11 ms·
Anti-Immigrant Ads Aimed at Tech Workers Are Running on Public Transit
- tabtab 9y agoI don't know the motivation of the poster authors, but the H-1B program is BS as stated in law. I've seen it abused with my own eyes. Corporations just want cheap and/or complacent labor, and use the "shortage" lie to get it. IT may be in an up cycle now, but it's had hard times also, such after the dot-com bust on the west coast, and citizens were being replaced or skipped during the hard times.
- RamshackleJ 9y agoYep, being anti-h1b !== being anti-immigrant. Immigrants who are free to hop jobs are a key component of a vibrant, entrepreneurial, worker-friendly economy. Immigrants who are disposable, bonded labor undermine the freedoms everyone else has while also promoting inefficient labor allocation. not sure if this organization actual feels that way though...
- akhilcacharya 9y agoThe only other realistic path to a green card for an Indian national, as far as I know, is L1 intracompany transfer (which has an identical effect on the local labor pool) or sponsorship from another American citizen, the latter of which the current administration and its supporters are attempting to limit.
- tabtab 9y agoI forgot to describe what I meant by "complacent" and you helped clear that up. Thanks! While it is technically possible for such a visa worker to hop jobs, it's not easy in practice, such that they are more or less indentured servants. They also often don't have families (yet) and so can work long hours. By the way, "!==" (or "!=") means "not the same as" for you non-coders out there.
- biocomputation 9y agoEven worse, many non-profits are exempt from the annual caps. http://www.thenonprofittimes.com/news-articles/nonprofits-using-h-1b-visa-program-face-uncertainty/ http://www.thenonprofittimes.com/news-articles/nonprofits-us... "For-profit companies and many nonprofits come under a nationwide cap of 65,000 H-1B visas per year, plus 20,000 for an advanced degree exemption. Nonprofits are exempt from any cap if they are institutions of higher education; related to or affiliated with an institution of higher education; or a research organization." I'm a lifelong Democrat (and socially and fiscally liberal) and I see this as an issue of social justice for American workers. Tech jobs are among the best paying jobs in the country, and if we're serious about income inequality then more (or very nearly all) of these jobs need to go to US citizens. The US already has a generous immigration policy. H-1B is solely about access to cheap labor, and it should be ended immediately.
- dilyevsky 9y ago> I'm a lifelong Democrat (and socially and fiscally liberal) and I see this as an issue of social justice for American workers. Why not take this one step further and make it “white Murican workers”? Or how bout “white straight males of aryan descent”?
- freejulian 9y agoThere's nothing wrong with being against laws that weaken labor's bargaining power. Productivity and wages decoupled a long time ago. It's about time the working class started fighting back. It's obvious corporations want cheap labor, and claiming there's a "skill shortage" is an easy way to achieve that.
- biocomputation 9y ago<< Why not take this one step further and make it “white Murican workers”? Or how bout “white straight males of aryan descent”? American worker doesn't mean "white Murican worker". It means American citizen. American citizen isn't a synonym for Caucasian. You're doing that thing that people do when we talk about H1-B. You're conflating opposition to H1-B with racism and xenophobia. It's not racist or xenophobia to say that American workers should have first crack at economic opportunities in their own country. As noted in my original remarks, this is something we have to talk about if we're serious about addressing things like income inequality and equal access to economic opportunity. I think it's utterly wrong to give the best economic opportunities to foreign nationals when there are imminently qualified US workers.
- cowmoo728 9y agoIt seems like the most effective strategy for H1B applicants without truly exceptional skills is to pay a consulting company to mail thousands of fake applications and simply overwhelm US immigration with junk. Many of these people are then held semi hostage, have their immigration documents taken from them illegally, and are forced to pay annual dues to get the continued support of these companies in filing renewals for their immigration status. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10033111 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10033111 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/06/us/outsourcing-companies-dominate-h1b-visas.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/11/06/us/outsourcin... https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-egregious-examples-of-H1B-visa-abuse https://www.quora.com/What-are-some-egregious-examples-of-H1...
- mozumder 9y agoH1B salaries are more expensive than regular salaries for a lot of jobs: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/are-h-1b-visa-workers-really-paid-less-than-americans-2017-04-24 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/are-h-1b-visa-workers-real... And the jobs where they're paid less, they're not much cheaper.
