Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Silicon Valley Presses Obama, Congress On Immigration Reform

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the 9/10-corporations-agree dept.

Businesses 221

walterbyrd sends this excerpt from the LA Times: "In a rare show of unity, Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg and Yahoo Chief Executive Marissa Mayer were among a coalition of high-profile executives and venture capitalists to send a letter on Thursday to President Obama and congressional leaders pressing for a fix to restrictive immigration laws by year's end. Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, investors and executives are also planning a virtual "march" on Washington in April. 'Because our current immigration system is outdated and inefficient, many high-skilled immigrants who want to stay in America are forced to leave because they are unable to obtain permanent visas,' the letter says. 'Some do not bother to come in the first place.'" The letter also offers these suggestions: "We believe that numerical levels and categories for high-skilled nonimmigrant and immigrant visas should be responsive to market needs and, where appropriate, include mechanisms to fluctuate based on objective standards. In addition, spouses and children should not be counted against the cap of high-skilled immigrant visas. There should not be a marriage or family penalty."

cancel ×

221 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Pussy hole, pussy hole, pussy hole! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43189913)

I demand a pussy hole! Why don't one of you worthless women come and give my penis pleasure? That's all you exist for. What, you think you're a human being? Such insolence! You women are mere sex objects!

someradicaldude (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43189921)

NO

The real problem is .... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43189933)

IT workers not realizing they control the means of production

we need more (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43189941)

wage slaves

ageism (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43189945)

If they didn't refuse to hire anyone over 40, they wouldn't have a problem...

Re:ageism (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43189987)

If they didn't refuse to hire anyone over 40, they wouldn't have a problem...

If people over 40 could put in the 60+ hour weeks needed to for US firms to stay competitive in the global market, instead of whining about needing to spend time with their families, then maybe they'd wouldn't lose out to younger people in hiring.

Re: ageism (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190045)

Oh WE, can put in the . Just don't want to. 56 and doing jist fine. i do contract because you're going to pay me fir my time. Make it to the gym 6 days a wewk and swim a mile 3 days a week. You'll be 40 one day and have different priorities. Dry behind your little ears and put your skateboard away.

Re: ageism (1)

moosehooey (953907) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190467)

Apparently the ability to detect sarcasm declines with age...

Re:ageism (5, Insightful)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190147)

If people over 40 could put in the 60+ hour weeks needed to for US firms to stay competitive in the global market

If US companies *need* to force techies to put in the 60+ hour weeks to stay competitive, perhaps they're doing something wrong.

Re:ageism (5, Informative)

novium (1680776) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190315)

Except study after study has shown that a 60 work week produces about as much as a 40 hour work week. Productivity goes through the floor the longer the hours get. So there's nothing to gain. (With the exception of one-time, short-term periods of longer hours, but it's not sustainable after a week or two).

Not true (1, Insightful)

rsilvergun (571051) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190487)

for a small sliver of the population. That's why these immigration programs are so great for companies. There's a small group of people that are fully productive working 60 hours a week. Thanks to the H1B program you're competing head on with all of them at once.

I tell ya, what we IT people need is a Super Pac. If everyone that touched a computer got together and pitched in $5 bucks a month in we'd at least be able to buy some House reps, maybe even a senator. If that's how the game works, I say we start playing.

Re:Not true (0)

dubiousx99 (857639) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190733)

It's called a union.

Re:ageism (1)

WindBourne (631190) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190713)

And yet, most other nation's workers do NOT put in 60 hours.

Re:ageism (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190043)

If they didn't refuse to hire anyone over 40, they wouldn't have a problem...

Why should they hire anyone above 40? How many 40 plus athletes are there? How many hostesses or security guards/soldiers you know above 40? IT is just another industry and there is no reason why companies should not prefer younger cheaper employees. Perhaps you should look at jobs where experience _really_ matters, e.g., Medicine, Aviation, Academics etc.

Re:ageism (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190219)

If they didn't refuse to hire anyone over 40, they wouldn't have a problem...

Why should they hire anyone above 40? How many 40 plus athletes are there? How many hostesses or security guards/soldiers you know above 40? IT is just another industry and there is no reason why companies should not prefer younger cheaper employees. Perhaps you should look at jobs where experience _really_ matters, e.g., Medicine, Aviation, Academics etc.

Considering the crap quality of so much of today's software, maybe a little experience would be a good idea.

Re: ageism (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190323)

There is something to be said for maintainable code.

Re:ageism (5, Insightful)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190689)

Why should they hire anyone above 40? How many 40 plus athletes are there?

Why should people over 60 teach at universities? Hire people under 30 for professor positions! Oh, wait, it's a different field, this is about brains, whereas programmers are about muscles and beauty, that's why you mentioned athletes and hostesses, right? I mean, if your argument were stupid, I'm sure you wouldn't be mentioning it...or not?

At the same time (4, Insightful)

maroberts (15852) | about a year and a half ago | (#43189977)

...the US has a problem with high levels of employment.

Why can't these firms set up educational establishments to train US citizens to the skill levels they need? Or have apprenticeships? Or....

Actually I think it seems a cynical way to keep labour costs down, so perhaps companies ought to be allowed to hire from overseas providing they demonstrate they're paying that worker 25% more than a US citizen would earn in the same role.

I'm not a US citizen, but I think this, like offshoring is a way of trying to force labour costs down. Paradoxically I think you want labour costs up, as increasing the affluence of the lower/middle classes creates a larger market for your goods.

Re:At the same time (1)

loufoque (1400831) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190105)

High levels of skill is not something that can be taught in normal education institutions.
It's something a select few acquire through a particular life style and experience.

Of course you need to search all over the world if you only want highly skilled people.

Re:At the same time (0)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190131)

I don't think the skills they want are actually that highly skilled either. Some do but I suspect most don't. Facebook and Yahoo are both companies whose business is basically putting pretty skins on databases.

Re:At the same time (1)

Electricity Likes Me (1098643) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190237)

"Experience" - perhaps meaning exposure to training, practical applications, the opportunity to work with projects in industry?

i.e. the types of things training and apprenticeships are setup - specifically - to provide to develop the skills of talented people.

