5 ms·

Seems kind of silly to say without evidence that it's just to feed the base when there's a valid reason as to why it's being done (to prioritize Americans out o

Seems kind of silly to say without evidence that it's just to feed the base when there's a valid reason as to why it's being done (to prioritize Americans out of work)

iamacyborg 6y ago
Ah yes, we can expect restaurant staff to soon be working tech jobs.
- WillPostForFood 6y ago
  College graduate unemployment rate is over 8%, up from 2% a few months ago. There are a lot of skilled, educated, unemployed workers right now. I wouldn’t kick out H-1Bs, but no reason take in new ones right now. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CGRA2534 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CGRA2534
  - oneplane 6y ago
    You do know that H-1B's are already only in because there was no American that could do it, right? Plenty of education and skill in the USA that doesn't have a fitting job (right now) to put that to use. Say there are 100000 MBA's but you need someone who knows how to run a kubernetes cluster with a custom syscall shim for a modified kernel and there is someone in Norway who knows how to do that. Even combining all those college graduates combined with all their business education wouldn't be useful for such a role, but that Norwegian person would be. But you still want to stop H-1B?
    - x0x0 6y ago
      The number of recent layoffs make it clear that there are plenty of people perfectly capable of performing even your pretend scenario. See eg http://layoffs.fyi/ http://layoffs.fyi/ and also eng layoffs at Uber, Samsara, etc.
      - oneplane 6y ago
        Well, then the government in the USA is wrong, because they wrote that the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 101(a)(15)(H) is for foreign workers in specialty occupations, especially due to the need of skills that are urgently needed by the country. Also, those mass layoffs you reference are rather recent and doesn't seem to have anything to do with this specific visa system. At the same time, the pool of available people might suddenly exist now, and that means that a company that needs someone with those skills now has a native worker available instead of having to search for people elsewhere. H-1B workers that were laid off have to exit the USA so it's not like they will add to that pool. That said, it is still possible that those laid off people were selected to let go because their stills aren't as needed as others inside that company (i.e. positions that only exist due to scale). That doesn't mean those people happen to be the ones that you'd need to seek someone else for. Assuming that all tech people have identical skills doesn't help the conversation.
        jessaustin 6y ago
        Well, then the government in the USA is wrong, because... That's always true. You don't need to provide particulars.
  - belltaco 6y ago
    Unemployment in tech is down from Jan to May this year. https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2020/06/11/unemployment-rate-for-computer-occupations-fell-in-may/#1920885216ad https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2020/06/11/unemp...
- theonemind 6y ago
  The average H1B doesn't seem to have a PhD or get more than $100,000/yr (indicating that they can't do something that rare or valuable that you likely can't find in the American labor pool). It seems pretty clear to me that the program gets abused and Americans could fill most of those jobs. It does, of course, also fulfill its intended purpose of supplying skilled talent when/where Americans can't.
  - neilparikh 6y ago
    > get more than $100,000/yr If this is objection, why not just raise the minimum salary requirements to 100k instead of banning it? Most Silicon Valley companies would easily meet it.
    - theonemind 6y ago
      I would support that. The program is supposed to allow for filling positions unfillable in the American labor market with specialized skills, not as a way to undercut American salaries.
      - neilparikh 6y ago