- s73v3r_ 9y agoBut, if you're one of the coding sweatshops, you're able to get away with gross abuses of labor law. You can work them to the bone, far more hours than you would a citizen.
- s73v3r_ 9y agoI think most on both sides would agree that the program as-is is BS (kinda like a lot of topics these days). The disagreement is what you want to do to fix it. Do you want to give more power to the immigrants so that they are not abused by the sweatshops? Or do you want to simply get rid of the program? That being said, I do believe that the group behind the ads is on the "ban the program and immigrants" side.
- bjourne 9y agoThen it seems that the most sensible way forward is not to limit immigrants ability to immigrate, but to limit corporations' power to abuse immigrants, doesn't it?
- hocuspocus 9y agoOr even limit corporations' power to abuse workers altogether, so that Disney can't just lay off its entire IT staff and replace it with cheaper labor, but hey that would be business unfriendly! The level of cognitive dissonance on HN every time this topic comes up is pretty impressive.
- hliyan 9y agoI read the text of the ad without making any assumptions, and I was hard pressed to find any fault with it. The only problem appears when you factor in who's saying it and what you _think_ the ad is saying. Edit: in case readers assume I'm being racist in some way: I'm a Sri Lankan national.
- mfoy_ 9y agoGenerally speaking, it's not wrong. There's historically always been friction between labour and management. I don't know what the ideal "solution" is, though the authors of the ad seems to thinks it involves immigrants. :\
- lightbyte 9y agoI think the name of the organization that is running the ad is also a problem. They seem to be trying to co-opt the "progressive" label for something that is completely opposite to what it is supposed to (over the last few years) stand for. I can't tell if they are intentionally doing that for nefarious reasons. Imagine seeing a "Conservatives for repealing the 2nd amendment" ad. I would assume they have some ulterior motives there.
- mfoy_ 9y agoI think the ad is utterly genius (in a nefarious way) because it's making me want to play devil's advocate soooo badly. The authors are clearly trying to get people to conflate "H1-B abuse" with "immigration". People can be against H1-B abuse and NOT be anti-immigration.
- drb91 9y agoYea, this is a conversation that people should be having, the "progressive" part seems to just be a straight up lie/misdirection. Hard to take it seriously.
- Symmetry 9y agoIt was really weird to me when people in the 21st century started calling themselves to differentiate themselves from other sorts of liberals. Modern progressives and the progressives of the Progressive era share many features but traditional progressives were strongly associated with moral paternalism and eugenics. Seeing people I would have called liberals start calling themselves progressive was as jarring as Trump's use of "America First". And I think that nativism isn't unknown to modern progressives. I think Bernie Sanders is commonly considered a progressive and he was very down on immigrants depressing native worker's wages.
- joshuaheard 9y agoOnly 30% of tech workers in Silicon Valley are Americans? I'd say there was an imbalance there that should be addressed.
- Cenk 9y ago57% of tech workers in SF are foreign-born (https://www.theatlas.com/charts/SkTkDFUHb https://www.theatlas.com/charts/SkTkDFUHb).
- stuffedBelly 9y agokeep in mind that 57% does not mean 57% are on H1B. This dataset does not show the percentage of permanent residents.
- cgy1 9y agoI believe that's a debunked stat. 30% might be native born, but that doesn't account for foreign-born U.S. citizens, even ones that grew up in the U.S.
- JimboOmega 9y agoYeah that REALLY caught my eye; in the context I read it as "citizens and nationals of the US" (when they say "Americans"). Even is SJ is cherry picked, it is a big employment center and that number is shocking. The implication being that visa-holders are getting the majority of jobs. If it is based on country of birth I'm way less impressed. Where did that number even come from? Country of birth isn't something companies usually collect.
- nowayjose123 9y agoWhy do you think this imbalance needs to be addressed? Silicon Valley is a meritocracy and the best workers find employment. This is obviously a pipeline problem. Because if this is an imbalance that needs to be corrected with policy, then does SV's gender and racial imbalance also need to be addressed similarly?
- ysv2 9y agoThe reaction to this ad is predictably absurd. The far left's constant push to draw increasingly unremarkable positions like "US jobs should go to US workers" as beyond the pale is why we're stuck with Trump. For my part I don't even agree with the ad, and I consider myself lucky to work with my H-1B coworkers. But it can be disagreed with minus the pretense that it's equivalent to painting a swastika on the side of a bus.
