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

[TheCount]

So as a practical interim solution, let's limit what we can do in the here and now.

These arguments always reduce the problem to the absurd and suggest an action which is counterproductive to the overall goal. More government is not a solution to reach less government. Less freedom will never beget more freedom.

it has been shown we already have qualified workers here for those positions

It has been shown where by whom?

But companies don't want to hire them.

You'll need to invent an entirely new school of economic thought to explain how and why companies are ignoring a surplus of local qualified workers in favor of a once-a-year lottery wherein they pay the government for the privilege to hire a foreign worker at an additional cost.

 

[Danke]

These arguments always reduce the problem to the absurd and suggest an action which is counterproductive to the overall goal. More government is not a solution to reach less government. Less freedom will never beget more freedom.

[/COLOR]

It has been shown where by whom?

[/COLOR]

You'll need to invent an entirely new school of economic thought to explain how and why companies are ignoring a surplus of local qualified workers in favor of a once-a-year lottery wherein they pay the government for the privilege to hire a foreign worker at an additional cost.

Not really creating more government, just this system already in place.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...Not-Reformed&p=6458395&viewfull=1#post6458395

 

[jmdrake]

I only believe in Libertarian values within what is the geographic borders of the US. Unless you are an internationalist Oligarch, outside of that, it and globalism is retarded for any chance at individual liberty for the majority of people in this geographic region.

Well Ron Paul believes libertarian values go beyond U.S. borders which is why he supports a non-interventionist foreign policy based on the Golden Rule. Oh and he supports freedom of international travel including the right of foreign workers to come to the U.S. While in Congress Ron voted to double the number of H1B Visas. http://profiles.numbersusa.com/improfile.php3?DistSend=TX&VIPID=787 I agree with his position. But not just because he has it. The OP article is farcical in its arguments. H1B visa holders on welfare? Wrong. Flat out lie. Keep foreign workers out because they use the highways? Silly. They pay gas tax just like anyone else. Hospitals? They typically have private health insurance so that's not a factor. They over use libraries? Whoever wrote this has probably not been to a library in years. Libraries are in no danger of overuse. They drive down U.S. wages? Not nearly as much as if they aren't allowed in the country. You see you can outsource over the internet. Someone from India who works in Silicon Valley has to pay the same high cost of living as someone born in the U.S. who works in Silicon Valley. But if you have that same person working and living in India...well on a McDonald's salary he can have a decent life. So...why don't the high tech firms just outsource over the internet if it's simply about saving money on salary? Because it is NOT about saving money on salary! Go to any major university in the country and check out who's getting the PhDs in STEM fields. The majority are people born outside the U.S., mostly China, India and Pakistan. That's the problem. H1B visas are merely a symptom.

 

[BSWPaulsen]

I don't mind you "calling out" corporations for their "immorality". What I hate is when you support government power to infringe on my natural rights. In this case the right of a business to hire who it wants, which affects me indirectly because now I have to pay more for stuff.

And here we have a case example of the atomization of western society in action. In the pursuit of ever-cheaper goods, and the utter detachment from any sense of community, people will sell out their neighbors in favor of foreigners if they can extract personal economic benefit from it. When economics is your god base behavior inevitably follows.

As a side-note, the number of libertarians that both protest government involvement in the market and endorse supporting their community (despite the increased cost often associated in the era of the internet) are laughably few. This, perhaps more than anything, demonstrates why libertarians will remain politically irrelevant. It is difficult to rally a people with no attachment to those around them at all. Herding cats indeed.

Poll idea: how many libertarians would buy something at twice the cost to support another libertarian in favor of purchasing it cheaper from a communist? I have a feeling the result would be depressing.

 

[Madison320]

Best I can tell , people in the US are not buying many products made in the US . I am in one of the last few remaining areas heavily involved in Mnfg and there is only one Co here employing these people .

I agree, but banning H1Bs puts yet another small nail in the manufacturing coffin.

And it annoys me when people here assume they know more than the CEOs of corporations. You guys are watching too many Hollywood movies where every CEO has a hot secretary and practices putting all day in his office.

 

[jmdrake]

And here we have a case example of the atomization of western society in action. In the pursuit of ever-cheaper goods, and the utter detachment from any sense of community, people will sell out their neighbors in favor of foreigners if they can extract personal economic benefit from it. When economics is your god base behavior inevitably follows.

