Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Trump’s Next Move on Immigration to Hit Closer to Home for Tech

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 371 posts

Re: Trump’s Next Move on Immigration to Hit Closer to Home for Tech

#311

Post by jimmywanger »

794CD01 wrote: post #305
akiselev wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, until that other country elects an orange demagogue that utilizes popular discontent to demonize you and cut off that flow of talent, regardless of the mutually assured harm. Societies are fickle, especially in times of war or increasing tensions. A well maintained local talent pool and industrial capacity subsidized against foreign economic forces are not. Relying on other nations is the exact opposite of nat…

The movement of labor and ideas also means that there is no shortage of educated people to speak out against said orange demagogue's terrible policies. And most peoples' postmortems of the election agree that the election was close enough that higher immigration (or even better distribution of existing immigrants) would likely have kept him out of office.

> higher immigration (or even better distribution of existing immigrants) would likely have kept him out of office.

Only importing immigrants who have political views that agree with yours? A country has a particular culture and set of views. Why would we want to import people from countries with inferior living conditions and follow the way they do things? There's a reason they left.

Re: Trump’s Next Move on Immigration to Hit Closer to Home for Tech

#312

Post by mattnewton »

794CD01 wrote: post #302
mattnewton wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like we are almost entirely in agreement :D I just think this order should be the new textbook example on why move fast and break things should not be executive policy.

Interesting, I would have called it a good example of how moving fast and breaking things is OK even for government action. It's only been two days and it's already been amended to allow green card holders to enter again, and several courts have ordered it to not be enforced. Before this, I and most people I know would not have guessed that government could move to amend broken policy this quickly.

But meanwhile

1. We look capricious and incompetent to international allies, especially Iraqis.

2. The federal judges decision to stay parts of the order is not being enforced in its entirety. CBP refused to allow lawyers to meet with those being detained, in Dulles and in LA, even with Members of Congress attempting to enforce it in Dulles. This confusion among the rank and file about what a federal court order means is really worrysome and shows the checks aren't as strong as they should be. Real people are being harmed as a result of not at least explaining it in full to people who have to enforce it before it took effect.

3. The underlying motivations for the rule include discrimination against Muslims, as evidenced by Rudy Guilloani's statements that they were instructed to write a legal "Muslim ban". The word is out that the president, who is also a symbolic head of state and not just an acting office, is anti-Muslim in policy as well as rhetoric. No longer can we claim to take the high ground against ISIS or other radical Islamic group. (Edit: wrt religious freedom. As a commentor points out this obviously does not make us equivalent to ISIS)

This order will be mostly rescinded, leaving nothing but backlash.

Re: Trump’s Next Move on Immigration to Hit Closer to Home for Tech

#313

Post by smsm42 »

fergie wrote: post #45

I'm going to stick my neck out here and say that this may not be an altogether bad thing. From the article: "The foreign work visas were originally established to help U.S. companies recruit from abroad when they couldn’t find qualified local workers. But in recent years, there have been allegations the programs have been abused to bring in cheaper workers from overseas to fill jobs that otherwise may go to Americans…

> That's a bad thing for everybody, not least the immigrants themselves.

I don't see how it is a bad thing, as an immigrant. It seems to me it's better to get a job (and relocation) to US at slightly lower rate than US-native professional, but still much higher than one I'd get in the origin country. Note that once you're in the US, you can build the network, find better job, apply for green card, then citizenship, etc. And, of course, for many to benefit from safer environment, higher quality of life, etc.

> When companies like Tata are fulfilling government contracts, they _should_ be filling those positions with local labour at local rates.

If local rates are significantly higher, I am not sure - why taxpayer dollars should be spent more abundantly than private investor's dollar? I don't care too much if Sergey Brin loses one of his billions, it's not like he's going to raise the price of Google searches, but if my city doesn't have enough money to fix the road because they spent too much on other stuff and now have to raise taxes, that hits me right in the wallet.

Re: Trump’s Next Move on Immigration to Hit Closer to Home for Tech

#314

Post by crdoconnor »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #185
DarkKomunalec wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They still depress wages, and they will take most of their wages back with them, where their families are, and the cost of living is lower. There have also been many reports of americans training their replacements, at which point the distinction to outsourcing disappears. Finally, I take issue with your characterization of software engineers as 'high income' - as I understand it, compared to the cost of living, they…

In that case, should we also avoid hiring American citizens who send money to family overseas? I agree that this reduces wages of high income workers. That's exactly why it reduces income inequality. There are essentially no statistics in the US which adjust income for cost of living. Do you criticize all income inequality arguments on this ground, or just this one?

