21–30 of 404 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that?
The US government is supposed to first and foremost take care of US citizens, not just allow them to be pushed out of jobs because corporations would rather import cheap labor.
US immigration is in the biggest crisis in decades - between rhetoric & admin burden from Trump, covid, and ossified bureaucracy, it is the worst time in history for a tech worker to migrate to the US. Each time a developer works for the US from abroad, the US economy loses up to 50% o salaries in taxes for gov funding, and up to 80% of the reminder in spending within the economy. An argentine developer making 150k f…
Doesn't the US have tax agreements with most countries? You still have to pay tax on US income.
US immigration is in the biggest crisis in decades - between rhetoric & admin burden from Trump, covid, and ossified bureaucracy, it is the worst time in history for a tech worker to migrate to the US. Each time a developer works for the US from abroad, the US economy loses up to 50% o salaries in taxes for gov funding, and up to 80% of the reminder in spending within the economy. An argentine developer making 150k f…
Doesn't the US have tax agreements with most countries? You still have to pay tax on US income.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that?
The US government is supposed to first and foremost take care of US citizens, not just allow them to be pushed out of jobs because corporations would rather import cheap labor.
Do you agree that should be weighted by the need of the country to remain competitive, say in the hypothetically scenario where we came to the conclusion that the average american is lazy, and that that's the core reason why immigrants replace them?
Imagine how frustrating it must be being qualified, living in the country for decades and still blocked from residency all because you were born somewhere, it’s something you have no control over
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there's a demand for certain roles, which clearly seems to be the case, what difference does it make where the people filling those roles comes from?
I'll flip your question on its head: why are the people filling these roles so heavily skewed to one country?
Indians account for 73.9 percent out of the total number of H1B visa holders in the USA. Now i wouldn't want anyone to be discriminated but still it makes sense to limit green card based on nationality
The US issues roughly 1 million green cards each year. 86% of those go to family based immigration. The rest 14% are for employment based immigration. Even in there the dependents (spouse + kids) are counted against that quota. So net effect is close to 5% employment based immigration if we count only primary applicants. What purpose is discrimination by country of birth serving here?
I think it's really eye opening to me that he still only got a green card so far after 18 years. He's been going thru immigration hoops in the US for as long as it would take to raise an adult.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that?
The US government is supposed to first and foremost take care of US citizens, not just allow them to be pushed out of jobs because corporations would rather import cheap labor.
If you're worried about losing your job to cheap labor that's an issue with our immigration system not a problem with immigration in general. You should be asking yourself why companies are allowed to pay non-US citizens less for the same jobs we're doing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there's a demand for certain roles, which clearly seems to be the case, what difference does it make where the people filling those roles comes from?
I'll flip your question on its head: why are the people filling these roles so heavily skewed to one country?
1. India is poor but not too poor
2. It has a huge population
3. A lot of upper class Indians already have family in the US
Of course, it is not clear why any of this should matter. Why should it be capped by country (as opposed to continent, zipcode or planet?)