3 ms·

Does anyone else consider immigration a significant part of US foreign policy? Wouldn't offering visas to "rising" countries allow us to pick off much of their

Does anyone else consider immigration a significant part of US foreign policy? Wouldn't offering visas to "rising" countries allow us to pick off much of their best talent, thus boosting the US and lowering the other countries? The global power struggles of today, I believe, will be won by countries who can dictate the technology that refocuses which resources are needed.

shard972 10y ago
> Wouldn't offering visas to "rising" countries allow us to pick off much of their best talent, thus boosting the US and lowering the other countries? I haven't seen H1B visa's used like this in my personal experience. At the last company I worked for they were mostly used to fill our testing team with people from India. Maybe they were all guinness, the problem was all but one of them could speak/write english fluently. I can also look at my boyfriend's current employer who recently took a trip to india in order to hire a team of indians "on the cheap" only to fire all but 1 within a month after they didn't really get anything productive done.
- alextheparrot 10y ago
  I largely agree with both your observations and opinions. The comment was in response to a lot of "citizens first, immigrants only if they don't hurt our current citizens at all" arguments here. By proposing that visas may be, or at least could be, a form of foreign policy I believe helps to dispute that point in general, highlighting higher goals than plugging talent shortages that may or may not exist.
- mildbow 10y ago
  Guinness? Are you calling them stout? :) Anyway, the point should be you want to get people who are skilled. Maybe/maybe not that means English fluency. But, that's another matter. It seems most abuse[0] happens due to random Indian body-shops. Since Trump is so carte-blanche maybe he can just blacklist the ones we know to be obvious abusers. Maybe a better answer is to require all H1-Bs be actual full-time employees of the company, rather than being under contract through a third party? [0]I define abuse as using H1-Bs primarily for cheap labor vs skilled labor.
- jza00425 10y ago
  This only proves the company you worked and you are so incompetent. Does Google hire Indians who cannot speak English? No. You last company sucks and you worked there.
amykhar 10y ago
That's fine if you're not hurting your current citizens. Pick off those talented people at a proper wage. Companies aren't seeking talent that American engineers don't have. They're seeking cheap labor.
- alextheparrot 10y ago
  US foreign policy often hurts citizens, it is done to play a longer game. While the relative degree may matter, I'm not convinced on general terms it hurting makes it bad policy, given the other factors that may be in play.
- euyyn 10y ago
  > Companies aren't seeking talent that American engineers don't have. They're seeking cheap labor. Some companies are seeking cheap labor. Others are seeking talent that American engineers don't have (except the ones they do hire).

shard972 10y ago

> Wouldn't offering visas to "rising" countries allow us to pick off much of their best talent, thus boosting the US and lowering the other countries? I haven't seen H1B visa's used like this in my personal experience. At the last company I worked for they were mostly used to fill our testing team with people from India. Maybe they were all guinness, the problem was all but one of them could speak/write english fluently. I can also look at my boyfriend's current employer who recently took a trip to india in order to hire a team of indians "on the cheap" only to fire all but 1 within a month after they didn't really get anything productive done.

alextheparrot 10y ago
I largely agree with both your observations and opinions. The comment was in response to a lot of "citizens first, immigrants only if they don't hurt our current citizens at all" arguments here. By proposing that visas may be, or at least could be, a form of foreign policy I believe helps to dispute that point in general, highlighting higher goals than plugging talent shortages that may or may not exist.
mildbow 10y ago
Guinness? Are you calling them stout? :) Anyway, the point should be you want to get people who are skilled. Maybe/maybe not that means English fluency. But, that's another matter. It seems most abuse[0] happens due to random Indian body-shops. Since Trump is so carte-blanche maybe he can just blacklist the ones we know to be obvious abusers. Maybe a better answer is to require all H1-Bs be actual full-time employees of the company, rather than being under contract through a third party? [0]I define abuse as using H1-Bs primarily for cheap labor vs skilled labor.
jza00425 10y ago
This only proves the company you worked and you are so incompetent. Does Google hire Indians who cannot speak English? No. You last company sucks and you worked there.

amykhar 10y ago

That's fine if you're not hurting your current citizens. Pick off those talented people at a proper wage. Companies aren't seeking talent that American engineers don't have. They're seeking cheap labor.

alextheparrot 10y ago
US foreign policy often hurts citizens, it is done to play a longer game. While the relative degree may matter, I'm not convinced on general terms it hurting makes it bad policy, given the other factors that may be in play.
euyyn 10y ago
> Companies aren't seeking talent that American engineers don't have. They're seeking cheap labor. Some companies are seeking cheap labor. Others are seeking talent that American engineers don't have (except the ones they do hire).