5 ms·

You contributing to supply would still suppress wages though no?

vkou 8y ago
I guess I should just not work for a living, then. I'm hoping that people making such an observation have native American ancestry.
- baruchthescribe 8y ago
  Sure you can. But you have to go back first.
  - gnulinux 8y ago
    This is an extremely aggressive and rude attitude. How do people end up hating other people this much?
  - dang 8y ago
    Normally we'd ban a new account for posting this way. Fortunately your previous comment was a fine one for HN, so we won't do that this time. But if you'd please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules when commenting here, we'd appreciate it.
- biocomputation 8y ago
  << I guess I should just not work for a living, then. I'm hoping that people making such an observation have native American ancestry. In addition to being cheap and uncivil, it's absolutely unbelievable (but not surprising) that a foreign national here in this country as a guest of the American people thinks that it is in any way acceptable to say things like this. You would do very well to advise yourself on the laws of the United States, which do not require ancestry from any particular place in order to qualify for citizenship. That includes people like you who also don't have any native American ancestry. America is a sovereign country, and we the people have every right to make whatever laws we like about what qualifies someone for citizenship or entry into our country. You're not an American citizen, and you have no such rights. For example: that's why you can't vote. One more thing: in America we have a word for people who believe someone's race disqualifies them speaking. It starts with R.
  - Gigablah 8y ago
    > It starts with R. And ends with N? /s
    - biocomputation 8y ago
      ?
  - vkou 8y ago
    That's the whole point. Unless you are a direct descendant of native Americans, you too are a guest of theirs, regardless of whether you are a first generation immigrant, or the grandchild of one. But strangely, nobody is in much of a hurry to ask for native opinions on immigration policy. I am here under the same set of rules as any native born settler - which accurately describes most Americans - is. Maybe even more legally, given that immigration control is historically, a relatively recent phenomena. (At least, with respect to 'white' people. Let's not talk about the incredibly racist history of that institution.) There's a certain oddity to having a country founded on immigration, without the consent of the native inhabitants, setting up rules for who can immigrate to it (which many Americans' ancestors would probably not have been able to meet), and then pooh-poohing someone who has met said rules for legally being here. It's a tad hypocritical.
    - abc_lisper 8y ago
      Sounds fair. Why restrict yourself to US then. You should go to Venezuela, which according to you, you have an equal right to go to.
    - biocomputation 8y ago
      << That's the whole point. Unless you are a direct descendant of native Americans, you too are a guest of theirs, regardless of whether you are a first generation immigrant, or the grandchild of one. But strangely, nobody is in much of a hurry to ask for native opinions on immigration policy. That's an utterly fallacious argument and you know it. We're talking about current US immigration policy, not the history of the US, which no one is in a position to change. Your attempt to reframe this debate by painting all US citizens who are not the descendants of indigenous peoples as 'guests' only weakens your arguments because it is crystal clear that you're using US history as a straw man. Whether you like it or not, US citizens cannot be guests in the US, not legally nor otherwise. Furthermore, this discussion isn't even framed around 'native' vs 'descended from people from elsewhere'. This discussion is about US citizens (people with US passports who can vote in US elections) and foreign nationals here in the US as guest workers. Start a different discussion if you want to debate the history of immigration to the US. << I am here under the same set of rules as any native born settler - which accurately describes most Americans - is. Maybe even more legally, given that immigration control is historically, a relatively recent phenomena. (At least, with respect to 'white' people. Let's not talk about the incredibly racist history of that institution.) Your attempt to shift the discussion to various aspects of US history shows that you're apparently not willing to debate H1-B on its merits. As noted above, we define US citizens as people who hold US passports and who can vote in US elections. Immigration control is also not a recent phenomenon. People have been engaging in various forms of immigration control for thousands and thousands of years. << There's a certain oddity to having a country founded on immigration, without the consent of the native inhabitants, setting up rules for who can immigrate to it (which many Americans' ancestors would probably not have been able to meet), and then pooh-poohing someone who has met said rules for legally being here. It's a tad hypocritical. This is talking out of both sides of your mouth. If you really believe the US was founded without the consent of the natives, then why are you here participating in a system that you describe as racist with its origins in colonization? You either truly believe these things about the US and participate anyway (thereby nominating yourself for the hypocrisy prize) or you don't believe it, which means you're presenting baseless arguments that you don't believe. You can't have it both ways.
annon2323 8y ago
Wealth creation is not a zero sum game, nice try
paxys 8y ago
There are tons of studies that show that high-skilled immigrants create more jobs than they occupy and overall boost a region's economy, but all of those are conveniently ignored whenever someone wants to make a point. Silicon Valley wouldn't exist without the H-1B visa. Yes, there are companies that abuse visas and pay low wages etc. Why not focus on improving enforcement rather than rant about immigrants?
- mc32 8y ago
  This is true. High skilled are desired and add to the economy; unfortunately, in an attempt to ride on the coattails of legal immigrants, supporters of illegal immigration purposefully conflate the two and dilute the former's repute, unfortunately.
- checker659 8y ago
  Also last quarter, 65% of Apple's revenue was from outside America. And, yet, looking at their total H1B numbers, only about 9% of their employees are H1B holders. If American companies earn money from the rest of the world, is it really that unfair that they hire a small percent of international people to work at their company? 1) https://www.immihelp.com/employer/APPLE+INC/205136/applications https://www.immihelp.com/employer/APPLE+INC/205136/applicati... 2) https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/02/apple-reports-first-quarter-results/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/02/apple-reports-first-q...
  - diebeforei485 8y ago
    The 9% only includes H-1B folks who are directly employed by Apple. Apple also has hundreds of contractors employed by Tata, Infosys etc on H-1B's, in Apple's internal IT department ("IS&T"). These people are paid less than the 9% of people above, and would not count towards Apple's own H-1B numbers.
    - checker659 8y ago
      Like how many?
nostrademons 8y ago
As an American citizen formerly at Google - no, not really. The supply of engineers that can pass Google's slightly ridiculous hiring bar is still fairly small, and Google tends to take whoever meets it regardless of how many people it has already hired. It's not like they're short on cash, after all, and there was plenty of work to go around while I was there. Anti-poaching agreements, proprietary tech stacks that are useless outside of Google, a broad prohibition on moonlighting, standardized salary bands (which actually blunt the impact of immigration on wages), and a tendency to offer non-monetary perks like free food and private Cirque du Soleil shows over more cash - those depress wages. Immigrant coworkers are not a significant concern.
jarsj 8y ago
Short term may be. Long term companies like Google will be forced to expand where high skill talent is, so you loose jobs and slightly long term, you run the risk of loosing the entire silicon valley. Have you seen Detroit ? Imagine San Francisco like that.
closeparen 8y ago
Why are people unlucky enough to be born in the wrong part of the world less entitled to "suppress wages" compared to the hordes of Americans entering the field?
- Trundle 8y ago
  Why is there no bike lane between me and work?

