21–30 of 95 posts
Seems to be limited to H1B applicants who are outside the country. If I'm reading this correctly, it doesn't impact renewals for those in the country.
You cannot renew a visa (any visa) in the US. You need to exit the country and apply to a US consulate.
If the cost benefit analysis for employers still shows that H1-Bs are cheaper, how will this offset H1-B exploitation? My guess is that this will suppress STEM wages artificially to account for paying a one-time fee for an H1-B, but hiring someone for 1+ years at that suppressed rate will be cheaper. Employers will blame AI for decrease in STEM wages, of course. A complementary solution is to add the $100k fee, and t…
The decision is hiring in the US (visa or citizen) versus hiring abroad.
Given that a large number of EMs, PMs, Directors, and even VPs are on some sort of immigration or work visa, this makes it easier to incentivize you as an employer to move some of them back to India or Czechia to open a GCC. This is what has been happening for the past 5 years now.
On top of that, vast swathes of STEM academia are dependent on H1B. You simply aren't going to find enough American citizens with a background in (say) battery chemistry to become a tenure track professor versus from Korea, Japan, or China.
Now you basically created an incentive for large swathes of junior faculty in STEM subfields to return to Asia, leading to a massive reverse brain drain.
[flagged]
People are smoking if they think “talents” would still want to stay in the US given this series of policies (i.e. recent cuts/restrictions on science funding, international students, and visas) from Trump government.
This is a good time for EU to build its own digital economy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are H-1Bs comparable to nepotism?
Don't focus on the nepotism aspect specifically, but rather that job group in one distinct, identifiable population (my kid or H1Bs) grew at a far higher rate than for the general (not my kids or not H1Bs) employment market, despite the latter experiencing more absolute growth.
Consider two scenarios:
1. H-1Bs get massively reduced over the next five years. Tech sector crisis ensues due to market shocks. Foreign workers decrease. American workers go up by 25% (~2.5M).
2. H-1B numbers stay as is. Tech sector relatively unperturbed. Foreign workers increase by 50% (~1.3M). American workers increase by 30% (~3M).
Wouldn't you argue that 2 is preferable to 1?
(I'm not saying that a crisis will happen if H-1Bs end, I'm just presenting two scenarios with different relative increases that I believe prove my point)
Good. Skilled Indians/Chinese/Europeans should go back to their countries, build their own tech and compete with the US. People are smoking if they think “talents” would still want to stay in the US given this series of policies (i.e. recent cuts/restrictions on science funding, international students, and visas) from Trump government. This is a good time for EU to build its own digital economy.
This is ridiculously stupid given how vast swathes of industries we want to redevelop need talent from our partners in the EU, Japan, Korea (still opposed to Hyundai's visa shenanigans, but two wrongs don't make a right - also interesting how HN is so positive about this but so negative about that), etc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't focus on the nepotism aspect specifically, but rather that job group in one distinct, identifiable population (my kid or H1Bs) grew at a far higher rate than for the general (not my kids or not H1Bs) employment market, despite the latter experiencing more absolute growth.
I still don't see what the issue is. Consider two scenarios: 1. H-1Bs get massively reduced over the next five years. Tech sector crisis ensues due to market shocks. Foreign workers decrease. American workers go up by 25% (~2.5M). 2. H-1B numbers stay as is. Tech sector relatively unperturbed. Foreign workers increase by 50% (~1.3M). American workers increase by 30% (~3M). Wouldn't you argue that 2 is preferable to 1…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are H-1Bs comparable to nepotism?
Maybe because nepotism leads to untalented people getting jobs? I think the $100K fee is a good idea. If these H-1Bs are exceptional talent, paying $100k to employ one is truly a bargain.
[flagged]
They all know that. These are politicians. They know they’re misrepresenting the data. They don’t care, they consider it to be part of the job, and they’re not wrong. That’s it.