Why the H-1B Visa Racket Should Be Abolished, Not Reformed

[Brian4Liberty]

What makes you think business owners are going to keep losing money paying high salaries?

From the post:

"Taxpayer money and corporate budgets alike are drained to feed a system that costs more than it saves."

Have you worked at a large corporation? Have you worked at a large corporation that hires H1-Bs?

Big corporations are just like government. The waste and incompetence is incredible. The amounts of money thrown around is ludicrous. Incompetence (like not getting the job done or going over budget) are rewarded with bigger budgets.

There is literally no one doing real cost analysis. Fire 10 Americans and hire 100 cheaper Indians. No one knows whether that was productive or profitable. No one knows the total cost of a move like that. 100 warm bodies does not guarantee productivity, competence or, god forbid, quality.

Big corporations are not like mom and pop, close to the bottom line businesses. Even CEOs of major corporations often don't care about anything but their next bonus and their exit reward or golden parachute.

 

[acptulsa]

You're assuming that businesses will just replace cheap foreign workers with expensive US workers and everything will be great. You're forgetting that the business owner is not running a charity. He needs to make a profit.

In reality many of those businesses will go under or move offshore. So instead of a business having 100 US workers and 100 foreign workers we get 0 US workers.

Banning foreign workers is like a high tax rate. You can have a really high tax rate and earn nothing because businesses will just move.

1. What Brian said.

2. These people are often not capable of long term thinking, or too psychotic to care. Consider the CEO of the railroad CSX, who gutted it to the point where it could barely operate because selling old rails and the land under them brought in enough money to cut him a bonus.

3. "Long term thinking" is often imposed upon them. For example, the WEF and the gay agenda almost killed Anheuser Busch and may have killed Jaguar. CEOs can bite on subsidies and destroy themselves.

4. An obvious long term project of somebody -- the WEF, Bilderberg, somebody -- has been the elimination of the first world and hammering all workers worldwide into third world poverty.

It isn't just a matter of will they hire Americans at living wages. It's also a matter of how complicit is our government, and can we, the people of this republic stop them?

 

[Madison320]

From the post:

"Taxpayer money and corporate budgets alike are drained to feed a system that costs more than it saves."

Have you worked at a large corporation? Have you worked at a large corporation that hires H1-Bs?

Big corporations are just like government. The waste and incompetence is incredible. The amounts of money thrown around is ludicrous. Incompetence (like not getting the job done or going over budget) are rewarded with bigger budgets.

There is literally no one doing real cost analysis. Fire 10 Americans and hire 100 cheaper Indians. No one knows whether that was productive or profitable. No one knows the total cost of a move like that. 100 warm bodies does not guarantee productivity, competence or, god forbid, quality.

Big corporations are not like mom and pop, close to the bottom line businesses. Even CEOs of major corporations often don't care about anything but their next bonus and their exit reward or golden parachute.

So your theory is that big corporations waste money therefore it's ok to force them to do shit.

 

[Madison320]

1. What Brian said.

2. These people are often not capable of long term thinking, or too psychotic to care. Consider the CEO of the railroad CSX, who gutted it to the point where it could barely operate because selling old rails and the land under them brought in enough money to cut him a bonus.

3. "Long term thinking" is often imposed upon them. For example, the WEF and the gay agenda almost killed Anheuser Busch and may have killed Jaguar. CEOs can bite on subsidies and destroy themselves.

4. An obvious long term project of somebody -- the WEF, Bilderberg, somebody -- has been the elimination of the first world and hammering all workers worldwide into third world poverty.

It isn't just a matter of will they hire Americans at living wages. It's also a matter of how complicit is our government, and can we, the people of this republic stop them?

You're saying that large corporations make bad decisions therefore the government should run them.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

So your theory is that big corporations waste money therefore it's ok to force them to do shit.

And your theory is that crony corporatism and regulatory capture are ok.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

3. "Long term thinking" is often imposed upon them. For example, the WEF and the gay agenda almost killed Anheuser Busch and may have killed Jaguar. CEOs can bite on subsidies and destroy themselves.

4. An obvious long term project of somebody -- the WEF, Bilderberg, somebody -- has been the elimination of the first world and hammering all workers worldwide into third world poverty.

And consider ownership of public corporations. Because of ETFs, where majority voting power now resides with Blackrock, Vanguard, etc instead of individual shareholders, those major "voters" can force the WEF agenda on "public" corporations.

I have been talking about this flaw in the ETF system for years, but it is pretty much never mentioned by any side of the issue in the media.

Elon Musk tweeted about it once, so maybe it will get more attention. Or not.

 

[Madison320]

And your theory is that crony corporatism and regulatory capture are ok.

You're going to have to explain that one.

 

[Madison320]

And consider ownership of public corporations. Because of ETFs, where majority voting power now resides with Blackrock, Vanguard, etc instead of individual shareholders, those major "voters" can force the WEF agenda on "public" corporations.

I have been talking about this flaw in the ETF system for years, but it is pretty much never mentioned by any side of the issue in the media.

Elon Musk tweeted about it once, so maybe it will get more attention. Or not.

Do you think we should ban corporations?

I think you're blaming the flaws of socialism on free market capitalism.

 

[acptulsa]

You're saying that large corporations make bad decisions therefore the government should run them.

What you said:

You're going to have to explain that one.

Like, I'm wondering if government is doing crap we don't like and we should maybe see if the electorate still has enough influence to stop that, and you drop that? Where did that come from? What does it mean?