Re:At the same time (4, Insightful)

nukenerd (172703) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190441)

Loufoque wrote :-

Of course you need to search all over the world if you only want highly skilled people.

What bollocks.

I know highly skilled and qualified people (in the UK this is) who are cleaning offices for a living, while the politicians and businessmen are believing that such people can only be found abroad. In fact some of those office cleaners DID come from abroad under the delusion that they could get good jobs here and they are STILL overlooked by employers.

When did the bosses acquire this obsessive delusion that someone coming from abroad must be a superior worker to a home-grown one? Not in my experience anyway. How ironic it is that our UK universities are half-filled with overseas students - because UK teaching is held in high regard world-wide - and yet the bosses believe that people educated abroad must be better.

It is racial discrimination, although of the opposite sense to what is always assumed, but they get away with it.

You haven't worked (2)

rsilvergun (571051) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190515)

in a place with lots of H1Bs. They're code monkeys and entry level sys admins. We're not importing their physicists and mathematicians. India is smart enough to take care of those guys and see that they don't leave. We're bringing in guys at the entry level. If you can read, write and type I can have you doing it in 3 months. Sure, I can do it with an H1B in half that, but that's because they'll work 80 hours a week until they get the job down.

Re:At the same time (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190143)

Why can't these firms set up educational establishments to train US citizens to the skill levels they need?

They don't need to. They exist. they're called Stanford, calTech, GATech, Univeristy of (insert state or city here), (Insert state here) State, etc ....

offshoring is a way of trying to force labour costs down.

yes, and it's working. Tech pay hasn't moved much since the late 90s. I see the same pay ranges for the same experience level as I saw in the late 90s early 00s. In the meantime, the cost of living has increased dramatically.

If there were truly a shortage of skilled people, then salaries would be exploding.

And then there are the hiring methods. I saw this talk by a manager for Meebo, and she was talking about how hard it was to get a Javascript programmer to do what they needed - she said something like there was only 25 people in the World who could do what they needed! Really?

And she spent all this time and expense to find the "right" person when she could have saved time and money by getting a Javascript programmer who was close, let them get up to speed, and then go to it.

But that doesn't enter their minds for some reason. Why? Why do employers insist on having a perfect fit? And do they really think that if they can't get an American that there is some Third Workd person who will know their breakthrough - bleeding edge technology? really?

If you have trouble finding people, you really need to look at your hiring methods and get a reality check.

Re:At the same time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190209)

They don't need to. They exist. they're called Stanford, calTech, GATech, Univeristy of (insert state or city here), (Insert state here) State, etc ....

There are few good trade schools in the US. Traditional colleges focus on theories that are often unrelated to real life work and the people that come out of them have no experience whatsoever.

Re:At the same time (2, Interesting)

Electricity Likes Me (1098643) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190255)

Why do employers insist on having a perfect fit? And do they really think that if they can't get an American that there is some Third Workd person who will know their breakthrough - bleeding edge technology? really?

If you have trouble finding people, you really need to look at your hiring methods and get a reality check.

You hit the nail on the head at the top of your post. They're simply not that desperate. What they want are all those skills for as close to nothing as they can get it. If they actually needed to hire people, then they'd just go ahead and do it and salaries would be going through the roof since it's hardly a cash-poor sector.

Industries which desperately need people - say, oil geology - have had their salaries explode (though similarly it's precisely because they haven't been training anyone, just poaching off each other and yet the entire field is apparently aging pretty quickly now and will retiring soon - and they have no answer for who's going to replace them, because a whole bunch of industrial knowledge is going to retire with them).

Re:At the same time (1)

Peter Bortas (130) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190465)

Have you tried hiring specialists in the Valley? I do not care if I could train you to do something next year when I need someone now. I'm sure H1Bs and similar are misused, but It's no joke that tech companies have a problem finding people regardless of salary.

Because that's not how capitalism works (1)

rsilvergun (571051) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190505)

really it's not. I don't understand why people get confused and bemused when they see Capitalism as it's always been doing what it always has.

Australia OTOH, a largely socialist country, just voted a guy in on a platform of job protection.

I call bullshit... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43189985)

"We believe that numerical levels and categories for high-skilled nonimmigrant and immigrant visas should be responsive to market needs and, where appropriate, include mechanisms to fluctuate based on objective standards. In addition, spouses and children should not be counted against the cap of high-skilled immigrant visas. There should not be a marriage or family penalty."

We should improve the education system and encourage our fine American youth to make use of it rather than importing immigrants from abroad. Why is the knee jerk reaction from these greedy corporate bastards always to import talent or export jobs rather than fix the what's wrong at home?

Re:I call bullshit... (4, Informative)

jamstar7 (694492) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190157)

"We believe that numerical levels and categories for high-skilled nonimmigrant and immigrant visas should be responsive to market needs and, where appropriate, include mechanisms to fluctuate based on objective standards. In addition, spouses and children should not be counted against the cap of high-skilled immigrant visas. There should not be a marriage or family penalty."

We should improve the education system and encourage our fine American youth to make use of it rather than importing immigrants from abroad. Why is the knee jerk reaction from these greedy corporate bastards always to import talent or export jobs rather than fix the what's wrong at home?

Because training workers from scratch to do the job costs MONEY. Rumor has it, way the hell back when, Steve Jobs hired people with zero coding experience who had the 'proper hacker mindset' and taught them inhouse, then worked them 80+ hours a week cranking out Apple II software. Reputedly, it took a couple years for Apple to recoup their investment on training them.

