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

Why Silicon Valley Wouldn't Work Without Immigrants

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 111 posts

Re: Why Silicon Valley Wouldn't Work Without Immigrants

#61

Post by TuringNYC »

Tyco wrote: post #26
MichaelBurge wrote: post #8

The immigration-related policies I've heard of were: * H1B wage increase: I heard a rumor somewhere that they were thinking about raising the minimum wage for either H1B visas or NAFTA jobs to $130k. That shouldn't affect the Googles and Apples of the world at all; if anything, it benefits them because it frees the slots the cheap H1B outsourcing firms are taking up, or removes competition from low-paying startups. *…

It was abrupt and it came from Trump. Those are the main reasons it's causing such a stir.

It is causing a stir because Permanent Residents (green-card holders) were being told they were no longer welcome into the country. If Permanent Residency is no longer actually permanent, and can be removed on a whim, that is incredibly stirring.

Re: Why Silicon Valley Wouldn't Work Without Immigrants

#62

Post by leereeves »

otalp wrote: post #56
leereeves wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was hoping for an actual quote from Bannon that supports that claim, instead of an article that admits: > While Bannon didn’t explicitly say anything against immigrants, then adds the partisan spin: > he seemed to hint ...

I was not the OP who you replied to but I assumed that this was what he was referring to. When asked about students staying back in the country after going to Ivy league schools the quote is “When two-thirds or three-quarters of the CEOs in Silicon Valley are from South Asia or from Asia, I think . . . ” Bannon said, not finishing the sentence. “A country is more than an economy. We’re a civic society.” Which implies…

> Steve Bannon would prefer fewer legal immigrants

I think that's a fair characterization of his position. Fewer.

But I'm asking about a source for the claim "[Steve Bannon] wants to stop skilled immigrants from coming to America".

Re: Why Silicon Valley Wouldn't Work Without Immigrants

#63

Post by otalp »

MichaelBurge wrote: post #45
otalp wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Iran is a huge bed for talent. As the article mentioned, 2 of the 3 people who created Google's Ad Services came from Iran, which came under the recent EO. But in general it is the rise of anti-immigration sentiment, and the instability with respect to immigration. There's the case of green cards for Indians and the Chinese. Under the current system, Indians and Chinese workers who start the process of getting a gree…

> But in general it is the rise of anti-immigration sentiment, and the instability with respect to immigration. I guess that makes sense. If you have a low opinion of Trump starting out, then hearing about his upcoming "immigration reform" is like the Pointy-Haired Boss telling you not to worry about that race condition in the billing server because he "fixed" it: It just makes you more worried. > Under the current s…

>Would plans to make the requirements more strict(such as requiring them to work a high-paying job..) help alleviate this, since the queue will be shorter

If it does, the effects will only be seen in a couple of decades. A lot things can change by then. What would be better would a system where countries get green cards proportional to their population. It makes no sense for Fiji to be awarded the same number as India.

Re: Why Silicon Valley Wouldn't Work Without Immigrants

#64

Post by talmand »

Tyco wrote: post #26
MichaelBurge wrote: post #8

The immigration-related policies I've heard of were: * H1B wage increase: I heard a rumor somewhere that they were thinking about raising the minimum wage for either H1B visas or NAFTA jobs to $130k. That shouldn't affect the Googles and Apples of the world at all; if anything, it benefits them because it frees the slots the cheap H1B outsourcing firms are taking up, or removes competition from low-paying startups. *…

It was abrupt and it came from Trump. Those are the main reasons it's causing such a stir.

Especially since it has been done many times before with little noise.

Re: Why Silicon Valley Wouldn't Work Without Immigrants

#65

Post by moultano »

ones_and_zeros wrote: post #14

I'll take a stab at a response: - The argument against H1B isn't an argument against immigration or immigrants, it is an argument against corporate welfare. This pretty much negates all of the points the author makes (We all agree immigrants provide diversity, some are net positives on the economy, sometimes talent doesn't exist in the US, etc) - H1Bs aren't allowed to start companies, so this point is moot - It isn'…

> it is an argument against corporate welfare.

Explain. As I see it, none of these companies could hire enough in the US to exist here at all without H-1Bs. They would have to move operations somewhere else if they couldn't bring people here. I've never worked on a team at Google that was more than a third from the US.

Tech companies already have offices around the world since not everyone wants to or can move here. If there were fewer work visas, they would just hire less in the US and more abroad.

>H1Bs aren't allowed to start companies, so this point is moot

People who started the immigration process on H-1B do. They are one of the only ways to effectively come here. Getting a green card can take 8 years for someone from a large country.

Re: Why Silicon Valley Wouldn't Work Without Immigrants

#66

Post by m52go »

dragonwriter wrote: post #48
ones_and_zeros wrote: post #14

I'll take a stab at a response: - The argument against H1B isn't an argument against immigration or immigrants, it is an argument against corporate welfare. This pretty much negates all of the points the author makes (We all agree immigrants provide diversity, some are net positives on the economy, sometimes talent doesn't exist in the US, etc) - H1Bs aren't allowed to start companies, so this point is moot - It isn'…

> The argument against H1B isn't an argument against immigration or immigrants, it is an argument against corporate welfare. Which argument against H1Bs are you referring to? Because Steve Bannon's, which may well be the most influential in government policy right now, was embedded against an argument that also specifically called out the overall proportion of immigrants in the US population as a problem. It is, quit…

Do you have a source for Steve Bannon's argument?

Re: Why Silicon Valley Wouldn't Work Without Immigrants

#67

Post by moultano »

m52go wrote: post #66
dragonwriter wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The argument against H1B isn't an argument against immigration or immigrants, it is an argument against corporate welfare. Which argument against H1Bs are you referring to? Because Steve Bannon's, which may well be the most influential in government policy right now, was embedded against an argument that also specifically called out the overall proportion of immigrants in the US population as a problem. It is, quit…

Do you have a source for Steve Bannon's argument?

https://www.google.com/amp/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/201...

Re: Why Silicon Valley Wouldn't Work Without Immigrants

#68

Post by [deleted] »

talmand wrote: post #59
amyjess wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Loss of privilege feels like oppression, but it isn't.

That's a rather simple-minded response. You define the person as having privilege without knowing said person, and then dehumanize them by saying their situation is irrelevant to justify your offensive attitude. There are circumstances that the purpose of removal of privileges is specifically for oppression.

[deleted]

Re: Why Silicon Valley Wouldn't Work Without Immigrants

#70

Post by beachstartup »

dxhdr wrote: post #52
randomdata wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> for example the minimum wage was set back in 1989 1998, under the American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act[1]. $60,000 in 1998 would be about $89,000 today, after adjusting for inflation. Trump's initiative is around $40K above that. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Competitiveness_and_W...

> $60,000 in 1998 would be about $89,000 today, after adjusting for inflation. I have a hard time believing $89k is the equivalent of $60k in 1998. Gas was $1 a gallon, average rent in LA was $900, health insurance was $35 a month, DOW was at 9k.

the official inflation rate isn't accurate, as it doesn't take into consideration any of those things you just mentioned.

i'd say $60k 20 years ago is more like $120k today... and that's being generous.

Post reply on HN