- always_good 9y ago>The far left's constant push to draw increasingly unremarkable positions like "US jobs should go to US workers" as beyond the pale is why we're stuck with Trump. Well said. Just like how anti-illegal-immigration (an unremarkable position) is now synonymous with anti-Mexican. It creates scenarios like the article where you're kneejerk labeled a racist and that's supposed to be self-evident.
- mozumder 9y agoWe're entering a neoliberal world of open borders and free trade, like Hillary Clinton wanted. I, and many others, fully support that. It's best for the US economy going forward, since protectionism is a good way to wreck an economy. I hope you are ready for it.
- gadders 9y agoOne distinction I like to draw as well is being anti-immigration doesn't mean you're anti-immigrant. Wanting immigration to be limited or criteria changed or whatever doesn't mean that you don't like the people that come to your country via these means.
- dashundchen 9y ago> Well said. Just like how anti-illegal-immigration (an unremarkable position) is now synonymous with anti-Mexican. Have you considered this is because the some of the loudest voices on the right have wrapped up the immigration debate with some nasty rhetoric based on race, nationality and nationalistic emotion, not policy or fact? Do any of the statements linked below, which were well reported on, seem like productive ways to discuss immigration? http://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/donald-trump-announces-presidential-bid-trashing-mexico-mexicans-n376521 http://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/donald-trump-announces-pr... https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/9-outrageous-things-donald-trump-has-said-about-latinos_us_55e483a1e4b0c818f618904b https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/9-outrageous-things-don... http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/trump-slams-shithole-countries-in-oval-office-meeting-on-immigration-1134990403518 http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/trump-slams-shithole-countr...
- DonaldPShimoda 9y ago> “I don’t see where innovation necessarily comes from diversity,” [the executive director at Progressives for Immigration Reform, the group that paid for the ads,] said. I can't claim to know Lynn's exact thoughts (Lynn being the person quoted here), but this kind of rhetoric is common among racists/xenophobes. Diversity (in some respect) is inherently good for innovation. You could have a room full of CS PhDs, and if they all come from similar enough backgrounds then they may all come up with the same solutions to certain problems. "Merit" on its own isn't always enough. Simply having a different background could give someone an edge in such a group when it comes to innovation. I think skill-based immigration is important and useful, though I do think that there should be some sort of regulation to ensure that (1) immigrants are not exploited (they are paid fair wages equal to what a non-immigrant would be paid for the same job) and (2) some effort was put into recruiting from the US first (because I think US-based companies have a duty to the United States and its citizens, at least to some extent).
- manigandham 9y agoWhy did you assume that all those PHDs have the same background? What is the objective measure of how interesting your life is compared to someone else? And how do you score how different two lives are? What does it mean that it "could" give an edge? Sure, something in your past might help you solve a problem in the future, whether that is your entire career experience or a single phrase you remember from childhood. However that's just fact and so generic that it applies to every human being on the planet, which is why these vague claims of "diverse" backgrounds being helpful are dubious at best, and that's before getting into the much worse "diverse-based-on-appearance" nonsense.
- BuckRogers 9y agoThe only real diversity they're looking for is diversity of wages (trending down). If they wanted thought diversity, this is already a very diverse nation in every sense and a foreign passport is not a requirement. These exploitative capitalists are destroying the country. There are young black children born here that need a good paying job too. Taxes need to go up on the same employers so their schools are good enough to get all the kids there. We should reserve the benefits of having a company in the USA for those that want to invest and benefit from our labor. Those companies who only exist to take the good and not pay in should be forced to move their operation to Vietnam or wherever they feel is what they're looking for. I'm not going to be held hostage by them and want them and their downward, corrosive effect out of my country. 'Free traitors' beware, people are waking up from all political backgrounds.
- brandonmenc 9y agoH-1B workers aren't immigrants - they're foreigners being exploited for cheap labor, driving wages down for everyone - including themselves. I think your typical anti H-1B person would have no problem blanket granting all H-1Bs citizenship in order to equip them with the agency required to demand fair wages for themselves, which would level the playing field for everyone.
- jnbiche 9y ago> I think your typical anti H-1B person would have no problem blanket granting all H-1Bs citizenship I wouldn't, as long as we didn't continue to bring in immigrants targeting one specific profession such as continued H1B, and instead increased general immigrant quotas, perhaps half skilled (college educated) and half "low skill" (who have often become successful entrepreneurs here in the US).