Quickest way to destroy a country? Keep the people ignorant and uneducated. Implement programs like 'No Child Left Behind' designed to reward the underachievers and make everybody 'feel better about themselves' rather than teach them the skills they need to survive in today's society. Defund education to the point where nobody learns anything anyway, and jack up the cost of college to the point where only the richest 5% can afford it, even though most colleges in the US these days tend to be run as 'profit centers' rather than as institutes of learning. Politicize the few remaining 'real' universities to the point where students either obey the Party Line or get kicked off campus and handed a bill for their 'education'. Rig the student loan system so that borrowing to finance an education incurs a lifelong debt to be paid,

Trade schools? Why bother with those when the people learning those trades will be replaced by robots in a few years anyway? I did a stint of a couple years learning 'high tech electronics that would employ me for a lifetime' back in the 70's. The 'career ' I trained for was obsolete in 10 years. NOBODY repairs tvs anymore, they toss them and buy a new one. You can't repair one anyway, you can't find the ICs on the open market for less than the cost of a new set.

Re:I call bullshit... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190383)

Because training workers from scratch to do the job costs MONEY.

Nobody has to train the workers from scratch. The workers already have related skills, they don't even want to pay for training to update those skills. Of course, every year less workers have related skills, since progress marches on but their training doesn't.

On No Child (4, Insightful)

rsilvergun (571051) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190547)

it's not designed to reward underachievers. It pulls funding from failing schools for God's sakes (you lose funding if you're kids don't pass the tests). It's goal is pretty obvious: gut the school system so education can be privatized for profit.

There was just a really nice article on why the US Healthcare system is so bleeding expensive and the conclusion of an extensive multi-year study was: because it can be. My buddy drove a school bus until they privatized that and cut his wages. Did the district save money? Nope, not after 3 years. They're just so short on cash they wanted to sell their bus fleet so they could operate another year, and hope the voters would take a 1% tax raise to pay for schools (they didn't). Now the company that has the contract is jacking up prices because they know the district can't afford to buy back their fleet and make it public again.

But yeah, it's a nice side effect that it makes a weak, dumb populace.

Re:I call bullshit... (2, Interesting)

nukenerd (172703) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190599)

We should improve the education system and encourage our fine American youth to make use of it rather than importing immigrants from abroad. Why is the knee jerk reaction from these greedy corporate bastards always to import talent or export jobs rather than fix the what's wrong at home?

Because training workers from scratch to do the job costs MONEY.

Who said about "training from scratch"? Schools an universities should do much of the training. And if someone is going to be good at something it will have been a hobby too. I am a senior professional engineer and was model engineering from about the age of 8. My son was writing games programs from about that age too and is now an IT consultant.

Once intelligent people have the basics of a subject it does not take them long to adapt to a particular applications.

But bosses tend to look for exact matching previous experience. My wife sat on an interview panel for a book-keeper and favoured the obviously most intelligent candidate. But the company used Sage book-keeping software, and the bright candidate had previously used Quickbooks, not Sage, so the boss chose a duller candidate just because they had used Sage before.

It turned out that the woman who got the job was absolutely f#@king useless . She just sat and moaned all day and had to be shown everything and even then could not do it (including using Sage). The boss pushed her out after 3 months, but no doubt, and this is the point, she would now be able to say that she had "experience" of Sage in two jobs - at her next interview with the next stupid boss who believes experience = capability.

My wife's theory is that the boss (like many) was frightened/envious of employing someone more intelligent than himself.

Marissa Mayer (1)

ferret4 (459105) | about a year and a half ago | (#43189993)

Marissa Mayer needs immigration reform, because she won't let them work from their home.

I'm here all night.

her home (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190365)

Marissa Mayer needs immigration reform, because she won't let them work from their home.

or from her home.

Re:Marissa Mayer (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190541)

I read somewhere that Mayer's salary package for Yahoo works out at $117 million over her five year contract. Now, if saving money is important, and companies aim to get skills from anywhere in the world, then why don't they get rid of Mayer and hire an Indian or Chinese CEO? Pay them, say, $5 mil a year. There would be hundreds of possible candidates willing to work like dogs for that sort of money.

But this never happens for the upper echelon of management. CEOs (wherever they're from) are paid the same ridiculous sums, even if they tank the company in the process (can Yahoo afford to dish out $117 million to one person? Don't think so).

So essentially the Zucks, Mayers and other bosses make sure their sky-high pay packets are protected. Yet if they really believed in the 'free market' they'd be happy to see their job go to someone paid less. Of course they'll tell us that their skills are irreplaceable and therefore they deserve that sort of money. Then in the next breath they'll say they can't get certain skilled engineers so therefore... they need to buy in cheap ones from abroad implying the skilled engineers are replaceable cogs in their cash-making behemoth.

Sure there's issues with education in most countries, but put yourself in the position of a teenager thinking of going into this sort of business. They know if they go to MIT or Stanford they'll be okay. However if they graduate from a normal college they'll either be working for peanuts, replaced by an immigrant or worked much harder than their peers in similar professional roles for less money. Meanwhile respect for their job will be pretty low, management will see them as mere 'code monkeys' & the popular culture is likely to portray them as comedy geeks. Being a 'rock star' in the computer world is about as easy and likely as being an actual rock star. Is it any wonder so many of the youngsters don't give a shit?

Re:Marissa Mayer (1)

ferret4 (459105) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190621)

While I don't disagree with you, to be honest I think Marissa Mayers involvement in this immigration affair may be entirely altruistic - Yahoo! has offices around the globe, so she and Yahoo! can already easily tap into cheap IT labour worldwide (and has done for many years).

Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (1)

MacTO (1161105) | about a year and a half ago | (#43189999)

The brain drain is hurting the nation that the educated immigrant left behind (e.g. that immigrant is not filling positions nor creating opportunities in their homeland).

The immigrant is taking opportunities from educated Americans and likely reducing the potential wages of that educated American.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190027)

The immigrant is taking opportunities from educated Americans

Nonsense. This is like those idiots who say things like, "You stole my job!" No, he/she didn't; you didn't have the job to begin with, or someone in charge willingly decided to give your job to someone else. Whatever the case, you're not entitled to a job.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190057)

The immigrant is taking opportunities from educated Americans

Nonsense. This is like those idiots who say things like, "You stole my job!" No, he/she didn't; you didn't have the job to begin with, or someone in charge willingly decided to give your job to someone else. Whatever the case, you're not entitled to a job.

