Los Angeles Schools, 2008. Web.
Immigration and School Overcrowding, 2008, Web.
Immigration Myths and Facts, 2008. Web.
Susan N. Burgess (2003) Immigration the easy way, United States, Barron Educational Publishers.
William W. Brickman (1964) Educational Systems in the United States, New York, Center for Applied Research in Education Press.
Describe immigration policy on the state and federal level
Immigration policy in the United States is aimed towards multiple goals. These goals are: reuniting immigrants with their families when some part of the family is living within the United States; secondly, bringing in workers with special skills to fill positions of shortage; third, providing political asylum to refugees seeking protection in an alien land; and finally, ensuring diversity by admitting people with low rates of immigration to the United States. The Congressional Budget Office paper outlines the categories of people eligible for immigration to the United States and also includes the latest data admitted under each category recently. It even provides estimates of the number of people who are in the United States illegally. To enter US legally, there are two distinct paths: permanent admission may be given by according the status of lawful permanent residents (LPRs). Such people receive a permanent resident card or green card. The second path is admission on a temporary basis. Temporary admission is provided by the national government to a large and diverse group of people for a specific purpose for a limited period of time for reasons such as tourism, diplomatic missions, study and temporary work. Diversity immigrants, the last group of any size, come from a variety of countries under a lottery system without respect to the number entering from their countries via other visa groups. The Constitution does not directly define the scope of federal power to regulate immigration, but possible textual sources of the federal power include the Naturalization Clause that addresses citizenship but not regulation of aliens and the Migration Clause that deals with slavery (Booth, 2006). The earliest debate regarding the distribution of powers over immigration between the federal and state governments arose in the context of the Alien Act of 1798. Debate surrounding this law focused on whether Congress could supersede the authority of states to regulate immigration (Booth, 2006). Proponents of the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions claimed that the states, not the federal government, retained general power over aliens. Some others suggested that states as sovereign entities possess the inherent authority to enforce immigration laws and regulate immigration. Legally, the state governments powers are limited only to the extent that the Constitution or federal law preempts such power and it is not clear whether the state has the ability to enact and enforce civil laws regarding immigration. Some members of Congress have proposed legislation that would confirm this authority and facilitate cooperation among state, local, and federal officials in the enforcement of immigration laws.
Compare statistics of New Yorks immigration to other states
According to data published by the Department of Home Security, in the year 2007, the number of persons obtaining legal residence in the United States totaled 1,052,415. Of these, California topped with 264,667 followed by New York in the second place with 136,739. They were followed by Florida 155,986, Texas 77, 278 and Illinois 41,971 (Jefferys and Monger, 2007).
The DHS year book 2006 provides the following data (DHS, 2006):
Persons naturalized in the year 2006 were overall 702,589 of which the majority came from California 152,836 followed by Florida 90,846 and New York in third position 66,234
Among people who obtained Legal Permanent Resident Status 2006 there were overall 1,266,264 in the United States of whom California had 264,677 followed by New York at 180,165 and Florida at 155,996 and New Jersey 65,934
Non immigrant admissions were of total 33667328 with California leading with 5,573,588, followed by Florida at 4,942,206, New York at 4,243,472 and Texas at 2,450,389
New York has maximum number of tourist and business travelers with visa waiver (2, 554,878) first position in Tourist and business travelers with Visa waiver; second in the number of student and exchange visitors (143,003 second after California)
New York also stands second in the number of temporary workers (224871) after California.
In the number of visiting diplomats and representatives, New York stands first at 63,416, followed by Florida at 54,653 and California a distant third at 16,834.
In 1991-2002, new comers were predominantly of Asian (31%) origin and Latin American (42%). New York was their second most likely state of intended residence after California (U. S. Department of Justice, 2002, Yearbook of Immigration Statistics).
