6 ms·

I would like everyone answer few questions to define what is fair and what is not: 1. Is it fair for high-skilled Indian-nationals to wait 10+ years for a GC?

I would like everyone answer few questions to define what is fair and what is not: 1. Is it fair for high-skilled Indian-nationals to wait 10+ years for a GC? 2. Is it fair that indian consultancy bodyshops overwhelmed the IT market and H1B quota and then brought down the wages of IT professionals via C2C, 1099, OPT/CPT, fake resumes and other tricks? 3. Is it fair that indian GC backlog will delay GC for other nationals, in case the 7% limit is lifted? I would say since Indians enjoyed getting the majority of H1-Bs, they should also bear the consequences of hitting the country limit. Otherwise, it would only benefit Indian nationals only at a cost of other nationals. I am not even talking about nurses and other professions that will be harmed by this bill.

belltaco 7y ago
Nations don't get visas. Individuals do. Punishing or rewarding people on the basis of where they were born instead of their own skills is wrong. Regarding #2, the body shops are able to get away with it because of the long GC backlog for Indians. Hence companies like to hire Indians precisely because they will work for them for a long time without pay hikes because of the GC backlog, compared to hiring Americans or workers from other non-backlogged countries. This bill will take that away and equalize everyone's footing. You know the body shops and staffing companies hate this bill right? >Is it fair that indian GC backlog will delay GC for other nationals, in case the 7% limit is lifted? Yes, it is. It's called first come first served. That's like asking if it is fair that people who got into the queue at the DMV before you get to go to the counter before you. Yes, it definitely is.
- C1sc0cat 7y ago
  But its fairer - its certainly not fair that one country take the lions share? What about some bright young kid from Saharan Africa doesn't get a fair chance at a H1b Visa. And you could argue from a realpolitik view that allowing more sub Sharan h1b's would act as a counter to the Chinese Belt and Road would be a good policy
  - triceratops 7y ago
    > What about some bright young kid from Saharan Africa doesn't get a fair chance at a H1b Visa. Why not? They can go the student, OPT route and a shot at H1B the same as anyone else. Plus they'll get a green card faster than any bright Indian or Chinese kid. EDIT: Changed some wording and "engineer" to "bright kid"
    - C1sc0cat 7y ago
      But the bright possibly partially self taught "bright kid" wont have the same support structure. Its just like WASP kids with a rich mommy and daddy who can support them in unpaid internships for those high status jobs.
      - triceratops 7y ago
        How does keeping per-country green card quotas do anything at all to fix this problem? I'm not seeing any connection here.
  - belltaco 7y ago
    The bright young kid from Saharan Africa has a less chance of being hired by a company right now because he will get his green card in 7 months, compared to 70 years for a less bright Indian worker. Companies can pay the Indian worker less to retain him for a decade since he cannot switch companies easily unlike the African worker. It also reduces their employee turnover so they prefer Indian workers. This new law will make it more likely for that African worker to get hired because everything would be on an even footing so the bright young kid would get preferred.
- bazooka_penguin 7y ago
  The reason why diversity is good is because it helps break down enclaves and bubbles and let's the dominant culture play a bigger role. When people from one nation migrate en masse are they forced to integrate into their new environment and culture or they do they form ethnic and cultural enclaves that resist the dominant culture and form a concrete in group that resists outsiders, including the native population? Country quotas have existed across the globe and history for a reason. People inherently have in group preferences, they are nationalist, that includes migrants.
  - belltaco 7y ago
    First of all, this bill benefits people that are already in the US and working there for close to a decade, so all that text about diversity in your post is completely irrelevant. Looks like you need to advocate for national quotas on H1B visas, so you're barking up the wrong tree. >Country quotas have existed across the globe and history for a reason Not really. Do you have examples of other countries still enforcing a country quota on work visas?
