Honestly, I detest Taco, but the H-1B thing - at least within IT - is a scam to suppress wages within the IT industry. Not that I think Taco is doing this for labor rights, but more for the xenophobia. I’d much rather more oversight was put on this and far, far fewer visas issued, and only for very extreme, well vetted, situations.
If companies really need more workers, give more foreigners full citizenship and the ability to properly negotiate wages! But they do not want workers with actual mobility, they want obedient indentured servants who are highly fearful of losing their job.
Also, never believe the bullshit coming from companies about not being able to source talent in the United States. Especially when there are so many job-seekers - you can just assume that is total bullshit.
Followup - I’m glad to see this upvoted so much. I remember trying to talk about this in the 90s - online as well as IRL - and people would just generally shrug and just say, “well, you’re just racist”. Which is just an incredibly stupid dodge and has nothing to do with any of the matter at hand.
I honestly think it was intentionally set up just like that so much discussions about it were thoroughly ignored and sidelined with such “arguments”. Reminds me of the way Israel was discussed, TBH. I think the tide is turning on both for similar reasons - there is no longer such a choke hold by corporate gate-keepers.
Bingo. I had interviews with Apple and Google with 2 relevant collage degrees. They offered $18/hour. I quit a $25/hour job to get through college.
Too bad back then. I was an Apple fanatic back in the day and their next ad campaign was exactly my skillset. The whole experience really soured the company for me and I never bought another product from them again.
I think we should grant them full residency for the duration, with an easy path to permanent residency if they behave while they’re in the country (eg not getting arrested or something, being gainfully employed throughout in their field). If these are people that really have skills we have a critical shortage of, then we should be begging them to stay in the country.
I think the main problem is one of lateral mobility once they have a visa. Having people who make 10x what they make in their home country, and they can’t change jobs if they’re mistreated, effectively means they’re okay with being treated like slaves for a few years. Which makes the market suck for everyone else. If companies had to actually worry about retaining H1Bs because they could change jobs after sponsoring a visa, the problem would mostly solve itself.
We should want this kind of talent here, and we shouldn’t be treating them like shit and acting like it’s some kind of major privilege to even be here 6 years (max) since they don’t make as much at home.
We should entice them to come and stay here, not treat them like a used Kleenex once their six years is up…if we are even supposed to believe the narratives from the capitalists, they are precious commodities to be found nowhere else. But then we kick them out after 6 years unless they find some other way to stay? The narrative is not even consistent.
Good grief, what a great idea. This is the kind of thing that progressive and even moderate Democrats should be doing. It’s weird to see the GOP reverse themselves of decades of “free trade” dogma and, on some things at least, starting to sound like the kinds of things you’d hear left-leaning people say in daily life. Given that it’s the GOP, I have to suspect the motives, but still…
I think a good idea would be to give companies some time to adapt, with a planned hike, constantly making it more and more steep. Something like 25% now as the act proposes, raising it 10-15% every year, to hit some max planned amount, but then revisiting and adjusting year after year, based on whatever variables would be relevant, like how many Americans are estimated to be out of work in related sector(s), etc.
Honestly, I detest Taco, but the H-1B thing - at least within IT - is a scam to suppress wages within the IT industry. Not that I think Taco is doing this for labor rights, but more for the xenophobia. I’d much rather more oversight was put on this and far, far fewer visas issued, and only for very extreme, well vetted, situations.
If companies really need more workers, give more foreigners full citizenship and the ability to properly negotiate wages! But they do not want workers with actual mobility, they want obedient indentured servants who are highly fearful of losing their job.
Also, never believe the bullshit coming from companies about not being able to source talent in the United States. Especially when there are so many job-seekers - you can just assume that is total bullshit.
Followup - I’m glad to see this upvoted so much. I remember trying to talk about this in the 90s - online as well as IRL - and people would just generally shrug and just say, “well, you’re just racist”. Which is just an incredibly stupid dodge and has nothing to do with any of the matter at hand.
I honestly think it was intentionally set up just like that so much discussions about it were thoroughly ignored and sidelined with such “arguments”. Reminds me of the way Israel was discussed, TBH. I think the tide is turning on both for similar reasons - there is no longer such a choke hold by corporate gate-keepers.
Bingo. I had interviews with Apple and Google with 2 relevant collage degrees. They offered $18/hour. I quit a $25/hour job to get through college.
Too bad back then. I was an Apple fanatic back in the day and their next ad campaign was exactly my skillset. The whole experience really soured the company for me and I never bought another product from them again.
I think we should grant them full residency for the duration, with an easy path to permanent residency if they behave while they’re in the country (eg not getting arrested or something, being gainfully employed throughout in their field). If these are people that really have skills we have a critical shortage of, then we should be begging them to stay in the country.
I think the main problem is one of lateral mobility once they have a visa. Having people who make 10x what they make in their home country, and they can’t change jobs if they’re mistreated, effectively means they’re okay with being treated like slaves for a few years. Which makes the market suck for everyone else. If companies had to actually worry about retaining H1Bs because they could change jobs after sponsoring a visa, the problem would mostly solve itself.
Yep. I’ve been saying this since the 90s. :)
We should want this kind of talent here, and we shouldn’t be treating them like shit and acting like it’s some kind of major privilege to even be here 6 years (max) since they don’t make as much at home.
We should entice them to come and stay here, not treat them like a used Kleenex once their six years is up…if we are even supposed to believe the narratives from the capitalists, they are precious commodities to be found nowhere else. But then we kick them out after 6 years unless they find some other way to stay? The narrative is not even consistent.
Yep, as long as the employer is the one paying the $100k, this is actually a good change.
Employers are the ones generally sponsoring these visas, but when they cost more than hiring domestically, maybe that’ll change.
No, it just means they’ll offshore even more jobs than they are now.
Look up the Hire Act of 2025. I think the GOP is finally doing something helpful. Somehing about a clock being right, twice a day, etc.
Good grief, what a great idea. This is the kind of thing that progressive and even moderate Democrats should be doing. It’s weird to see the GOP reverse themselves of decades of “free trade” dogma and, on some things at least, starting to sound like the kinds of things you’d hear left-leaning people say in daily life. Given that it’s the GOP, I have to suspect the motives, but still…
I think a good idea would be to give companies some time to adapt, with a planned hike, constantly making it more and more steep. Something like 25% now as the act proposes, raising it 10-15% every year, to hit some max planned amount, but then revisiting and adjusting year after year, based on whatever variables would be relevant, like how many Americans are estimated to be out of work in related sector(s), etc.