According to Joseph Berger, author of The world in a city: Traveling the Globe through the neighborhoods of the New York today, New York has a stunning reputation for ethnicity in its population. He points out that 60% of New York residents are immigrants or children of immigrants and neighborhoods are being remade as older immigrant groups, like the Irish and Italians continue to live in the suburbs (Chan, 2007). Berger cited the Chinese and Koreans in Flushing, the Dominicans in Washington Heights and the West Bronx, the Guyanese in Richmond Hill, the Caribbeans in East Flatbush, the South Asians in Jackson Heights, the growing Chinese population in Bensonhurt and the polyglot mix of Arabs, Brazilians and Bangladeshis in Astoria (Chan, 2007). Hasia R. Diner, a professor of American Jewish history at New York University reminds that New York was a heterogeneous city from its founding. She says that by 1855, New York was the most Irish city in America, a hub of nationalist politics and even of the Gaelic revival. Irish women worked as maids and household servants to the wealthy and the educated among them worked as teachers. The Irish also impacted the religious landscape by bringing in a network of social and political organizations that revolved around the Roman Catholic Church, challenging the power of the Protestant Church. Professor Diner notes that Jews and Italians migrated to New York at the same period in the late 19th and early 20th centuries (Chan, 2007). While Italian migration was initially composed of males, Jewish immigration was more evenly split between men and women. Moreover, over one-third of Italians returned to Italy whereas the Jews could not return to Europe due to anti-Semitism. Italians largely came from agricultural backgrounds, whereas Jews were more likely to come from industrial and urban backgrounds. Due to their higher skills and literacy Jews soon became entrepreneurs. Both Jews and Italians worked for the welfare of their ethnic kinsmen. Profound shift happened in immigrant population patterns when the immigration law ended the quota system in 1965. Earlier, the quota system had barred most immigrants since the 1920s (Chan, 2007). In 1970, 18.2 percent of the citys population was foreign-born; by 2005, 36.6 percent were (Chan, 2007). In 1970, the leading countries of origin for the citys foreign-born were Italy, Poland, the Soviet Union, Germany, Ireland, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, the United Kingdom, Australia and Jamaica. By 2000, the list had changed: the Dominican Republic, China, Jamaica, Mexico, Guyana, Ecuador, Haiti, Trinidad and Tobago, India and Colombia (Chan, 2007). The composition within racial groups has also changed significantly. In 1970, two-thirds of the citys Hispanic population was Puerto Rican; in 2005, Puerto Ricans represented about 35 percent of the Hispanic population, and Dominicans about 24 percent (Chan, 2007). The wave of immigration has helped New York City maintain and even expand its population.
The foreign-born population in New York City is most concentrated in its two most populous boroughs: 36.2 percent of the citys live foreign-born live in Queens and 31.4 percent in Brooklyn, compared with 14.7 percent in Manhattan, 14.4 percent in the Bronx and 3.3 percent on Staten Island (Chan, 2007). In Manhattan, the only concentrations of immigrants are in Lower Manhattan (Chinatown area) and in Washington Heights, where an estimated 90,000 to 100,000 Hispanics - mostly Dominicans - are clustered. Even on Staten Island, where there is hardly a concentration of immigrations, neighborhoods have been transformed over short periods of time: In the 1990s, the North Shore of the island lost about 12,000 non-Hispanic whites and gained about 10,000 black and Latino residents (Chan, 2007). Illegal immigration is not a major problem in New York as it is in the Southwest and California. This is because New York has a relatively small share of the Mexican population in the United States. Demographers estimate that 400,000 to 500,000 undocumented immigrants live in the five boroughs (Foner, 2007).
The top three groups Dominicans, Chinese, and Jamaicans made up less than 30 percent of all foreign-born people in the five boroughs in 2000 (Foner , 2007). Many immigrants still come from Europe. The countries of the former Soviet Union are the fourth-largest source. Even among blacksa group often counted as if it were a monoliththere is tremendous diversity. More than a quarter of the citys two million non-Hispanic black residents were born abroad (Foner, 2007).
Describe why New York has more or less immigrants
New York has always been a favorite destination with immigrants mainly because of its strategic position as port of entry and also because of the increasingly welcome climate in the state to immigrants. Immigrants come in search of a living. New York State provides a great environment for immigrants to make their living. This is evident in the fact that immigrants added $229 billion to the New York State economy in 2006, according to a new report by the Fiscal Policy Institute titled Working for a Better Life: A Profile of Immigrants in the New York Economy , this number represents 22.4 percent of the states Gross Domestic Product. The report further reveals that immigrants make up 21 percent of people living in New York State37 percent in New York City, 18 percent in the downstate suburbs, and 5 percent in upstate in 2005, according to the report (Anderson, 2007). The Fiscal Policy Institute prepared this report as part of The Truth About Immigrants, a joint project with the New York Immigration Coalition. Immigrants also make up 31 percent of people who commute into New York State to work. Fully 34 percent of New Yorks children are growing up in families with at least one foreign-born adult8 percent in upstate New York, 31 percent in the downstate suburbs, and 57 percent in New York City (Anderson, 2007).