>I agree that this reduces wages of high income workers. That's exactly why it reduces income inequality.

The majority of the money saved from those wages would be transferred to the managerial classes (execs, etc.) and shareholders, making income inequality worse:

http://www.forbes.com/2004/08/31/cx_da_0831topnews.html

Income inequality isn't high because people who work for a living are earning too much.

Re: Trump’s Next Move on Immigration to Hit Closer to Home for Tech

#315

Post by FireBeyond »

refurb wrote: post #239
FireBeyond wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is, I'm afraid, going to be a hallmark of the Trump presidency. We're dealing with someone who is used to being "The Boss". Someone pointed out to me that he as a Congress that has shown that it will be pliant and enabling (for better or worse), and that Executive Orders are not necessary. But to Trump, they are, in a different way. We are dealing with someone for whom, having to have his decisions "signed off o…

This is, I'm afraid, going to be a hallmark of the Trump presidency. I think I know who he learned it from.[1] [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/14/us/politics/obama-era-leg...

You missed a pretty critical point. Obama used Executive Orders because in part he had a Congress that, courtesy of Mitch McConnell, stated openly that they had no intention of passing Bills on the President's behalf, even if good. That the way to make him a failure was to "do nothing for him". That left Obama with little option but to enact Executive Orders for many things. And with that being said, he still managed to sign less than Bush II or Clinton.

Trump on the other hand has Congress and Republicans firmly in his control, who've shown themselves to be fully "pliant" (or "spineless", depending on your perspective of the world) of all Trump's desires, so Trump has no _need_ of the Executive Order other than to make a statement, "Look at me, I'm the boss. Why would I act like I need approval from Congress?"

There's a distinct difference.

Re: Trump’s Next Move on Immigration to Hit Closer to Home for Tech

#316

Post by smsm42 »

mattnewton wrote: post #205
794CD01 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That has some huge problems which we've all seen this weekend, but in the long run, is that really worse than the old style of decades of inaction and debate topped off by an ineffectual bill that does nothing? It's pretty similar to the disruption in the tech industry. "What do you mean you deploy bugs to production and then fix them after end users report them? Haven't you heard of QA?!!"

Yes. The process you described is called democracy. Unilateral executive action of the top cabinet alone outside times of declared war (and even sometimes within a war) would be called dictatorial or authoritarian. The debates, compromises checks are not just a tradition to be distrupted.

That's not how representative democracy works, in general. Direct democracy may work like that, but I don't see a way to run direct democracy on US federal scale, and even if there were a way, US is not one. In US system, there's debate, there's vote, representatives are elected and then they have power to act (within the bounds of law, of course, and within limitations like due process, procedures, judicial review, etc.) without further debating anyone. Of course, if they act poorly, they will soon find themselves out when the next election comes. But executive action is always "unilateral" and if it is consistent with the law and mandates given to the executive, not dictatorial.

Re: Trump’s Next Move on Immigration to Hit Closer to Home for Tech

#317

Post by mavelikara »

davidf18 wrote: post #309
mavelikara wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The limitation in "job liquidity" means less competition for Americans for jobs that immigrants might underbid. What is stopping the employer from trapping a "job illiquid" immigrant into such a job you want to apply for? > If the law were rigidly enforced so that only jobs allowed under H1-B were a job that no American could do I could be wrong, but my understanding is that there is no such law.

According to law, H1-B Visas are only for those jobs which cannot be filled by Americans, that is no American has the skill to perform them. The law has been greatly abused, but that is in fact the law. I find it really, really hard to believe that there are 85,000 jobs per year (the H1-B Visa limit) that cannot possibly done by Americans. As I have pointed out the issue is that firms do not want to pay prevailing wa…

> According to law, H1-B Visas are only for those jobs which cannot be filled by Americans, that is no American has the skill to perform them.

This, I believe, is a misunderstanding of the H-1B program. There is no requirement that there "is no American has the skill to perform" a job before it being filled by someone on H-1B. Please see the Wikipedia page here [1]. The employer only has to attest that:

  The employment of H-1B non-immigrants does not adversely affect working
  conditions of workers similarly employed.
At this point, I think it is advisable for you to get educated about the program you so vehemently oppose here on HN.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-1B_visa#Protections_for_U.S....

