3 ms·

Also amusing is to observe the HN/SV attitude towards skilled immigration vs otherwise. When President Trump issued an Executive Order banning immigrants from

Also amusing is to observe the HN/SV attitude towards skilled immigration vs otherwise. When President Trump issued an Executive Order banning immigrants from seven countries, over 100 tech companies showed up at the courts opposing the move. But support for skilled immigration - i.e. immigrants working at these tech companies - is scant. For instance, so far only Microsoft [2] has come forward to support legislation fixing systemic discrimination against skilled immigrants from the most populous countries. Sure, the firms are free to choose the causes they support. But it sounds hollow when they are blind to plight of their own employees who they come across every day, but are able to manufacture anguish for others they often have very little contact. [1]: https://www.recode.net/2017/4/19/15363806/trump-amazon-google-facebook-travel-ban-rejection https://www.recode.net/2017/4/19/15363806/trump-amazon-googl... [2]: https://www.facebook.com/CongressmanJasonChaffetz/posts/1222121941236420 https://www.facebook.com/CongressmanJasonChaffetz/posts/1222...

dguaraglia 9y ago
If you truly think that tech companies haven't been lobbying to change the H1B program for ages... then you really live in a bubble.
- mavelikara 9y ago
  They have been arguing for increasing the number of H1Bs. But when those H1Bs arrive in the country, work for their employers and then apply for permanent residentship, most of them - those from populous countries - are faced with wait times that last decades. Note that I was talking about relief for current employees of these tech companies. Please direct me to evidence supporting massive support for this cause from tech companies.
  - dguaraglia 9y ago
    I'm not really sure I understand your point. What you are saying is that companies: 1) Lobby to increase H1B caps 2) Once they are here they "don't do anything" to help them get permanent residency I think you are conflating two very different things: Valley companies were very vocal about refugees not being allowed into the country, which has little (arguably nothing) to do with H1B immigration. Most people coming on H1Bs aren't fleeing a war zone or at risk of death. While waiting times for extremely populous countries (i.e. China and India) can be very long, that's because of the way immigration quotas for citizenship/permanent residency are setup, and has nothing to do with the employer/employee relationship that is in the company's interest. What, exactly, do you expect companies to do besides providing a job? What would be your proposal?
    - mavelikara 9y ago
      What, exactly, do you expect companies to do besides providing a job? What would be your proposal? My proposal would be for companies to use their lobbying muscle to try pass legislation that would put a stop to the systemic racial discrimination embodied in the current legal immigration laws. It is no longer called "XYZ Exclusion Act of NNN" but that is what it boils down to, in practice. See Microsoft's stance I linked to in the comment you replied to originally. More of the same is what I expect from Valley companies who benefit immensely from the labor of immigrants. Instead these companies choose to use their influence to speak for allowing more refugees into the country, protecting illegal immigrants etc. This comes out as hollow to me. If these companies really cared for immigration issues, there are issues much closer to home. It needn't be this or that. But, the fact that organizations like FWD.us etc are completely silent about legal immigration issues makes one wonder about their true intentions.
pvg 9y ago
When President Trump issued an Executive Order banning immigrants from seven countries That's not what the executive order did.
- mavelikara 9y ago
  That's not what the executive order did. From [1]: Executive Order 13769 lowered the number of refugees to be admitted into the United States in 2017 to 50,000, suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for 120 days, suspended the entry of Syrian refugees indefinitely, directed some cabinet secretaries to suspend entry of those whose countries do not meet adjudication standards under U.S. immigration law for 90 days, and included exceptions on a case-by-case basis. Homeland Security lists these countries as Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. What did I miss? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13769 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13769
  - pvg 9y ago
    You are confusing refugees, immigrants and the people affected by the EO. None of these are the same thing.
    - pyre 9y ago
      I recall people with valid green cards having issues getting back into the country under the original EO. Even people with (e.g.) Canadian citizenship that were born in said countries were having issues... or people born in Canada whose parents were originally from those countries. I don't think that the distinction is as narrow as you think that it is.
      - pvg 9y ago
        That's... kind of my point so I'm not sure what narrow distinction you think I have in mind.
        9y ago

dguaraglia 9y ago

If you truly think that tech companies haven't been lobbying to change the H1B program for ages... then you really live in a bubble.

mavelikara 9y ago
They have been arguing for increasing the number of H1Bs. But when those H1Bs arrive in the country, work for their employers and then apply for permanent residentship, most of them - those from populous countries - are faced with wait times that last decades. Note that I was talking about relief for current employees of these tech companies. Please direct me to evidence supporting massive support for this cause from tech companies.
- dguaraglia 9y ago
  I'm not really sure I understand your point. What you are saying is that companies: 1) Lobby to increase H1B caps 2) Once they are here they "don't do anything" to help them get permanent residency I think you are conflating two very different things: Valley companies were very vocal about refugees not being allowed into the country, which has little (arguably nothing) to do with H1B immigration. Most people coming on H1Bs aren't fleeing a war zone or at risk of death. While waiting times for extremely populous countries (i.e. China and India) can be very long, that's because of the way immigration quotas for citizenship/permanent residency are setup, and has nothing to do with the employer/employee relationship that is in the company's interest. What, exactly, do you expect companies to do besides providing a job? What would be your proposal?
  - mavelikara 9y ago
    What, exactly, do you expect companies to do besides providing a job? What would be your proposal? My proposal would be for companies to use their lobbying muscle to try pass legislation that would put a stop to the systemic racial discrimination embodied in the current legal immigration laws. It is no longer called "XYZ Exclusion Act of NNN" but that is what it boils down to, in practice. See Microsoft's stance I linked to in the comment you replied to originally. More of the same is what I expect from Valley companies who benefit immensely from the labor of immigrants. Instead these companies choose to use their influence to speak for allowing more refugees into the country, protecting illegal immigrants etc. This comes out as hollow to me. If these companies really cared for immigration issues, there are issues much closer to home. It needn't be this or that. But, the fact that organizations like FWD.us etc are completely silent about legal immigration issues makes one wonder about their true intentions.

pvg 9y ago

When President Trump issued an Executive Order banning immigrants from seven countries That's not what the executive order did.

mavelikara 9y ago
That's not what the executive order did. From [1]: Executive Order 13769 lowered the number of refugees to be admitted into the United States in 2017 to 50,000, suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) for 120 days, suspended the entry of Syrian refugees indefinitely, directed some cabinet secretaries to suspend entry of those whose countries do not meet adjudication standards under U.S. immigration law for 90 days, and included exceptions on a case-by-case basis. Homeland Security lists these countries as Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. What did I miss? [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13769 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13769
- pvg 9y ago
  You are confusing refugees, immigrants and the people affected by the EO. None of these are the same thing.
  - pyre 9y ago
    I recall people with valid green cards having issues getting back into the country under the original EO. Even people with (e.g.) Canadian citizenship that were born in said countries were having issues... or people born in Canada whose parents were originally from those countries. I don't think that the distinction is as narrow as you think that it is.
    - pvg 9y ago
      That's... kind of my point so I'm not sure what narrow distinction you think I have in mind.
      - 9y ago