These people also aren't entitled to come to my country.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (1)

war4peace (1628283) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190085)

Your fight against globalization has pretty much the same chance of success like staying in front of Hurricane Sandy and yelling "thou shalt NOT pass!!!".
TL;DR: you can't win this fight. Period.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190135)

If globalisation is so great then why can't we have region free digital goods, websites, etc? I think people would be less butt hurt if globalisation was a one way street.

Decades-long exclusive contracts (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190497)

If globalisation is so great then why can't we have region free digital goods

Decades-long exclusive territorial distribution contracts agreed to before home broadband became affordable make that difficult. So do exchange rate discrepancies caused by historic lack of an export sector in a country's economy [wikipedia.org] . So does a dearth of local advertisers in some regions.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190181)

Then every American graduate in science or engineering over the last 10 years is now sentenced to a life of unemployment, poverty and being a second class citizen, unlike the MBAs and lawyers who got to enjoy their college years instead of working hard. Tough shit, you say, but you know what happens when large numbers of people are utterly disenfranchised and feel like they have nothing to lose? Ugly shit, that's what, moreso when those people have the skills to cause real damage in a society reliant on technology. Maybe we should just keep the brown people out after all. The country will be better for it in the long run.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (5, Insightful)

fruitbane (454488) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190267)

Trying to fight globalization on the whole is ineffective, but fighting the demand for more H1B visas with factual data isn't. Recent studies show that companies have been lying about their inability to find domestic talent AND about how much they pay their H1B visa employees. The long and short of it is, the experts exist within the US but the companies want to save money on H1B visas, so they lie to congress, all the while, claiming we need more tech-savvy Americans. When we produce the appropriately educated Americans, the companies won't hire them because they are too expensive compared to their H1B shortcut. All this fight is doing is creating over-educated Americans who will have lots of education debt and no jobs.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (1)

MacTO (1161105) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190353)

Just because someone points out the issues with globalization doesn't mean that they are fighting against globalization.

The way things stand today, globalization is for the multinational corporations who desire international trade to push down the costs of production while increasing the cost of goods. Very little regard is given to the individual who is ultimately affected by these laws.

Now if globalization was negotiated in terms of those people, raising the standards of living for the disadvantaged, then you'd find that a lot of the anti-globalization types would actually back globalization.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (1)

buybuydandavis (644487) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190229)

These people also aren't entitled to come to my country.

Moreover, the people who want to hire them aren't entitled to breaks on immigration quotas so they can make a few more bucks.

If you don't believe in open borders, there will be immigration limits. Why should a company get subsidized with a free pass to bypass those limits?

How about we set the quota for spaces, and take bids from *anyone* who wants the slot?

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (1)

pchimp (767649) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190635)

How about companies who 'require' a specially skilled immigrant justify a waiver of immigration limits by posting the opening locally and demonstrating to Immigration Services why the domestic applicants are unfit.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (4, Interesting)

buybuydandavis (644487) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190853)

My understanding is that supposedly they do that. They advertise somewhere, rule out the locals, then hire the H1B.

Trouble is, there's no objective demonstration that the H1B can do anything local hires can't. Elsewhere, I suggest objective *tests*. At least give locals a real chance to compete, instead of having their applications thrown out in a bogus "we're pretending we're looking for local hires" kabuki dance.

But even if a company demonstrates that a H1B is more qualified, why should that put the company's needs for a worker ahead of the needs of everyone else who would like to use that immigration slot? Just more crony capitalism.

The immigration slot is a valuable asset. Any slots set aside for economic reasons should go to the highest bidder.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190153)

Nonsense. This is like those idiots who say things like "we don't have enough skilled workers". No, you do, you're just not willing to pay market rate for labor and think you're entitled to cheap workers.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (0)

hibiki_r (649814) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190081)

Your argument could be made for geographic regions smaller than a country. If a programmer leaves Montana, he is not creating opportunities in his home state, and when he moves to California, he takes opportunities from locals.

Not enough for you? How about making the same argument for, municipalities? You weaken your hometown if you ever leave it!

Maybe you do believe in the value of loyalty to your country, but asking for, say, a young greek to stay at home, in his country with over 25% unemployment, when he could find a better job somewhere else, is putting very little value on freedom. It also means having a very naive look at economics: Does the high skilled immigrant not eat? Doesn't the fact that he is increasing the supply of his skill in his destination town not make it more likely that people will make new high tech jobs in that same town, because it's much easier to open a company in a place where it's easy to recruit than one where it isn't?

But hey, who wants to study economics anyway? I am sure they are all full of shit, like the geologists or the biologists.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (2)

Kjella (173770) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190773)

But hey, who wants to study economics anyway? I am sure they are all full of shit, like the geologists or the biologists.

The problem is that many parts of economy is more like meteorology combined with (group) psychology, since there's so many butterfly wings flapping and crazy hordes of investors, customers and suppliers trying to outsmart each other and because almost everything in economics happens by a decision, either it's to buy, sell, produce, decommission, hire, lay off, in-house, outsource, integrate, specialize and choices of technology, markets, distribution channels, promotion and so on. It is very much unlike geology/biology where most things happen by the laws of nature and the process isn't influenced by geologists/biologists at all. Throw in a ton of positive/negative feedback loops and I assure you nobody really "understands" the macro economy. And yes, I know enough about it to know how much I don't know.

Don't get me wrong, certain parts of economics is very well understood like accounting, also known as "bean counting" but unlike the engineers who want to make regardless of cost and the sales people who want to sell regardless of price it's rather important to the business whether it turns a profit or a loss. But I think most here who's ever been forced to make or read a business case knows that unless there's some explicit existing costs that are replaced by a fairly certain new development/maintenance cost you are starting to try predicting the future, much like the entire stock market. You want to be there when the flock stampedes to smart phones and tablets, but not when they all stampede away from SUVs (in real life, I'd probably prefer the opposite), but I don't think you'll find the answer in an economics textbook.

