The economist proposes getting rid of the rule that requires H1B workers remain within the company that sponsors them That sounds reasonable, but why then require that a company sponsor an immigrant in the first place? Why not let that immigrant choose where he or she will work? In fact, why not let the immigrant choose what to study, where to work, where to live, all in response to market signals? People have posted…
This is the moral, practical, and efficient solution. It's disheartening to see so many smart people blame H1B immigration for "harming" the tech econonomy, when the tech industry has comparatively high salaries and low unemployment. The amount of vitriol towards people trying to get by in life is unwarranted.
The US doesn't have a good immigration system, and if you don't have family reunification or a few other avenues, there isn't much left for you, even as a skilled worker. We don't have a "I'm a skilled and decent person, I'd contribute a lot, and I'd like to live and work in the US" program.
Yeah, I completely get it. This is the only game in town for some really good people. No way would I blame someone using this path, considering their limited options.
The nice thing that I really believe that we can solve this problem by expanding personal freedom and limiting corporate power over people's lives. The sad thing is, that's probably why it hasn't happened and continues to not happen.