- nowayjose123 9y agoAka the Canadian model.
- jnbiche 9y agoI love the Canadian immigration system. I'd love to shift to a similar system.
- s2g 9y agoOf course they are immigrants.
- oneworld 9y agoI agree with the ads. I don't see them as being anti-immigrant. It is calling for reforms in the H1B system. We need to reform the visa system and the subsequent GC process. Why do the loud voices on the Left (&the Right) conflate everything with whatever agenda they are pushing. Merit based immigration might help me and thousands of immigrants. In the whole spectrum of immigration issues, there is a sliver that both the left and the right can agree on. Employers viewing H1Bs as lower cost dispensable workers is definitely not desired by both sides. FWIW, I am an immigrant on H1B with both bachelor's and masters degrees from US universities.
- s73v3r_ 9y agoThe group behind them would like to "reform" the system by getting rid of it.
- biocomputation 9y agoGetting rid of H1-B wouldn't end immigration though.
- s73v3r_ 9y agoThey also wish to get rid of many other immigration programs. However, they have chosen to focus on this one.
- nowayjose123 9y agoIt's not calling for the kinds of reforms you'd want though. Is reforming GC caps on this org's agenda?
- aggronn 9y ago"Hire US Workers" doesn't strike you as anti-immigrant? I don't see this as looking for constructive reform for, as an example, better conditions for H1B residents who have no mobility or leverage. Its saying "Stop H1B and stop foreigners from taking our jobs". If thats not their message, I don't know what is.
- matt4077 9y agoThis issue is a great example of a real-world “leaky abstraction”: we use this mental model of a market’s function, where prices are set by the interaction of supply and demand. And it’s a great model! It’s almost indispensable if you’re selling apples or buying a home. But the IT job market, specifically in Silicon Valley, is an almost pathological failure case. There have been hundreds of attempts to replicate the unique success of Silicon Valley across the world. Even within the US, where the regulatory environment, market size, and other confounding factors can be ruled out, they have all failed to varying degrees. The not-so-secret secret to SV’s success is now pretty well established to be very similar to an airport’s “meeting point”: It doesn’t actually matter that much where it is, as long as there are enough signs leading you there. And there needs to be just one meeting point, or the concept falls apart pretty quickly. SV is the meeting point of tech. Throw the best people, some good universities, a lot of capital, and maybe a decade of experiments with LSD in one pot, stirr, wait, and watch it bloom. Tech immigrants in the Valley are competing for jobs on the micro level. But zoom out just slightly, and they are a necessary ingredient of building the world’s most competitive innovation pressure-cooker. It may be useful to make the analogy with capital: just like people are competing for jobs, VC firms are competing for deals. Yet you never see attempts by that industry to restrict foreign capital to flow into the Valley, even though they would have all the resources to make their case to legislators. On a moral level, there is something not quite right about professionals with $60,000+ starting salaries to be antagonistic towards those using education and dedication to seek a better future among them. But even if you reject what some will surely call “SJW virtue signaling”, you should pragmatically choose to advocate for policies that help both you and your presumptive competitors: advocating for some of the practices that are close to indentured servitude will do just that. But that’s difficult to do, in practice: are you actually advocating for their benefit? Or are you trying to drape so many gold chains around their neck that they’ll sink, I. e. pricing them out of the market? If you are in SV, you have all the possibilities to discuss these questions with those affected by them. Make sure you do: that ability is but one of the perks of living in the world’s best place to find smart people of any background.
- jnbiche 9y agoYou do realize that SV is not the entire American software industry, right? There are many H1Bs in the mid-sized Southern city where I'm from, where it's extremely difficult to find a software development job and where the economy is already struggling. It's just wrong.
- jnbiche 9y agoIt's ridiculous to call this campaign 'anti-immigrant'. I'm very much for increasing our general skilled and unskilled immigration lottery quotas and our asylum allotment. However, I'm very much against programs like H1B that are abused to suppress workers' salaries. Industries should not be permitted to bring in foreign workers (who are often not even citizenship track!) whenever the demand for a certain skill increases and salaries go up accordingly, all to bring salaries down to a level that's more "affordable" for those industries. It's wrong and it's anti-worker. If the paragraph above sounds "racist" or "xenophobic" to you, I'd suggest examining the role you played in the election of Trump. It's not wrong, racist, or unethical for workers to protect their rights and their livelihood. I love diversity and immigrants, but H1B isn't designed for that, it's designed to suppress worker salaries, and also reduces employment opportunities.