The main attraction of immigrants to New York is that New York State offers equal opportunities to immigrants and New Yorkers. Its laws enable immigrants to start businesses, invest in New York, and work in jobs all across the economic spectrumthe same as other New Yorkers. The report also finds that immigrants are subject to the same economic forces as everyone else in New Yorks highly polarized economy. A recent research finding is that over one third of all children growing up in New York State are part of an immigrant family. Alan B. Lubin, executive vice president of the New York State United Teachers says This stunning statistic shows how immigrants and their families are interwoven into the fabric of our schools and our communities (Chakravarthy, 2007). He also points out that immigrants also contribute heavily towards higher education efforts by serving as teachers. Over time, the report shows, immigrants become fully participating members of New Yorks communities. There are many successful immigrant entrepreneurs in New York and the number of Hispanic- and Asian-owned businesses is found to be growing at a rapid rate. About two thirds of immigrants in the upstate and downstate suburbs own their own homes (McGeehan, 2007).
What adds to the charm of New York as a destination city for immigrants is that immigrants in New York City are more likely than U.S.-born residents to live in families in the middle income brackets, and less likely to live in families with very high or very low incomes. It has been found that immigrants make up a quarter of CEOs who live in New York City, half of accountants, a third of office clerks, a third of receptionists, and a third of building cleaners. In sector after sector, immigrants are found in the top, middle, and bottom rungs of the economic ladder, from finance to real estate to medicine. In the downstate suburbs, 18 percent of all residents are foreign-born, with immigrants making up 23 percent of the labor force. Immigrants in the downstate suburbs are doing better, economically, than immigrants in other parts of the state. Median income for families with at least one immigrant adult is $71,000, compared to a statewide median of $45,000 for families with at least one immigrant (the statewide median for people in U.S.-born families is $53,000). More immigrants work as registered nurses than in any other occupation. In addition, 41 percent of physicians and surgeons in the downstate suburbs are foreign-born, as are 28 percent of college and university professors, 22 percent of accountants and auditors, and 19 percent of financial managers (Kallick and Brill, 2007). In upstate New York, five percent of the population is foreign-born, but immigrants play a disproportionately important role in some areas that are key to the regions economy, culture, and history. In universities, immigrants make up 20 percent of all professors, four times their share of the overall population (Kallick and Brill, 2007). In health care, the fastest-growing sector in upstate New York, immigrants make up 35 percent of physicians and surgeons. In scientific fields, related to upstates strength in research and development, immigrants make up 20 percent of computer software engineers and 13 percent of computer scientists and systems analysts (Kallick and Brill, 2007). And in farming, important to rural communities and to the cultural heritage of the region, immigrants make up an estimated 80 percent of the seasonal workers who pick the crops. Perhaps surprisingly, the three most common countries of origin for upstate immigrants are Canada, India, and Germany (Kallick and Brill, 2007). Mexico, the focus of so much public attention in the immigration debates, comes fourth (Kallick and Brill, 2007).
New York is a modern city that respects its infinite variety of ethnic groups by suspending alternate-side parking restrictions on no fewer than 34 legal and religious holidays, including the Hindu celebration of Diwali, the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha, the Catholic feast of the Assumption, the Jewish holiday of Purim, and the Asian Lunar New Year.
New York also has historical advantages. Migration into the boroughs has been steady and diverse for more than a century, unlike some cities that have been surprised by a large recent influx after generations of little change. New Yorks low-skilled immigrants have been balanced by an equal number of highly skilled newcomers. The citys 51 city council seats, 65 state assembly positions, 25 state senate slots, and 59 community boardswith up to 50 members eachoffer abundant opportunities for ethnic representation.
New Yorkers pride themselves on a tradition of successfully absorbing immigrants. They are proud of their innumerable ethnic festivals and parades, their settlement houses, the huge City University of New York, and their ethnic politics.
New York is a vibrant center for commerce and business and one of the three world cities along with London and Tokyo that control world finance. The city is a major center of television broadcasting, book publishing, advertising, and other facets of mass communication. It became a major movie-making site in the 1990s, and it is a preeminent art center, with artists revitalizing many of its neighborhoods. It is served by three major airports: John F. Kennedy International Airport and LaGuardia Airport, both in Queens, and Newark International Airport, in New Jersey. Railroads converge upon New York from all points (Skerry, 2006).
With its vast cultural and educational resources, famous shops and restaurants, places of entertainment, striking and diversified architecture and parks and botanical gardens, New York draws millions of tourists every year. Some of its streets and neighborhoods have become symbols throughout the nation. Wall Street means finance; Broadway, the theater; Fifth Avenue, fine shopping; Madison Avenue, advertising; and SoHo, art (Burrows and Wallace, 1999).
New York City is also famous for its ethnic diversity, manifesting itself in scores of communities representing virtually every nation on earth, each preserving its identity. Little Italy and Chinatown date back to the mid-19th cent. African Americans from the South began to migrate to Harlem after 1910, and in the 1940s large numbers of Puerto Ricans and other Hispanic-Americans began to settle in what is now known as Spanish Harlem. Since the 1980s New York City has undergone substantial population growth, primarily due to new immigration from Latin America (especially the Dominican Republic), Asia, Jamaica, Haiti, the Soviet Union and Russia, and Africa (Burrows and Wallace, 1999).
