The only diversity I see being achieved due to the per-country limit is the diversity of passports. India, with it's many cultures and languages, is quite diverse. For example, see this thread here on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16538881
For skilled immigrants, why does it matter what passport they hold?
I can understand the argument for and benefits of diversity of thought, of culture etc. But why passports? It makes as much sense as trying to insist that there must be equal number of right-handed, left-handed, and ambidextrous skilled immigrants.
There might as well be a preference for right-handed preference, if someone can convince enough people for it to be the law.
As of current, that is what the congress prefer. They made the law. Indirectly it was the american public preference because it is the representative of american people.
Yes, that is what the current law states. The GPs question was why it was so. What did you mean to add to the discussion when you originally replied, "Diversity"?
As I replied, diversity in term of country of origin. If you then asking why is this is the case. Its because its simply the current preference of american public.
> Its because its simply the current preference of american public.
Yes, that much is obvious. The question, if it was not clear, was an attempt to understand why this is the preference.
Note: This thread is already gone much pedantic IMO, but I give you the benefit of doubt that it is some miscommunication in language. If your point is "it is the way it is, and no explanation is owed to anyone", I will withdraw from the discussion because we don't have much to discuss.
