31–40 of 115 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Slavery was a system in the way it was and it was even legal! You can't turn around and yell this is how it is.
And not being able to swarm into another country is equivalent to slavery?
Is it really discrimination if the system is already known to have a per-country limit, and yet more and more people from that country continue to file for Green Cards? Indians who come to the US these days know for a fact there is a 10+ year wait for a Green Card, so they're the ones taking their chances. If they scream discrimination, I call BS on that. It sucks that the system is the way it is, and I think a point…
If the rules are discriminatory then it's entirely valid to call them as such, and doing so may help to change them.
1. There is no per-country quota on H1Bs
2. There is a per-country quota on EB-1/2/3 GCs
3. And this is crux of the problem: H1Bs are issued indiscriminately, most problematically to so-called bodyshops.
There are various proposals to fix the immigration backlog. There's one bill that would get rid of per-country quotas. I wonder what that would do to the backlog of everyone. I kind of see this one as a nonstarter.
Bizarrely, it's the current (otherwise abhorrent) administration that is the first to even talk about fixing the real problem, which is (3). H1Bs are a lottery now. When the likes of FAAMG companies can't hire people because the likes of Infosys and Tata are flooding applications for people who will essentially become indentured servants, that's a problem.
Infosys settled a visa fraud case with the US government several years ago including a payment of millions of dollars. How exactly are they still able to apply for visas?
There are problems with ranking applicants based on salary (or total compensation) as the one proposal would do. This would potentially drown out lower-paid STEM fields that have legitimate need with FAAMG SWEs. Then again... that's still probably better than the current system.
People have also complained "well you can't hire graduates if you rank on salary". That's true. But at the same time, are newly minted college graduates fulfilling unsatisfied demand for specialty occupation? Or just being used to lower labour costs?
So this is the result of several factors that are at odds with each other. 1. There is no per-country quota on H1Bs 2. There is a per-country quota on EB-1/2/3 GCs 3. And this is crux of the problem: H1Bs are issued indiscriminately, most problematically to so-called bodyshops. There are various proposals to fix the immigration backlog. There's one bill that would get rid of per-country quotas. I wonder what that wou…
The entire premise of "limiting immigration" is discrimination based on a binary national origin/citizenship (i.e. you happened to be one of us or not) so it is comically laughable to talk about how to make such system "fair" without opening it to everyone, which has practical issues. Immigration is an inherently political mechanism constructed as a result of amalgamation of various underlying game theoretic balances and trade-offs over the years between nation states. It's important to note that you cannot divorce the individuals from their own governments/resource allocation when thinking about that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can work until your priority date is current and you can even change employer.
The caveat is that your employer keeps you on a very short leash. If you are fired you must have a new job within 30 days, else must leave the country. Not everyone has the stomach for this, especially if you have a family.
Is it really discrimination if the system is already known to have a per-country limit, and yet more and more people from that country continue to file for Green Cards? Indians who come to the US these days know for a fact there is a 10+ year wait for a Green Card, so they're the ones taking their chances. If they scream discrimination, I call BS on that. It sucks that the system is the way it is, and I think a point…
Knowing that discrimination exists while you get into something doesn't make it less discriminatory. Sure they knew what they were getting into, but I doubt they are complaining that they didn't know it was like this.
"Discrimination" is a neutral term though: there are acceptable kinds and unacceptable kinds. For instance, it is discrimination to not let a stranger sleep in your home or in your bed, though no one reasonable would call that unacceptable discrimination.
The actual policy we're talking about here is a country-neutral permanent immigration quota coupled with country-neutral per-country percentage caps. There's nothing specially discriminatory in the law against people from India. It's just that there's massive amounts of temporary-worker immigration from there, which crashes hard against the other quotas. If German immigration were equally massive, Germans would have the same problems Indians have now, so the problem has nothing to due with racial or ethnic discrimination.
You could also think of the quotas another way: they're protecting the ability of people from countries other than India to immigrate, so the incoming immigrant stream is more diverse.
Is it really discrimination if the system is already known to have a per-country limit, and yet more and more people from that country continue to file for Green Cards? Indians who come to the US these days know for a fact there is a 10+ year wait for a Green Card, so they're the ones taking their chances. If they scream discrimination, I call BS on that. It sucks that the system is the way it is, and I think a point…