- nowayjose123 9y agoThe H1B doesn't directly allow worker exploitation. There are two classes of H1 workers: the vast majority who work for consulting firms/body shops and the better skilled minority that works for "product" companies in the Bay Area, New York, Seattle and other tech hubs. The second type of worker typically has employer sponsorship for green cards and skills that allow them to find new jobs. Green cards are given out on a per-country-cap basis. Because India and China have large populations, H1 workers from those countries have to wait a long time to get their green cards. Whereas people from almost any other country can have an employer sponsored green card in a matter of 2-4 years. Fix the green card system and you'll mostly not have many H1 workers in SV software companies (only those waiting for their green cards to be filed). It's hard to make the argument that tech workers making $200k/year are indentured servants or exploited in some way or a "cheaper" alternative to domestic talent. That then just leaves workers from the first category, body shops, which draws most of the H1 ire for being cheap and low-skilled . I don't have a good solution for fixing it and agree that the numbers there probably need to be reduced. If no employer thinks you're worth the cost of sponsoring a GC then your skills probably aren't that great and it's a more fair system.
- jnbiche 9y ago
- mixmastamyk 9y ago> “Americans now fill only 29% of the tech jobs in San Jose, the cradle of Silicon Valley. Despite the demand for science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) workers, wages have been flat for years,” the website reads. Is this true? It is a very important point to say the least. > "It is important for our riders to know the ads contradict our values,” a transit spokesperson wrote via email. Why is the transit system making political statements? What do "values" have to do with it? Have they disproved the claim(s) above, or not? > San Francisco’s BART took a strong stance on immigration issues. Its board of directors passed a safe transit policy in June 2017, which banned federal agents from questioning riders, and stated its “commitment to stand together with the people of the Bay Area in opposing hate, violence, and acts of intolerance committed against our riding community and employees.” Following immigration law equals hate/violence? Or perhaps agents were overstepping their authority? They need to get their story straight because it is hard to understand as a non-expert on the subject. Perhaps just poor reporting.
- JoeAltmaier 9y ago"I was just following orders" is widely recognized as a poor replacement for good citizenship. I endorse BART's stance.
- mixmastamyk 9y agoPainting immigration enforcement as WWII atrocity is not the most compelling argument I've ever read. Not to mention, it is not BART doing the enforcement according to the article.
- JoeAltmaier 9y agoNot my argument (straw man?). Good citizens must recognize overreach and respond, not as obedient robots.
- mixmastamyk 9y ago> "I was just following orders" It is very clear what this means. I asked a question, was it overreach? You responded with a foregone conclusion.
- geebee 9y agoUgh, this hurts. I've repeatedly argued here on HN that while I support immigration generally, and would like to see a good program for skilled immigration, I am generally opposed to the H1B and other employer sponsored visas. The reason comes down to basic freedom. Immigrants should be free to choose their career path in response to personal interests and market signals, just as people born in the US. I don't think that tech employers should have the right to decide who is and isn't allowed to live and work in the US. I think that is virtually guaranteed to be abused. I think that this power on the part of tech companies has skewed the market, badly. If I refuse, for instance, to take google's white-board exam on data structures as part of an interview, google can say to me "ok, then we won't hire you", and that's fine. But what if they get to say "ok, then we won't bestow upon you the right to live and work in the US, or grant you a spot in the queue for permanent residency"? I pretty much believe that if people with the freedom to choose their path in live don't want it to involve becoming a software developer in the valley at the salary offered under the conditions demanded by tech companies, that's the market's answer. I absolutely do not support giving google control over a shadow immigration system where they can coerce would-be immigrants as a condition of living and working in the US. Beyond that, there have been some pretty horrendous black eyes for the program, such as Epson, Disney, and UCSF's decision to fire tech workers and have them train their replacements brought in on a visa marketed specifically for people with skills you can't find in your existing workforce. This ad campaign, though, to me, is cringeworthy. Ever see that argument hat allows your opponents to see you the way they want to, attribute to you positions you don't hold, and avoid engaging with the arguments you've raised? This is pretty much it.