letitgo12345 7y ago
You know Indians aren't just coming from consulting companies right? They are individuals. Is it fair that the children of Indians who have grown up in the US have to self deport because other nationalities think it's better to subject indians to decades long uncertainty rather than not considering race or national origin (which would equalize wait times to 5-6 years)? Btw pretty much NO other country in the world has national origin quotas. Are you saying that racially discriminatory provisions put in place to satisfy southern segregationists that no other country follows are fair??
- manas666 7y ago
  I was talking about big picture. Majority of H1-B are taken by nationals of one country. It cannot be one way street to benefit one country nationals only in H1-B and GC. I agree that the system is completely broken, but the harm to the system is contained within H1-B system only. Thanks to the country limit, the GC immigration system is not broken yet for all other nationals. If America wants diversity in immigration, then the country limit is doing its work perfectly as was designed. I dont agree with you that "US system is subjecting indians" - this is manipulation. You failed to mention that fact that there is entire industry of bringing Indian engineers into US from Hyderabad (and cities like that) via student visas, H1-B, and then GC. It is this system that is flooding the immigration with H1-B and then GCs that put family immigration and other category GCs in a very long backlog
  - damnyou 7y ago
    As a society we decided a long time ago that blanket punishments based on country of origin are immoral.
    - C1sc0cat 7y ago
      Err no - society and states are quite happy with economic and other pressure being applied and effecting a population.
      - 7y ago
sremani 7y ago
1. Waiting a decade for GC is not such a uncommon thing, actually I would argue every person has to wait for a decade before they become permanent resident, even the marriage people 2. The current lottery system should be replaced with highest salary first system. Show me the money, this would take away the incentive of using H1-B as cheap labor sourcing. 3. It is fair, for too long people outside of 4 countries pretty much walked in the park and got GC, refer to point #1. I prefer people stay in US for 10 years for the privilege of GC.
- BeetleB 7y ago
  >actually I would argue every person has to wait for a decade before they become permanent resident, even the marriage people For people of equivalent degrees and skills as those Indians, the wait is often about 2 years for EB-2. So no, almost no equivalently skilled person needs to wait a decade.
BeetleB 7y ago
I've often heard "fair" being referred to as "The F word" in communications circles. The reason is that the word will have many meanings to many people, with all of them being "correct" to some degree. And many of those meanings will be contradictory to one another. The only meaningful response I can give to your questions is that "No. A fair solution to the problem is not possible". You have to pick what you are optimizing for. Whatever solution you come up with will have elements of unfairness. The major concerns here are: 1. Whether it's OK for people to jump the queue (current system) 2. Whether diversity is important (currently, yes). 3. Whether it's OK for someone who has contributed with advanced degrees to the country for over a decade to find him/herself without a job and being booted out of the country. (currently, yes - putting the US in the same category as a bunch of Middle Eastern countries). You're not going to devise a (simple) system that solves all 3.
conanbatt 7y ago
Why make a country-case at all. Would you advocate for import quotas from china because china takes too much of US's imports? Forget entirely about the well being of foreign nationals, take the most cynical and cold approach to them as if they did not matter at all. Look at americans: they would like to purchase goods and services at the best available price/quality ratio they can get, and they are forbidden from doing so explicitly by immigration law. It is literally taking away liberties from the american people.

