The Republican party is frequently in a contradictory state with immigration, where they speak loudly against it, but then yield in to business demands for immigrant labor.
It's possible Trump is uniquely different there, but he's talked about being sympathetic to farm and hospitality businesses. It's hard to tell. Everything is up to his whims now.
The comment you are replying to quite intentionally said "legal immigration". Republicans love illegal immigration. Why? because it suppresses wages of both documented and undocumented workers.
Undocumented workers can be employed below minimum wage. If they get an attitude and start demanding a fairer wage or better working conditions, their employer just calls in an ICE raid to clear them out and then they start with a fresh batch. They pay a token fine and that's that.
Several sectors are completely dependent on this arrangement, most notably agriculture and food processing (eg chicken farms)
If they actually cared about this, they would seriously punish the employers for employing undocumented workers. they do not. In fact, when that's been tried it's been a disaster (eg [1])
And because the system allows this to happen, it suppresses the wages of documented workers as well. That's the point. The entire system of restricting immigration is designed to increase profits. Nothing more.
What's the alternative? Easy. Document them. We've done this before. When there was a shortage of male workers in WW2 (because a lot of men were in the Army), we had the Bracero program [2] for temporary workers.
Historically, many such workers came to work then went back to (primarily) Mexico. They only ended up staying permanently when it became too hard to cross the border.
As for these latest bans, well we had 3 Muslim bans in Trump 1. The 19 then 39 (and now apparently 75) countries are pretty much jus tprimarily Muslim and "shithole" [3] countries.
All of this stems from the desire to turn the United States into a Christian theocracy but only for white people.
You've essentially agreed, despite your opening sentence, by suggesting they are speaking out against illegal immigration, but want it to support businesses (the people who want low wages). That's exactly the contradiction I suggested.
That was obvious ever since they claimed asylum seekers that had followed the legal asylum process were “illegal immigrants” and society and the media just went along with that phrasing despite it being factually incorrect.
Is this sarcasm? Not that Trump's word means anything, but Trump has been against it since his first term. Having cancelled it temporarily in that first term, has said that he'll end H1B if he gets reelected, and that US shouldn't have the H1B program.
It's only since 2025 when Elon was in his good books and told Republicans to not vote for a bill that Trump woke up that day and decided he'd be pro-H1B.
All you had to do was a 10 second google search to find that:
The racial and ethnic makeup of legal immigrants who have obtained Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) status or arrived as new immigrants in the past four years (2022–2025) has been primarily driven by arrivals from Latin America and Asia.
Asian: Approximately 27% to 28% of all immigrants.
Hispanic/Latino (Ethnicity): Roughly 45% of the total immigrant population identify with Hispanic or Latino ethnic origins.
White: About 20% to 21%.
Black/African American: Approximately 9%.
Multi-racial: About 22% identify as having two or more races.
It just amazes me people continue to push these racist narratives that doesn't hold up once you look at the actual data. Its staggering to think we have the unlimited power of the internet and still can't seem to take 10 seconds to confirm or deny something as simple as this? How depressing.
It's such a small country and an even smaller amount are coming to the U.S. that this would have no material impact. Strange to see them there, but not Argentina (in much worse financial situation).
My guess is they view India as producing an elite immigration (i.e. net tax paying) in large numbers. It is stunning how many successful tech or non-tech executives are Indian born. I haven't seen the full list but I doubt any country on that list gets close, even as a % of population.
1st gen immigrants from India are almost always well-educated, and oftentimes even entrepreneurial. They are among the lowest-risk (with Chinese) immigrants. That is to say, they typically will not contribute to crime, gangs, or public welfare burden. So it's a pretty big difference between those two countries and all the others on the list.
Companies have been trying that since the 90s, yet the quality of work done by offshore teams is consistently crap. Better to import the entire team to the US, pay them below average wages, make them work 80 hour weeks under the watchful eye of a manager and threaten to fire them (which means deportation) if they dare to complain.
> the quality of work done by offshore teams is consistently crap
This isn't nearly true anymore, and hasn't been for a long time. Especially since everyone is using the same AI tooling as everyone else now.
What is true (in my experience) is that they do tend to lack a sense of ownership and craft. But I think companies care less and less about that all the time.
If you are a good software developer in India then you move abroad. It's not that India doesn't make great software developers, it's just they don't tend to stick around.
> A U.S. official confirmed the full list of countries will include Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia, Brazil, Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Republic of the Congo, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan and Yemen.
Grenada is here because the US asked to install radars here for their Venezuelan operation("drug boat interception") and Grenada declined. They also raised the The Level 2 advisory for US citizen.
