Is there any difference in the results to our society from accepting Indians, Chinese, Koreans and on the other hand accepting Mexicans?

" They have shown what can be achieved by integrating themselves into U.S. society and taking advantage of all the opportunities the country offers." No govt. handouts? How heartless!

And of course, it raises the question in India: "If Indians there have such success, why not here?"

Mike Earl, I think the reason is the American Dream is real and can be lived in the US whereas it can't elsewhere. I worked with Indian engineers here in Asia and the US. They were very competent in both places but only in the US can they reach their plateau. For instance my co-worker in Abu Dhabi tried for 5 years to get a simple drivers license. He never got one and never will. Here is how ridiculous it is. On a 100KPH road he was failed for not driving exactly 100KPH, the next year he was failed for driving 98KPH, then next year failed for 101 KPH. How can he achieve his potential when he can't advance his personal stature. In the US they don't have these problems and can make their way with relative ease. Consequently they give it their all and succeed in the US.

The article gives very few reasons to be able to compare the Indians, with say, perhaps Mexicans.
Someone answer me this: have you ever met someone from the Untouchable class who has become successful in America? If you have any, ask your Indian friends what their families in India do for a living?
Do the sons of daughters of surgeons in Mexico sneak over the border? Or perhaps are they, like the Brahmin of India, afforded more opportunities (like a good education) afforded from having rich parents?

Potter, I can answer a small part of your question. Since you used Medicine I'll do likewise from listening to my family who for the most part are Dr's.

Both Mexican and Indian, or any 3rd World Dr cannot simply come to the US and practice if their sole medical education was completed in their native state. Most cannot pass their boards. The reason being is their ciriculum majors in resperatory ailments, i.e. TB, dengue,bacterial, etc., and ailments not common in the US. Most end up either being educated in the US or equivalent training, post grad.

Dr. Alvarez, a Mexican peasant came to the US with his family (probably illegal), joined the Military and off to VietNam, went to college,became a citizen, became an orthopedic surgeon. Operated on my knee in 1984.

Of course money helps and I do know that several of the Indians I have worked with do have monied parents. No denying that.

This is why I want to:

(1) Build a fence along the Mexican border and

(2) Open up the quotas for India (and any other country whose immigrants do better than average.)

This country has been and will be built buy immigrants ... so shouldn't we pick the best?

There are none better than the Mexicans we're getting, but, as Thomas Sowell has pointed out, all immigrant groups do better than average. The quality won't change when they switch from walking to boating.

Ralph, don't despair. No matter where they come from, they become the "best" when they get here. Perhaps not many become professionals in the first generation, but by the second, watch their smoke.

"..all immigrant groups do better than average."
oj, Who wouldy you say is doing worse than average?

Obviously almost all immigrant groups do better than natives. But some immigrant groups do better than other immigrant groups. With Indian immigrants you don't have to wait for the second or third generation - they're starting businesses, paying taxes and employing the native-born at a far higher rate than Mexicans. Plus their contacts back home help cement ties with this century's next superpower. There are other groups with other benefits - we can steal Europe's best educated and brightest, people from ex-Communist countries know what freedom really means and will fight to preserve it, etc.

I'm just sayig if we're going to have lots of immigrants we should select them based on our national interest, and "who's best at sneaking over the border" is probably not a very good selection mechanism.

Ralph:

Once you start picking and choosing based solely on "success" oughtn't you deport the natives, since they do worse than the immigrants?

Emma:

Natives are lazy--immigrants motivated.

"oughtn't you deport the natives..."

No, because we're the one paying the taxes and voting for the politicians. I want an immigration policy designed to maximize our national interests.

What interest do we have in keeping lazy natives when we could replace them with hard working immigrants who share our values?

"What interest do we have in keeping lazy natives ..."

My interest in keeping "lazy natives" is that I am one.

Now, what immigration policy most benefits me? One that brings in lots of employable, emloyment generating, current and future taxpayers.

Yesm but your interest diverges radically from our society's.