Re: Trump’s Next Move on Immigration to Hit Closer to Home for Tech

#318

Post by smsm42 »

mattnewton wrote: post #312
794CD01 wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, I would have called it a good example of how moving fast and breaking things is OK even for government action. It's only been two days and it's already been amended to allow green card holders to enter again, and several courts have ordered it to not be enforced. Before this, I and most people I know would not have guessed that government could move to amend broken policy this quickly.

But meanwhile 1. We look capricious and incompetent to international allies, especially Iraqis. 2. The federal judges decision to stay parts of the order is not being enforced in its entirety. CBP refused to allow lawyers to meet with those being detained, in Dulles and in LA, even with Members of Congress attempting to enforce it in Dulles. This confusion among the rank and file about what a federal court order mean…

The fact that CBP has very wide powers and very little supervision has been talked about for ages. Unfortunately, nothing is being done about it. Refusing to execute a court order should be grounds for immediate dismissal, and possibly following contempt of court proceedings, but I suspect CBP has a union which would fight that tooth and nail and probably win.

> No longer can we claim to take the high ground against ISIS or other radical Islamic group.

That's pretty grand claim. While Trump's order indeed caused a lot of trouble, I think trouble of being detained for a day or even sent back to the port of origin is not the same as trouble of being murdered, raped, sold to sexual slavery, having head cut off, burned alive, etc. which ISIS routinely does. The position of "is US government does something wrong they are the same of ISIS" is idiotic. Of course US government will do a lot of things wrong, they are as imperfect as huge bureaucracy composed of hundreds of thousands of imperfect people can be. It doesn't mean they are the same as terrorist death cult.

Re: Trump’s Next Move on Immigration to Hit Closer to Home for Tech

#319

Post by mattnewton »

smsm42 wrote: post #318
mattnewton wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But meanwhile 1. We look capricious and incompetent to international allies, especially Iraqis. 2. The federal judges decision to stay parts of the order is not being enforced in its entirety. CBP refused to allow lawyers to meet with those being detained, in Dulles and in LA, even with Members of Congress attempting to enforce it in Dulles. This confusion among the rank and file about what a federal court order mean…

The fact that CBP has very wide powers and very little supervision has been talked about for ages. Unfortunately, nothing is being done about it. Refusing to execute a court order should be grounds for immediate dismissal, and possibly following contempt of court proceedings, but I suspect CBP has a union which would fight that tooth and nail and probably win. > No longer can we claim to take the high ground against…

I edited my comment to clarify. I did not mean to imply that we are equivalent in all regards, or that this is the one thing that broke the camels back (guantanamo, predators bombing civilians in Pakistan, etc have been far worse for example). I just mean we lost something real and tangible there for no gain. This is not a good MO for the government.

Re: Trump’s Next Move on Immigration to Hit Closer to Home for Tech

#320

Post by freehunter »

mavelikara wrote: post #298
freehunter wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it wasn't tipped toward foreign workers, you'd hear stories of H1B workers who sadly lost their job to an American. You'd hear stories about companies who hired all American employees, then apologized when they realize it didn't work out and they went back to H1B workers. You'd hear politicians calling for more foreign workers because there are too many jobs for Americans. The 25% success rate? That's the system w…

> If it wasn't tipped toward foreign workers, you'd hear stories of H1B workers who sadly lost their job to an American. You don't, because when an H-1B worker loses her job, she has to leave the country or find another job real quick. Either way, she most likely do not have time to get her story across to you.

That's another problem I have with the current H1B visa system: the workers are almost literally slaves. It is so close to indentured servitude that I'm not sure if it isn't the same thing as indentured servitude. I've worked at multinational tech companies and I've worked at regional enterprises and everywhere in between and unfailingly, the H1B employees have four people in a two bedroom apartment all sharing a 1987 Toyota Camry. They work 17 hour days for less money than their coworkers, and if they complain, they're deported and banned from the country.

That's not fair. If your skillset is so important that American companies will bring you across the ocean from your home country to work for them, you should be a god to them. You should be the most valuable employee they have. They hired Joe because he was the best candidate that applied to their local ad. They hand-picked Prakesh and brought him all the way to California from his home in India because no one is better than Prakesh.

The best way to make that happen? Pay them more.

Post reply on HN