Russia I presume is on the list because of geopolitical tensions.
I am not familiar with every country in that list but in my experience, what looks like an anomaly is Morocco, which produces a fairly large elite compared to the size of the country (worked with lots of highly educated / highly paid (and therefore net tax contributing) moroccan nationals). I have hardly worked with any other nationality in that list in my professional life (Bangladesh and Tunisia maybe).
I think this move could harm US in two ways: It will reduce the immigrant diversity which might make the population skew towards the biggest immigrant population such as from India and Mexico which are not in this list. Second it will remove USA as top destination for talent, which will help stop brain drain from these countries causing their local industry to benefit and thereby reducing the edge of US companies.
The State Department said[1]:
"The State Department will pause immigrant visa processing from 75 countries whose migrants take welfare from the American people at unacceptable rates."
Whether or not that's a good/true reason is another discussion.
Trump and his whole administration is extremely pro-Israel, even by the standards of US administrations. Jordan is 95% Muslim and around a quarter of the population are Palestinian refugees, so I suspect that has something to do with it
Not only Azerbaijan, but the whole Caucasia is included (Armenia and Georgia too). Given Trump's recent peace middlemanship between Azerbaijan and Armenia, this is actually somewhat surprising.
I pulled the latest overstay data from the CBP website (2024) and compared it to the list of countries. Some of the countries have high overstay rates (Haiti and Laos >24%), but others don't. Barbados (0.44%) has a lower overstay rate than France (0.48%). Libya (1.59%) has a lower rate than Portugal (1.68%). Some countries with high rates aren't on the list entirely, like Malawi (22.05%). Also, the hypothesis fails a chi square test. It's not that.
Their justification is interesting too, because if the threshold is "citizenship must require personal attendance", then Canadian citizenship is almost certainly invalid too if you obtained yours over Zoom, which is how most new Canadians obtain it.
I'm surprised that you can get non-attendant citizenship in Canada. They don't even give automatic citizenship to children of Canadian parents born outside of Canada (maybe if both parents are Canadian they do, but my experience is with one Canadian and one American). US citizenship for a child born outside of the US to US parents is as simple as bringing their birth certificate to the consulate. And if you marry a Canadian, they won't give you residency unless you physically reside in Canada.
It’s bound to generate some heated discussion. A lot of people on that discussion asks the same question. There’s a lack of transparency on why some posts get flagged.
A pause in processing of immigration visas affects the tech industry and is relevant to most of the audience who lives in the US.
> A pause in processing of immigration visas affects the tech industry
Is an immigration visa the same as a work visa? I don't know much about the different types of immigration. The stated reason for the pause in immigration visas is to keep out those who would end up being a "public charge." I interpret this as people who want to come to the US but have no demonstrated means of support once they get here.
Student visas, I presume, are unaffected? What about work visas? If you're coming to work, you would also be paying taxes and not need public support.
My biggest issue with work visas is they're treated as an under-class that literally competes at upwards of half the pay or less and used to suppress wages. Especially in the past 5 years.
I'd like to see a 100% tax on Visa workers combined with salary floors per work classification. A tech worker that needs to be imported from another country shouldn't be paid less than 6 figures IMO, and depending on the position upwards of twice that. The tax itself should specifically be used to fund grants for STEM undergrads and graduates.
Just my own take on this, and I do have a personal stake and took a 40% pay cut last year just to be able to keep working.
Because like most political threads, it will largely consist of people with a crayon-and-coloring-book understanding of geopolitics posting low-effort snipes and trading insults while contributing basically zero to productive discussion.
The most disgusting example of this in recent memory was the Scott Adams death thread, where complimentary comments were being aggressively flagged, and toxic vitriol was being upvoted. It made me finally realize how many joyless, seriously broken people lurk here.
>On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
>Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
This is stupid and weakens the U.S. We have benefited so much from the visa program over the history of this country. If the smartest people of Russia and various other countries want to flee and join the U.S., we would be at an advantage.
Loving the downvotes on a valid, reasonable question.
I'm asking for specifics, isn't that what goes into a good comment here?
Or maybe the downvotes are political.
I think HN discussion should stand alone and not require research to find what someone is vaguely referring to, especially in an emotionally charged comment.
> I think HN discussion should stand alone and not require research
I don't know what random reader knows and I will assume someone can look up context in good faith. It's not productive to conduct conversations any other way. If someone understands my comments, we can exchange ideas. If not, that's ok too.
The one that I'm at a complete loss for is Uruguay - it is one of the wealthiest countries per capita in South America as well as the least corrupt and most egalitarian... not exactly a huge source of desperate immigrants. Did their government scold ours too harshly for the recent Venezuela shenanigans or something?