Anyway, to actually say something useful on social economics vs business economics, in business those who aren't your customers aren't your problem. In social economics, unless people choose to emigrate (which no significant amount of the population ever do due to friends, family, homestead, culture, language and so on except under the most grave circumstances) you can only shuffle them around in various categories such as employed, job seekers, students, invalids, black labor, criminals, prisoners, alcoholics, junkies etc. that all have costs to society. The ROI of getting a job seeker into a job is thus much greater than the tax income of the job, it is also avoiding all the other costs. But when your credit limit is maxed out like Greece, well you don't got any money to spend at anything no matter the ROI.

That is actually a pretty well known fact from individual life as well, it's expensive to be poor because you can't afford to make the good long term investments. You're always skimping and saving to make it go around short term, while the people with disposable cash can take the opportunity to invest in something that'll last longer or be cheaper to maintain in the long run. Not to mention the people living ahead of their paycheck on credit card debt, the financing costs are huge for really very little benefit at all. But it's worse for the macro economy, because when they cut spending, they also cut income so really the only way not to get screwed is to not get that stuck in debt in the first place. But it's always tempting to take one step closer to the edge, only to find out it was one step too far.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (1)

loufoque (1400831) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190117)

It's the job of the immigrant's government to make their economy competitive and make it interesting for him to stay in his country.
It shouldn't be very difficult, the person probably has personal and family ties there already.

When people leave their country to go work in the US, it just means that the US is offering that much more to the person.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (1)

nukenerd (172703) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190715)

It's the job of the immigrant's government to make their economy competitive and make it interesting for him to stay in his country. It shouldn't be very difficult, the person probably has personal and family ties there already.

Sounds like cloud cuckoo land. In the UK, many of the immigrants we get are positively escaping or avoiding their families, or getting away from a trail of petty crookery (or worse) and starting fresh (ie fresh crookery). The East Europeans in particular have set up an extensive new gangster culture here. Metal theft is a speciality among them - they send it back to agents back home on containers. No doubt their bringing UK railway lines to a halt because of stolen copper signal cables is not something those other governments care greatly about when wealth in the form of copper and other earnings is flowing back to those countries.

Prostitution is another speciality - take a look at any of several UK escort directories (I don't want to give links here) and you will see a much higher proportion of Asian and East European girls than in the general population. The advantage for "escorts" moving to another country is in fact to get well away from "personal and family ties"; the last thing those girls want is for their mother to find out what they do.

Why get an engineering degree just to train ur H1B (2)

walterbyrd (182728) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190249)

replacement?

This is also pushing Americans away from the tech field. Which will, eventually, cost the US it's technological edge.

If you want Americans to be attracted to engineering jobs, provide jobs for them.

Re:Two issues with taking educated immigrants ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190723)

And those damn Californians taking all the jobs in Austin. Horrible!

So the management over the development teams... (1)

rusty0101 (565565) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190033)

...hasn't learned the lessons that manufacturers and call center managers have learned?

That seems odd.

Looks like the smart ones stay away.... (1)

gweihir (88907) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190035)

The current state is a really bad deal. The smart ones realize this and stay away (well, that and the US looking more and more like a fundamentalist state...). Hence the quality of foreign workers drops and they cannot be used to depress the wages of the US workers so easily anymore, which of course is bad for corporate US, but good for US citizens looking for a job.

Just look at who complains and the story becomes pretty clear.

Wrong! It is bad for the economy as a whole (2, Informative)

brunes69 (86786) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190373)

Look. I work in a major US tech company and am involved with hiring from a technical level, and I can tell you first hand that the quantity of quality people in North America IS lacking. Out of all of the employees you hire, maybe 1 of the 10 is the rockstar you need for your project... the rest are OK, sure, but when you are working under tight timelines and need creative solutions on a global stage, you don't need a bunch of churned-out code monkeys, you NEED those rock stars.

This is NOT about cheap labor. Do you think it is cheap to pay a lawyer to handle the visa process (about 10K minimum), to handle the annual renewal (about 5K minimum), to pay global relocation expenses (another 10K)? On top of this, the wages and benefits we're talking about here in Silicon Valley are some of the highest in the country. We're not bringing people over from India and paying them 40K / year to work on Facebook - it is just not happening, it is a myth.

There are two problems we have here
- We are not getting enough kids into STEM at an early age. Only kids who are really into STEM in middle and high school are the ones who go onto be the rock stars this country needs to compete. Someone who goes to university just to get a job in CS that pays well on graduation, and does not have a PASSION for technology, is not going to be this rock star.

- The US, like most countries in the OECD, has a declining birth rate. The US is one of the only remaining countries in the first world that still has replacement population birth levels, but very soon (maybe end of 2014), it won't anymore. Combine declining birth rates with accelerating boomers retiring and you have a very poor economic picture. WE NEED more skilled immigrants just to maintain the economy. Otherwise, you are going to have a very very scary picture developing in the next couple of decades.

Re:Wrong! It is bad for the economy as a whole (0)

bbelt16ag (744938) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190593)

Brunes, The problem is that they are not teach kids the skills and the creativity they need for a stem job. They are teaching the USA kids how to run a freaking farm or be an accounttant in the 50's era. We need a over-hall of education, infrastructure, health, etc etc. in this country. You can only bring in so many h1bs before you piss every one off and you get a backlash from the poor who werent trained in school for those jobs. I understand we need them now, but this problem is NOT going away. it is only going to get worse. So the bussiness secotor has to put pressure on the governement to fix the damn problem, not jerry rig it with more imports of labor. The science and math and health sectors need to be secured in this country from middle school to internship to full time job. It has to be clear you are learning for a role, and that if you don't you are fucked.

Re: Wrong! It is bad for the economy as a whole (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190873)

Yes, we do need an 'over-hall' of education so we are 'teach' the creativity you need for a STEM job. We can't keep 'jerry'-rigging solutions to this problem. Obviously the 'bussiness secotor' has nothing to do with causing or propagating this system and the government needs to step in and fix this mess for them.

