How Immigration Uncertainty Threatens America’s Tech Dominance • Hacker News Board

Re: How Immigration Uncertainty Threatens America’s Tech Dominance

#371

Post by some_guy_there » Thu, Feb 02, 2017, 10:59 PM UTC

yummyfajitas wrote: post #202

jacquesm wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have heard of the US refusing entry to people with visas. I know someone this happened to, in fact. That's along the lines of if something happens to one person it is a tragedy but if it happens to a lot of people it is statistics. The numbers are now high enough that it has become a statistic, and one worth noticing. It also draws attention because the list of 7 countries could easily be expanded (on a twitter i…

It's hardly clear that folks would object. Obama is actually the one who came up with the list of 7 countries and authorized this in the Terrorist Travel Prevention act of 2015. It's unclear that this list can be expanded on a whim. https://sethfrantzman.com/2017/01/28/obamas-administration-m... Obama did something similar in 2012 to little protest. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2012/03... Agai…

The authority asserted by President Trump in the executive order does not arise from the TTPA. It derives from INA (viz. 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) ). The fact that this order uses the country listed in TTPA does not negate the fact that the executive has asserted the authority to negate already existing visa from any country that they wish to. (Well technically they still have the visa, but what use is it if there is a blanket ban.)

In particular, nothing in TTPA barred entry to people who have helped American armed forces, or legally enrolled students from those country, which this order does. Again, not by authority of TTPA, but under INA. Taking the executive order at face value, the executive can ban any and all countries. The fact that they used the list from TTPA is political convenience.

Re: How Immigration Uncertainty Threatens America’s Tech Dominance

#372

Post by carry_bit » Fri, Feb 03, 2017, 12:00 AM UTC

rm_-rf_slash wrote: post #316

carry_bit wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It holds up quite well actually. You pretty much outlined why step two is deportation, to remove those already inside the gates.

Allow me to expand. The American economy depends on immigrants, as did Rome. We need immigrants to work our fields, found startups, and maintain the birth rate (which would be demographic doom in America without immigration). If we expel recent immigrants and close the gates, we will need to either automate furiously or push the birth rate way, way, way up. Good luck convincing more young people to have kids when the…

I think you may be overlooking the level of desperation coming from the "build the wall, deport them all"-types. They viewed the 2016 election as the Flight 93 election: they could either sit back and face certain death, or they could try storming the cabin and at least have a chance. While there are challenges and hardships in fixing the immigration situation, they would prefer to face those issues rather than sit back while the nation commits suicide.

This choice is also made easier for them, as many of them are starting at the same point as you are. They don't believe maintaining the birth rate is that vital. They don't know or don't believe in the benefits of free trade. They believe that kicking out 20 million consumers is fine because Americans will be producing for Americans now and not the Chinese. It's easy to sell people on economic policies that have seen benefits and unseen costs, even if overall they cost society as a whole.

Re: How Immigration Uncertainty Threatens America’s Tech Dominance

#373

Post by gozur88 » Fri, Feb 03, 2017, 12:04 AM UTC

lutorm wrote: post #291

Retric wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the language program just gets cut. And then what? Yes, an Alabama community collage can't pay for a language teacher, that's a fairly normal problem for community collages. It does not suggest there is somehow a market failure. PS: I think you miss understood my upper bound. I doubt people want an immigration policy based on filling any jobs that pays more than ~30k/year.

So why is this a better outcome than letting them hire one on an H1B? No American loses their job, and a community college program remains, giving people access to education. I don't see what "market failure" has to do with the H1B at all. Just because the market worked correctly doesn't imply that the outcome was desirable.

The way it's supposed to work is people who already have those job skills enjoy a temporary boom in compensation, and then other people think "I could do that. I will learn that skill and get paid the big bucks."

The H-1B system short circuits that mechanism. The salary doesn't rise, and young people are savvy enough to realize once an industry starts using foreign workers it never will.

Voila! Permanent shortage of Americans willing to do that job.

Re: How Immigration Uncertainty Threatens America’s Tech Dominance

#374

Post by dukeluke » Fri, Feb 03, 2017, 12:48 AM UTC

Arizhel wrote: post #367

dukeluke wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit presumptuous that everyone living in rural areas is unskilled. I've got nearly two years in the tech industry, hold several certifications, and almost have a BS completed. But because I live in a rural area & all the tech jobs are becoming more and more centralized, it's nearly impossible for me to find work. I don't want to move because my wife is in school and my family also lives in the middle of nowher…

Ok, then how exactly do you propose tech companies hire you when you absolutely refuse to leave this rural area? You think they're going to set up a satellite office just so they can hire one or two people out in SmallTown? Of course you can't find work, if you choose to live in the middle of nowhere. It doesn't make sense to locate companies in places with very few qualified workers. If it did, companies would be lo…

Well I would work remote, but almost all jobs that should be done remotely have been outsourced.

Re: How Immigration Uncertainty Threatens America’s Tech Dominance

#375

Post by Retric » Fri, Feb 03, 2017, 1:13 AM UTC

wan23 wrote: post #353

Retric wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there people in the US who know the language and are not willing to move to Alabama for 95k? Then the market has spoken. The entire point of capitalism is not everyone get's what they want and price how that is decided.