- maoistinquisitr 9y ago> would like to see a good program for skilled immigration It's very difficult to build a case that we need any immigration at all, skilled or otherwise. All claims that we need high skill immigration come from either the immigrants themselves, or employers with an interest in wage suppression. It's plain fact that most "high skill" jobs are not seeing real wage growth. Ergo, there is no real shortage. Americans would fill these jobs as wages and working conditions improved.
- 9y ago
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- JarlUlvi 9y ago"The campaign was paid for by Progressives for Immigration Reform, a DC-based group designated as “anti-immigrant” by the Southern Poverty Law Center (a civil rights nonprofit) in 2010." Southern Poverty Law Center is actively demonizing the Left, and the Right, for anyone that dares an Orthodox dogma.
- stuffedBelly 9y agoOk, I've seen this statement quite often from all these worker unions. Can someone point me to a source showing: 1.what fraction of the job market H1B workers took away? 2.among these jobs taken, how many were taken by H1B workers that are brought in directly from other countries? 3.how many are people who went through college/master/PhD eduction in the US and followed the rules and got H1B? It must not be hard for DHS to gather these stats, right? It would be a lot easier to counter arguments/come up with strategies using these statistics.
- logfromblammo 9y agoI am somewhat surprised that the US immigration system has not already been combined with the stack ranking philosophy to create the ultimate dehumanizing meat grinder. My solution to the US immigration problem is to bypass portions of the existing system with a simpler labor law. Federal minimum wage for all workers inside the US is raised to the US Census median household income, divided by 2080 hours of full-time employment ($28.39/hour). If you pay your worker more than that, no one cares where they came from or how they got here. Anyone paid more is, by definition, adding value to the US economy. If the worker pays all applicable taxes on that level of income, about the only thing they can't do is vote. If you can document and verify that your worker is a US citizen or permanent resident, you are exempted from the blanket minimum wage, and can go as low as the US Census poverty threshold for a 2-person household, divided by 2080 hours ($7.92/hour). Instead of showing your tax receipt to receive government services, you show your government-issued ID. If you can document and verify that your worker is a non-resident non-citizen, entered legally, with a valid visa, you are exempted from the blanket minimum wage, and can go as low as the US Census poverty threshold for a 6-person household, divided by 2080 hours ($16.23/hour). Instead of showing tax receipts or ID cards for government services, you show your stamped passport. This largely eliminates the incentives to displace domestic workers with lower-paid foreign workers, for the lower end of the income scale. At the upper end of the scale, worker mobility and competition encourages companies to pay foreign workers the same as domestic workers. Once they are on site, they can easily go to work for anyone else that pays more, so you can't use them to resolve the "labor shortage" that occurs whenever a company pays too little for the work. To round it all out, you put an outflow duty on remittances, transfers, and cash posted or hand-carried out of the country, to encourage immigrants to bring their family with them, and stay (and spend) in the US, rather than sending their earnings back "home". To this end, a working immigrant can sponsor a number of nonworking immigrants commensurate with their income, and maybe even earn a subsidy for converting some of those sponsored individuals to workers. "Chain migration" is what we want, economically. It is better for the money to stay close, and circulate locally. Ideally, all the best and brightest in the world decide to come work in the US, they bring their closest dependents, and spend all their earnings on local businesses. In doing so, they provide jobs for domestic workers, because most low-skilled service businesses cannot afford to pay the premium for foreign low-skilled workers until those wages are bid up by an actual shortage in available workers. And the best part is that you no longer need to police millions of people. Police only tens of thousands of businesses, and allow economic forces to take care of most deportations and illegal entries. The US could go back to its golden age of immigration, where the major motivators were whether the immigrants could support themselves, and whether they were carrying any contagious diseases. People that can support themselves by working will support their communities by spending.
- BuckRogers 9y agoThe fix is easy. Mandate that every employee on a visa is paid twice the amount of the company's highest earner. Them they'll truly only bring people over when they have to. If you'll pay double the going rate, you can bring over as many as you want. But it needs to be purely pushing wages up, not down under any circumstance. This guarantees that.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- archagon 9y agoIt's sad how susceptible people here are to propaganda[1]. You can be completely against H-1B and still find these ads deplorable. Don't let malicious actors brainwash you. [1]: https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2010/10/08/anti-immigrant-groups-continue-greenwashing-campaign https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2010/10/08/anti-immigran...