belltaco 7y ago

Nations don't get visas. Individuals do. Punishing or rewarding people on the basis of where they were born instead of their own skills is wrong. Regarding #2, the body shops are able to get away with it because of the long GC backlog for Indians. Hence companies like to hire Indians precisely because they will work for them for a long time without pay hikes because of the GC backlog, compared to hiring Americans or workers from other non-backlogged countries. This bill will take that away and equalize everyone's footing. You know the body shops and staffing companies hate this bill right? >Is it fair that indian GC backlog will delay GC for other nationals, in case the 7% limit is lifted? Yes, it is. It's called first come first served. That's like asking if it is fair that people who got into the queue at the DMV before you get to go to the counter before you. Yes, it definitely is.

C1sc0cat 7y ago
But its fairer - its certainly not fair that one country take the lions share? What about some bright young kid from Saharan Africa doesn't get a fair chance at a H1b Visa. And you could argue from a realpolitik view that allowing more sub Sharan h1b's would act as a counter to the Chinese Belt and Road would be a good policy
- triceratops 7y ago
  > What about some bright young kid from Saharan Africa doesn't get a fair chance at a H1b Visa. Why not? They can go the student, OPT route and a shot at H1B the same as anyone else. Plus they'll get a green card faster than any bright Indian or Chinese kid. EDIT: Changed some wording and "engineer" to "bright kid"
  - C1sc0cat 7y ago
    But the bright possibly partially self taught "bright kid" wont have the same support structure. Its just like WASP kids with a rich mommy and daddy who can support them in unpaid internships for those high status jobs.
    - triceratops 7y ago
      How does keeping per-country green card quotas do anything at all to fix this problem? I'm not seeing any connection here.
- belltaco 7y ago
  The bright young kid from Saharan Africa has a less chance of being hired by a company right now because he will get his green card in 7 months, compared to 70 years for a less bright Indian worker. Companies can pay the Indian worker less to retain him for a decade since he cannot switch companies easily unlike the African worker. It also reduces their employee turnover so they prefer Indian workers. This new law will make it more likely for that African worker to get hired because everything would be on an even footing so the bright young kid would get preferred.
bazooka_penguin 7y ago
The reason why diversity is good is because it helps break down enclaves and bubbles and let's the dominant culture play a bigger role. When people from one nation migrate en masse are they forced to integrate into their new environment and culture or they do they form ethnic and cultural enclaves that resist the dominant culture and form a concrete in group that resists outsiders, including the native population? Country quotas have existed across the globe and history for a reason. People inherently have in group preferences, they are nationalist, that includes migrants.
- belltaco 7y ago
  First of all, this bill benefits people that are already in the US and working there for close to a decade, so all that text about diversity in your post is completely irrelevant. Looks like you need to advocate for national quotas on H1B visas, so you're barking up the wrong tree. >Country quotas have existed across the globe and history for a reason Not really. Do you have examples of other countries still enforcing a country quota on work visas?

letitgo12345 7y ago

You know Indians aren't just coming from consulting companies right? They are individuals. Is it fair that the children of Indians who have grown up in the US have to self deport because other nationalities think it's better to subject indians to decades long uncertainty rather than not considering race or national origin (which would equalize wait times to 5-6 years)? Btw pretty much NO other country in the world has national origin quotas. Are you saying that racially discriminatory provisions put in place to satisfy southern segregationists that no other country follows are fair??

manas666 7y ago
I was talking about big picture. Majority of H1-B are taken by nationals of one country. It cannot be one way street to benefit one country nationals only in H1-B and GC. I agree that the system is completely broken, but the harm to the system is contained within H1-B system only. Thanks to the country limit, the GC immigration system is not broken yet for all other nationals. If America wants diversity in immigration, then the country limit is doing its work perfectly as was designed. I dont agree with you that "US system is subjecting indians" - this is manipulation. You failed to mention that fact that there is entire industry of bringing Indian engineers into US from Hyderabad (and cities like that) via student visas, H1-B, and then GC. It is this system that is flooding the immigration with H1-B and then GCs that put family immigration and other category GCs in a very long backlog
- damnyou 7y ago
  As a society we decided a long time ago that blanket punishments based on country of origin are immoral.
  - C1sc0cat 7y ago
    Err no - society and states are quite happy with economic and other pressure being applied and effecting a population.
    - 7y ago

sremani 7y ago

1. Waiting a decade for GC is not such a uncommon thing, actually I would argue every person has to wait for a decade before they become permanent resident, even the marriage people 2. The current lottery system should be replaced with highest salary first system. Show me the money, this would take away the incentive of using H1-B as cheap labor sourcing. 3. It is fair, for too long people outside of 4 countries pretty much walked in the park and got GC, refer to point #1. I prefer people stay in US for 10 years for the privilege of GC.

BeetleB 7y ago
>actually I would argue every person has to wait for a decade before they become permanent resident, even the marriage people For people of equivalent degrees and skills as those Indians, the wait is often about 2 years for EB-2. So no, almost no equivalently skilled person needs to wait a decade.

BeetleB 7y ago

I've often heard "fair" being referred to as "The F word" in communications circles. The reason is that the word will have many meanings to many people, with all of them being "correct" to some degree. And many of those meanings will be contradictory to one another. The only meaningful response I can give to your questions is that "No. A fair solution to the problem is not possible". You have to pick what you are optimizing for. Whatever solution you come up with will have elements of unfairness. The major concerns here are: 1. Whether it's OK for people to jump the queue (current system) 2. Whether diversity is important (currently, yes). 3. Whether it's OK for someone who has contributed with advanced degrees to the country for over a decade to find him/herself without a job and being booted out of the country. (currently, yes - putting the US in the same category as a bunch of Middle Eastern countries). You're not going to devise a (simple) system that solves all 3.

conanbatt 7y ago

Why make a country-case at all. Would you advocate for import quotas from china because china takes too much of US's imports? Forget entirely about the well being of foreign nationals, take the most cynical and cold approach to them as if they did not matter at all. Look at americans: they would like to purchase goods and services at the best available price/quality ratio they can get, and they are forbidden from doing so explicitly by immigration law. It is literally taking away liberties from the american people.