        My point is that Trump isn’t pushing for that, and instead just suspending it completely, because his goal isn’t to reform H1Bs, so mentioning specific criticism of the program is irrelevant when the primary objection is idealogical.
  - oneplane 6y ago
    You don't need a Phd or a lot of money to have a skill that an American doesn't have. Assuming that those things are 'indicators' doesn't seem to be based on anything. The difference here is that America has a large 'labour' pool, but the roles you need filled aren't as much just clocking in and out doing some random task, but have requirements that are harder to meet and apparently aren't met by the available Americans. Assuming malice isn't very constructive and to do something about it that actually helps anything needs some backing information. The other way around: most people don't really want to work in the USA and will only go if the money is right. This also means that the company in the USA that is trying to find someone to fill a gap in their needs might have to spend twice as much getting their problem solved. At the same time, the amount of Americans asked to work outside of the USA is rather low as there aren't that many special skilled people that aren't already available. If you check out the sources listed at the WikiPedia page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_diaspora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_diaspora you'll find that a lot of emigration happens for other reasons, and only a small part is related to special skills needed in emerging markets (which are markets that need a lot of skilled people but are not very attractive to a lot of people due to cultural differences or stability worries).
mistursinistur 6y ago
Silly to say without evidence that preventing some people from doing their jobs somehow creates more jobs for other people. H1-B visa holders aren't competing with workers in the retail services industry!
Sam_Odio 6y ago
> there's a valid reason as to why it's being done (to prioritize Americans out of work) The "Fixed pie fallacy" [1] is probably both one of the most important tenants of modern policy-making, yet it's rarely explicitly discussed or debated. Cyclone_, your thinking relies on this fallacy, namely that if one person is working a job, that's one less job available. [2] In reality, there is quite a bit of empirical research that indicates when people work (especially highly skilled jobs like in tech), it does not reduce (and may even increase) the jobs available to others [3]. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy 2. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/07/opinion/lumps-of-labor.html https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/07/opinion/lumps-of-labor.ht... 3. https://siepr.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Do.older_.workers.squeeze.out_.younger.workers_2.pdf https://siepr.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/...
- jjoonathan 6y ago
  If globalization and automation are so good at job creation, why did the American manufacturing workforce collapse? Economies are complex, counter-intuitive feedback machines, but the "supply and demand" model fits the last 40 years of data, while the "floats all boats" model really doesn't. "Lump of labor is a fallacy, honest!" sure sounds like the kind of opinion I could get a good penny for if I were an enterprising economist, though.
  - kjksf 6y ago
    He was talking about software jobs. "More than half of the top American tech companies were founded by immigrants or the children of immigrants" https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/30/us-tech-companies-founded-by-immigrants-or-the-children-of-immigrants.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/30/us-tech-companies-founded-by... Recent immigrants were responsible for creating tens of thousands of jobs, most of them for Americans. Software isn't a zero-sum game even on a country level and certainly US benefits enormously because companies like Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Netflix etc. are global giants but employ massive amounts of highly paid people in US.
    - 6y ago

