3 ms·
I think what you're missing is that it isn't the absolute numbers of green cards and H1-Bs that matter, but the number per qualified applicant or per source cou
by DuskStar 8y ago
I think what you're missing is that it isn't the absolute numbers of green cards and H1-Bs that matter, but the number per qualified applicant or per source country population. If each country has 1000 green cards allotted, it's going to be far easier to be a top 1000 applicant from a country of 1,000,000 (or 1,000) than from a country of 1,339,000,000.
Or put another way - India, the country, might not be discriminated against, as it gets the same allocation of green cards as everyone else. Indians, the people from India, are discriminated against, as there are far fewer green cards per person allocated.
(the situation is of course more complicated than each country getting a flat number of green cards, but the idea holds)
- droithomme 8y agoAll right. We can do it as a proportion of population, as you wish. Given that zero Vatican citizens receive green cards or H1B visas in the US each year, the population corrected ratio of H1B visas and green cards granted to India vs granted to Vatican, having zero in the denominator, is actually "infinity" for both. Indian citizens receive infinitely more green cards and infinitely more H1B visas than Vatican citizens. Those are the actual numbers we get when using Vatican as a counter example. India is infinitely more privileged and favored here.
- DuskStar 8y agoAnd I think you're missing that this is caps, not minimums. The actual selection process happens before these caps are applied, which is what leads to the waitlists - people pass the selection process, and then get stuck in line due to the per-country cap hitting India but not Vatican City. (Or Germany, or Japan, or the UK...) The cap for Vatican City is far larger than the population. This does not change just because no one used it.