vkou 8y ago

I guess I should just not work for a living, then. I'm hoping that people making such an observation have native American ancestry.

baruchthescribe 8y ago
Sure you can. But you have to go back first.
- gnulinux 8y ago
  This is an extremely aggressive and rude attitude. How do people end up hating other people this much?
- dang 8y ago
  Normally we'd ban a new account for posting this way. Fortunately your previous comment was a fine one for HN, so we won't do that this time. But if you'd please read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and follow the rules when commenting here, we'd appreciate it.
biocomputation 8y ago
<< I guess I should just not work for a living, then. I'm hoping that people making such an observation have native American ancestry. In addition to being cheap and uncivil, it's absolutely unbelievable (but not surprising) that a foreign national here in this country as a guest of the American people thinks that it is in any way acceptable to say things like this. You would do very well to advise yourself on the laws of the United States, which do not require ancestry from any particular place in order to qualify for citizenship. That includes people like you who also don't have any native American ancestry. America is a sovereign country, and we the people have every right to make whatever laws we like about what qualifies someone for citizenship or entry into our country. You're not an American citizen, and you have no such rights. For example: that's why you can't vote. One more thing: in America we have a word for people who believe someone's race disqualifies them speaking. It starts with R.
- Gigablah 8y ago
  > It starts with R. And ends with N? /s
  - biocomputation 8y ago
    ?
- vkou 8y ago
  That's the whole point. Unless you are a direct descendant of native Americans, you too are a guest of theirs, regardless of whether you are a first generation immigrant, or the grandchild of one. But strangely, nobody is in much of a hurry to ask for native opinions on immigration policy. I am here under the same set of rules as any native born settler - which accurately describes most Americans - is. Maybe even more legally, given that immigration control is historically, a relatively recent phenomena. (At least, with respect to 'white' people. Let's not talk about the incredibly racist history of that institution.) There's a certain oddity to having a country founded on immigration, without the consent of the native inhabitants, setting up rules for who can immigrate to it (which many Americans' ancestors would probably not have been able to meet), and then pooh-poohing someone who has met said rules for legally being here. It's a tad hypocritical.
  - abc_lisper 8y ago
    Sounds fair. Why restrict yourself to US then. You should go to Venezuela, which according to you, you have an equal right to go to.
  - biocomputation 8y ago
    << That's the whole point. Unless you are a direct descendant of native Americans, you too are a guest of theirs, regardless of whether you are a first generation immigrant, or the grandchild of one. But strangely, nobody is in much of a hurry to ask for native opinions on immigration policy. That's an utterly fallacious argument and you know it. We're talking about current US immigration policy, not the history of the US, which no one is in a position to change. Your attempt to reframe this debate by painting all US citizens who are not the descendants of indigenous peoples as 'guests' only weakens your arguments because it is crystal clear that you're using US history as a straw man. Whether you like it or not, US citizens cannot be guests in the US, not legally nor otherwise. Furthermore, this discussion isn't even framed around 'native' vs 'descended from people from elsewhere'. This discussion is about US citizens (people with US passports who can vote in US elections) and foreign nationals here in the US as guest workers. Start a different discussion if you want to debate the history of immigration to the US. << I am here under the same set of rules as any native born settler - which accurately describes most Americans - is. Maybe even more legally, given that immigration control is historically, a relatively recent phenomena. (At least, with respect to 'white' people. Let's not talk about the incredibly racist history of that institution.) Your attempt to shift the discussion to various aspects of US history shows that you're apparently not willing to debate H1-B on its merits. As noted above, we define US citizens as people who hold US passports and who can vote in US elections. Immigration control is also not a recent phenomenon. People have been engaging in various forms of immigration control for thousands and thousands of years. << There's a certain oddity to having a country founded on immigration, without the consent of the native inhabitants, setting up rules for who can immigrate to it (which many Americans' ancestors would probably not have been able to meet), and then pooh-poohing someone who has met said rules for legally being here. It's a tad hypocritical. This is talking out of both sides of your mouth. If you really believe the US was founded without the consent of the natives, then why are you here participating in a system that you describe as racist with its origins in colonization? You either truly believe these things about the US and participate anyway (thereby nominating yourself for the hypocrisy prize) or you don't believe it, which means you're presenting baseless arguments that you don't believe. You can't have it both ways.

