So there's a pragmatic question of how to avoid putting yourself at a disadvantage by being comparatively overgenerous that you don't have to be a "paleoconservative" or Trump supporter, or even Republican, to be concerned about.

>if you make more than a certain amount not if you invest over a certain amount.

I don't know any developed countries with that system. Do you?

There might have technically been other minimal requirements like knowing English or the local language, but most people who fulfill the pay requirements will fulfill the minor requirements too if applicable.

If so that's not the same as an income requirement at all.

If not, I'd like a list of them because that's very interesting.

I'm sure lots of countries have similar rules.

They have to demonstrate that they can't find a citizen to do the job etc...?

But: - tech salaries aren't US competitive - people often speak Danish (sometimes it's a requirement)

And while you'll probably do fine with English in Denmark in general. Long term you would need to learn the language. And to be fair, it's a useless language, there is only 5M speakers, why would anyone spend time learning that? :)

And yes, you would experience racism too. Just because it's a borderline social-libertarian paradise doesn't mean all the people are angels.

A disadvantage or an advantage? It's always seemed to me that people from other countries and cultures contributed very positively to what the US is today.

One thing that gets somewhat ignored for political reasons is assimilation/integration. Of course there was never a purely smooth, even, perfect melting pot, and there's a large history of enclaves in America, but today there are parties taking that to a prescriptive rule of "don't culturally appropriate" that feels self-defeating (and just dumb, frankly).

There's also room for a discussion of what good qualities to explicitly promote adoption of for shared values, etc.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.8408304,-79.398378,3a,53.5y,...

You might like to ruminate on teh fact that while Trump demonizes immigrants out of one side of his mouth, the resort he owns at Mar-A-Lago- was able to get 70 H1-B visas to hire hotel staff, despite the availability of some 5000 such people in Florida's state employment opportunities database and a whole lot of US citizens in Puerto Rico that are in search of economic opportunity right about now. Not that you were making a partisan point, but this is a great example of how the rhetorical divisions in American politics do not line up with the business practices.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

" What US Democrats ignore is that practically every damn country in the world does this too, often to a higher degree than the US.

So there's a pragmatic question of how to avoid putting yourself at a disadvantage by being comparatively overgenerous that you don't have to be a "paleoconservative" or Trump supporter, or even Republican, to be concerned about. "

my point is that things have shifted, and is perfectly in line with the parent which has +1 vote and was not considered a 'troll'..

line-of-discusison kthx

You're missing an 's' there. To make life a bit easier and to focus the discussion here is an easy to digest page on the subject:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

If after reading that you still feel that JFK would be a fascist then I don't know what to do next.

I said "By modern dem logic, JFK would be a facist"

now, thankfully corrected to:

"By modern dem logic, JFK would be a fascist"

not that I actually believed him to be a facscist.

glad you caught that 1 letter spelling typo though..

" What US Democrats ignore is that practically every damn country in the world does this too, often to a higher degree than the US.

So there's a pragmatic question of how to avoid putting yourself at a disadvantage by being comparatively overgenerous that you don't have to be a "paleoconservative" or Trump supporter, or even Republican, to be concerned about. "

my point is that things have shifted, and is perfectly in line with the parent which has +1 vote and was not considered a 'troll'..

line-of-discusison kthx.

Why did you put scare quotes around "their own"? Is it not their own country?

Culture changes over time no matter what you do, but is it completely unreasonable to want your culture to change slowly enough that you can still function in your dotage?

The point of linking that is only to question whether there are people who want their culture to change more slowly for reasons other than prejudice. Should "obviously wrong" dramatic cultural shifts like gay marriage somehow be slowed so people can get used to the idea? Even in the linked example, there are clearly other forces at work (anti-Muslim propaganda) which seem to exist purely to make it appear that the culture itself is changing entirely, when in reality it's just becoming more mixed race.

[0] https://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/600/...

I think the quotes are to suggest that those voters habitually overestimate their share of ownership, compared to everyone else in the country.

For clearer and not-political example, consider the average cat and "their house". It is true that they are a legitimate and valued member of the household... But the quotes suggest something about the way the cat sees the world.

A great deal of anger seems to be conservatives wanting to engineer the outcome rather than allowing culture to become more inclusive to people not like them e.g. more companies voluntarily saying Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas. This voluntary push to accomidate more non-christian customers is viewed as the "war" on Christmas, with the proposed "solution" being fewer non-christians in the country.

This is absolutely incorrect, Americans do not have freedom of association, so people of other cultures can always live with you, work with you, buy from you, etc - by law. Whether you think that's a good thing or not, that is a fact: you can't have an enclave in any meaningful sense.

Yes, our society. The people already here. People seem to have a hard time grasping that the culture who founded the modern US gov't are indeed those people, or it's somehow become offensive. Even a 1st generation immigrant would agree with that, but not some revisionist who brings up the American Indians as if fair amends haven't been made there or somehow a new government completely void of their influence is somehow not the founding of the country.

I hope these same people go around the internet beating the drum on east Asian immigration policies and immigrant acceptance along with Israel. You'd think this country is evil and I completely disagree we're as bad as these finger-wagging liberals insist we are with their scare quotes.

Because these arguments just condense to 'We got here first' talk?

Don't dish it out if you can't take it.

Don't we all agree that what happened to the indigenous tribes was a tragedy and we don't ever want to repeat it?

Doesn't it highlight the problem with unchecked immigration?

This is really reminding me of how supporters of the Confederacy insist on talking about the 'War of Northern Aggression' despite being the ones that started the conflict. Perhaps you could consider matters from a less absolutist perspective.

Actually they are simply pissed at that fact- since the end of slavery and colonialism, life has gotten simply too hard.

Also you have to live in the situation now where you are continually reminded you are no racial superman, and some one you thought was way beneath your station is now routinely beating you in highly intellectual activities.

This is not new to the US. Bulk of Indias current social friction problems happen because the previously lower caste people are doing well off in life now. Now economy might be a growing pie on the longer run, but on the shorter run, its just competition for limited resources at the end. If you previously were a upper caste person albeit not very capable, you could still succeed easily, given only your castes were allowed to study and prosper. Today with more people having an opportunity to compete, you just don't stand a chance. Now imagine being a upper caste person who only until recently had to merely exist to succeed to now having to compete and routinely be beaten by people whom you think are beneath you.

Things don't work well.

To those seasoned to privilege, equality feels like oppression - Internet Quote

The key question is: are they right?

Why would you hand over the keys to your kingdom to people who will displace you and rule against you?