It continues to be clear that the administration opposes legal immigration (except perhaps in narrow cases, like white South Africans).
The Republican party is frequently in a contradictory state with immigration, where they speak loudly against it, but then yield in to business demands for immigrant labor.
It's possible Trump is uniquely different there, but he's talked about being sympathetic to farm and hospitality businesses. It's hard to tell. Everything is up to his whims now.
That's not contradictory at all.
The comment you are replying to quite intentionally said "legal immigration". Republicans love illegal immigration. Why? because it suppresses wages of both documented and undocumented workers.
Undocumented workers can be employed below minimum wage. If they get an attitude and start demanding a fairer wage or better working conditions, their employer just calls in an ICE raid to clear them out and then they start with a fresh batch. They pay a token fine and that's that.
Several sectors are completely dependent on this arrangement, most notably agriculture and food processing (eg chicken farms)
If they actually cared about this, they would seriously punish the employers for employing undocumented workers. they do not. In fact, when that's been tried it's been a disaster (eg [1])
And because the system allows this to happen, it suppresses the wages of documented workers as well. That's the point. The entire system of restricting immigration is designed to increase profits. Nothing more.
What's the alternative? Easy. Document them. We've done this before. When there was a shortage of male workers in WW2 (because a lot of men were in the Army), we had the Bracero program [2] for temporary workers.
Historically, many such workers came to work then went back to (primarily) Mexico. They only ended up staying permanently when it became too hard to cross the border.
As for these latest bans, well we had 3 Muslim bans in Trump 1. The 19 then 39 (and now apparently 75) countries are pretty much jus tprimarily Muslim and "shithole" [3] countries.
All of this stems from the desire to turn the United States into a Christian theocracy but only for white people.
[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/14/alabama-immigr...
[2]: https://guides.loc.gov/latinx-civil-rights/bracero-program
[3]: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-referred-...
You've essentially agreed, despite your opening sentence, by suggesting they are speaking out against illegal immigration, but want it to support businesses (the people who want low wages). That's exactly the contradiction I suggested.
That was obvious ever since they claimed asylum seekers that had followed the legal asylum process were “illegal immigrants” and society and the media just went along with that phrasing despite it being factually incorrect.
[dead]
That definitely isn't true. Trump has repeatedly been effusive about how important H1B labor is.
How so? In September he added a requirement that any future H1B visas from people abroad will require an unprecedented $100,000 payment.
Well either $100,000 per person or an large one time direct donation to Trump to be legally exempted from that charge.
Is this sarcasm? Not that Trump's word means anything, but Trump has been against it since his first term. Having cancelled it temporarily in that first term, has said that he'll end H1B if he gets reelected, and that US shouldn't have the H1B program.
It's only since 2025 when Elon was in his good books and told Republicans to not vote for a bill that Trump woke up that day and decided he'd be pro-H1B.
All you had to do was a 10 second google search to find that:
The racial and ethnic makeup of legal immigrants who have obtained Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) status or arrived as new immigrants in the past four years (2022–2025) has been primarily driven by arrivals from Latin America and Asia.
Asian: Approximately 27% to 28% of all immigrants.
Hispanic/Latino (Ethnicity): Roughly 45% of the total immigrant population identify with Hispanic or Latino ethnic origins.
White: About 20% to 21%.
Black/African American: Approximately 9%.
Multi-racial: About 22% identify as having two or more races.
It just amazes me people continue to push these racist narratives that doesn't hold up once you look at the actual data. Its staggering to think we have the unlimited power of the internet and still can't seem to take 10 seconds to confirm or deny something as simple as this? How depressing.
Uruguay is on the list. I remember when Uruguayans didn't even need a visa to visit the US.
It's such a small country and an even smaller amount are coming to the U.S. that this would have no material impact. Strange to see them there, but not Argentina (in much worse financial situation).
This is about immigrant visas. Visits are non-immigrant visas.
Well then technically the US wasn't processing their visa's back then either.
An interesting way to make make lots of friends in many countries around the world all at the same time.
There is a German saying:
"Ist der Ruf erst ruiniert lebt es sich ganz ungeniert"
translates to: “Once your reputation is ruined, you can live completely uninhibited.”
Perhaps that was their reasoning when starting two world wars?
I'm glad India is not yet included
My guess is they view India as producing an elite immigration (i.e. net tax paying) in large numbers. It is stunning how many successful tech or non-tech executives are Indian born. I haven't seen the full list but I doubt any country on that list gets close, even as a % of population.