Restrictive Immigration Laws???!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190051)

Is there anybody who thinks the US really has restrictive immigration laws considering how many millions of people want to come here?
We take in more immigrants than any other country already. The fact is there are only so many we can absorb at a time without compromising social services, stability and the job market. Some would say we have already gone past that point.

Re:Restrictive Immigration Laws???!!! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190259)

Really, can you provide some examples of how you "take more immigrants" and i don't mean "temporary" H1B's but real immigration with full citizenship.

As a Canadian on a H1B i find the system incredibly unfair. The corp "owns" my ability to enter the US. If they don't sponsor my GC i get to go home. Unlike in Canada where the relationship is between the individual and the government.

I think that many Americans dont understand the immigration system as they have never had to deal with it, just as when i lived in Canada i had no clue how canadian immigration worked.

By having the corps control your entry, well you can see the problems.

Re:Restrictive Immigration Laws???!!! (1)

khallow (566160) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190619)

Really, can you provide some examples of how you "take more immigrants" and i don't mean "temporary" H1B's but real immigration with full citizenship.

For example, the US takes in [cia.gov] more immigrants per thousand people than the EU countries, except for Luxembourg, Spain, and Italy. During the 90's, the immigration rate was considerably higher and the US probably outmatched any other developed world country.

It looks to me like most of the slow down [wikipedia.org] , while occurring in the restrictive 9/11 era, also was due to the economic and political weakness of the largest states, particular California, Illinois, and New York. For example, the fraction of California's population that was foreign born jumped by 4.5% between 1990 and 2000 and increased a further 1% between 2000 and 2010. Meanwhile, its increase in population [wikipedia.org] dropped from 14% increase between 1990 and 2000 to 10% between 2000 and 2010. That probably is most of the decline in immigration for the US just in that state. There are some smaller states that show similar trends of high immigration in 1990-2000, but not in 2000-2010. The rest of the big states (for example, Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio) don't show that.

XIII. "Neither slavery nor indentured servitude" (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190535)

Then why hasn't a Thirteenth Amendment lawsuit been filed over the indentured servitude-like aspects of the H-1B program?

H1-b Visa = Modern Day Indentured Servitude (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190071)

Tech companies love work visas, because they can draw smart kids from China, India, and elsewhere, pay them way below market wages, and the poor schmucks have to take it because their resident status is tied to their job.

Sure, you say, they could just switch jobs to a better paying one...but since it costs a company thousands to sponsor you for a visa, even if you've already got one and are transferring it to your new employer, so they won't want to pay you jack either so they can recoup the cost of sponsoring you.

Re:H1-b Visa = Modern Day Indentured Servitude (1)

war4peace (1628283) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190101)

As I said before: those foreigners coming to the USA are more than happy to work for half your wage, which is 5 times their usual national wage.
Furthermore, when you see "they're not allowed to switch jobs", they see "we have job security".

No (1)

headhot (137860) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190077)

How about hiring some americans at competitive wages, instead of indentured servants?

Re:No (1)

alphatel (1450715) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190089)

Why is it these tech companies are always in favor of anything that helps their profits in the guise of helping others?

We want cheap labor too... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190087)

In a show of unity both tech giants want their very own underpaid over worked employees just like every other segment of the U.S economy. Punks all of them.

fuq dat (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190107)

immigrant minority citizen computer scientist here.

this whole thing is a bullshit ploy to provide high tech companies with skilled labor for less money along with a nice tax write off for the taxes that they don't pay anyways. between facebook, google, and apple they robbed california blind on the balance sheets. i say if they start paying taxes like the rest of us, they should be able to import whatever the fuck they want.

im tired of how stpid/lazy/fat americans have become. they are not inherently less intelligent. they are just drowning in media and eating fast food with no access to education. only children of the rich and immigrants have access to education in the usa.

people who go to school in the usa think that christopher columbus discovered the americas (lol). they think that edison invented the lightbulb (fucking thief). they think that lincoln faught the civil war to free the slaves (he apologized for it, and as an attorney represented slave owners). they think god gave israel to zionist colonizers (the rothchilds are better propagandists than hitler). they think terrorists hate america because of freedom (not even touching this one).

fuck the h1b visa. let americans learn to read. give them maps. take away their burgers. turn of their televisions. let them work respectable jobs. dont let them use calculators until after they graduate. most importantly, fuck silicon valley. the internet means anyone from anywhere can do anything. if zuckerburg cant find noobs in the bay area, he can hire from the rest of the usa so facebook can continue to peddle their crap.

Re:fuq dat (2)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190489)

But hey, we've figured out where the shift key is.

The real reason, as always... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190133)

...is money. And go figure that Zuckerburg would want it, he doesn't even like paying taxes, much less paying a decent wage to an American employee.

Don't even get me started on Meyer. She's directly answering to the oil sheiks these days with all the gas being consumed by telecommuting. We know where her investments lie.

cheap workers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190159)

There is no shortage, its companies attempting to avoid paying north american residents and to refuse to invest in training of their employees, Hey which would you rather hire Employee A who earns 50k and two weeks vacation and no benefits or Employe B 120k, four weeks, benefits and legally aware of their rights.
Employee A -> India
Employee B -> North American (Canada, USA, Mexico)

globalisation is only about screwing people over (1)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190183)

Globalisation is something we don't all get to benefit from. It about letting immigrants, generally from poor countries, come to a western country and probably working for poor wages. He'll be ok with that because we have clear water and hide our poverty away better, right?

But we still get web sites, films, games, etc divided up into regions. Why can't I take advantage of globalisation and buy games from anywhere? Why is it harder for an American to go to Hong Kong and take a job where he may be needed more?

Maybe if they'd push for the negotiation of free movement treaties and provide content on a global basis then people would be happier to support them. Instead, I can't help but feel all they really care about is driving down costs.

Shortage of skilled IT workers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190185)

Yes, those reforms need to be passed. It's getting harder and harder to find highly skilled professionals willing to work for 20K/year.
All American IT workers payed between 60K-120K are standing in the way for companies to be competitive in the global market.
Let MBA's make the rules. Unemployment will be history and everybody happily will earn $5/hr.

