I was responding to the point in the article linked by 'davidw: the optimal number of immigrants into the U.S. is over 2 billion (i.e. to match the population density of the U.K.) But I will also note that just because someone is educated does not mean they share American values. I have met very educated people who defend practices such as requiring women to be chaperoned in public. Where I come from (south asia), coming out as gay is still unacceptable, even in educated upper-class circles. I'm willing to pay $300k educating a kid here in the U.S. if we can use that opportunity to inculcate the proper values.

> the optimal number of immigrants into the U.S. is over 2 billion (i.e. to match the population density of the U.K.)

You should read beyond the first few sentences.

Edit:

> coming out as gay is still unacceptable, even in educated upper-class circles.

I think it would be difficult and dangerous to try and use the immigration system to select for, say, Obamas over Scalias.

The biggest American value is its diversity, which create the liberal values and progressive society that you guys have (otherwise American will just fight to the death if they don't accept each other values). Claiming something to be "American value" and then use it as a mean to cultivate a homogeneous culture seems to be a good way to turn conservatives.

> The biggest American value is its diversity, which create the liberal values and progressive society

Correlation, meet causation. Lots of countries are more diverse than the USA but are doing far worse when you look at crime/corruption/QoL statistics. Lots of countries are far more progressive and far less diverse.

You are attacking a strawman. I did not claim that diversity is a sufficient condition for progressive values, I did not even claim that it's a necessary condition. There are many sets of values that will go together to create a "good" society (for any subjective definition of good). For the case of the US, diversity is one of those values. It is entirely possible for a country to not have much diversity and still be a progressive country. In other words, I guess "create" in the quoted sentence should be replaced with "strongly influence".

Essentially, if you're claiming that diversity isn't one of the more defining cultural value of the US, and without it the States would be the same, then I would like to hear your reasoning.

> There are only 65,000 H1-B visas per year. Surely the fabric of our country wouldn't dissolve if that number were doubled or even tripled.

In a way, it's already 6 times higher, because H1-B is not a yearly visa, but (potentially, simplifying here) a six-year visa. 65k is only for "fresh" applications, not the concurrent limit.

Putting it another way, you are advocating leeching off of the educational systems of poor countries to save the USA a cost that it rightly owes its citizens regardless? Which is going to be spent anyway, regardless of whether that USA student later becomes an employed taxpayer?

In any case, this position only makes sense if you think people are a fungible, replaceable commodity. It does not address the parent's comment at all, which is about culture.

If you can add taxpayers who are already passed the point where you spend huge amounts of money on them then you win. So if you can snatch up people straight out of undergrad into high paying (highly taxed) jobs and have them contribute as young single workers then you should do it.