As a side-note, the number of libertarians that both protest government involvement in the market and endorse supporting their community (despite the increased cost often associated in the era of the internet) are laughably few. This, perhaps more than anything, demonstrates why libertarians will remain politically irrelevant. It is difficult to rally a people with no attachment to those around them at all. Herding cats indeed.

Poll idea: how many libertarians would buy something at twice the cost to support another libertarian in favor of purchasing it cheaper from a communist? I have a feeling the result would be depressing.

I will pose you two different scenarios. Pick one. The background scenario is a new robotics startup that has a need for PhD level engineers to solve tricky problems in machine vision and machine learning. This company is having trouble filling these positions.

Scenario 1: The startup fills them using H1B visa holders who just graduated from U.S. universities. (Again most of the STEM PhD's at U.S. universities are foreigners.) The startup flourishes and highers lots of Americans to do various tasks that don't require engineering PhDs.

Scenario 2: The H1B visa program is killed, the foreign born PhD students return home, the startup relocates to India or China.

Which scenario do you choose and why?

Edit: And why do you believe H1B visa holders are more likely to be communists than native born Americans?

 

[Madison320]

And here we have a case example of the atomization of western society in action. In the pursuit of ever-cheaper goods, and the utter detachment from any sense of community, people will sell out their neighbors in favor of foreigners if they can extract personal economic benefit from it. When economics is your god base behavior inevitably follows.

As a side-note, the number of libertarians that both protest government involvement in the market and endorse supporting their community (despite the increased cost often associated in the era of the internet) are laughably few. This, perhaps more than anything, demonstrates why libertarians will remain politically irrelevant. It is difficult to rally a people with no attachment to those around them at all. Herding cats indeed.

Poll idea: how many libertarians would buy something at twice the cost to support another libertarian in favor of purchasing it cheaper from a communist? I have a feeling the result would be depressing.

Two questions.

1. Do you shop around for the best deal?

2. Do you favor government intervention in the free market?

I think one major reason people tend to focus on cost is due to government regulation. Government regulation tends to make products and services more uniform so the only thing left to shop for is cost. Plus it lowers our standard of living so we HAVE to focus on cost.

 

[oyarde]

I agree, but banning H1Bs puts yet another small nail in the manufacturing coffin.

And it annoys me when people here assume they know more than the CEOs of corporations. You guys are watching too many Hollywood movies where every CEO has a hot secretary and practices putting all day in his office.

I have ran more mnfg companies than most CEO's will ever hope to . I personally do not care who they employ but still see no reason for that program .

 

[jmdrake]

I have ran more mnfg companies than most CEO's will ever hope to . I personally do not care who they employ but still see no reason for that program .

Yeah. Screw it. They should just move operations to India and be done with it. /sarcasm

 

[BSWPaulsen]

I will pose you two different scenarios. Pick one. The background scenario is a new robotics startup that has a need for PhD level engineers to solve tricky problems in machine vision and machine learning. This company is having trouble filling these positions.

Scenario 1: The startup fills them using H1B visa holders who just graduated from U.S. universities. (Again most of the STEM PhD's at U.S. universities are foreigners.) The startup flourishes and highers lots of Americans to do various tasks that don't require engineering PhDs.

Scenario 2: The H1B visa program is killed, the foreign born PhD students return home, the startup relocates to India or China.

Which scenario do you choose and why?

Kill the H1B visa program, and let come what may. I have zero doubt your hypothetical start up, with its lush cash fund enabling it to relocate wherever it pleases in order to make use of ostensibly superior Indian or Chinese talent, will figure it out without the H1B program. Hell, if those countries are where the talent is coming from and they have no compunction about hiring foreigners why wouldn't they start it overseas in the first place?

If, on the other hand, this start up is founded by an American that just cannot locate other American talent, the question must be posed - why in the hell are Americans only good enough to start something up, but not finish it themselves?

Edit: And why do you believe H1B visa holders are more likely to be communists than native born Americans?

Utterly bizarre extrapolation from my post.

 

[timosman]

I will pose you two different scenarios. Pick one. The background scenario is a new robotics startup that has a need for PhD level engineers to solve tricky problems in machine vision and machine learning. This company is having trouble filling these positions.