The thing is that this is a problem caused by government regulations interfering with supply and demand. If there is a business that's willing to pay for a worker and worker willing to take the job then it should be good for the economy for that match to happen. However, in this case immigration regulations sometimes make the supply lower than the demand. Sure, that makes the price go up and that's good for workers b…

Companies are free to higher Canadian workers in Canida etc.

You can even get an Indian worker in Mexico and import the results free of charge. But, limiting immigration is one of the fundamental functions of government, and it's not going away any time soon.

PS: I also somehow doubt you would be OK with al qaeda corp setting up shop an then importing large number of people.

Re: How Immigration Uncertainty Threatens America’s Tech Dominance

#376

Post by comments_db » Fri, Feb 03, 2017, 1:14 AM UTC

Arizhel wrote: post #362

comments_db wrote: post #346

Dear policy makers and sections of HN, please maintain this unfavorable attitude towards immigrant tech workers for at least 4-8 years. Once this (unpleasant) feeling gets under our skin we will start departing in hordes and take that American Dream appeal with us. (Probably a very bad analogy) a product is only as good as its fan base. We are fan of American Dream that's why we are okay with lining outside in the ra…

>we will start departing in hordes and take that American Dream appeal with us. And where will you go? I can't think of very many nations which are remotely competitive with the US as a place for tech work. Either their infrastructure is terrible, the culture and government too corrupt, their government too oppressive, the quality of life and standard of living too poor, the ability to immigrate too difficult, or the…

India for East Indians, but not right away. It'll take continuous backlash against tech immigrant for a period of 4-8 years. Then you are going to witness new Silicon Valleys growing up organically in those places.

Remember not much can be expected when everything is going smooth. That's why so many failed Silicon Valley projects.

Think 10 years, not right away.

Re: How Immigration Uncertainty Threatens America’s Tech Dominance

#377

Post by maverick_iceman » Fri, Feb 03, 2017, 2:29 AM UTC

hungrygs wrote: post #28

The general direction of the Trump plan regarding H-1b is the way to go. The lottery needs to be replaced with a demand system where the highest salaries get slots. A floor of $100,000/yr should exist and adjust for inflation. Next, generously expand the green card fast track, as this category of employee, as an immigrant, is a free agent to move among companies or to start their own business. To date, as we all know…

Also the diversity lottery based green card needs to be replaced. Those 50K/year slots would go a long way towards alleviating employment based green card shortages.

Re: How Immigration Uncertainty Threatens America’s Tech Dominance

#378

Post by rsfern » Fri, Feb 03, 2017, 2:42 AM UTC

Arizhel wrote: post #360

rsfern wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congress, hopefully. Call your senators and representatives! There's a Senate bill that needs support. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/248

Oh please. Congress has been stuffed with GOP people who are in league with him. The only time they complain is when he does something that isn't conservative enough for them, like when he issued a statement that his administration would uphold the LGBT anti-discrimination order from Obama, and a few GOP congressmen complained how this infringes "religious freedom". The only people in Congress who'll oppose him are (…

Eh, I don't disagree with you that Congress is pretty one-sided right now, and unlikely to meaningfully oppose the executive branch, but I don't think your fatalistic attitude is all that productive. I don't think it's without merit to call up the sympathetic offices to thank and encourage them, or to call up the offices supporting Trump's more egregious policies to express dissatisfaction. Who knows, maybe if more people did this, we wouldn't be in such a polarized mess right now.

Re: How Immigration Uncertainty Threatens America’s Tech Dominance

#379

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Feb 03, 2017, 3:05 AM UTC

Retric wrote: post #375

wan23 wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is that this is a problem caused by government regulations interfering with supply and demand. If there is a business that's willing to pay for a worker and worker willing to take the job then it should be good for the economy for that match to happen. However, in this case immigration regulations sometimes make the supply lower than the demand. Sure, that makes the price go up and that's good for workers b…

Companies are free to higher Canadian workers in Canida etc. You can even get an Indian worker in Mexico and import the results free of charge. But, limiting immigration is one of the fundamental functions of government, and it's not going away any time soon. PS: I also somehow doubt you would be OK with al qaeda corp setting up shop an then importing large number of people.

[deleted]

Re: How Immigration Uncertainty Threatens America’s Tech Dominance

#380

Post by credit_guy » Fri, Feb 03, 2017, 3:13 AM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #300

maxerickson wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other countries tend to have less productive economies than the US. Both overall and per worker. Of the few with higher productivity, most of them have more generous immigration policy than the US has had in recent years. So yes, you are wrong, both about the impact of immigration here and the impact of closed borders elsewhere. With the training I see it as a utilitarian issue. If training someone is a net benefit t…

When you say more generous immigration policies, do they just allow anyone in, or do they try to ensure there is an unmet demand at home? Can I just get a ticket land there and get a job in a desirable sector?

Here's a link [1] to a description of the point-based immigration systems in Australia, Canada and the UK. They all seem to be much more permissive than the US. And no, they don't allow everyone in.

[1] https://loc.gov/law/help/points-based-immigration/index.php