3 ms·

"Disingenuous" means "dishonest." Did you actually intend to accuse me of dishonesty? > From the linked article, you likely also have adequate coding skills if

"Disingenuous" means "dishonest." Did you actually intend to accuse me of dishonesty? > From the linked article, you likely also have adequate coding skills if you come from an engineering, scientific, STEM, or similar background. The linked article discusses the fact that people with a broad range of undergraduate computer-, math- and engineering-related degrees have unemployment rates of 1.5-2% in the United States. Long-term unemployment for these groups is even lower, in the 0.4-0.7% range. > Then add people from bootcamps that came from outside STEM. Now you're discussing people who likely don't have the same qualifications as people coming in on H1B visas. On the other hand, you're not providing any evidence that these people have trouble finding employment in the tech sector, so I don't know what I'm supposed to make of your argument here. > You seem to apply to another perpetual myth in economics that companies like to spout about labour shortages and skilled labour shortages. Everything you're describing points towards a constrained labor market in tech. Unemployment for people with relevant undergraduate degrees is near 0%. Companies are desperate to increase the number of visas for tech workers. People can go to "bootcamps" for a few weeks to get basic training in programming, and then quickly find high-paying employment. If I can add to that: big tech companies are offering lavish workplace benefits (free gourmet food, free gyms, free transportation, etc.) in order to try to attract talent. This all points towards a very tight labor market in tech. > You also ignore that H1Bs are frequently used to replace citizens, their poor working conditions, and lower salaries. [...] What you seem to ascribe to is a shortage of workers that are willing to be taken advantage of, work for lower wages, and work in poor conditions. I've read the horror stories, just like everyone else. But in general, we're talking about people making 80k+ USD per year, many far more. Most people in America would love to be "taken advantage of" for $100k/year. It's very difficult to get behind a political call to action to exclude foreigners from the labor market in order to limit wage competition for people in the top few percent of the income distribution.

unimployed 7y ago
Yes, dishonest (maybe to yourself) or naive. Try not to behave too reactively on a call out for handwaving or ignorance, it makes you appear more biased, partial, and unable to evaluate things honestly. $80k average is very low if we are to believe that these workers can’t be found in the USA, where the average for a tech worker is significantly higher at >$110k. Also, the minimum H1B wage is still $60k, which seems to encourage companies to try anything to get approval for what amounts to the wages of junior and intern level employees. You can see this low minimum is clearly being utilized since the average is $30k cheaper annually. The average H1B wage alone tells you the wages are purposefully bid underneath the average tech worker as a cost savings. If the talent actually could not be found from citizens, the wages (price) would obviously be above what citizens are paid. Basic economics. You want to make your case based on the long-term unemployment statistic? It is a poor measurement to trot out here, since the definition of the measurement will no longer count individuals that exit the field or give up searching or no longer fit in the period of measurement. All it says is that inside the period of measurement, the individuals being measured did not report to the survey lottery that they were claiming unemployment benefits or that they were seeking a replacement job. I know of no one who has ever been contacted by such a survey, so it is difficult to place any faith in the results that are measured outside of unemployment benefits. What is not answered is whether U.S. citizen tech workers are actually working in tech or properly utilizing their skills, experience, or degree. Just because people are employed doing something does not mean people are not perhaps chronically underemployed. In fact we know this in a modern chronic issue in many fields (STEM, etc.). The history of the tech sector is rife with examples of people that are self-taught or transitioned into a tech job without a degree to speak of (HS drop-outs too). I don’t think you can make a blanket statement that people that didn’t choose CS as their initial degree are lower quality than an individual from another nation that likely (highly likely) completed a CS degree with the very intent of increasing their chances of immigrating. It may be difficult for you to process why citizens want to address the issues in the H1B system because dare I say you might be biased?
- dang 7y ago
  This comment breaks the site guidelines by crossing into personal attack. Please edit personal swipes out of your comments here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - unimployed 7y ago
    Please elaborate where there was ever a personal attack. Poster is willing debating the finer points of the topic. Debate is routinely attacking ideas; that is normal. Pointing out the trend of routine holes, inconsistencies, selectively addressing facts, glossing over arguments/facts, handwaving in the posters comments that demonstrate bias, blindspots, misrepresentation, poor judgement, dishonesty, ignorance, bigotry, sexism, racism, hate, nationalistic hate, or routinely lacking insight, experience, and informedness is not a personal attack. Those are features of settling debates instead of perpetuating misinformation, small mindedness, and uninformed/poor ideas. Please reflect on your post with the personal swipe I am to edit out, because it is not clear to me a personal swipe was made.
    - dang 7y ago
      Your first paragraph changed the topic into psychologizing the other commenter in a patronizing way. Please don't do that on HN.
      - unimployed 7y ago
        I feel like that is a trap criticism since the poster became suddenly offended by my highly civil, PC, and blunted expression (disingenuousness) that their ideas and treatment of the data/facts was being criticized (to the point of misrepresenting/mischaracterizing the data or being dishonest). That is not changing the topic at all, it is redirecting their evaluative skills to the facts/data they chose to not respond to and hand-wave away, and puts pressure on their reputation to explain their motives for not choosing to respond or evaluate the facts/data. That is entirely substantive in the topic debate. Further, the poster asked for a straightforward no-nonsense opinion and clarification, which I provided them in an adult fashion without kid gloves at their own request. I would expect the same adult, civil-but-no-nonsense treatment in an adult setting if I started choosing to get offended because someone criticized/called out the way I choose to view the world/facts/data with rose coloured glasses. Respectfully this is the internet and difficult topics should not be so difficult to discuss because someone might take an adult but civil and valid criticism of repeated questionable opinions that contradict data/facts presented to them personally. Hacker news is an adult site that may include divisive and real world type content where there will be disagreement to carry out informed but adult, real world discussions that spread/communicate valuable information and discovery and further everyone’s understanding of the world. If I call out someone for being a hypocrite or espousing and spreading hypocritical views/ideas, does that warrant a warning to not to call them a hypocrite? I cannot shield a person from civil but real world criticism they choose to find offensive if their offense is derived from a criticism to their questionable behavior and questionable ways they choose to carry out discussion here. TLDR: “I believe you may be a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.” “Did you just call me a hypocrite?” “Yes I did. That or possibly a liar.” “You can’t tell someone they are a hypocrite or a liar, those terms carry an air of superiority and trigger feelings of inferiority and are patronizing/condescending even if they ask you to clarify and even if they are a behaving as a hypocrite or a liar. https://news.ycombinator.com/thislinkhasnorelevantcontentpertainingtothecomplaint.html” https://news.ycombinator.com/thislinkhasnorelevantcontentper... scratches head