Re:Shortage of skilled IT workers (1)

Vince6791 (2639183) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190785)

"Yes, those reforms need to be passed. It's getting harder and harder to find highly skilled professionals willing to work for 20K/year.
All American IT workers payed between 60K-120K are standing in the way for companies to be competitive in the global market.
Let MBA's make the rules. Unemployment will be history and everybody happily will earn $5/hr."

20k/year? are you serious. Here in New York in Brooklyn and Queens the apartment rentals cost between $18-$27k/year without utilities. Obamacare(will fail) which is not even implemented fully yet, because the insurance companies, doctors, and states are confused how to go about it. If successful this will force individuals to purchase regular healthcare insurance and it will go up with less treatments available. I was paying 2 years ago $650Month/$7800Year which I got rid of. Expenses are going up while salaries are stagnant. So 20k a year? I don't think so.

objective standards (1)

buybuydandavis (644487) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190187)

" include mechanisms to fluctuate based on objective standards."

How about objective *tests* for these positions that supposedly there are no competent citizens available to perform?

If no citizens can pass the test, and H1B candidates can, fine, let the H1B candidate win.

The bogus thing is, the H1Bs hired by pimp contract agencies aren't the best available, they're just the whores that the pimp with the employment contract happens to own, and indentured servants who you can kick out of the country if they displease you make better whores than citizens with the right to be here.

Investors and executives planning a virtual march (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190195)

Of course it will be a virtual march for them:

Silicon Valley entrepreneurs, investors and executives are also planning a virtual "march" on Washington in April.

They will be underpaying highly skilled immigrants to march for them.

Borders in general (0)

roman_mir (125474) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190207)

What are national borders for in general? Isn't the first reason for them to secure the resources and to know if somebody crosses in with an army to steal resources?

What should borders be in a global economy? Should they even exist to prevent people from moving from country to country for example to provide supply of labour?

What are the main problems with immigrants crossing borders? Isn't it the fear that "they" will come and take away your .... whatever government subsidy and a job?

But for example USA in the current economy is importing TRILLIONS worth of goods, and at least 500 Billion of it is unpaid for, it's 'borrowed' with vendor's money. Given that fact, doesn't it make sense to OPEN borders and ALLOW people to move in and out without even bothering with any visa regime whatsoever, as long as nobody can claim some form of social assistance? Why am I saying it? Because the more skilled labour is within your borders, the more offer there is for labour, the lower the prices are but this means that investors can actually hire people (yes, at lower prices), but given the unsustainable trade deficit, you want as much labour to be actually occupied within your borders in productive capacity as possible, because you want to be able to balance out that trade deficit and actually pay down the debt.

My proposal is that there should be no limits to any number of people coming into the country, as long as they do not get any form of social assistance, and they should be able to work anywhere at all without any government authorisation.

USA government isn't even authorised to limit people from coming in and working without some government official allowing them in the first place! Article 1 section 8 of USA Constitution says: Congress is authorised to regulate commerce with foreign nations, but individuals are not nations and if they come in and work inside the country they are not actually even engaged in Interstate and cross-border commerce.

My point is that this is one more thing that the government is doing that is illegal for it to do - limiting people's ability to move anywhere they want and work anywhere they want and where their abilities can be employed. It doesn't matter that they are not US citizens, actually nothing in Article 1 section 8 states that Congress has the right to prevent anybody from moving in and out of States unless they are a foreign occupying military force.

Re:Borders in general (1)

qaz123 (2841887) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190415)

>> Actually nothing in Article 1 section 8 states that Congress has the right to prevent anybody from moving in and out of States.

Actually it is the right of any sovereign country to prevent anybody (except its citizens) from entering the country. They aren't even obliged to explain the reason. It's like the right to prevent anyone from entering the house.

Re:Borders in general (0)

roman_mir (125474) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190495)

The federal government is somehow the country? So if you are the citizen of a country and you want to have some guy, Bob from Mexico work in your factory, you have to ask the federal government to allow you rather than hiring Bob because you ARE the sovereign owner of your factory? So when did you become the slave?

I've seen the 'less restrictive laws' at work. (5, Interesting)

johnlcallaway (165670) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190213)

In the last three months, our company has hired THREE H1B employees, one being a programmer. They had to post the jobs, so I got to see the salary ranges.

'Less restrictive' is code for 'lower paid'. There are plenty of out-of-work US citizens that could have done these jobs, but if they hire H1B, they can pay less and keep them longer because of the sponsorship requirement. I was able to review resumes for one position, and there were definitely capable US citizens to do these.

I'm not against hiring talented, smart, folks. I'm not even against companies paying less and driving down wages if it makes products cheaper.

I am against lying about why they are doing it. Just be honest, and admit Mr. Zuckerberg that you just want to hire people you can pay less money.

Re:I've seen the 'less restrictive laws' at work. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190429)

What you describe is ILLEGAL and needs to be prosecuted.

Re:I've seen the 'less restrictive laws' at work. (1)

swillden (191260) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190449)

In the last three months, our company has hired THREE H1B employees, one being a programmer. They had to post the jobs, so I got to see the salary ranges.

Can we assume you've reported your company's illegal behavior to the INS?

That's so cute (2)

rsilvergun (571051) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190589)

you think labor laws are enforced. IBM got caught and nothing happened. What? You thought that 30 years of tax cuts would have no consequences? None of the labor regulators are funded. They exist on paper only. There's no money to hire anyone. In your zeal to cut bureaucrats, red tape and waste you've only succeeded in making the world a worse place. Those bureaucrats did good work, the red tape held back a tsunami of evil business practices and there never was that much waste to begin with when the entire budget is looked at. Shit, you waste more on sodas and coffee in a year than the gov't does.

Re:That's so cute (1)

CncRobot (2849261) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190665)

Thats cute, you think a national budget of $3.8 Trillion isn't enough to fund something like that. How much does the federal government need before it will fund that? $5Trillion, $10 Trillion?