Scenario 1: The startup fills them using H1B visa holders who just graduated from U.S. universities. (Again most of the STEM PhD's at U.S. universities are foreigners.) The startup flourishes and highers lots of Americans to do various tasks that don't require engineering PhDs.

Scenario 2: The H1B visa program is killed, the foreign born PhD students return home, the startup relocates to India or China.

Which scenario do you choose and why?

Edit: And why do you believe H1B visa holders are more likely to be communists than native born Americans?

Please find me a profitable startup.

 

[BSWPaulsen]

Two questions.

1. Do you shop around for the best deal?

I shop around for the best deal between vendors/companies whose interests align most closely with my own. I do not place the lowest cost as the most important factor, and never will. I regard such behavior as base, and tantamount to useful idiocy when it leads to supporting companies whose priorities are not necessarily in line with my own.

2. Do you favor government intervention in the free market?

Domestically? No. If the whole country is playing by the same rules it's all good.

Internationally? The notion of an international free market, one in which all countries are playing by the same rules, is nonsense. It is simply impossible so long as governments span the globe. There is too much advantage in using unethical means to achieve beneficial economic ends. If the US ceased doing it (or ceased to exist altogether) other governments would pick up the slack.

As such, given I have no compulsion to support some kind of universal free market, as opposed to one operative within an outlined boundary, it would suit me fine if the US were entirely funded through taxes collected at ports and borders.

I think one major reason people tend to focus on cost is due to government regulation. Government regulation tends to make products and services more uniform so the only thing left to shop for is cost. Plus it lowers our standard of living so we HAVE to focus on cost.

People tend to focus on cost because they either believe there is no moral dimension to their economic activity, or simply are looking out for themselves first. There is no bigger picture, just the atomized individual. Cost should be a consideration, not the determinant.

The chief problem with government regulation is that it reduces competition, and as such limits the ability to purchase from people that could be pro-liberty.

 

[jmdrake]

Kill the H1B visa program, and let come what may. I have zero doubt your hypothetical start up, with its lush cash fund enabling it to relocate wherever it pleases in order to make use of ostensibly superior Indian or Chinese talent, will figure it out without the H1B program. Hell, if those countries are where the talent is coming from and they have no compunction about hiring foreigners why wouldn't they start it overseas in the first place?

Maybe they actually want to...I don't know...higher Americans when they can? You pushed the cynical view that libertarians are so awful that all they care about is the bottom line and have no sense of community, and yet you're perfectly willing to just have all of the jobs go to foreigners instead of just some? Rather self defeating don't you think?

If, on the other hand, this start up is founded by an American that just cannot locate other American talent, the question must be posed - why in the hell are Americans only good enough to start something up, but not finish it themselves?

Utterly bizarre extrapolation from my post.

Not really. You said: Poll idea: how many libertarians would buy something at twice the cost to support another libertarian in favor of purchasing it cheaper from a communist? I have a feeling the result would be depressing.

That poll, in the context of this thread, depends upon H1B visa holders being somehow "less libertarian." Maybe well educated people coming over from India to get a good paying high tech job are more libertarian than native born Americans. Then if you give the job to the Indian you're giving it to the libertarian.

 

[BSWPaulsen]

Maybe they actually want to...I don't know...higher Americans when they can? You pushed the cynical view that libertarians are so awful that all they care about is the bottom line and have no sense of community, and yet you're perfectly willing to just have all of the jobs go to foreigners instead of just some? Rather self defeating don't you think?

Actually, I am of the belief that all of the jobs would, in fact, go to Americans without the H1B program if the founder of the start up wanted to hire Americans. I suffer no delusion that only foreigners could perform the highly specific work you cited. That would be considered optimistic, but as I decided to play along with your overly contrived scenario I left that out.

Not really. You said: Poll idea: how many libertarians would buy something at twice the cost to support another libertarian in favor of purchasing it cheaper from a communist? I have a feeling the result would be depressing.

That poll, in the context of this thread, depends upon H1B visa holders being somehow "less libertarian." Maybe well educated people coming over from India to get a good paying high tech job are more libertarian than native born Americans. Then if you give the job to the Indian you're giving it to the libertarian.