1st gen immigrants from India are almost always well-educated, and oftentimes even entrepreneurial. They are among the lowest-risk (with Chinese) immigrants. That is to say, they typically will not contribute to crime, gangs, or public welfare burden. So it's a pretty big difference between those two countries and all the others on the list.
Looking at the list, it appears to be wheather the country or its population is pro-israel or not
Well yeah Trump's big tech friends need cheap H-1B labor.
I don't think tech companies need H-1Bs anymore. From my experience they just set up a subsidiary in India and move all their dev teams there.
Companies have been trying that since the 90s, yet the quality of work done by offshore teams is consistently crap. Better to import the entire team to the US, pay them below average wages, make them work 80 hour weeks under the watchful eye of a manager and threaten to fire them (which means deportation) if they dare to complain.
> the quality of work done by offshore teams is consistently crap
This isn't nearly true anymore, and hasn't been for a long time. Especially since everyone is using the same AI tooling as everyone else now.
What is true (in my experience) is that they do tend to lack a sense of ownership and craft. But I think companies care less and less about that all the time.
If you are a good software developer in India then you move abroad. It's not that India doesn't make great software developers, it's just they don't tend to stick around.
I wish it was.
[dead]
Does anyone have the list?
NBC has posted the full list here: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/us-sto...
> A U.S. official confirmed the full list of countries will include Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belize, Bhutan, Bosnia, Brazil, Burma, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Colombia, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Dominica, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Republic of the Congo, Russia, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Uzbekistan and Yemen.
Grenada is here because the US asked to install radars here for their Venezuelan operation("drug boat interception") and Grenada declined. They also raised the The Level 2 advisory for US citizen.
Russia I presume is on the list because of geopolitical tensions.
I am not familiar with every country in that list but in my experience, what looks like an anomaly is Morocco, which produces a fairly large elite compared to the size of the country (worked with lots of highly educated / highly paid (and therefore net tax contributing) moroccan nationals). I have hardly worked with any other nationality in that list in my professional life (Bangladesh and Tunisia maybe).
I think this move could harm US in two ways: It will reduce the immigrant diversity which might make the population skew towards the biggest immigrant population such as from India and Mexico which are not in this list. Second it will remove USA as top destination for talent, which will help stop brain drain from these countries causing their local industry to benefit and thereby reducing the edge of US companies.
Both Armenia and Azerbaijan? At least they aren’t playing favorites.
Why Bhutan is here? It's a peaceful small place.
It has Nepal, Pakistan and Bangladesh too - some of them makes sense.
But overall this list feels too much.
What did Jordan, Azerbaijan, Macedonia or Uruguay do?
The State Department said[1]: "The State Department will pause immigrant visa processing from 75 countries whose migrants take welfare from the American people at unacceptable rates."
Whether or not that's a good/true reason is another discussion.
1: https://x.com/StateDept/status/2011478657680757214
Jordan has been a key ally of the US. No one will make that mistake again.
So was Denmark.
Trump and his whole administration is extremely pro-Israel, even by the standards of US administrations. Jordan is 95% Muslim and around a quarter of the population are Palestinian refugees, so I suspect that has something to do with it
Not only Azerbaijan, but the whole Caucasia is included (Armenia and Georgia too). Given Trump's recent peace middlemanship between Azerbaijan and Armenia, this is actually somewhat surprising.
What did Fiji do!?
Not white enough I presume.
It's hard to get more Caucasian than Azerbaijan.
It’s telling that Russia stands out in this list. “One of these is not like the others”
Crazy that Macedonia and Montenegro are there, and Serbia is not. Even Albania and Kosovo are there, despite them being US puppets
Overstay visas more often than South Koreans or Norwegians?
I pulled the latest overstay data from the CBP website (2024) and compared it to the list of countries. Some of the countries have high overstay rates (Haiti and Laos >24%), but others don't. Barbados (0.44%) has a lower overstay rate than France (0.48%). Libya (1.59%) has a lower rate than Portugal (1.68%). Some countries with high rates aren't on the list entirely, like Malawi (22.05%). Also, the hypothesis fails a chi square test. It's not that.
> Afghanistan Iraq
Comparing to US immigration support following the Vietnam war this is shameful.
> Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan
They forgor Tajikistan. Or may be it was just too hard to spell.
Tajikistan is used by the US for CIA training against Iran. This is why Iran will often deny visas to Americans who have Tajikistan passport stamps.
> Saint Kitts and Nevis
How many immigrants from an island with less than 50k inhabitants are there?
Also, Cuba surprises me, doesn't the USA usually love to make a big deal about people fleeing big bad evil communists?