All of these factors make New York an attractive destination for immigrants.
How does government of USA effect immigration in New York State? How is it different from other states
The government of USA allows states to have their own laws regarding immigration. As of April 13, 2007, state legislators in all of the 50 states had introduced at least 1169 bills and resolutions related to immigration or immigrants and refugees (NCSL, 2007). This is more than twice the total number of introduced bills in 2006. In New York, as in most states the following kinds of bills were passed: Benefit bills restricting benefits and services to legal immigrants and citizens and require proof of citizenship or legal immigration status In particular, New York is considering a bill that would exclude undocumented immigrants from receiving health care services from a publicly funded health care facility; Documentation bills tightening requirements of documentation and identity verification; Driving Licensing Bills restricting qualification for licenses to citizens and legal immigrants; Education bills mandating that a determination of the immigration status of persons be complete before they may participate in educational programs; Employment bills prohibiting employment of unauthorized workers and requiring verification of work authorization; Law Enforcement bills requiring cooperation with federal immigration authorities, prohibiting non-cooperation, or offering enhanced authority to state and local law enforcement related to immigration; Some bills restricting certain state and local law enforcement from assisting in the enforcement federal immigration law; Licensing bills restricting granting of business and professional licenses to citizens and legal immigrants and establishing documents that are acceptable proof of identity (NCSL, 2007). Thus the government interventions mostly make life difficult for the immigrants.
Bibliography
Anderson, Phillip (2007). NY Immigrants Add $229 Billion to State Economy Last year. The Albany Project.
Booth, Daniel (2006). Federalism on ice: state and local enforcement of federal immigration law. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy.
Burrows, Edwin G., and Mike Wallace (1999). Gotham: A History of New York City to 1898. New York: Oxford University Press.
Chakravarthy, N. Srirekha (2007). Immigrants are changing the face of New York. India Post News Service.
DHS (2006). Immigration Statistics Yearbook. Web.
Foner, Nancy (2007). Ethnic and Racial Studies: New York, Immigration 101. The Wilson Quarterly, Vol. 32.
Kallick, D. David and Brill, Jo (2007). Immigrants Create Almost a Quarter of New York State Economic Output. Fiscal Policy Institute Publication. Web.
McGeehan, Patrick (2007). Immigrants Pull Weight in Economy, Study Finds. The New York Times.
NCSL (National Conference of State Legislatures) (2007). Overview of State Legislation Related to Immigration and Immigrants.
Skerry, Peter (2006). Mother of Invention: The Statue of Liberty Stood for Decades in New York Harbor before It Became a Symbol of Welcome to Newcomers. in Forgetting That Fact, Americans Reveal Their Taste for Myths about Immigration. The Wilson Quarterly. Vol. 30.
Immigration is the particular international movement of people to a country where they do not have citizenship or in which they are not indigenous with the purpose of settling as naturalized citizens or permanent residents. Urbanization is a special term that describes the decreasing proportion of people who live in rural areas, the population shift from rural to urban areas, and the possible ways of societies adaption to these changes. It is hard to disagree that immigration and urbanization have significant impacts on the rise of the global economy.
Main body
Immigration is a severe process, the effects of which are not completely studied. According to Saiidi, nearly 50 million people in the U.S. are foreign-born, which accounts for about 15 percent of the total population. Hence, in all parts of the world, there is a significant number of immigrants, which provides all countries with a net economic benefit. For example, the International Monetary Fund found out that the share of migrants one percentage point increase GDP per person in advanced economies by up to two percent. It is hard to disagree that this influences the global economy.
It is evident that people have lived in the countryside, small towns, and villages for almost all of human history. However, over the last two centuries, the proportion of the worlds population living in rural areas has grown rather rapidly ( The Role of Cities in the Global Economy ). In 1800 it was five percent, and in 2008, more than half of people had become the livers of cities. Of course, there are some significant impacts of urbanization on the global economy.
This process delivers prosperity and wealth, but there are some costs, and a certain financial framework has to be established in order to cover them. For example, it may be done through taxation, and if it affects one countrys economy, it also influences the global one. Moreover, seventy percent of greenhouse gas emissions because of climate change come from cities.
Conclusion
Hence, their share of global emissions is likely to increase further as urbanization grows ( The Role of Cities in the Global Economy ). That also influences the global economy since cities will have to accelerate the use of renewable energy.
Works Cited
The Role of Cities in the Global Economy. Pictet, n.d. 2020. Web.