annon2323 8y ago

Wealth creation is not a zero sum game, nice try

paxys 8y ago

There are tons of studies that show that high-skilled immigrants create more jobs than they occupy and overall boost a region's economy, but all of those are conveniently ignored whenever someone wants to make a point. Silicon Valley wouldn't exist without the H-1B visa. Yes, there are companies that abuse visas and pay low wages etc. Why not focus on improving enforcement rather than rant about immigrants?

mc32 8y ago
This is true. High skilled are desired and add to the economy; unfortunately, in an attempt to ride on the coattails of legal immigrants, supporters of illegal immigration purposefully conflate the two and dilute the former's repute, unfortunately.
checker659 8y ago
Also last quarter, 65% of Apple's revenue was from outside America. And, yet, looking at their total H1B numbers, only about 9% of their employees are H1B holders. If American companies earn money from the rest of the world, is it really that unfair that they hire a small percent of international people to work at their company? 1) https://www.immihelp.com/employer/APPLE+INC/205136/applications https://www.immihelp.com/employer/APPLE+INC/205136/applicati... 2) https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/02/apple-reports-first-quarter-results/ https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2018/02/apple-reports-first-q...
- diebeforei485 8y ago
  The 9% only includes H-1B folks who are directly employed by Apple. Apple also has hundreds of contractors employed by Tata, Infosys etc on H-1B's, in Apple's internal IT department ("IS&T"). These people are paid less than the 9% of people above, and would not count towards Apple's own H-1B numbers.
  - checker659 8y ago
    Like how many?

nostrademons 8y ago

As an American citizen formerly at Google - no, not really. The supply of engineers that can pass Google's slightly ridiculous hiring bar is still fairly small, and Google tends to take whoever meets it regardless of how many people it has already hired. It's not like they're short on cash, after all, and there was plenty of work to go around while I was there. Anti-poaching agreements, proprietary tech stacks that are useless outside of Google, a broad prohibition on moonlighting, standardized salary bands (which actually blunt the impact of immigration on wages), and a tendency to offer non-monetary perks like free food and private Cirque du Soleil shows over more cash - those depress wages. Immigrant coworkers are not a significant concern.

jarsj 8y ago

Short term may be. Long term companies like Google will be forced to expand where high skill talent is, so you loose jobs and slightly long term, you run the risk of loosing the entire silicon valley. Have you seen Detroit ? Imagine San Francisco like that.

closeparen 8y ago

Why are people unlucky enough to be born in the wrong part of the world less entitled to "suppress wages" compared to the hordes of Americans entering the field?

Trundle 8y ago
Why is there no bike lane between me and work?