 

[acptulsa]

Do you think we should ban corporations?

Do you think that's necessary in order to make the people who do things on behalf of corporations accountable for their actions?

Do we, just to throw out an example, now have to ban corporations in the event we decide allowing LLCs to exist was a mistake? Or can we just change the way accountability happens, or in the other case, the way influence is peddled?

What turned you into an absolutist today? Does Halloween season have you on a socialist witch hunt?

 

[unknown]

From a taxation perspective, the H1Bs pay taxes as well, I think.

That having been said, get rid of the fucking program.

Twenty years ago, Bill Gates went to India and set up a few IT hubs.

And get this, he hired Indians.

For some insane reason, he didn't import Chinese IT grads into India.

If you don't wanna hire Americans, why TF are you here?

 

[TheCount]

I agree, we should implement a permanent residency program for skilled workers rather than just a temporary visa.

Whoever this handsome, witty gentleman is was right all the way back in 2017.

 

[unknown]

You're going to have to explain that one.

What I think he's saying is that we are pretty far from a free market.

 

[unknown]

Whoever this handsome, witty gentleman is was right all the way back in 2017.

Homoerectus.

 

[jmdrake]

From the post:

"Taxpayer money and corporate budgets alike are drained to feed a system that costs more than it saves."

Have you worked at a large corporation? Have you worked at a large corporation that hires H1-Bs?

Big corporations are just like government. The waste and incompetence is incredible. The amounts of money thrown around is ludicrous. Incompetence (like not getting the job done or going over budget) are rewarded with bigger budgets.

There is literally no one doing real cost analysis. Fire 10 Americans and hire 100 cheaper Indians. No one knows whether that was productive or profitable. No one knows the total cost of a move like that. 100 warm bodies does not guarantee productivity, competence or, god forbid, quality.

Big corporations are not like mom and pop, close to the bottom line businesses. Even CEOs of major corporations often don't care about anything but their next bonus and their exit reward or golden parachute.

Not just cheaper. Often better educated with higher test scores. But "meritocracy" has just been a pretext anyway.

 

[Madison320]

From a taxation perspective, the H1Bs pay taxes as well, I think.

That having been said, get rid of the fucking program.

Twenty years ago, Bill Gates went to India and set up a few IT hubs.

And get this, he hired Indians.

For some insane reason, he didn't import Chinese IT grads into India.

If you don't wanna hire Americans, why TF are you here?

According to Ron Paul the H1B has some serious flaws. My point is that in a free market the owner of a business should be allowed to hire whoever he wants.

 

[Madison320]

Do you think that's necessary in order to make the people who do things on behalf of corporations accountable for their actions?

Do we, just to throw out an example, now have to ban corporations in the event we decide allowing LLCs to exist was a mistake? Or can we just change the way accountability happens, or in the other case, the way influence is peddled?

What turned you into an absolutist today? Does Halloween season have you on a socialist witch hunt?

It's the liberal "soak the rich" attitude that annoys me. It's the last thing we need right now.

You make it sound like we're allowing LLCs to exist by permission. An LLC is just a contract. You'd have to forcibly ban contracts to ban LLCs. Business owners should be held accountable to the same laws as everyone else. We shouldn't make up "special" laws for business owners. For example they shouldn't get bailouts and they shouldn't have to pay a minimum wage.

Maybe if we had a budget surplus and a trade surplus we could afford to ban employers from hiring foreigners but not now.

 

[acptulsa]

It's the liberal "soak the rich" attitude that annoys me. It's the last thing we need right now...

Maybe if we had a budget surplus and a trade surplus we could afford to ban employers from hiring foreigners but not now.

Yeah, well, the idiots think soaking the rich is the way to get a budget surplus. Not that any of them have ever been able to resist spending every penny they can beg, borrow or steal. There is no amount of revenue that would produce a surplus if they were in charge.

That said, we've already had enough socialism, or fascism, that I could go for confiscating all the assets of people who became billionaires on government contracts. Especially if their campaign contributions have exceeded the GDP of most countries.

You don't seem to agree with Ron Paul, but I still do. The only way out of this mess is cold turkey. Fix everything, and weather the inevitable resulting depression while we rebuild. We'd come back stronger than ever. But it would take years to undo the institutional malaise and end the interference, so I guess we're screwed. Because fixing things piecemeal always results in people shutting it all down, each saying we can't afford to fix this part of it right now about a different part.

 

[Madison320]

Yeah, well, the idiots think soaking the rich is the way to get a budget surplus. Not that any of them have ever been able to resist spending every penny they can beg, borrow or steal. There is no amount of revenue that would produce a surplus if they were in charge.

That said, we've already had enough socialism, or fascism, that I could go for confiscating all the assets of people who became billionaires on government contracts. Especially if their campaign contributions have exceeded the GDP of most countries.

You don't seem to agree with Ron Paul, but I still do. The only way out of this mess is cold turkey. Fix everything, and weather the inevitable resulting depression while we rebuild. We'd come back stronger than ever. But it would take years to undo the institutional malaise and end the interference, so I guess we're screwed. Because fixing things piecemeal always results in people shutting it all down, each saying we can't afford to fix this part of it right now about a different part.

Where do I disagree with Ron Paul?

 

[Invisible Man]

Where do I disagree with Ron Paul?

I don't see anywhere that you do.

Ron Paul argued that employers shouldn't be made responsible for enforcing immigration laws. Under his policies, employers would be able to hire as many foreigners as they want without even needing to confirm they had any visa at all.