Immigration from India to the U.S. should be encouraged

Ok. So you made a very detailed argument there. However, I feel that it has failed to prove your original proposal that the USA should endorse mass immigration from India. Firstly, you made a big point about the racism and problems with the status quo concerning immigration. However, your solutions are unrealistic and weak responses. I want to deal with them rather than your premises about the status quo because I don't deny that there are problems with the status quo. So you suggested that racism will be solved by more interactions. This isn't always true and works both ways. Firstly, more interactions between groups is not what actually gets rid of racism. What does is positive interactions. An individual who receives many negative interactions with Indian immigrants would under your model be seen as becoming less racist but really its quite obvious that your model does not work. So we need to change our stance when looking at what solves racism - positive interactions between groups. What you could argue however is that the rate of immigration would be so high that Indian immigrants would become such a predominant group that it would be difficult to marginalise them. However, this is clearly not always true considering the treatment of African americans and other people of colour in the USA. Even though it is true that the treatment of such groups has improved this does validate your argument that we still should endorse immigration from India. Surely, it would just be better to import no racism in the first place by not endorsing immigration instead of endorsing it identifying racism towards immigrants as a problem and then taking a long time of injustice and tension to solve it? Going back to the previous issue with your point, in what way can you be sure that there will be more positive interactions between Americans and Indian immigrants because there will be undoubtedly more jobs market competition between the groups and competition for housing too. Above all there will be a clash of cultures when this happens under this motion. This is what will really drive the hate. I point you to the example of Polish migrants in the UK. Before large scale migration to the UK most British people considered Polish people to be there friends and allies having a long history of cooperation in WWII and fighting back against communist Russia. However, during the period of migration many British people saw Poles in a different way. They competed for low payed jobs, for housing, there were language and culture tensions and as a result once good views towards poles changed to negative views towards them and immigrants in general because after all if native people feel threatened by immigration they often take out their hatred on all groups even those who are not related to original group of immigrants. That is why Black British people witnessed an increase in hate crimes towards them after the Brexit vote which was a manifestation of how views towards immigrants have changed. Also you argued: " racism is not caused by an influx of migrants, the lack of "supposed" massive immigration is caused by (2). Indians are simply not coming over in droves as expected and perceived by the general population." My response to this is that this happens under the status quo where there already are such restrictions such as quotas on migration. However under your proposal we would drop such restrictions and therefore immigration from India would increase. And considering the obvious incentives of moving to a free, rich western, english speaking country migration would increase rapidly just as in the example of Poland and the UK. Therefore there would be mass immigration and thus all the associated problems would follow. Overall, when mass immigration occurs more negative interactions take place. It is these negative reactions which breed racism. History provides so many examples of this - Irish immigration to America etc. How about instead of importing hatred the government amends the racism already in the system by leading by example, introducing anti-discrimination laws etc. ? Your second point was on the economy. I don't deny that immigration can help the economy. However, this is only true when it is controlled. You painted a picture of an economically doomed USA. I'm really not convinced of this picture. It doesn't seem accurate. The US economy is currently growing at a good rate and jobs are being created. Furthermore, you don't need immigration to have a strong economy. In fact the fact that a country would rely on that suggests that the economy is fundamentally weak. Immigration does not solve this problem - only sustainable solutions. So why is this the case? Well, when immigrants come to the USA they eventually either assimilate or return to their country of birth. Therefore they eventually will adopt the wages and work of that country. I point you towards the examples of the Italian immigrants to the USA in the 1900s. Therefore, more and more immigrants are needed as the problems of job fulfilment are never solved. A way to solve this problem is by improving education, dealing with poverty and its associated social problems and investing in technology. Also immigrants may have different work patterns towards most americans however they aren't competing with the 'average' american worker. Eventually, its the working man and woman on low pay in unskilled jobs that have to deal with the squeeze. Their wages are often pushed down due to competition from migrant workers and they can eventually go unemployed. Those same migrant workers will eventually also experience the same problems as they are undercut by new immigrants. One point you made is that Americans won't do certain jobs. I question the tinge of racism underlying this point which seems to suggest that Americans are less inclined to do hard jobs. This is not the case. The reason Americans supposedly 'won't do those jobs' is actually because the wages are so poor in the first place. And why are they so poor? Because immigration brings down those wages and employers exploit that due to a lack of a high minimum wage. Finally, you made the point that we should exploit the willing of immigrants to work for such poor wages and hours. Now this seems rather immoral since it suggests that we should take advantage of people when we could treat them better. If we controlled immigration then we could avoid exploitation thus not treating migrant workers, in this case - Indian, so badly. Overall, your solution does not solve the over-exaggerated problems with the US economy that you identified because new Indian migrants will eventually become part of that economy and the problem will still exist. Your solution may just stall it which considering all the negative effects on the native population is just not worth it. And, it is the working class that suffers as a result. As for your statistics, you need to consider the bigger picture. The American economy is doing very well. The dollar is strong and employment is high with good GDP growth. As for the wider problem of an ageing population, people are also working for longer so that isn't as much of an issue. And also, immigrants get old too. They will also expect pensions and need tax money. The problem doesn't go away. Plus, America, although a fantastic country, is facing inevitable decline. Ultimately it will not be able to compete with China and India and so will eventually lose influence. But is this a bad thing? India and China are going in a more liberal and free direction and also China and India are much bigger countries so they should have more influence eventually. America can't cling onto power and so shouldn't. It should focus on improving its domestic situation which will not improve through high levels of migration from India. And, say a country doesn't create more jobs. Does that matter as long as people are becoming richer and happier? Surely the role of government is to improve the lives of the poorest especially instead of just creating jobs off the back of exploited immigrants? Anyway, I hope that has given you some sufficient room for thought and has addressed your main criteria of the motion: Can high levels of indian migration get rid of racism? Can high levels of indian migration improve the economy to the extent that this outweighs the problems is brings? Also, on a side note, why immigrants just from India? Isn't that a bit discriminatory?