Well, my original point was that that anchor is established on a skills basis. The only exceptions to the skills/anchor rule is the refugee count (which is not really part of the “immigration system” per se, as it’s an ad hoc matter) and the visa lottery, which as you say is very small.
As far as the “relatives following the anchor” component….I’m not sure our laws are all that different from Canada; it’s just that Canada is not considered to be as desirable a destination compared to the US. IOW, elderly parents in decent straits in the home country might say “Nah……Canada’s OK, but I’d rather stay here” but then turn around and say “USA? Hell yes I’ll come!” Our desirability as a immigration destination is offthecharts in the Middle East and India at least.
Now, you and I know that picking the US or Canada as a migration destination is basically a coin-flip; but there is a difference in international reputation.
Of course, I could be wrong about the laws in Canada. Maybe they actually are more restrictive.