Seems kind of silly to say without evidence that it's just to feed the base when there's a valid reason as to why it's being done (to prioritize Americans out of work)

iamacyborg 6y ago

Ah yes, we can expect restaurant staff to soon be working tech jobs.

WillPostForFood 6y ago
College graduate unemployment rate is over 8%, up from 2% a few months ago. There are a lot of skilled, educated, unemployed workers right now. I wouldn’t kick out H-1Bs, but no reason take in new ones right now. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CGRA2534 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CGRA2534
- oneplane 6y ago
  You do know that H-1B's are already only in because there was no American that could do it, right? Plenty of education and skill in the USA that doesn't have a fitting job (right now) to put that to use. Say there are 100000 MBA's but you need someone who knows how to run a kubernetes cluster with a custom syscall shim for a modified kernel and there is someone in Norway who knows how to do that. Even combining all those college graduates combined with all their business education wouldn't be useful for such a role, but that Norwegian person would be. But you still want to stop H-1B?
  - x0x0 6y ago
    The number of recent layoffs make it clear that there are plenty of people perfectly capable of performing even your pretend scenario. See eg http://layoffs.fyi/ http://layoffs.fyi/ and also eng layoffs at Uber, Samsara, etc.
    - oneplane 6y ago
      Well, then the government in the USA is wrong, because they wrote that the Immigration and Nationality Act, section 101(a)(15)(H) is for foreign workers in specialty occupations, especially due to the need of skills that are urgently needed by the country. Also, those mass layoffs you reference are rather recent and doesn't seem to have anything to do with this specific visa system. At the same time, the pool of available people might suddenly exist now, and that means that a company that needs someone with those skills now has a native worker available instead of having to search for people elsewhere. H-1B workers that were laid off have to exit the USA so it's not like they will add to that pool. That said, it is still possible that those laid off people were selected to let go because their stills aren't as needed as others inside that company (i.e. positions that only exist due to scale). That doesn't mean those people happen to be the ones that you'd need to seek someone else for. Assuming that all tech people have identical skills doesn't help the conversation.
      - jessaustin 6y ago
        Well, then the government in the USA is wrong, because... That's always true. You don't need to provide particulars.
- belltaco 6y ago
  Unemployment in tech is down from Jan to May this year. https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2020/06/11/unemployment-rate-for-computer-occupations-fell-in-may/#1920885216ad https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2020/06/11/unemp...
theonemind 6y ago
The average H1B doesn't seem to have a PhD or get more than $100,000/yr (indicating that they can't do something that rare or valuable that you likely can't find in the American labor pool). It seems pretty clear to me that the program gets abused and Americans could fill most of those jobs. It does, of course, also fulfill its intended purpose of supplying skilled talent when/where Americans can't.
- neilparikh 6y ago
  > get more than $100,000/yr If this is objection, why not just raise the minimum salary requirements to 100k instead of banning it? Most Silicon Valley companies would easily meet it.
  - theonemind 6y ago
    I would support that. The program is supposed to allow for filling positions unfillable in the American labor market with specialized skills, not as a way to undercut American salaries.
    - neilparikh 6y ago
      My point is that Trump isn’t pushing for that, and instead just suspending it completely, because his goal isn’t to reform H1Bs, so mentioning specific criticism of the program is irrelevant when the primary objection is idealogical.
- oneplane 6y ago
  You don't need a Phd or a lot of money to have a skill that an American doesn't have. Assuming that those things are 'indicators' doesn't seem to be based on anything. The difference here is that America has a large 'labour' pool, but the roles you need filled aren't as much just clocking in and out doing some random task, but have requirements that are harder to meet and apparently aren't met by the available Americans. Assuming malice isn't very constructive and to do something about it that actually helps anything needs some backing information. The other way around: most people don't really want to work in the USA and will only go if the money is right. This also means that the company in the USA that is trying to find someone to fill a gap in their needs might have to spend twice as much getting their problem solved. At the same time, the amount of Americans asked to work outside of the USA is rather low as there aren't that many special skilled people that aren't already available. If you check out the sources listed at the WikiPedia page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_diaspora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_diaspora you'll find that a lot of emigration happens for other reasons, and only a small part is related to special skills needed in emerging markets (which are markets that need a lot of skilled people but are not very attractive to a lot of people due to cultural differences or stability worries).

mistursinistur 6y ago

Silly to say without evidence that preventing some people from doing their jobs somehow creates more jobs for other people. H1-B visa holders aren't competing with workers in the retail services industry!

Sam_Odio 6y ago

> there's a valid reason as to why it's being done (to prioritize Americans out of work) The "Fixed pie fallacy" [1] is probably both one of the most important tenants of modern policy-making, yet it's rarely explicitly discussed or debated. Cyclone_, your thinking relies on this fallacy, namely that if one person is working a job, that's one less job available. [2] In reality, there is quite a bit of empirical research that indicates when people work (especially highly skilled jobs like in tech), it does not reduce (and may even increase) the jobs available to others [3]. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy 2. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/07/opinion/lumps-of-labor.html https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/07/opinion/lumps-of-labor.ht... 3. https://siepr.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Do.older_.workers.squeeze.out_.younger.workers_2.pdf https://siepr.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/publications/...

jjoonathan 6y ago
If globalization and automation are so good at job creation, why did the American manufacturing workforce collapse? Economies are complex, counter-intuitive feedback machines, but the "supply and demand" model fits the last 40 years of data, while the "floats all boats" model really doesn't. "Lump of labor is a fallacy, honest!" sure sounds like the kind of opinion I could get a good penny for if I were an enterprising economist, though.
- kjksf 6y ago
  He was talking about software jobs. "More than half of the top American tech companies were founded by immigrants or the children of immigrants" https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/30/us-tech-companies-founded-by-immigrants-or-the-children-of-immigrants.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/30/us-tech-companies-founded-by... Recent immigrants were responsible for creating tens of thousands of jobs, most of them for Americans. Software isn't a zero-sum game even on a country level and certainly US benefits enormously because companies like Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Netflix etc. are global giants but employ massive amounts of highly paid people in US.
  - 6y ago