There are a bunch of factors at play. I think the basic frame is that there are two calamities that play into immigration. The first is climate change, water food instabilities that stem from this. The second is lack of incentives for both sides (nations) to meet in an equitable agreement. I think the divergence between what is politically viable, and at the same time addresses systemic change will be very difficult.
As far as I can tell this as stated before is still relevant.
We could augment the idea with gaining forecasts on immigration mitigation infrastructure. The state department does this work on some level I would imagine. USAID was functionally a path for infrastructure projects along with the WBG being a funder.
We must mention there is an impending population collapse is over hyped in my estimation. I mention it here are two fold; one is it could be a slow unwind, or a quick one. I am in favor the less turbulent option, but we ignore it at our peril. Two is that this is a disincentive to invest in a country that is sending you their population. This is especially likely to their detriment at some point if world population trends continue.
Which is to lead me to my final point; the under lying factors here need to be addressed. If we don’t fix these issues we have little chance elsewhere in the long run.
The next is expatriates and the so called brain drain. This can happen to all countries and we should be careful not to all our human talent pool to be driven away. We have a version of this with the so called passport bros. We are likely to disparage them but like the so called neck beards. We may find it acceptable to mock them but we are less strong without their potential contributions. Also it should be said the passport bros far more often then not make a new life in their brides home country.
On to migration, traditionally what was done is we coordinate the immigrant population with the population here with their closest ethnic makeup. This has some major advantages, and drawbacks. This creates pockets of communities that all codify, but may find it difficult to assimilate more broadly.
I think the move is you mix it up, and you explain to migrants the choice before them. You say there are more jobs in XYZ towns and cities. If you seek support from a community members with a similar ethnicity we recommend these places. To the extent they overlap that could be highlighted. Then the crucial part is you fund programs to create a support system that looks at the entire family.
Shifting immigration from a person to person focus to a family group focus would create efficiencies in the system that don’t seem apparent at first. Redundant due diligence seems to be an issue here.
What seems to be the ideal common case is you give the migrant the best information possible then allow them to choose. Crucially when they choose where to go we then support the choice as best as possible given the circumstances.
If many choose a certain series of options are popular this may indicate the need for creating a social support node for this group. Our duty is to identify that node, and its needs then build it out. While you maintain a fabric of support with a social worker core as best you can.
I must say there is moral hazard in generating this list, I suspect most would not understand that statement. The current power structure would likely view an immigration system as a stop gap measure to stem our declining birth rate trends.
I know places like Sweden are in a crisis, so it would appear we are in a bit of a catch 22 situation. The frame I give this information is that, this list isn’t as detailed as I would like. Know that immigration is generally a closely related to many other issues. This means when you solve other underlying problems you will indirectly solve migration pressure.
Conditions that exacerbate migration:
Industry overrepresented in government policy over the interest of populous in nations.
Apathy by the those in the positions of power and the populations that should hold them to account.
Rate of opportunities should be gaged and published for gender, ethnicity, and region.
Outreach support should exist to help those in need. The nature of the problem is that we need to have a sort of social worker response team.
Enhanced income and benefits extended to skilled mentors subsidized by the state and NGO fabric. There are many in society that are older and have great knowledge to give. It would be great if space were made for them to do so.
Hope intervention targeting at risk youth granting them opportunity where if they are willing to work through a remedial onboarding program they are paid to do work in a foreign civil core. I think the underlying mandate is travel. Having public / military craft with boatswain / shipwright crew internships. You need to show young men the world to allow them to see the possibilities before them.
Employee ex-gang members to act as de-escalation squads. These gangs will much more likely respect the words of others that have been in the lifestyle. These squads could act as a response team that attempts to deescalate known points of conflict. This program could be the tip of the spear of a jobs, and societal reintegration program.
Apathy of ourselves and others when dealing with the plight of poorer countries needs to be confronted with the moral hazard arguments that are appropriate.
I hope this helps, I would offer greater scope and detail once / if the political meta changes.
Yeh, that all sounds fine. I don’t know. I’m thinking a lot of what you suggest is in place, it’s simply overwhelmed and the volume of immigration allowed is inconsistent.
I don’t see it as a slash and burn republican issue so much as a patch job of incoherent legislation by both parties, but maybe there’s some of both.
I agree that global warming is a big part of this… and that it will get to be more of a problem.
I really like the idea of ex-gang member de-escalation squads. I hadn’t thought of that.
You also bring up a good point, I think, about the infrastructure of immigration. Human traffickers are making money getting people to the border, and the migrants are not getting accurate information as to what will be waiting for them.
Meanwhile, there are people in the US from all over the world who have to continue filing and showing up for court dates for years before they are granted a green card, and then for years before they are granted citizenship.
Meanwhile, Rohingyan refugees have been stuck in an open air prison in Bangladesh for six years. I think we should be helping them first as we did with the Hmong… according to need… but I won’t even bother to suggest that to my congressman.
I don’t know. I’m thinking what I would most like to see over the next year is a push to get reporters into those border prisons.