Again, utterly bizarre extrapolation. My question was specifically aimed at libertarians and communists, not Americans and foreigners. If I had wanted to make the poll idea into what you thought it was, then I would have. I didn't, which is why your extrapolation is erroneous.

 

[jmdrake]

Actually, I am of the belief that all of the jobs would, in fact, go to Americans without the H1B program if the founder of the start up wanted to hire Americans. I suffer no delusion that only foreigners could perform the highly specific work you cited. That would be considered optimistic, but as I decided to play along with your overly contrived scenario I left that out.

Please visit your local state university, find out how many STEM PhDs are going to Americans, and get back to us once you pull your jaw up off the floor.

Again, utterly bizarre extrapolation. My question was specifically aimed at libertarians and communists, not Americans and foreigners. If I had wanted to make the poll idea into what you thought it was, then I would have. I didn't, which is why your extrapolation is erroneous.

What is "utterly bizarre" is that you engage in a thread that is specifically about U.S. vs foreign workers and then try to pretend that we aren't talking about U.S. vs. foreign workers. But if you want to engage in silliness, go right ahead. Sorry for actually trying to take you seriously.

 

[BSWPaulsen]

Please visit your local state university, find out how many STEM PhDs are going to Americans, and get back to us once you pull your jaw up off the floor.

Completely and utterly irrelevant. If there is even 1 American receiving it, then there is a market for an American doing the job.

What is "utterly bizarre" is that you engage in a thread that is specifically about U.S. vs foreign workers and then try to pretend that we aren't talking about U.S. vs. foreign workers. But if you want to engage in silliness, go right ahead. Sorry for actually trying to take you seriously.

I did mention I was delving into a side-note in the preceding paragraph, or did you miss that? Reading comprehension is fundamental, and I suggest you work on yours.

 

[jmdrake]

Completely and utterly irrelevant. If there is even 1 American receiving it, then there is a market for an American doing the job.

Says the guy that injects a discussion about whether a libertarian would buy a good made by a communist into a thread about H1B visas.

If there isn't 1 American receiving "it"? What is "it"? An H1B visa? By definition no American can receive "it." And whether there is a market for an American doing the job is irrelevant. The question is are there qualified Americans ready and willing to take the job? If the job specs are for a PhD in quantum physics and all of the American born quantum physics PhDs are not looking for a job, then while there is certainly a "market for an American doing the job", there's not a qualified American in the market to do the job.

I did mention I was delving into a side-note in the preceding paragraph, or did you miss that? Reading comprehension is fundamental, and I suggest you work on yours.

The "side note" really has no relevance to the thread and was basically a baseless attack on libertarian thinking with no rhyme or reason to it. Writing is fundamental. I suggest you work on yours.

 

[BSWPaulsen]

Says the guy that injects a discussion about whether a libertarian would buy a good made by a communist into a thread about H1B visas.

If there isn't 1 American receiving "it"? What is "it"? An H1B visa? By definition no American can receive "it." And whether there is a market for an American doing the job is irrelevant. The question is are there qualified Americans ready and willing to take the job? If the job specs are for a PhD in quantum physics and all of the American born quantum physics PhDs are not looking for a job, then while there is certainly a "market for an American doing the job", there's not a qualified American in the market to do the job.

"It" is obviously a degree in this oh-so-specialized field you fancied in your overly wrought scenario (Why would I mention an American alongside an H1B visa?!). There's that reading comprehension problem of yours again...

Let's be entirely clear. If there is even one qualified American, just one, then there is a market for those services. Given your ridiculous start-up scenario now requires there to be no Americans available and interested in the job it must be summarily dismissed as a trite absurdity. If that was your goal, then you have succeeded brilliantly. Bravo!

The "side note" really has no relevance to the thread and was basically a baseless attack on libertarian thinking with no rhyme or reason to it. Writing is fundamental. I suggest you work on yours.

It wasn't a "baseless attack" on libertarian thinking. It was an observation on why libertarians have no political power, and will continue to have no political power. Whether this is a defect in the philosophy or a defect in the individuals endorsing it is another matter entirely.

Your inability to draw distinctions does explain why you are struggling so badly with this.