4 years ago we spent $850 Billion on "infrastructure" and "shovel ready jobs" because the infrastructure needed $1.2 Trillion in fixing up at the time. Today we need $2 Trillion. How much of that $850 Billion went to where it was promised to go? None.

Why do you think giving them MORE money will fund something that will help you? They steal it, all of it. Cut the bureaucrats, you won't notice, except you may have to pay less in taxes. Until they can show they are responsible, I say we cut the federal budget in half every year until they are responsible.

If a 1% cut means cutting tuition reimbursment for active military, but also continues tuition reimbursment for illegal aliens and a $250 Million hand out to Egypt, its pretty clear that the Federal government has declared war on its people and the best we could hope for is to defund it until it behaves.

Re:I've seen the 'less restrictive laws' at work. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190501)

Who made the decision to hire the person and why? If salary was low and you offered to the US citizens, which didn't accept, that's different, if they got the foreigner because of lower paid and not qualifications, then the hiring manager is not only wrong messing with the team, but doing something illegal. I think there's a deeper reason or you are just bs'ing

Re:I've seen the 'less restrictive laws' at work. (1)

geekymachoman (1261484) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190615)

> I am against lying about why they are doing it. Just be honest, and admit Mr. Zuckerberg that you just want to hire people you can pay less money.

Why would an entity(corporation) 'admit' something like that ? What you expect them to say ? Something like this:

- We won't hire expensive local people. We want easier access to poor submissive {indians, pakistanis, etc.} so we can make them work harder and give them less money for it, which in turn maximizes our profit. ... be real.

Why people by default think these people are on their side, is more mysterious to me than question about point of living, universe, nature of reality and couple of other things combined.
Whatever they do, it's for profit. They just wrap it up nicely for the media. The wrappings are all that matters anyway in your culture.

Re:I've seen the 'less restrictive laws' at work. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190701)

every time H1B discussion comes up, we talk about depressing the wage market, maybe that does happen, but was not my experience. When I came to work in USA about 10years ago on H1B, I was making about $150k.

the main issue I see with attracting the best is the restrictive family visa.

Sách hc tiêng anh (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190253)

sách hc toeic [seomaster.vn] sách ngoi vn [seomaster.vn]

Importing "Highly Skilled Labor" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190297)

Every couple of years I have a thought that I feel deserves to be voiced, I apologize in advance for my ignorance.

When I think of a group's need to import skilled labor I think to myself, "Hmm. We must be puling from the same old bag of tricks while at work and need some fresh perspective." That is a good motivation! But more importantly I think, and philosophically, and please try your best not to skewer me for not being able to be concise, the idea should be that we need to co-mingle at an earlier age to achieve lasting, non-bicker fraught, advantage.

All too often at places I have worked when the idea of "teamwork" is brought up during meeting, it is met with snickers and jeers instead of sincere concern that the cohesiveness that enables success as a group has been found missing.

In a nutshell I think that the "import" concept needs to extend more heavily and with support to a time when future "highly skilled labor" is still in the education phase.

 

there's no shortage of qualified Americans (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190401)

There's no shortage of qualified Americans. Those companies prefer to employ cheap foreign labor. Where IT jobs have not yet been offshored, the companies want to bring in foreigners.

I'm applying for an H1B (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43190479)

My hopefully future employer is applying for an H1B on my behalf for a software developer position, so let me give you that perspective. This company is hiring everyone they can find with the right aptitude, so I don't see that I'm taking anyone's job. I don't think I'm depressing wages either, given that my salary is going to be in excess of $150,000 a year and I am not a senior developer. According to Glassdoor.com, my salary is higher than the average for people in that position at that company and also for people in that position in that area. The company is known as a good place to work, so it's not that Americans don't want to work there. It's simply that they can't find enough qualified people, even though they are hiring for aptitude more so than concrete skills - the specific topic I'll work on is something I haven't done before. Yet it is possible that there will be an H1B lottery this year (it happens if the cap is reached in a single day) and that I will lose the lottery and therefore won't get an H1B. I'm not sure that really benefits the US, but I imagine that my home country won't mind me sticking around.

There needs to be a counter march (2)

BlueCoder (223005) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190567)

What they are doing is importing cheap skilled labor willing to work for below market rates. They are trying to cheat the free market of supply and demand within the United States. The is no shortage of people able to do the job. There is a shortage of people willing to work at half the market rate in a slave type manner.

I will agree that the laws are outdated. Congress shouldn't be limiting by artificial numbers but rather by the going market rate of employees. Lets start at 25% over the market rate and have it exponentially increase from there.

We should start a web sites for tech workers looking for work and their qualifications and then the companies have to prove why there are not hiring these Americans. They should be forced to show why they let go of past employees and how they could not perform the task that some imported worker could.

I would in fact favor laws that forced companies to hire and spend money proportionately from all the countries in which they derive their income. If Facebook makes 90 million a year from France then it should be obligated to spend at least half of that in that country and have a proportionate number of workers (total salary) not only from that country but actually in that country.

reform higher EDU / more trades / apprenticeships? (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190655)

reform higher EDU / more trades based schools / apprenticeships?

Right now we have lots college who are turning out people who have skills gaps do the over load of theory that can be over kill for most jobs.

The Trades / techs schools get passed over even when at some of them you can learn more in 2 years then you do at a 4 year school.

Also in tech there are lot's things where you need to work hands on to learn and that is where a Apprenticeship system can work good.

Some of the H1B's only have paper skills / are good at passing tests.

International borders (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190765)

They exist for the sole purpose of keeping the slave trade alive. The rich countries have just moved the plantation offshore, and business is better than ever. Contrary to all the propaganda we see and hear on the TV, we have been living in a post scarcity world for over 70 years. We can transport anything anytime anywhere, and if not for the paperwork, it can be done in less than 24 hours. Only a very class group of people actually benefit from the present system. It's long past time to tear it down and allow people to move to 'where the food is'. Nations are prisons, quite literally for some.

Re:International borders (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year and a half ago | (#43190775)

Um... Only a very small class of people... I hope the message isn't lost in the typo..

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>