I remember when I went to Australia, I could stay a year but American backpackers only 6 months because that's what Australians got in the US.
New Zealand and Spain you really couldn't be more wrong. Just for starters, both countries combined accept only ~50k immigrants per year (the US is 20x that).
If you calculate the "expected value" for a migrant from anywhere in the world, the best bet you can make will predict that they'll end up migrating into the US. From this metric, I'd judge that the US is the "easiest" destination.
Btw, I say this as an immigrant in the USA ;)
"Accepting" is different from "tolerating with a few instances of hate crimes and likelihood of incarceration". You have to include non-white people in the acceptance criteria.
And which of those are as desirable for foreigners to come work in, as the US?
It's easy to be super open to migration when you have little migration to begin with and the one you get is mostly wealthy foreigners coming to invest/buy properties and vacation/retire/remote-work there.
Which % are those?
>but if they're just going to treat the country as a vacation and retirement home then I don't see how that helps the country really
They help the existing property/business owners by making them wealthier, which let's be real is all governments care about.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/article/canada-adding-new-ex...