111–120 of 186 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is getting outcompeted by India, basically.
>The US is getting outcompeted by India, basically. And it almost completely comes down to housing costs. If half of your $150k salary wasn't going directly into a landlord's pocket in the US, we would easily be able to compete.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Labor really is not fungible that way. On shore H1B Indians generally are higher skilled than offshore Indians, perform different roles at companies, and are paid more. Many of them could have chosen different careers than Tech and likely will if they move back to India.
Why not just move US H1Bs back to India and keep paying them US wages? They will be filthy rich in India, their living standards will literally skyrocket. They will be highly unlikely to leave. And keep them on same roles as they did in US.
The leadership in a GCC are all ex-US EMs, PMs, PMMs, and FP&As who are given the option to take a haircut on their US salary and build a hiring pipeline within India while meeting the company's hiring requirements.
Tech salaries in India have already converged with much of the EU, especially for top talent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Go ahead and hire exclusively cheap foreign engineers. See where it gets you.
As someone that routinely works in offshoring projects, most business don't care, even if there are escalations as long as total cost remains under doing everything in the country, upper management is happy. An example is the amount of crap software that exists out there, that people would rather use with a race to bottom prices, instead of paying for quality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m not describing what’s happening right now — I’m saying the data shown in the article is insufficient to ground what it claims. The testimony you mention better supports the argument, but also is insufficient to show that this shift to H1-B is not in addition to a reduction of overall projected headcount due to AI.
Multiple things can be true at once. Some jobs have been eliminated by AI. The H1B system is being abused by employers. Offshoring has replaced more American jobs than H1Bs. Corporations are lying to investors about the impact of AI on their headcount. All of the above are true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You realize that no more than a third of the people in the country actually voted for said president?
You realize, that it doesn't change the fact, that the elected president represents that large country with many opinions?
It's readily apparent that no president for the past decade has clearly represented a majority of the country (as opposed to a plurality) in the sense that they voted for or supported him. But Trump has gone further, and openly declared that not only does he not consider himself to represent the people politically opposed to him, he considers them to be dangerous violent extremists.
At what point do you admit that a fascist dictator no longer meaningfully "represents" the people he rules?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone that routinely works in offshoring projects, most business don't care, even if there are escalations as long as total cost remains under doing everything in the country, upper management is happy. An example is the amount of crap software that exists out there, that people would rather use with a race to bottom prices, instead of paying for quality.
It’s understandable, but I doubt you’re hiring in North Korea or Iran.
In Prometheus' term, the "beneficiaries approved" is neither a counter nor a gauge. It doesn't tell you the percentage of H1b holders amongst all full time employees and certainly don't include H1b contractors. It also don't include other temporary visa types like L1 or H4, both could be "cheap foreign labors".
The "# of layoffs" also doesn't provide much information about how many H1b holders are part of the layoffs.
The goal of combining the two columns seems to be giving reader a fuzzy feeling that they are correlated, to support the author's narrative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is getting outcompeted by India, basically.
>The US is getting outcompeted by India, basically. And it almost completely comes down to housing costs. If half of your $150k salary wasn't going directly into a landlord's pocket in the US, we would easily be able to compete.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US is getting outcompeted by India, basically.
>The US is getting outcompeted by India, basically. And it almost completely comes down to housing costs. If half of your $150k salary wasn't going directly into a landlord's pocket in the US, we would easily be able to compete.
I guess some of it is the "captive" effect for an individual - if you leave the expensive property market for somewhere cheaper with a lower salary, it becomes very hard to move back to the expensive place. But is that a strong enough effect?
Surely an efficient free market should theoretically make tech companies much more geographically distributed?