USCIS is challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications • Hacker News Board

Re: USCIS is challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications

#221

Post by SolaceQuantum » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 9:13 PM UTC

damnyou wrote: post #214

rpowers wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your proposal is a feel-good hurrah, but oversimplifies a few complex issues. No protections = Exploitation of workers. Instant green card = Increased competition for Housing/public services. So unless you think that lowly-paid immigrants with limited access to social services is the best path forward, I'd advocate for some protections. I agree with no limits. If a company can provide for the workers, then go for it.…

> No protections = Exploitation of workers. I said no protectionism (in the form of visa caps), not no protections. > Instant green card = Increased competition for Housing/public services. Sounds like a great opportunity for entrepreneurs to provide those services and make lots of money. I wonder why the otherwise enterprising Hacker News crowd is blind to the incredible market opportunities open borders would provi…

> Sounds like a great opportunity for entrepreneurs to provide those services and make lots of money.

I believe these were called slums and the entrepreneurs slumlords.

Re: USCIS is challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications

#222

Post by ashleyn » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 9:13 PM UTC

gozur88 wrote: post #103

ashleyn wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paleoconservatism/populism isn't concerned about the economic benefits of immigration; it's concerned about "protecting" culture so that immigrants don't have the opportunity to reshape it in any capacity. A sizeable portion of Trump's base believes that they are in danger of becoming a minority in "their own" country and will sidestep the economic benefits of immigration to retain a demographic majority. To these vo…

>A sizeable portion of Trump's base believes that they are in danger of becoming a minority in "their own" country... Why did you put scare quotes around "their own"? Is it not their own country? Culture changes over time no matter what you do, but is it completely unreasonable to want your culture to change slowly enough that you can still function in your dotage?

The point of constitutional liberty is that culture can change as much as you want but you'll always be free to retreat to your enclave where it never will.

A great deal of anger seems to be conservatives wanting to engineer the outcome rather than allowing culture to become more inclusive to people not like them e.g. more companies voluntarily saying Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas. This voluntary push to accomidate more non-christian customers is viewed as the "war" on Christmas, with the proposed "solution" being fewer non-christians in the country.

Re: USCIS is challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications

#223

Post by damnyou » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 9:14 PM UTC

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #221

damnyou wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No protections = Exploitation of workers. I said no protectionism (in the form of visa caps), not no protections. > Instant green card = Increased competition for Housing/public services. Sounds like a great opportunity for entrepreneurs to provide those services and make lots of money. I wonder why the otherwise enterprising Hacker News crowd is blind to the incredible market opportunities open borders would provi…

> Sounds like a great opportunity for entrepreneurs to provide those services and make lots of money. I believe these were called slums and the entrepreneurs slumlords.

Thankfully, with the power of legislation (TM) we can ensure that new buildings are up to modern standards.

Re: USCIS is challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications

#224

Post by comicjk » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 9:15 PM UTC

dmix wrote: post #167

rrhd wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Trump has repeatedly called for a Canadian or Australian style skills-based immigration system to replace chain and quota-based immigration coupled with slashing immigration in general.

That's because 64% of people currently coming into the US get in because they are relatives or family of another person who was given a green card. Only 15% of people come in due to skill or a job. The bill would change the system to be more about skill/merit rather than the fact you are related by blood to someone who has skill. The reduction in numbers is a side effect of the current ratios of the existing system.…

Cutting legal immigration in hopes of a later bill that increases it is a fool's errand. This proposal already gives the lie to the Republican marketing on immigration - that they have nothing against legal immigration, and only want to cut the illegal kind. Who knows what they'll ask for next.

Re: USCIS is challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications

#225

Post by anigbrowl » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 9:15 PM UTC

horsecaptin wrote: post #95

komali2 wrote: post #13

Conservatives may generally view this as "good" regardless of the impact because (according to arguments I've heard) "the less globalization, the better." In my mind, however, it boils down to two pretty simple points: Given that (1) the US is lagging far behind every developed nation in education, and higher education in the US is prohibitively expensive compared to other developed nations, (2) the only way for the…

Not too long ago, "the less globalization, the better" was the liberal point of view.

