8 ms·

If you read the entire article, you can see that President Trump is on the side of the American IT worker and President Obama was working against Americans by a

If you read the entire article, you can see that President Trump is on the side of the American IT worker and President Obama was working against Americans by allowing more immigrants to work here outside the legal H1-B Visa system through an executive order. People seem to think that Trump is the bad guy and Obama the good guy, but then how do you justify Obamas actions? Trump is right. Obama is wrong. It was Trump who spoke out against Disney of Florida's abuse of H1-B Visas displacing 250 American IT workers. Except for Sanders and Trump all of the other candidates were for replacing American IT workers with immigrants and depressing American IT worker wages. "This is an argument which Trump has weighed in on in the past and a point of contention between the President Elect and Barack Obama. It was almost one year ago when Obama raised eyebrows by issuing an executive order which would allow these H-1B visa holders to receive green cards and stay in the country even if their employment was terminated. This led observers to note that he was essentially corrupting the entire purpose of the H-1B program and overload existing immigration quotas. (Numbers USA)" http://hotair.com/archives/2016/12/19/disney-lawsuit-may-drag-trump-back-into-h-1b-visa-debate/ http://hotair.com/archives/2016/12/19/disney-lawsuit-may-dra...

mavelikara 10y ago
From the article you linked: "What is going on is he is effectively giving Green Cards to people on H-1B visas who are unable to get Green Cards due to the [annual] quotas… it could be over 100,000." The INA states that no country may receive more than 7 percent of the total number of green cards available in a given year. The executive action would bypass the INA per-country caps for H-1B workers, essentially providing them with a fast track to U.S. citizenship. This is a misunderstanding. There are no extra green cards handed out. All this provision does is that it removes the 7-percent-per-country quota restriction. This restriction is unfair to applicants from populous countries, and the administration was planning to remove those. Please don't spread misinformation here on HN.
- davidf18 10y ago
  From the quote you gave, "What is going on is he is effectively giving Green Cards to people on H-1B visas who are unable to get Green Cards due to the [annual] quotas… it could be over 100,000." [emphasis added] The article states effectively which means that while they aren't given out in reality, they are accomplishing much the same thing in practice and that 100,000 more people are working here than should be according to the intent of the law. For every one of those workers working here, there is one less American working here. When Congress passed the law, they knew what they were doing. 7% is about 1 in 14 for a world with over 180 countries. Instead of an executive order, they should probably change the law through Congress. If you want to talk about fairness, then talk about how unfair it is that American workers have wages further depressed and have a more difficult time finding jobs because of this change in executive order (and not the law). The President is supposed to represent American citizens who vote him in office, instead represents the elites (e.g. Silicon Valley firms and Wall Street firms) who want depressed wages for American STEM workers.
  - mavelikara 10y ago
    H-1B, the input stream for these skilled immigrants, do not have any such per-country limits. But the green card process does. This brings into existence a large number of skilled immigrants who have their stay in the country tied to their job. This weakens their negotiation power, and contributes significantly to the wage depression you talk about. Even NumbersUSA do not oppose removing this [1] restriction. Yet, you are _for_ keeping the per-country quotas. Why? [1]:https://www.numbersusa.org/content/news/november-30-2011/sen-chuck-grassley-place-hold-employment-based-visa-bill.html https://www.numbersusa.org/content/news/november-30-2011/sen...
    - serge2k 10y ago
      I'm (selfishly) for keeping them because I don't want to get stuck in line with the huge backlog of people from India and China. That's a lousy reason though. I'm not going to spend a decade living a shitty life waiting though. So if the per country caps go I might just give up.

mavelikara 10y ago

From the article you linked: "What is going on is he is effectively giving Green Cards to people on H-1B visas who are unable to get Green Cards due to the [annual] quotas… it could be over 100,000." The INA states that no country may receive more than 7 percent of the total number of green cards available in a given year. The executive action would bypass the INA per-country caps for H-1B workers, essentially providing them with a fast track to U.S. citizenship. This is a misunderstanding. There are no extra green cards handed out. All this provision does is that it removes the 7-percent-per-country quota restriction. This restriction is unfair to applicants from populous countries, and the administration was planning to remove those. Please don't spread misinformation here on HN.

davidf18 10y ago
From the quote you gave, "What is going on is he is effectively giving Green Cards to people on H-1B visas who are unable to get Green Cards due to the [annual] quotas… it could be over 100,000." [emphasis added] The article states effectively which means that while they aren't given out in reality, they are accomplishing much the same thing in practice and that 100,000 more people are working here than should be according to the intent of the law. For every one of those workers working here, there is one less American working here. When Congress passed the law, they knew what they were doing. 7% is about 1 in 14 for a world with over 180 countries. Instead of an executive order, they should probably change the law through Congress. If you want to talk about fairness, then talk about how unfair it is that American workers have wages further depressed and have a more difficult time finding jobs because of this change in executive order (and not the law). The President is supposed to represent American citizens who vote him in office, instead represents the elites (e.g. Silicon Valley firms and Wall Street firms) who want depressed wages for American STEM workers.
- mavelikara 10y ago
  H-1B, the input stream for these skilled immigrants, do not have any such per-country limits. But the green card process does. This brings into existence a large number of skilled immigrants who have their stay in the country tied to their job. This weakens their negotiation power, and contributes significantly to the wage depression you talk about. Even NumbersUSA do not oppose removing this [1] restriction. Yet, you are _for_ keeping the per-country quotas. Why? [1]:https://www.numbersusa.org/content/news/november-30-2011/sen-chuck-grassley-place-hold-employment-based-visa-bill.html https://www.numbersusa.org/content/news/november-30-2011/sen...
  - serge2k 10y ago
    I'm (selfishly) for keeping them because I don't want to get stuck in line with the huge backlog of people from India and China. That's a lousy reason though. I'm not going to spend a decade living a shitty life waiting though. So if the per country caps go I might just give up.