2 ms·
> "you'd have to still normalize and keep reviewing the threshold yearly. 100k is junior salary for SDE in SF for example." I agree about reviewing the thresho
by whack 10y ago
> "you'd have to still normalize and keep reviewing the threshold yearly. 100k is junior salary for SDE in SF for example."
I agree about reviewing the threshold yearly, and indexing for inflation.
Why normalize for region though? Why should companies in SF be penalized by the visa system just because they pay high salaries? I stand by my earlier assertion that anyone whom a company deems valuable enough to pay six figures, is valuable enough to be an asset to this nation.
- didibus 10y ago> Why should companies in SF be penalized by the visa system just because they pay high salaries? Well 100k in SF is not equal to exceptional talent. So for 100k, you'd bring engineers who don't fit your definition of "deserving to be here". While 100k in say Nashville, well that's definitly going to be someone exceptional if a Nashville company is willing to spend it on them. So in SF, to infer that the candidate truly merits to be here, he needs to be expanssive to those companies, and 100k in SF is not.
- whack 10y agoI think the key factor isn't "how valuable is she to the company", but rather, "how valuable is she to the economy". There's a significant difference between the 2. Someone who is slightly important to Google, is still a lot more valuable to the national economy, compared to someone who is very important to {random_mediocre_business}.
- didibus 10y agoI thought this was about giving Americans a chance at those jobs. If the focus is the economy, we probably want to allow even more foreign workers. What is the issue with the H1-B visa in terms of the economy?