Saint Kitts and Nevis sells passports, so I imagine that is the rationale. I see some other microstates on the list that fit that pattern as well.
I suspect that too, and the US is not the only country to be having issues with some of the citizenship by investment countries.
Norway for example, appears to have de-facto banned 5 countries (all on the list) that have such programs: https://www.imidaily.com/europe/confirmed-norway-quietly-den...
Their justification is interesting too, because if the threshold is "citizenship must require personal attendance", then Canadian citizenship is almost certainly invalid too if you obtained yours over Zoom, which is how most new Canadians obtain it.
I'm surprised that you can get non-attendant citizenship in Canada. They don't even give automatic citizenship to children of Canadian parents born outside of Canada (maybe if both parents are Canadian they do, but my experience is with one Canadian and one American). US citizenship for a child born outside of the US to US parents is as simple as bringing their birth certificate to the consulate. And if you marry a Canadian, they won't give you residency unless you physically reside in Canada.
Turkmenistan made it through? lol
They just want foreigners to be Indians and the remaining Europeans that will actually want to go to the US.
And chinese
Earlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46618809
Huh, actually checked first few pages before posting. I wonder why the thread got flagged.
While I didn't flag it, I closed that article without reading after the fourth popup. Thank you for submitting a better source.
It’s bound to generate some heated discussion. A lot of people on that discussion asks the same question. There’s a lack of transparency on why some posts get flagged.
A pause in processing of immigration visas affects the tech industry and is relevant to most of the audience who lives in the US.
> A pause in processing of immigration visas affects the tech industry
Is an immigration visa the same as a work visa? I don't know much about the different types of immigration. The stated reason for the pause in immigration visas is to keep out those who would end up being a "public charge." I interpret this as people who want to come to the US but have no demonstrated means of support once they get here.
Student visas, I presume, are unaffected? What about work visas? If you're coming to work, you would also be paying taxes and not need public support.
My biggest issue with work visas is they're treated as an under-class that literally competes at upwards of half the pay or less and used to suppress wages. Especially in the past 5 years.
I'd like to see a 100% tax on Visa workers combined with salary floors per work classification. A tech worker that needs to be imported from another country shouldn't be paid less than 6 figures IMO, and depending on the position upwards of twice that. The tax itself should specifically be used to fund grants for STEM undergrads and graduates.
Just my own take on this, and I do have a personal stake and took a 40% pay cut last year just to be able to keep working.
Not sure on the downvotes, I'm literally advocating for paying VISA workers MORE.
Because like most political threads, it will largely consist of people with a crayon-and-coloring-book understanding of geopolitics posting low-effort snipes and trading insults while contributing basically zero to productive discussion.
The most disgusting example of this in recent memory was the Scott Adams death thread, where complimentary comments were being aggressively flagged, and toxic vitriol was being upvoted. It made me finally realize how many joyless, seriously broken people lurk here.
[dead]
>I wonder why the thread got flagged.
It is off-topic.
>On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
>Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures. If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.
This is stupid and weakens the U.S. We have benefited so much from the visa program over the history of this country. If the smartest people of Russia and various other countries want to flee and join the U.S., we would be at an advantage.
[flagged]
Genuinely curious: what exactly did we see before?
And what will the luck be needed for?
A very vague comment.
Loving the downvotes on a valid, reasonable question. I'm asking for specifics, isn't that what goes into a good comment here? Or maybe the downvotes are political.
I doubt the downvotes are political. This is hn after all.
I think you're getting downvotes because, particularly in the AI era, this is very easy to look up
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924
Thank you, that helps to clarify.
I think HN discussion should stand alone and not require research to find what someone is vaguely referring to, especially in an emotionally charged comment.
> I think HN discussion should stand alone and not require research
I don't know what random reader knows and I will assume someone can look up context in good faith. It's not productive to conduct conversations any other way. If someone understands my comments, we can exchange ideas. If not, that's ok too.
It looks like we’re trying to beat Japan, China, South Korea, Italy and Germany in who can age and shrink their population the fastest.
We used to be great shape in regards to the age depopulation bomb.
The presence of Brazil and Thailand on this list stumped me.
The one that I'm at a complete loss for is Uruguay - it is one of the wealthiest countries per capita in South America as well as the least corrupt and most egalitarian... not exactly a huge source of desperate immigrants. Did their government scold ours too harshly for the recent Venezuela shenanigans or something?
Yeah, Uruguay is also surprising.
Well given that the US DHS is posting on social media that it intends to get rid of all 100 million non-white Americans. What exactly did you expect?