unimployed 7y ago

Yes, dishonest (maybe to yourself) or naive. Try not to behave too reactively on a call out for handwaving or ignorance, it makes you appear more biased, partial, and unable to evaluate things honestly. $80k average is very low if we are to believe that these workers can’t be found in the USA, where the average for a tech worker is significantly higher at >$110k. Also, the minimum H1B wage is still $60k, which seems to encourage companies to try anything to get approval for what amounts to the wages of junior and intern level employees. You can see this low minimum is clearly being utilized since the average is $30k cheaper annually. The average H1B wage alone tells you the wages are purposefully bid underneath the average tech worker as a cost savings. If the talent actually could not be found from citizens, the wages (price) would obviously be above what citizens are paid. Basic economics. You want to make your case based on the long-term unemployment statistic? It is a poor measurement to trot out here, since the definition of the measurement will no longer count individuals that exit the field or give up searching or no longer fit in the period of measurement. All it says is that inside the period of measurement, the individuals being measured did not report to the survey lottery that they were claiming unemployment benefits or that they were seeking a replacement job. I know of no one who has ever been contacted by such a survey, so it is difficult to place any faith in the results that are measured outside of unemployment benefits. What is not answered is whether U.S. citizen tech workers are actually working in tech or properly utilizing their skills, experience, or degree. Just because people are employed doing something does not mean people are not perhaps chronically underemployed. In fact we know this in a modern chronic issue in many fields (STEM, etc.). The history of the tech sector is rife with examples of people that are self-taught or transitioned into a tech job without a degree to speak of (HS drop-outs too). I don’t think you can make a blanket statement that people that didn’t choose CS as their initial degree are lower quality than an individual from another nation that likely (highly likely) completed a CS degree with the very intent of increasing their chances of immigrating. It may be difficult for you to process why citizens want to address the issues in the H1B system because dare I say you might be biased?

dang 7y ago
This comment breaks the site guidelines by crossing into personal attack. Please edit personal swipes out of your comments here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- unimployed 7y ago
  Please elaborate where there was ever a personal attack. Poster is willing debating the finer points of the topic. Debate is routinely attacking ideas; that is normal. Pointing out the trend of routine holes, inconsistencies, selectively addressing facts, glossing over arguments/facts, handwaving in the posters comments that demonstrate bias, blindspots, misrepresentation, poor judgement, dishonesty, ignorance, bigotry, sexism, racism, hate, nationalistic hate, or routinely lacking insight, experience, and informedness is not a personal attack. Those are features of settling debates instead of perpetuating misinformation, small mindedness, and uninformed/poor ideas. Please reflect on your post with the personal swipe I am to edit out, because it is not clear to me a personal swipe was made.
  - dang 7y ago
    Your first paragraph changed the topic into psychologizing the other commenter in a patronizing way. Please don't do that on HN.
    - unimployed 7y ago
      I feel like that is a trap criticism since the poster became suddenly offended by my highly civil, PC, and blunted expression (disingenuousness) that their ideas and treatment of the data/facts was being criticized (to the point of misrepresenting/mischaracterizing the data or being dishonest). That is not changing the topic at all, it is redirecting their evaluative skills to the facts/data they chose to not respond to and hand-wave away, and puts pressure on their reputation to explain their motives for not choosing to respond or evaluate the facts/data. That is entirely substantive in the topic debate. Further, the poster asked for a straightforward no-nonsense opinion and clarification, which I provided them in an adult fashion without kid gloves at their own request. I would expect the same adult, civil-but-no-nonsense treatment in an adult setting if I started choosing to get offended because someone criticized/called out the way I choose to view the world/facts/data with rose coloured glasses. Respectfully this is the internet and difficult topics should not be so difficult to discuss because someone might take an adult but civil and valid criticism of repeated questionable opinions that contradict data/facts presented to them personally. Hacker news is an adult site that may include divisive and real world type content where there will be disagreement to carry out informed but adult, real world discussions that spread/communicate valuable information and discovery and further everyone’s understanding of the world. If I call out someone for being a hypocrite or espousing and spreading hypocritical views/ideas, does that warrant a warning to not to call them a hypocrite? I cannot shield a person from civil but real world criticism they choose to find offensive if their offense is derived from a criticism to their questionable behavior and questionable ways they choose to carry out discussion here. TLDR: “I believe you may be a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.” “Did you just call me a hypocrite?” “Yes I did. That or possibly a liar.” “You can’t tell someone they are a hypocrite or a liar, those terms carry an air of superiority and trigger feelings of inferiority and are patronizing/condescending even if they ask you to clarify and even if they are a behaving as a hypocrite or a liar. https://news.ycombinator.com/thislinkhasnorelevantcontentpertainingtothecomplaint.html” https://news.ycombinator.com/thislinkhasnorelevantcontentper... scratches head