 

[jmdrake]

"It" is obviously a degree in this oh-so-specialized field you fancied in your overly wrought scenario (Why would I mention an American alongside an H1B visa?!). There's that reading comprehension problem of yours again...

Oh yes. You are so smart. Your ability to twist the English language in ways that it (that is the language) is not supposed to be used is fascinating. Is Egnwish your 3rd or 4th language? Clearly you are not an native speaker so you must have mastered something else first. Chinese perhaps? You had what is known as a dangling pronoun. "It" could have referred to a job or a PhD. So now that we've cleared up your writing deficiencies, what you wrote still doesn't make sense. If there is at least 1 American receiving a PhD then there is a market for American PhDs. Of course there is. Now the question which seems to have escaped your oh so brilliant mind is, are there more American PhDs then there are PhD job openings? If that 1 American PhD gets hired and there are 10 PhD job openings....well you see the problem? No, you probably don't. If Engwish was your first language you might.

Let's be entirely clear. If there is even one qualified American, just one, then there is a market for those services. Given your ridiculous start-up scenario now requires there to be no Americans available and interested in the job it must be summarily dismissed as a trite absurdity. If that was your goal, then you have succeeded brilliantly. Bravo!

You're making the assumption that the one American PhD that exists either didn't get hired or is willing and able to work all of the PhD jobs. Maybe English isn't your problem. Maybe it's math and/or logic that you are failing at.

It wasn't a "baseless attack" on libertarian thinking. It was an observation on why libertarians have no political power, and will continue to have no political power. Whether this is a defect in the philosophy or a defect in the individuals endorsing it is another matter entirely.

Now you're shifting gears to why libertarians aren't politically powerful? That's simple. Freedom isn't popular. People like hearing silly platitude like "Let's fight em over there so we don't have to fight em over here" or "ban all drugs and just build a wall to keep them out" or "The constitution is not a suicide pact so get used to getting groped before you get on an airplane." Banning foreign workers to "save" the job from some American PhD that probably has more job offers than he or she can handle is yet another example of a stupid platitude that the ignorant masses can latch onto. Congratulations! You've master the art of demagogue politics! MAGA!

 

[BSWPaulsen]

Oh yes. You are so smart. Your ability to twist the English language in ways that it (that is the language) is not supposed to be used is fascinating. Is Egnwish your 3rd or 4th language? Clearly you are not an native speaker so you must have mastered something else first. Chinese perhaps? You had what is known as a dangling pronoun. "It" could have referred to a job or a PhD. So now that we've cleared up your writing deficiencies, what you wrote still doesn't make sense. If there is at least 1 American receiving a PhD then there is a market for American PhDs. Of course there is. Now the question which seems to have escaped your oh so brilliant mind is, are there more American PhDs then there are PhD job openings? If that 1 American PhD gets hired and there are 10 PhD job openings....well you see the problem? No, you probably don't. If Engwish was your first language you might.

In no context could it have been anything other than a PhD given the statement I was responding to. Good God, man. You wrote the preceding statement I directly responded to and could not follow the discussion? Disappointing.

Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that there was a lack of American PhDs at a given point in time the number is not static, and newly minted American PhDs could be expected in a field with such urgent demand. This supposed risk of a "successful start up" that "wants to hire the Americans they can" of relocating to India or China to exploit the ostensibly superior labor pool in those countries is categorical bullshit devoid of any attachment to reality.

This supposed need for highly qualified foreigners is dramatically overblown, and is tantamount to useful idiocy on behalf of those that primarily make use of H1B visa programs to bring in cheaper labor.

You're making the assumption that the one American PhD that exists either didn't get hired or is willing and able to work all of the PhD jobs. Maybe English isn't your problem. Maybe it's math and/or logic that you are failing at.

In your absurd and overwrought scenario it is altogether unlikely there isn't an American available for the jobs in question. And even if there weren't it does not create a need for nonsense like the H1B visa program.

Now you're shifting gears to why libertarians aren't politically powerful? That's simple. Freedom isn't popular.

When those that do espouse freedom cannot achieve any degree of unity and interdependency they will never have any degree of political power as there is nothing binding them together. The fact is that even among those people with which freedom is popular far too many of them are thoroughly atomized and therefore politically ineffectual.

The rest of your post was inane and unworthy of comment.