{"title":"尊严时代的生产力与亲和力","authors":"Stephen Lee","doi":"10.36644/mlr.114.6.productivity","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Review proceeds as follows. Part I summarizes The Age of Dignity. Part II explains how this segment of immigrant workers challenges the productivity/affinity binary that dominates immigration law’s formal migration rules. Part III shows how this binary sets up dual migration streams, both of which could account for future flows of care workers. As Part III shows, the example of the eldercare industry nicely illustrates how the employment based and family-based migration systems simply represent two different ways of filling labor needs. I then conclude.","PeriodicalId":81320,"journal":{"name":"Georgetown immigration law journal","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Productivity and Affinity in The Age of Dignity\",\"authors\":\"Stephen Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.36644/mlr.114.6.productivity\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This Review proceeds as follows. Part I summarizes The Age of Dignity. Part II explains how this segment of immigrant workers challenges the productivity/affinity binary that dominates immigration law’s formal migration rules. Part III shows how this binary sets up dual migration streams, both of which could account for future flows of care workers. As Part III shows, the example of the eldercare industry nicely illustrates how the employment based and family-based migration systems simply represent two different ways of filling labor needs. I then conclude.\",\"PeriodicalId\":81320,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Georgetown immigration law journal\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-05-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Georgetown immigration law journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36644/mlr.114.6.productivity\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Georgetown immigration law journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36644/mlr.114.6.productivity","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
This Review proceeds as follows. Part I summarizes The Age of Dignity. Part II explains how this segment of immigrant workers challenges the productivity/affinity binary that dominates immigration law’s formal migration rules. Part III shows how this binary sets up dual migration streams, both of which could account for future flows of care workers. As Part III shows, the example of the eldercare industry nicely illustrates how the employment based and family-based migration systems simply represent two different ways of filling labor needs. I then conclude.