I've discussed this with a lot of people. Why do you feel the "shortage" isn't a rational response to wages and working conditions? Do you think none of the U

I've discussed this with a lot of people. Why do you feel the "shortage" isn't a rational response to wages and working conditions? Do you think none of the US citizens who became nurse anesthetists, physicians, or lawyers were capable of becoming programmers? I suspect many of them could have, but realized that better working conditions and wages were available in other fields. This doesn't really many much to do with immigration - the 1.2 million immigrants the US takes in every year are, like people born here, generally free to pursue their profession or trade in response to their own personal interests and market signals. Interestingly, among 300 million US citizens and 1.2 million new arrivals every year, software employers continue to experience a shortage. I'm glad you feel well compensated, but the real test is whether someone who is free to pursue other fields chooses to pursue this one. I see the restrictions of these visas as inherently anti-market. I actually see them as anti-freedom. If you can't compete for the labor of free people, people who are free to choose their field, then you don't deserve workers. Setting up a coercive visa program that allows immigrants into the country only if they agree to work as software developers seems like a magnificently bad way to solve this problem. I'm also very confident that in the absence of this crutch, employers would absolutely find a way to improve wages and working conditions, to the point where people with choice (a group that includes all immigrants who came here freely) might be more interested in it again. If you create a large scale program that staffs this field with people who have no choice in the job they work, I assure you, eventually the only people who work it will be the ones who have no other choice.