Because its incredibly expensive and time consuming and provides minimal (if any?) long term benefit


We already have this system. The legal immigration is not impacted by illegal immigration. Illegal immigration is impossible to regulate without extreme dedication of resources. Its like the war on drugs. This isn't exactly rocket science.

No Biden is the I support Israel unconditionally it may not be an election platform and I am sure Trump would as well though he has called out Netanyahu as he should . Trump is running on stopping all illegal immigration from all countries including bogus Asylum claims . The sad reality is there are xxxx hole countries out there that no one that believes in their safety would visit .

You are correct that is not part of his platform but his only platform is I am not Trump will see how that works out for him

Ah yes, the bogus asylum claims coming from people in *checks notes* dangerously unsafe places.

This is simply false tbh, all it takes (unlike the war on drugs) is a lot of violence for a brief period of time, and the credible threat of future use of such violence if necessary.

So you are implying we should execute illegals trying to cross the border?

Then you can just lean into "the implication"

"We don't want all the undedicated smelly 'bad hombre' criminal immigrants from dangerous African or Latino countries"

What would you like the Italian government/military to do, specifically?

Naval blockade as done with Albania in the 90s.

Making it physically impossible for boats carrying asylum seekers to enter the maritime economic area of Italy (or whatever line triggers our constitutional obligations toward people who are physically in our country).

What is your take on Meloni? Think she's legit or puppet?

A moderate centrist, leaning left on the economy and vaguely right on "culture".

To be clear she doesn't even bash unions nor even remotely touches the topic of abortion, so she is not even right-wing in what is typically associated with conservative rightwingism here.

The only topic where she is "normally right-wing" (for European standards) is immigration.

She is not even nationalist, in the sense of "Rome rules on everything", her government just started the procedure to give more autonomy to some regions which asked for it.

Even most MSM covering her from foreign countries has started to accept she is not the demon, meaning she is completely mainstream on most stuff or you would be hearing about her being Satan 24/7 as it happens with Wilders and what not.

She is legit normal center-right overall in a continent where the normal center right is to the left of Biden on many topics, perhaps not environmental policy, but many topics

I simply quoted one sentence, a rather disturbing one, and suggested that Mr. Miller would approve of that philosophy. I'm glad to hear you may diverge on some other immigration philosophies. That doesn't make your quoted statement any more palatable, of course.

Where are seeing that merit based immigration is "incredible expensive and time consuming" as well as not providing much long-term benefit?

Legal immigration is impacted by illegal immigration in that that more illegal immigration there is the less some people are to support more legal immigration.

If the goal is get illegal immigration to 10% of what it currently is I agree that would be insanely expensive and not worth it. I think a goal of cutting illegal immigration for the next 25 years by 50% would be relatively cheap.

Perhaps some of the people trying to trespass the border worked in hospitals for years, or can install air conditioners, or any other of the 100+ jobs in extreme demand in the USA.

Just giving super -preferential access to them, a very easy path to the green card (or something equivalent), would already decrease illegal immigration and make it more manageable to control the reduced amount of unqualified people trying anyway to enter.

That's an example of a very low cost improvement to the current situation

I glossed over your first point and thought you were talking about illegal immigration

As for the bolded, the main issue there is that MSM and Politicians are lying to the general public about how much illegal immigration there actually is and what the impacts of that illegal immigration actually are. If people weren't bombarded with lies and were able to think critically for themselves this wouldn't be an issue, but it is.

The easiest solution is stopping the lies and disinformation.

How do you confirm these skills in a manner that is satisfactory to you that they aren't the exact same people coming over as now?

Are we going with a trust first policy? Case workers going to perform aptitude tests at the border?

The employer takes part in the process because it's the first entity which gains materially (he fills the vacancies!) from that expansion of legal immigration.

It's fairly easy to adjudicate formal education, less for on-the-job learning, so in the latter case the neo-immigrant can be for some months on a kind of parole with the employer certifying he actually possesses those skills after the trial period, otherwise he is sent home.

For H1B visa you already have an employer sponsored system, that can be enlarged to a lot more jobs lowering the requirements (and abolishing quotas).

It would also help if people weren't bombarded by lies on the other side mixing up the many useful immigrants with the unqualified, unskilled ones

Oh, do tell me more about how you define useful and useless relative to immigrants

With lies about net fiscal contribution of specific subgroups.

The argument goes from "immigration on average is a net positive" (true) to "every single immigrant is always a net positive" (lol).

If "immigration on average is a net positive" then "illegal immigration on average is a net positive", DUCY?

I am certainly not claiming that every single immigrant is always a net positive. In fact I think I explicitly stated that illegal immigration is at worst a net neutral.

I have said you lied about the topic.

I am saying a lot of people (ITT as well) do.

Well, if you are going to call me a liar then I see no point in continuing discussions.

Lol sorry I was meant to write I have NOT said you are a liar on this.

My bad.

My point was a typical leftist approach to the topic is: we need immigrants (true), immigrants are good for the economy look at the numbers (true), SO we need to take in all those asylum seekers (complete non sequitur)

So this performative bullshit was so nonsensical you can’t even get the DHS impeached

Good luck god bless

Merit based immigration is one thing, but merit based asylum? I'm not saying it's an awful idea but don't think it would go over well