By definition, not - maybe you could pick a better term?

Re: USCIS is challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications

#226

Post by melonhack » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 9:15 PM UTC

throwkgaj wrote: post #63

sumitgt wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not like that. Most top companies do detailed paperwork. This causes other side effects and stress. For example, you could be working at Google / Facebook earning top $$$$ every year and you paperwork could be spotless. But the stress of having to go through an uncertain renewal process every 3 years prevents you from investing in big things like buying a house or having kids. You are always worried about being…

This was me. Working at big tech firm, $190+ salary, 6 years. Green card applied and approved in 2014. But Indians have to wait at least 5years for a green card(EB-2). And this was before the current admin. I’m now in Canada. Permanent Resident (took 8 months), $180k+ salary, big tech company. Going to buy a house in the summer.

Whoa. That CDN salary seems unreal. What is your position there?

Re: USCIS is challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications

#227

Post by giobox » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 9:17 PM UTC

dmix wrote: post #208

giobox wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you honestly believe the Executive in the US has this little influence on policy agenda, I'm not sure what else to say! I think most people are capable of understanding that when we talk about "Trump" performing a legislative act, we almost never mean he literally picks up pen and paper and writes the bill himself, or even directly proposes it.

> If you honestly believe the Executive in the US has this little influence on policy agenda, Again, I never said that, or that he writes it directly himself. This is why I don't debate politics on the internet. My point is the bill is primarily a congressional matter, and is not at the whims of just the president the way an executive order would be, as was suggested above.

> This is why I don't debate politics on the internet.

This thread and your post history strongly suggest otherwise!

Re: USCIS is challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications

#228

Post by wmil » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 9:19 PM UTC

komali2 wrote: post #13

Conservatives may generally view this as "good" regardless of the impact because (according to arguments I've heard) "the less globalization, the better." In my mind, however, it boils down to two pretty simple points: Given that (1) the US is lagging far behind every developed nation in education, and higher education in the US is prohibitively expensive compared to other developed nations, (2) the only way for the…

> He joins Chevron and is turning a profit for them within the year, pumping out research and getting taxed on his 100k/year salary, spending his money in-country and oh well, maybe he sends a bit (already taxed) home.

But that's not the typical H1B. There are "Manager Trainees" at slaughterhouses making 35k.

http://h1bdata.info/index.php?job=MANAGER+TRAINEE

Developers making between 30k - 70k are quite common.

Putting in an 80k or so wage floor would be a huge improvement to the current system.

Re: USCIS is challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications

#229

Post by KKKKkkkk1 » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 9:20 PM UTC

davidw wrote: post #74

xraystyle wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stated purpose of the H1-B program is to allow companies to fill vacancies with international applicants if they are unable to find US employees qualified for the roles. I've never heard any sane, rational person object to this use case. The issue most people have is that the program seems to be rampantly abused. Companies are replacing US workers with H1-B's sourced from companies like Tata and Infosys at much l…

The logical remedy would be to eliminate the lock the employer has on these people so that they can get competitive offers and see their salaries bid up to something better.

There is no lock. Once you have an H-1B, you can transfer as soon as you get another offer. The lock is on the J-1 and O-1 visas very popular at research orgs. That's where the true indentured servitude happens.

Re: USCIS is challenging an unusually large number of H-1B applications

#230

Post by pcwalton » Tue, Nov 07, 2017, 9:20 PM UTC

cat199 wrote: post #140

majormajor wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What US Democrats ignore is that practically every damn country in the world does this too, often to a higher degree than the US. So there's a pragmatic question of how to avoid putting yourself at a disadvantage by being comparatively overgenerous that you don't have to be a "paleoconservative" or Trump supporter, or even Republican, to be concerned about.

By modern dem logic, JFK would be a facist - nationalistic, america-first policies - socially conservative - womanizing - served in military - against homosexuals - wanted to get rid of the fed - invaded other countries to fight communism

What on Earth does most of this list have to do with the article or this discussion? This is the kind of thing that I would expect to see from Pepe avatars on Twitter, not HN.